Trads - what's up with ya'll

[Peace]

OK it is no surprise to the oldheads of this forum that Peace has no love for Trads. Which is quite interesting considering that Phatmass is basically a Trad forum.

But seriously. I don't really have a huge disdain for Trads (or "Traditionalism") that it may seem like sometimes. My main parish is a "Trad" parish. TLM 3 times a week.

I even have a Trad friend.

I can appreciate the desire to resist huge changes, especially if people feel like those changes are taking the Church in a direction that is bad, or even heretical. So in some respects I think that the skepticism that Trads seem to have of change, and the skepticism that Trads seem to have towards the living authorities in our Church, can be a good thing. At some level I agree that it is all of our responsibility to keep our clergy accountable.

But the impression I have about Trads (and granted, it could be a false impression) is that they are literally never happy with anything, if it falls outside of TLM, communion on the tongue, gregorian chant, and "outside the Church there is no salvation". Truly, it does kind of seem to me like Trads do nothing but complain. Has there ever been a Trad in history that has actually liked a pope who was alive during their actual lifetime? It kind of seems like all of the Trad icons are popes who lived like 100 years ago. I wonder if the same Trads were actually alive then, would be just as disgruntled with the pope then as they are today?

Another thing I don't quite get is that there seems to be like this unwritten presumption that change is bad, or like there seems to be this nostalgia about times past, the "Good old days" if you will when the Church was at her ideal. I don't really get where this notion comes from, when I look at history, I see the Church always moving in a positive direction, although not always linearly.

Lastly, my main issue with Trads is that it seems like many Trads have a major issue with the idea of diversity. It kind of seems like a lot of Trads have it in their mind that there is only one way that things should be done. There doesn't seem to be a lot of recognition of different cultures, or that people express and live out their faith in different ways, that are all good. Like, sometimes I'll go to a black Catholic church. They'll have more like gospel type music for the Mass, maybe the choir and the singing is a lot more elaborate, the preaching is usually pretty on point. But some of the Trads I know will like sneer at it and call it stuff like "entertainment." I think that's complete BS.

Well, I am guessing that in many respect my impressions of Trads are simply wrong, but if I am being honest many Trads do strike me that way, and it is difficult for me to understand them, what their concerns are, or what is really going on in their heads, why they act they way that they do. I'll presume that many of ya'll have good intentions, or perhaps just a different and equally valid perspective on things, but it's pretty difficult for me to understand what it is most of the time, honestly.

Edited October 25, 2020 by Peace

[chrysostom]

How do you see this thread going?

[Peace]

12 minutes ago, chrysostom said:

How do you see this thread going?

I would guess that not many people will respond, but we'll see.

[chrysostom]

My response would be (since you're asking some people, in essence, to defend or characterize themselves) that if you had to pin me down I would probably be considered trad, depending on who you talked to. I have a lot of opinions about stuff, but most of it is in the context of learning and deepening my knowledge of faith and history which is an ongoing process. I have no particular interest in defending other people I don't know against impressions you have formed about them except to say that some certain generalizations in the paragraphs above come off as judgy as anything I've ever seen on here.

I'm guessing you're posting this with good will and some kind of an open mind, but we're not exactly starting from zero here, and I'm just not super motivated to hop on that train.

Happy Feast of Christ the King!

Edited October 25, 2020 by chrysostom

[Peace]

1 minute ago, chrysostom said:

My response would be (since you're asking some people, in essence, to defend or characterize themselves) that if you had to pin me down I would probably be considered trad, depending on who you talked to. I have a lot of opinions about stuff, but most of it is in the context of learning and deepening my knowledge of faith and history which is an ongoing process. I have no particular interest in defending other people I don't know against impressions you have formed about them except to say that some certain generalizations in the paragraphs above come off as judgy as anything I've ever seen on here.

I'm guessing you're posting this with good will and some kind of an open mind, but we're not exactly starting from zero here.

Happy Feast of Christ the King!

Thanks. You too.

I am extremely judgmental, but nobody is perfect.

I wouldn't say that I want anybody to defend themselves. I would guess that many of my impressions are wrong, but yeah, I don't get where a lot of Trads are coming from. If my impressions are false, I have difficulty understanding what the truth of the matter is, or what the alternative is, I guess you could say.

Of course, not every one of my impressions applies to every Trad in the world. To a certain extent you have to generalize to start a discussion of that sort. If we are talking about this forum, for example, my impressions seem to apply much more strongly to some Trads, but not so much, if at all, for others. But I think there is a general trend, tbh.

[cruciatacara]

Peace, we aren't all trads here but I do agree that Phatmass over the years seems to have become basically a trad influenced forum. It can be a little off-putting when one isn't a trad, but I still come to check things out and always hope there will be a chance for some different views while not generating antagonism. I think you walk the line pretty well. 

[chrysostom]

3 hours ago, Peace said:

Thanks. You too.

I am extremely judgmental, but nobody is perfect.

I wouldn't say that I want anybody to defend themselves. I would guess that many of my impressions are wrong, but yeah, I don't get where a lot of Trads are coming from. If my impressions are false, I have difficulty understanding what the truth of the matter is, or what the alternative is, I guess you could say.

Of course, not every one of my impressions applies to every Trad in the world. To a certain extent you have to generalize to start a discussion of that sort. If we are talking about this forum, for example, my impressions seem to apply much more strongly to some Trads, but not so much, if at all, for others. But I think there is a general trend, tbh.

I'm guessing you like to learn things by talking it out? (correct me if I'm wrong.) My learning style is more to watch and wait. Strengths and weaknesses in both methods, but as long as goodwill is present I respect the spirit of inquiry!

In this post, you seem to be critiquing the manner or attitude in which opinions are expressed. But also perhaps the opinions themselves. Are you wondering about what's behind the attitude you perceive in some Catholics or are you wondering about the actual opinions and ideas regardless of how they are expressed?

I'm not sure if that's a helpful distinction for you, but maybe answering that will help clarify for lurkers...

[Peace]

1 hour ago, chrysostom said:

I'm guessing you like to learn things by talking it out? (correct me if I'm wrong.) My learning style is more to watch and wait. Strengths and weaknesses in both methods, but as long as goodwill is present I respect the spirit of inquiry!

In this post, you seem to be critiquing the manner or attitude in which opinions are expressed. But also perhaps the opinions themselves. Are you wondering about what's behind the attitude you perceive in some Catholics or are you wondering about the actual opinions and ideas regardless of how they are expressed?

I'm not sure if that's a helpful distinction for you, but maybe answering that will help clarify for lurkers...

I would say both attitude and opinions, but I'll try to get back to you later with a bit more detail on that.

[Aloysius]

it's interesting to note I think a lot of people who were JPII-era "conservative (for lack of a better term)" Catholics have ended up a bit traddy during the Francis era.  I think that's a combination of Benedict's program of mutual enrichment between TLM and Novus Ordo that many of found resonant and drove them more into traditional liturgical norms, and then a sense of dismay over things said and done by Pope Francis (and / or the way things said and done by Pope Francis were portrayed by the media) that maybe made them a bit more fretful about the direction of the church and outspoken about that.  When it comes to what you identify as a trad-lean in the phorums probably has a lot to do with people that went along that trajectory, and back in the day most traddys were eventually chased off the boards, despite all my attempts to mediate between the two groups... ahhh memories.  :D

I imagine in the Church at large there is such a movement of attitudes, though I am not sure how much it's a movement towards being a 'trad' or just being a fretful 'conservative' catholic confused and worried about what they perceive is going on.  it would be interesting to see good polling done in that regard to know whether this trad movement is actually growing or just getting more visible on the internet.

either way people with such anxieties about the direction of the church would certainly tend to be more outspoken about their problems.  to them the church must seem like quite a dysfunctional family at the moment, and a thread like this must seem like a family member saying "oh come now, remember the good times!".

one thing that might be true in terms of people not accepting different cultural iterations of the liturgy might also be that they're spinning their wheels so caught up in the sense of loss of the traditions of the liturgy and the liturgical spirit.  look to the Eastern Orthodox / Eastern Catholic liturgies to see a preserved liturgical spirit, for example.  While enculturation can be good, it's not just supposed to be a meeting where anyone can express their prayers in any individualistic personal way (although it would be good to have additional prayer meetings like that, that's not what the liturgy is for).  there is a certain ethos of the liturgy you can see across all eastern liturgies and the traditional roman liturgy; gospel music or some specific enculturated aspect need not take away from that, what tends to take away from that is an underlying attitude of innovation that some people approach the liturgy with.

Personally I like good gospel music and think it can fit into the Roman Liturgy just fine, though i do prefer the solemn approach of gregorian chant, but there's some heights of spirituality a good gospel song can reach that are great.  I think adding more musical instruments should always be viewed with suspicion though--a good liturgical principle is that the music should be driven as much as possible by the human voice and the words being sung IMO.  But give me Gospel music over the music of Haugen and Haas any day!!

[Jaime]

Al something tells me you’re not going to hear any Haas ever again

[Aloysius]

1 minute ago, Jaime said:

Al something tells me you’re not going to hear any Haas ever again

well I'd much rather it be because people decided his music was a bad fit for liturgies.  I see there is a sexual abuse scandal surrounding him, that he seems to have admitted to.  Prayers for all the victims.  Quite a sad story, it looks like.

It is an interesting question as to whether something like that should mean people should no longer sing the songs he wrote, though.  Similar question to things like Michael Jackson and the accusations against him.  But that would derail the thread, I suppose.  I can see both sides of such an issue, particularly in terms of whether he gets royalties for hymn books that are sold with his songs in them.  I don't know the answer there (it's obviously not the most important part of that story anyway, but since I brought him up in the context of his music I mention it) but I see official publications are removing him from their books.  I usually attend English masses in non-English speaking countries that often have outdated hymnals so probably the ripple effect of removing him will take some time before it affects hymnals I come across in mass.

((as far as the Haugen and Haas music (outside that issue), I don't hate it all outside the liturgy, some of it would make a good TV theme song for some kind of Catholic soap opera or daytime talk show.))

((I hope that doesn't cause any offense to anyone who has gotten something from that music.  my opinion that it's not right for the liturgy doesn't mean it couldn't have been meaningful to you at some point in your life.  ok enough caveats added))

[Jaime]

3 minutes ago, Aloysius said:

well I'd much rather it be because people decided his music was a bad fit for liturgies.  I see there is a sexual abuse scandal surrounding him, that he seems to have admitted to.  Prayers for all the victims.  Quite a sad story, it looks like.

It is an interesting question as to whether something like that should mean people should no longer sing the songs he wrote, though.  Similar question to things like Michael Jackson and the accusations against him.  But that would derail the thread, I suppose.  I can see both sides of such an issue, particularly in terms of whether he gets royalties for hymn books that are sold with his songs in them.  I don't know the answer there (it's obviously not the most important part of that story anyway, but since I brought him up in the context of his music I mention it) but I see official publications are removing him from their books.  I usually attend English masses in non-English speaking countries that often have outdated hymnals so probably the ripple effect of removing him will take some time before it affects hymnals I come across in mass.

I’ve never been a fan either (although I’ve had to play almost every piece he’s written). I know several of his victims personally and I would rather it was because his music was bad and not because he is a pig.  

But thank you for letting me go off topic.  

As far as the trad debate, I really don’t have a problem with 95% of their position save the presumption that the TLM is the only mass that is valid.  I spent a year of my life working with the poor in Guatemala and never did I hear one say “You know what would be great?  Mass in Latin!!”  

Some people love the TLM and that’s great!! But the Eucharist isn’t 50% more Jesus at the TLM is it?  Reverence is required yes but reverence isn’t universal.  How other cultures show reverence is different.

[chrysostom]

I have never personally met anyone who believes the ordinary form is invalid. I'm sure those people are out there, though.

Edited October 26, 2020 by chrysostom

[Ash Wednesday]

Just a reminder for people posting to please avoid going down the Extraordinary vs. Ordinary Form/Validity of Vatican II debate rabbit hole. Otherwise we'd have to lock the thread. I'm inclined to hope that most of us know this and will behave, but for new and unfamiliar visitors, I don't want this thread to veer into Catholic vs. Catholic debate, which is against the forum rules on here.

[fides' Jack]

I personally never understood the "Catholic vs. Catholic debate" thing.  I honestly don't know what it means.  Catholics debate other catholics on here all the time, as has been happening vociferously regarding Pope Francis and his comments, or several other 2020 issues.

Seriously, what exactly is prohibited?