Wimps to the Left of Me, Crazies to the Right

[Beachcomber]

Hi, I am thinking of starting to attend Latin mass at a small traditional catholic parish close by and I had a couple of question.

1.Uniforms seem to include prairie dresses and veils for the girls and matching suits and ties for the boys. Do we have to dress this way to attend mass or will any dressy clothes do? I went not long ago and I could tell everybody was staring at the way we were dressed and we felt really out of place. I think that it was because my wife was wearing pants which seems to be a big no no.
2.There seems to be a 9 child minimum for attending mass. The thing is my wife and I are infertile and I am worried when we don’t squirt out any more children everyone will start to gossip and assume we are using contraception. Should I just come out and tell them we can’t have any more children or wait until they ask?
3.There is a little “leader” to the community and he seems rather nosey. He has no problem butting into very intimate details of people’s lives from where they work to the clothes they wear. I like the priest but really the man who organized the mass and put everything together really rubs me the wrong way. I am worried I will start a row by attending mass but not listening to the spiritual leader and simply dismissing him. How do I deal with him without making any waves?

I do feel stuck because it seems one parish is rather liberal, wimpy, and unorthodox and the other parish is just plain nuts./QUOTE

One thing that stood out to me in your post is #3, the ‘leader’ with the nosey questions. Be wary of people like that; they can create a toxic environment in a church whereby more attention is paid to keeping rules rather than developing spiritually. This is a red flag, I think.

Personally, I have seen this happen (to be completely honest, it was in a Protestant church, but it could happen within a Catholic community, too.). You might want to look into a third alternative, as one poster mentioned.

 

[Young_Thinker]

Could well be. I was actually thinking of kilts, but togas are good too.

Actually, I like kilts, but I am not in Scotland and do not have much Scottish blood. Togas have a bad image nowadays(as from college toga-parties); besides, they were formal garments for ancient Romans(I do not think that anyone here seriously call himself one). The clergy and lay celebrants are the only men who should be wearing robes of any kind in church.

 

[dominicandinah]

I appreciate your animated response. For one thing, I personally feel that a man should, at the very least, wear smart/business casual attire during Mass upon “regular” days and suits upon feasts, solemnities, and the like. Should why should a lady wear a pantsuit(which I feel is ugly anyway) there? A decent dress(as long as it is not gaudy or the like), perhaps with a little jewelry is more suitable.

Nicely put!! While I don’t agree, the manner and charity in which you put this is very appreciated. This gets us into another ruckus about people that may not be able to afford this type of attire. There are a lot of people out there, including families where mom is at home and dad is a blue-collar, laborer, or other worker that doesn’t wear suits to work, in which purchasing, even a used wardrobe of this nature from Goodwill, would put their bills behind for a couple of months. I say, if you have the dress-up clothes, then wear them, if you don’t, don’t feel bad because you are putting a roof over your family’s head and food on the table instead of buying clothes to wear one day a week, when you are struggling to get clothes to wear the rest of the week. As long as what you wear to Mass is clean and modest, I think it’s fine. I’ve heard more than one traditional priest say that he’d rather see women in modest pants than a dress of questionable modesty.

 

[Young_Thinker]

Nicely put!! While I don’t agree, the manner and charity in which you put this is very appreciated. This gets us into another ruckus about people that may not be able to afford this type of attire. There are a lot of people out there, including families where mom is at home and dad is a blue-collar, laborer, or other worker that doesn’t wear suits to work, in which purchasing, even a used wardrobe of this nature from Goodwill, would put their bills behind for a couple of months. I say, if you have the dress-up clothes, then wear them, if you don’t, don’t feel bad because you are putting a roof over your family’s head and food on the table instead of buying clothes to wear one day a week, when you are struggling to get clothes to wear the rest of the week. As long as what you wear to Mass is clean and modest, I think it’s fine. I’ve heard more than one traditional priest say that he’d rather see women in modest pants than a dress of questionable modesty.

All right.

 

[malphono]

I appreciate your animated response.

 

[SpiritusSanctus]

Dear SpiritusSanctus,

No one here bears you or your right to your own opinion any ill will. Please listen to that and understand it.

It is the way you present your thoughts that is, frankly, insulting. If you would listen closely, you might hear many of us expressing very similar viewpoints to your own on many topics. But you seem to automatically assume that anyone who disagrees with you in any small detail is seeking to attack your entire belief system.

I’m sure you are a great person, but a review of your threads here paints a combative, angry, and obstinate picture of traditional Catholics. *** I know traditional Catholics are not that way.*** Please, in the best interest of advancing your own point of view, consider toning it down.

Example:

Conversation One
“I attend the OF, I don’t get those EF folks, what’s the deal?”
“Well, if you insist on going to that travesty of a liturgy, I can’t help you!”
“Oh yeah, well, I’m taking my ball and going home!”

vs

Conversation Two
“I attend the OF, I don’t get those EF folks, what’s the deal?”
“We really love Christ and His Church and want to worship Him in a beautiful way”
“Oh, that sounds cool…could I visit sometime? I’ve been afraid to go to a TLM alone, but you seem really nice”

Yes, this is the Traditional forum. No, it is not limited to TLM-attenders only. If you post thoughts on a discussion board, you’re going to get discussion. If you want to only hear opinions that match your own, have these conversations after Mass with some friends over coffee.

I pray that God may richly bless you.

I am sorry if I came off as being insulting to people because they dis-agreed with me, I assure you that was not my intent. However, just because I dis-agree with a person does not mean I am thinking they are attacking my belief system. I am not entirely sure what made anyone think that is true, but it certainly is not true.

The reason I may come off as being “combative” and “obstinate” is because I speak out against what I believe is wrong more than many others I have seen here. I’m also a frequent poster so my posts are usually going to receive alot of attention because of how many of my posts there are. I’m not the first Traditional Catholic on here to have issues with the NO or whatever else. I actually see a few others on here whose posts are pretty simular to mine. I just want to make it clear that whenever I dis-agree with a person I am not implying that I am holier or smarter than them, I just want to clear up any confusion on that. And I know that not everyone who posts on this section is a Traditional Catholic. I knew not everyone would be from the day I joined these forums. I knew not all opinions would match mine. I guess I expected more Traditional Catholics on here than this, like maybe anywhere from 5 to 10 more. Anyway, I’m finished debating on this thread. I don’t want to ruin the thread by arguing with others.

 

[ChurchTorch]

The reason I may come off as being “combative” and “obstinate” is because I speak out against what I believe is wrong more than many others I have seen here. I’m also a frequent poster so my posts are usually going to receive alot of attention because of how many of my posts there are. I’m not the first Traditional Catholic on here to have issues with the NO or whatever else. I actually see a few others on here whose posts are pretty simular to mine. I just want to make it clear that whenever I dis-agree with a person I am not implying that I am holier or smarter than them, I just want to clear up any confusion on that. And I know that not everyone who posts on this section is a Traditional Catholic. I knew not everyone would be from the day I joined these forums. I knew not all opinions would match mine. I guess I expected more Traditional Catholics on here than this, like maybe anywhere from 5 to 10 more. Anyway, I’m finished debating on this thread. I don’t want to ruin the thread by arguing with others.

No, that’s not true.

People take exception to some of your postings not because you “speak out” but because some of your comments are objectively false per the Church I hope your realize that. Some of the comments you made earlier are not open to discussion they are simply wrong:

Multi-Cultural liturgies are not really the Catholic Church.

No, the Novus Ordo is valid in the sense that it is a Mass. But in a way it’s sacreligious.

The Vatican II Council simply brain-washed people into thinking that tables and altars
were the same thing so nobody would notice…

 

[SpiritusSanctus]

No, that’s not true.

People take exception to some of your postings not because you “speak out” but because some of your comments are objectively false per the Church I hope your realize that. Some of the comments you made earlier are not open to discussion they are simply wrong:

We’re still arguing about this? Can’t we move on? There’s really no need to constantly keep telling me I’m wrong. Telling me I’m wrong won’t change my opinion It won’t make me think I’m wrong. I don’t know if anyone will stop replying to my posts on this thread so I think I’ll just stop posting on this thread completely. Plenty of other threads on the traditional section of this site to debate on, this isn’t the one.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

My posts have been labeled as nothing but “nonsense” on here. Yet I have not said anyone’s posts were heretical, nonsense, etc, nor have I cussed or violated any forum rules. This person asked for advice, I gave him my honest opinion. If I had said “Your wife better wear a veil or just don’t bother showing up” then yes, that would come off as dictating. But that’s not what I said. I simply gave a suggestion. I do not “attack” anyone on these forums. There is no need for an argument on this thread.

You can be as nice as you want to be, but still be entirely ignorant of the facts. For example, you’ve said that a woman needs to wear a veil to the TLM. That’s not true now, under current canons, and it was never true (they could wear hats). You also said that black veils were for married women and white veils for unmarried! There is absolutely no rule whatsoever that states that. Further, you stated that an altar had to be attached to a wall! That ALSO is completely untrue, as you would know if you’ve read Church history or ever seen a Mass offered by the Holy Father at Saint Peter’s! Altars CAN be free-standing, as the Jewish altars of old were. We’ve no clear indication of what kinds of altars were originally used by the ancient Church, but it wouldn’t matter anyway, because the Church doesn’t have a regulation that states the altar has to be attached to the wall.

You need to read the faith and the history of it, all of it, not just the bits you like and agree with. You don’t want to argue or be argued with, but you keep blithely posting misinformation as though it were Apostolic truth.

 

[mullenpm]

SpiritusSanctus, where do these rules come from? Good gracious - black for married and white for non-married.

I have never heard of any such distinction with respect to head coverings according to marital status. Is that some cultural thing in your area? Who keeps track of the marital status — does the usher ask each woman her marital status to make sure she is wearing the correct color of head covering.

Back in the day when every woman wore a head covering no such rule was in place. I always wear a head cover when entering a Catholic church but I would consider it rude for anyone to tell me what color to wear or even to say that I should wear one. :byzsoc:

 

[tbtcom1213]

If you don’t dress correctly the liturgical fashion police will drag you from your pew and you will have to face the tribunal of doom never to be heard from again

Not responding to anyone in this thread but I can somehow relate to the OPs points and observations at TLM Sunday Mass. For instance, the large families, veils, meddling lay leaders, disgruntled priests et cetera. Though I was born Catholic-Christian I started attending the Tridentine Mass (weekdays) since Lent of 2009, serving them since last August and then attending (and subsequently serving) Sunday TLMs. The faces of congregants and servers become more familiar as do the rubrics. I’ve encountered great people who give great advice and tips of what to do and what to avoid. One wrong move and BAM! you’re done with (just kidding but remember to do your best to honor him who hath redeemed us). I do my best to dress well when attending Mass (collar shirt, black slacks and shoes to coordinate w/ cassock) because you must give God all the reverence. In my opinion it is also a matter of assimilation, conformity, impression, reverence within the fold itself. I wouldn’t want to stick out like a sore thumb since I’m simply the new kid on the block. Reverence and Worship to God is reflected in our personality, interaction with others, contributions, dress and the way we carry out ourselves overall. Other than Church we can relate to our brethren on other things like sports, music, media, academics and the like. Do your best to get along well with others. It is what Christ wants for us to do instead of sowing seeds of dissent. The Church Militant is inclusive and exclusive. Though we have a reputation to uphold and maintain remember that all you do must be for His Glory Amen:coffeeread::angel1:::

Pics of TLM on my blog at teddybarboza.blogspot.com

 

[Zooey]

[SIGN]
I just had to drop in, and say that this thread has my vote for the BEST thread title in years!!!
[/SIGN]

 

[mullenpm]

SpiritusSanctus, suddenly this thread has turned into a battle between so-called Traditionalist and “others.” I consider myself a conservative, orthodox, traditional, Roman Catholic.

I am of an age that I remember well the church before V2; women wore hats, scarves, etc. No marital status involved. People in that time were normal, God-fearing people just as present day Catholics are. Styles have changed in clothing and while I do cringe at some of the outfits worn by both men and women in the Communion line they ARE going to Communion.

I attend a Pauline Mass but I have the choice of attending an early morning Latin Mass in my own parish or going just down the street to attend a Tridentine Mass. Our Pauline Mass is every bit as reverent as any other Mass. One’s choice of Mass does not indicate the degree of personal holiness. I will only receive the Holy Eucharist on my tongue and await the day when that will again be the required form; but, today it is not and Catholics have a right to chose to take the Eucharist in their hand.

We assume that the Holy Spirit guided the participants at V2 - I am not certain about the crazies who mis-interpreted the proceedings and caused a crisis in our Church that is becoming more apparent every day.:knight2::knight1:

Let us not argue about silliness such as head coverings and pray to the Holy Spirit to guide our Holy Father out of the present dangers.

 

[CarrieH]

I have never heard of any such distinction with respect to head coverings according to marital status. Is that some cultural thing in your area?

I have heard of this before, only a bit broader: black or dark-colored veils for married or older women, white or pastels for the young single ones, and chapel caps for the little girls. But it’s a tradition, certainly not a rule. We have one married woman with 5 kids who has black hair, and she often wears an off-white veil. I think she wants her veil to show up, and a black one will blend right in with her hair. But that’s up to her, and it’s really nobody’s business. And some of us are not the “lacey-type” anyway, and prefer hats, scarves, or wide headbands if and when we choose to cover. Actually, I want one of those 1950’s whimsy-veils to wear for springtime, preferably with a velvet-bow/rhinestone clip!

 

[ChurchTorch]

I think these mantillas, veils and chapel caps are more like crowns of pride these days than anything else.

Back in the day when women were required to cover their hair they often wore hats. Veils were often kept in their purses so they would not have to face the indignity of bobby-pinning a Kleenex to their heads should they not be wearing a hat (we’ve come a long way.)

When I go to church now I sometimes see high school and college-aged women wearing berets, ivy league caps or totally unadorned ball caps. All every bit as proper as a any of the above yet they get the “look” from the traditionalists. Traditionalists who cannot separate the function of any legitimate head covering from the “crown qualities” of mantillas, veils and chapel caps

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I think these mantillas, veils and chapel caps are more like crowns of pride these days than anything else.

Back in the day when women were required to cover their hair they often wore hats. Veils were often kept in their purses so they would not have to face the indignity of bobby-pinning a Kleenex to their heads should they not be wearing a hat (we’ve come a long way.)

When I go to church now I sometimes see high school and college-aged women wearing berets, ivy league caps or totally unadorned ball caps. All every bit as proper as a any of the above yet they get the “look” from the traditionalists. Traditionalists who cannot separate the function of any legitimate head covering from the “crown qualities” of mantillas, veils and chapel caps

Here’s what I want to know: per Saint Paul’s instruction, at Mass should you be able to see a woman’s hair at all? Are the mantillas, veils, hats, etc. sufficient? Shouldn’t every bit of hair be covered?

 

[Ockham]

I think these mantillas, veils and chapel caps are more like crowns of pride these days than anything else.

Then that is a sorry view of people trying to be as reverent to God as possible. Why don’t you just admit you dislike Traditional Catholics and call it a day? What’s your agenda here?

 

[ChurchTorch]

Then that is a sorry view of people trying to be as reverent to God as possible. Why don’t you just admit you dislike Traditional Catholics and call it a day? What’s your agenda here?

A beret would be every bit as “reverent” as a mantilla yet I never see any berets worn by the “traditionalists.” I only see dirty looks given those women that do.

I’m not sure what a “Traditional Catholic” is. Given it’s proper capitalization it sounds like some sort of Protestant sect. I am very much a “traditionally-minded” Catholic who simply rejects the games some play who claim to be arbiters of what is and what is not “traditionalism.”

 

[Ockham]

I’m not sure what a “Traditional Catholic” is. Given it’s proper capitalization it sounds like some sort of Protestant sect.

Given the disdain and anamosity you display towards Catholics I would say you are much like certain Protestant groups.

 

[mullenpm]

Sorry ChurchTorch, but I must disagree with you.

I am 80 years old and have worn a head covering since I was first taken to church. I do not now wear a head covering as a show of pride. I wear a head covering to show respect to the House of God.

I wear a chapel cap in the Jewish style because my hair is now too thin to still wear a mantilla and a baseball cap is not my style.

How very ungracious of you (unChristian?) to suggest that women wearing head coverings are prideful.:knight2:

And I don’t believe that we must go to the extreme that St. Paul advised. Even in the old days women did not go that far, although many women in my part of the country did wear a babuska (?) which did cover the head almost completely. :byzsoc: