Why do extremist give the EF and traditionalist a bad name?


You wrote:

That gives the impression that why you were going to say after this paragraph was that Vatican II did in fact call for the abolition of ad orientem worship. Sorry if I misunderstood.

Explain how I’m being “pushy” or imposing my “opinions” on other Catholics? :roll_eyes:


“I’m an extremist if the truth is considered extreme.”


If you read what I wrote, and took it at face value, there would have been no need to contradict me. I simply linked a document that proves that VII did indeed address the topic.
I find this to be a common tactic in the circles the OP is referring to.


How do you know I wasn’t taking your statement at face value?

How do you know I was contradicting you? Maybe if you took my statement at face value, it would be clear that I am not. But isn’t that what we’re supposed to do with Vatican II as well? And then carefully discern how “seeming contradictions in fact aren’t contradictions”? :wink:

…because if we all took the documents of Vatican II at face value, there would be several problems.


Just to correct you Sacrosanctum Concilium is not a dogmatic constitution. It was merely a constitution of the church. Dei Verbum was a dogmatic constitution.


Although to be fair it says altars should be built to allow walking around it (for incensing) and to also to allow versus populism masses. However it is not mandating this (versus populism) as the norm . What is being mandate is freestanding altars. As has been noted many times the GIRM is written with the presuppotion of the mass being said ad orientem.


No where did I say it mandated anything!
I used this as an example of how misunderstood VII really was and that not only is it necessary to read the original documents, but that one must go deeper into post-conciliar documents.

To all of you who keep trying to say “Well, ok the document says that, but…” this is exactly the type of attitude that the OP is talking about. Never did I say anything about mandates or that something “must be done”. I used a common example to show the that the documents and the council and it’s aftermath are often very misunderstood. I guess I proved that point too.


At this point in history, the Catholic Church is bleeding members. The sex scandals have done horrific damage–I would say a direct hit with many casualties and a seriously wounded C.O. I think we will see a much smaller, scaled-down, and less-elaborate Church in the years to come. The money will go fast as more lawsuits are filed and less people are in the Church giving tithes and offerings.

It seems to me that this kind of in-fighting (and no matter what anyone says, that what it looks like to me and many others–FIGHTING) is not helping one bit.

Jesus said, “By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”

He also prayed that we would be ONE.

That doesn’t mean all practicing our faith the same way, but it means respecting what our God-appointed leaders have pronounced as “good” and rejoicing with each other, not picking at each other, over liturgical matters like music and the position of the priest that have been given much freedom by the various Church documents.

Loud-living dogma, on the “what would you change about the OF Mass” thread, you made some pretty sarcastic comments about some of my posts about the pipe organ–I’m not sure what you are trying to say, since you didn’t come right out and say it, but relied on sarcasm, and I’m not very good at sarcasm. I think you were saying that I am working against what the Catholic Church says is appropriate for liturgical music–and that’s just not true, and I am having a hard time loving someone who would say something like this about me!

And the same thing is happening on this thread–you who are traditionalists seem to be putting words into CilladeRoma’s post that they did not write, and the more CilladeRoma tries to defend their words, the more you all surround CilladeRoma and dig in for the attack! It’s like watching a pack of coyotes surround a victim.

I admit that I say and write some snarky things here on CAF more often than I wish, and it’s WRONG of me to do that. It hurts others and it doesn’t help. I’m trying very hard to be kinder in my words, but I’m not always faithful to this resolution.

When we say things to each other that are intended to knock the other person down so that we can claim the win :trophy:–it does NOT matter anymore whether the Mass music is chant, or whether the priest faces front or back. By our unloving words and attitudes, we have made it very hard, maybe even impossible, for people to KNOW that we are Jesus’ disciples. People will not recognize our Church as His Church because we have stopped loving one another. And remember, love is not a feeling–it is an action, and words, including written words, are actions.



I see one person who offered a clarification in response to one of CilladeRoma’s statements, then apologized for having possibly misunderstood the original post. The exchange seemed civil enough. Where is the “pack of coyotes” surrounding “a victim?” Your post is needlessly provocative.


Interesting generalization…could easily and errantly be stated, “why do extremists give the OF and those accepting Vatican 2 a bad name?”

Just sayin’!


Maybe “less elaborate”, but the church has been steadily gaining members over the decades and projections indicate greater numbers in the years to come.


Only that this doesn t exist.
It is created in this bubble within CAF.
" Those accepting Vatican II" is among the most ridiculous descriptions of what happens outside this place in real life than can be heard of.
Hollow . Dated. Lost in who knows what time.
How many of us were brought up after it and how much does one have to endure as if we had been brought up in the " leftovers " of Catholicism.
Say it often enough and it becomes real. To whom? Where?
Almost surreal.


You must be new here…this is an ongoing source of discontent between keepers of the Catholic faith, here at CAF…it is no better on one side than the other.


I’m not going to really add much to this other than to try to explain the psychology of the traditionalist.

There’s something called The traditionalist challenge in which the person goes to only traditional mass’s whether at a Tridentine Mass or an Eastern Divine Liturgy for 6 months or longer.

After that time that person will then attend the Ordinary Form and they will see a world of difference.

When you look at the Tridentine Mass and other ancient forms in the Latin Rite such as the Mozarabic Mass, Sarum Mass, Celtic Mass and the Eastern Divine Liturgy of St Basil and Divine Liturgy of St Chrysostom the Novus Ordo Missae is a huge culture shock.

I will inevitably anger somebody by saying this but the Ordinary Form Liturgy has more in common with the Liturgical Protestantism then it does with Orthodox Christianity.

The things that are allowed in the liturgy are drastic and extreme in comparison to all the other liturgies of the Church throughout the ages.

One thing that I really admire about the East is that they have not really changed that much or at least in an extreme way.

I think prior to the New Mass there was more in common in comparison between the East and the West and whether people think so or not having a ethnic liturgical identity is very important.

The East has a very Slavic and Middle Eastern background and the West has a very Latin and Western European background and we need to have that connection to the ancestral Saints.

What I’m saying is that it’s good to have a family history and to feel connected to it in the liturgy even if you’re not exactly from that background.

I’m not Slavic or Middle-Eastern at all but I regularly attend a Ukrainian Catholic Divine Liturgy and I feel very connected to many of the ancient Saints because it’s one of the oldest liturgies of the Church.

When I go to the Tridentine mass I feel very connected to many of the Saints I admire that are of French background that I share with them.

This is one of the things that attracts people to Eastern Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy and even in some cases Roman Catholicism.

I also think in general there are more liturgies and prayer services celebrated in traditional communities just as there are an Eastern communities and I think that’s a really beautiful thing that is sorely lacking in most diaconate parishes.


Not new. Just done with it here…
And to make it more difficult ,there are different characters posting anything but stumbling blocks to interesting conversations. Which there were,even among different backgrounds.
It is.no longer challenging here but tedious among infiltrates of all sorts.
This isn t even real out there.
I am in Texas right now. And when I am out in the streets I wonder where the nasty people are that I cannot find them.

That is what I see.


praying for you.


On the subject of what direction the priest faces during the Novus Ordo Missae.

In the West both ad populum and ad orientem were permitted but the direction that the priest was facing relied on which direction was true East.

It’s some rare cases the priest would intentionally face West to show his communion with Rome but it was more common to have the priest face East whether that was ad orientem or ad populum.

Today sadly it is explained by some Priest and Deacons that during the Second Vatican Council they turned the priest around to face the people because before the priest had their back turned to the people.

I have actually heard a Deacon teach an adult catechism class with those words almost verbatim.

The problem is not the priest offering the liturgy ad populum because it is historic in our liturgical rites but it’s the politicalization of ad populum being a progressive inclusive movement.

The reason the priest would offer the mass ad orientem was because traditionally the tabernacle was at the center of the Church for all to worship Christ and the priest led the faithful in worship as their shepherd.

The altar was also most times connect to a wall were the tabernacle would be located as well.

Nowadays it’s just taught to the priest that they should offer the mass this direction or the people will have a violent negative reaction but I don’t really think that’s the case if a good priest explains the theology of ad orientem well.

In some cases the altar is not facing true East and so the priest would have to improvise and offer the mass ad orientem but nowadays it’s usually always offered up ad populum.

In the East ad populum is never used to do the consecration.

The priest will walk around the altar and will at times face the faithful but during the consecration the priest closes the Royal doors and faces East.


Thank you!


Adding to my first comment about the psychology of the traditionalist.

I think some of the extreme behavior comes from what I was talking about with the culture shock after attending traditional liturgies in the West or the East.

It might start out by watching a YouTube video or attending a service in which you hear a really great and theologically rich homily and then you go back to your normal diaconate parish and have the same old boring vague generalized homily.

That’s exactly what happened to me I started listening to the priest on Sensus Fidelium because I was interested in the devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and Spiritual Warfare and I learned a lot of theology just by listening to those homilies and conferences.

Eventually I got lucky and started attending a Eastern Divine Liturgy and occasionally at Tridentine Mass although I don’t go really anymore because I don’t care for the priest he’s rather uncharitable in the confessional.

After you attend those liturgies and traditions for so long it does feel like you’re in two different churches and although feelings are not subjective facts it’s understandable why people have the impression that they have.

There are people that attend the Ordinary Form Liturgy and are a million times better Catholic than I willl ever be and that’s just the truth.

Going to a traditional liturgy and sticking to traditions doesn’t necessarily make you a better Catholic if you don’t love your neighbor.


I believe extremes in any aspect of life are off-putting. I love the TLM, the old Roman Breviary, and even the Douay-Rheims translation. That said, I also love the new mass, especially when celebrated in Latin ad orientem. The Mass is a Holy Sacrifice, regardless of the language used or even the missal used. As long as it is said according to a form approved by the Church, it is the meeting of Heaven and earth. Instead of placing our preferences to the level of doctrine and dogma, we need to love our brothers and sisters and encourage them in the faith; letting them exercise the faith as they choose.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.