Why is it so hard to be traditional?

[ProVobis]

I agree, especially with the TLM and getting ridiculed. My own family does to me. They ask “why would you go to a mass that you can’t even understand what they are saying” and my grandma tried to convince me to stop altar serving and go back to the really modern parish near my house. My dad is the only one who understands me I guess.

That’s sad. But thank God for dads, I guess.

 

[ProVobis]

I don’t think I’ve ever ONCE read, in the time that I’ve made nearly 9,000 posts, anyone denigrate the EF.

Maybe because you read only your own posts?

By the way I wouldn’t consider myself a traditionalist but I must admit there is a lot of Truth in the pre-Vatican II church. Check it out.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Maybe because you read only your own posts?

By the way I wouldn’t consider myself a traditionalist but I must admit there is a lot of Truth in the pre-Vatican II church. Check it out.

Oh, no, ProVobis, I must perforce read more than my own posts. I generally keep track of yours, for example.

 

[ProVobis]

Oh, no, ProVobis, I must perforce read more than my own posts. I generally keep track of yours, for example.

Well, that’s a start. Except I don’t consider myself a traditionalist so I really shouldn’t count.

I will never denounce a Mass which I can recognize as Catholic. I don’t want to attend a Vietnamese wedding only to find out later it’s Baptist as I have done. A Latin Mass either OF or EF I will always recognize.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Well, that’s a start. Except I don’t consider myself a traditionalist so I really shouldn’t count.

That said, I will never denounce a Mass which I can recognize as Catholic. I don’t want to attend a Vietnamese wedding only to find out later it’s Baptist as I have done. A Latin Mass I will always recognize.

One assumes you grieve that the Holy Fathers have not been so discerning as you, at least for the last few pontificates.

 

[ProVobis]

One assumes you grieve that the Holy Fathers have not been so discerning as you, at least for the last few pontificates.

As I have said before, when I have doubts I will go back to the pre-Vatican II Church. Things got very ugly in the 60’s and 70’s for me.

 

[maurin]

One assumes you grieve that the Holy Fathers have not been so discerning as you, at least for the last few pontificates.

That is a bit over the top, Kirk.

But…at least…you didn’t…use labels!

 

[maurin]

I realize that the Forums don’t keep their archives back as long as I’ve been here (for example, all of my posts don’t appear), but could you please provide evidence of your assertion from the fora? I do realize that there are people “in the real world” who denigrate the EF, I do realize that the bishops have dragged their feet to a large degree (but I also honestly question how wide-spread the desire or demand for the EF has been), etc., but I mean simply from the fora?

Who needs the archives, kirk? Scroll through the last 2 months of threads from this forum. I could post a few doozies for you, but that would be more ridiculous than being requested to do so. Btw, I checked–the grass is still green outside my door.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

That is a bit over the top, Kirk.

But…at least…you didn’t…use labels!

No, as has been stated, that wouldn’t be…traditional!

 

[Vico]

…Isn’t this commendable?

Why is there such strife?

… those that kneel and receive on the tongue are ridiculed and those that don’t are not and why is this so?

… Look at the SSPX, the pope has respect for them and is trying to reconcile with them, but some Catholics don’t share his sentiment and continue to say derogatory statements about them. I don’t understand this.

Everyone has their own preference for worship, but it seems to me that the traditional way of worship is not accepted by most and I have a hard time understanding why…

Yes, the devotion is commendable. The strife is from the beginning, and due to the faithful not being Christlike yet, it takes time, you can be a model for them. Saint Paul admonished the churches for fighting over issues. It seems likely that some faithful may be fearful that what they are comfortable with will disappear. Personally, I was raised with the Pope Benedict XV Mass (1920), Pope Pius XII Mass (1955), Pope John XIII Mass (1962), Pope Paul VI English Masses (1965, rev 1967, 1968), and Pope Paul VI Novus Ordo (1970). I liked the qualities of the Latin Masses which actually had very small revisions (1920, 1955, 1962).

There were dramatic changes in society at that time.

I can see that some people liked the Mass changes, others not. But I am part of a Byzantine Catholic parish, and have had less experience with the Novus Ordo Mass (5 times a year perhaps).

 

[roveau]

What confuses me is why people feel the need to label themselves as traditional Catholics. That is what causes the negative feelings. We’re all Catholic we don’t need to separate ourselves through useless labels.

I would just say that I am an ordinary Catholic with ‘traditionalist’ leanings. I love the old forms but recognize that the Church has newer forms of worship which are just as valid as the old forms. Being of the older generation now, I guess I find the old forms more familiar and somehow richer.

 

[maurin]

What confuses me is why people feel the need to label themselves as traditional Catholics. That is what causes the negative feelings. We’re all Catholic we don’t need to separate ourselves through useless labels.

What confuses me is why people feel that there isn’t a need to use labels. For instance, how would onje ever find this thread if the forum itself isn’t labeled. You might spend twenty minutes looking for it in the apologtetics forum, or the Eastern Rites Forum. That would get frustrating.

On the other hand, I believe I understand the content of the Pope’s desire to avoi the use of labels which are inflammatory and lead to division. But the fact is that it is necessary to use them, as long as they are used as distinctions, and not as stones.

 

[maurin]

There lies the rub! I was formed as a Catholic in the 1940’s and early 1950’s; we were taught never, never, never was a lay person to handle a Consecrated Host; those of us who were drawn to be Altar Boys took great pride in learning all the Mass responses in perfectly enunciated Latin, that meant we also had to learn much of the priest’s Mass parts in Latin; we learned to be absolutely quiet the entire time we were in the Lord’s presence, in church in other words, out of reverence to Him and courtesy to those around us praying: liturgical music was mostly Gregorian Chant accompanied by Pipe Organ using solemn registration; guitar, piano, saxophone, flute don’t be silly!

So, along comes the transitional period then VII, and all that essentially went out the window!

Now I ask you to what teachings of the Church am I to conform; the teachings that to me were absolutely reverent and respectful to Our Lord, those that seem to focus more on the congregation than the Lord; maybe even the good old banjo-fiddle Masses of the 1970’s; I don’t know but after many years of something just not feeling right I chose finally to follow my initial formation.

:applause: excellent post. Excellent point.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

What confuses me is why people feel that there isn’t a need to use labels. For instance, how would onje ever find this thread if the forum itself isn’t labeled. You might spend twenty minutes looking for it in the apologtetics forum, or the Eastern Rites Forum. That would get frustrating.

On the other hand, I believe I understand the content of the Pope’s desire to avoi the use of labels which are inflammatory and lead to division. But the fact is that it is necessary to use them, as long as they are used as distinctions, and not as stones.

That’s a good question. I’ve long wondered why we ever needed the Traditional Forums (and no, I’m not saying it to provoke anyone). Those who self-identify as such could post in the othe forums. The attitudes, arguments, and agreements wouldn’t change, I should think.

One reason not to use this particular label is that it is so fluid and subjective. I objected to some stuff that was going on in an RCIA for someone I sponsored and got labeled (and At Trent, you and ProVobis will want to sit down for this) “a white male with a typical pre-Vatican II mindset!” Among my friends and family, I’m reckoned as hopelessly conservative. Anyone on the traditional forums want to agree with them?

I hear the sound of crickets chirping.

 

[ProVobis]

Among my friends and family, I’m reckoned as hopelessly conservative.

Well, that explains it!

I always thought a conservative to be a slow liberal.

 

[maurin]

That’s a good question. I’ve long wondered why we ever needed the Traditional Forums (and no, I’m not saying it to provoke anyone). Those who self-identify as such could post in the othe forums. The attitudes, arguments, and agreements wouldn’t change, I should think.

One reason not to use this particular label is that it is so fluid and subjective. I objected to some stuff that was going on in an RCIA for someone I sponsored and got labeled (and At Trent, you and ProVobis will want to sit down for this) “a white male with a typical pre-Vatican II mindset!” Among my friends and family, I’m reckoned as hopelessly conservative. Anyone on the traditional forums want to agree with them?

I hear the sound of crickets chirping.

Me too!

I will say this, though Kirk. If I ever found myself in LVNV I certainly wouldn’t mind running into by chance. You’re a stand up guy, even though some of your responses send me to the door or window to check the colors outside.

 

[Ockham]

IThere is a constant denigration in the Traditionalist Forum of most if not all things that are post-Conciliar (unless we’re talking about the Council of Trent), in particular the Mass. People react to that. There is a lot of arrogant, triumphalistic "the Mass of the Ages is the BEST!, that the OF is inferior, or lacking, or theologically insufficient, or, at worst, not a Mass at all. There’s a lot of denigration of the Ven. Pope John Paul II. And then there’s a general (again, not everybody) tone of “We’re better than you,” which can only rub people the wrong way. Finally, in this particular fora, there’s a lot of misinformation, from “spin” to outright misinformation.

This post is offensive.

 

[Oneofthewomen]

This post is offensive.

No, Ockham, what is offensive is you only posting a snippet of a comment and labeling it offensive because you do not agree. I think JKirk makes some very valid points and answered the OP’s question very well.

JKirk-

I can’t speak for what has happened to you in your life as a “traditionalist,” but I can make this observation:

You have made 107 posts, which implies that you haven’t been around these fora for a terribly long time. If you had, you’d understand why a lot of people MIGHT have an antipathy for some who label themselves as “traditionalists.” There is a constant denigration in the Traditionalist Forum of most if not all things that are post-Conciliar (unless we’re talking about the Council of Trent), in particular the Mass. People react to that. There is a lot of arrogant, triumphalistic "the Mass of the Ages is the BEST!, that the OF is inferior, or lacking, or theologically insufficient, or, at worst, not a Mass at all. There’s a lot of denigration of the Ven. Pope John Paul II. And then there’s a general (again, not everybody) tone of “We’re better than you,” which can only rub people the wrong way. Finally, in this particular fora, there’s a lot of misinformation, from “spin” to outright misinformation.

I don’t think I’ve ever ONCE read, in the time that I’ve made nearly 9,000 posts, anyone denigrate the EF. There’ve been questions about it, there have been statements of preference regarding it, there have been respectful critiques of it, but I cannot recall a single time anyone questioned it’s licitness or legitimacy. That is quite the opposite of the “open season” on the OF.

You asked, “Then why are traditionalists as a whole mocked, looked down upon and labeled as “holier than thou”. Their ulterior motive is to give God the adoration and worship He is deserving of. Isn’t this commendable? Why is there such strife?” There’s strife because lots (not all) of self-styled “traditionalists” mock and look down upon the efforts of other faithful Catholics to give God the adoration and worship He is deserving of, Catholics who are only worshipping in the way the Church has approved.

You did ask.

 

[Ockham]

No, Ockham, what is offensive is you only posting a snippet of a comment and labeling it offensive because you do not agree. I think JKirk makes some very valid points and answered the OP’s question very well.

JKirk-

So now you are telling me if I’m offended or not? I posed the first paragraph as the rules point out entire posts don’t need to be quoted.

 

[floresco]

On the other hand, I believe I understand the content of the Pope’s desire to avoid the use of labels which are inflammatory and lead to division. But the fact is that it is necessary to use them, as long as they are used as distinctions, and not as stones.

I think it is more necessary to take the Pope’s words to heart.