Chains of love got a hold on me
When passions a prison, you can’t break free
Wohhhh, you’re a loaded gun, yeah
Chains of love got a hold on me
I’m reading Sacrosanctum Concilium now (I know I’ve read it before, but it’s been a while). It’s sad to see the way things worked out in real life. I would say more, but it would probably get the thread shut down…
Where can I read that? Any good sites I’m actually VERY interested
I think because people like to believe they are “right”. Often, they achieve this not because of what they believe, but because they convince themselves other people are “wrong”. They latch on to something, in this case their extreme beliefs and convince themselves everyone else is “wrong”, making themselves feel so much better about being “right”.
It really is pretty twisted, in my opinion (especially when religion is used this way). I just try to ignore people who are like that. You an’t fix or change them or convince them of anything. Better to direct your energy towards something more positive.
Read it and weep. Read about the “restoration of the liturgy”.
I would just like to make another note. I think one of the beautiful things of the Catholic church is that, while the core teachings of the Church remain the same for all, members do have a lot of flexibility in the way they practice their faith. So you can have traditionalists, and you can have those who aren’t so traditional. But they are still both Catholics and no one is “more Catholic” than the other. It isn’t as though there are “sects” which can be quite divisive in other religions.
Anyhow, as most people know I am agnostic but i just wanted to let you all know it is something I admire about your religion. Embrace it and don’t be mad over it. It really is a beautiful aspect of the faith.
You might like the Church Music Association of America. Lots of documents on musicasacra.com. lots of fun learning to be done on their forum as well!
This is interesting and reflects my initial experience with traditionalists very well. I have nothing but good things to say about the traditional priests that I have known, though and I am happy to say that the situation is slowly changing at the parish that I know.
Yes. Many traditionalists aren’t aware of their problems. And I’m not excluding myself.
Just how, exactly?
I refer you to the video posted earlier in the thread by @semper_catholicus.
I have found that traditionalists can be very dogmatic about things that are not dogma and quite judgemental when others (outsiders) do not adhere to their standards.
I think it’s because they either say or if they don’t say SOME OF THEM make us who attend Novus Ordo Masses feel like we are in the wrong, doing something wrong or that we are misguided/lost, missed the boat, BOTH Masses are approved, BOTH Masses are allowed and BOTH Masses are Catholic. One is not better or worse than the other.
Oh, if that’s all you mean, I have to agree, to an extent. I consider myself a traditionalist, and have been attacked many times on this forum by my fellows. Not every Catholic who attends the Novus Ordo is unorthodox, not every Catholic who attends the old mass is orthodox, and we cannot form prejudices based on trends. I must say, however, overall, that I admire the spirit of holiness and humility within the movement as a whole, far more so than the culture that tends to prevail in parishes that exclusively celebrate the Novus Ordo, especially in the manner it is usually celebrated. We should, however, be respectful to each other as long as others remain orthodox at all times. Just as long as that doesn’t mean we can’t call out heresy when we see it. God Bless!
I feel your pain.
The EF/TC people in my personal life are fond of pointing at other Catholics and shouting, “Yer doin’ it wrong!!”
I’ve met actually met some cool ones on CAF, though, so it gives me hope.
What many people fail to understand is that the official documents of VII were meant to be a beginning, not a means to an end.
After the council, each Bishop’s Conference met and there were subcommittees and all sorts of goings on that produced many more documents, procedures and recommendations, that ultimately were approved or disapproved by Rome and then implimented.
One really cannot get a true sense of how we got to where we are now, without looking at the Council as a whole, which can take a lifetime.
For example, one of the big complaints I hear is about ad orientum worship and how “no where in VII did it say to abolish it…”
If you read inter oeumenici specifically paragraph 91, you will find a direction that says altars should be built so that the priest may face the people.
It was/is a complex issue and one that will take much more than the 50 years to bear only good fruit.
All sorts of people push their views. Catholics at the other end of the spectrum can do the same. Moderately conservative parishioners can also end up feeling pushed out of their parishes as a result.
“The main altar should preferably be freestanding, to permit walking around it and celebration facing the people. Its location in the place of worship should be truly central so that the attention of the whole congregation naturally focuses there”.
This does not mandate the versus populum celebration of the liturgy; otherwise, celebrating the Novus Ordo ad orientem would be forbidden. Now clearly, this is absurd, and many priests and bishops celebrate the Novus Ordo ad orientem.
The document states that preferably the altar should be built so that the priest may face the people. It does not say that Mass must be said facing the people. And this also does not indicate that the entire Novus Ordo should be said facing the people, either; in fact, the actual Rite itself requires the priest to face the people fewer times than he is obliged to do so in the traditional Mass.
I didn’t say it mandated anything.
I said that many people complain that VII never called for things but
they have no clue about all the documents. The one I shared showed that, yes it was part of the vision of VII for Mass being celebrated facing the people.
Thank you for proving the OP’s point.
Extremists give everything a bad name.
Written word usually seems more severe than the spoken word.
Internet emboldens people and prompts worse rhetoric.