You said that the EF choice and OF choice is between traditionalism and modernism. That is simply not the case.
Funny, like I was saying both sides face similar situations. For instance, I think it’s the O.F. community that has a “pride and charity” issue in accepting the rebirth of the traditional liturgy.
The OF is also traditional liturgy; it stems out of a legitimate Catholic tradition.
Also, there has been no “rebirth” of anything, at least in the formal context. If you want to argue that greater permission to celebrate the EF constitutes “rebirth,” then fine, but that seems an extremely tenuous claim.
There is a defensiveness that I can’t understand…nobody who supports the traditional liturgy is claiming to be better or anything like that…
LOL. That is totally untrue. Many people who support the EF do believe that they are better and that their liturgy is better. Consider the opinions of those on traditional catholic forums, for example.
you know, it feels just like when back in school some students would try to be more committed and organized and the rest, the majority, would somehow blame them for this behavior :shrug:
Reported – you claim that “nobody who supports traditional liturgy is claiming to be better” and in the very same post claim that those who support traditional liturgy are “more committed and organized.”
However, there are elements within the Extraordinary Form (and I’m not referring to the language, that’s a whole topic in its own) that are lacking in the Ordinary Form, which makes the E.F. richer.
There is no additional richness of the EF.
And there’s no reason for anyone, priest or lay faithful, to be upset at this additional richness of the E.F.: if both are treasures of the Church, one may have more jewels, but both enjoy equal worth: infinite, for it is the banquet of the living God.
Those who are angry at such claims are angry because an illusory status is being presented as concrete.