Suscipe Domine Traditional Catholic Forum

The Church Courtyard => General Catholic Discussion => Topic started by: 2Towers on September 08, 2019, 08:18:48 PM

Title: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: 2Towers on September 08, 2019, 08:18:48 PM
I wanted to be Catholic most of my life, and finally became one in 2014.  One of the reasons it took so long was that my father was an Episcopal Priest.  I felt like I would be betraying him, but when it became clear he was an atheist, that took some of the power out of my concerns.  This is the very short version of things.

A crisis finally propelled me into becoming Catholic and life got better right away.  Since then I have been working towards leaving my sinful days behind and becoming more and more converted towards sainthood.  I have made great progress, but I still have a ways to go.  Don't we all.

I found a wonderful church. Adoration at this church is 24 hours.  I feel the presence of Christ there like no where else, I would hate to leave  The priests have been good, the music great [very hard to find]  but clapping and pass the peace leave me cold.  I feel like that is too Protestant. I have nothing against Protestants, I just didn't like being one.  I love being Catholic.

Being a Trad, I usually get a lot of space in the pews.  I look fine.  I just don't do the hands up thing all the time, that is what the priest is supposed to do not me.  I don't do the hand holding thing during the Lord's prayer.  All of this seems to mystify them. The Mass should be solemn and reverent.

This week two things happened, and I am not sure what to do.  .  They have started getting people to put on name tags.  I don't know if it is temporary or permanent.  That flies all over me.  The other thing, they put a page in the newsletter about an "Hour with Father Martin" via facebook in the family life center this week, and a whole big shpeel  about LGBTQ community etc.  I don't want to open that can of worms in this discussion, just that it happened bothers me.

The only Latin Mass in Metro Atlanta is about thirty minutes away.  I have never been to one.  I hate to leave my home Church but I am giving it some thought.  Am I over reacting?  Do they get into hand holding and pass the peace in the Latin mass?

Thanks,
2t
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Davis Blank - EG on September 08, 2019, 09:25:35 PM
It is a mere 30 minutes away and you aren't going?  My family travels 90 minutes each way by public transport.

No hand holding, no swaying, no name tags, no LGBTQ, no clapping, no nonsense.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: 2Towers on September 08, 2019, 09:32:56 PM
I figure they are packed to the rafters.  But maybe they aren't.  Maybe there are that few trads around down here.  I was shocked when the AB invited Fr. Martin to speak at diocesan see in Atlanta.  I didn't realize he was so liberal until the Pope whisked him off to Washington. 

Thanks for responding.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Gardener on September 08, 2019, 10:15:24 PM
If transportation is an issue, contact the parish and see if they have any parishioners who are near your current location -- they almost certainly do. They might be able to arrange some rides for you to check it out.

I met a guy today after Mass who drives with his family 90 minutes to get to the parish.

Only hands I see being held at the TLM are those of little kids trying to escape the pews.

Don't try to "understand" the Mass (who can? It's a mystery!), but rather focus on praying it as best as possible.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: diaduit on September 09, 2019, 02:50:44 AM
There is no hand holding, clapping or anything charismatic like in the Latin mass.  It is quiet and for the most part people have either heads down in prayer or face forward looking at the priest.  I've been to masses where kids have fallen or somebody has knocked over a walking stick and not one head has turned around to see what was the kerfuffle. Mid week mass is even quieter.  NO mass is so full of noise and babble I can never get to finish a Hail Mary never mind actually concentrate on Our Lord in the Tabernacle and I find my mind is muddled/agitated after attending.
Most definitely you will not hear or see anything about LGBTQ issues except solid Catholic doctrine in relation to sin.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 09, 2019, 04:46:29 AM
The typical Trad Latin Mass is NOT QUIET.  Trads are fond of claiming how mysterious and reverent the TLM is.  But the reality of the TLM these days, particularly Sunday TLMs, is that they are, for me, as noisy and cacophonous as your typical NO Mass.

It's true you won't hear anything in the way of modern theology though.  And perhaps you don't mind praying against a backdrop of constantly crying babies and toddlers having tantrums. 

So give it a go, especially during the week if you can when it tends to be (marginally) quieter.  Get a Missal.  I'm sure it helps to be able to bury your nose in a book to keep out the mayhem going on around you, like people do when they're travelling.

Oh, and take ear plugs, just in case you don't like 'Mass in the Creche'.  It's what I was advised to do on this forum in order to cope with the typical Trad 'Screaming Baby Mass'.

Of course, this kind of noise might not bother you at all.  But if it does, don't dare say anything.  Hell hath no fury …..

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Lynne on September 09, 2019, 05:29:12 AM
By the way, I don't know if this Mass (location) is closer for you...

https://sspx.org/en/st-michaels-church-roswell-atlanta-georgia (https://sspx.org/en/st-michaels-church-roswell-atlanta-georgia)

Roswell (Atlanta) Georgia
715 Hardscrabble Road,
Roswell (Atlanta), GA 30075
770-992-8171

Confessions:
Sunday 7:30-8:00, 9:00-10:00;
Saturday 9:30-10:00

Mass:
Sunday 8:00 (Low), 10:00 (High)
Tu-Fr 11:00
Sat 9:00
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: spasiisochrani on September 09, 2019, 08:24:39 AM
You could visit these places, too:

https://archatl.com/places/eastern-rite/ (https://archatl.com/places/eastern-rite/)
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: aquinas138 on September 09, 2019, 12:09:32 PM
You could visit these places, too:

https://archatl.com/places/eastern-rite/ (https://archatl.com/places/eastern-rite/)

I used to be a parishioner at Epiphany Byzantine in Roswell. It's a good parish, and the new pastor is a wonderful, knowledgable priest. You will not get any nonsense there. There's a good mix of the older Ruthenian/Ukrainian crowd and several younger families. Many are "Roman refugees," some are converts from Protestant and Orthodox backgrounds—you certainly don't have to be from a Slavic background to fit right in. Although, it helps to like Eastern European food! Their founders day picnic is in late September, so that might be a good time to visit.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: St.Justin on September 09, 2019, 01:22:59 PM
The typical Trad Latin Mass is NOT QUIET.  Trads are fond of claiming how mysterious and reverent the TLM is.  But the reality of the TLM these days, particularly Sunday TLMs, is that they are, for me, as noisy and cacophonous as your typical NO Mass.

It's true you won't hear anything in the way of modern theology though.  And perhaps you don't mind praying against a backdrop of constantly crying babies and toddlers having tantrums. 

So give it a go, especially during the week if you can when it tends to be (marginally) quieter.  Get a Missal.  I'm sure it helps to be able to bury your nose in a book to keep out the mayhem going on around you, like people do when they're travelling.

Oh, and take ear plugs, just in case you don't like 'Mass in the Creche'.  It's what I was advised to do on this forum in order to cope with the typical Trad 'Screaming Baby Mass'.

Of course, this kind of noise might not bother you at all.  But if it does, don't dare say anything.  Hell hath no fury …..
I hope this was sarcasm as these families with the crying babies are the future of the Faith.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on September 09, 2019, 02:20:01 PM
The typical Trad Latin Mass is NOT QUIET.  Trads are fond of claiming how mysterious and reverent the TLM is.  But the reality of the TLM these days, particularly Sunday TLMs, is that they are, for me, as noisy and cacophonous as your typical NO Mass.

It's true you won't hear anything in the way of modern theology though.  And perhaps you don't mind praying against a backdrop of constantly crying babies and toddlers having tantrums. 

So give it a go, especially during the week if you can when it tends to be (marginally) quieter.  Get a Missal.  I'm sure it helps to be able to bury your nose in a book to keep out the mayhem going on around you, like people do when they're travelling.

Oh, and take ear plugs, just in case you don't like 'Mass in the Creche'.  It's what I was advised to do on this forum in order to cope with the typical Trad 'Screaming Baby Mass'.

Of course, this kind of noise might not bother you at all.  But if it does, don't dare say anything.  Hell hath no fury …..
I hope this was sarcasm as these families with the crying babies are the future of the Faith.

no, he's dead serious. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: clau clau on September 09, 2019, 04:53:10 PM
I was one of those screaming babies once.  I remember the looks my Mum and Dad used to get and the tsk tsk noises.

I sometimes find the screams annoying but I make a deliberate effort not to turn around.  Most of the time the parents will take the child out of the church but sometimes they dont. I just offer it up.  Maybe I miss some of the sermon.  There are plenty of sermons online I can listen to or read.

It reminds me of a comment from G K Chesterton.

G.K. Chesterton once said that his umbrella helped reveal to him why he knew the Catholic Church was for him. He said that whenever he went to the non-Catholic churches, he would customarily leave his umbrella by the back door during the worship service. In these churches, his umbrella would always be there waiting for him when he went back out. But the first time went into a Catholic church to hear Mass, his umbrella disappeared from the back of the church. Someone had stolen it.

His conclusion? If the Catholic church offered such a generous and open doorway to the rabble, being a home for both sinners and saints, then he had indeed found a home where he could also fumble along into the Kingdom. He also added, “Every one on this earth should believe, amid whatever madness or moral failure, that his life and temperament have some object on the earth. Every one on the earth should believe that he has something to give to the world which cannot otherwise be given.”
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: St.Justin on September 09, 2019, 04:58:21 PM
The typical Trad Latin Mass is NOT QUIET.  Trads are fond of claiming how mysterious and reverent the TLM is.  But the reality of the TLM these days, particularly Sunday TLMs, is that they are, for me, as noisy and cacophonous as your typical NO Mass.

It's true you won't hear anything in the way of modern theology though.  And perhaps you don't mind praying against a backdrop of constantly crying babies and toddlers having tantrums. 

So give it a go, especially during the week if you can when it tends to be (marginally) quieter.  Get a Missal.  I'm sure it helps to be able to bury your nose in a book to keep out the mayhem going on around you, like people do when they're travelling.

Oh, and take ear plugs, just in case you don't like 'Mass in the Creche'.  It's what I was advised to do on this forum in order to cope with the typical Trad 'Screaming Baby Mass'.

Of course, this kind of noise might not bother you at all.  But if it does, don't dare say anything.  Hell hath no fury …..
I hope this was sarcasm as these families with the crying babies are the future of the Faith.

no, he's dead serious.

The apost;es were rebuked for just such an attitude.

Matthew 19:13 *Then were little children presented to him, that he should lay his hands upon them and pray. And the disciples rebuked them.

14 But Jesus said to them: *Suffer the little children, and forbid them not to come to me: for the kingdom of heaven is for such.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Michael Wilson on September 09, 2019, 05:21:21 PM
My sister attended the Roswell Chapel for many years until she moved to Texas; its a real nice chapel.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: bigbadtrad on September 09, 2019, 05:42:50 PM
Most traditional Masses are quiet worldwide. You won't have any problem kneeling, praying, and thanking God for his grace to attend.

If there is a child screaming, which does happen on occasion, it's not a Novus Ordo irreverence but a family trying to raise their kids.

Awkward's categorization is incredibly rare. Most parents who have kids usually take their kids out of church if they act up.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 09, 2019, 05:57:45 PM
The apost;es were rebuked for just such an attitude.

Matthew 19:13 *Then were little children presented to him, that he should lay his hands upon them and pray. And the disciples rebuked them.

14 But Jesus said to them: *Suffer the little children, and forbid them not to come to me: for the kingdom of heaven is for such.

And yet there is a striking absence of babies and toddlers at the most sacred and significant events of Christ's Ministry.

Were there little children at the Last Supper?

The Mass is not a toddler training class.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 09, 2019, 06:01:41 PM
Most traditional Masses are quiet worldwide. You won't have any problem kneeling, praying, and thanking God for his grace to attend.

If there is a child screaming, which does happen on occasion, it's not a Novus Ordo irreverence but a family trying to raise their kids.

Awkward's categorization is incredibly rare. Most parents who have kids usually take their kids out of church if they act up.

You know this isn't true.  Why pretend?

It's no use promising Catholics the reverence and holiness of the true Mass when the reality of the typical (particularly) Sunday TLM is so very different.

I agree that not everyone minds the noise.  But many do.  They tend not to say anything and grit their teeth - or leave - because of the vitriol that inevitably results.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: TheReturnofLive on September 09, 2019, 06:06:43 PM
The apost;es were rebuked for just such an attitude.

Matthew 19:13 *Then were little children presented to him, that he should lay his hands upon them and pray. And the disciples rebuked them.

14 But Jesus said to them: *Suffer the little children, and forbid them not to come to me: for the kingdom of heaven is for such.

And yet there is a striking absence of babies and toddlers at the most sacred and significant events of Christ's Ministry.

Were there little children at the Last Supper?

The Mass is not a toddler training class.

Except when it was, and still is; as back in the day in the Roman Church, infants would receive Confirmation after Baptism and would also, thus, receive Communion.

Just read "Francis of Assisi: A New Biography" by Augustine Thompson; he was Baptized and Confirmed by the Bishop during the Easter Vigil, and received Communion that same day.

This is reflected in all the Eastern Rites which do the same thing. Indeed, Confirmation as a Sacrament for "those who hit the age of reason," completely separate from Baptism, was a novelty in the Roman Rite.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on September 09, 2019, 06:19:23 PM
The apost;es were rebuked for just such an attitude.

Matthew 19:13 *Then were little children presented to him, that he should lay his hands upon them and pray. And the disciples rebuked them.

14 But Jesus said to them: *Suffer the little children, and forbid them not to come to me: for the kingdom of heaven is for such.

And yet there is a striking absence of babies and toddlers at the most sacred and significant events of Christ's Ministry.

Were there little children at the Last Supper?

The Mass is not a toddler training class.

The only people attending The Last Supper were Christ and his Apostles (bishops). There weren't any laity there.... regardless of age.

Also, one of the joyful mysteries is the finding of the child Jesus in the temple.  Christ was also an infant at the Nativity.  Those were significant and sacred events of His life.  I assume there were children His first miracle, as well
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: 2Towers on September 09, 2019, 06:27:02 PM
If transportation is an issue, contact the parish and see if they have any parishioners who are near your current location -- they almost certainly do. They might be able to arrange some rides for you to check it out.

I met a guy today after Mass who drives with his family 90 minutes to get to the parish.

Only hands I see being held at the TLM are those of little kids trying to escape the pews.

Don't try to "understand" the Mass (who can? It's a mystery!), but rather focus on praying it as best as possible.

Thanks!  I guess that brings up another good question, I think they have missiles that have Latin on one side, English on the other.  I wonder if most folks even try to learn liturgical Latin or just memorize the transliteration sounds.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: 2Towers on September 09, 2019, 06:35:12 PM
There is no hand holding, clapping or anything charismatic like in the Latin mass.  It is quiet and for the most part people have either heads down in prayer or face forward looking at the priest.  I've been to masses where kids have fallen or somebody has knocked over a walking stick and not one head has turned around to see what was the kerfuffle. Mid week mass is even quieter.  NO mass is so full of noise and babble I can never get to finish a Hail Mary never mind actually concentrate on Our Lord in the Tabernacle and I find my mind is muddled/agitated after attending.
Most definitely you will not hear or see anything about LGBTQ issues except solid Catholic doctrine in relation to sin.

So you prefer NO? [which is fine if you can find one you like.  I never accept our Lord in the hand even at NO]
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: 2Towers on September 09, 2019, 06:48:53 PM
Crying babies are rare at my church.  I never gave it much thought.  Maybe they don't go to the vigil.  There is an autistic kid /CP who shrieks some, but that doesn't bother me as I am a sped teacher.

The business with the hands is what really bothers me, and the clapping.  If people try to say hello during the "greet your neighbor" phase I am of course polite, but I don't turn around.  If someone "jets" over to me before the Lord's prayer, I don't refuse, it just annoys me.  The name tags and an evening with Fr. Martin were really the last straw. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Gardener on September 09, 2019, 07:13:11 PM
If transportation is an issue, contact the parish and see if they have any parishioners who are near your current location -- they almost certainly do. They might be able to arrange some rides for you to check it out.

I met a guy today after Mass who drives with his family 90 minutes to get to the parish.

Only hands I see being held at the TLM are those of little kids trying to escape the pews.

Don't try to "understand" the Mass (who can? It's a mystery!), but rather focus on praying it as best as possible.

Thanks!  I guess that brings up another good question, I think they have missiles that have Latin on one side, English on the other.  I wonder if most folks even try to learn liturgical Latin or just memorize the transliteration sounds.

It's really up to you. Follow in the missal with rabid attention or just simply follow Christ to Calvary and watch as He offers Himself to the Father for your sins. Or pay attention to the Missal at certain parts (hint: the bells are there for a reason -- to clue in the laity something extra important is about to happen).

My advice is to not worry about the missal at first. It will be a frustration and distraction from what is occurring.

Just go. Pray. That is actual participation in Mass.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on September 09, 2019, 07:21:53 PM
I actually prefer to just look at the crucifix and pray silently as Mass is being offered, and sing when the choir sings.  The missal is helpful when my mind can't sit still and focus, which is more often than not, honestly.  But, ideally, I would just kneel and adore Our Lord the whole time, sans missal.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Flick on September 09, 2019, 08:10:22 PM
Most traditional Masses are quiet worldwide. You won't have any problem kneeling, praying, and thanking God for his grace to attend.

If there is a child screaming, which does happen on occasion, it's not a Novus Ordo irreverence but a family trying to raise their kids.

Awkward's categorization is incredibly rare. Most parents who have kids usually take their kids out of church if they act up.

You know this isn't true.  Why pretend?

It's no use promising Catholics the reverence and holiness of the true Mass when the reality of the typical (particularly) Sunday TLM is so very different.

I agree that not everyone minds the noise.  But many do.  They tend not to say anything and grit their teeth - or leave - because of the vitriol that inevitably results.


Yes, why pretend?

Since I was able to find a TLM in 1991 I have attended Mass at three Society chapels: Hopkington, NY; Hudson Falls, NY; North Caldwell, NJ, an independent chapel in West Orange, NJ, and the same West Orange church now staffed by the ICKSP and never in all these Masses has anything remotely happened with children crying as you assert.

Additionally, in my years of attending my parish in Caldwell, NJ--1947-1970--has there been any been any long crying at Mass.  (There was on one occasion, but my mother took me out!!)

It just doesn't happen.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 10, 2019, 03:09:49 AM
Denial is not a river in Egypt.

Admit it.  Babies and toddlers at Mass is the one Vatican II innovation that Trads have adopted wholeheartedly.

Read St Therese of Lisieux.  In 'Story of a Soul' she describes staying at home with 'Mama' because she was considered too young to attend Sunday Mass.

How did she ever become a Saint?
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Lynne on September 10, 2019, 05:05:19 AM
There is no hand holding, clapping or anything charismatic like in the Latin mass.  It is quiet and for the most part people have either heads down in prayer or face forward looking at the priest.  I've been to masses where kids have fallen or somebody has knocked over a walking stick and not one head has turned around to see what was the kerfuffle. Mid week mass is even quieter.  NO mass is so full of noise and babble I can never get to finish a Hail Mary never mind actually concentrate on Our Lord in the Tabernacle and I find my mind is muddled/agitated after attending.
Most definitely you will not hear or see anything about LGBTQ issues except solid Catholic doctrine in relation to sin.

So you prefer NO? [which is fine if you can find one you like.  I never accept our Lord in the hand even at NO]

No, she goes to a TLM (in Ireland  :) )
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Gardener on September 10, 2019, 07:55:37 AM
The apost;es were rebuked for just such an attitude.

Matthew 19:13 *Then were little children presented to him, that he should lay his hands upon them and pray. And the disciples rebuked them.

14 But Jesus said to them: *Suffer the little children, and forbid them not to come to me: for the kingdom of heaven is for such.

And yet there is a striking absence of babies and toddlers at the most sacred and significant events of Christ's Ministry.

Were there little children at the Last Supper?

The Mass is not a toddler training class.

The Last Supper was the mystical enacting of Calvary, by which Christ enacted His perpetual Sacrifice under the appearance of bread and wine. But one doesn't get to escape Calvary by appealing to the Last Supper -- the Novus Ordo tries, and has lost all semblance of the truly sacred, profound, and real.

At the Crucifixion there were a few saints, yes. But it would not have been quiet or even reverent. For additionally there was the bad thief and the crowds wandering by, wagging their tongues. There were pagan soldiers who were foul mouthed. Flies. The heat of the day. Likely the stench of the dead whose bodies had been carted off already, their evacuated refuse at the feet of the 3 crosses' vertical beams. The screaming of the condemned sinner who would mock Christ. The guttural wailing of recognizing death that most men think will not escape their lips until the spectre of death sits perched above their heads.

At the Last Supper was Judas, embodying the personal worthlessness of it all for all who would reject the reality of what was occurring, quiet and reverent as it was.

Tell us, awkward, was Calvary more or less special and sacred than the Last Supper?
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Innocent Smith on September 10, 2019, 08:16:22 AM
Denial is not a river in Egypt.

Admit it.  Babies and toddlers at Mass is the one Vatican II innovation that Trads have adopted wholeheartedly.

Read St Therese of Lisieux.  In 'Story of a Soul' she describes staying at home with 'Mama' because she was considered too young to attend Sunday Mass.

How did she ever become a Saint?
Yup. And it seems to me that most are so hardcore for the Mass that they wouldn't even think of missing a minute or two by taking their child out to the vestibule for a spell. Even if it wrecks a beautiful and quiet Low Mass for everyone else.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 10, 2019, 08:40:08 AM
Denial is not a river in Egypt.

Admit it.  Babies and toddlers at Mass is the one Vatican II innovation that Trads have adopted wholeheartedly.

Read St Therese of Lisieux.  In 'Story of a Soul' she describes staying at home with 'Mama' because she was considered too young to attend Sunday Mass.

How did she ever become a Saint?
Yup. And it seems to me that most are so hardcore for the Mass that they wouldn't even think of missing a minute or two by taking their child out to the vestibule for a spell. Even if it wrecks a beautiful and quiet Low Mass for everyone else.

Beautiful and quiet Low Masses are largely a thing of the past.  They can be found but they are rare indeed.

I'm not sure what kind of devotion to the Mass this demonstrates.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 10, 2019, 08:50:57 AM
Trads demonstrate their love of the traditional Mass by wrecking its beautiful silence.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Innocent Smith on September 10, 2019, 08:55:13 AM
Denial is not a river in Egypt.

Admit it.  Babies and toddlers at Mass is the one Vatican II innovation that Trads have adopted wholeheartedly.

Read St Therese of Lisieux.  In 'Story of a Soul' she describes staying at home with 'Mama' because she was considered too young to attend Sunday Mass.

How did she ever become a Saint?
Yup. And it seems to me that most are so hardcore for the Mass that they wouldn't even think of missing a minute or two by taking their child out to the vestibule for a spell. Even if it wrecks a beautiful and quiet Low Mass for everyone else.

Beautiful and quiet Low Masses are largely a thing of the past.  They can be found but they are rare indeed.

I'm not sure what kind of devotion to the Mass this demonstrates.
Well you know they home school, travel far, and probably don't feed the poor kids. With all that sacrifice why should they miss a moment?
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: TheReturnofLive on September 10, 2019, 09:20:26 AM
Denial is not a river in Egypt.

Admit it.  Babies and toddlers at Mass is the one Vatican II innovation that Trads have adopted wholeheartedly.

Read St Therese of Lisieux.  In 'Story of a Soul' she describes staying at home with 'Mama' because she was considered too young to attend Sunday Mass.

How did she ever become a Saint?

Bro, did you even read my post?

Are the Eastern Catholics inferior spiritually because they allow infants to commune?
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on September 10, 2019, 09:37:42 AM
Denial is not a river in Egypt.

Admit it.  Babies and toddlers at Mass is the one Vatican II innovation that Trads have adopted wholeheartedly.

Read St Therese of Lisieux.  In 'Story of a Soul' she describes staying at home with 'Mama' because she was considered too young to attend Sunday Mass.

How did she ever become a Saint?
Yup. And it seems to me that most are so hardcore for the Mass that they wouldn't even think of missing a minute or two by taking their child out to the vestibule for a spell. Even if it wrecks a beautiful and quiet Low Mass for everyone else.

Low Masses weren't even intended for the laity, from what I understand.  They were originally designed for monestaries, so multiple Masses could be said at once at various altars in the same place. 

Ideally, the most pleasing form of worship to God on Sundays is the sung High Mass.  Low Masses are done when High Mass can't be done for some reason. 

Also, the Mass isn't about us or our enjoyment of it, nor do our preferences for how it's done matter one bit.  The only thing that matters is that worship be given to God in the way that is most pleasing to Him.  The Mass is all about Him.  It's a NO innovation to have the idea that Mass should be pleasing to the people and all about accommodating the congregation.  Parents still have an obligation under the 10 commandments to assist at Holy Mass on Sundays and Holy Days; having  children does not abrogate them from that duty, and as it's a mortal sin to skip Mass without grave reason....

Our Lord was quite specific in the gospel about how he felt about children, as St. Justin pointed out earlier.  So, it's safe to assume that children at Mass is not displeasing to Our Lord.  If parents fail to take disruptive children out, then the parish priest should address it accordingly.  All the parents I go to Mass with do their best to keep their kids quiet, or step out with a child if they are disruptive.  Your mileage may vary, of course. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on September 10, 2019, 09:41:56 AM
Denial is not a river in Egypt.

Admit it.  Babies and toddlers at Mass is the one Vatican II innovation that Trads have adopted wholeheartedly.

Read St Therese of Lisieux.  In 'Story of a Soul' she describes staying at home with 'Mama' because she was considered too young to attend Sunday Mass.

How did she ever become a Saint?
Yup. And it seems to me that most are so hardcore for the Mass that they wouldn't even think of missing a minute or two by taking their child out to the vestibule for a spell. Even if it wrecks a beautiful and quiet Low Mass for everyone else.

Beautiful and quiet Low Masses are largely a thing of the past.  They can be found but they are rare indeed.

I'm not sure what kind of devotion to the Mass this demonstrates.
Well you know they home school, travel far, and probably don't feed the poor kids. With all that sacrifice why should they miss a moment?

This is just rude and blatantly false.  I don't know any traditional Catholic parent who neglects to feed their children, or thinks that their privalege to participate in Mass is higher than anyone else's.

Many if us do homeschool and travel far for Mass, though.  I will grant you that one.  Although, lots and lots of people travel far distances for Sunday Mass, regardless of if they have children or not.  I'm not sure what that has to do with the price of eggs in China, though. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: bigbadtrad on September 10, 2019, 09:51:42 AM

The first Mass wasn't the Last Supper, that's a prefiguring. The real first Mass was the Crucifixion, that's why the Mass is called the unbloody sacrifice of Calvary, not the Last Supper. How quiet was it there? Yet saints were made. People crying, Our Lord wincing in pain, and Our Lady weeping, soldiers laughing in derision, and yes babies crying, "Do not weep for me but for your children."

The only people who believe what you say are bitter, nasty people who hold families in scorn thinking that "if only those nasty kids weren't here we'd all be in ecstasy."  You're just giving the caricature of nasty older people who hate families and stare at every yawn or sneeze a child makes. Yup, I know your kind well.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: bigbadtrad on September 10, 2019, 10:11:40 AM
The apost;es were rebuked for just such an attitude.

Matthew 19:13 *Then were little children presented to him, that he should lay his hands upon them and pray. And the disciples rebuked them.

14 But Jesus said to them: *Suffer the little children, and forbid them not to come to me: for the kingdom of heaven is for such.

And yet there is a striking absence of babies and toddlers at the most sacred and significant events of Christ's Ministry.

Were there little children at the Last Supper?

The Mass is not a toddler training class.

You get an award for misleading.

No one thinks it's toddler training. The 1st Joyful Mysteries are all about children, the Sorrowful were mostly the middle of the night, and ones that weren't had children present.

Both the East and West had infant Holy Communion for centuries as TheReturnofLive points out, and do you think with all of the children receiving from baptism their whole lives churches were quiet? Unless you expect a woman not to go to Mass for 20 years they usually had kids for 20 years. If you think this was normal give me some history of woman missing Mass for 20 years.

I don't remember Our Lord saying the Church was for adults only but I do remember Him saying not to stop the children from coming to Him. You have a strange way of twisting Our Lord, history, and reality.

Several people have pointed out your caricature but of course your bitterness has no limit. My guess is you've stared down so many people and get upset when they look back at you as if your kingdom was violated. You're so bitter you use the Last Supper as a litmus test when Calvary is what Mass is. You've confused Catholicism for a hermitage.

This is how we should think of children:
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-MKfsie5xO1M/TVhEFDdcCzI/AAAAAAAAAto/DtmjKYnCjbg/s1600/st+pio.jpg)
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: St.Justin on September 10, 2019, 12:07:37 PM
I really think in addition to what was said about the origin of low Masses. I think it really came about when the Priest started saying multiple Masses and it was hard on them to do multiple High Masses. Also early morning Masses or laborers etc.
I love a low Mass as I can focus on the Mass and not some choir member who can't sing or someone swinging an incensor around.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Ascetik on September 10, 2019, 01:06:31 PM
Stop going to the Novus Ordo. There is an FSSP in Mableton or the SSPX in Roswell. Take your pick. I used to commute 45 minutes one way to mass multiple times a week. 30 minutes is nothing.

I have been to both parishes, they're both great, but the FSSP has a lot more young people and young families than St. Michael's in Roswell.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Sempronius on September 10, 2019, 01:23:17 PM
I posted this painting a while ago.

Many kids..

(https://images.fineartamerica.com/images/artworkimages/mediumlarge/1/mass-in-the-expiatory-chapel-lancelot-theodore-turpin-de-crisse.jpg)
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: diaduit on September 10, 2019, 01:41:09 PM
There is no hand holding, clapping or anything charismatic like in the Latin mass.  It is quiet and for the most part people have either heads down in prayer or face forward looking at the priest.  I've been to masses where kids have fallen or somebody has knocked over a walking stick and not one head has turned around to see what was the kerfuffle. Mid week mass is even quieter.  NO mass is so full of noise and babble I can never get to finish a Hail Mary never mind actually concentrate on Our Lord in the Tabernacle and I find my mind is muddled/agitated after attending.
Most definitely you will not hear or see anything about LGBTQ issues except solid Catholic doctrine in relation to sin.

So you prefer NO? [which is fine if you can find one you like.  I never accept our Lord in the hand even at NO]

God no, I do not like it but funerals and baptisms are par for the course here.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: diaduit on September 10, 2019, 01:52:56 PM
There is a real sense of deja Vu going on here.

Really awkward  if you want adults only at mass you're scaring off one adult who is contemplating about going!!
You have a responsibility for the good of souls to act prudently and using this thread as an opportunity to vent your pet hates is not charitable.
Who knows, the op maybe another curmudgeon like yourself in relation to kids at mass but give em a chance to find the mass first and find out  :)
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 10, 2019, 02:35:25 PM
Bro, did you even read my post?

Are the Eastern Catholics inferior spiritually because they allow infants to commune?

Yes.

No.  But I'm not sure why your question is relevant to the discussion.  At any rate, in the Western Church the practice fell out of favour.  According to the Council of Trent -

Quote
The same holy council teaches that little children who have not attained the use of reason are not by any necessity bound to the sacramental communion of the Eucharist; for having been regenerated by the laver of baptism and thereby incorporated with Christ, they cannot at that age lose the grace of the sons of God already acquired. Antiquity is not therefore to be condemned, however, if in some places it at one time observed that custom. For just as those most holy Fathers had acceptable ground for what they did under the circumstances, so it is certainly to be accepted without controversy that they regarded it as not necessary to salvation.
— Council of Trent, Sess. XXI, chap. iv

What's more -

Quote
If anyone says that communion of the Eucharist is necessary for little children before they have attained the years of discretion, let him be anathema.
— Council of Trent, Sess. XXI, can. iv
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 10, 2019, 02:40:33 PM
The only people who believe what you say are bitter, nasty people who hold families in scorn thinking that "if only those nasty kids weren't here we'd all be in ecstasy."  You're just giving the caricature of nasty older people who hate families and stare at every yawn or sneeze a child makes. Yup, I know your kind well.

What you're saying is that anyone who questions your right to destroy the beautiful silence of the Mass must be old, bitter and nasty.

Holiness and charity in a nutshell.

 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 10, 2019, 02:56:50 PM
Well you know they home school, travel far, and probably don't feed the poor kids. With all that sacrifice why should they miss a moment?

You're onto something here.  It certainly explains their sense of entitlement.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 10, 2019, 03:08:18 PM
There is a real sense of deja Vu going on here.

Really awkward  if you want adults only at mass you're scaring off one adult who is contemplating about going!!
You have a responsibility for the good of souls to act prudently and using this thread as an opportunity to vent your pet hates is not charitable.
Who knows, the op maybe another curmudgeon like yourself in relation to kids at mass but give em a chance to find the mass first and find out  :)

A curmudgeon like myself!  And you think this kind of nastiness is a good advertisement for Tradition.  Not to mention the rest of the vicious comments above.

It's no use promising reverence and holiness and in practice providing noise and commotion.  Some would call that being less than honest.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: ermy_law on September 10, 2019, 03:38:19 PM
The only Latin Mass in Metro Atlanta is about thirty minutes away.  I have never been to one.  I hate to leave my home Church but I am giving it some thought.  Am I over reacting?  Do they get into hand holding and pass the peace in the Latin mass?

Thanks,
2t

I used to live in Macon, Georgia, about 1.5 hours south of Atlanta. When we lived there, we drove to the FSSP parish in Mableton and to the SSPX chapel in Roswell. We rented a hotel and stayed in Atlanta during Holy Week.

Thirty minutes isn't that far. Make the drive.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Non Nobis on September 10, 2019, 04:36:40 PM

The first Mass wasn't the Last Supper, that's a prefiguring. The real first Mass was the Crucifixion, that's why the Mass is called the unbloody sacrifice of Calvary, not the Last Supper.


The Catholic teaching I know is that the Last Supper was the first Mass.  The Crucifixion was the BLOODY Sacrifice of Calvary.  The Mass is the one and the same sacrifice, but re-presented in an UNBLOODY manner.  The Last Supper was the first Mass, the UNBLOODY Sacrifice, with the Consecration and Transubstantiation.  There was no Transubstantiation in the Bloody Sacrifice of Calvary. I think you might say that the Last Supper was the unbloody PRE-presentation of the bloody Sacrifice of Calvary (this just occurs to me).  Notice how the Consecration says that  Christ's blood "SHALL be shed for you and for many unto the remission of sins" - at the Last Supper the Crucifixion had not yet taken place.  The Mass today, while it is also the same sacrifice as the one at Calvary, uses the words of the Last Supper.

Obviously there is mystery here, and I am not positive that I am presenting this in the perfect theological way, but this is how I understand it.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: diaduit on September 10, 2019, 04:41:40 PM
There is a real sense of deja Vu going on here.

Really awkward  if you want adults only at mass you're scaring off one adult who is contemplating about going!!
You have a responsibility for the good of souls to act prudently and using this thread as an opportunity to vent your pet hates is not charitable.
Who knows, the op maybe another curmudgeon like yourself in relation to kids at mass but give em a chance to find the mass first and find out  :)

A curmudgeon like myself!  And you think this kind of nastiness is a good advertisement for Tradition.  Not to mention the rest of the vicious comments above.

It's no use promising reverence and holiness and in practice providing noise and commotion.  Some would call that being less than honest.

Meh, you shot the first arrow !

That being said I do enjoy a curmudgeon vent 😉
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 10, 2019, 05:50:18 PM
There is a real sense of deja Vu going on here.

Really awkward  if you want adults only at mass you're scaring off one adult who is contemplating about going!!
You have a responsibility for the good of souls to act prudently and using this thread as an opportunity to vent your pet hates is not charitable.
Who knows, the op maybe another curmudgeon like yourself in relation to kids at mass but give em a chance to find the mass first and find out  :)

A curmudgeon like myself!  And you think this kind of nastiness is a good advertisement for Tradition.  Not to mention the rest of the vicious comments above.

It's no use promising reverence and holiness and in practice providing noise and commotion.  Some would call that being less than honest.

Meh, you shot the first arrow !

That being said I do enjoy a curmudgeon vent 😉

You enjoy venting at 'curmudgeons'.

So tell me, is there part of you that enjoys the disturbance and distress to 'curmudgeons' that your babies and toddlers cause when they kick off during Mass?  Do you enjoy the power, even just a little bit?

There are people who let their children rampage about in public places - restaurants, cafes, art galleries etc - because they enjoy the annoyance to others that it causes.  Yes, there really are people like that.

And anyone who objects, even a young person, is accused of being a nasty, twisted, child-hater.  It's the perfect cover.

How strange that this response is so prevalent here.

Perhaps it explains the vitriol.  There's secret malice behind it.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on September 10, 2019, 06:05:25 PM
Well you know they home school, travel far, and probably don't feed the poor kids. With all that sacrifice why should they miss a moment?

You're onto something here.  It certainly explains their sense of entitlement.

Indeed.  Parents who fulfill their Sunday obligation and educate their children are clearly not feeding them.  It makes perfect logical sense   ::)
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on September 10, 2019, 06:11:56 PM
There is a real sense of deja Vu going on here.

Really awkward  if you want adults only at mass you're scaring off one adult who is contemplating about going!!
You have a responsibility for the good of souls to act prudently and using this thread as an opportunity to vent your pet hates is not charitable.
Who knows, the op maybe another curmudgeon like yourself in relation to kids at mass but give em a chance to find the mass first and find out  :)

A curmudgeon like myself!  And you think this kind of nastiness is a good advertisement for Tradition.  Not to mention the rest of the vicious comments above.

It's no use promising reverence and holiness and in practice providing noise and commotion.  Some would call that being less than honest.

Meh, you shot the first arrow !

That being said I do enjoy a curmudgeon vent 😉

You enjoy venting at 'curmudgeons'.

So tell me, is there part of you that enjoys the disturbance and distress to 'curmudgeons' that your babies and toddlers cause when they kick off during Mass?  Do you enjoy the power, even just a little bit?

There are people who let their children rampage about in public places - restaurants, cafes, art galleries etc - because they enjoy the annoyance to others that it causes.  Yes, there really are people like that.

And anyone who objects, even a young person, is accused of being a nasty, twisted, child-hater.  It's the perfect cover.

How strange that this response is so prevalent here.

Perhaps it explains the vitriol.  There's secret malice behind it.

No, she did not say she enjoys venting at curmudgeons.  I think you misunderstood what she was saying.  She said she enjoys hearing curmudgeons vent. 

As for the rest, it is rash judgment.  There is no secret malice behind many, if not most, parents who take their children to Mass.  For most of us, our intention is not even close to taking enjoyment in allowing our children to be disruptive.  Many of us work extremely hard to teach our children proper behavior in ALL places - in private and public alike.  Many of us take our duty as parents very seriously, though none of us are perfect, of course, and we make mistakes just like everyone else. Anecdotes of the opposite do not apply across the board, which is how you are making it sound. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: mikemac on September 10, 2019, 06:50:21 PM
Bro, did you even read my post?

Are the Eastern Catholics inferior spiritually because they allow infants to commune?

Yes.

No.  But I'm not sure why your question is relevant to the discussion.  At any rate, in the Western Church the practice fell out of favour.  According to the Council of Trent -

Quote
The same holy council teaches that little children who have not attained the use of reason are not by any necessity bound to the sacramental communion of the Eucharist; for having been regenerated by the laver of baptism and thereby incorporated with Christ, they cannot at that age lose the grace of the sons of God already acquired. Antiquity is not therefore to be condemned, however, if in some places it at one time observed that custom. For just as those most holy Fathers had acceptable ground for what they did under the circumstances, so it is certainly to be accepted without controversy that they regarded it as not necessary to salvation.
— Council of Trent, Sess. XXI, chap. iv

What's more -

Quote
If anyone says that communion of the Eucharist is necessary for little children before they have attained the years of discretion, let him be anathema.
— Council of Trent, Sess. XXI, can. iv

This has completely nothing to do with taking children to Mass.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: mikemac on September 10, 2019, 07:00:46 PM
So 2Towers, welcome to awkwardcustomer's whine and cheese party.  I think he actually believes that there was never ever a child present at a Mass for 1965 years before the Second Vatican Council.  That is how ridiculous his whine is.  Please forgive the derailing of your thread.

I would certainly travel the 30 minutes every Sunday to go to the TLM if I were you.  I'm sure you will be glad you did.

By the way, welcome to the forum.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: bigbadtrad on September 10, 2019, 08:02:04 PM
What you're saying is that anyone who questions your right to destroy the beautiful silence of the Mass must be old, bitter and nasty.

Holiness and charity in a nutshell.

Actually I'm making distinctions, something nasty/bitter people don't.

You used the Last Supper as an example - FAIL
You said children screaming is normal - FAIL
You said parents treat it as toddler practice - FAIL
You quote Trent as a straw man - FAIL
Now you say I'm against silence - FAIL

I was a monk as a young man. When I want silence I get silence. Our Lord tells us to go to desert for it, or we call it a retreat.

You're like that battle ax who lives in an apartment with parents who have kids upset with every noise when if you were really serious about "silence" they'd live next to a monastery.

It's Scooby-Doo all over again: "If it wasn't for those pesky kids I would have reached ecstasy." It's alright, I have your mask over here when you want it back.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: bigbadtrad on September 10, 2019, 08:15:25 PM

The first Mass wasn't the Last Supper, that's a prefiguring. The real first Mass was the Crucifixion, that's why the Mass is called the unbloody sacrifice of Calvary, not the Last Supper.


The Catholic teaching I know is that the Last Supper was the first Mass.  The Crucifixion was the BLOODY Sacrifice of Calvary.  The Mass is the one and the same sacrifice, but re-presented in an UNBLOODY manner.  The Last Supper was the first Mass, the UNBLOODY Sacrifice, with the Consecration and Transubstantiation.  There was no Transubstantiation in the Bloody Sacrifice of Calvary. I think you might say that the Last Supper was the unbloody PRE-presentation of the bloody Sacrifice of Calvary (this just occurs to me).  Notice how the Consecration says that  Christ's blood "SHALL be shed for you and for many unto the remission of sins" - at the Last Supper the Crucifixion had not yet taken place.  The Mass today, while it is also the same sacrifice as the one at Calvary, uses the words of the Last Supper.

Obviously there is mystery here, and I am not positive that I am presenting this in the perfect theological way, but this is how I understand it.

The true sacrifice was a prefigurement to the actual sacrifice. The Last Supper is the 1st Mass but only as an unbloody sacrifice of what was to come of the True Sacrifice. The "this is my body" which will shall be given up for you is the Crucifixion. The Last Supper has meaning only through the Crucifixion.

Passover is an "anamnesis" which literally means recollection of past events, but truly it was the full embodiment of living what was lived in the past as to be lived now through a full recollection of the totality of the experience. The anamnesis of the New Testament is True Sacrifice of Calvary. We don't "remember" it literally, it's the anamnesis, the living as if it were true today. We don't just pray the Mass, we live it as if it were happening in real time with Christ. I had a great professor who explained it to me for an hour. It was beautiful.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Gardener on September 10, 2019, 08:31:31 PM

The first Mass wasn't the Last Supper, that's a prefiguring. The real first Mass was the Crucifixion, that's why the Mass is called the unbloody sacrifice of Calvary, not the Last Supper.


The Catholic teaching I know is that the Last Supper was the first Mass.  The Crucifixion was the BLOODY Sacrifice of Calvary.  The Mass is the one and the same sacrifice, but re-presented in an UNBLOODY manner.  The Last Supper was the first Mass, the UNBLOODY Sacrifice, with the Consecration and Transubstantiation.  There was no Transubstantiation in the Bloody Sacrifice of Calvary. I think you might say that the Last Supper was the unbloody PRE-presentation of the bloody Sacrifice of Calvary (this just occurs to me).  Notice how the Consecration says that  Christ's blood "SHALL be shed for you and for many unto the remission of sins" - at the Last Supper the Crucifixion had not yet taken place.  The Mass today, while it is also the same sacrifice as the one at Calvary, uses the words of the Last Supper.

Obviously there is mystery here, and I am not positive that I am presenting this in the perfect theological way, but this is how I understand it.

It's the true sacrifice was a prefigurement to the actual sacrifice. The Last Supper is the 1st Mass but only as an unbloody sacrifice of what was to come of the True Sacrifice. The "this is my body" which will shall be given up for you is the Crucifixion. The Last Supper has meaning only through the Crucifixion.

Passover is an "anamnesis" which literally means recollection of past events, but truly it was the full embodiment of living what was lived in the past as to be lived now through a full recollection of the totality of the experience. The anamnesis of the New Testament is True Sacrifice of Calvary. We don't "remember" it literally, it's the anamnesis, the living as if it were true today. We don't just pray the Mass, we live it as if it were happening in real time with Christ. I had a great professor who explained it to me for an hour. It was beautiful.

"Why is this night different from all other nights?" ... :)

Indeed.

Calvary is truly the crux of history. All flowed to it, and all flows from it. Without Calvary, we'd have only bread and wine. With Calvary, as mystically, truly enacted/prefigured at the Last Supper, we have the Eucharist.

Your professor didn't happen to be Dr. Pitre, was he?
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: TheReturnofLive on September 10, 2019, 09:23:55 PM
Bro, did you even read my post?

Are the Eastern Catholics inferior spiritually because they allow infants to commune?

Yes.

No.  But I'm not sure why your question is relevant to the discussion.  At any rate, in the Western Church the practice fell out of favour.  According to the Council of Trent -

Quote
The same holy council teaches that little children who have not attained the use of reason are not by any necessity bound to the sacramental communion of the Eucharist; for having been regenerated by the laver of baptism and thereby incorporated with Christ, they cannot at that age lose the grace of the sons of God already acquired. Antiquity is not therefore to be condemned, however, if in some places it at one time observed that custom. For just as those most holy Fathers had acceptable ground for what they did under the circumstances, so it is certainly to be accepted without controversy that they regarded it as not necessary to salvation.
— Council of Trent, Sess. XXI, chap. iv

What's more -

Quote
If anyone says that communion of the Eucharist is necessary for little children before they have attained the years of discretion, let him be anathema.
— Council of Trent, Sess. XXI, can. iv

I'll be more convinced if you can pull a section from Trent which forbids children from attending Mass.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: diaduit on September 11, 2019, 03:11:48 AM
There is a real sense of deja Vu going on here.

Really awkward  if you want adults only at mass you're scaring off one adult who is contemplating about going!!
You have a responsibility for the good of souls to act prudently and using this thread as an opportunity to vent your pet hates is not charitable.
Who knows, the op maybe another curmudgeon like yourself in relation to kids at mass but give em a chance to find the mass first and find out  :)

A curmudgeon like myself!  And you think this kind of nastiness is a good advertisement for Tradition.  Not to mention the rest of the vicious comments above.

It's no use promising reverence and holiness and in practice providing noise and commotion.  Some would call that being less than honest.

Meh, you shot the first arrow !

That being said I do enjoy a curmudgeon vent 😉

You enjoy venting at 'curmudgeons'.

So tell me, is there part of you that enjoys the disturbance and distress to 'curmudgeons' that your babies and toddlers cause when they kick off during Mass?  Do you enjoy the power, even just a little bit?

There are people who let their children rampage about in public places - restaurants, cafes, art galleries etc - because they enjoy the annoyance to others that it causes.  Yes, there really are people like that.

And anyone who objects, even a young person, is accused of being a nasty, twisted, child-hater.  It's the perfect cover.

How strange that this response is so prevalent here.

Perhaps it explains the vitriol.  There's secret malice behind it.

Its called  ' lightening the mood' and I said it to take the sting out of the bitterness in your posts in a thread by a possible newcomer and maybe to show that the op shouldn't take what you say too seriously.

You forget Awkward, I have the same noise sensitivity as you (previous thread on this topic) and I understand what it does to you but I don't believe I am entitled to complete silence at mass and I have a far more realistic perception of what constitutes outright disturbance compared to an acceptable range of basic noise.  Add to that I can see that parents ARE actually very understanding and do their best to remove an over fussy child.  Your perception is way off , the problem is YOU.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 11, 2019, 06:05:54 AM
What you're saying is that anyone who questions your right to destroy the beautiful silence of the Mass must be old, bitter and nasty.

Holiness and charity in a nutshell.

Actually I'm making distinctions, something nasty/bitter people don't.

You used the Last Supper as an example - FAIL
You said children screaming is normal - FAIL
You said parents treat it as toddler practice - FAIL
You quote Trent as a straw man - FAIL
Now you say I'm against silence - FAIL

I was a monk as a young man. When I want silence I get silence. Our Lord tells us to go to desert for it, or we call it a retreat.

You're like that battle ax who lives in an apartment with parents who have kids upset with every noise when if you were really serious about "silence" they'd live next to a monastery.

It's Scooby-Doo all over again: "If it wasn't for those pesky kids I would have reached ecstasy." It's alright, I have your mask over here when you want it back.

Thank you for demonstrating yet again the charity and holiness of the Trad parent.

I picked your post to respond to, out of all the other holy and charitable posts, because it contains this statement by you and I wanted to point out how perceptive and intelligent you are.

You said this.

Quote
You're like that battle ax who lives in an apartment with parents who have kids upset with every noise when if you were really serious about "silence" they'd live next to a monastery.

Why did I pick this?  Because I actually do live in an apartment building with lots of parents with kids and have never had a problem with this.  In fact, I love my apartment building.

I had to laugh at your ridiculous caricature.  You people should get out more.  Your immaturity is showing.

You also said this.

Quote
You said parents treat it as toddler practice.

I was only repeating what posters on another thread said - that taking toddlers to Mass was necessary in order to teach them how to behave at Mass. Parents taking toddlers to Mass in order to teach them how to behave at Mass sounds as if they're treating the Mass as a toddler training class, which they are.

If you don't like the idea, take it up with them. 

Meanwhile, thank you again for your charity and holiness.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: TheReturnofLive on September 11, 2019, 06:12:29 AM
What you're saying is that anyone who questions your right to destroy the beautiful silence of the Mass must be old, bitter and nasty.

Holiness and charity in a nutshell.

Actually I'm making distinctions, something nasty/bitter people don't.

You used the Last Supper as an example - FAIL
You said children screaming is normal - FAIL
You said parents treat it as toddler practice - FAIL
You quote Trent as a straw man - FAIL
Now you say I'm against silence - FAIL

I was a monk as a young man. When I want silence I get silence. Our Lord tells us to go to desert for it, or we call it a retreat.

You're like that battle ax who lives in an apartment with parents who have kids upset with every noise when if you were really serious about "silence" they'd live next to a monastery.

It's Scooby-Doo all over again: "If it wasn't for those pesky kids I would have reached ecstasy." It's alright, I have your mask over here when you want it back.

Thank you for demonstrating yet again the charity and holiness of the Trad parent.

You literally went Keyboard Crusader about how Trad Cats are betraying the Faith by bringing their kids to Mass. THAT is uncharitable. It takes a high degree of being lost to extremely take the moral high ground on petty things, judging others from above for those who disagree, and then play the victim when it's revealed how you aren't high and mighty above everyone else.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 11, 2019, 07:10:07 AM
Does bringing babies and toddlers to Mass enhance or destroy the beautiful silence of the Mass?

Perhaps you don't like silence.  Or perhaps you've never experienced the beautiful silence of the trad Mass.

Either way, you can't have your cake and eat it on this question.

So which is it? 

Do babies and toddlers at Mass enhance the beautiful silence or destroy it?
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 11, 2019, 07:52:40 AM
I see both sides of this argument and think further distinctions need to be made.    I have had the wonderful good fortune to see families of children grow from babes to adults.  Sunday Mass was the only time I would see some of them.  Watching a large family of children from age 7 –  adult,  dressed beautifully and returning one behind the other from communion, heads bowed, hands clasped, used to lift my spirit and I would ensure I communicated after them, just so I could watch them come back down the aisle so reverently.  Their younger siblings, including babes in arms, were all in the pew, or on mother’s hip and none of them caused any disturbance.  If they did and couldn’t be quieted immediately, the parents (or an older sibling) would immediately take them out of the church.    They had prayer or saint books for them to read. They often sat on their mother or father’s  lap or fell asleep in their arms.    The expectation was for them to remain quiet for the duration of the Mass – which they did.   

I have friends, all of whom have had many children attending Mass every Sunday from just after birth, unless, of course, they were unwell.  Babes do cry, toddlers do become restless and noisy and the moment this happened and the mother or father wasn’t able to hush them immediately, they left the Church in a bid not to disrupt everyone else.    Many of these children have grown into extremely well formed adults (or nearly so) still practising the faith, setting yet a further good example for their younger siblings.

I  have also been to traditional Masses, where the priest would stop mid-sentence in his sermon if a crying or disruptive child persisted and wasn’t removed.   The parents soon got the message.   

In more recent times, I have noticed that the newer/younger parents don’t seem to be as concerned about a crying or noisy child.   They don’t always remove them or quieten them or elect to sit in the back room, sound-proofed from the main Church (but with the altar visible) with the rest of the mothers and young children.  I imagine it is their different form of parenting, lending more to the modern way, where children “need” to be able to express themselves freely.  Or perhaps it is because the parents, in choosing that mode of parenting, have become immune to the noise and crying without good reason and expect the rest of us to abide by their choices and build up a tolerance similar to theirs.  The child would have to be crying without good reason and not because they were hungry, wet, over-tired etc., in which case the parent’s obvious duty is to address the child’s needs, which would require them to do so outside the Church, one would think.     

And like Awkward, I find the parents in this latter category very annoying, disrespectful and selfish.  I don’t agree with their mode of parenting and I am open to any evidence one might be able to provide that shows me it is pleasing to God.  Until then, I remain unconvinced and “suffer the little children to come unto Me” does not cut it.  Awkward was not arguing that children should be turned away from God, but just that the baptised crying baby is just as pleasing to God if it is being rocked to sleep at home, or outside the Church or screaming in the pew next to Awkward.   The mother is pleasing to God when she is fulfilling her duty.  One will need to present a case if that is supposed to include attempting unsuccessfully to pacify a crying child in the church or curb an unruly tot, whilst they disturb everyone else trying to fulfil their Sunday obligation.  An obligation which requires “devout attendance, i.e. he must have the necessary intention and attention” (Jone: Moral Theology).       

Offer up the inconvenience?  Well, I try, together with a prayer for the poor child, whose prospects are compromised.   I also ensure I sit down the front, close as possible to the altar and priest, as I find those in question tend to sit further back.  Fortunately, my experience is not nearly as bad as Awkward’s and neither do I have their issue with noise.  And I don’t think that it is right to classify all traditional Masses as a liturgy played to the tune of a cacophony of unrestrained brats.  I don’t know how one would be in a position to know what all Masses are like, unless one had been to a significant amount of them at different locations worldwide.  I can only speak from my own experience, over a significant amount of years, at a number of different Mass venues, from which I can verify a recent trend in the direction Awkward describes and unfortunately has to endure.  I too think it is an unfortunate sign of the times in which we live. 

Have you tried speaking to your priest about it Awkward?  Perhaps if enough people raise it with him, he would be forced to address it.   
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Davis Blank - EG on September 11, 2019, 08:07:25 AM
What do you all think about women wearing pants?

Anyone have any opinions on the necessity of baptism?

How about that Benedict, pope or not?

 :trainwreck:
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on September 11, 2019, 08:10:21 AM
I agree with you, Aeternitus.  Myown experience is of what you first described, where most of the families I attend Mass with keep their children quiet, and if the child makes noise, they step out.  I've been to low Masses with more children than adults, and you could hear a pin drop.  I don't like unruly children in Mass, either, and I think parents have a duty to handle it rather than ignore it (I have seen parents let children do whatever the please, as well, but that was more in the NO).  My issue is not with the fact that people don't like children to be noisy in Mass (why would they?), but rather with awkward's seeming insistence that bringing children to Mass at all, even when quiet, is displeasing to God (he mentioned that in another thread); or that parents are being accused of being intentionally malicious by bringing their children to Mass; or that they don't feed their children because they bring them to Mass (how they came to that conclusion,I cannot even fathom). He doesn't seem to want to show any understanding or compassion whatsoever about the issue, nor has he admitted that  children sitting quietly in the pew is fine.  He seems to just have the blanket, general opinion that if children are in Mass, they will be screaming and noisy, and parents will do nothing about it. When we try to tell him otherwise, even charitably, we get accused of being entitled and full of virtol. If I have misinterpreted his position, I apologize, but that it how it has come across to me, and that is what I take issue with.  It actually doesn't bother me if people prefer children to not be at Mass.  They are entitled to their opinion and preference.  However, to accuse families of being less Catholic (he said that in another thread, as well), full of malice, and taking pleasure in bringing children to Mass, simply because they enjoy the power they have of annoying others, is quite another issue.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on September 11, 2019, 08:11:24 AM
What do you all think about women wearing pants?

Anyone have any opinions on the necessity of baptism?

How about that Benedict, pope or not?

 :trainwreck:

It depends...does the pants-wearing woman breastfeed, or bottle feed; and, did she use an epidural during birth?   :cheeseheadbeer:
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Michael Wilson on September 11, 2019, 08:24:23 AM
Crying children is not half as disturbing, as the parent who is continually inter-acting with the young child, either to be pinching, pushing, turning its head, making the two year old that is half asleep, kneel on the kneeler, turn the pages of the child's prayer book (which the kid obviously cannot read) etc. etc. The adult is twice as distracting as any of its children and has missed the whole Mass.
Ps. Aeternitas, good to see you here again.  :)
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 11, 2019, 08:29:17 AM
I agree with you, Aeternitus.  Myown experience is of what you first described, where most of the families I attend Mass with keep their children quiet, and if the child makes noise, they step out.  I've been to low Masses with more children than adults, and you could hear a pin drop.  I don't like unruly children in Mass, either, and I think parents have a duty to handle it rather than ignore it (I have seen parents let children do whatever the please, as well, but that was more in the NO).  My issue is not with the fact that people don't like children to be noisy in Mass (why would they?), but rather with awkward's seeming insistence that bringing children to Mass at all, even when quiet, is displeasing to God (he mentioned that in another thread); or that parents are being accused of being intentionally malicious by bringing their children to Mass; or that they don't feed their children because they bring them to Mass (how they came to that conclusion,I cannot even fathom). He doesn't seem to want to show any understanding or compassion whatsoever about the issue, nor has he admitted that  children sitting quietly in the pew is fine.  He seems to just have the blanket, general opinion that if children are in Mass, they will be screaming and noisy, and parents will do nothing about it. When we try to tell him otherwise, even charitably, we get accused of being entitled and full of virtol. If I have misinterpreted his position, I apologize, but that it how it has come across to me, and that is what I take issue with.  It actually doesn't bother me if people prefer children to not be at Mass.  They are entitled to their opinion and preference.  However, to accuse families of being less Catholic (he said that in another thread, as well), full of malice, and taking pleasure in bringing children to Mass, simply because they enjoy the power they have of annoying others, is quite another issue.

Well, perhaps Awkward can clear up any misunderstanding that may have occurred.  I am only commenting on this thread, not the other one you mention, so perhaps I don't have all the information.  I certainly believe children should attend Mass from as early as possible, providing they behave properly and are removed from the church when they don't.  I will leave it to Awkward to address your concerns. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 11, 2019, 08:33:13 AM
Crying children is not half as disturbing, as the parent who is continually inter-acting with the young child, either to be pinching, pushing, turning its head, making the two year old that is half asleep, kneel on the kneeler, turn the pages of the child's prayer book (which the kid obviously cannot read) etc. etc. The adult is twice as distracting as any of its children and has missed the whole Mass.
Ps. Aeternitas, good to see you here again.  :)

I agree!!  The whispers of instruction drive me to distraction, which is why I try and sit at the front with the walking sticks and wheelchairs!
 
Thanks Michael.  I do pop in from time to time. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Michael Wilson on September 11, 2019, 08:47:38 AM
What do you all think about women wearing pants?

Anyone have any opinions on the necessity of baptism?

How about that Benedict, pope or not?

 :trainwreck:
Maybe we can start some new threads just on those subjects?  :laugh:
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 11, 2019, 01:00:03 PM
I agree with you, Aeternitus.  Myown experience is of what you first described, where most of the families I attend Mass with keep their children quiet, and if the child makes noise, they step out.  I've been to low Masses with more children than adults, and you could hear a pin drop. 

Just to be clear, I'm specifically referring to babies and toddlers - not children in general.  Babies and toddlers who, by the very fact that they are babies and toddlers, find it extremely difficult to stay still and quiet for any length of time.

In 20 years of attending Mass, including the NO but predominantly the TLM, my experience is that if a baby or a toddler is at Mass, that baby or toddler will, inevitably, cry or make a fuss.  There may have been a couple of examples of this not happening - in 20 years - but that would be rare.

As for children - I don't think I've noticed anything which suggests there isn't a problem.

Quote
I don't like unruly children in Mass, either, and I think parents have a duty to handle it rather than ignore it (I have seen parents let children do whatever the please, as well, but that was more in the NO).  My issue is not with the fact that people don't like children to be noisy in Mass (why would they?), but rather with awkward's seeming insistence that bringing children to Mass at all, even when quiet, is displeasing to God (he mentioned that in another thread);

Not children, babies and toddlers who will inevitably cause a disturbance because they're babies and toddlers.

So you're half right.  I don't think babies and toddlers should be at Mass.

Quote
.... or that parents are being accused of being intentionally malicious by bringing their children to Mass; or that they don't feed their children because they bring them to Mass (how they came to that conclusion,I cannot even fathom). He doesn't seem to want to show any understanding or compassion whatsoever about the issue,

I was replying to a specific poster who claimed that she enjoyed a 'curmudgeon rant'.  It was hardly a leap for me to wonder if she enjoyed 'curmudgeon rants' so much that she might also enjoy the discomfort of the 'curmudgeons' at Mass when the baby and toddler chorus starts up.

Plus, I have witnessed this kind of behaviour.  You can deny it all you like but I have witnessed such malice.

Quote
... nor has he admitted that  children sitting quietly in the pew is fine.  He seems to just have the blanket, general opinion that if children are in Mass, they will be screaming and noisy, and parents will do nothing about it. When we try to tell him otherwise, even charitably, we get accused of being entitled and full of virtol.

Since the point I am making concerns babies and toddlers specifically, I didn't think it necessary to admit that children sitting quietly in the pews is fine.

But I'll say it now.  Children sitting quietly in the pews isn't a problem, is lovely in fact.

But babies and toddlers don't, can't, sit quietly in the pews.  And the parents don't do anything about it most of the time, in my experience of 20 years, and even if they do, they take 10 minutes to make up their mind, another 5 minutes to gather their things and carry the (by now) screaming toddler outside, by which time half the Mass has been subjected to yet another toddler drama.

This is what I have witnessed time and time again.  And yet you tell me what I'm experiencing isn't true.

Quote
If I have misinterpreted his position, I apologize, but that it how it has come across to me, and that is what I take issue with.  It actually doesn't bother me if people prefer children to not be at Mass.  They are entitled to their opinion and preference.  However, to accuse families of being less Catholic (he said that in another thread, as well), full of malice, and taking pleasure in bringing children to Mass, simply because they enjoy the power they have of annoying others, is quite another issue.

Well, judging by the arrogant and sullen expressions on the faces of some parents as their babies and toddlers scream and have tantrums during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass …… I wonder how wrong I am in at least some cases.

The beautiful silence of the Traditional Low Mass is a fragile thing and should be protected for the precious gift it is.  It is beyond belief to me that so few Trads recognise this.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Miriam_M on September 11, 2019, 01:17:06 PM
Crying children is not half as disturbing, as .......

...adults who call attention to themselves, as if they themselves are children.

Yesterday at the low Mass a parent came in with her 2 toddlers and one 5-year-old.  Often, a young couple who likes children helps her out, which happened also yesterday.  Although the three were a handful among the three adults, I was so much LESS distracted by that than when an older woman who is a theatrical type shows up and draws as much attention to herself as possible.

I think this is mostly about expectations.  I think that Awkward expects a certain stillness at Mass, and I appreciate that. (I also prefer more "perfect" calm than even mild disturbance.)  However, because I've been a Mom of young children and do know young children well anyway, I have a certain expectation that they're not going to sit completely still, even if they're silent/very quiet.  And I know they won't, not because they are consciously trying to be uncooperative, but because it's difficult for them, giving their unsettled age and bodies.  So, if the children are merely more physically restless than the adults supervising them, that does not disturb me as long as there's basic quiet and not inappropriate movement.  (No children kept in the pew screaming, whining; no lying down on the pews, crawling underneath the kneelers, sprawling in the aisles.)

What does disturb me is what we have a right not to expect:  that adults will behave like babies.  Said theatrical adult did not appear yesterday.  Whenever she is not present at Mass, the entire atmosphere changes:  there is calm in the air, and it's beautiful.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on September 11, 2019, 02:00:01 PM
Actually, awkward, the very quiet Low Mass I was referring to with more children than adults, had babies, toddlers, preschoolers, and all the way up to teens.  They are very much capable of being quiet. My own babies and toddlers are usually quiet, as well.  That's not to say that the have never made noise or cried (I immediately take them out in that case, or I stay in the back where no one can see me until they are able to sit in the pew without making noise), but generally they are well-fed before Mass and quiet.  Most of the time, the toddler sleeps on her Dad's shoulder or sits in his lap without saying anything for the entire Mass.  Unless something is wrong or they are hurt or something, they are quiet.

Our own personal experiences demonstrate two completely different scenarios.  Which means, we can't make a general statement that babies and toddlers are always and everywhere noisy, or incapable of being quiet.  I've seen evidence to the contrary.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: bigbadtrad on September 11, 2019, 03:54:13 PM
Meanwhile, thank you again for your charity and holiness.

So says the person who insults parents, misdirects people, and pretends it's all about holiness and charity. Good luck with that.

Your argument boils down to "I can offend anyone, but if you dare offend me it's uncharitable." Got it. Why not quote Trent on justification since you've justified yourself with any pseudo-argument you want.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: bigbadtrad on September 11, 2019, 03:59:07 PM

The first Mass wasn't the Last Supper, that's a prefiguring. The real first Mass was the Crucifixion, that's why the Mass is called the unbloody sacrifice of Calvary, not the Last Supper.


The Catholic teaching I know is that the Last Supper was the first Mass.  The Crucifixion was the BLOODY Sacrifice of Calvary.  The Mass is the one and the same sacrifice, but re-presented in an UNBLOODY manner.  The Last Supper was the first Mass, the UNBLOODY Sacrifice, with the Consecration and Transubstantiation.  There was no Transubstantiation in the Bloody Sacrifice of Calvary. I think you might say that the Last Supper was the unbloody PRE-presentation of the bloody Sacrifice of Calvary (this just occurs to me).  Notice how the Consecration says that  Christ's blood "SHALL be shed for you and for many unto the remission of sins" - at the Last Supper the Crucifixion had not yet taken place.  The Mass today, while it is also the same sacrifice as the one at Calvary, uses the words of the Last Supper.

Obviously there is mystery here, and I am not positive that I am presenting this in the perfect theological way, but this is how I understand it.

It's the true sacrifice was a prefigurement to the actual sacrifice. The Last Supper is the 1st Mass but only as an unbloody sacrifice of what was to come of the True Sacrifice. The "this is my body" which will shall be given up for you is the Crucifixion. The Last Supper has meaning only through the Crucifixion.

Passover is an "anamnesis" which literally means recollection of past events, but truly it was the full embodiment of living what was lived in the past as to be lived now through a full recollection of the totality of the experience. The anamnesis of the New Testament is True Sacrifice of Calvary. We don't "remember" it literally, it's the anamnesis, the living as if it were true today. We don't just pray the Mass, we live it as if it were happening in real time with Christ. I had a great professor who explained it to me for an hour. It was beautiful.

"Why is this night different from all other nights?" ... :)

Indeed.

Calvary is truly the crux of history. All flowed to it, and all flows from it. Without Calvary, we'd have only bread and wine. With Calvary, as mystically, truly enacted/prefigured at the Last Supper, we have the Eucharist.

Your professor didn't happen to be Dr. Pitre, was he?

Actually it is a Fr. McCloskey who rediscovered "traditio" after 30 years of being a charismatic. Today he's in a nursing home and needs our prayers. He is a fine man.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 11, 2019, 04:22:06 PM
So says the person who insults parents, misdirects people, and pretends it's all about holiness and charity. Good luck with that.

Your argument boils down to "I can offend anyone, but if you dare offend me it's uncharitable." Got it. Why not quote Trent on justification since you've justified yourself with any pseudo-argument you want.

Triggered, are we?

Are you a Trad Snowflake?
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: bigbadtrad on September 12, 2019, 04:00:30 AM
Are you a Trad Snowflake?

So you went from insulting parents, to being exposed, to saying I wasn't charitable to name calling again.

Like I said nasty and bitter.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 12, 2019, 10:16:07 AM
Are you a Trad Snowflake?

So you went from insulting parents, to being exposed, to saying I wasn't charitable to name calling again.

Like I said nasty and bitter.

Trads demonstrate their love of the traditional Mass by wrecking its beautiful silence.

That's what I said and I stand by it.  Where are the Trads who want to protect this beautiful gift?  Where are the Trad priests who stand up for it?  Where are the Trad laypeople who object to being denied this precious and fragile thing?  Keeping their eyes down and their mouths shut for fear of the fury they will generate if they object.

Trad priests are so engrossed in the liturgy and so rushed off their feet as they dash to the next Mass Centre that they hardly have time to be concerned.  The laity sit huddled in the pews pouring over their Missals in an effort to block out the noise and bustle. Those who can, slip away as often as possible to an out of the way, non advertised chapel where a priest might say a private Mass from time to time.

Meanwhile generations of Trads hardly know the beautiful silence of the Traditional Mass.  They've never experienced it. The priests of the various Trad groups are responsible for this sorry state of affairs.  It seems they don't think it matters.

You are offended by what I have said.  But you cannot deny it.  Actions speak louder than words.  You can read every devotional book on the beauty, transcendence, holiness and wonder of the Mass you like, but you will never experience that beautiful silence.

Which is hard luck for you.  Because you don't know what your missing.

If being a bitter and twisted curmudgeon is what it takes to object to being deprived of something precious, then so be it. 

Insult me all you like.  At least I know what I'm missing. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Jacob on September 12, 2019, 11:29:19 AM
Trads demonstrate their love of the traditional Mass by wrecking its beautiful silence.

That's what I said and I stand by it.  Where are the Trads who want to protect this beautiful gift?

I'm deaf, so I have no dog in this fight.  Mass, sung or silent, TLM or NO, is without sound for me, unless you count my ceaseless tinnitus.

I'm a bit perplexed though how you keep reiterating that the Traditional Mass is beautiful for its silence.  Does this mean you go /only/ to Low Mass?  What do you do in other circumstances?  Someone brought this up earlier, but I didn't catch a reply.

Thank you!
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Miriam_M on September 12, 2019, 12:37:56 PM
Awkward,
I'm not trying to be belligerent here; I only want to remind you gently that Mass is for families as well as single individuals.  Had we not children, we would have no vocations, and that is one reason that vocations, percentage-wise, are stronger in the traditional movement than in the Novus Ordo.

To be honest, one major turn-off (apart from the inglorious Mass form itself) of N.O. parishes is the paucity of children.  Too often it's a gathering of lukewarm or lost (if genuinely seeking) adult souls, middle-aged and elderly.  And in one parish local to my work, the Saturday "vigil" Mass is louder than a small trad Mass chapel with 20 young children.  Why?  It's a mere social occasion for the older folks who feel entitled to make Mass their social hour.

Yes, I know we're talking about tradition, not the N.O.  But I'm making a comparison.  As long as parents are really trying to manage their children and not just being indulgent/permissive, then the Catholic Church of tradition welcomes them.  In those cases, parents and children are comporting themselves the best they can, with an orientation toward the dignity and formality of the Mass.  Yes, yes, I know that there will always be some parents who do not cooperate, and for whom Mass time is their private prayer time.  When it's obvious that they're ignoring their misbehaving children, it is discouraging, yes, but it's an opportunity to offer it up.  The same thing cannot be said of middle-aged and elderly adults who selfishly talk in loud voices before Mass (when other people are trying to examine their consciences before Confession!) and insist on turning the inside of a Catholic church into a Senior Community Center.  That is so much more offensive than seeing parents try but sometimes fail to control a child or two. 

It is true that childrearing and Mass attendance has undergone a change from medieval times, or since the last era when young children were kept out of formal events, including religious ones. But we're not going to turn back the clock on that.  We don't have the kinds of extended families or servant class which allows parents to keep children under 10 at home so that they can attend Mass.  I'm not being sarcastic when I suggest that the only Mass environment that would make you truly happy would be a monastic one.  Some single people, including the young, who value silent Masses and reverent attendees actually move near monasteries or convents where they can attend the public Masses there.  That would guarantee much fewer, if any, children. 

Again, I am not criticizing your preferences in low and high Masses.  If my children were still very young, I would take them to the super-early low Mass on Sundays, where young children act practically angelic -- refreshed from a long sleep and not having attended school the day before.  They're too dewy-eyed (not conscious enough) to be mischievous and restless.  I would do that both for charitable reasons and for selfish reasons:  It would be worth it to me to avoid the drag of spending almost 2 hours doing childcare during the later High Mass with its enjoyable reception afterwards.  I guess too many parents at our own parish (where there's an actual choice on Sundays) prefer to sleep in.  Yes, I like to sleep in, too, but not for that tradeoff!  At most other parishes, the TLM is offered at one time on Sunday.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Prayerful on September 12, 2019, 02:41:37 PM
It is a mere 30 minutes away and you aren't going?  My family travels 90 minutes each way by public transport.

No hand holding, no swaying, no name tags, no LGBTQ, no clapping, no nonsense.

Yes, and some will drive for even longer, if that's what it takes. 30 mins isn't too long a time.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 12, 2019, 07:47:38 PM
Awkward,
I'm not trying to be belligerent here; I only want to remind you gently that Mass is for families as well as single individuals.  Had we not children, we would have no vocations, and that is one reason that vocations, percentage-wise, are stronger in the traditional movement than in the Novus Ordo.

To be honest, one major turn-off (apart from the inglorious Mass form itself) of N.O. parishes is the paucity of children.  Too often it's a gathering of lukewarm or lost (if genuinely seeking) adult souls, middle-aged and elderly.  And in one parish local to my work, the Saturday "vigil" Mass is louder than a small trad Mass chapel with 20 young children.  Why?  It's a mere social occasion for the older folks who feel entitled to make Mass their social hour.

Yes, I know we're talking about tradition, not the N.O.  But I'm making a comparison.  As long as parents are really trying to manage their children and not just being indulgent/permissive, then the Catholic Church of tradition welcomes them.  In those cases, parents and children are comporting themselves the best they can, with an orientation toward the dignity and formality of the Mass.  Yes, yes, I know that there will always be some parents who do not cooperate, and for whom Mass time is their private prayer time.  When it's obvious that they're ignoring their misbehaving children, it is discouraging, yes, but it's an opportunity to offer it up.  The same thing cannot be said of middle-aged and elderly adults who selfishly talk in loud voices before Mass (when other people are trying to examine their consciences before Confession!) and insist on turning the inside of a Catholic church into a Senior Community Center.  That is so much more offensive than seeing parents try but sometimes fail to control a child or two. 

It is true that childrearing and Mass attendance has undergone a change from medieval times, or since the last era when young children were kept out of formal events, including religious ones. But we're not going to turn back the clock on that.  We don't have the kinds of extended families or servant class which allows parents to keep children under 10 at home so that they can attend Mass.  I'm not being sarcastic when I suggest that the only Mass environment that would make you truly happy would be a monastic one.  Some single people, including the young, who value silent Masses and reverent attendees actually move near monasteries or convents where they can attend the public Masses there.  That would guarantee much fewer, if any, children. 

Again, I am not criticizing your preferences in low and high Masses.  If my children were still very young, I would take them to the super-early low Mass on Sundays, where young children act practically angelic -- refreshed from a long sleep and not having attended school the day before.  They're too dewy-eyed (not conscious enough) to be mischievous and restless.  I would do that both for charitable reasons and for selfish reasons:  It would be worth it to me to avoid the drag of spending almost 2 hours doing childcare during the later High Mass with its enjoyable reception afterwards.  I guess too many parents at our own parish (where there's an actual choice on Sundays) prefer to sleep in.  Yes, I like to sleep in, too, but not for that tradeoff!  At most other parishes, the TLM is offered at one time on Sunday.

Miriam, as I've said to other posters, this is about babies and toddlers at Mass specifically, not children.

And as you point out, since Vatican II, babies and toddlers at Mass is the norm and the bitter, old grumpies had better offer it up.  I get it. 

So there's nothing more to be said.  Tradition bumps along the bottom and has been entirely unsuccessful in halting the VII revolution.  And no wonder.  We live in the time of the rise of the antichrist and there's no peace to be had at Mass.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: 2Towers on September 12, 2019, 10:35:09 PM
Stop going to the Novus Ordo. There is an FSSP in Mableton or the SSPX in Roswell. Take your pick. I used to commute 45 minutes one way to mass multiple times a week. 30 minutes is nothing.

I have been to both parishes, they're both great, but the FSSP has a lot more young people and young families than St. Michael's in Roswell.

Forgive my question, perhaps it has been laid to rest in this Forum, and given what we hear out of Rome it seems ridiculous  to even ask, but do most traditionalists here feel that the SSPX mass is Catholic? [Im using that term instead of valid or licit]
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Traditionallyruralmom on September 12, 2019, 10:48:00 PM
Absolutely, way more Catholic than the "in communion" absurdity that you describe in your original post.  We are so discombobulated by the crisis that we cant even discern what is truly Catholic and what is not.  I am not saying that to be mean to you, its just the truth, and I was there years ago when I was a new convert  :)
I drive 1 1/2 hours to get my family to the SSPX  :)  make your half hour drive and dont worry about the legalities of the SSPX, we are in a grave crisis in the Church.  Read about the good Archbishop, read his whole open letter to confused Catholics.....here is an excerpt here...
http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/OpenLetterToConfusedCatholics/Chapter-18.htm

and this is excellent as well
https://angeluspress.org/products/catechism-crisis
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: 2Towers on September 12, 2019, 10:53:54 PM
I drive 1 1/2 hours to get my family to the SSPX  :)  make your half hour drive and dont worry about the legalities of the SSPX, we are in a grave crisis in the Church.
http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/OpenLetterToConfusedCatholics/Chapter-18.htm

We most certainly are, and it seems to get worse by the day.   
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Traditionallyruralmom on September 12, 2019, 11:25:14 PM
yes, it is good to be aware of that.  I had a holy SSPX priest tell us not to get to bogged down in it, we know its bad...we need to work on our knowledge of the faith and holiness.  For me, reading books like the 2 I linked above have helped me to know my faith better.  I am also a "unite the clans" person.  I understand the issues that people have with the Institute and FSSP, as well as the issues people have with the SSPX....but I know many of their priests and was brought into tradition by the Institute, and now attend an SSPX (after our bishop ended our Institute apostolate  :( ) so I am very supportive of them all.  Its bad out there and we have to keep the faith! 
Catechism of the Council of Trent, thats another great book  :) 
But seriously, any parish that invites Fr LGBT is one that you need to run from, screaming.......for the sake of your own soul.  Certainly you can keep relationships you have built, as long as you are strong enough in the authentic faith not to be taken in by false teachings of well meaning but badly catechized parishioners.  All the good music and 24 hour adoration in the world cant make up for accepting and promoting sins that cry to heaven for vengeance.  What you have described is modernism in its sneaky way...95% catholic, using catholic words and practices so that when you slip in the 5% poison, people are blindsided or too confused to realize that its diabolical.
Go there by all means for Adoration, and beg God for His mercy (I attend a PEA chapel that is very N.O....had to chuck many books in the library in the trash :( ) but stay away from the teaching and be wary of the priests there.  If anyone allows Martin in the door in any way, something is rotten in Greenville!
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Ascetik on September 12, 2019, 11:36:33 PM
We're in the same diocese. I sent you a PM OP.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Miriam_M on September 13, 2019, 03:04:14 AM

Miriam, as I've said to other posters, this is about babies and toddlers at Mass specifically, not children.

Babies and toddlers are among the classification, "children."  And at our High Mass, the 5 and 6 year old children are often more disruptive than 3 year olds -- if the parents of the 5 and 6 year olds do not want to participate in childcare and are generally permissive at home.

Quote
And as you point out, since Vatican II, babies and toddlers at Mass is the norm and the bitter, old grumpies had better offer it up.  I get it. 

No, I didn't "point that out."  I pointed out that it's been many a year since adults had the luxury of leaving young children at home for no money.  I'm quite sure that didn't begin in 1962.  Stop blaming V2.  V2 did not invent permissiveness or bad parenting; V2, in its blithe naivete, posited that there was no reason not to embrace "the world" -- in all its facets.  This is called the erroneous acceptance of novelty and modernism.  The timing of it was that the Church embraced the world at the precise time that the world was devolving into anti-traditionalism, iconoclasm, and rebellion against authority. 

Permissive parenting flowered during the 1960's -- just before and certainly much after V2 -- most of it having nothing to do with the Council directly.  Since 1960 disrespect for authority has been the norm in the West, regardless of religious affiliation. 

Ridicule of tradition, including traditional attire and suitability of attire to the occasion, was part of the social revolution.  I know plenty of non-Catholics who consider suitability of dress (based on tradition and convention) to be antiquated and irrelevant.  These are the people who wear flip-flops to formal occasions, claim  (if they are men) that they don't own a single dress jacket, and refuse to wear anything but jeans.  I mean to weddings, funerals, Masses, graduations, recitals, court appearances, you name it.  They stubbornly insist on a single, casual wardrobe.

V2 merely exploited the Capital Sin of Sloth present in all of us.  The Council appealed to the lowest common denominator and invited the faithful to rationalize laziness and self-indulgence in the area of religion, as modern society was already doing in all other spheres.

My parents were not afraid of their authority, and for the most part, their friends weren't either.  So children other than babies were expected to be as silent at Mass as adults were, no matter how bored or how little they supposedly understood about the Mass.  Punishment was more swift and corporal punishment common. Nevertheless (again), efforts at regulating the behavior of young children were as difficult as they have been in most eras. Parents who, overall, succeed have to spend lots of Mass time doing childcare:  we have been over this and over this on other threads. 

Quote
Tradition bumps along the bottom and has been entirely unsuccessful in halting the VII revolution. 

Tradition has not enjoyed a massive return to itself by a self-indulgent society accustomed to getting its own way and impatient with standards, discipline, respect, and authority.  It's as difficult to find people who respect any kind of tradition as it is to convert most of the Catholic hierarchy and laity back to religious tradition.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 13, 2019, 05:48:27 AM

Miriam, as I've said to other posters, this is about babies and toddlers at Mass specifically, not children.

Babies and toddlers are among the classification, "children."  And at our High Mass, the 5 and 6 year old children are often more disruptive than 3 year olds -- if the parents of the 5 and 6 year olds do not want to participate in childcare and are generally permissive at home.

But I am referring to babies and toddlers specifically.  Older children creating a disturbance at Mass is hardly a problem.  It is always babies and toddlers, not 6, 8 or 10 year olds.

One thing I have noticed is that when a family group includes a baby or a toddler, the otherwise quiet older children will take the opportunity to act up when the baby or toddler starts.  Disruptive behaviour is infectious.


Quote
Quote
And as you point out, since Vatican II, babies and toddlers at Mass is the norm and the bitter, old grumpies had better offer it up.  I get it. 

No, I didn't "point that out."  I pointed out that it's been many a year since adults had the luxury of leaving young children at home for no money.  I'm quite sure that didn't begin in 1962.  Stop blaming V2.  V2 did not invent permissiveness or bad parenting; V2, in its blithe naivete, posited that there was no reason not to embrace "the world" -- in all its facets.  This is called the erroneous acceptance of novelty and modernism.  The timing of it was that the Church embraced the world at the precise time that the world was devolving into anti-traditionalism, iconoclasm, and rebellion against authority. 

Permissive parenting flowered during the 1960's -- just before and certainly much after V2 -- most of it having nothing to do with the Council directly.  Since 1960 disrespect for authority has been the norm in the West, regardless of religious affiliation. 

Ridicule of tradition, including traditional attire and suitability of attire to the occasion, was part of the social revolution.  I know plenty of non-Catholics who consider suitability of dress (based on tradition and convention) to be antiquated and irrelevant.  These are the people who wear flip-flops to formal occasions, claim  (if they are men) that they don't own a single dress jacket, and refuse to wear anything but jeans.  I mean to weddings, funerals, Masses, graduations, recitals, court appearances, you name it.  They stubbornly insist on a single, casual wardrobe.

V2 merely exploited the Capital Sin of Sloth present in all of us.  The Council appealed to the lowest common denominator and invited the faithful to rationalize laziness and self-indulgence in the area of religion, as modern society was already doing in all other spheres.

My parents were not afraid of their authority, and for the most part, their friends weren't either.  So children other than babies were expected to be as silent at Mass as adults were, no matter how bored or how little they supposedly understood about the Mass.  Punishment was more swift and corporal punishment common. Nevertheless (again), efforts at regulating the behavior of young children were as difficult as they have been in most eras. Parents who, overall, succeed have to spend lots of Mass time doing childcare:  we have been over this and over this on other threads.

When St Therese of Lisieux was a toddler she was considered too young to attend Mass.  She writes this in 'Story of a Soul'.

But whatever the reason - Vatican II, the world, or both - Trads have decided that noisy Masses are now the norm.  That is a decision that Trads, and Trads alone, have made.

Older children who play up at Mass, or anywhere else, are older children who are playing up.  Babies who cry during Mass and toddlers who have tantrums are just being babies and toddlers.  Bringing a baby or a toddler to Mass is signalling that the Mass is to be a noisy affair.  There's no way round it.

Trads have opted for noisy Masses.  The beautiful silence of the Traditional Mass is no longer valued in Tradland.  It's your decision, not mine.

So it's hardly surprising if older people chat to themselves at Mass, or Massgoers are more noisy in general. There's no incentive for anyone to be quiet if there's a toddler screaming in the next pew.

Quote
Quote
Tradition bumps along the bottom and has been entirely unsuccessful in halting the VII revolution. 

Tradition has not enjoyed a massive return to itself by a self-indulgent society accustomed to getting its own way and impatient with standards, discipline, respect, and authority.  It's as difficult to find people who respect any kind of tradition as it is to convert most of the Catholic hierarchy and laity back to religious tradition.

Why would anyone turn to Tradition when the the typical TLM is as noisy, disturbing and chaotic as the NO?

The last SSPX Sunday, 11.00 am Mass I attended was a dog's dinner.  I have heard Trad (men mainly) complain of SSPX Masses being "chaos at the back", and "a mess".  These Masses were in different locations to mine, so the problem is widespread.

But babies and toddlers at Mass are now the norm. So here we are.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Michael Wilson on September 13, 2019, 08:19:10 AM
Stop going to the Novus Ordo. There is an FSSP in Mableton or the SSPX in Roswell. Take your pick. I used to commute 45 minutes one way to mass multiple times a week. 30 minutes is nothing.

I have been to both parishes, they're both great, but the FSSP has a lot more young people and young families than St. Michael's in Roswell.

Forgive my question, perhaps it has been laid to rest in this Forum, and given what we hear out of Rome it seems ridiculous  to even ask, but do most traditionalists here feel that the SSPX mass is Catholic? [Im using that term instead of valid or licit]
Originally the term "Traditionalist" was almost synonymous with Msgr. Lefebvre and those that rejected Vatican II and the N.O.M. But since the founding of the Ecclesia Dei institutes the term has become more generic and embraces a wider spectrum of opinions. So its tough to answer the question accurately; for those who do reject Vatican II and the N.O.M. The answer would be "of course"; and we even might add: "We are the only true Catholics left, for all intent and purposes. For the broader trad community, some would say "no", others would say yes, but with qualifiers, such as "tend to be schismatic"; "not in full communion" etc. etc. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: The Harlequin King on September 13, 2019, 09:00:50 AM
For whatever it's worth, when I'm tasked with planning a music program for a TLM, there's really not much silence at all.  A spirit of contemplation and reflection, certainly. But little silence. This past Sunday, I took over a choirmaster position for a monthly TLM which had not had a sung Mass in over a year. I brought my own chant schola to sing the full Propers, of course (including extending the Offertory with Offertoriale Triplex verses, the Communion with psalm verses, etc.), sang some of the more unusual chants of the Ordinary from the Liber Usualis, even a different Asperges than usual. Organ before and after the homily, after the elevation of the chalice, during the Last Gospel, etc. Everything was done firmly within the established tradition, but even so, the only prolonged period of silence during this particular liturgy--as with many others I've served over the years--was during the consecration itself, and during the priest's own Communion.

Thankfully, it was incredibly well received, and attendance almost doubled just because people knew the schola was coming.

Short clip of fourth verse from processional hymn, followed by Asperges me:
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: aquinas138 on September 13, 2019, 10:38:03 AM
Why would anyone turn to Tradition when the the typical TLM is as noisy, disturbing and chaotic as the NO?

I'm not sure when you last attended the NO, but this is simply not true. First of all, total silence during Mass is not the point of Tradition (it's a "little t" tradition anyway); the point of Tradition is, or ought to be, the True Faith. You would attend the TLM because it is the Roman Church's bimillennial expression of the Catholic Faith; the NO is deficient in virtually every respect, even if it is technically valid, and is expressive less of the unchanged Faith than of the theological Zeitgeist of the 1960s.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Miriam_M on September 13, 2019, 12:50:32 PM

But whatever the reason - Vatican II, the world, or both - Trads have decided that noisy Masses are now the norm.  That is a decision that Trads, and Trads alone, have made.

I hope we've "made a decision" to be tolerant, and not expect monastic silence at Masses attended exclusively by laity, in populated areas.  At my Church, babies are not a problem; if they act up, 90% of the time they are hungry, and the mother retreats outside or to the vestibule to nurse. Toddlers can be tame or not; school-age children can be tame or not.  It's whatever standards of discipline exist in the family.  Maybe you just have an unusually low tolerance for noise and restlessness; some people do, because of hyper-acute senses.  I think I mentioned that on another thread.

But all of your reporting is anecdotal -- hard to verify from a continent away, and there are not enough data points of comparison for me to believe all of your claims as to the offenses against silence.  At one of the last N.O. Masses I attended (several years ago), a couple embodying the disobedient spirit of V2 brought their child or children -- I forget.  Not a single TLM I have ever attended sounded like that.  It wasn't only that there was sheer shrieking, without exaggeration, from the back rows.  It was the utter lack of will on the part of the couple to maintain any parental control whatsoever.  Apparently they believed that the shrieking was charming or entertaining.

So for every anecdote -- exaggerated or not -- you can provide us, I can offer many more instances of unruly N.O. Masses -- usually where BOTH the children and adults are ill-behaved, and in my experience at vast numbers of N.O. Masses, the offenses by adults far outnumber the offenses by children. 

I wasn't joking when I suggested that it would be a good idea for you to attend Masses at monasteries instead.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 13, 2019, 06:41:57 PM

But whatever the reason - Vatican II, the world, or both - Trads have decided that noisy Masses are now the norm.  That is a decision that Trads, and Trads alone, have made.

I hope we've "made a decision" to be tolerant, and not expect monastic silence at Masses attended exclusively by laity, in populated areas. 

No.  You have "made a decision" to end the peace and quiet at Mass that used to be widely available to the laity. 

You have "made a decision" to embrace a Vatican II novelty.

Quote
At my Church, babies are not a problem;

Aren't you lucky.

Quote
But all of your reporting is anecdotal

So is yours.

Quote
I wasn't joking when I suggested that it would be a good idea for you to attend Masses at monasteries instead.

Do you really think I haven't tried this?

You seem to be saying that silence and peace at Mass are only for those in religious orders, or attached to them.  The laity, on the other hand, have to tolerate noise and disturbance at Mass because Trads have made the decision to embrace a Vatican II novelty.

Modern …...
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Miriam_M on September 13, 2019, 07:48:08 PM
Having families with a complete spread of ages at a Latin Mass is NOT a "Vatican II novelty."  You really need to read some more history, and not just selectively.  Many pre-V2 churches had crying rooms.  We discussed this on another thread.  Adults with unruly very young children, prior to V2 were expected to bring them to the crying room.  The parents were not expected to leave their children home, even though the traditional Mass was offered multiple times every Sunday in suburbs and cities (and therefore "tag-team" parenting was possible). Parents who did not control their children were subject to public scolding about that from the pulpit.  However, often the congregation could hear the screaming in the crying room anyway. It depended on how loud the noise was.

Here's what trads have "decided to embrace":

a return to large families and the rejection of contraception.  This is going to mean that siblings in close age will be together in a pew, and "bothering each other" (or worse) could add to the noise concern (i.e., make management more difficult).

the whole family coming to Mass together, as a witness for the children within a family and for other families, including visitors from the N.O. 

practicing a little charity -- recalling that probably our parents disciplined us at the same age if we were restless at Mass.

Regarding your question about monasteries, the obvious reason their Masses are quiet is that those in religious life have no children.  Also, a very quiet Mass is going to be something that many large families avoid, because they know that by contrast a family will inadvertently draw attention to itself by being such a minority in that setting.  I am not saying that "peace and quiet" is ONLY for those in religious orders. I'm saying that one is far more likely to find it there than at a largely lay Mass.  And I'm saying that you're practicing revisionist history if you believe that pre-V2 Sunday Masses -- not weekday Masses -- had a profoundly different air of peace and quiet about them than post-V2 Sunday TLM's.

Several of us have said on the previous thread that very early a.m. low Sunday Masses will be in general far quieter than the later Sunday TLM's. This is consistently true at my parish.  Part of that quiet is because of smaller Mass attendance at the early hour.  A few very large families do come, and the children are impeccably behaved -- calm, etc. It's too early for them to "know what hit them," so to speak.  The later in the day (e.g., midday), the more crowded the church (80% full), and the longer the Mass itself (High Mass of 2 hours vs. low Mass of 35-40 minutes, with homily), the more difficult it will be for young children to be as quiet as they would be at the early hour.

But rare is the parish with more than one Sunday TLM.  And rare is the parish where all TLM attendees live nearby.  All of that factors into the noise you keep complaining about.

Except for your faulty revisionist history, it no longer sounds as if you'd be happiest even at a monastery Mass, or at least that's something you seem unwilling to try.  But you've said it over and over how bad trads are for what we tolerate.  So returning to the N.O. is perhaps a solution for you.

The other solution would be ceasing your complaints to us but addressing your complaints to the presiding priests.  Whether or not we have young children, we're not responsible for your discomfort unless we attend your church, and we're also not responsible to come up with a solution.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 13, 2019, 08:48:02 PM
Having families with a complete spread of ages at a Latin Mass is NOT a "Vatican II novelty."  You really need to read some more history, and not just selectively.  Many pre-V2 churches had crying rooms.  We discussed this on another thread.  Adults with unruly very young children, prior to V2 were expected to bring them to the crying room.  The parents were not expected to leave their children home, even though the traditional Mass was offered multiple times every Sunday in suburbs and cities (and therefore "tag-team" parenting was possible). Parents who did not control their children were subject to public scolding about that from the pulpit.  However, often the congregation could hear the screaming in the crying room anyway. It depended on how loud the noise was.

Things were different before Vatican II, is what you're saying. 

Quote
Here's what trads have "decided to embrace":

a return to large families and the rejection of contraception.  This is going to mean that siblings in close age will be together in a pew, and "bothering each other" (or worse) could add to the noise concern (i.e., make management more difficult).

the whole family coming to Mass together, as a witness for the children within a family and for other families, including visitors from the N.O. 

practicing a little charity -- recalling that probably our parents disciplined us at the same age if we were restless at Mass.

Catholics used to embrace all of the above.  And still St Therese of Lisieux was considered too young, as a toddler, to attend Sunday Mass.

Quote
I am not saying that "peace and quiet" is ONLY for those in religious orders.

Yes you are. 

Quote
Several of us have said on the previous thread that very early a.m. low Sunday Masses will be in general far quieter than the later Sunday TLM's. This is consistently true at my parish.  Part of that quiet is because of smaller Mass attendance at the early hour.  A few very large families do come, and the children are impeccably behaved -- calm, etc. It's too early for them to "know what hit them," so to speak.  The later in the day (e.g., midday), the more crowded the church (80% full), and the longer the Mass itself (High Mass of 2 hours vs. low Mass of 35-40 minutes, with homily), the more difficult it will be for young children to be as quiet as they would be at the early hour.

But rare is the parish with more than one Sunday TLM.  And rare is the parish where all TLM attendees live nearby.  All of that factors into the noise you keep complaining about.

It seems you think I haven't been attending the TLM for 20 years.

Quote
Except for your faulty revisionist history,

My history is more accurate than yours.

Quote
So returning to the N.O. is perhaps a solution for you.

Thank you very much.

Quote
The other solution would be ceasing your complaints to us but addressing your complaints to the presiding priests.  Whether or not we have young children, we're not responsible for your discomfort unless we attend your church, and we're also not responsible to come up with a solution.

And thank you again.

Meanwhile, I have another solution.  You, and others, could stop taking this so personally.  You, and others, could try not reacting so emotionally to this problem and start to accept that there's an issue here that might, just might, be open to a discussion that could lead to reasonable and nuanced solutions. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: 2Towers on September 14, 2019, 12:23:12 AM
For whatever it's worth, when I'm tasked with planning a music program for a TLM, there's really not much silence at all.  A spirit of contemplation and reflection, certainly. But little silence. This past Sunday, I took over a choirmaster position for a monthly TLM which had not had a sung Mass in over a year. I brought my own chant schola to sing the full Propers, of course (including extending the Offertory with Offertoriale Triplex verses, the Communion with psalm verses, etc.), sang some of the more unusual chants of the Ordinary from the Liber Usualis, even a different Asperges than usual. Organ before and after the homily, after the elevation of the chalice, during the Last Gospel, etc. Everything was done firmly within the established tradition, but even so, the only prolonged period of silence during this particular liturgy--as with many others I've served over the years--was during the consecration itself, and during the priest's own Communion.

Thankfully, it was incredibly well received, and attendance almost doubled just because people knew the schola was coming.

Short clip of fourth verse from processional hymn, followed by Asperges me:

Outside of a monastery there is little silence anywhere.  What I think is important is reverence.  When the mass is underway, there shouldn't be a lot of talking in the pews.  Even in my liberal church once the mass gets started people are usually pretty quiet.  We had a vicar that started getting on people that were arriving late and wandering in and out during mass, more than just bathroom traffic.  People got indignant about it at first, but many of us were grateful.  I will take a little extra noise if it means getting away from the modernists.  I am no angel, just a sinner made from dirt, who is striving for holiness  before I finally kick off the planet.  I just can't stomach my church's rapid plunge towards becoming an Episcopal Church.  .02
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Miriam_M on September 14, 2019, 12:43:28 AM
I don't really want to argue any more about this topic, but I do want to suggest something, based on my own experience becoming more tolerant.

I realize that for some people, it's simply not helpful just to say, essentially, "Get used to it."  When I did that myself (trying to force myself to get used to unpleasant settings, including church settings), it merely increased my anger because all I really did was suppress my honest disappointment.  It was only when I realized I had to stop focusing on my disappointment -- not to focus on the externals of what was happening outside of me -- on "the other" -- that I was able to be at peace. 

I don't know how to explain this well.  It feels somewhat like meditation, perhaps.  (Catholic meditation, not New Age or "transcendental"!)  Perhaps centering is a better word, but the point is, that it's really about my calm, not about what's going on around me.  And it starts even before I walk into church, which is one reason I actually do not like it when others entering the church try to stop me and socialize. I sometimes have trouble being my usual friendly self then, because I do not experience low or high Mass as a social event.  Chatting afterwards is very different than chatting beforehand. I try to recollect myself before I enter.  So I enter a kind of interior ("monastic") silence to prepare myself to be receptive to grace, not to whichever adult is making a spectacle of herself (read my much earlier post on this) or whether a group of any age is being restless in the pews or doing odd things.

A few other things help:  (1) not making eye contact with others, but practicing custody of the eyes, mind, and soul.  ("Let nothing disturb you.")  (2) Praying to Our Lady to help with interior silence, since surely she is the queen of silence and receptivity  (3) Using my veil as a kind of "screen" on either side of me, discouraging me from looking at every distracting event or sound.

So for example I did this tonight at Mass, and it was very helpful because there were a lot more attendees tonight, for some reason.  And many of those were not "regulars" at this Mass, which sometimes creates distractions by that very fact, if I allow it.  I realized tonight that I really have cultivated using my body and mind to help me focus only on what's important.  I think part of what has helped me is that I now sleep next to a very, very busy street -- major thoroughfare, lots of loud cars, motorcycles, buses, emergency vehicles, street sweepers, etc.  I was either going to learn to tune out noise, or I was going to be awake all night.  So I have learned to do this in more than one setting.

Now, it's true that I do use earbuds at night sometimes, if the street is just too loud and if I have no time to waste going to sleep for an early rising.  But I listen to traditional sermons while doing so, and that gets me in a prayerful mood, which itself helps the process of tuning out external noise. I think I have unconsciously applied that practice of calm to the practice of the presence of God inside church, regardless of disruption.  It has really helped.

If I hadn't been able to develop those techniques, perhaps I would use earbuds in church, but ONLY if I were able to do so very unobtrusively, which for me would mean:

already arriving with earbuds on
sitting somewhere very out of the way (like the side pews near the confessionals, or the back if noisemakers are closer to the middle of the church, and vice-versa

I'm pretty sure that my trad priest would disapprove of anyone inserting earbuds in response to children's noise and in view of that family.  He would consider that quite uncharitable.  He would instead prescribe moving far away from the family but never doing anything so overt.

Just some ideas for Awkward, in an attempt to be constructive.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: diaduit on September 14, 2019, 04:08:50 AM

Meanwhile, I have another solution.  You, and others, could stop taking this so personally.  You, and others, could try not reacting so emotionally to this problem and start to accept that there's an issue here that might, just might, be open to a discussion that could lead to reasonable and nuanced solutions.

I am interested in your offer of a solution.
Married father and mother with 6 children, two under 3 and another on the way, one TLM on Sunday at 10 a.m and a midweek mass every day at  11 a.m. and they live 45 minutes away.  The father works Monday to Friday and the mum home schools.  Her (mum) parents are elderly and she has a hands on active part in their daily lives taking care of essentials.

What do you propose this family does to accommodate your situation.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 14, 2019, 06:34:55 AM
I don't really want to argue any more about this topic, but I do want to suggest something, based on my own experience becoming more tolerant.

Tolerant?  I'm surprised you're not embarrassed to keep using this word. 

Whenever a modern person urges others to be more 'tolerant', what they are really saying is 'put up and shut up'.

Quote
I realize that for some people, it's simply not helpful just to say, essentially, "Get used to it."  When I did that myself (trying to force myself to get used to unpleasant settings, including church settings), it merely increased my anger because all I really did was suppress my honest disappointment.  It was only when I realized I had to stop focusing on my disappointment -- not to focus on the externals of what was happening outside of me -- on "the other" -- that I was able to be at peace. 

Exactly.  Having tried every way, for 20 years, to accommodate myself to the modern Trad preference for noise and disturbance at Mass, I find that the situation has become worse for me, not better.

Quote
I don't know how to explain this well.  It feels somewhat like meditation, perhaps.  (Catholic meditation, not New Age or "transcendental"!)  Perhaps centering is a better word, but the point is, that it's really about my calm, not about what's going on around me.  And it starts even before I walk into church, which is one reason I actually do not like it when others entering the church try to stop me and socialize. I sometimes have trouble being my usual friendly self then, because I do not experience low or high Mass as a social event.  Chatting afterwards is very different than chatting beforehand. I try to recollect myself before I enter.  So I enter a kind of interior ("monastic") silence to prepare myself to be receptive to grace, not to whichever adult is making a spectacle of herself (read my much earlier post on this) or whether a group of any age is being restless in the pews or doing odd things.

A few other things help:  (1) not making eye contact with others, but practicing custody of the eyes, mind, and soul.  ("Let nothing disturb you.")  (2) Praying to Our Lady to help with interior silence, since surely she is the queen of silence and receptivity  (3) Using my veil as a kind of "screen" on either side of me, discouraging me from looking at every distracting event or sound.

So for example I did this tonight at Mass, and it was very helpful because there were a lot more attendees tonight, for some reason.  And many of those were not "regulars" at this Mass, which sometimes creates distractions by that very fact, if I allow it.  I realized tonight that I really have cultivated using my body and mind to help me focus only on what's important.  I think part of what has helped me is that I now sleep next to a very, very busy street -- major thoroughfare, lots of loud cars, motorcycles, buses, emergency vehicles, street sweepers, etc.  I was either going to learn to tune out noise, or I was going to be awake all night.  So I have learned to do this in more than one setting.

There's not a single suggestion you have made here or elsewhere that I haven't already tried.  Apart from ear buds, that is.  See below.

Quote
If I hadn't been able to develop those techniques, perhaps I would use earbuds in church, but ONLY if I were able to do so very unobtrusively, which for me would mean:

already arriving with earbuds on
sitting somewhere very out of the way (like the side pews near the confessionals, or the back if noisemakers are closer to the middle of the church, and vice-versa

I'm pretty sure that my trad priest would disapprove of anyone inserting earbuds in response to children's noise and in view of that family.  He would consider that quite uncharitable.  He would instead prescribe moving far away from the family but never doing anything so overt.

Just some ideas for Awkward, in an attempt to be constructive

Ah - ear buds.  I haven't tried this.  A poster on the other thread suggested ear buds. And I have a pair of musicians' ear defenders which are almost unobtrusive enough look like ordinary headphones.  Perhaps I should try them at Mass. Except you also seem to be saying that it would be 'uncharitable' to wear them. 

What you were saying earlier, Miriam, is that noise and disturbance are now the norm at Mass, including the TLM, and that anyone who finds this distressing should go elsewhere - to a monastery or to the NO. Now you are suggesting all kinds of techniques - all of which I have tried, over and over again, to no avail, apart from the ear defenders. 

I get it, Miriam.  There's no place at the typical modern Trad TLM for people like me, unless they're prepared to devote endless time and effort into blocking out the noise.  You might have plenty of energy for dealing with a situation that no Catholic before Vatican II would have dreamt of 'tolerating', but I no longer have such energy.   

Ear defenders aside - I have found my solution.  I look for private TLMs at out of the way, unadvertised locations.  Those who are distressed by the modern acceptance of noise and disturbance at Mass have to find their own solutions.

I suggest we agree to differ on this.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 14, 2019, 09:16:45 AM

Meanwhile, I have another solution.  You, and others, could stop taking this so personally.  You, and others, could try not reacting so emotionally to this problem and start to accept that there's an issue here that might, just might, be open to a discussion that could lead to reasonable and nuanced solutions.

I am interested in your offer of a solution.
Married father and mother with 6 children, two under 3 and another on the way, one TLM on Sunday at 10 a.m and a midweek mass every day at  11 a.m. and they live 45 minutes away.  The father works Monday to Friday and the mum home schools.  Her (mum) parents are elderly and she has a hands on active part in their daily lives taking care of essentials.

What do you propose this family does to accommodate your situation.

You could start by asking yourself if the 'our situation versus your situation' approach is helpful. 

You could also recognise that you are living in a situation that is unique in Catholic history.  How many miles is a 45 minute drive? How far do you live from any Trad Catholic support networks, if any exist?  Do you have a support network among your non Catholic neighbours?  Catholics living in such isolation, especially individual families, even extended ones, is  an entirely modern development.

But according to contemporary Trad culture, it is your fairly typical living arrangements which have to be accommodated.   Part of that culture even awards brownie points to those who have to travel the furthest to get to Mass. 

So I wouldn't suggest you do anything.  It would be too much of a burden and wouldn't achieve anything.  The culture is too ingrained and those who struggle with it are running scared because they know how people will react if the subject is raised.

I'm always surprised at how many young Trads come to those out of the way, private, Low Masses.  Are they seeking refuge from the chaos, I sometimes wonder. Who knows, perhaps one or more of your own children might be one of those highly sensitive types who joins them one day.

Meanwhile, I shall pray to Our Lady, queen of silence and receptivity as Miriam pointed out above, for someone to start a new Trad movement dedicated to preserving the beautiful silence of the traditional Low Mass, open to all Catholics who have reached the age of reason.

I shall do this for all those children, teenagers and twentysomethings who also long for peace and stillness at Mass.

Someone has to.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: The Harlequin King on September 14, 2019, 10:39:36 AM
I think awkwardcustomer would like the Mass community I posted the video of. There are actually no small, noisy children, so while it's a sung Mass, it's a very... orderly one.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Miriam_M on September 14, 2019, 11:20:40 AM
THIS:

Outside of a monastery there is little silence anywhere.

Awkward has ridiculed several suggestions, but I will say something I'm pretty sure my trad priest would say.  He would say that although we have a right to expect silence from adults in church, and supervision from parents to establish the maximum silence possible from young children, things happen because a lay church building is not a monastery or contemplative convent.  We do not have a right to monastic silence, even though I also prefer that, because we are not ourselves vowed religious.

He would say that the purpose of any moment, including any Mass "moment" for us as individuals is to respond to all the opportunities for virtue presented to us.  When I have complained even about adults misbehaving in particular settings, he has shown me that the most important thing at the moment was for me to respond to the grace opportunity to develop whatever virtue I have needed (I'm sure still need):  patience, tolerance, etc., and use whatever means I need to protect myself from whatever disruptions disturb me. Some of those methods could be exterior, some interior.

Thus, an individual's "right" for the ideal Mass environment does not eclipse our need to grow in virtue in every environment, at every occasion, at that present moment.

He's not advocating for noisy Masses and permissiveness, because he himself has corrected adult misbehavior in church, and I know he does not approve of quite untamed children.  Nor am I setting myself up as someone "more tolerant" --a comment you made above, implying that I'm comparing myself favorably to you; I'm not; I'm saying I have had the same concerns and impulses and have had to find coping strategies just like you; you're hardly unique.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 14, 2019, 02:22:56 PM
.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: diaduit on September 14, 2019, 03:44:50 PM

Meanwhile, I have another solution.  You, and others, could stop taking this so personally.  You, and others, could try not reacting so emotionally to this problem and start to accept that there's an issue here that might, just might, be open to a discussion that could lead to reasonable and nuanced solutions.

I am interested in your offer of a solution.
Married father and mother with 6 children, two under 3 and another on the way, one TLM on Sunday at 10 a.m and a midweek mass every day at  11 a.m. and they live 45 minutes away.  The father works Monday to Friday and the mum home schools.  Her (mum) parents are elderly and she has a hands on active part in their daily lives taking care of essentials.

What do you propose this family does to accommodate your situation.

You could start by asking yourself if the 'our situation versus your situation' approach is helpful. 

You could also recognise that you are living in a situation that is unique in Catholic history.  How many miles is a 45 minute drive? How far do you live from any Trad Catholic support networks, if any exist?  Do you have a support network among your non Catholic neighbours?  Catholics living in such isolation, especially individual families, even extended ones, is  an entirely modern development.

But according to contemporary Trad culture, it is your fairly typical living arrangements which have to be accommodated.   Part of that culture even awards brownie points to those who have to travel the furthest to get to Mass. 

So I wouldn't suggest you do anything.  It would be too much of a burden and wouldn't achieve anything.  The culture is too ingrained and those who struggle with it are running scared because they know how people will react if the subject is raised.

I'm always surprised at how many young Trads come to those out of the way, private, Low Masses.  Are they seeking refuge from the chaos, I sometimes wonder. Who knows, perhaps one or more of your own children might be one of those highly sensitive types who joins them one day.

Meanwhile, I shall pray to Our Lady, queen of silence and receptivity as Miriam pointed out above, for someone to start a new Trad movement dedicated to preserving the beautiful silence of the traditional Low Mass, open to all Catholics who have reached the age of reason.

I shall do this for all those children, teenagers and twentysomethings who also long for peace and stillness at Mass.

Someone has to.
[/quote

so the answer is you have no solution to offer.

BTW it was me who suggested ear plugs.  An elderly gentleman in my parish put in ear plugs one day when I was at midweek mass with my little one.  I was so grateful to him for taking it upon himself to sort out what was a distraction for him and I was not a bit put out.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 15, 2019, 05:31:30 AM

Meanwhile, I have another solution.  You, and others, could stop taking this so personally.  You, and others, could try not reacting so emotionally to this problem and start to accept that there's an issue here that might, just might, be open to a discussion that could lead to reasonable and nuanced solutions.

I am interested in your offer of a solution.
Married father and mother with 6 children, two under 3 and another on the way, one TLM on Sunday at 10 a.m and a midweek mass every day at  11 a.m. and they live 45 minutes away.  The father works Monday to Friday and the mum home schools.  Her (mum) parents are elderly and she has a hands on active part in their daily lives taking care of essentials.

What do you propose this family does to accommodate your situation.

I have a suggestion. 

Run an anonymous poll at your parish to determine if any of the parishioners find the noise of babies and toddlers disturbing in any way and detrimental to their own devout attendance at Mass.  Make it clear you want complete honesty and not that people should answer it from an “offering it up” perspective, afraid they will lose any merit they have spent years acquiring if they answer in the affirmative.   

If the response is no, relax and carry on as is.  It is obviously not a problem at your parish, for whatever reason and you have done your best. It may be these findings need to be reviewed periodically in the event of new Mass attendees. 

If, however, the answer is yes and you have no available support network close by who could assist with child minding on Sundays or occasional Sundays, then take the initiative in doing what you can to ensure that some of those mid-week Masses are not attended by all babies and young children, not just your own.   Present the case to the priest and other mothers on behalf of your fellow parishioners and discuss what mid-week, baby/tot - free days works best for all concerned.   You are the one on this forum and the issue has been brought to your attention.  The other mothers may have never given it a moment’s thought.   I certainly did not think about this at all until I read this thread.  Even bringing it to their attention alone may make them more aware and vigilant.       

In reading this thread, it seems to me, Awkward’s argument has largely been against the fact that he/she is the one who is expected to be more tolerant and accepting of a situation that is a result, not of traditional practice, but due to the crisis in the Church.  Awkward provided the example of St Therese of Lisieux being kept at home as a young child, because she was considered too young to attend Mass.  This example was not one from the middle ages, but much more recent – less than 150 years ago.  And it was the example of a saint.  If people deny it then the onus is on them to provide evidence to the contrary.  I have seen no counter argument to this example, other than the claim of the current crisis in the Church, which I agree is a very strong argument in favour of departing from what was considered normal/acceptable practice.   

But I fail to see why the focus should be on people like Awkward becoming more tolerant, charitable and saintly in these difficult times.  Parents of very young children should be just as tolerant, charitable and saintly towards their fellow parishioners, who have probably suffered a considerable amount themselves in holding fast to the Faith.    Let’s be honest here, this is not about any detriment to the babes and toddlers not attending Mass.  To make it so is a false argument and nothing less than emotional blackmail.   This is about what takes priority – Awkward and co or the parents’ of young babies and toddlers.  Why not work it out together?  Sunday Mass may still be a trial for those affected by noise and disturbance, as it is highly unlikely all those with very young children would be able to have alternative child-minding arrangements available.    But at least those who are sensitive to noise and disruption, for whatever reason, may have the opportunity to attend one or two quiet mid-week Masses when time and circumstance permit.  They would be in a  better position to plan their lives around these days if a regular routine is adopted.   And, as a result, may be forever grateful for your consideration in acknowledging the legitimacy of their problem, which is as a result of the legitimacy of your own (and other parents’) difficult situation.       
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: diaduit on September 15, 2019, 06:52:33 AM

Meanwhile, I have another solution.  You, and others, could stop taking this so personally.  You, and others, could try not reacting so emotionally to this problem and start to accept that there's an issue here that might, just might, be open to a discussion that could lead to reasonable and nuanced solutions.

I am interested in your offer of a solution.
Married father and mother with 6 children, two under 3 and another on the way, one TLM on Sunday at 10 a.m and a midweek mass every day at  11 a.m. and they live 45 minutes away.  The father works Monday to Friday and the mum home schools.  Her (mum) parents are elderly and she has a hands on active part in their daily lives taking care of essentials.

What do you propose this family does to accommodate your situation.

I have a suggestion. 

Run an anonymous poll at your parish to determine if any of the parishioners find the noise of babies and toddlers disturbing in any way and detrimental to their own devout attendance at Mass.  Make it clear you want complete honesty and not that people should answer it from an “offering it up” perspective, afraid they will lose any merit they have spent years acquiring if they answer in the affirmative.   

If the response is no, relax and carry on as is.  It is obviously not a problem at your parish, for whatever reason and you have done your best. It may be these findings need to be reviewed periodically in the event of new Mass attendees. 

If, however, the answer is yes and you have no available support network close by who could assist with child minding on Sundays or occasional Sundays, then take the initiative in doing what you can to ensure that some of those mid-week Masses are not attended by all babies and young children, not just your own.   Present the case to the priest and other mothers on behalf of your fellow parishioners and discuss what mid-week, baby/tot - free days works best for all concerned.   You are the one on this forum and the issue has been brought to your attention.  The other mothers may have never given it a moment’s thought.   I certainly did not think about this at all until I read this thread.  Even bringing it to their attention alone may make them more aware and vigilant.       

In reading this thread, it seems to me, Awkward’s argument has largely been against the fact that he/she is the one who is expected to be more tolerant and accepting of a situation that is a result, not of traditional practice, but due to the crisis in the Church.  Awkward provided the example of St Therese of Lisieux being kept at home as a young child, because she was considered too young to attend Mass.  This example was not one from the middle ages, but much more recent – less than 150 years ago.  And it was the example of a saint.  If people deny it then the onus is on them to provide evidence to the contrary.  I have seen no counter argument to this example, other than the claim of the current crisis in the Church, which I agree is a very strong argument in favour of departing from what was considered normal/acceptable practice.   

But I fail to see why the focus should be on people like Awkward becoming more tolerant, charitable and saintly in these difficult times.  Parents of very young children should be just as tolerant, charitable and saintly towards their fellow parishioners, who have probably suffered a considerable amount themselves in holding fast to the Faith.    Let’s be honest here, this is not about any detriment to the babes and toddlers not attending Mass.  To make it so is a false argument and nothing less than emotional blackmail.   This is about what takes priority – Awkward and co or the parents’ of young babies and toddlers.  Why not work it out together?  Sunday Mass may still be a trial for those affected by noise and disturbance, as it is highly unlikely all those with very young children would be able to have alternative child-minding arrangements available.    But at least those who are sensitive to noise and disruption, for whatever reason, may have the opportunity to attend one or two quiet mid-week Masses when time and circumstance permit.  They would be in a  better position to plan their lives around these days if a regular routine is adopted.   And, as a result, may be forever grateful for your consideration in acknowledging the legitimacy of their problem, which is as a result of the legitimacy of your own (and other parents’) difficult situation.     

If you read the other thread which did this topic to death, every sympathy was given to awkward especially me as I have and totally understand the agitation noise does to your brain. Suggestions were made including ear plugs (as previously said I could have hugged the older man in my parish when he did this and didn't take offense to it) . The problem with awkward is there is NO effort in understanding our position, NO acknowledgement of our predicament and all done in an extremely hostile aggressive tone to the point that (not by him but entertained by him) the suggestion that parents willfully neglect their children by starving them. How insulting. If any one has a 'put up shut up' tone it's awkward.
Here's the thing, by and large trad kids are very well behaved, not perfect but actually a credit to parents who are dealing with modern onslaughts daily but that's not enough for awkward, HE WANTS complete silence and therefore he is adamant he should get it. Life doesn't work like that.
As.i said in previous thread, most people are annoying, should I take a poll on whether garlic eaten before mass should be banned.....I just endured an hour of sitting behind a person who always reeks of garlic (lovely person I should add). Should I take a poll on old people who shuffle in with a very annoying clickety clack walking stick which is very disturbing . I could go on but I won't.
I have done my best with my children and stood in freezing cold vestibules to quieten a fussy child as most and frankly all in my parish have done, so as not to disturb other mass goers so I'm not going to be made feel guilty for attending to my Sunday duty to God and attending to my children's Catholic formation because one person whom I have sympathy for but has an unrelenting unbendable fixation on his needs above the good of families.

I'm not going to post anymore on this anyway and I can still enjoy his posts but on this topic he is blindingly uncooperative.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Daniel on September 15, 2019, 07:06:44 AM
.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Davis Blank - EG on September 15, 2019, 07:20:46 AM
It has been far from proven that tradition, little t or big T, is that babies / infants did not go to Mass.  The entire evidence presented thus far in this thread and the prior one on this matter is as follows:

1) St. Therese did not go as a baby
2) Cry rooms existed prior to VII
3) Babies and infants have attended Mass for as long as any living person's memory shows across the planet

None of this is sufficient to prove that babies / infants have always attended Mass, or never attended Mass until the past century.  The singular example brought forth is St. Therese and that may merely be 1) her family 2) her local culture 3) that specific period in time (or any combination of those things).

I think the question is actually quite interesting and I've poked around online trying to sleuth it out and found absolutely nothing.  The best I can find is that there are child saints whom expressed deep devotion to Christ when ~5 years old.  But that does not really indicate Mass attendance at what age. 

I also recall documentaries on the Medieval times which showed well worn wood around the corner posts of back pews, which the anthropologist suggested indicated that the villagers were tying up sheep or dogs in the back.  Also suggested was that the back of the Church was used as a lavatory during the freezing months.  I am cautious to believe anything said about the Medieval time since moderns hate it so much, but I am merely reporting what I have heard before and offering it as maybe an instance where Medieval Mass was not quite as serene as we think.

I also read of at least one Medieval noble lady whom attended Mass alone, but that was because at those times noble women did not nurse nor care for their own children, that was the task of the wetnurse, hence it is no surprise that the noble did not have her baby with her.  This says nothing about what the peasants were doing.

And that is the crux of it all - we really have very little clue what the peasants were doing.  No one cared to write about the lives of the peasants and the peasants were illiterate and hence wrote nothing about themselves.  As far as I can tell we have close to zero information to determine the status of the presence / absence of babies / infants at Mass throughout the ages and locations.

My understanding of Mass at the Orthodox Church is that it involves people freely walking in and out.  That seems rather noisy to me, but maybe I am wrong.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 15, 2019, 07:55:32 AM
It has been far from proven that tradition, little t or big T, is that babies / infants did not go to Mass.  The entire evidence presented thus far in this thread and the prior one on this matter is as follows:

1) St. Therese did not go as a baby
2) Cry rooms existed prior to VII
3) Babies and infants have attended Mass for as long as any living person's memory shows across the planet

None of this is sufficient to prove that babies / infants have always attended Mass, or never attended Mass until the past century.  The singular example brought forth is St. Therese and that may merely be 1) her family 2) her local culture 3) that specific period in time (or any combination of those things).

I think the question is actually quite interesting and I've poked around online trying to sleuth it out and found absolutely nothing.  The best I can find is that there are child saints whom expressed deep devotion to Christ when ~5 years old.  But that does not really indicate Mass attendance at what age. 

I also recall documentaries on the Medieval times which showed well worn wood around the corner posts of back pews, which the anthropologist suggested indicated that the villagers were tying up sheep or dogs in the back.  Also suggested was that the back of the Church was used as a lavatory during the freezing months.  I am cautious to believe anything said about the Medieval time since moderns hate it so much, but I am merely reporting what I have heard before and offering it as maybe an instance where Medieval Mass was not quite as serene as we think.

I also read of at least one Medieval noble lady whom attended Mass alone, but that was because at those times noble women did not nurse nor care for their own children, that was the task of the wetnurse, hence it is no surprise that the noble did not have her baby with her.  This says nothing about what the peasants were doing.

And that is the crux of it all - we really have very little clue what the peasants were doing.  No one cared to write about the lives of the peasants and the peasants were illiterate and hence wrote nothing about themselves.  As far as I can tell we have close to zero information to determine the status of the presence / absence of babies / infants at Mass throughout the ages and locations.

My understanding of Mass at the Orthodox Church is that it involves people freely walking in and out.  That seems rather noisy to me, but maybe I am wrong.


Yes, I find this topic interesting too and also have been trying to find out more.  What I did read today was that pews as such, did not come into being until after the reformation and that in the Middle Ages people stood and knelt rather than sat, which may or may not be true, but would allow for a more noiseless departure, one would think.   

Can you please point me to the evidence that cry rooms existed prior to VII?  All I could find was that they came into being in the 60s and 70s. 

Thank you for your input.  Please note if I don't reply quickly it is not because I am not interested in your research, but only because I have very limited time. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 15, 2019, 08:19:12 AM

If you read the other thread which did this topic to death, every sympathy was given to awkward especially me as I have and totally understand the agitation noise does to your brain. Suggestions were made including ear plugs (as previously said I could have hugged the older man in my parish when he did this and didn't take offense to it) . The problem with awkward is there is NO effort in understanding our position, NO acknowledgement of our predicament and all done in an extremely hostile aggressive tone to the point that (not by him but entertained by him) the suggestion that parents willfully neglect their children by starving them. How insulting. If any one has a 'put up shut up' tone it's awkward.
Here's the thing, by and large trad kids are very well behaved, not perfect but actually a credit to parents who are dealing with modern onslaughts daily but that's not enough for awkward, HE WANTS complete silence and therefore he is adamant he should get it. Life doesn't work like that.
As.i said in previous thread, most people are annoying, should I take a poll on whether garlic eaten before mass should be banned.....I just endured an hour of sitting behind a person who always reeks of garlic (lovely person I should add). Should I take a poll on old people who shuffle in with a very annoying clickety clack walking stick which is very disturbing . I could go on but I won't.
I have done my best with my children and stood in freezing cold vestibules to quieten a fussy child as most and frankly all in my parish have done, so as not to disturb other mass goers so I'm not going to be made feel guilty for attending to my Sunday duty to God and attending to my children's Catholic formation because one person whom I have sympathy for but has an unrelenting unbendable fixation on his needs above the good of families.

I'm not going to post anymore on this anyway and I can still enjoy his posts but on this topic he is blindingly uncooperative.

No worries, Diaduit.    

As I said in my first post on this thread, I see both sides of this.  I am not sure of the solution or even if there is one, until the current crisis we are living through is resolved.  I agree with Awkward’s understanding of what the Mass should be in normal times.  A silent offering to God in which we adore Him and give him the honour which is due to Him, thank Him, appease His justice and implore grace and mercy for ourselves and those for whom we should pray.   A sung Mass doesn’t detract from this “silence”, as one saint (can’t remember who) said that singing praises to God was akin to praying twice.  It lifts the soul.     

But we don’t live in normal times.  Parents have an enormously tough job, rearing children without the support of family, schools and communities, in many instances.  Priests and religious are overworked and spread thin on the ground.   Others have lost family and friends due to their adherence to the true Faith and find themselves alone in the raging sea of the world, struggling to secure their spot on the Ark of Salvation, which will never go under, but nevertheless is currently under siege from the storm of all storms. 

I think the only thing one can do in this situation is our best to help each other where we can, which will undoubtedly involve compromise.  Of course I don’t mean compromising the Faith in any way.   

 


Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 15, 2019, 09:41:04 AM
The problem with awkward is there is NO effort in understanding our position, NO acknowledgement of our predicament and all done in an extremely hostile aggressive tone to the point that (not by him but entertained by him) the suggestion that parents willfully neglect their children by starving them. How insulting. If any one has a 'put up shut up' tone it's awkward.

You are grossly misinterpreting my position.

On the other thread I made repeated references to the difficulties faced by Catholic parents today.  Over and over again I tried to find some kind of middle ground where views could be exchanged in a non-rageful way.  But no-one was interested.  As on this thread, posters seem only concerned with shooting down my arguments with endless personal insults.

The poster who made the joke comment about parents starving their children was making a rhetorical point.  You are supposed to know that the statement shouldn't be taken seriously, simply because it was so outrageous that it couldn't be taken seriously.  I understood this immediately and assumed that others would too.

Quote
HE WANTS complete silence and therefore he is adamant he should get it. Life doesn't work like that.

I have never said I want complete silence as this would be ridiculous.  But this doesn't stop yourself and Miriam from insisting that this is exactly what I want.

The beautiful silence of the TLM does not depend on imposing silence.  It depends upon excluding noise and disturbance.

I can only assume that you have never experienced it, which is YOUR loss.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 15, 2019, 09:52:38 AM
BTW it was me who suggested ear plugs.  An elderly gentleman in my parish put in ear plugs one day when I was at midweek mass with my little one.  I was so grateful to him for taking it upon himself to sort out what was a distraction for him and I was not a bit put out.

Since you don't hold back in your comments, I'll share here what came to mind when I read this.

You chose to introduce noise and disturbance to a weekday Mass.  You chose to be the cause of someone having to wear earbuds at Mass.  You are under no obligation to attend a weekday Mass, but you chose to, knowing full well that you will create noise and disturbance for your fellow Mass goers. Are you entirely unaware of the effects of your choices, or do you just assume you have the right and don't care?

If the "elderly gentleman" who you obliged to wear earbuds had, instead, complained about the noise and disturbance you chose to introduce to Mass, would he have suddenly become an old, bitter, twisted, curmudgeon who probably hates his neighbours kids?

These are the insults that have been hurled at me on this thread for questioning YOUR right to disturb every Mass you attend.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Innocent Smith on September 15, 2019, 11:10:41 AM
BTW it was me who suggested ear plugs.  An elderly gentleman in my parish put in ear plugs one day when I was at midweek mass with my little one.  I was so grateful to him for taking it upon himself to sort out what was a distraction for him and I was not a bit put out.

Since you don't hold back in your comments, I'll share here what came to mind when I read this.

You chose to introduce noise and disturbance to a weekday Mass.  You chose to be the cause of someone having to wear earbuds at Mass.  You are under no obligation to attend a weekday Mass, but you chose to, knowing full well that you will create noise and disturbance for your fellow Mass goers. Are you entirely unaware of the effects of your choices, or do you just assume you have the right and don't care?

If the "elderly gentleman" who you obliged to wear earbuds had, instead, complained about the noise and disturbance you chose to introduce to Mass, would he have suddenly become an old, bitter, twisted, curmudgeon who probably hates his neighbours kids?

These are the insults that have been hurled at me on this thread for questioning YOUR right to disturb every Mass you attend.

That's just great that the "old fart" had to put in earplugs. I bet that sea shell noise really added to him being able to assist.

The responses here simply prove the point that I tried to make earlier. They made the effort to attend the TLM. They will be damned before they miss one second of it due to a crying or noisy child.

And by the way, I notice lots of Trad parents raising idiot kids. Many cannot look another adult in the eye, say hello, or even shake hands with a friend of their parents. So don't tell me that home schooling does not effect socialization.

Then they run wild after Mass. Clearly they have not been given any requirements or initiation into proper deportment.

I also instruct my children and we always manage to read all the Propers and discuss the nature of the Mass we are to attend the evening before and the tone of the day within the Liturgical Year.

So, they are well prepared.

Don't expect to get a pat on the back here, but thought I would mention it, since I certainly don't get any credit from my fellow parishioners. At least not those hard core home schooling types. I do receive compliments, as do my children, from the classier people who we know. They're usually older and have already finished raising their kids and must have done a proper job themselves.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 15, 2019, 11:32:57 AM
Yes, I find this topic interesting too and also have been trying to find out more.  What I did read today was that pews as such, did not come into being until after the reformation and that in the Middle Ages people stood and knelt rather than sat, which may or may not be true, but would allow for a more noiseless departure, one would think.   

Can you please point me to the evidence that cry rooms existed prior to VII?  All I could find was that they came into being in the 60s and 70s. 

Thank you for your input.  Please note if I don't reply quickly it is not because I am not interested in your research, but only because I have very limited time.

I have a thing about Pews. Pews are Protestant.  I've often wondered by the Church chose to dismantle Rood screens and introduce the dreaded pews. 

Medieval Churches were arranged in a similar way to traditional Russian Orthodox churches.  The Sanctuary was behind the Rood Screen, there were no pews and people stood or knelt in the knave.  There were benches lining the side aisles where people could sit, hence the exression' the weak can go to the wall'.

I have been to a Sunday, Russian Orthodox church where this was the arrangement.  This was the most liberating liturgical experience I have ever had.  If you want to prostrate yourself before the Iconostasis, you can.  If you simply wish to stand or kneel in the knave, you can.  If you want to venerate an icon, you can.

Yes, there was lots of movement because the service lasts 1 1/2 hours.  But the movement was all in the side aisles where people also sat to rest.  Somehow, this arrangement allowed the nave to remain an area of peace. There was also a lovely courtyard.  People came and went, a lot, but still there was peace.

And yes, there were babies and toddlers, but somehow the arrangement minimised the disturbance.  Part of the problem, for me at least, is being stuck in a pew.  I've posted my opinion about pews before.

An excellent source of info on Medieval parish life for peasant and noble alike is 'The Stripping of the Altars', by Eamon Duffy.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on September 15, 2019, 12:06:41 PM
BTW it was me who suggested ear plugs.  An elderly gentleman in my parish put in ear plugs one day when I was at midweek mass with my little one.  I was so grateful to him for taking it upon himself to sort out what was a distraction for him and I was not a bit put out.

Since you don't hold back in your comments, I'll share here what came to mind when I read this.

You chose to introduce noise and disturbance to a weekday Mass.  You chose to be the cause of someone having to wear earbuds at Mass.  You are under no obligation to attend a weekday Mass, but you chose to, knowing full well that you will create noise and disturbance for your fellow Mass goers. Are you entirely unaware of the effects of your choices, or do you just assume you have the right and don't care?

If the "elderly gentleman" who you obliged to wear earbuds had, instead, complained about the noise and disturbance you chose to introduce to Mass, would he have suddenly become an old, bitter, twisted, curmudgeon who probably hates his neighbours kids?

These are the insults that have been hurled at me on this thread for questioning YOUR right to disturb every Mass you attend.

That's just great that the "old fart" had to put in earplugs. I bet that sea shell noise really added to him being able to assist.

The responses here simply prove the point that I tried to make earlier. They made the effort to attend the TLM. They will be damned before they miss one second of it due to a crying or noisy child.

And by the way, I notice lots of Trad parents raising idiot kids. Many cannot look another adult in the eye, say hello, or even shake hands with a friend of their parents. So don't tell me that home schooling does not effect socialization.

Then they run wild after Mass. Clearly they have not been given any requirements or initiation into proper deportment.

I also instruct my children and we always manage to read all the Propers and discuss the nature of the Mass we are to attend the evening before and the tone of the day within the Liturgical Year.

So, they are well prepared.

Don't expect to get a pat on the back here, but thought I would mention it, since I certainly don't get any credit from my fellow parishioners. At least not those hard core home schooling types. I do receive compliments, as do my children, from the classier people who we know. They're usually older and have already finished raising their kids and must have done a proper job themselves.

We actually also read the Mass readings prior to Mass, which does help.  The children and I read the saint of the day, introit and collect every morning during morning prayer, too.  And, before we start a school, we read the Epistle and Gospel for the day, as well.  I like to keep us in tune with the liturgical year, since we are not able to attend daily Mass.

We also receive compliments on our children's behavior....both at Mass and other places: doctors offices, restaurants, grocery stores.   We've had fellow patrons of restaurants pay for our meal on several occasions, because they were so impressed with how well our kids behaved.  And, since you brought up hand shakes, we've also had many men compliment our boys (12 and 8 ) on how they looked them in the eye and gave them a firm handshake. 

It's not homeschooling or bringing babies and toddlers to Mass in and of themselves that is the problem.  I've seen many parents successfully keep ALL their children quiet at Mass, regardless of age. And I know many wonderful homeschool families with lovely, polite children.   It's society at large.  I also know and have seen many children who have poor social and behavior skills... homeschooled and public/private schooled alike.  They can't even bother themselves to look away from their handheld devices long enough to acknowledge that there is anyone else in the room with them, let alone look someone in the eye and say something polite.  Heck, many grown adults are the same!  It's no wonder kids are lacking in social skills. 

Kids will be as bad as you let them, and as good as you expect them to be.  There is definitely some truth to that.  Societal expectations are just so low in regards to behavior, morality, modesty, social norms, etc. that there is simply no motivation for parents to raise the bar with their children.  It is unfortunate, for sure. 

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: aquinas138 on September 15, 2019, 12:14:03 PM
My understanding of Mass at the Orthodox Church is that it involves people freely walking in and out.  That seems rather noisy to me, but maybe I am wrong.

This is broadly true, though there are certain times during the Liturgy in which walking in and out is frowned upon (during the Gospel, the anaphora, etc.). There's a whole lot more "commotion" during Orthodox services in general—lighting candles, kissing icons, etc. It's not generally noisy, but could be distracting to someone not used to it. If one were to observe the full panoply of ancient Christian liturgies, the super-quiet Roman Low Mass is unusual, and perhaps entirely unique. Eastern Divine Liturgies (both Byzantine and other Eastern forms) are very rarely silent; when the priest is praying quietly, the deacon is either chanting a litany or the choir is singing. To be honest, no other liturgical tradition has anything like the Low Mass (namely, a shorter version of the Liturgy stripped of most ceremony and chant), so it's kind of difficult to compare to anything else.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Sempronius on September 15, 2019, 12:25:07 PM
I recently found out that pews werent introducerad by protestants. There are 13th century legal documents where its specified that parishoners had to buy benches if they wanted them during mass. It was a legal document because the priests didnt have responsibility for the nave. (This was in some places in England.)
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: dymphnaw on September 15, 2019, 12:41:24 PM

[/quote]

This is just rude and blatantly false.  I don't know any traditional Catholic parent who neglects to feed their children, or thinks that their privalege to participate in Mass is higher than anyone else's.

Many if us do homeschool and travel far for Mass, though.  I will grant you that one.  Although, lots and lots of people travel far distances for Sunday Mass, regardless of if they have children or not.  I'm not sure what that has to do with the price of eggs in China, though.
[/quote]

You don't feed the kids because then  they'll have to go to the restroom at multiple times during the trip.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: The Harlequin King on September 15, 2019, 02:10:40 PM
Medieval Churches were arranged in a similar way to traditional Russian Orthodox churches.  The Sanctuary was behind the Rood Screen, there were no pews and people stood or knelt in the knave.  There were benches lining the side aisles where people could sit, hence the exression' the weak can go to the wall'.

I have been to a Sunday, Russian Orthodox church where this was the arrangement.  This was the most liberating liturgical experience I have ever had.  If you want to prostrate yourself before the Iconostasis, you can.  If you simply wish to stand or kneel in the knave, you can.  If you want to venerate an icon, you can.

Yes, there was lots of movement because the service lasts 1 1/2 hours.  But the movement was all in the side aisles where people also sat to rest.  Somehow, this arrangement allowed the nave to remain an area of peace. There was also a lovely courtyard.  People came and went, a lot, but still there was peace.

And yes, there were babies and toddlers, but somehow the arrangement minimised the disturbance.  Part of the problem, for me at least, is being stuck in a pew.  I've posted my opinion about pews before.

An excellent source of info on Medieval parish life for peasant and noble alike is 'The Stripping of the Altars', by Eamon Duffy.

It really IS liberating, isn't it? I have unfortunately never found a pew-less Eastern church in communion with Rome in my area. If I did, I would join it in a heartbeat.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: The Harlequin King on September 15, 2019, 02:13:40 PM
I recently found out that pews werent introducerad by protestants. There are 13th century legal documents where its specified that parishoners had to buy benches if they wanted them during mass. It was a legal document because the priests didnt have responsibility for the nave. (This was in some places in England.)

It's.... complicated. Protestants didn't invent pews, but they certainly expanded their usage far beyond what had been seen before. They had a much different idea of what a church building was to be used for: a place to sit and hear preaching and instruction like a synagogue, rather than a temple for liturgical and devotional prayers. Today, the Protestant idea has mostly won out.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Michael Wilson on September 15, 2019, 02:28:41 PM
Thank goodness for pews! I cannot kneel for very long or stand; if it wasn't for being able to sit down during Mass, I would have to skip going to High Mass and sometimes even low Mass, depending how my knees and feet are feeling.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 15, 2019, 02:49:09 PM
Thank goodness for pews! I cannot kneel for very long or stand; if it wasn't for being able to sit down during Mass, I would have to skip going to High Mass and sometimes even low Mass, depending how my knees and feet are feeling.

Of course you wouldn't have had to skip going to Mass. In churches without pews you could sit on the benches in the side aisles. They were available for anyone who couldn't stand, kneel or prostrate themselves on the floor in the nave.

That's where the expression 'the weak can go to the wall' comes from.  It literally refers to the benches in the side aisles of churches where the 'weak' could sit.

Sitting in the presence of God, unless you had to, was frowned upon back then.  Not now though.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 15, 2019, 02:51:32 PM
Today, the Protestant idea has mostly won out.

And that's the problem.

It's been a long way down, but here we are.

How did it happen, that final descent?

They decided to let their children terrorise them and their women rule over them.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Michael Wilson on September 15, 2019, 03:11:39 PM
Thank goodness for pews! I cannot kneel for very long or stand; if it wasn't for being able to sit down during Mass, I would have to skip going to High Mass and sometimes even low Mass, depending how my knees and feet are feeling.

Of course you wouldn't have had to skip going to Mass. In churches without pews you could sit on the benches in the side aisles. They were available for anyone who couldn't stand, kneel or prostrate themselves on the floor in the nave.

That's where the expression 'the weak can go to the wall' comes from.  It literally refers to the benches in the side aisles of churches where the 'weak' could sit.

Sitting in the presence of God, unless you had to, was frowned upon back then.  Not now though.
So what is the difference between sitting on the benches in the side isles and sitting in the main isle; the principle is the same. Also thank goodness for padded kneelers; that is a real life saver for me and others who don't have a good set of knees.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: aquinas138 on September 15, 2019, 03:38:20 PM
Thank goodness for pews! I cannot kneel for very long or stand; if it wasn't for being able to sit down during Mass, I would have to skip going to High Mass and sometimes even low Mass, depending how my knees and feet are feeling.

Of course you wouldn't have had to skip going to Mass. In churches without pews you could sit on the benches in the side aisles. They were available for anyone who couldn't stand, kneel or prostrate themselves on the floor in the nave.

That's where the expression 'the weak can go to the wall' comes from.  It literally refers to the benches in the side aisles of churches where the 'weak' could sit.

Sitting in the presence of God, unless you had to, was frowned upon back then.  Not now though.
So what is the difference between sitting on the benches in the side isles and sitting in the main isle; the principle is the same. Also thank goodness for padded kneelers; that is a real life saver for me and others who don't have a good set of knees.

In the Russian Orthodox churches I've visited, everyone stands for the duration of the service; the elderly, infirm, and pregnant or nursing sit on benches around the side. People stand and turn to face the deacon as he censes the church, and they also make prostrations and bows at various times, so pews in the middle would definitely be in the way. In places where pews have become common, the ceremonial observed by the laity has become reduced. If kids get weary from standing, they just sit on the floor at their parents' feet. I think this was what was more or less the case in Roman churches in the earlier middle ages and antiquity—standing and kneeling right on the floor.

And my knees are bad too, though I find it much easier to just kneel on the floor—the kneelers, padded or otherwise, kill my knees.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: The Curt Jester on September 15, 2019, 04:24:33 PM
And by the way, I notice lots of Trad parents raising idiot kids. Many cannot look another adult in the eye, say hello, or even shake hands with a friend of their parents. So don't tell me that home schooling does not effect socialization.

Homeschooling doesn't affect socialization in that way if parents bother to teach their children etiquette.  I teach in a school and the majority of the children have no socialization skills whatsoever.  They fail to say "Thank you", "Please," or "You're welcome", have the weakest handshakes imaginable and will do anything but look another person in the eye.  Their table manners are atrocious as well. Interestingly enough, we have only one student who has been previously home-schooled and she is one of the most outgoing, polite students we have.

So, yeah, I'll look you in the eye and tell you that proper homeschooling does not negatively affect socialization.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 15, 2019, 05:32:25 PM
Thank goodness for pews! I cannot kneel for very long or stand; if it wasn't for being able to sit down during Mass, I would have to skip going to High Mass and sometimes even low Mass, depending how my knees and feet are feeling.

Of course you wouldn't have had to skip going to Mass. In churches without pews you could sit on the benches in the side aisles. They were available for anyone who couldn't stand, kneel or prostrate themselves on the floor in the nave.

That's where the expression 'the weak can go to the wall' comes from.  It literally refers to the benches in the side aisles of churches where the 'weak' could sit.

Sitting in the presence of God, unless you had to, was frowned upon back then.  Not now though.
So what is the difference between sitting on the benches in the side isles and sitting in the main isle; the principle is the same. Also thank goodness for padded kneelers; that is a real life saver for me and others who don't have a good set of knees.

Sitting was the exception not the norm.  The side benches were not intended to be used like pews.  They were intended for those who needed to rest a while before they resumed the correct posture for a Catholic at prayer - standing, kneeling, or prostrate on the floor.  I'm sure that those who absolutely needed to sit there could, though.

Is standing painful for you?
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Heinrich on September 15, 2019, 07:40:00 PM
Thank goodness for pews! I cannot kneel for very long or stand; if it wasn't for being able to sit down during Mass, I would have to skip going to High Mass and sometimes even low Mass, depending how my knees and feet are feeling.

Of course you wouldn't have had to skip going to Mass. In churches without pews you could sit on the benches in the side aisles. They were available for anyone who couldn't stand, kneel or prostrate themselves on the floor in the nave.

That's where the expression 'the weak can go to the wall' comes from.  It literally refers to the benches in the side aisles of churches where the 'weak' could sit.

Sitting in the presence of God, unless you had to, was frowned upon back then.  Not now though.
So what is the difference between sitting on the benches in the side isles and sitting in the main isle; the principle is the same. Also thank goodness for padded kneelers; that is a real life saver for me and others who don't have a good set of knees.

Sitting was the exception not the norm.  The side benches were not intended to be used like pews.  They were intended for those who needed to rest a while before they resumed the correct posture for a Catholic at prayer - standing, kneeling, or prostrate on the floor.  I'm sure that those who absolutely needed to sit there could, though.

Is standing painful for you?

Standing is painful for me nowadays. I had to quite coaching football this year. Going through therapy and there are improvements. I have a pinched nerve that makes my left leg burn and standing onerous. As far kneeling, the pressure on my back and then the bone on bone left knee makes it that I can only get through the Credo, and then maybe to through the Consecration. After that, it normally sitzville for me until Patre Noster.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Michael Wilson on September 15, 2019, 09:45:00 PM
A.C.
Standing for me was painful for a while, because I had black  callouses on the soles of my feet from standing all day at my job at school and at the liquour store. When I walked it felt like somebody was sticking pins into my feet. Also I had lower back problems, that I have been able to correct through visits to the Chryro and exercise. Kneeling, I have had bursitis in both knees for a long time, so I can't do it for very long.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Traditionallyruralmom on September 15, 2019, 10:01:09 PM
And by the way, I notice lots of Trad parents raising idiot kids. Many cannot look another adult in the eye, say hello, or even shake hands with a friend of their parents. So don't tell me that home schooling does not effect socialization.

Homeschooling doesn't affect socialization in that way if parents bother to teach their children etiquette.  I teach in a school and the majority of the children have no socialization skills whatsoever.  They fail to say "Thank you", "Please," or "You're welcome", have the weakest handshakes imaginable and will do anything but look another person in the eye.  Their table manners are atrocious as well. Interestingly enough, we have only one student who has been previously home-schooled and she is one of the most outgoing, polite students we have.

So, yeah, I'll look you in the eye and tell you that proper homeschooling does not negatively affect socialization.

To add to Curt's experience...

My oldest home educated lad is a US Marine.....no issues fitting in with the world there...I have people tell me all the time what a polite young man he is....
My next child (19) works at a local restaurant.  Last week, the girl she was working with said at the end of the night "You are so happy!  All the kids at my school are so depressed and grumpy, its so nice to be around someone who is happy!"
My 14 year old is naturally quiet, it is her personality.  But her manners and her ability to talk to people of any age are very good.
My 10 year old just competed in the county fair and won multiple first place prizes and had to interact with tons of people she did not know.  I had another mom who I had never met before,  come up to me today in the horse barn and tell me how sweet my daughter is, and how outgoing she is...
The rest of the children are young and loud and very silly......

Please don't paint us with a broad brush  :)
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 16, 2019, 07:23:13 AM
Thank goodness for pews! I cannot kneel for very long or stand; if it wasn't for being able to sit down during Mass, I would have to skip going to High Mass and sometimes even low Mass, depending how my knees and feet are feeling.

Of course you wouldn't have had to skip going to Mass. In churches without pews you could sit on the benches in the side aisles. They were available for anyone who couldn't stand, kneel or prostrate themselves on the floor in the nave.

That's where the expression 'the weak can go to the wall' comes from.  It literally refers to the benches in the side aisles of churches where the 'weak' could sit.

Sitting in the presence of God, unless you had to, was frowned upon back then.  Not now though.
So what is the difference between sitting on the benches in the side isles and sitting in the main isle; the principle is the same. Also thank goodness for padded kneelers; that is a real life saver for me and others who don't have a good set of knees.

Sitting was the exception not the norm.  The side benches were not intended to be used like pews.  They were intended for those who needed to rest a while before they resumed the correct posture for a Catholic at prayer - standing, kneeling, or prostrate on the floor.  I'm sure that those who absolutely needed to sit there could, though.

Is standing painful for you?

Standing is painful for me nowadays. I had to quite coaching football this year. Going through therapy and there are improvements. I have a pinched nerve that makes my left leg burn and standing onerous. As far kneeling, the pressure on my back and then the bone on bone left knee makes it that I can only get through the Credo, and then maybe to through the Consecration. After that, it normally sitzville for me until Patre Noster.

Sorry to hear that.  I have a bad knee and hip which make it painful to kneel or sit for too long. Moving around helps, for me anyway.

But in a church without pews, there would be plenty of opportunity for you to sit and take rest. 

'Let the weak go to the wall.'  That's were the benches are.  And if that includes me, so be it.

PS. As per the 'vegetables are bad for you thread', since I went on a low oxalate diet, my aches and pains have reduced by 80%.  I don't know if your problem is the result of an injury, but decades of eating high oxalate foods can lead to accumulations of calcium oxalate crystals in the joints, causing pain and arthritis symptoms.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 16, 2019, 07:47:36 AM
A.C.
Standing for me was painful for a while, because I had black  callouses on the soles of my feet from standing all day at my job at school and at the liquour store. When I walked it felt like somebody was sticking pins into my feet. Also I had lower back problems, that I have been able to correct through visits to the Chryro and exercise. Kneeling, I have had bursitis in both knees for a long time, so I can't do it for very long.

As I said to Heinrich - sorry to hear that.  You have my sympathies, especially as I have had a painful knee and hip which was made much worse by kneeling or sitting in one place for too long.  And it they still play up from time to time.

This might sound harsh, but in a church without pews - the weak go to the wall where they can sit on the side benches, and that would include me.

It also might sound onerous.  The current arrangement is that everyone sits, has to sit, in pews packed into the nave.  This is what people are used to.  And so it might seem like a penalty to have to sit at the side if you're not fit enough to stand.

But standing, not sitting, in the presence of God was always the default, until pews put everyone in a box. In the Constantine Basilicas, the laity stood in the side aisles.  They did NOT sit it the nave.  The altar was in the west, facing the doors in the east and at the moment of Consecration, the laity turned towards the main doors in the east.

The Protestants put the laity in pews, in boxes, in order to emphasis the importance of word over sacrament, and so that they could thunderously impose the new religion on them. Once you're stuck in a pew, you're stuck in a pew.

The Tridentine Church disposed of Rood Screens, thereby opening up the Sanctuary to full view, and put the laity in pews where the default is to SIT in the presence of God.  While it is obviously true that the Tridentine Church produced great beauty and artistry in the churches of the period, this has to have had an effect on the mindset of those at prayer.  I suspect this was the first step in the great 'opening up to the world' which has led to the sorry state we now find ourselves in.

It would be interesting to experience Mass in a church without pews, would it not, just to find out?
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: 2Towers on September 17, 2019, 09:48:36 PM
I think even the monks sit at mass... except for during the consecration, and for that they stand.  Benedictine, I don't know about other orders.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Markus on September 17, 2019, 09:49:37 PM
Time to start attending a traditional Mass.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on September 22, 2019, 12:00:20 PM
Having families with a complete spread of ages at a Latin Mass is NOT a "Vatican II novelty."  You really need to read some more history, and not just selectively.  Many pre-V2 churches had crying rooms.  We discussed this on another thread.  Adults with unruly very young children, prior to V2 were expected to bring them to the crying room.  The parents were not expected to leave their children home, even though the traditional Mass was offered multiple times every Sunday in suburbs and cities (and therefore "tag-team" parenting was possible). Parents who did not control their children were subject to public scolding about that from the pulpit.  However, often the congregation could hear the screaming in the crying room anyway. It depended on how loud the noise was.

Things were different before Vatican II, is what you're saying. 

Quote
Here's what trads have "decided to embrace":

a return to large families and the rejection of contraception.  This is going to mean that siblings in close age will be together in a pew, and "bothering each other" (or worse) could add to the noise concern (i.e., make management more difficult).

the whole family coming to Mass together, as a witness for the children within a family and for other families, including visitors from the N.O. 

practicing a little charity -- recalling that probably our parents disciplined us at the same age if we were restless at Mass.

Catholics used to embrace all of the above.  And still St Therese of Lisieux was considered too young, as a toddler, to attend Sunday Mass.

Quote
I am not saying that "peace and quiet" is ONLY for those in religious orders.

Yes you are. 

Quote
Several of us have said on the previous thread that very early a.m. low Sunday Masses will be in general far quieter than the later Sunday TLM's. This is consistently true at my parish.  Part of that quiet is because of smaller Mass attendance at the early hour.  A few very large families do come, and the children are impeccably behaved -- calm, etc. It's too early for them to "know what hit them," so to speak.  The later in the day (e.g., midday), the more crowded the church (80% full), and the longer the Mass itself (High Mass of 2 hours vs. low Mass of 35-40 minutes, with homily), the more difficult it will be for young children to be as quiet as they would be at the early hour.

But rare is the parish with more than one Sunday TLM.  And rare is the parish where all TLM attendees live nearby.  All of that factors into the noise you keep complaining about.

It seems you think I haven't been attending the TLM for 20 years.

Quote
Except for your faulty revisionist history,

My history is more accurate than yours.

Quote
So returning to the N.O. is perhaps a solution for you.

Thank you very much.

Quote
The other solution would be ceasing your complaints to us but addressing your complaints to the presiding priests.  Whether or not we have young children, we're not responsible for your discomfort unless we attend your church, and we're also not responsible to come up with a solution.

And thank you again.

Meanwhile, I have another solution.  You, and others, could stop taking this so personally.  You, and others, could try not reacting so emotionally to this problem and start to accept that there's an issue here that might, just might, be open to a discussion that could lead to reasonable and nuanced solutions.

 You know what, you are right. Solutions are important. I have a fantastic one.

Most traditional Catholics are very willing to complain about the world, I'm sure you are one of them. You hate how liberal the world is, you hate how immodest the women are, you hate the laws allowing abortion, contraception, etc. If only people would just embrace tradition, wear modest clothing, stop all the insanity, the world would be a better place...
 Well as a matter of fact, a lot of people have done this...the married people with all the children. It is one thing to verbally denounce the world and modernism as a single person. It is a whole other thing to be the ones living out the obedience to laws both natural and divine. No contraception? Ok then, lots and lots of children. Mom staying home with children? Ok then, one income. You can kiss luxuries like cleaning ladies, maids, etc away. You want to attend mass on Sunday? Well then you have to bring your children with you since you cannot afford the aforementioned nanny/maid/servant to watch them.

I am not casting aspersions on anyone, but you seem to forget during your constant St. Therese examples that her mother and father both had full time jobs, and a house full of maids and servants.
 
  Now for the reasonable solution you asked for. I think single people in the parish with no children should volunteer to babysit for couples on Sunday and feast days. This way, anyone has the option of leaving their children at home like St. Therese. I know you don't want tradition to be dead in 20 years, so you must be in favor of large families. I know you want people to obey the laws of God, so you must not be in favor of abortion or contraception. You must realize that in order to raise good children who love God, it is best for Mother's to stay home, so I cannot imagine you want us all out there earning two incomes per household. I will assume then that you understand exactly why things are "different" now then they were in the old days and would like to help. Let me know your thoughts.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Traditionallyruralmom on September 22, 2019, 04:53:34 PM
yeah, St Therese's mom sent her to live with a wet nurse for the first years of her life...did not even raise her when she was a baby.....definitely a different world and absolutely not interested in that. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 22, 2019, 07:21:10 PM
yeah, St Therese's mom sent her to live with a wet nurse for the first years of her life...did not even raise her when she was a baby.....definitely a different world and absolutely not interested in that.

St Therese's mother had been ill for some time and died when St Therese was four.  Perhaps this explains her inability to nurse her child.

In 'Story of a Soul', St Therese makes no suggestion that her non-attendance at Mass was due to her mother.  Rather, that it was the practice of the day, as demonstrated by her excitement when her father and older sister brought her the 'blessed bread' from Mass. 

But you're right, it was a different world, one in which the presence of babies and toddlers at Mass and the inevitable disturbance they create would have been unthinkable.

And yet they still managed to make saints.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: diaduit on September 23, 2019, 03:07:35 AM
yeah, St Therese's mom sent her to live with a wet nurse for the first years of her life...did not even raise her when she was a baby.....definitely a different world and absolutely not interested in that.

St Therese's mother had been ill for some time and died when St Therese was four.  Perhaps this explains her inability to nurse her child.

In 'Story of a Soul', St Therese makes no suggestion that her non-attendance at Mass was due to her mother.  Rather, that it was the practice of the day, as demonstrated by her excitement when her father and older sister brought her the 'blessed bread' from Mass. 

But you're right, it was a different world, one in which the presence of babies and toddlers at Mass and the inevitable disturbance they create would have been unthinkable.

And yet they still managed to make saints.




Zelie sent all her children to wet nurses and they lost one little girl to a bad wet nurse who took the money but never fed the baby who eventually died.  She had a successful lace business and had to return to work very soon after the birth of her children.

She did rear great saints but she did work and she did send them away for the first year or two to be fed by strangers hired by her.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: bigbadtrad on September 23, 2019, 04:20:35 AM
Using St Therese as an example is ridiculous. It was a regional custom ONLY FOR THE WEALTHY. There is no history of children not attending Mass.

Again, children receiving Holy Communion was the norm for the east and west for hundreds of centuries from baptism on. The East still continues this.

If you want to use her as an example you couldn't receive frequently, and you couldn't even receive daily as a nun, even St. Therese didn't receive Holy Communion daily.

I know we use the wealthy most of the time as historical precedent, but she is not a precedent for history. She's an example of rich 19th century France. Nothing more, nothing less.

If anyone dared raise their children like she was they would be turned into social services and every trad would say her mother wasn't doing her job.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 23, 2019, 04:50:41 AM
Using St Therese as an example is ridiculous. It was a regional custom ONLY FOR THE WEALTHY. There is no history of children not attending Mass.

Again, children receiving Holy Communion was the norm for the east and west for hundreds of centuries from baptism on. The East still continues this.

If you want to use her as an example you couldn't receive frequently, and you couldn't even receive daily as a nun, even St. Therese didn't receive Holy Communion daily.

I know we use the wealthy most of the time as historical precedent, but she is not a precedent for history. She's an example of rich 19th century France. Nothing more, nothing less.

If anyone dared raise their children like she was they would be turned into social services and every trad would say her mother wasn't doing her job.

Nonsense.

You, and others here, are dismissing the example of St Therese because it doesn't suit your argument.  But St Therese's example still stands, and was certainly not a practice reserved only for the wealthy.

You or any other poster here, are free to post as many counter examples as you like.  So provide one. Give us an example of a Saint, Doctor, theologian, or any lay Catholic for that matter, who writes about the presence of babies and toddlers at the Masses of their childhood.

Not children, but babies and toddlers.

As for the mothers of the past, would the pre-Vatican II mother of a friend of mine also be reported to Social Services, because she hated any noise and disturbance at Mass, wouldn't tolerate babies and toddlers at Mass, and used go alone to a Sunday Low Mass for the peace and quiet?

And what about the pre-Vatican II nuns who used to patrol the church, ready to pounce on and eject any child who dared make a peep during Mass?  Again, this is the testimony of another Catholic who remembers the pre-V2 situation.

How would Trads today cope with some real Tradition?  Not very well, I suspect.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 23, 2019, 04:57:40 AM
yeah, St Therese's mom sent her to live with a wet nurse for the first years of her life...did not even raise her when she was a baby.....definitely a different world and absolutely not interested in that.

Yes, this is true.  Zelie did send St Therese to live with a wet nurse:

Quote
… His tomb will be near that of my two little Josephs." This last sentence refers to her two boys, Joseph, who died at the age of one year in 1867 and Joseph-Jean-Baptiste, who also died at the age of one in 1868. In 1870 her little girl, Hélène, died at the age of five and a half years. In 1870 Mélanie also died, less than two months old. In five years Zélie went to the graveside six times [father and father-in-law]. In this multiple experience of grief we see how affectionate she was, how sensitive to suffering, and how imbued with a strong spirit of faith.

She says of the deaths of her children, "When I closed the eyes of my dear children and prepared them for burial, I was indeed grief-stricken, but, thanks to God's grace, I have always been resigned to His will. I do not regret the pains and sacrifices I underwent for them." She then goes on to say that she "doesn't understand people who say 'You'd have been better not to have gone through all of that." She adds, "They're enjoying heaven now. Moreover, I have not lost them always. Life is short, and I shall find my little ones again in heaven."

Birth of Thérèse

     When Thérèse was born in 1873, Zélie knew that this would be the last child she would have. Thérèse became very ill right after her birth. By now acquainted with death, Zélie feared for Thérèse's life. After her first three children, Zélie could not breast-feed her babies and so had them fed by a wet-nurse. She describes Thérèse's illness in this way:

     If it had not been so late, I would have set out that night to find a nurse. How long that night was! Thérèse would not take the least nourishment, and, all that night, all the sad signs that preceded the deaths of my other little angels manifested themselves, and I was sad that this last-born could not receive from me the least help in her weak and feeble condition.

     At first light she set off, and on the way she saw two rough-looking men coming toward her on a deserted road. She said to herself, "If they kill me, it will make no difference. I have the grief of death already in my heart." She finally reached Semallè and asked Rose Taillè to come to Thérèse. Rose had nursed some of the other Martin children. She asked Rose to come and stay in Alençon. But Rose had a baby of her own and refused to go—both mothers drawn to protect the children they had brought into the world. Finally Rose agreed to go and bring Thérèse back to Semallè, where she would care for her. When they got back to Alençon, Rose saw Thérèse and said, "It is too late." Zélie rushed upstairs to the statue of St. Joseph and begged him to help the baby. When she came downstairs, Thérèse was drinking away to her heart's content.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 23, 2019, 05:09:58 AM
yeah, St Therese's mom sent her to live with a wet nurse for the first years of her life...did not even raise her when she was a baby.....definitely a different world and absolutely not interested in that.

St Therese's mother had been ill for some time and died when St Therese was four.  Perhaps this explains her inability to nurse her child.

In 'Story of a Soul', St Therese makes no suggestion that her non-attendance at Mass was due to her mother.  Rather, that it was the practice of the day, as demonstrated by her excitement when her father and older sister brought her the 'blessed bread' from Mass. 

But you're right, it was a different world, one in which the presence of babies and toddlers at Mass and the inevitable disturbance they create would have been unthinkable.

And yet they still managed to make saints.




Zelie sent all her children to wet nurses and they lost one little girl to a bad wet nurse who took the money but never fed the baby who eventually died.  She had a successful lace business and had to return to work very soon after the birth of her children.

She did rear great saints but she did work and she did send them away for the first year or two to be fed by strangers hired by her.


Not all of her children had to go to wet nurses, only those after the first three:

Quote
We have noticed that Zélie could not breast-feed Thérèse. As a young girl, she had fallen against a table and hurt her breast. In 1865 she mentioned to her brother in a letter that she was experiencing pain. She did not do anything about it, probably hoping it would go away. Later she developed lumps in her breast, and, with the pain, was unable to feed the children herself. Finally, because of the pain, she realized that she had cancer—but it was too late; the doctors pronounced it terminal.

Yes, Zelie did work - from home:

Quote
     Alençon is a center of lacemaking in France. Zélie became an expert in this accurate, detailed, and demanding work. Eventually she organized a group of women around her. She designed the patterns and bought the thread. On Thursdays the ladies came to her home, and she assigned a certain amount of work to each, which they would do in their houses. The following Thursday they would bring the completed pieces to Zélie. She would assemble the pieces, mend broken threads, and assign new work for the coming week. She became very successful in this business venture. She used the ground floor of her family home in the Rue Ste. Blaise as her office and workrooms. Realizing that she was not destined to be a nun, she decided to marry and have a family. It was in this frame of mind that she met the eligible bachelor Louis Martin. When they married she was 27 years of age; he was 35.

     It is interesting that when she got married, Zélie had no idea of what we call "the facts of life." Discovering them on her wedding day, she went to her sister (now Sister Marie-Dosithée, a Visitation Sister in Le Mans) and poured out her heart in a flood of tears. Later on we have a letter where she says, "I never regretted having married." Louis was an idealist, almost a romanticist, and he convinced her that they would live together as brother and sister. After ten months, they realized that was not really what God wanted, especially in view of Zélie's desire to have children. The next year Marie was born, then Pauline, and then Léonie.

     Zélie's lace business was doing so well that Louis sold his watch-making and jewelry business to his nephew and became manager and salesman for Zélie. They moved into the home where Zélie had her offices, on the Rue Ste. Blaise. Louis traveled a lot getting orders for the Point d'Alençon. He also did designs for the lace, being an accomplished artist. He was often away on business. We see references to this in Zélie's correspondence: "Your father is away." And we notice that he was away when Thérèse was born.


Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 23, 2019, 05:23:20 AM
I know you don't want tradition to be dead in 20 years, so you must be in favor of large families. I know you want people to obey the laws of God, so you must not be in favor of abortion or contraception. You must realize that in order to raise good children who love God, it is best for Mother's to stay home, so I cannot imagine you want us all out there earning two incomes per household. I will assume then that you understand exactly why things are "different" now then they were in the old days and would like to help. Let me know your thoughts.

Things are different now because Trads have decided to embrace the Vatican II novelty of bringing babies and toddlers to Mass.

Things are also different now because misguided Trad priests have decided to bank on the demographic option to the crisis in the Church.  They have some kind of fantasy that Trads can outbreed the Modernists and in a couple of centuries, maybe, might be a majority. Meanwhile, the baby and toddler chorus had become a non-stop addition to the liturgy.

And no-one needed great wealth to employ domestic help in St Therese's time.  Anyone we would term 'middle class' would have had the means to employ a home help at the very least.

As for strangers babysitting while Trad parents attend Mass.  Now that might indeed be a case for Social Services.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Bernadette on September 23, 2019, 06:21:17 AM
yeah, St Therese's mom sent her to live with a wet nurse for the first years of her life...did not even raise her when she was a baby.....definitely a different world and absolutely not interested in that.

I thought she couldn't nurse Therese because of her breast cancer.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Gardener on September 23, 2019, 08:07:51 AM
Were it the norm, it wouldn't have been such a big deal to write about as it was written, and wouldn't serve as what I can tell is one of the few (only?) examples trotted out.

One example, the only one I seem to ever hear about, is indicative in my mind to show a lack of examples. One-offs are typically one-offs for a reason: they're one-off examples which fall outside the norm!

The claim is that pre-Vatican 2, infants and toddlers did not go to Mass. Therefore, the onus rests not on another to show it the case, but on the claimant to show the case, and 1 example from a particular region and period in time is insufficient to draw a conclusion. For by that one could argue for 13 year old boys acting as EMHC's, and outside of Mass at that! (St. Tarcisius, pray for us).

But, what we do know is that The Didiscalia has a specific chapter dedicated to Mass and the reality of lay structure in its context. Children (with no specification given otherwise) states where they should be, which means that they were commonly there. As this was not a document for a mere village, but an accepted document about as close to universal as one can hope of the period outside of Scripture, this is far more compelling than a particular family in France at a particular time, who experienced an unusual set of circumstances such that the reality of it was a big enough deal to make its conveyed tone seem... unusual.

Quote
CHAPTER XII

To Bishops: that they should be peaceable.

[ii. 57] And you the bishops, be not hard, nor tyrannical, nor wrathful, and be not rough with the people of God which is delivered into your hands. And destroy not the Lord's house nor scatter His people; but convert all, that you may be helpers with God; and gather the faithful with much meekness and long-suffering and patience, and without anger, and with doctrine and exhortation, as ministers of the kingdom everlasting.

And in your congregations in the holy churches hold your assemblies with all decent order, and appoint the places for the brethren with care and gravity. And for the presbyters let there be assigned a place in the eastern part of the house; and let the bishop's throne be set in their midst, and let the presbyters sit with him. And again, let the lay men sit in another part of the house toward the east. For so it should be, that in the eastern part of the house the presbyters sit with the bishops, and next the lay men, and then the women that when you stand up to pray, the rulers may stand first, and after them the lay men, and then the women also. For it is required that you pray toward the east, as knowing [[120]] that which is written: Give ye glory to God, who rideth upon the heaven of heavens toward the east [Ps 67.34 LXX].

But of the deacons let one stand always by the oblations of the Eucharist; and let another stand without by the door and observe them that come in; and afterwards, when you offer, let them minister together in the Church. And if anyone be found sitting out of his place, let the deacon who is within reprove him and make him to rise up and sit in a place that is meet for him. For our Lord likened the Church to a fold; for as we see the dumb animals, oxen and sheep (p. 57) and goats, lie down and rise up, and feed and chew the cud, according to their families, and none of them separate itself from its kind; and (see) the wild beasts also severally range with their like upon the mountains:? so likewise in the Church ought those who are young to sit apart, if there be room, and if not to stand up; and those who are advanced in years to sit apart. And let the children stand on one side, or let their fathers and mothers take them to them; and let them stand up. And let the young girls also sit apart; but if there be no room, let them stand up behind the women. And let the young women who are married and have children stand apart, and the aged women and widows sit apart. And let the deacon see that each of them on entering goes to his place, that no one may sit out of his place. And let the deacon also see that no one whispers, or falls asleep, or laughs, or makes signs. For so it should be, that with decency and decorum they watch in the Church, with ears attentive to the word of the Lord.

[ii. 58] But if any brother or sister come from another congregation, let the deacon question her and learn whether she is married, or again whether she is a widow (who is) a believer; and whether she is a daughter of the Church, or belongs perchance to one of the heresies; and then let him conduct her and set her in a place that is suitable for her. But if a [[122]] presbyter should come from another congregation, do you the presbyters receive him with fellowship into your place. And if it be a bishop, let him sit with the bishop; and let him accord him the honour of his rank, even as himself. And do thou, O bishop, invite him to discourse to thy people; for the exhortation and admonition of strangers is very profitable, especially as it is written:? There is no prophet that is acceptable in his own place [Lk 4.24]. And when you offer the oblation, let him speak. But if he is wise and gives the honour to thee, and is unwilling to offer, at least let him speak over the cup.? But if, as you are sitting, some one else should come, whether a man or a woman, who has some worldly honour, either of the same district or of another congregation:? thou, O bishop, if thou art speaking the word of God, or hearing, or reading, shalt not respect (p. 58) persons and leave the ministry of thy word and appoint them a place; but do thou remain still as thou art and not interrupt thy word, and let the brethren themselves receive them. And if there be no place, let one of the brethren who is full of charity and loves his brethren, and is one fitted to do an honour, rise and give them place, and himself stand up. But if, while younger men or women sit, an older man or woman should rise and give up their place, do thou, O deacon, scan those who sit, and see which man or woman of them is younger than the rest, and make them stand up, and cause him to sit who had risen and given up his place; and him whom thou hast caused to stand up, lead away and make him to stand behind his neighbours:? that others also may be trained and learn to give place to those more honourable than themselves. But if a poor man or woman should come [cf. Jas 2.2], (whether of the same district) [[124]] or of another congregation, and especially if they are stricken in years, and there be no place for such, do thou, O bishop, with all thy heart provide a place for them, even if thou have to sit upon the ground; that thou be not as one who respects the persons of men, but that thy ministry may be acceptable with God.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/didascalia.html
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on September 23, 2019, 08:35:56 AM
Quote
Things are different now because Trads have decided to embrace the Vatican II novelty of bringing babies and toddlers to Mass.

This is not true.  For one, I still don't think it's been proven that it is a Vatican II novelty.  One example does not equal full proof.  Nothing has been written on the topic, that I can find, to prove what was normal either way.  So, at best, we really don't know what the traditional practice was.  For another, and I'm speaking for myself here, it's not so much that I've made a conscious and intentional decision to accept a practice that goes against tradition (which, as I said before, I'm still not convinced it even does); it's more that I simply have no choice.  Many Catholics, with and without children alike, travel long distances to attend a Latin Mass , through absolutely no fault of their own.  Babysitting for that is just not feasible.  A nursing mother cannot leave her baby that long.  It would be cruel,for the child wot be starving by the time she got home, and the babysitter would be helpless to do anything about it - assuming I could even find one I trust enough to hire for that length of time on a Sunday.  For another, babysitting is not cheap. The going rate where I am is somewhere around $15/hour.  While my husband does provide well for us, we also have a very large family, which is expensive to provide for in this economy.  Society is not conducive to large, Catholic families anymore.  It's a shame, but it is the reality.  Hiring a babysitter every Sunday for the duration of most women's birthing and child raising years, would be more financial burden than the majority of families could afford, even the middle class ones, considering many Catholic mother's will be having babies and nursing for upwards of 20 years, give or take.  As far as I know, The Church gives a woman a 6 weeks dispensation for attending Mass after the birth of her child.  After that, she must start attending again under pain of mortal sin.  In our current reality, we have to do the best we can.  Yes, I agree the noise is a problem.  But, the solution to leave babies and toddlers at home is not a viable one for many, many people - even if the family would like to.  Therefore, we must look to other ways to figure out how to minimize it.  As I've pointed out earlier, babies and toddlers making noise is NOT inevitable.  I've seen much evidence to the contrary, and have successfully achieved that goal personally.  I think a good start to the problem would be to talk or one's priest, if it's an issue in one's parish (it's not in mine). Maybe he's unaware of how bothersome it is to people? Hopefully, he would be glad to work with the souls in his flock to figure out a better way to accommodate both sides of the coin: the very real need for parents to fulfill their Sunday obligation and the very real need for respect for quiet that is conducive to reverence at Mass (silence which I have experienced on many occasions, even in a church with a baby and toddler in just about every other pew).
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 23, 2019, 08:58:40 AM
Quote
CHAPTER XII

To Bishops: that they should be peaceable.

[ii. 57] And you the bishops, be not hard, nor tyrannical, nor wrathful, and be not rough with the people of God which is delivered into your hands. And destroy not the Lord's house nor scatter His people; but convert all, that you may be helpers with God; and gather the faithful with much meekness and long-suffering and patience, and without anger, and with doctrine and exhortation, as ministers of the kingdom everlasting.

And in your congregations in the holy churches hold your assemblies with all decent order, and appoint the places for the brethren with care and gravity. And for the presbyters let there be assigned a place in the eastern part of the house; and let the bishop's throne be set in their midst, and let the presbyters sit with him. And again, let the lay men sit in another part of the house toward the east. For so it should be, that in the eastern part of the house the presbyters sit with the bishops, and next the lay men, and then the women that when you stand up to pray, the rulers may stand first, and after them the lay men, and then the women also. For it is required that you pray toward the east, as knowing [[120]] that which is written: Give ye glory to God, who rideth upon the heaven of heavens toward the east [Ps 67.34 LXX].

But of the deacons let one stand always by the oblations of the Eucharist; and let another stand without by the door and observe them that come in; and afterwards, when you offer, let them minister together in the Church. And if anyone be found sitting out of his place, let the deacon who is within reprove him and make him to rise up and sit in a place that is meet for him. For our Lord likened the Church to a fold; for as we see the dumb animals, oxen and sheep (p. 57) and goats, lie down and rise up, and feed and chew the cud, according to their families, and none of them separate itself from its kind; and (see) the wild beasts also severally range with their like upon the mountains:? so likewise in the Church ought those who are young to sit apart, if there be room, and if not to stand up; and those who are advanced in years to sit apart. And let the children stand on one side, or let their fathers and mothers take them to them; and let them stand up. And let the young girls also sit apart; but if there be no room, let them stand up behind the women. And let the young women who are married and have children stand apart, and the aged women and widows sit apart. And let the deacon see that each of them on entering goes to his place, that no one may sit out of his place. And let the deacon also see that no one whispers, or falls asleep, or laughs, or makes signs. For so it should be, that with decency and decorum they watch in the Church, with ears attentive to the word of the Lord.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/didascalia.html

The entire text you quoted refers to children, not babies and toddlers which is the issue here. 

And you failed to bold this part.

Quote
And let the deacon also see that no one whispers, or falls asleep, or laughs, or makes signs. For so it should be, that with decency and decorum they watch in the Church, with ears attentive to the word of the Lord.

No whispering at Mass, or even laughing …..

How would that go down today?  Would you accept it?
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on September 23, 2019, 09:57:15 AM
Quote
The entire text you quoted refers to children, not babies and toddlers which is the issue here.

Usually when people use the term "children", they use it to mean children of any age.  They aren't intending to exclude particular ages, unless they note otherwise.  So, it's not a fair assumption to say that "children" doesn't include babies and toddlers, since it typically does.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 23, 2019, 10:49:47 AM
Quote
The entire text you quoted refers to children, not babies and toddlers which is the issue here.

Usually when people use the term "children", they use it to mean children of any age.  They aren't intending to exclude particular ages, unless they note otherwise.  So, it's not a fair assumption to say that "children" doesn't include babies and toddlers, since it typically does.

The example Gardener quoted includes standing and seating arrangements for children who are old enough to stand and sit.

This implies that the children being referred to are not babies and toddlers.

And yet Gardener used this example to argue that babies and toddlers have always been taken to Mass. 




Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on September 23, 2019, 11:06:27 AM
Toddlers are capable of sitting and standing.  It also mentions that young women with children are to stand apart.  That could imply that women are supposed to be holding said children, because they are too young to be set down.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Bernadette on September 23, 2019, 11:16:34 AM
I just wish the parents at my church would insist that their children not talk and hit each other during Mass. :( That's more distracting than babies and toddlers any day, in my book. At least babies can't help it, and toddlers have some excuse due to being toddlers.  :shrug:
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 23, 2019, 12:32:57 PM
Toddlers are capable of sitting and standing.  It also mentions that young women with children are to stand apart.  That could imply that women are supposed to be holding said children, because they are too young to be set down.

I had to look it up, but 'The Didascalia' which Gardener quoted from dates from the 3rd century.  The practice in the early Church was for the laity to stand at Mass.  There would have been no chairs or pews in the nave.  The early Christians stood before the altar, and those too weak or infirm sat on benches in the side aisles.  The quote needs to be read with this in mind.

For example, you referred to the following.....

Quote
And let the young women who are married and have children stand apart, and the aged women and widows sit apart.

The aged women and widows sit.  The young women who are married and have children stand apart.  I find it difficult to imagine women with babies and toddlers being expected to stand, which suggests that the children being referred to had reached the age of reason.

I'm not sure what standing 'apart' means, unless it means standing in the side aisles and not the nave.  At any rate, the example from the Didascalia refers to an entirely different church layout than what is the norm today, a church layout that was also the norm for the entire Middle Ages and only disappeared after the Reformation.

Quote
The Didascalia, or the Catholic Teaching of the Twelve Apostles and Holy Disciples of Our Saviour, is a Church Order, composed, according to recent investigations, in the first part, perhaps even the first decades, of the third century, for a community of Christian converts from paganism in the northern part of Syria. The work is modelled on the Didache (cf. vol. I, pp. 29-39) and forms the main source of the first six books of the Apostolic Constitutions.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/didascalia.html
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: mikemac on September 23, 2019, 02:29:00 PM
The entire text you quoted refers to children, not babies and toddlers which is the issue here. 

I believe in the first round of your rant, a month or so ago you were referring to all children, not just babies and toddlers.  Well at least you are coming around; a bit.  It's very nice of you to allow older children into your Church.   :rolleyes:

You are way off mark to think that anything regarding this came out of VII.  That is your imagination working overtime.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 23, 2019, 03:05:33 PM
The entire text you quoted refers to children, not babies and toddlers which is the issue here. 

I believe in the first round of your rant, a month or so ago you were referring to all children, not just babies and toddlers.  Well at least you are coming around; a bit.  It's very nice of you to allow older children into your Church.   :rolleyes:

You are way off mark to think that anything regarding this came out of VII.  That is your imagination working overtime.

Nasty.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Gardener on September 23, 2019, 03:13:13 PM
Quote
The entire text you quoted refers to children, not babies and toddlers which is the issue here.

Usually when people use the term "children", they use it to mean children of any age.  They aren't intending to exclude particular ages, unless they note otherwise.  So, it's not a fair assumption to say that "children" doesn't include babies and toddlers, since it typically does.

The example Gardener quoted includes standing and seating arrangements for children who are old enough to stand and sit.

This implies that the children being referred to are not babies and toddlers.

And yet Gardener used this example to argue that babies and toddlers have always been taken to Mass.

My 2 and 4 year old, toddlers, stand just fine thank you. Including when I'd much rather they sit. My 1 year old is perfectly capable of being held.

That there are no exclusions in the age differentiation is telling.

As for your other question on laughing etc., no, I would not have a problem with that. Which is why when my kids act up in Mass we remove them.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on September 23, 2019, 03:54:44 PM
Toddlers are capable of sitting and standing.  It also mentions that young women with children are to stand apart.  That could imply that women are supposed to be holding said children, because they are too young to be set down.

I had to look it up, but 'The Didascalia' which Gardener quoted from dates from the 3rd century.  The practice in the early Church was for the laity to stand at Mass.  There would have been no chairs or pews in the nave.  The early Christians stood before the altar, and those too weak or infirm sat on benches in the side aisles.  The quote needs to be read with this in mind.

For example, you referred to the following.....

Quote
And let the young women who are married and have children stand apart, and the aged women and widows sit apart.

The aged women and widows sit.  The young women who are married and have children stand apart.  I find it difficult to imagine women with babies and toddlers being expected to stand, which suggests that the children being referred to had reached the age of reason.

I'm not sure what standing 'apart' means, unless it means standing in the side aisles and not the nave.  At any rate, the example from the Didascalia refers to an entirely different church layout than what is the norm today, a church layout that was also the norm for the entire Middle Ages and only disappeared after the Reformation.

Quote
The Didascalia, or the Catholic Teaching of the Twelve Apostles and Holy Disciples of Our Saviour, is a Church Order, composed, according to recent investigations, in the first part, perhaps even the first decades, of the third century, for a community of Christian converts from paganism in the northern part of Syria. The work is modelled on the Didache (cf. vol. I, pp. 29-39) and forms the main source of the first six books of the Apostolic Constitutions.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/didascalia.html

So, parents' offspring don't officially count as "children", until they reach the age of reason at 7? 6 and under are in the "babies and toddlers" category?

I don't think it's difficult to expect women with babies and toddlers to stand at all.  It happens all the time in the back of church, because often babies and younger children are more easily kept quiet if standing in Mama's arms rather than sitting. 
Maybe that's why it was suggested that the mother/child pair stand off to the side; so they could tend to their children in Mass more easily. 

The quote also specifically mentioned children independently, who were to stand on one side; and then young mothers with children (which I took to mean as amother/child pair).  So, if a child has met the age of reason, then they would stand "on one side".  If they had not yet reached age of reason (baby or toddler, by your definition), then they would "stand apart" with their mother. I would presume that means stand next to the mother, as toddlers are perfectly capable of doing so, or sit at mother's feet quietly, or be in mother's arms if the child was too young to stand by himself.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on September 23, 2019, 03:59:46 PM
 And, yes, I agree that the layout of churches and rubrics the laity are expected and capable of following has definitely changed.  Obviously, parishioners can no longer follow that method of suggested postures, since churches are not set up that way anymore.  But, the point of the quote, I think, was not so much to present a case for what posture the various members of the laity should adopt (though, it is an interesting topic), but more to show that back in the 3rd century when that was written, there was a very wide range of age groups - from very young to very old, parents and children of all ages alike - that attended Holy Mass. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: orate on September 23, 2019, 04:35:13 PM
The entire text you quoted refers to children, not babies and toddlers which is the issue here. 

I believe in the first round of your rant, a month or so ago you were referring to all children, not just babies and toddlers.  Well at least you are coming around; a bit.  It's very nice of you to allow older children into your Church.   :rolleyes:

You are way off mark to think that anything regarding this came out of VII.  That is your imagination working overtime.

Nasty.

And how does this putdown contribute to the debate?


awkwardcustomer
  You feel free to respond with an emotional putdown.  Yet when any or many of those who disagree with you respond in such away as to offend your delicate sensibilities, we are somehow ganging up on you.

You have hijacked this thread to continue your one man crusade against babies and toddlers at Mass, when the OP was asking about attending the traditional Mass.

You have not proved that leaving babies and toddlers at home was ever a universal practice in the Church.  And as has been pointed out by others, the example of St. Therese is just one example and does not constitute a universal proof.

Grow up!  The sun does not rise and set on you alone!

Life is not about you and your problem with noise.  It is about the love of God and doing His Will.  God has said nothing about absolute silence at Mass, but He has commanded us to "Keep holy the Lord's Day."

Let us not discourage young Catholic parents who are besieged by the world about their choice to obey God's Will, by implying that they are somehow doing something wrong in bringing their little ones to Church!  They should be praised for their efforts, not put down by one who presumes to know the mind of the Church.

edited for grammar and clarity
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Miriam_M on September 23, 2019, 05:16:04 PM
THIS:

You are way off mark to think that anything regarding this came out of VII. 


Correct.  The allegation is historically false.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 23, 2019, 05:34:46 PM
The entire text you quoted refers to children, not babies and toddlers which is the issue here. 

I believe in the first round of your rant, a month or so ago you were referring to all children, not just babies and toddlers.  Well at least you are coming around; a bit.  It's very nice of you to allow older children into your Church.   :rolleyes:

You are way off mark to think that anything regarding this came out of VII.  That is your imagination working overtime.

Nasty.


Quote
And how does this putdown contribute to the debate?

Because it highlights that the poster who made the uncalled for comment Awkward was responding to (#153) was not contributing to the debate themselves, but making an unjustified attack.   It was nasty.  Awkward clarified way back in #70 that they were not referring to children, but only babies or toddlers.  That’s about 90 posts ago.  Perhaps one could not be bothered to read them all?  That’s fine, and a perfect reason to refrain from making any comment at all. 

I find Awkward’s and Munda’s (in particular) posts worthy of thought and I haven’t yet come to any conclusion.  Posts like #153 don’t help. 



Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Davis Blank - EG on September 23, 2019, 07:21:10 PM
Aeternitus,

Sorry for the delayed reply.  This is with regards to your question about cry-rooms pre-VII:

https://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=22198.msg477134#msg477134

This is also a link to a prior 13-page thread on this same topic.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: orate on September 23, 2019, 07:52:37 PM
The entire text you quoted refers to children, not babies and toddlers which is the issue here. 

I believe in the first round of your rant, a month or so ago you were referring to all children, not just babies and toddlers.  Well at least you are coming around; a bit.  It's very nice of you to allow older children into your Church.   :rolleyes:

You are way off mark to think that anything regarding this came out of VII.  That is your imagination working overtime.

Nasty.


Quote
And how does this putdown contribute to the debate?

Because it highlights that the poster who made the uncalled for comment Awkward was responding to (#153) was not contributing to the debate themselves, but making an unjustified attack.   It was nasty.  Awkward clarified way back in #70 that they were not referring to children, but only babies or toddlers.  That’s about 90 posts ago. Perhaps one could not be bothered to read them all?  That’s fine, and a perfect reason to refrain from making any comment at all. 

I find Awkward’s and Munda’s (in particular) posts worthy of thought and I haven’t yet come to any conclusion.  Posts like #153 don’t help.

In fact I have read this entire thread from the beginning, as well as this entire thread:  https://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=22198.msg477134#msg477134

The fact remains that this thread was hijacked to rehash what has been beaten to the ground in a previous thread.  Prior to post #153 I purposely refrained from commenting as I had commented fully, respectfully, I might add, in the previous thread.

In both threads awkwardcustomer has had some pretty snarky replies to those who respectfully disagree with him.  I guess I'm just tired of him dishing it out and then feigning feeling ganged up upon when anyone replies in kind.

The Church has never made a ruling calling for infants and toddlers NOT to attend Mass.  She has, however, made it a law of the Church to attend Mass on Sundays and holy days.

Again, I see no need to imply that  young Catholic parents are somehow doing something wrong when they try to do both their duties of state and obey the Laws of the Church.

Modified because of quotation error
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: mikemac on September 23, 2019, 09:28:59 PM
I have actually read every post in both threads myself as well.  In the last thread, which was about two months ago it was suggested to awkwardcustomer that he wears a pair of ear plugs.  At that time it sounded like he thought that was a good idea.  Yet in this thread he says he still has not tried using ear plugs.  And on top of that he gives the impression that the entire Church should change for him, and not him for the Church.  My answer to that is that it is his problem.  If he at least had tried using ear plugs then this round number two rant would not sound like such a self righteous whine.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 24, 2019, 06:27:23 AM
Aeternitus,

Sorry for the delayed reply.  This is with regards to your question about cry-rooms pre-VII:

https://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=22198.msg477134#msg477134

This is also a link to a prior 13-page thread on this same topic.

Thank you.   No time to read it at present, but I will get to it. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 24, 2019, 07:18:37 AM
The entire text you quoted refers to children, not babies and toddlers which is the issue here. 

I believe in the first round of your rant, a month or so ago you were referring to all children, not just babies and toddlers.  Well at least you are coming around; a bit.  It's very nice of you to allow older children into your Church.   :rolleyes:

You are way off mark to think that anything regarding this came out of VII.  That is your imagination working overtime.

Nasty.


Quote
And how does this putdown contribute to the debate?

Because it highlights that the poster who made the uncalled for comment Awkward was responding to (#153) was not contributing to the debate themselves, but making an unjustified attack.   It was nasty.  Awkward clarified way back in #70 that they were not referring to children, but only babies or toddlers.  That’s about 90 posts ago. Perhaps one could not be bothered to read them all?  That’s fine, and a perfect reason to refrain from making any comment at all. 

I find Awkward’s and Munda’s (in particular) posts worthy of thought and I haven’t yet come to any conclusion.  Posts like #153 don’t help.

In fact I have read this entire thread from the beginning, as well as this entire thread:  https://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=22198.msg477134#msg477134

The fact remains that this thread was hijacked to rehash what has been beaten to the ground in a previous thread.  Prior to post #153 I purposely refrained from commenting as I had commented fully, respectfully, I might add, in the previous thread.

In both threads awkwardcustomer has had some pretty snarky replies to those who respectfully disagree with him.  I guess I'm just tired of him dishing it out and then feigning feeling ganged up upon when anyone replies in kind.

The Church has never made a ruling calling for infants and toddlers NOT to attend Mass.  She has, however, made it a law of the Church to attend Mass on Sundays and holy days.

Again, I see no need to imply that  young Catholic parents are somehow doing something wrong when they try to do both their duties of state and obey the Laws of the Church.

Modified because of quotation error



I haven’t yet read the earlier thread and my comments only relate to this one.  I will read the other thread in due course, but my time is limited.  Until then, my comments on #153 still stand.  It was nasty and didn’t contribute at all to the debate.   Awkward made it quite clear 80 or 90 posts ago, that if anyone thought her problem was with children attending Mass then those people were mistaken –babies and toddlers only.     After that clarification, whether you think  #153 was warranted due to the previous thread, and therefore appropriate to “reply in kind”, as you say, well, that’s your call.  I don’t.   
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: orate on September 24, 2019, 07:45:56 AM
I haven’t yet read the earlier thread and my comments only relate to this one.  I will read the other thread in due course, but my time is limited.  Until then, my comments on #153 still stand.  It was nasty and didn’t contribute at all to the debate.   Awkward made it quite clear 80 or 90 posts ago, that if anyone thought her problem was with children attending Mass then those people were mistaken –babies and toddlers only.     After that clarification, whether you think  #153 was warranted due to the previous thread, and therefore appropriate to “reply in kind”, as you say, well, that’s your call.  I don’t.

So be it.  Aeternitus, my bone of contention is not with you or most of the other posters on this forum.  I'm sorry if I may have offended you.

Opinions, as they say, are like another part of the human anatomy, everyone has one.  The primary value of this forum is the discussion of true Catholic teaching, not in the expression of one's individual opinion--this includes my own.

edited for spelling and to add

I stand by my statement: "The Church has never made a ruling calling for infants and toddlers NOT to attend Mass.  She has, however, made it a law of the Church to attend Mass on Sundays and holy days."  Thus, I find it uncharitable to encourage Catholic parents to forego their duty to attend Mass just because they must bring an infant or toddler or both, in order to fulfill their duty.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 24, 2019, 08:19:07 AM
I haven’t yet read the earlier thread and my comments only relate to this one.  I will read the other thread in due course, but my time is limited.  Until then, my comments on #153 still stand.  It was nasty and didn’t contribute at all to the debate.   Awkward made it quite clear 80 or 90 posts ago, that if anyone thought her problem was with children attending Mass then those people were mistaken –babies and toddlers only.     After that clarification, whether you think  #153 was warranted due to the previous thread, and therefore appropriate to “reply in kind”, as you say, well, that’s your call.  I don’t.

So be it.  Aeternitus, my bone of contention is not with you or most of the other posters on this forum.  I'm sorry if I may have offended you.

Opinions, as they say, are like another part of the human anatomy, everyone has one.  The primary value of this forum is the discussion of true Catholic teaching, not in the expression of one's individual opinion--this includes my own.

edited for spelling

You haven't offended me.  And if you had, this post of your would have unoffended me immediately  ;D  Post # 153 (which was not yours) offended my sense of justice, that’s all.  I think this is an interesting topic and I actually don’t know the answer.  I have witnessed babes and tots attend Mass and not make a sound.  Or if they did their parents would have them out of the door before the cry erupted.  That is how diligent they were, together with horrified at the thought of disrupting Mass.  So I know it can be done and it seems that Munda may have achieved similar.   But I have also witnessed slack parents let young ones babble, look around, play on the pews, cry etc, which irks me as much as it does Awkward.  Not because I have an issue with noise, but because I find it irreverent and selfish.  I have a definite sympathy for parents given the crisis in which we live and the lack of family support, such as competent grandparents, siblings and extended family who can assist, together with the options of more than one Mass.  I also have a sympathy for Awkward who seems to take the following words of St John Chrysostum to heart and I can find no fault in that:

Quote
Nothing so becomes a Church as silence and good order. Noise belongs to theaters, and baths, and public processions, and market-places: but where doctrines, and such doctrines, are the subject of teaching, there should be stillness, and quiet, and calm reflection, and a haven of much repose…

Say, during the celebration of the Mysteries, is there any noise? any disturbance? when we are baptizing (baptizwmeqa), when we are doing all the other acts? Is not all Nature decked (as it were) with stillness and silence? Over all the face of heaven is scattered this charm (of repose) (St John Chrysostom Homily XXX Acts of the Apostles)


 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: orate on September 24, 2019, 08:46:25 AM
I haven’t yet read the earlier thread and my comments only relate to this one.  I will read the other thread in due course, but my time is limited.  Until then, my comments on #153 still stand.  It was nasty and didn’t contribute at all to the debate.   Awkward made it quite clear 80 or 90 posts ago, that if anyone thought her problem was with children attending Mass then those people were mistaken –babies and toddlers only.     After that clarification, whether you think  #153 was warranted due to the previous thread, and therefore appropriate to “reply in kind”, as you say, well, that’s your call.  I don’t.

So be it.  Aeternitus, my bone of contention is not with you or most of the other posters on this forum.  I'm sorry if I may have offended you.

Opinions, as they say, are like another part of the human anatomy, everyone has one.  The primary value of this forum is the discussion of true Catholic teaching, not in the expression of one's individual opinion--this includes my own.

edited for spelling

You haven't offended me.  And if you had, this post of your would have unoffended me immediately  ;D  Post # 153 (which was not yours) offended my sense of justice, that’s all.  I think this is an interesting topic and I actually don’t know the answer.  I have witnessed babes and tots attend Mass and not make a sound.  Or if they did their parents would have them out of the door before the cry erupted.  That is how diligent they were, together with horrified at the thought of disrupting Mass.  So I know it can be done and it seems that Munda may have achieved similar.   But I have also witnessed slack parents let young ones babble, look around, play on the pews, cry etc, which irks me as much as it does Awkward.  Not because I have an issue with noise, but because I find it irreverent and selfish.  I have a definite sympathy for parents given the crisis in which we live and the lack of family support, such as competent grandparents, siblings and extended family who can assist, together with the options of more than one Mass.  I also have a sympathy for Awkward who seems to take the following words of St John Chrysostum to heart and I can find no fault in that:

Quote
Nothing so becomes a Church as silence and good order. Noise belongs to theaters, and baths, and public processions, and market-places: but where doctrines, and such doctrines, are the subject of teaching, there should be stillness, and quiet, and calm reflection, and a haven of much repose…

Say, during the celebration of the Mysteries, is there any noise? any disturbance? when we are baptizing (baptizwmeqa), when we are doing all the other acts? Is not all Nature decked (as it were) with stillness and silence? Over all the face of heaven is scattered this charm (of repose) (St John Chrysostom Homily XXX Acts of the Apostles)


 

Agreed.  I think all of us agree that unruly, misbehaving children--and adults, I might add-- are a disruption to the sacredness of Holy Mass.  Beseeching parents to tend to their children during Mass and train them in proper behavior at Mass--as is their duty-- is quite appropriate. But asking parents to stay home from Mass, especially on a Sunday, just because their infant or toddler, is being an infant or toddler, is a far cry from that, and is not only inappropriate, but lacks charity as well.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on September 24, 2019, 09:51:48 AM
I'll be honest....St. John's quote confuses me.  He likens the stillness and silence at Mass to nature.  Nature is not still and silent, though.  It's robust and full of life and sounds.  Birds constantly flittering around, signing their songs, feathering their nests, feeding their babies; a symphony of thousands of insects and frogs in the evening, chirping and croaking.  The list could go on and on. Maybe I'm just not clear on what the virtue of silence looks like in practice?  Is silence the complete and utter lack of sound altogether; or is it just the absence of noise.  There is a difference there.  I tend to think it is more a lack of noise and disorder.  Because while nature is not silent, it is not exactly noisy and it's definitely not disorderly.  Despite it's robustness of sounds and movements, it does foster a sense of inner peace, quiet, and stillness.  Which tells me some tolerance of sound and movement in Mass is to ve allowed
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Miriam_M on September 24, 2019, 11:24:03 AM
Just a point of information, nothing else:

The poster awkward customer is a she.
 ;)
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: The Curt Jester on September 24, 2019, 02:35:39 PM
Just a point of information, nothing else:

The poster awkward customer is a she.
 ;)

Well, that's rather awkward!
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Flick on September 24, 2019, 07:39:33 PM
Just a point of information, nothing else:

The poster awkward customer is a she.
 ;)

Knock my socks off; all this time I was sure the poster was a curmudgeon old man!  So much for the nurturing attribute of the female gender.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: bigbadtrad on September 25, 2019, 11:21:15 AM

I had to look it up, but 'The Didascalia' which Gardener quoted from dates from the 3rd century. 

Wait wait wait... didn't you say we wouldn't like tradition or only the ones you disagreed with? Oh that's right, that was you.

Funny how things work when people don't like tradition. You think because someone regionally did something in history that's tradition, which is false.

To answer your statement one would lose their kids to social services if you gave your kids to a wet-nurse for years. That's not non-sense, but you didn't understand me so no big deal. "Where is your daughter?" "I gave her to a wet-nurse, don't worry she'll be back in a few years." Yeah that wouldn't raise any flags.

Also, the entire East & West had children receiving Holy Communion for centuries. I don't need a doctor of a Church for Church teaching. Like I said before, your citation was a regional custom, nothing more or less, what I know was a teaching of the Church, not a snippet of history like yours.

I just left an Eastern rite liturgy and all the children received. They even made some noise. No one complained and they all smiled at the children.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: diaduit on September 26, 2019, 01:53:14 AM
Toddlers are capable of sitting and standing.  It also mentions that young women with children are to stand apart.  That could imply that women are supposed to be holding said children, because they are too young to be set down.

I had to look it up, but 'The Didascalia' which Gardener quoted from dates from the 3rd century.  The practice in the early Church was for the laity to stand at Mass.  There would have been no chairs or pews in the nave.  The early Christians stood before the altar, and those too weak or infirm sat on benches in the side aisles.  The quote needs to be read with this in mind.

For example, you referred to the following.....

Quote
And let the young women who are married and have children stand apart, and the aged women and widows sit apart.

The aged women and widows sit.  The young women who are married and have children stand apart.  I find it difficult to imagine women with babies and toddlers being expected to stand, which suggests that the children being referred to had reached the age of reason.

I'm not sure what standing 'apart' means, unless it means standing in the side aisles and not the nave.  At any rate, the example from the Didascalia refers to an entirely different church layout than what is the norm today, a church layout that was also the norm for the entire Middle Ages and only disappeared after the Reformation.

Quote
The Didascalia, or the Catholic Teaching of the Twelve Apostles and Holy Disciples of Our Saviour, is a Church Order, composed, according to recent investigations, in the first part, perhaps even the first decades, of the third century, for a community of Christian converts from paganism in the northern part of Syria. The work is modelled on the Didache (cf. vol. I, pp. 29-39) and forms the main source of the first six books of the Apostolic Constitutions.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/didascalia.html

I have stood while breast feeding my baby in the freezing cold vestibule (approx. 8ft x 8ft with no seats available) , we don't have a cry room for some length of time especially if the baby was fussy.  This would be a regular occurrence in the first year of a babies life, I only have 4 children compared to some of our other mothers of 8 or 10 who have been doing it for years.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 27, 2019, 02:06:42 PM
Knock my socks off; all this time I was sure the poster was a curmudgeon old man!  So much for the nurturing attribute of the female gender.

Perhaps St John Chrysostom was a "curmudgeon old man".

After all, he did say the following, as Aeternitus points out above.

Quote
Nothing so becomes a Church as silence and good order. Noise belongs to theaters, and baths, and public processions, and market-places: but where doctrines, and such doctrines, are the subject of teaching, there should be stillness, and quiet, and calm reflection, and a haven of much repose

I've yet to learn of a Saint who extolled the virtue of noise and disturbance at Mass.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: orate on September 27, 2019, 02:45:13 PM
Knock my socks off; all this time I was sure the poster was a curmudgeon old man!  So much for the nurturing attribute of the female gender.

Perhaps St John Chrysostom was a "curmudgeon old man".

After all, he did say the following, as Aeternitus points out above.

Quote
Nothing so becomes a Church as silence and good order. Noise belongs to theaters, and baths, and public processions, and market-places: but where doctrines, and such doctrines, are the subject of teaching, there should be stillness, and quiet, and calm reflection, and a haven of much repose

I've yet to learn of a Saint who extolled the virtue of noise and disturbance at Mass.

No one here extols the "virtue of noise and disturbance at Mass."  As Munda points out in post #169, the orderly sounds of nature are not the equivalent of noise.  The natural happy sounds of infants and toddlers are not necessarily noise.  Orderly silence is not necessarily the total absence of sound.

I've yet to learn of a Saint who extolled the virtue of an adult disobeying the Laws of the Church---especially by staying home from Mass on Sundays and Holy Days, just because his infant or toddler may make a sound or two, consistent with the child's nature.

This is particularly true if the parent makes every effort to keep the sound level to a minimum.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: bigbadtrad on September 27, 2019, 02:47:15 PM
awkwardcustomer since this is about tradition I'll make it easier for you. You wanted quotes from a doctor and tradition:

Fr. Robert Taft, Archimandrite of the Russian Greek Catholic Church:

“The practice [of communing infants] began to be called into question in the 12th century not because of any argument about the need to have attained the “age of reason” (aetus discretionis) to communicate. Rather, the fear of profanation of the Host if the child could not swallow it led to giving the Precious Blood only. And then the forbidding of the chalice to the laity in the West led automatically to the disappearance of infant Communion, too. This was not the result of any pastoral or theological reasoning. When the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) ordered yearly confession and Communion for those who have reached the “age of reason” (annos discretionis), it was not affirming this age as a requirement for reception of the Eucharist.

“Nevertheless, the notion eventually took hold that Communion could not be received until the age of reason, even though infant Communion in the Latin rite continued in some parts of the West until the 16th century. Though the Fathers of Trent (Session XXI,4) denied the necessity of infant Communion, they refused to agree with those who said it was useless and inefficacious — realizing undoubtedly that the exact same arguments used against infant Communion could also be used against infant baptism, because for over ten centuries in the West, the same theology was used to justify both! For the Byzantine rite, on December 23, 1534, Paul III explicitly confirmed the Italo-Albanian custom of administering Communion to infants….

"So the plain facts of history show that for 1200 years the universal practice of the entire Church of East and West was to communicate infants. Hence, to advance doctrinal arguments against infant Communion is to assert that the sacramental teaching and practice of the Roman Church was in error for 1200 years. Infant Communion was not only permitted in the Roman Church, at one time the supreme magisterium taught that it was necessary for salvation. In the Latin Church the practice was not suppressed by any doctrinal or pastoral decision, but simply died out. Only later, in the 13th century, was the ‘age of reason’ theory advanced to support the innovation of baptizing infants without also giving them Communion. So the “age of reason” requirement for Communion is a medieval Western pastoral innovation, not a doctrinal argument. And the true ancient tradition of the whole Catholic Church is to give Communion to infants. Present Latin usage is a medieval innovation.”

St. Augustine  Sermon 174, 7

“Those who say that infancy has nothing in it for Jesus to save, are denying that Christ is Jesus for all believing infants. Those, I repeat, who say that infancy has nothing in it for Jesus to save, are saying nothing else than that for believing infants, infants that is who have been baptized in Christ, Christ the Lord is not Jesus. After all, what is Jesus? Jesus means Savior. Jesus is the Savior. Those whom he doesn’t save, having nothing to save in them, well for them he isn’t Jesus. Well now, if you can tolerate the idea that Christ is not Jesus for some persons who have been baptized, then I’m not sure your faith can be recognized as according with the sound rule. Yes, they’re infants, but they are his members. They’re infants, but they receive his sacraments. They are infants, but they share in his table, in order to have life in themselves.”

Tell me what saint says children shouldn't attend Mass. You asked for doctors, I gave you tradition + a doctor/father. Your quote from St. John (who gave children Holy Communion) shows you don't understand what you're quoting. He wasn't separating silence from children at Mass. In fact he was a promoter of having them there and giving them Communion.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on September 27, 2019, 03:07:41 PM
awkwardcustomer since this is about tradition I'll make it easier for you. You wanted quotes from a doctor and tradition:

Fr. Robert Taft, Archimandrite of the Russian Greek Catholic Church:

“The practice [of communing infants] began to be called into question in the 12th century not because of any argument about the need to have attained the “age of reason” (aetus discretionis) to communicate. Rather, the fear of profanation of the Host if the child could not swallow it led to giving the Precious Blood only. And then the forbidding of the chalice to the laity in the West led automatically to the disappearance of infant Communion, too. This was not the result of any pastoral or theological reasoning. When the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) ordered yearly confession and Communion for those who have reached the “age of reason” (annos discretionis), it was not affirming this age as a requirement for reception of the Eucharist.

“Nevertheless, the notion eventually took hold that Communion could not be received until the age of reason, even though infant Communion in the Latin rite continued in some parts of the West until the 16th century. Though the Fathers of Trent (Session XXI,4) denied the necessity of infant Communion, they refused to agree with those who said it was useless and inefficacious — realizing undoubtedly that the exact same arguments used against infant Communion could also be used against infant baptism, because for over ten centuries in the West, the same theology was used to justify both! For the Byzantine rite, on December 23, 1534, Paul III explicitly confirmed the Italo-Albanian custom of administering Communion to infants….

"So the plain facts of history show that for 1200 years the universal practice of the entire Church of East and West was to communicate infants. Hence, to advance doctrinal arguments against infant Communion is to assert that the sacramental teaching and practice of the Roman Church was in error for 1200 years. Infant Communion was not only permitted in the Roman Church, at one time the supreme magisterium taught that it was necessary for salvation. In the Latin Church the practice was not suppressed by any doctrinal or pastoral decision, but simply died out. Only later, in the 13th century, was the ‘age of reason’ theory advanced to support the innovation of baptizing infants without also giving them Communion. So the “age of reason” requirement for Communion is a medieval Western pastoral innovation, not a doctrinal argument. And the true ancient tradition of the whole Catholic Church is to give Communion to infants. Present Latin usage is a medieval innovation.”

St. Augustine  Sermon 174, 7

“Those who say that infancy has nothing in it for Jesus to save, are denying that Christ is Jesus for all believing infants. Those, I repeat, who say that infancy has nothing in it for Jesus to save, are saying nothing else than that for believing infants, infants that is who have been baptized in Christ, Christ the Lord is not Jesus. After all, what is Jesus? Jesus means Savior. Jesus is the Savior. Those whom he doesn’t save, having nothing to save in them, well for them he isn’t Jesus. Well now, if you can tolerate the idea that Christ is not Jesus for some persons who have been baptized, then I’m not sure your faith can be recognized as according with the sound rule. Yes, they’re infants, but they are his members. They’re infants, but they receive his sacraments. They are infants, but they share in his table, in order to have life in themselves.”

Tell me what saint says children shouldn't attend Mass. You asked for doctors, I gave you tradition + a doctor/father. Your quote from St. John (who gave children Holy Communion) shows you don't understand what you're quoting. He wasn't separating silence from children at Mass. In fact he was a promoter of having them there and giving them Communion.

Can I just say...MIC DROP
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 27, 2019, 08:51:30 PM
awkwardcustomer since this is about tradition I'll make it easier for you. You wanted quotes from a doctor and tradition:

Fr. Robert Taft, Archimandrite of the Russian Greek Catholic Church:

“The practice [of communing infants] began to be called into question in the 12th century not because of any argument about the need to have attained the “age of reason” (aetus discretionis) to communicate. Rather, the fear of profanation of the Host if the child could not swallow it led to giving the Precious Blood only. And then the forbidding of the chalice to the laity in the West led automatically to the disappearance of infant Communion, too. This was not the result of any pastoral or theological reasoning. When the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) ordered yearly confession and Communion for those who have reached the “age of reason” (annos discretionis), it was not affirming this age as a requirement for reception of the Eucharist.

“Nevertheless, the notion eventually took hold that Communion could not be received until the age of reason, even though infant Communion in the Latin rite continued in some parts of the West until the 16th century. Though the Fathers of Trent (Session XXI,4) denied the necessity of infant Communion, they refused to agree with those who said it was useless and inefficacious — realizing undoubtedly that the exact same arguments used against infant Communion could also be used against infant baptism, because for over ten centuries in the West, the same theology was used to justify both! For the Byzantine rite, on December 23, 1534, Paul III explicitly confirmed the Italo-Albanian custom of administering Communion to infants….

"So the plain facts of history show that for 1200 years the universal practice of the entire Church of East and West was to communicate infants. Hence, to advance doctrinal arguments against infant Communion is to assert that the sacramental teaching and practice of the Roman Church was in error for 1200 years. Infant Communion was not only permitted in the Roman Church, at one time the supreme magisterium taught that it was necessary for salvation. In the Latin Church the practice was not suppressed by any doctrinal or pastoral decision, but simply died out. Only later, in the 13th century, was the ‘age of reason’ theory advanced to support the innovation of baptizing infants without also giving them Communion. So the “age of reason” requirement for Communion is a medieval Western pastoral innovation, not a doctrinal argument. And the true ancient tradition of the whole Catholic Church is to give Communion to infants. Present Latin usage is a medieval innovation.

Fr. Robert Taft, Archimandrite of the Russian Greek Catholic Church, claims that the "age of reason" requirement is a "medieval innovation", as if that somehow renders it disposable.  What greater insult can there be to a liturgical practice than to dismiss it as a 'medieval innovation'?

But it's a development that has lasted and still exists today, is it not?  And other than that, I'm not sure what relevance this quote has, other than to illustrate that since the 12the century, the Tradition of the Church has been to give Communion to children who have reached the age of reason.

As things stand, the Church does not require anyone below the age of reason to be at Mass.


Quote
St. Augustine  Sermon 174, 7

“Those who say that infancy has nothing in it for Jesus to save, are denying that Christ is Jesus for all believing infants. Those, I repeat, who say that infancy has nothing in it for Jesus to save, are saying nothing else than that for believing infants, infants that is who have been baptized in Christ, Christ the Lord is not Jesus. After all, what is Jesus? Jesus means Savior. Jesus is the Savior. Those whom he doesn’t save, having nothing to save in them, well for them he isn’t Jesus. Well now, if you can tolerate the idea that Christ is not Jesus for some persons who have been baptized, then I’m not sure your faith can be recognized as according with the sound rule. Yes, they’re infants, but they are his members. They’re infants, but they receive his sacraments. They are infants, but they share in his table, in order to have life in themselves.”

How old are infants? 

And were they sitting 'apart' as in the passage from 'The Didiscalia'  quoted by Gardener, whatever sitting 'apart' meant in a church without pews.  Churches without pews were the ancient tradition of the Church and ended in the West after the Reformation when Protestant pews were introduced into Catholic Churches.

I'm all for a return to that tradition, especially as the presence of babies and toddlers at the Russian Orthodox Mass I attended in a pewless church seemed far less obtrusive for some reason.

Quote
Tell me what saint says children shouldn't attend Mass. You asked for doctors, I gave you tradition + a doctor/father. Your quote from St. John (who gave children Holy Communion) shows you don't understand what you're quoting. He wasn't separating silence from children at Mass. In fact he was a promoter of having them there and giving them Communion

It becomes very tedious having to explain it for the umpteenth time.  Even Aeternitus has explained it a couple of times.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 28, 2019, 10:56:54 AM
Aeternitus,

Sorry for the delayed reply.  This is with regards to your question about cry-rooms pre-VII:

https://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=22198.msg477134#msg477134

This is also a link to a prior 13-page thread on this same topic.

Many thanks for the link, which I have now read, but I didn’t find any evidence showing cry rooms were pre Vatican II, just people claiming as much, with no real indication of why they held that view.     

In what I could find, it seems they were pre Vatican II – just.  The general consensus, as indicated in the quotes below, is that they came into being in the 50s, as a result of the post-war baby boom, gaining momentum during Vat II years of 60s and 70s.  If anyone has any further evidence to the contrary, I’d be interested in seeing it. 

Quote
I’m constantly wondering how people have Mass-trained their children. A quick study of old world architectural structures reveals the absence of any cry room plans. However, even the oldest of churches had a quieting space, an area like a vestibule, where a child could be removed to briefly while a parent calmed them down…

It wasn’t until the ’60s and ’70s that soundproof rooms started showing up. And while the cry room solved one set of problems for exasperated parents and distracted parishioners, it introduced a whole set of new ones. For instance, would cry room inhabitants feel like we are still participating in the Mass? https://www.uscatholic.org/cryrooms
Quote
One architectural feature of the church reflects that it was built at the height of the baby boom.  A soundproof room, screened with artfully decorated windows and fitted with speakers carry the voice of the priest, was next to the narthex.  Literature from that era explains that the “cry room has been provided so mothers with young children can still attend the divine services.”  The first Mass was celebrated on Sunday, September 23, 1951. https://www.stgabrielstl.org/Parish-Information/About-St-Gabriel

Quote
This is true around the country, as well. Cry rooms sprang up in churches after the Second Vatican Council in the late 1960s, but were often repurposed over the decades since then. https://evangelist.org/Content/Opinion/Perspectives/Article/To-cry-room-or-not-to-cry-room/4/36/22962

Quote
That isn’t to say that such rooms are a perfect solution. In fact, cry rooms — which became popular in the 1950s, after the baby boom — have become a sort of lightning rod. http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/cry-rooms-solution-or-a-catholic-version-of-children-should-be-seen-but-not

And also some responses from forums/blogs etc, showing that St Theresa isn’t the only example of a young child being kept at home:

Quote
My husband claims he didn't go to church with his family until about age 5, so that does give credence to the claim that in times past people used to do this...”

Quote
Quote
Well, that's why there aren't originally-built cry rooms in the old churches. Because babies stayed home with someone, mom, grandma, whoever. Also, parishes were close by and people could just scoot out to an earlier or later Mass. And Mass wasn't about socializing.  That's the way it was always done. This whole dragging babies to Mass thing is a relatively new convention.

Quote
Also, what is wrong, when kids are very young, to have tag-team family Mass? That's what my parents did for four or five years. Yes, it would have been great to attend Mass together, but it was better for Mom and Dad to be able to focus on the liturgy too with the kids who could also focus.

Quote
My guess is that mothers and their babies didn’t go to Mass at all in the middle ages. Between taking care of their other small children, breastfeeding, etc., I doubt that attending Mass was a priority. Our church is pretty old and doesn’t have a cry room, and our [very conservative] priest has told parishioners that they are excused from Mass, per canon law, until their children are old enough to be reasonably under control for an hour.

One interesting thing I’ve noted is that adults around the age of 60 or older always mention having split their time at Masses when their children were young so that they didn’t have to take their babies or toddlers to church. People younger than that seem horrified and/or baffled by the idea, as if it never occurred to them that a husband and wife would attend different Masses, and their small children wouldn’t attend Mass at all.

Quote
I was so lucky! My parents did not take me to Mass until I was five. We the kids stayed with grandma while mom and dad went to Mass. Grandma read the stories from the bible to us every Sunday morning. When my oldest brother started going to Mass I begged my parents to take me also. Can you imagine a kid begging to go to Mass! By then I knew the stories, I knew there was a connection to the scriptures to be found. And I had to catch up to my brother. Thank you Lord for fraternal rivalry!
Quote
This is a favorite subject of mine…what is missing in all of this discussion, seems to me, is the fact that we are participating in the Sacrament of the Eucharist…this is not a parish social where we are expecting noisy children…crying is irreverence, however unknown to the child, for which the parents are responsible…it is also inconsiderate of others…the solution is either take the child to the vestibule or parents split the duties..that way everybody benefits and the Mass is celebrated properly and reverently for all…when we make excuses and the complainers are accused of impatience, we miss the point. It is the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist….
Quote
I think it’s unfair to subject other parishioners to badly behaving children and persistent crying infants. My grandparents went to early Mass and babysat us while parents went to Church. Mom started bringing us once we were about 5yrs. old. I did the same with my kids.
 


Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 28, 2019, 11:02:41 AM

Quote
…See, then what ought to be your modesty, your respect and your attention, if you wish to derive the fruit and the blessings which God is wont to pour out on those who assist at the sacred mysteries with sentiments of piety and reverence.

We read in the Old Law, that while the Jews were offering their sacrifices, in which were immolated bulls, lambs and other animals, it was a sight worthy of admiration to behold with what earnestness, respect and silence all the people assisted thereat.  And although the number of persons was innumerable, besides seven hundred ministers of the sacrifices, yet it seemed as if the temple were empty; not the least noise, not even a whisper was heard from the vast multitude.  Now, if such respect and veneration were shown to these sacrifices, which were only shadows and mere figures of ours, what respect, what devotion, what religious silence does not the Holy Mass demand, in which the Immaculate Lamb Himself, the Incarnate Word, is offered for us in sacrifice.  This truth was perfectly understood by the glorious St Ambrose, who, as Cesarius relates, was accustomed whilst celebrating the Divine Mysteries, to turn to the people after the Gospel and exhort them to a rigorous silence, by which he understood, not only that they put a bridle to their tongue, but they took care not to make the least noise, by coughing, moving or making any sort of other sound.   His orders were strictly obeyed, and all those who assisted at his Mass felt themselves seized with a holy fear and were so interiorly moved by divine grace that they derived great fruit and an increase of every spiritual blessing.” (The  Hidden Treasure: Holy Mass by St Leonard of Port Maurice.)


Quote
Mothers ought to leave very young children at home, as they disturb not only those who bring them to church, but other people, and sometimes even the priest himself.  But bigger children who are old enough to be still, may be brought to Mass. (p 351 Cochem’s Explanation of the Holy Mass)
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: John Lamb on September 28, 2019, 12:03:50 PM
I sympathise with you awkwardcustomer but I don't think your appeal to a pre-VII tradition amounts to much. We have to distinguish between real apostolic and ecclesiastical traditions, and mere cultural traditions. Other posters have offered enough evidence to show that infants being prohibited from attending Mass is not a universal apostolic or ecclesiastic tradition. That it was the tradition in the part of France where St. Therese lived in the 19th century doesn't prove much. She still lived in a largely Catholic culture, belonged to a 19th century middle class home where she probably had a nanny, and in any case would be able to receive instruction in the faith outside of church. The culture is different today. Traditionalists are a beleaguered group in a very hostile prevailing culture, so it's to be expected that things sometimes feel slapdash and less than the ideal. I think Miriam made an excellent point about forming the right interior disposition within yourself before arriving. If you're being idealistic and expecting something specific you're always going to be annoyed when it's denied to you. Traditional Catholics cannot be expected to behave in every single way exactly as Catholics prior to the Council did, since we are living in very different conditions inside and outside the Church.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: bigbadtrad on September 28, 2019, 01:35:25 PM
Fr. Robert Taft, Archimandrite of the Russian Greek Catholic Church, claims that the "age of reason" requirement is a "medieval innovation", as if that somehow renders it disposable.  What greater insult can there be to a liturgical practice than to dismiss it as a 'medieval innovation'?

It's not tradition therefore an innovation. Are you denying it now that I've proven it and you are just using your own logic instead of tradition and it was you who was screaming TRADITION why not stick with tradition?

Quote
...the Tradition of the Church has been to give Communion to children who have reached the age of reason.

You mean innovation, not tradition. The Church has that prerogative, but it's still an innovation. St. Pius V called Quo Primum an innovation. Doesn't mean Quo Primum is bad.

You're arguing past facts, tradition, and a doctor of the Church when you have nothing. You just claim tradition and when it's proven by Church teaching and a doctor of the Church (which was your criteria BTW) then you have nothing except a regional, cultural example.

Quote
As things stand, the Church does not require anyone below the age of reason to be at Mass.

Nor does She prohibit them, nor does She recommend they don't go, nor does She stop mothers from going to Mass for 20 years to stay home as would be the case today.

Unless you're childless you don't know the habit of religion and how important it is. Take away the habit of public worship of a mother for 20 years and find how Catholic the kids are and how Catholic she is.

But let me toss it back... I quoted the history and tradition of the Church and tossed in a doctor of the Church. Show me one that tells us not to bring children to Mass as they destroy silence. We both know the answer, it doesn't exist.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 28, 2019, 03:48:04 PM
Fr. Robert Taft, Archimandrite of the Russian Greek Catholic Church, claims that the "age of reason" requirement is a "medieval innovation", as if that somehow renders it disposable.  What greater insult can there be to a liturgical practice than to dismiss it as a 'medieval innovation'?

It's not tradition therefore an innovation. Are you denying it now that I've proven it and you are just using your own logic instead of tradition and it was you who was screaming TRADITION why not stick with tradition?

You're quibbling.

But whether the 'age of reason' requirement is tradition or innovation, the Church has taught it since the 12th century.

That's eight centuries and counting.

Quote
Quote
...the Tradition of the Church has been to give Communion to children who have reached the age of reason.

You mean innovation, not tradition. The Church has that prerogative, but it's still an innovation. St. Pius V called Quo Primum an innovation. Doesn't mean Quo Primum is bad.

You're arguing past facts, tradition, and a doctor of the Church when you have nothing. You just claim tradition and when it's proven by Church teaching and a doctor of the Church (which was your criteria BTW) then you have nothing except a regional, cultural example.

Innovation, tradition …. whatever you call it, this has been the practice of the Church for 800 years.

Quote
Quote
As things stand, the Church does not require anyone below the age of reason to be at Mass.

Nor does She prohibit them, nor does She recommend they don't go, nor does She stop mothers from going to Mass for 20 years to stay home as would be the case today.

Unless you're childless you don't know the habit of religion and how important it is. Take away the habit of public worship of a mother for 20 years and find how Catholic the kids are and how Catholic she is.

Who said anything about stopping mothers from attending Mass for 20 years?

Only you.

Have you read any of the quotes posted above by Aeternitus?

Quote
But let me toss it back... I quoted the history and tradition of the Church and tossed in a doctor of the Church. Show me one that tells us not to bring children to Mass as they destroy silence. We both know the answer, it doesn't exist.

St John Chrysostom gave Communion to children, you said.  As I have pointed out countless times on this thread, the issue here is babies and toddlers, not children.  How can any discussion proceed if the terms people use vary.

So you haven't proved anything, other than that you do not read posts but see fit to comment on them anyway.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 28, 2019, 04:05:05 PM
Here is evidence that babies and toddlers weren't taken to Mass - from 1896, published not in some corner of France as in the testimony of St Therese of Lisieux, but in the USA with an Imprimateur from the Archbishop of New York.

Aeternitus kindly posted it above, and I'm reposting it here for emphasis, from 'Cochem's Explanation of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass with an Appendix, Containing Devotions for Mass, for Confession, and for Communion', by Camillus P. Maes

Quote
Mothers ought to leave very young children at home, as they disturb not only those who bring them to church, but other people, and sometimes even the priest himself.  But bigger children who are old enough to be still, may be brought to Mass. (p 351 Cochem’s Explanation of the Holy Mass)

http://www.saintsbooks.net/books/Fr.%20Martin%20Cochem%20-%20Explanation%20of%20the%20Holy%20Sacrifice%20of%20the%20Mass.pdf 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on September 28, 2019, 04:34:29 PM
Here is evidence that babies and toddlers weren't taken to Mass - from 1896, published not in some corner of France as in the testimony of St Therese of Lisieux, but in the USA with an Imprimateur from the Archbishop of New York.

Aeternitus kindly posted it above, and I'm reposting it here for emphasis, from 'Cochem's Explanation of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass with an Appendix, Containing Devotions for Mass, for Confession, and for Communion', by Camillus P. Maes

Quote
Mothers ought to leave very young children at home, as they disturb not only those who bring them to church, but other people, and sometimes even the priest himself.  But bigger children who are old enough to be still, may be brought to Mass. (p 351 Cochem’s Explanation of the Holy Mass)

http://www.saintsbooks.net/books/Fr.%20Martin%20Cochem%20-%20Explanation%20of%20the%20Holy%20Sacrifice%20of%20the%20Mass.pdf

That was thoughtful of you to re-quote that passage. Let me ask you this. If "mothers" should leave babies at home, exactly who should they leave them with. What if you live (like MANY trads) almost an hour, or more than an hour from mass. What if you have no family. What if it costs so much in fuel to get to mass that you could never afford to drive to mass, come home, and send your spouse right back again. What if you only have one mass on Sunday? If every mass centre had two masses per Sunday and feastday, and you lived close to mass, some of these suggestions of Aeternitus would work....mostly they don't.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Maximilian on September 28, 2019, 07:08:23 PM

What if you live (like MANY trads) almost an hour, or more than an hour from mass. What if you have no family. What if it costs so much in fuel to get to mass that you could never afford to drive to mass, come home, and send your spouse right back again. What if you only have one mass on Sunday?

The issues of time, money, gas, etc. have to be worked out by the parents. There may be some juggling involved. But one solution that should be scratched off the list ahead of time is to have children violate the sanctity of the Mass. If that "solution" is not considered as an option, then since "necessity is the mother of invention," other plans will be made.

The real issue is in one's heart. If a parent desires to do everything possible to prevent children's noise from violating the sanctity of the Mass, then they will achieve their goal one way or another, to the greatest extent possible, even if accidents happen on occasion.

But if parents think that it is their "right" to bring noisy children to Mass, then they won't make the necessary efforts, and the dignity of the sacrifice will be spoiled every Sunday.

And along with entitled parents, we also suffer frequently from entitled children -- those who have been raised to believe that they should express themselves, even within the confines of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Here again, if children have the right attitude at heart, the one where they realize that this is not about them, that they are not the center of the universe, and that others don't revolve around their whims, then even if occasional accidents happen, in general there will not be a constant environment of noise and distraction at a time when there should be reverent silence.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 28, 2019, 07:51:19 PM
Here is evidence that babies and toddlers weren't taken to Mass - from 1896, published not in some corner of France as in the testimony of St Therese of Lisieux, but in the USA with an Imprimateur from the Archbishop of New York.

Aeternitus kindly posted it above, and I'm reposting it here for emphasis, from 'Cochem's Explanation of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass with an Appendix, Containing Devotions for Mass, for Confession, and for Communion', by Camillus P. Maes

Quote
Mothers ought to leave very young children at home, as they disturb not only those who bring them to church, but other people, and sometimes even the priest himself.  But bigger children who are old enough to be still, may be brought to Mass. (p 351 Cochem’s Explanation of the Holy Mass)

http://www.saintsbooks.net/books/Fr.%20Martin%20Cochem%20-%20Explanation%20of%20the%20Holy%20Sacrifice%20of%20the%20Mass.pdf

That was thoughtful of you to re-quote that passage. Let me ask you this. If "mothers" should leave babies at home, exactly who should they leave them with. What if you live (like MANY trads) almost an hour, or more than an hour from mass. What if you have no family. What if it costs so much in fuel to get to mass that you could never afford to drive to mass, come home, and send your spouse right back again. What if you only have one mass on Sunday? If every mass centre had two masses per Sunday and feastday, and you lived close to mass, some of these suggestions of Aeternitus would work....mostly they don't.

You are right.  The situation now, due to the crisis in the Church, is very different from what it was even in the 50s and 60s.  Parents of families have a very difficult task without the support of family or reliable Catholic friends.  What one can do about it is subject to the individual family circumstance/options and after discussion with one’s priest.  But the default position from the most vocal posters here, seems to be outrage that parents of young children should be expected to do anything, because the church doesn’t have a law forbidding babies and toddlers (NOT children) at Mass attendance, opposed to the duty of fulfilling one’s Sunday obligation.  Well, if one lives too far from church that obligation doesn’t apply and it then becomes a choice.  How far is too far is a discussion one has with one’s priest, so that the particular circumstances of the family can be taken into consideration also.
 
Right from the beginning, when I joined the discussion on this thread, I could see both sides.  I have now read both threads on this topic and a significant amount of other material in trying to come to a conclusion.
   
From the evidence provided, the traditional position seems to be not to take babies and young children to church.  Yes, infants could receive communion in the early church, but that is not evidence in itself that they received and were at church every Sunday, or even that they were present at the Mass. They could have been brought in from an outer room. 
 
St Theresa was kept at home because she was considered too young to attend Mass.  The recent quotes I provided, indicated the same applied to others in the US.  St Ambrose insisted on complete quiet in his Mass, no coughing or moving at all, to the point of instilling holy fear into his parishioners; St Leonard of Port Maurice highlights the necessity of complete quiet and compares it to the Old Law when the sacrificing of animals was done in such total silence that one would think the church was empty.  Cochem makes clear the accepted practice of not bringing babies and children to Mass until they could sit still. Munda explained, in the first thread, that she read in an old mother’s manual that babies and toddlers were left at home. The evidence is significant.  On the contrary, the only evidence provided for babies and toddlers attending church is current practice and practical need.
 
Given the above, my conclusion is that the crisis in the church is responsible for babies and toddlers attending Mass, thereby potentially compromising the silence, reverence and devout attention it deserves. 

How does one deal with it? Well, it is a tough one and requires the exercise of charity from both sides.  As I said in an earlier post, I have friends who have reared excellent children during this crisis, all of whom have attended Mass since just after birth.  They too didn’t have family help and lived about a 30 minute drive from Church.  In thinking further of their example, I can see now that they employed a number of means to achieve this.  They tag-teamed on occasion, they utilised the assistance of Catholic friends when necessary, they were outside with the children in turns and they disciplined accordingly. They were extremely vigilant, which was prompted by their combined horror at the thought of the Mass being disrupted in any way, which they considered as offensive to God, the priest and their neighbour.  Afterwards they would head off for some coffee and cigarettes, which they also found helped  :D while the kids ran wild on the beach or in the park to burn off some of that restrained energy.  They were and still are the happiest family I have ever had the good fortune to meet.
 
I don’t know what you can do in your situation, Coffee & Cigs.  I am saddened to hear you have no assistance at all and hope that vigilance with your young ones/children, reverence for the sanctity of the Mass and charity towards your neighbour brings you the same rewards it has brought my home-schooling friends. 

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Maximilian on September 28, 2019, 08:06:11 PM

St Ambrose insisted on complete quiet in his Mass, no coughing or moving at all, to the point of instilling holy fear into his parishioners; St Leonard of Port Maurice highlights the necessity of complete quiet and compares it to the Old Law when the sacrificing of animals was done in such total silence that one would think the church was empty. 

Some years ago when I was attending Mass at the SSPX chapel in Cincinnati, the problem was severe, and it was not only infants who were causing distraction, but also the adults getting up to go to the bathroom, etc. Some were spending the whole Mass in the basement social hall which had a speaker which was supposed to be used only by nursing mothers.

The pastor gave a sermon really dropping the hammer. Perhaps he did a little research on St. Ambrose and St. Leonard of Port Maurice.

Afterwards the result was startling. The improvement was tremendous. I guess that's a testimony to the good people of Cincinnati that they took his words to heart and straightened up immediately, rather than making a lot of excuses.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 28, 2019, 08:11:00 PM

St Ambrose insisted on complete quiet in his Mass, no coughing or moving at all, to the point of instilling holy fear into his parishioners; St Leonard of Port Maurice highlights the necessity of complete quiet and compares it to the Old Law when the sacrificing of animals was done in such total silence that one would think the church was empty. 

Some years ago when I was attending Mass at the SSPX chapel in Cincinnati, the problem was severe, and it was not only infants who were causing distraction, but also the adults getting up to go to the bathroom, etc. Some were spending the whole Mass in the basement social hall which had a speaker which was supposed to be used only by nursing mothers.

The pastor gave a sermon really dropping the hammer. Perhaps he did a little research on St. Ambrose and St. Leonard of Port Maurice.

Afterwards the result was startling. The improvement was tremendous. I guess that's a testimony to the good people of Cincinnati that they took his words to heart and straightened up immediately, rather than making a lot of excuses.

Yes, sometimes all it takes is having it brought to one's attention. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Miriam_M on September 28, 2019, 11:06:14 PM

I didn’t find any evidence showing cry rooms were pre Vatican II, just people claiming as much, with no real indication of why they held that view.

We "hold the view," because we were there before V2, in churches, with families -- large families which included babies and toddlers.  Many churches. We were in pews next to the crying rooms.  IOW, we viewed the crying rooms.  That's why we "hold the view."  Do not tell other people what we did and did not see and hear, in person, pre V2 and what thousands of others saw and heard.   

If you can't find the documentation, that's your problem.  Absence or paucity of documentation, in the way anyone demands it, does not invalidate facts.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 29, 2019, 12:54:24 AM

I didn’t find any evidence showing cry rooms were pre Vatican II, just people claiming as much, with no real indication of why they held that view.

We "hold the view," because we were there before V2, in churches, with families -- large families which included babies and toddlers.  Many churches. We were in pews next to the crying rooms.  IOW, we viewed the crying rooms.  That's why we "hold the view."  Do not tell other people what we did and did not see and hear, in person, pre V2 and what thousands of others saw and heard.   

If you can't find the documentation, that's your problem.  Absence or paucity of documentation, in the way anyone demands it, does not invalidate facts.

I wasn’t questioning your veracity and many apologies if that is the impression I gave.   What you wrote, reproduced below, could have been second or third hand information, about one or two churches, thus exceptions to the rule, as far as I could tell, and I didn’t realise you were talking from personal experience.  Had I realised you had witnessed them yourself, prior to V2, I would have been intrigued and asked you to tell us a bit more about it, such as how old were the churches; when were the crying rooms built; how many churches in the US are you talking about?  Having researched this to the extent that I have, I can now understand why the priests you mention were the most intolerant.   

Anyway, I agree that cry rooms were pre V2 – by a decade or so, as I made clear in my earlier post, but gained momentum during the 60s and 70s.  Do you dispute that?  Are we now on the same page with regard to crying rooms being introduced in the 1950s, as a result of the baby boom?  Or are your examples prior to that?   I myself went to churches from the 60s (not in the US) and visited a number in various countries built well before V2, but had never before seen a crying room until I started attending the SSPX many years ago.  Actually, the cry room was added to the church some years after I began attending.           


Quote
“I do not know what the history of that was beyond the pond, but it is not true that in the U.S. "the Traditional Catholic way was not to bring babies and toddlers to Mass."  That's why pre-V2 trad churches did have (sorry, folks) crying rooms.  Actually, the most intolerant people about children's noise during that time were often the priests themselves. If parents were allowing sustained noise, the priest would sometimes point it out from the pulpit, and embarrass the parents into retreating into the Crying Room.”

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: diaduit on September 29, 2019, 03:06:21 AM
Where on this or other thread did trad parents say it was okay to remain inside the church with a noisy baby.
Unanimously we all agreed and have abided by the unwritten rule, baby makes noise mama or Papa steps outside.

NOWHERE ON THIS THREAD WILL YOU FIND OTHERWISE.

So for the last few posters at least acknowledge that trad parents aren't completely ignorant of their responsibility in that regards. Argue all you want of whether parents should or shouldn't bring them but it's a flat out lie to say we (posters on this thread)don't remove a noisy baby.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 29, 2019, 06:29:54 AM
Where on this or other thread did trad parents say it was okay to remain inside the church with a noisy baby.
Unanimously we all agreed and have abided by the unwritten rule, baby makes noise mama or Papa steps outside.

NOWHERE ON THIS THREAD WILL YOU FIND OTHERWISE.

So for the last few posters at least acknowledge that trad parents aren't completely ignorant of their responsibility in that regards. Argue all you want of whether parents should or shouldn't bring them but it's a flat out lie to say we (posters on this thread)don't remove a noisy baby.

Hello Diaduit,

As I am one of the last few posters, I am thinking I must be one of those to whom your post is addressed.   I have never claimed that anyone here has not removed children when they thought they have created noise and certainly have no difficulty in acknowledging that posters here have agreed this should be done.  It does, of course, raise the issue of that which constitutes noise and distraction for some, may not constitute noise and distraction for another, as evidenced by your own example of the man at the mid-week mass you attended who had the need to put in ear-plugs.  But if acknowledging that you all would remove the baby or toddler when you considered they became disruptive helps you in any way, then I am happy to do so.  I do believe you all would.  But that is not what is under discussion.  What is under discussion is whether babies or toddlers should be at Mass at all, if other arrangements can be made, given that they are bound to make noise of some description simply because they are little babies and toddlers. 

I didn’t know the answer, but in researching it to the extent I have, I am now of the view (which is always open to further evidence) that the best traditional practice was to keep babies and toddlers (not children) at home.  I came to this conclusion because my findings highlighted the reverential  silence and attention related directly to the sanctity of the Mass, inculcated by such saints such as St Leonard of Port Maurice, St Ambrose and St John Chrysostom, and confirmed in practice with the example of St Therese, the instruction in in Cochem’s (the author of the 4 Last Things) book and the manual for mothers Munda mentioned in the first thread.  This was not the main reason noisy babies/toddlers/children irked me initially.  Whilst thinking it was irreverent, I was more moved by how irritatingly selfish I found the behaviour of some (not all) parents and thought it was something I had to overcome.  I still have to overcome my irritation, but what I now know is my main focus should be on protecting and increasing the reverence, devotion, silence and attention the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass deserves from me.  To lose that feeling of awe and respect or have it diluted, even by mitigating circumstances and unavoidable distractions, would be to undermine the Faith I am honoured to hold.  So, I am now aware that I need to put into place protections for that end.  And for that reason I am extremely grateful to Awkward for almost singlehandedly debating this contentious and highly emotional issue. 

I would like to add, whilst I have come to my view, I do acknowledge that we live in an unprecedented time of crisis, so things are not always going to go according to best practice, simply because they can’t.  When other arrangements can’t be made, they can’t be made.  We all just have to do our best.  I am saddened at the thought of you have caring responsibilities for elderly parents on top of rearing your own children, with no one to assist, the availability of only one Sunday Mass and a distance to travel.  I think Coffeeandcig is in a similar situation and it really is a heavy cross for you both.  May your rewards be great. 

 
 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: orate on September 29, 2019, 08:07:47 AM
Aeternitus  Although I still disagree with your conclusion about infants and toddlers at Mass, especially when parents try to keep the sound level down and attend to their wee ones well,  I very much appreciate the reasonableness of your posts.  Your charity toward ALL, no matter  what side of the fence they sit, is admirable.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 29, 2019, 08:19:43 AM
Aeternitus  Although I still disagree with your conclusion about infants and toddlers at Mass, especially when parents try to keep the sound level down and attend to their wee ones well,  I very much appreciate the reasonableness of your posts.  Your charity toward ALL, no matter  what side of the fence they sit, is admirable.

What a lovely comment. Thank you. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: diaduit on September 29, 2019, 10:22:37 AM
Here is evidence that babies and toddlers weren't taken to Mass - from 1896, published not in some corner of France as in the testimony of St Therese of Lisieux, but in the USA with an Imprimateur from the Archbishop of New York.

Aeternitus kindly posted it above, and I'm reposting it here for emphasis, from 'Cochem's Explanation of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass with an Appendix, Containing Devotions for Mass, for Confession, and for Communion', by Camillus P. Maes

Quote
Mothers ought to leave very young children at home, as they disturb not only those who bring them to church, but other people, and sometimes even the priest himself.  But bigger children who are old enough to be still, may be brought to Mass. (p 351 Cochem’s Explanation of the Holy Mass)

http://www.saintsbooks.net/books/Fr.%20Martin%20Cochem%20-%20Explanation%20of%20the%20Holy%20Sacrifice%20of%20the%20Mass.pdf

That was thoughtful of you to re-quote that passage. Let me ask you this. If "mothers" should leave babies at home, exactly who should they leave them with. What if you live (like MANY trads) almost an hour, or more than an hour from mass. What if you have no family. What if it costs so much in fuel to get to mass that you could never afford to drive to mass, come home, and send your spouse right back again. What if you only have one mass on Sunday? If every mass centre had two masses per Sunday and feastday, and you lived close to mass, some of these suggestions of Aeternitus would work....mostly they don't.

You are right.  The situation now, due to the crisis in the Church, is very different from what it was even in the 50s and 60s.  Parents of families have a very difficult task without the support of family or reliable Catholic friends.  What one can do about it is subject to the individual family circumstance/options and after discussion with one’s priest.  But the default position from the most vocal posters here, seems to be outrage that parents of young children should be expected to do anything, because the church doesn’t have a law forbidding babies and toddlers (NOT children) at Mass attendance, opposed to the duty of fulfilling one’s Sunday obligation.  Well, if one lives too far from church that obligation doesn’t apply and it then becomes a choice.  How far is too far is a discussion one has with one’s priest, so that the particular circumstances of the family can be taken into consideration also.
 
Right from the beginning, when I joined the discussion on this thread, I could see both sides.  I have now read both threads on this topic and a significant amount of other material in trying to come to a conclusion.
   
From the evidence provided, the traditional position seems to be not to take babies and young children to church.  Yes, infants could receive communion in the early church, but that is not evidence in itself that they received and were at church every Sunday, or even that they were present at the Mass. They could have been brought in from an outer room. 
 
St Theresa was kept at home because she was considered too young to attend Mass.  The recent quotes I provided, indicated the same applied to others in the US.  St Ambrose insisted on complete quiet in his Mass, no coughing or moving at all, to the point of instilling holy fear into his parishioners; St Leonard of Port Maurice highlights the necessity of complete quiet and compares it to the Old Law when the sacrificing of animals was done in such total silence that one would think the church was empty.  Cochem makes clear the accepted practice of not bringing babies and children to Mass until they could sit still. Munda explained, in the first thread, that she read in an old mother’s manual that babies and toddlers were left at home. The evidence is significant.  On the contrary, the only evidence provided for babies and toddlers attending church is current practice and practical need.
 
Given the above, my conclusion is that the crisis in the church is responsible for babies and toddlers attending Mass, thereby potentially compromising the silence, reverence and devout attention it deserves. 

How does one deal with it? Well, it is a tough one and requires the exercise of charity from both sides.  As I said in an earlier post, I have friends who have reared excellent children during this crisis, all of whom have attended Mass since just after birth.  They too didn’t have family help and lived about a 30 minute drive from Church.  In thinking further of their example, I can see now that they employed a number of means to achieve this.  They tag-teamed on occasion, they utilised the assistance of Catholic friends when necessary, they were outside with the children in turns and they disciplined accordingly. They were extremely vigilant, which was prompted by their combined horror at the thought of the Mass being disrupted in any way, which they considered as offensive to God, the priest and their neighbour.  Afterwards they would head off for some coffee and cigarettes, which they also found helped  :D while the kids ran wild on the beach or in the park to burn off some of that restrained energy.  They were and still are the happiest family I have ever had the good fortune to meet.
 
I don’t know what you can do in your situation, Coffee & Cigs.  I am saddened to hear you have no assistance at all and hope that vigilance with your young ones/children, reverence for the sanctity of the Mass and charity towards your neighbour brings you the same rewards it has brought my home-schooling friends.

It was the bolded/underlined that gave the impression that we trad parents were just feckless in our responsibility to keep our children quiet, it didn't say that our default position was we couldn't leave them at home , it said our default position was outrage at being expected to do ANYTHING.

If I took it up wrong then apologies.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Traditionallyruralmom on September 29, 2019, 11:16:53 AM
well, I am once again faced with reality and am on my way to Mass with the brood of children.  Husband is out of town, so I must go it alone.  Even if he was not out of town, we would be going to 1 Mass, as a family, as that is what circumstances dictate.   I am willing to take anyone up on an offer to babysit, or you can send me $ though pay pal if you want to help me hire a babysitter for the littles...though it will most likely have to be Amish, since all my neighbors are Amish.....they dont charge as much though, so that is a good thing......PM me if interested  :cheeseheadbeer:
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Maximilian on September 29, 2019, 12:46:40 PM

Where on this or other thread did trad parents say it was okay to remain inside the church with a noisy baby.
Unanimously we all agreed and have abided by the unwritten rule, baby makes noise mama or Papa steps outside.

I think that the posters who are objecting to noisy babies at Mass are reacting to real-life rather than to posters on this thread. To the extent that they disagree with some posters on this thread, it is probably because they see those posters as supporting the real-life people at their chapel who stay in church with noisy babies.

This morning, for example, I went to the chapel which has many noisy babies and many parents who don't believe in taking them out. The pastor of this chapel also prefers large ceiling fans over air conditioning, so there is a high-decibel white-noise background level from the fans which is then punctuated by baby cries. There was a 2-year old child sitting in the pew behind me who now and then let out an ear-piercing scream. His 4-year old sister would then talk for a long time telling him to be quiet.

Their pew was not exceptional. There were noisier pews scattered throughout the chapel. The elderly pastor is nearly deaf, so I don't think he realizes what is going on. For worshippers, however, you can't have any idea what is being said if you don't follow your missal.

Personally, I'm used to this kind of chaos, and I'm pretty much able to filter it out and focus on praying the Mass. I can understand, however, that there are others who are simply unable to tolerate this kind of situation.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 29, 2019, 12:47:19 PM
well, I am once again faced with reality and am on my way to Mass with the brood of children.  Husband is out of town, so I must go it alone.  Even if he was not out of town, we would be going to 1 Mass, as a family, as that is what circumstances dictate.   I am willing to take anyone up on an offer to babysit, or you can send me $ though pay pal if you want to help me hire a babysitter for the littles...though it will most likely have to be Amish, since all my neighbors are Amish.....they dont charge as much though, so that is a good thing......PM me if interested  :cheeseheadbeer:

So you DO have a choice. You choose to take your baby/toddler(s) to Mass rather than pay for an Amish babysitter.

How much would an Amish babysitter cost?
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Heinrich on September 29, 2019, 01:14:45 PM
well, I am once again faced with reality and am on my way to Mass with the brood of children.  Husband is out of town, so I must go it alone.  Even if he was not out of town, we would be going to 1 Mass, as a family, as that is what circumstances dictate.   I am willing to take anyone up on an offer to babysit, or you can send me $ though pay pal if you want to help me hire a babysitter for the littles...though it will most likely have to be Amish, since all my neighbors are Amish.....they dont charge as much though, so that is a good thing......PM me if interested  :cheeseheadbeer:

So you DO have a choice. You choose to take your baby/toddler(s) to Mass rather than pay for an Amish babysitter.

How much would an Amish babysitter cost?

I don't think she was being serious. And if she were, she solicited help to cover costs. Maybe you could dish out some jack for her.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Gardener on September 29, 2019, 01:50:32 PM
I’d pay $50 for awkward to babysit my kids while we went to Mass. She could buy a nice set of custom ear plugs with the money. Maybe even have enough left over for a $2 cup of extra strength reality.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Heinrich on September 29, 2019, 02:10:48 PM
I’d pay $50 for awkward to babysit my kids while we went to Mass. She could buy a nice set of custom ear plugs with the money. Maybe even have enough left over for a $2 cup of extra strength reality.

Things are cheap in OK.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 29, 2019, 02:36:42 PM

Where on this or other thread did trad parents say it was okay to remain inside the church with a noisy baby.
Unanimously we all agreed and have abided by the unwritten rule, baby makes noise mama or Papa steps outside.

I think that the posters who are objecting to noisy babies at Mass are reacting to real-life rather than to posters on this thread. To the extent that they disagree with some posters on this thread, it is probably because they see those posters as supporting the real-life people at their chapel who stay in church with noisy babies.

This morning, for example, I went to the chapel which has many noisy babies and many parents who don't believe in taking them out. The pastor of this chapel also prefers large ceiling fans over air conditioning, so there is a high-decibel white-noise background level from the fans which is then punctuated by baby cries. There was a 2-year old child sitting in the pew behind me who now and then let out an ear-piercing scream. His 4-year old sister would then talk for a long time telling him to be quiet.

Their pew was not exceptional. There were noisier pews scattered throughout the chapel. The elderly pastor is nearly deaf, so I don't think he realizes what is going on. For worshippers, however, you can't have any idea what is being said if you don't follow your missal.

Personally, I'm used to this kind of chaos, and I'm pretty much able to filter it out and focus on praying the Mass. I can understand, however, that there are others who are simply unable to tolerate this kind of situation.

Yes, I'm very familiar with the kind of chaotic noise and disturbance that characterises the typical Sunday Trad Mass.  What a nightmare!  How did it get to the stage where anyone objecting to the destruction of the beautiful silence of the Mass is regarded as some kind of bitter, twisted curmudgeon and becomes a target for all manner of catty comment?

The responsibility for this sad state of affairs must lie with the priests. All the Trad groups are the same. Trad priests somehow got it into their heads that the future of the Church lay with demographics. Trads have more babies than Modernists, they figured, and so in a couple of centuries, maybe, there will be so few Modernists left that Tradition will triumph.  Trad families consequently became associated with this future triumph and from then on they could do no wrong.

Of course, this is wrongheaded to say the least.  Trampling over today in the name of some future promise is a very Modern idea which never works and is entirely unjustified in this situation.  This is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass we are talking about.  Destroying the reverence, attention, silence and awe that it deserves is hardly a basis for any kind of restoration.

Trying to effect change at parish level is hopeless, judging by the vitriol behind so many comments here.  A new Trad liturgical movement is needed, aimed at restoring the silence, reverence and attention of the TLM.  We need priests like St Ambrose, St John Chrysostom and St Leonard.  Or perhaps you know a retired priest who might say a private TLM for you and others like you. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: orate on September 29, 2019, 02:44:11 PM
Today's Gospel:  Feast of St. Michael

Matthew 18:1–5
Douay-Rheims Bible

AT that hour the disciples came to Jesus, saying: Who, thinkest thou, is the greater in the kingdom of heaven?

2 And Jesus, calling unto him a little child, set him in the midst of them.

3 And said: amen I say to you, unless you be converted, and become as little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, he is the greater in the kingdom of heaven.

5 And he that shall receive one such little child in my name, receiveth me.

Edited to add Matthew 18:10

See that you despise not one of these little ones: for I say to you, that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father who is in heaven.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: bigbadtrad on September 29, 2019, 04:59:38 PM
Awkward wanted tradition and rejected it, wanted a doctor of the Church and got one and rejected that.

I've met trad priests against small kids in Mass, I don't need a quote from a book, but they aren't a doctor or tradition. I've met trad priests who say "if the church isn't crying it's dying." I've heard both arguments many times.

Either way I respect the idea of silence in Mass, I respect the good intention of pious desires.

What I rejected was the false dichotomy of saying children shouldn't go to Mass and trad Masses are so loud. That's false by a long-shot and only believed by people who hear a child whimper and think parents are grabbing pom-poms cheering them on to scream louder and louder.

The idea a child can learn the habit of religion absent Mass and then by the age of reason miraculously be pious in a world of internet, TV, and incredible sound against God is silly. I challenge anyone to show me how a child in 2019 can take their religion seriously without living their faith in every dimension. We aren't in 1800 or even 1950 when we could depend on our families.

I've heard more loud rap music and other exterior distractions during any Mass in a city than children acting poorly. We can't wipe out the world unless you want to live a monastic life, and even then you have problems. I know first-hand when some guy would blast his music during our holy hour on purpose to get even with us for ringing the bells.

The point is I don't know one parent that willfully wants noise in a church, and yet does not see how they can raise their children in a Godly fashion without going to Mass themselves.

I watched my daughter start crying almost 3 years ago during a candle light Christmas Mass when she was not even 9. My children from my oldest to my youngest thought it was one of the most beautiful moments of their lives (the youngest was around 2) and talked about it to this day as one of the highlights of their life. They talked about it daily for weeks and the next Christmas it was one of the most anticipated moments of their year.

This is what the future of the Church is, and if it means they make a little noise we grow with it, and if they get loud I'll take them out happily, but don't be myopic and short-sighted. No one willfully wants noise in Mass, we want our children to grow with the public habit of religion, not because we hate your silence, but because we know it's best to raise children and we see the fruits of it.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: queen.saints on September 29, 2019, 05:51:12 PM

St Ambrose insisted on complete quiet in his Mass, no coughing or moving at all, to the point of instilling holy fear into his parishioners; St Leonard of Port Maurice highlights the necessity of complete quiet and compares it to the Old Law when the sacrificing of animals was done in such total silence that one would think the church was empty. 

Some years ago when I was attending Mass at the SSPX chapel in Cincinnati, the problem was severe, and it was not only infants who were causing distraction, but also the adults getting up to go to the bathroom, etc. Some were spending the whole Mass in the basement social hall which had a speaker which was supposed to be used only by nursing mothers.

The pastor gave a sermon really dropping the hammer. Perhaps he did a little research on St. Ambrose and St. Leonard of Port Maurice.

Afterwards the result was startling. The improvement was tremendous. I guess that's a testimony to the good people of Cincinnati that they took his words to heart and straightened up immediately, rather than making a lot of excuses.

Yes, sometimes all it takes is having it brought to one's attention.

A word to the wise is sufficient.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 29, 2019, 05:58:55 PM
Awkward wanted tradition and rejected it, wanted a doctor of the Church and got one and rejected that.

How dare you. 

Still, one benefit of such spiteful and less than honest responses as yours have repeatedly been, is that we get to see what nastiness lies beneath so many Trad claims of piety and humility.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 29, 2019, 06:10:08 PM
It's just occurred to me what this is.

It's Trad style feminism and child-centredness.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: diaduit on September 29, 2019, 06:18:05 PM

Where on this or other thread did trad parents say it was okay to remain inside the church with a noisy baby.
Unanimously we all agreed and have abided by the unwritten rule, baby makes noise mama or Papa steps outside.

I think that the posters who are objecting to noisy babies at Mass are reacting to real-life rather than to posters on this thread. To the extent that they disagree with some posters on this thread, it is probably because they see those posters as supporting the real-life people at their chapel who stay in church with noisy babies.

This morning, for example, I went to the chapel which has many noisy babies and many parents who don't believe in taking them out. The pastor of this chapel also prefers large ceiling fans over air conditioning, so there is a high-decibel white-noise background level from the fans which is then punctuated by baby cries. There was a 2-year old child sitting in the pew behind me who now and then let out an ear-piercing scream. His 4-year old sister would then talk for a long time telling him to be quiet.

Their pew was not exceptional. There were noisier pews scattered throughout the chapel. The elderly pastor is nearly deaf, so I don't think he realizes what is going on. For worshippers, however, you can't have any idea what is being said if you don't follow your missal.

Personally, I'm used to this kind of chaos, and I'm pretty much able to filter it out and focus on praying the Mass. I can understand, however, that there are others who are simply unable to tolerate this kind of situation.
I would find that very very difficult alright.

Today my 4 yr old sat very still during sung mass and a long sermon  playing with his hands at times and I had to turn him back towards the altar once. It was his first time off mine or hubby's knee . 4 years training for this result.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: bigbadtrad on September 29, 2019, 07:31:44 PM

Still, one benefit of such spiteful and less than honest responses...

Oh please your name calling and blatantly false characterizations show you to be what you accuse me of. Your next post calling this feminism and child worship shows you cannot argue in the absence of facts.

What Max just described is something as a father would confront. I would walk up to the father and mother of a screaming child and tell them to be quiet in a nice way. I've done it before many times. I let them know it's an bad example for my children. Usually I apologize to them afterwards because I know it's difficult for everyone and explain myself.

If I had a wild child in a church I talk to the parents. I just did so a few weeks ago, but I do it with kindness and compassion. I've reprimanded my father for allowing my nephew to talk in church.

The difference is I don't think they are at war with me. I don't think it is against tradition or against the fathers. And I certainly don't think I'm above it all. We live in a broken world and you take yourself too seriously.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: orate on September 29, 2019, 07:35:41 PM
Awkward wanted tradition and rejected it, wanted a doctor of the Church and got one and rejected that.

How dare you. 

Still, one benefit of such spiteful and less than honest responses as yours have repeatedly been, is that we get to see what nastiness lies beneath so many Trad claims of piety and humility.

How dare he what?  bigbadtrad gave you an example from tradition and an example from a doctor of the Church, both of which you found unsatisfactory.  I do not see how his responses are spiteful and less than honest.

You come across as attacking anyone who disagrees with your OPINION about wee ones at Mass,  and then feign being put upon.  It is very off-putting.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: orate on September 29, 2019, 07:39:44 PM
It's just occurred to me what this is.

It's Trad style feminism and child-centredness.

So Matthew 18:1-10, Our Lord's own words, is "trad style feminism and child-centeredness."

Again how does your response above contribute to adult debate? It does not.  "Suffer the children to come unto Me."
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on September 29, 2019, 07:45:36 PM
Quote
But the default position from the most vocal posters here, seems to be outrage that parents of young children should be expected to do anything, because the church doesn’t have a law forbidding babies and toddlers (NOT children) at Mass attendance, opposed to the duty of fulfilling one’s Sunday obligation.
Aeternitus, I think you may have misunderstood what some of us are trying to say.  Speaking for myself, this is not my default position at all.  I don't get the impression it is anyone else's, either, but they are free to clarify for themselves. 

My opinion is more that if the ideal is to leave younger children (babies and toddlers are, in fact, children, too) home, then given the crisis and the lack of Masses available, we have an exception currently.  When I am visiting my Mom out of town, we are able to split Masses and leave the younger children.  That is exactly what we did today, in fact.  It's not possible to do split Masses when we are at home, though. Neither are we able to procure a babysitter.  Neither can I just stay home indefinitely, which is what it would take otherwise.

Quote
Well, if one lives too far from church that obligation doesn’t apply and it then becomes a choice.  How far is too far is a discussion one has with one’s priest, so that the particular circumstances of the family can be taken into consideration also

I actually remember reading what the Church says about Mass attendance and distance.  I believe She does have a set distance for dispensation.  I can't recall at the moment exactly what it is, but I'm pretty positive that the 45 minute commute my family makes is not up for a dispensation of our Sunday obligation.  Therefore, if we miss Mass, we incur mortal sin.  It's not worth the risk. 
 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Gardener on September 29, 2019, 07:58:04 PM
If one is willing to drive X miles for Y thing, then I fail to see how they can rationalize not driving X +/- for something literally infinitely more important.

It's not like we are living in the days of walking only, or covered wagons.

My wife's grandmother literally, as a kid and the only practicing Catholic in her family, used to walk 5 miles from Agua Fria, NM to the church in Santa Fe for Mass.

At 3 mph, probably not an inconceivable speed for a young girl to walk such a distance in such terrain, would have taken 1 hour and 40 minutes.

I don't buy the time argument. I might buy the gas argument. But if such a thing as money for gas is causing someone to miss Mass, please send me a PM and we'll discuss your local average gas prices, average miles per gallon one gets in their vehicle, the distance driven, and figure the average monthly cost. I'll gladly send that $ to said person(s) in order to keep them from missing out on literally the most beautiful thing on earth.

Sorry, I have yet to figure out a way to pay a toddler or infant to shut up though.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 29, 2019, 08:02:16 PM
Awkward wanted tradition and rejected it, wanted a doctor of the Church and got one and rejected that.

How dare you. 

Still, one benefit of such spiteful and less than honest responses as yours have repeatedly been, is that we get to see what nastiness lies beneath so many Trad claims of piety and humility.

How dare he what?  bigbadtrad gave you an example from tradition and an example from a doctor of the Church, both of which you found unsatisfactory.  I do not see how his responses are spiteful and less than honest.

You come across as attacking anyone who disagrees with your OPINION about wee ones at Mass,  and then feign being put upon.  It is very off-putting.

You haven't read the posts in which I repeatedly corrected what bigbadtrad was claiming I'd said.

BBT has been misrepresenting my words for several posts now and takes no notice when I explain what I meant.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 29, 2019, 08:14:54 PM
It's just occurred to me what this is.

It's Trad style feminism and child-centredness.

So Matthew 18:1-10, Our Lord's own words, is "trad style feminism and child-centeredness."

Again how does your response above contribute to adult debate? It does not.  "Suffer the children to come unto Me."

Your use of the "Suffer the little children" quote is a misuse of Scripture intended to close down the argument.  It is irrelevant to the discussion here.

And I think there definitely is a strong impulse amongst many Trad mothers to assert their wills in this situation, and a tendency to characterise anyone who objects as a "curmudgeon, old MAN".  This description of me has been used by a poster on this thread.  If a secular woman had said that, you'd all be accusing her of being a dreadful feminist.

And as for child-centredness - how can you deny it?  How would you describe a situation in which women insist on dictating the conditions under which Catholics must experience Mass and use the 'suffer the little children' quote to shout them down?
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 29, 2019, 08:22:30 PM
Today my 4 yr old sat very still during sung mass and a long sermon  playing with his hands at times and I had to turn him back towards the altar once. It was his first time off mine or hubby's knee . 4 years training for this result.

I'm sorry, but that's a lot of time at Mass spent in concerning yourself with something other than the Holy Sacrifice.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: orate on September 29, 2019, 08:26:19 PM

You haven't read the posts in which I repeatedly corrected what bigbadtrad was claiming I'd said.

BBT has been misrepresenting my words for several posts now and takes no notice when I explain what I meant.

Yes, I have read all the posts on this thread--and the previous one--and I can't see how he has  misrepresented anything.  If anything you have misrepresented all of us who not only think it is uncharitable to tell others to purposely disobey the Law of the Church to attend Mass on Sunday, but also think that children of any age should be welcome at Mass.

You accuse us of extolling the virtue of noise and disruption of Holy Mass, and take no notice when we try to explain otherwise.  Just because I think that it is a positive good to expose children at a very young age to the beauty of the Mass, it does not mean that I enjoy unnecessary noise and disruption.  I, and others, have said this repeatedly.  But YOU refuse to listen.

You are the one misrepresenting us.

If you want to debate whether very young children should attend Holy Mass, that is all well and good, as long as it is done in a respectful and adult manner as others who share your opinion have managed to do.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: orate on September 29, 2019, 08:36:28 PM


How would you describe a situation in which {a} wom{a}n insists on dictating the conditions under which Catholics must experience Mass...?

Exactly what you are doing. 

Especially by saying, "I'm sorry, but that's a lot of time at Mass spent in concerning yourself with something other than the Holy Sacrifice."  I'm sorry, but tending to one's children's religious education on how to behave at Mass, is not inconsistent with concerning oneself with the Holy Sacrifice.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: orate on September 29, 2019, 08:41:01 PM
"And I think there definitely is a strong impulse amongst many Trad mothers to assert their wills in this situation,"

Awk--you, too, suffer this impulse to assert your will in this situation.

There can be honest disagreement about whether very young children belong at Mass, without accusing each other of nefarious motives.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: mikemac on September 29, 2019, 10:22:43 PM
...
I watched my daughter start crying almost 3 years ago during a candle light Christmas Mass when she was not even 9. My children from my oldest to my youngest thought it was one of the most beautiful moments of their lives (the youngest was around 2) and talked about it to this day as one of the highlights of their life. They talked about it daily for weeks and the next Christmas it was one of the most anticipated moments of their year.
...

...
Today my 4 yr old sat very still during sung mass and a long sermon  playing with his hands at times and I had to turn him back towards the altar once. It was his first time off mine or hubby's knee . 4 years training for this result.

Thanks for sharing folks.  I love reading accounts like these.  It makes you feel like there is a bright future for the Church.  You know, because they are the future of the Church.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: diaduit on September 30, 2019, 04:18:19 AM
Today my 4 yr old sat very still during sung mass and a long sermon  playing with his hands at times and I had to turn him back towards the altar once. It was his first time off mine or hubby's knee . 4 years training for this result.

I'm sorry, but that's a lot of time at Mass spent in concerning yourself with something other than the Holy Sacrifice.

Correct, its called duty of State
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 30, 2019, 04:52:56 AM
Thanks for sharing folks.  I love reading accounts like these.  It makes you feel like there is a bright future for the Church.  You know, because they are the future of the Church.

How very Modern of you, mikemac, sacrificing the peace and reverence of the Mass today for a future demographic triumph that will never happen.

This is where Tradism falls flat.  There is nothing Traditional about such a position.

The end does not justify the means.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 30, 2019, 05:11:06 AM
Today my 4 yr old sat very still during sung mass and a long sermon  playing with his hands at times and I had to turn him back towards the altar once. It was his first time off mine or hubby's knee . 4 years training for this result.

I'm sorry, but that's a lot of time at Mass spent in concerning yourself with something other than the Holy Sacrifice.

Correct, its called duty of State

It absolutely is not.

You have no duty of state to attend Mass knowing you will have to spend half your time there childminding.  How could having at best half of your attention on the Holy Sacrifice as a matter of course be a 'duty of state'? Unless Mass attendance is a mere tick-box exercise, that is.  Is it?  Is that what your 'duty of state' is? 

When was the last time you went to Mass alone and were able to concentrate on the Mass from beginning to end?  Have you ever experienced the peace, silence and reverence of the TLM without the constant baby/toddler chorus?

Has it never occurred to you that you, as a Catholic parent, might be one of the greatest beneficiaries of a more restrictive approach to Mass attendance?  Yes you would have do things differently.  But what about the benefits?  What about the peace you would experience?  What about being able to focus all your attention on the Holy Sacrifice for a change.

If this has occurred to you, and to other parents here, why are you all so determined to cling to the existing situation? Perhaps because you imagine being deprived of something and can't conceive that you might, in fact, gain something infinitely precious.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: bigbadtrad on September 30, 2019, 05:25:06 AM
How very Modern of you, mikemac, sacrificing the peace and reverence of the Mass today for a future demographic triumph that will never happen.

Never happen? Modern?

You're the one who repudiates tradition for the innovation. Now you deny the future of the Church.

You are the one praising not bringing kids to Mass against tradition and a father & doctor of the Church, oh but don't worry you have a priest with an imprimatur admitting kids do go to Mass but he's against it which is almost at the same level of authority.

Now we know you're real motive, you just said it, you think the future of the Church will never happen. You just said it.

The end, raising holy children, justifies us trying to train them to be good and holy which takes practice, hard-work, and you just think the innocent sneeze must be stopped with a sword.

You don't want people training the future of the Church, you don't think it will exist.

No one should take your seriously. No one misrepresents you, and I think we would all be wise to ignore you. I'll start now.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 30, 2019, 07:34:57 AM


Quote
What one can do about it is subject to the individual family circumstance/options and after discussion with one’s priest.  But the default position from the most vocal posters here, seems to be outrage that parents of young children should be expected to do anything, because the church doesn’t have a law forbidding babies and toddlers (NOT children) at Mass attendance, opposed to the duty of fulfilling one’s Sunday obligation.  Well, if one lives too far from church that obligation doesn’t apply and it then becomes a choice.  How far is too far is a discussion one has with one’s priest, so that the particular circumstances of the family can be taken into consideration also.
 

It was the bolded/underlined that gave the impression that we trad parents were just feckless in our responsibility to keep our children quiet, it didn't say that our default position was we couldn't leave them at home , it said our default position was outrage at being expected to do ANYTHING.

If I took it up wrong then apologies.


Of course, apology accepted, but I’ve got to say I was completely surprised at how you read my words.  It has never occurred to me that people here didn’t take their young children outside when loud/noisy.  They obviously do and have said as much on many occasions.  So when I said that the most vocal posters seem outraged at the thought of doing anything, that was a direct follow on from my previous sentence: “What one can do about it is subject to the individual family circumstances/options and after discussion with one’s priest”. I thought this was evident by the qualifier “But the default position… which I used at the beginning of the sentence to which you took exception. 

So, to rephrase: most people don’t want to do anything about considering options and/or discussing them with one’s priest, because most people don’t think there is any need to do so.  Why? Because the church doesn’t have a law forbidding babies and toddlers at Mass attendance, whereas one does have the duty of fulfilling one’s Sunday obligation.  Isn't that the case most people have presented?

And I still think my comment, as intended, is fair comment.  Most people do not feel the need to consider options. They would only do that if they thought there were any merit in the arguments presented by Awkward and, more recently, myself.  Most people involved in this discussion don’t.  They have reached their decision.  If anything, most people have become more rigid in their original position, in opposition to what they view as Awkward’s antipathy towards children in general, coupled with her own self-focus.  A mistaken and ill-formed judgement of them to make, in my opinion.   The only option I have seen taken up with any enthusiasm and cheered on by others, with varying levels of thinly veiled sarcasm, is for Awkward to invest in ear-plugs, pay for a baby-sitter or simply do the babysitting herself.  So the problem is Awkward’s and the solution should come from her, is what most people think.   Some posters have even given her counselling on what her dispositions should be in preparing herself to suffer in silence. I am sorry, but I don’t agree, with most people on this topic, for all the reasons I have already discussed in this thread.

If I am wrong about most peoples’ lack of genuine openness to options and the need for them, please let me know.  One of those rare occasions when I would genuinely welcome being wrong!  ;D         
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 30, 2019, 07:37:07 AM
Quote
But the default position from the most vocal posters here, seems to be outrage that parents of young children should be expected to do anything, because the church doesn’t have a law forbidding babies and toddlers (NOT children) at Mass attendance, opposed to the duty of fulfilling one’s Sunday obligation.
Aeternitus, I think you may have misunderstood what some of us are trying to say.  Speaking for myself, this is not my default position at all.  I don't get the impression it is anyone else's, either, but they are free to clarify for themselves. 

My opinion is more that if the ideal is to leave younger children (babies and toddlers are, in fact, children, too) home, then given the crisis and the lack of Masses available, we have an exception currently.  When I am visiting my Mom out of town, we are able to split Masses and leave the younger children.  That is exactly what we did today, in fact.  It's not possible to do split Masses when we are at home, though. Neither are we able to procure a babysitter.  Neither can I just stay home indefinitely, which is what it would take otherwise.

Quote
Well, if one lives too far from church that obligation doesn’t apply and it then becomes a choice.  How far is too far is a discussion one has with one’s priest, so that the particular circumstances of the family can be taken into consideration also

I actually remember reading what the Church says about Mass attendance and distance.  I believe She does have a set distance for dispensation.  I can't recall at the moment exactly what it is, but I'm pretty positive that the 45 minute commute my family makes is not up for a dispensation of our Sunday obligation.  Therefore, if we miss Mass, we incur mortal sin.  It's not worth the risk.

Many thanks Munda.  All your points noted and I will reply as soon as possible, but no time at present. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on September 30, 2019, 08:08:34 AM
How very Modern of you, mikemac, sacrificing the peace and reverence of the Mass today for a future demographic triumph that will never happen.

Never happen? Modern?

You're the one who repudiates tradition for the innovation. Now you deny the future of the Church.

You are the one praising not bringing kids to Mass against tradition and a father & doctor of the Church, oh but don't worry you have a priest with an imprimatur admitting kids do go to Mass but he's against it which is almost at the same level of authority.

Now we know you're real motive, you just said it, you think the future of the Church will never happen. You just said it.

The end, raising holy children, justifies us trying to train them to be good and holy which takes practice, hard-work, and you just think the innocent sneeze must be stopped with a sword.

You don't want people training the future of the Church, you don't think it will exist.

No one should take your seriously. No one misrepresents you, and I think we would all be wise to ignore you. I'll start now.

I do not have sufficient time to address this completely, but this is important.   Misinterpretations have been made on this thread.  I know, I just spent time explaining one in which I was completely misunderstood.  I am not blaming anyone,  or applying motives.  I think it is always wise not to apply motives.   It is but the nature of language and peoples’ varying degrees of comprehension and language skills.  Things can be and are misunderstood. 

Awkward is not questioning the future of the Church.  She questioned a future triumph based on demographics.  There is a huge difference and to infer otherwise is a big misinterpretation – on your part.   
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on September 30, 2019, 08:33:07 AM
Quote
So, to rephrase: most people don’t want to do anything about considering options and/or discussing them with one’s priest, because most people don’t think there is any need to do so.  Why? Because the church doesn’t have a law forbidding babies and toddlers at Mass attendance, whereas it does have the duty of fulfilling one’s Sunday obligation.  Isn't that the case most people have presented?

I think I see what you mean now.  I don't think the case is that we don't want to do anything about the issue.  It's more that we feel our hands are tied.  There is not really anything we can do, except completely miss Mass for the duration of raising our babies.  I personally do not see that as a viable option.  Therefore, our solution is to then teach and expect our children to behave properly at Mass.  That is what we are doing, given the current reality of the situation.  Reality and ideals do not always line up, and we only have so much control over that.

And, yes, the fact that the Church does not have a law forbidding children (of any age) to attend Mass, yet does have the positive command to attend Mass under pain of mortal sin, is an important consideration.  We laity are not allowed to bind people to practices that Holy Mother Church Herself does not.  Regardless of whether it is the ideal or not, it is not intrinsic sinful to bring children (of any age to Mass).  Also, just because people are not able to meet a particular ideal, it does not automatically mean that said person is displeasing to God, as has been put forth as an argument previously. 

I think it's also important to distinguish between a discipline and a dogma.  Whether or not parents bring young children to Mass is a discipline.  So, The Church is within Her rights to allow that discipline to change, as She sees fit, regardless of if the laity approve or not.  The change also does no mean a prior discipline was wrong or less than ideal; it just means that The Church has decided that it is ok or necessary for the discipline to change for some reason. 

It is a dogma that missing Mass without grave reason incurs mortal sin.  That is a constant.  Having young children is not, that I can tell, grave reason to miss Mass.  As I said earlier, the Church allows six weeks for a mother to recover after child birth.  After that, her dispensation to be allowed to miss Mass is no longer applied.  That tells me that if I cannot find a way to leave the baby at home, then I have to bring him with me. 

 It is not that we parents are trying to be displeasing to God, modern, feminist, are extolling the "virtue" of noise and disruption, are choosing to introduce noise and disruption into Mass, entitled, take pleasure at our children (of any age) disrupting other people's Mass experience (as if Mass is about any of us in the first place), or any other of those things that awkward accused parents of (which, I believe is where the outrage stems from.  It comes across as rash judgment and uncharitable to apply those statements to parents, in general). It's simply that we want to obey God's 3rd commandment.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: diaduit on September 30, 2019, 08:42:56 AM
Quote
So, to rephrase: most people don’t want to do anything about considering options and/or discussing them with one’s priest, because most people don’t think there is any need to do so.  Why? Because the church doesn’t have a law forbidding babies and toddlers at Mass attendance, whereas it does have the duty of fulfilling one’s Sunday obligation.  Isn't that the case most people have presented?

I think I see what you mean now.  I don't think the case is that we don't want to do anything about the issue.  It's more that we feel our hands are tied.  There is not really anything we can do, except completely miss Mass for the duration of raising our babies.  I personally do not see that as a viable option.  Therefore, our solution is to then teach and expect our children to behave properly at Mass.  That is what we are doing, given the current reality of the situation.  Reality and ideals do not always line up, and we only have so much control over that.

And, yes, the fact that the Church does not have a law forbidding children (of any age) to attend Mass, yet does have the positive command to attend Mass under pain of mortal sin, is an important consideration.  We laity are not allowed to bind people to practices that Holy Mother Church Herself does not.  Regardless of whether it is the ideal or not, it is not intrinsic sinful to bring children (of any age to Mass).  Also, just because people are not able to meet a particular ideal, it does not automatically mean that said person is displeasing to God, as has been put forth as an argument previously. 

I think it's also important to distinguish between a discipline and a dogma.  Whether or not parents bring young children to Mass is a discipline.  So, The Church is within Her rights to allow that discipline to change, as She sees fit, regardless of if the laity approve or not.  The change also does no mean a prior discipline was wrong or less than ideal; it just means that The Church has decided that it is ok or necessary for the discipline to change for some reason. 

It is a dogma that missing Mass without grave reason incurs mortal sin.  That is a constant.  Having young children is not, that I can tell, grave reason to miss Mass.  As I said earlier, the Church allows six weeks for a mother to recover after child birth.  After that, her dispensation to be allowed to miss Mass is no longer applied.  That tells me that if I cannot find a way to leave the baby at home, then I have to bring him with me. 

 It is not that we parents are trying to be displeasing to God, modern, feminist, are extolling the "virtue" of noise and disruption, are choosing to introduce noise and disruption into Mass, entitled, take pleasure at our children (of any age) disrupting other people's Mass experience (as if Mass is about any of us in the first place), or any other of those things that awkward accused parents of (which, I believe is where the outrage stems from.  It comes across as rash judgment and uncharitable to apply those statements to parents, in general). It's simply that we want to obey God's 3rd commandment.

This times a thousand.

Thanks Munda.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: orate on September 30, 2019, 08:52:34 AM
Quote
So, to rephrase: most people don’t want to do anything about considering options and/or discussing them with one’s priest, because most people don’t think there is any need to do so.  Why? Because the church doesn’t have a law forbidding babies and toddlers at Mass attendance, whereas it does have the duty of fulfilling one’s Sunday obligation.  Isn't that the case most people have presented?

I think I see what you mean now.  I don't think the case is that we don't want to do anything about the issue.  It's more that we feel our hands are tied.  There is not really anything we can do, except completely miss Mass for the duration of raising our babies.  I personally do not see that as a viable option.  Therefore, our solution is to then teach and expect our children to behave properly at Mass.  That is what we are doing, given the current reality of the situation.  Reality and ideals do not always line up, and we only have so much control over that.

And, yes, the fact that the Church does not have a law forbidding children (of any age) to attend Mass, yet does have the positive command to attend Mass under pain of mortal sin, is an important consideration.  We laity are not allowed to bind people to practices that Holy Mother Church Herself does not.  Regardless of whether it is the ideal or not, it is not intrinsic sinful to bring children (of any age to Mass).  Also, just because people are not able to meet a particular ideal, it does not automatically mean that said person is displeasing to God, as has been put forth as an argument previously. 

I think it's also important to distinguish between a discipline and a dogma.  Whether or not parents bring young children to Mass is a discipline.  So, The Church is within Her rights to allow that discipline to change, as She sees fit, regardless of if the laity approve or not.  The change also does no mean a prior discipline was wrong or less than ideal; it just means that The Church has decided that it is ok or necessary for the discipline to change for some reason. 

It is a dogma that missing Mass without grave reason incurs mortal sin.  That is a constant.  Having young children is not, that I can tell, grave reason to miss Mass.  As I said earlier, the Church allows six weeks for a mother to recover after child birth.  After that, her dispensation to be allowed to miss Mass is no longer applied.  That tells me that if I cannot find a way to leave the baby at home, then I have to bring him with me. 

It is not that we parents are trying to be displeasing to God, modern, feminist, are extolling the "virtue" of noise and disruption, are choosing to introduce noise and disruption into Mass, entitled, take pleasure at our children (of any age) disrupting other people's Mass experience (as if Mass is about any of us in the first place), or any other of those things that awkward accused parents of (which, I believe is where the outrage stems from.  It comes across as rash judgment and uncharitable to apply those statements to parents, in general). It's simply that we want to obey God's 3rd commandment.

Thank you for stating so succinctly what I have been trying to express.

And even if it was the discipline of the Church in the past to not to bring small children to Mass--which I'm still not convinced it was--- I think a case can be made that it is a positive good to expose children from infancy to the sacredness and beauty, and, yes, the stillness of Holy Mass .
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: orate on September 30, 2019, 09:05:14 AM
And for the record, my children are now all adults.  I no longer have a hat in this ring.  My years of training up my children are over.

However, I find it edifying to see so many young families at Mass, with parents who are trying to teach their children, not only proper behavior, but a love of all things Holy!

I find myself, after Mass, more often praising parents for their children's good behavior, than I do extolling the very few parents who don't tend to their children's noisy behavior, to correct the situation.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: bigbadtrad on September 30, 2019, 10:09:34 AM
Awkward is not questioning the future of the Church.  She questioned a future triumph based on demographics.  There is a huge difference and to infer otherwise is a big misinterpretation – on your part.

Demography is certainly against us in general, but look at the context and I believe myself correct. I and another poster cited beautiful stories about our children and Mike was inspired by them.

Here's what mikemac said:
"Thanks for sharing folks.  I love reading accounts like these.  It makes you feel like there is a bright future for the Church.  You know, because they are the future of the Church."

Awkward's reply was:
"How very Modern of you, mikemac, sacrificing the peace and reverence of the Mass today for a future demographic triumph that will never happen."

Who says that except a bitter, angry person who doesn't see hope through children? I'm not wrong. It's like saying "I'm so happy" and someone replies "Oh shut up, you have no reason to be happy!"

Sorry the woman is crazy. Who thinks of such a reply? Only a crazy person.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: The Curt Jester on September 30, 2019, 10:13:55 AM
...long quote by Munda...

Thank you for stating so succinctly what I have been trying to express.

I  believe what Munda has expressed in that quote has actually been repeated (quite clearly) many, many, many times.  In the previous thread, even Awkward admitted about living in times in which sometimes ideal (assuming it is the ideal) is not possible.  That admittance seems to have been forgotten in this thread.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Xavier on September 30, 2019, 10:29:03 AM
Well, I think the disagreement has gotten out of hand: On the one hand, the very practice of Infant Communion that was practiced in some regions in antiquity, and is practiced by some Eastern Catholic Churches, clearly shows it's not inherently wrong to bring young children, even toddlers, to Holy Mass/Divine Liturgy. "Support for infant communion is drawn from several gospel verses, including Matthew 19:14 and Mark 10:14. Among the Church Fathers, Cyprian, Augustine, and Leo the Great explicitly favored infant communion.[1]". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infant_communion While it is not required as necessary for salvation for infants to communicate with the Lord Sacramentally, as they are already in the state of grace and cannot lose it, as the Catechism of Trent explains, it was not forbidden as harmful either, and therefore still less is it wrong for them to be merely present at the Lord's Sacrifice. The early Church apparently considered that more good than harm would result for those children. They will surely receive some grace by being present.

My personal experience at our TLM has been that quite a few young children come with their parents. They are generally well disciplined or at least quiet. On the rare occasion when you hear crying or other sounds little children make, their parents hasten to take them out. I don't see a problem with it. Being at Calvary can't have been easy for St. John and the Blessed Mother; the unbelieving Jews, Pharisees etc must have been hurling all sorts of insults at Our Lord, and causing Our Lady to weep, as some mystics also suggest. But She bore all that, offered it up along with the Sacrifice of Her Son, and participated most efficaciously along with St. John at the Cross. I believe we can all do the same, which really requires much less of a sacrifice from us. Of course mothers should try to quieten their children to the extent that is possible when they start crying, if necessary by taking them out. I don't think any one is saying otherwise.

Personally, I love when Holy Mass is so quite that everyone is entirely rapt with attention at the Holy Sacrifice being offered on the Altar. Generally, it is like that. Sometimes, it is not. If someone was deliberately making noise, it is different. Little children cry sometimes, that's a part of their growing up, and a part of life for their parents. I think we can bear a little cross patiently and without grumbling if they occasionally cry at Holy Mass; I'm sure Our Lord is not displeased or surprised that they do, and that's all that matters at the Holy Sacrifice. Jesus called them to come to Him.

Since no one is defending the idea that parents be indifferent, or even not do everything reasonable so that children are as less noisy as possible, I fail to see what the problem is. If the child cries, he or she can go out temporarily,

God bless all.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: lauermar on September 30, 2019, 10:29:57 AM
I just dropped in on this old thread, and my reaction is, what the hell! How did this go so far off topic, and why are members telling another not to bring her kids to church?

Just my 2 cents...I grew up in the 60s. My mom and dad went to separate masses until I was 4. My dad liked the 6am. Then he'd come home and watch me while mom went to 9am. When I turned 4, he took me to mass with him and explained the Latin to me and what was happening. It would have been 1964. I remember feeling privileged to be there. By the time I started school there 2 years later, Latin was gone and I wondered why.

Children and mentally handicapped should never be forbidden from mass unless they have extreme mental outbursts.

Matthew 19:14 King James Version (KJV)

14 But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.

King James Version (KJV)

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: lauermar on September 30, 2019, 10:31:35 AM
Accidental double post
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 30, 2019, 10:58:58 AM
How very Modern of you, mikemac, sacrificing the peace and reverence of the Mass today for a future demographic triumph that will never happen.

Never happen? Modern?

You're the one who repudiates tradition for the innovation. Now you deny the future of the Church.

You are the one praising not bringing kids to Mass against tradition and a father & doctor of the Church, oh but don't worry you have a priest with an imprimatur admitting kids do go to Mass but he's against it which is almost at the same level of authority.

Now we know you're real motive, you just said it, you think the future of the Church will never happen. You just said it.

The end, raising holy children, justifies us trying to train them to be good and holy which takes practice, hard-work, and you just think the innocent sneeze must be stopped with a sword.

You don't want people training the future of the Church, you don't think it will exist.

No one should take your seriously. No one misrepresents you, and I think we would all be wise to ignore you. I'll start now.

Please ignore me.

Then perhaps you will stop making false accusations against me, as you have done yet again in this post.

You misrepresent what I say, claim to know what my motives are, and resort to accusations and personal attack.

Just like a Social Justice Warrior.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: dellery on September 30, 2019, 11:58:05 AM
It's just occurred to me what this is.

It's Trad style feminism and child-centredness.

:patriot:
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 30, 2019, 12:04:01 PM
Awkward is not questioning the future of the Church.  She questioned a future triumph based on demographics.

Thank you, Aeternitus.

The future of the Church surely depends on CONVERSIONS.  The demographic argument comes from the priests of the various Trad groups.  Quite why they have adopted it is beyond me but it seems to universally held to be true across all Trad factions from what I can tell. 

A lot is said about 'state of life' and its various obligations.  But it has also been acknowledged that we are in an unprecedented, emergency situation. How far such obligations apply during times of crisis is never explained. 

And neither is it explained how far a state of life obligation applies if carrying that obligation out involves causing disturbance to oneself and others.

I'veen meaning to ask you about something you said in a previous post.

Quote
what I now know is my main focus should be on protecting and increasing the reverence, devotion, silence and attention the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass deserves from me.

I'd love to know if you have any ideas about how to achieve this?  My guess is that nothing can be done at the parish level and that Tradition needs a new liturgical movement aimed at restoring the silence, reverence, attention and awe of the TLM.

We need priests, or even just one priest, like St Ambrose, St John Chrysostom, St Leonard.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: dellery on September 30, 2019, 12:21:06 PM
It's hard to take an opinion here since both sides are convincing, but my opinion of awkwardcustomer has gone up considerably.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: mikemac on September 30, 2019, 12:44:51 PM
Awkward is not questioning the future of the Church.  She questioned a future triumph based on demographics.  There is a huge difference and to infer otherwise is a big misinterpretation – on your part.

Demography is certainly against us in general, but look at the context and I believe myself correct. I and another poster cited beautiful stories about our children and Mike was inspired by them.

Here's what mikemac said:
"Thanks for sharing folks.  I love reading accounts like these.  It makes you feel like there is a bright future for the Church.  You know, because they are the future of the Church."

Awkward's reply was:
"How very Modern of you, mikemac, sacrificing the peace and reverence of the Mass today for a future demographic triumph that will never happen."

Who says that except a bitter, angry person who doesn't see hope through children? I'm not wrong. It's like saying "I'm so happy" and someone replies "Oh shut up, you have no reason to be happy!"

Sorry the woman is crazy. Who thinks of such a reply? Only a crazy person.

Exactly
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: The Harlequin King on September 30, 2019, 02:08:54 PM
A new Trad liturgical movement is needed, aimed at restoring the silence, reverence and attention of the TLM. 

That already exists. See the New Liturgical Movement blog. My work has been featured on it multiple times. http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 30, 2019, 03:41:57 PM
It's hard to take an opinion here since both sides are convincing, but my opinion of awkwardcustomer has gone up considerably.

Goodness me, Dellery.

I wasn't sure what you meant by the flag waving emoji you posted earlier.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on September 30, 2019, 04:03:45 PM
A new Trad liturgical movement is needed, aimed at restoring the silence, reverence and attention of the TLM. 

That already exists. See the New Liturgical Movement blog. My work has been featured on it multiple times. http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/

I knew there was an actual organisation called the 'New Liturgical Movement', but do they propose restricting Mass attendance to those who have reached the age of reason, a measure which I believe would restore the silence, reverence and attention of the Mass in an instant?

'Recsacralising the liturgy' was the term used back when I was taking an interest in these things.  Then I realised that no matter how magnificent and holy the liturgy was, or how much effort had gone into preparing for it, the toddler screaming in the next pew always managed to sound louder, thereby dominating the proceedings.

Was it not St Augustine who was so moved by the chants he heard coming from a church he was passing that he went inside.  The evangelising power of the beautiful Catholic liturgy is being squandered, I think. 

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on September 30, 2019, 05:14:42 PM
Aeternitus  Although I still disagree with your conclusion about infants and toddlers at Mass, especially when parents try to keep the sound level down and attend to their wee ones well,  I very much appreciate the reasonableness of your posts.  Your charity toward ALL, no matter  what side of the fence they sit, is admirable.

I was just going to say this. A few cheers for a kind, charitable response in what can often be a unseemly brawl.. :cheeseheadbeer:
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Gardener on October 01, 2019, 07:58:04 AM
So those converts... the Church's future you say... they gonna shack up with TFP and not look at a woman or man except to spit vitriol about the quality of their cupboard's china, or get married and have kids?

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on October 01, 2019, 09:26:45 AM
Quote
So, to rephrase: most people don’t want to do anything about considering options and/or discussing them with one’s priest, because most people don’t think there is any need to do so.  Why? Because the church doesn’t have a law forbidding babies and toddlers at Mass attendance, whereas it does have the duty of fulfilling one’s Sunday obligation.  Isn't that the case most people have presented?

I think I see what you mean now.  I don't think the case is that we don't want to do anything about the issue.  It's more that we feel our hands are tied.  There is not really anything we can do, except completely miss Mass for the duration of raising our babies.  I personally do not see that as a viable option.  Therefore, our solution is to then teach and expect our children to behave properly at Mass.  That is what we are doing, given the current reality of the situation.  Reality and ideals do not always line up, and we only have so much control over that.

And, yes, the fact that the Church does not have a law forbidding children (of any age) to attend Mass, yet does have the positive command to attend Mass under pain of mortal sin, is an important consideration.  We laity are not allowed to bind people to practices that Holy Mother Church Herself does not.  Regardless of whether it is the ideal or not, it is not intrinsic sinful to bring children (of any age to Mass).  Also, just because people are not able to meet a particular ideal, it does not automatically mean that said person is displeasing to God, as has been put forth as an argument previously. 

I think it's also important to distinguish between a discipline and a dogma.  Whether or not parents bring young children to Mass is a discipline.  So, The Church is within Her rights to allow that discipline to change, as She sees fit, regardless of if the laity approve or not.  The change also does no mean a prior discipline was wrong or less than ideal; it just means that The Church has decided that it is ok or necessary for the discipline to change for some reason. 

It is a dogma that missing Mass without grave reason incurs mortal sin.  That is a constant.  Having young children is not, that I can tell, grave reason to miss Mass.  As I said earlier, the Church allows six weeks for a mother to recover after child birth.  After that, her dispensation to be allowed to miss Mass is no longer applied.  That tells me that if I cannot find a way to leave the baby at home, then I have to bring him with me. 

 It is not that we parents are trying to be displeasing to God, modern, feminist, are extolling the "virtue" of noise and disruption, are choosing to introduce noise and disruption into Mass, entitled, take pleasure at our children (of any age) disrupting other people's Mass experience (as if Mass is about any of us in the first place), or any other of those things that awkward accused parents of (which, I believe is where the outrage stems from.  It comes across as rash judgment and uncharitable to apply those statements to parents, in general). It's simply that we want to obey God's 3rd commandment.

Hi Munda,

Thank you for the time and trouble you have taken in this post and throughout this thread.  I have found your posts very helpful in coming to my own conclusions and I don’t doubt that you do the best you can in these troubled times.  I think we just have to accept that we differ in some things, whilst have common ground in others.   

I don’t think you necessarily understand mine in the way I hoped to convey it, but I am happy to put that down to my inability to express it sufficiently well.  All ok!  I don’t think there is anything further I am able to offer except perhaps the suggestion to read The Hidden Treasure of the Mass by St Leonard of Port Maurice.  It is available online for free. I would be interested to know what you think of it. 

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on October 01, 2019, 09:46:46 AM
Aeternitus  Although I still disagree with your conclusion about infants and toddlers at Mass, especially when parents try to keep the sound level down and attend to their wee ones well,  I very much appreciate the reasonableness of your posts.  Your charity toward ALL, no matter  what side of the fence they sit, is admirable.

I was just going to say this. A few cheers for a kind, charitable response in what can often be a unseemly brawl.. :cheeseheadbeer:

Many thanks!  :toth: And just count yourself fortunate that you have only been exposed to my writing rather than my speech.  By nature I am short tempered, sharp tongued with a propensity to shoot from the hip. With only half a tongue, the rest bitten off in submission over the years, my speech is rather messy these days! 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on October 01, 2019, 09:55:26 AM
Awkward is not questioning the future of the Church.  She questioned a future triumph based on demographics.

Thank you, Aeternitus.

The future of the Church surely depends on CONVERSIONS.  The demographic argument comes from the priests of the various Trad groups.  Quite why they have adopted it is beyond me but it seems to universally held to be true across all Trad factions from what I can tell. 

A lot is said about 'state of life' and its various obligations.  But it has also been acknowledged that we are in an unprecedented, emergency situation. How far such obligations apply during times of crisis is never explained. 

And neither is it explained how far a state of life obligation applies if carrying that obligation out involves causing disturbance to oneself and others.

I'veen meaning to ask you about something you said in a previous post.

Quote
what I now know is my main focus should be on protecting and increasing the reverence, devotion, silence and attention the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass deserves from me.

I'd love to know if you have any ideas about how to achieve this?  My guess is that nothing can be done at the parish level and that Tradition needs a new liturgical movement aimed at restoring the silence, reverence, attention and awe of the TLM.

We need priests, or even just one priest, like St Ambrose, St John Chrysostom, St Leonard.

Hello Awkward,

I have read The Hidden Treasure of the Mass by St Leonard before, which is why I knew where to look for  further information on the topic.   But that was years ago and it had become a faded and distant memory.  Still there, but hazy.  In reading it again, I was staggered at how much I had forgotten about the reverence and devotion due to the Mass.  This thread and dipping into St Leonard again, opened my eyes.  So I thank you, once more, for that, Awkward!  St Leonard says it in the book and in the title – the Mass is a hidden treasure found only by few.  In other words, one doesn’t necessarily find the treasure it holds, simply by attending and fulfilling one’s obligation.  Like the Faith, it has to be preserved and nurtured, lest it be lost.

I agree that the responsibility for this state of affairs rests with the priest.  I only have control over myself.  So I intend not to lose sight anymore of the treasure, hidden so well in the Mass. I intend to keep St Leonard close, to dip into regularly and particularly before Mass. I will discuss it with my friends and priests. I will pass on this book to those I think may benefit.  I will not accept a Mass that is too noisy as inevitable, nor allow myself to become immune to it, without creating some noise myself (after Mass!) with the priest responsible.  So, I will just do what I can... 

I don’t hold any realistic hope of this issue being addressed until the crisis is resolved and the Church restored.           
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 01, 2019, 11:47:56 AM
Hello Awkward,

I have read The Hidden Treasure of the Mass by St Leonard before, which is why I knew where to look for  further information on the topic.   But that was years ago and it had become a faded and distant memory.  Still there, but hazy.  In reading it again, I was staggered at how much I had forgotten about the reverence and devotion due to the Mass.  This thread and dipping into St Leonard again, opened my eyes.  So I thank you, once more, for that, Awkward!  St Leonard says it in the book and in the title – the Mass is a hidden treasure found only by few.  In other words, one doesn’t necessarily find the treasure it holds, simply by attending and fulfilling one’s obligation.  Like the Faith, it has to be preserved and nurtured, lest it be lost.

I agree that the responsibility for this state of affairs rests with the priest.  I only have control over myself.  So I intend not to lose sight anymore of the treasure, hidden so well in the Mass. I intend to keep St Leonard close, to dip into regularly and particularly before Mass. I will discuss it with my friends and priests. I will pass on this book to those I think may benefit.  I will not accept a Mass that is too noisy as inevitable, nor allow myself to become immune to it, without creating some noise myself (after Mass!) with the priest responsible.  So, I will just do what I can... 

I don’t hold any realistic hope of this issue being addressed until the crisis is resolved and the Church restored.         

You're probably right, Aeternitus, that the crisis in the Church must be resolved first unless, of course, addressing this issue is part of the resolutionn!!!  At any rate, I shall continue to seek out of the way, (probably) private, Low Masses where the beautiful silence has not been lost.

Meanwhile, I found 'The Hidden Treasure of the Holy Mass', by St Leonard of Port Maurice on several sites including here -

http://catholictradition.org/Eucharist/hidden-treasure.htm


Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 01, 2019, 12:03:20 PM
So those converts... the Church's future you say... they gonna shack up with TFP and not look at a woman or man except to spit vitriol about the quality of their cupboard's china, or get married and have kids?

To have even a hope of a resolution to the current crisis, the Church needs Tradition and Tradition needs conversions.

The demographic solution won't work, isn't working, hasn't worked.

Conversions are the future of the Church and Tradition isn't making any. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on October 01, 2019, 05:18:02 PM
So those converts... the Church's future you say... they gonna shack up with TFP and not look at a woman or man except to spit vitriol about the quality of their cupboard's china, or get married and have kids?

To have even a hope of a resolution to the current crisis, the Church needs Tradition and Tradition needs conversions.

The demographic solution won't work, isn't working, hasn't worked.

Conversions are the future of the Church and Tradition isn't making any.


In my view, the Mass is where the Church's future can be found.  God is going to save His Church.  His members are not.  They are going to be saved by His Church through being members of His Church.  So each members’ duty should be to do everything in their power to protect and preserve the Mass in all its beauty, glory and reverential, awe-inspiring silence and sanctity. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: bigbadtrad on October 01, 2019, 07:10:58 PM
So those converts... the Church's future you say... they gonna shack up with TFP and not look at a woman or man except to spit vitriol about the quality of their cupboard's china, or get married and have kids?

To have even a hope of a resolution to the current crisis, the Church needs Tradition and Tradition needs conversions.

The demographic solution won't work, isn't working, hasn't worked.

Conversions are the future of the Church and Tradition isn't making any.


In my view, the Mass is where the Church's future can be found.  God is going to save His Church.  His members are not.  They are going to be saved by His Church through being members of His Church.  So each members’ duty should be to do everything in their power to protect and preserve the Mass in all its beauty, glory and reverential, awe-inspiring silence and sanctity.

Sanctity is where the future of the Church is. The Mass, sacraments, and everything traditional existed before Vatican II and yet the Church was a mess. Archbishop Lefebvre recognized even society would collapse with tradition but it would have been slower.

The Mass is the center of our sanctity, but don't look for it in the silence of the Mass, but in the holiness of a soul that receives Him in great charity.

St. Alphonsus teaches: "Were fathers or mothers to lead  a  life  of  piety  and  continual  prayer,  and  to  communicate  every  day,  they  should  be damned if they neglected the care of their children."

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: orate on October 01, 2019, 07:28:28 PM
God is going to save His Church.  His members are not.  They are going to be saved by His Church through being members of His Church.

This.  And it includes even the very youngest members.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: orate on October 01, 2019, 07:34:19 PM

The Mass is the center of our sanctity, but don't look for it in the silence of the Mass, but in the holiness of a soul that receives Him in great charity.



And this.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: dellery on October 01, 2019, 08:11:20 PM
This isn't addressed to anybody in particular.

Let's be honest here.

Nobody in this thread, that I'm aware of, has indicated the hope of seeing children marginalized, indicated that children are not valuable, or implied children dont need the Sacraments.

So please drop the courageous white knight coming to rescue the children schtick.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 01, 2019, 08:21:11 PM
Quote
Behold, then, the most proper method of assisting with fruit at holy Mass. Go to the church as if you were going to Calvary, and behave yourself before the altar as before the throne of God, in company with the holy Angels. See what modesty, what reverence, what attention, are requisite from us in order that we may carry away the fruit and the blessings which Almighty God is wont to bestow on him who honors with devout demeanor these sacred mysteries.

From 'The Hidden Treasure of the Mass', St Leonard of Port Muarice, Ch 2 on the Devout Method of Hearing Mass.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: bigbadtrad on October 02, 2019, 06:31:43 AM
Let's be honest here.

Nobody in this thread, that I'm aware of, has indicated the hope of seeing children marginalized, indicated that children are not valuable, or implied children dont need the Sacraments.

So please drop the courageous white knight coming to rescue the children schtick.

Ok let's be honest. Of course that's what is implied. They pay lip service to what you say, but in reality they are against it.

The complainers see everything affecting them, and their sanctity, and their holiness and everything must be eradicated.

Maybe you're not aware of these types of people but they exist. Usually women (rarely a man, but it does happen) over the age of 60, never had kids, and very belligerent to everyone.

The same people who complain about a few sounds from kids (not screaming banshees) are the same people who complain about everything in the church. They complain to the priests about all the little things that upsets them. They stare at a person coughing, so it's not just kids.

They rarely if ever give the benefit of the doubt to people, and are constantly upset at everything but themselves.

They would be more upset during a 1st Holy Communion if a child slipped and fell down and made a ton of sound than feel bad that they were embarrassed and they were about to receive Our Lord and have sympathy on the child, because such people have no empathy.

It's the same person who sees someone say "I'm so happy to hear such great stories about children" and respond by saying they are liberal and modern.

Yes, the implication is clear.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 02, 2019, 07:20:48 AM
Let's be honest here.

Nobody in this thread, that I'm aware of, has indicated the hope of seeing children marginalized, indicated that children are not valuable, or implied children dont need the Sacraments.

So please drop the courageous white knight coming to rescue the children schtick.

Ok let's be honest. Of course that's what is implied. They pay lip service to what you say, but in reality they are against it.

The complainers see everything affecting them, and their sanctity, and their holiness and everything must be eradicated.

Maybe you're not aware of these types of people but they exist. Usually women (rarely a man, but it does happen) over the age of 60, never had kids, and very belligerent to everyone.

The same people who complain about a few sounds from kids (not screaming banshees) are the same people who complain about everything in the church. They complain to the priests about all the little things that upsets them. They stare at a person coughing, so it's not just kids.

They rarely if ever give the benefit of the doubt to people, and are constantly upset at everything but themselves.

They would be more upset during a 1st Holy Communion if a child slipped and fell down and made a ton of sound than feel bad that they were embarrassed and they were about to receive Our Lord and have sympathy on the child, because such people have no empathy.

It's the same person who sees someone say "I'm so happy to hear such great stories about children" and respond by saying they are liberal and modern.

Yes, the implication is clear.

Yet another Social Justice Warrior type argument from bigbadtrad.

In other words - no argument at all, just derision and insult.  Not to mention attributing one's own faults to others.  For example, you said of people like me - "They rarely if ever give the benefit of the doubt to people, and are constantly upset at everything but themselves."

Meanwhile you, bigbadtrad, have rarely if ever given the benefit of the doubt to anyone on this thread who offers an argument counter to yours, and have been constantly upset at everything but yourself.

It's called projection.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: dellery on October 02, 2019, 07:25:19 AM

Ok let's be honest. Of course that's what is implied. They pay lip service to what you say, but in reality they are against it.

The complainers see everything affecting them, and their sanctity, and their holiness and everything must be eradicated.

Maybe you're not aware of these types of people but they exist. Usually women (rarely a man, but it does happen) over the age of 60, never had kids, and very belligerent to everyone.

The same people who complain about a few sounds from kids (not screaming banshees) are the same people who complain about everything in the church. They complain to the priests about all the little things that upsets them. They stare at a person coughing, so it's not just kids.

They rarely if ever give the benefit of the doubt to people, and are constantly upset at everything but themselves.

They would be more upset during a 1st Holy Communion if a child slipped and fell down and made a ton of sound than feel bad that they were embarrassed and they were about to receive Our Lord and have sympathy on the child, because such people have no empathy.

It's the same person who sees someone say "I'm so happy to hear such great stories about children" and respond by saying they are liberal and modern.

Yes, the implication is clear.

You have no way of possibly knowing any of the accusations you've included in this strawman.

Besides, from what I've gathered, people get more irritated at the parents than at their loud misbehaving children.

The fact of the matter is that many people are too weak and lazy to properly discipline their children. Then they bring their know-no-consequence children in public and imply that the onus is on everybody else to tolerate them. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 02, 2019, 08:04:59 AM
mistake
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: diaduit on October 02, 2019, 08:22:36 AM

Ok let's be honest. Of course that's what is implied. They pay lip service to what you say, but in reality they are against it.

The complainers see everything affecting them, and their sanctity, and their holiness and everything must be eradicated.

Maybe you're not aware of these types of people but they exist. Usually women (rarely a man, but it does happen) over the age of 60, never had kids, and very belligerent to everyone.

The same people who complain about a few sounds from kids (not screaming banshees) are the same people who complain about everything in the church. They complain to the priests about all the little things that upsets them. They stare at a person coughing, so it's not just kids.

They rarely if ever give the benefit of the doubt to people, and are constantly upset at everything but themselves.

They would be more upset during a 1st Holy Communion if a child slipped and fell down and made a ton of sound than feel bad that they were embarrassed and they were about to receive Our Lord and have sympathy on the child, because such people have no empathy.

It's the same person who sees someone say "I'm so happy to hear such great stories about children" and respond by saying they are liberal and modern.

Yes, the implication is clear.

You have no way of possibly knowing any of the accusations you've included in this strawman.

Besides, from what I've gathered, people get more irritated at the parents than at their loud misbehaving children.

The fact of the matter is that many people are too weak and lazy to properly discipline their children. Then they bring their know-no-consequence children in public and imply that the onus is on everybody else to tolerate them.

This is simply untrue in any of the Trad masses I have been to.  Includes, Australia, Holland and France and includes the 3 major centres in Ireland Dublin, Cork and my own in the midlands.

I cannot name one parent in my head that abandons their duty of discipline during mass.  Not one.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: lauermar on October 02, 2019, 08:50:53 AM
Today's reading comes from the Gospel MT 18:1-5, 10

The disciples approached Jesus and said,
"Who is the greatest in the Kingdom of heaven?"
He called a child over, placed it in their midst, and said,
"Amen, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children,
you will not enter the Kingdom of heaven.
Whoever humbles himself like this child
is the greatest in the Kingdom of heaven.
And whoever receives one child such as this in my name receives me.

"See that you do not despise one of these little ones,
for I say to you that their angels in heaven
always look upon the face of my heavenly Father."

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: bigbadtrad on October 02, 2019, 08:52:00 AM
You have no way of possibly knowing any of the accusations you've included in this strawman.


Of course I do. I've seen at least 40 trad chapels. I know over 100 trad priests. We all know the type. It's a joke because we speak about "that 1 crazy person" and it's usually the same type found in half to 33% of the chapels, and less frequently in diocesan indults but more frequently with societies of apostolic life.

If you think I'm wrong go ask your trad priest. He'll either lament or start laughing because they've all gone through it. They joke about this type of person because they make everyone miserable.

I did say "usually" but she can reply if she likes (she won't except to say SNOWFLAKE or SJW).

I mean anyone who finds fault with someone enjoying stories of children in Mass as a liberal IS that type of person.

BTW you said I had no way of knowing about this strawman but you finished your post with your own.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on October 02, 2019, 10:43:00 AM
So, Aeternitus, I did look up that book and started on a few sections.  I'll give you my honest opinion, but keep in mind that I do struggle alot with scrupulosity.  After reading even a few sections, I felt myself being pulled into despair, so I won't be finishing the book, even though I think St. Leonard is right in extolling the beauty and treasure in the Mass.  I just know, based on previous spiritual guidance from a priest, that some books are not good for my scrupulosity, and I can tell this will be one of them.  I also apologize in advance, because my thoughts are somewhat all over the place.  Hope you can hear with me through my thought process ;)

Anyway, my very first thought after reading about the great lengths that St. Francis de Sales went to attend not only Sunday Mass but daily Mass really struck me.  It told me that merely having young children or a long distance to drive (in my comfortable, air conditioned Yukon, no less  ::)), definitely does not excuse us from attending Mass.  On the contrary, I should be doing everything I possibly can to go to Mass, even if it means bringing all of my children along and making sure they know how to be still and quiet. 


It also sounds like the book was saying that if we don't take every possible pain to get to Mass - Sunday AND daily Mass - then, we clearly don't recognize the treasure in it or love our Lord very much.  Because if we did, we would never miss an opportunity, regardless of the obstacles.  I thought that was a little extreme, personally.  But, like I said, I tend to scrupulosity, so my lens of perception is kind of defective to start with.  Perhaps he was using exaggeration to prove his point, similar to how Our Lord said we should cut out our eyes and hands if they cause us to sin, rather than being literal.

On the flip side, if we do attend Mass, we should be completely and utterly silent, no matter what.   One quote said that a priest didn't even tolerate coughing or the sound of breathing. 

Given all that, I don't see how anyone should dare to attend Mass, as even adults are incapable of making zero sound, however slight.  It made me think of the times when there were no pews.  How was that allowed?  From what I understand, it was done that way so people could have freedom of movement and posture.  That wouldn't foster stillness or complete silence, as people make slight noises as the move from standing to kneeling to lying prostrate; or if the walk from one place to another.  Pews seem more conducive to being completely still, yet those are considered Protestant innovations. 

So, basically, I walked away feeling damned if I do, damned if I don't.  Bring them along, and I'm a child-centered feminist who is displeasing to God.  Stay home with them, because I have no feasible way of leaving them behind, and I don't love the Mass enough to overcome that obstacle.

Honestly, I still stand by what I've said earlier in the discussion.  I do not think bringing children (of any age) is the problem.  The problem is when parents exert no effort at teaching, correcting, and expecting proper behavior of their children.  And they goes for at Mass or anywhere.  It's not expected of the parents by society at large, so the motivation to do so is pretty low.  I think of priests would raise the bar and teach the laity about the importance of reverence and quiet at Mass, then more people would fall in line, including parents and children.  Of course, it wouldn't solve things completely.  We are dealing with fallen human nature, and sometimes you just have to sneeze. We can't let perfection be the enemy of good; and virtue lies in the balance between two extremes.  We're all a work in progress, so we need to be understanding and compassionate in that regard....that applies to all people.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on October 02, 2019, 10:47:07 AM
There alot of grammatical errors in my previous post; sorry for that.  I don't have time to edit it.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: mikemac on October 02, 2019, 12:17:46 PM
Let's be honest here.

Nobody in this thread, that I'm aware of, has indicated the hope of seeing children marginalized, indicated that children are not valuable, or implied children dont need the Sacraments.

So please drop the courageous white knight coming to rescue the children schtick.

Ok let's be honest. Of course that's what is implied. They pay lip service to what you say, but in reality they are against it.

The complainers see everything affecting them, and their sanctity, and their holiness and everything must be eradicated.

Maybe you're not aware of these types of people but they exist. Usually women (rarely a man, but it does happen) over the age of 60, never had kids, and very belligerent to everyone.

The same people who complain about a few sounds from kids (not screaming banshees) are the same people who complain about everything in the church. They complain to the priests about all the little things that upsets them. They stare at a person coughing, so it's not just kids.

They rarely if ever give the benefit of the doubt to people, and are constantly upset at everything but themselves.

They would be more upset during a 1st Holy Communion if a child slipped and fell down and made a ton of sound than feel bad that they were embarrassed and they were about to receive Our Lord and have sympathy on the child, because such people have no empathy.

It's the same person who sees someone say "I'm so happy to hear such great stories about children" and respond by saying they are liberal and modern.

Yes, the implication is clear.

And they are generally more disruptive in Mass with their attitude than a little whimper from a child.  If you are paying attention to the Mass you don't even hear a little whimper from a child.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: dellery on October 02, 2019, 01:02:50 PM
This thread, in a nutshell.

I could not find video of this exchange without a bunch of left-wing nonsense included in it
.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 02, 2019, 01:15:27 PM
You have no way of possibly knowing any of the accusations you've included in this strawman.


Of course I do. I've seen at least 40 trad chapels. I know over 100 trad priests. We all know the type. It's a joke because we speak about "that 1 crazy person" and it's usually the same type found in half to 33% of the chapels, and less frequently in diocesan indults but more frequently with societies of apostolic life.

If you think I'm wrong go ask your trad priest. He'll either lament or start laughing because they've all gone through it. They joke about this type of person because they make everyone miserable.

I did say "usually" but she can reply if she likes (she won't except to say SNOWFLAKE or SJW).

I mean anyone who finds fault with someone enjoying stories of children in Mass as a liberal IS that type of person.

BTW you said I had no way of knowing about this strawman but you finished your post with your own.

Two can play at this game.

I've seen quite a few Trad chapels too, and known a few Trad groups.  Haven't you heard the jokes about that one Trad family who lets their babies and toddlers disrupt every Mass and every event they attend?  They are know as the family with the appallingly behaved children .  And it's usually the same type found in half to 33% of the chapels etc etc

Then meet the priest who complained to me in private (always private) about how disturbing it was to have little Jimmy "express" himself, in other words scream, all through the Mass.  And the other priests who have expressed their dismay at the noise and disruption caused by babies and toddlers at Mass (again in private).

I've know this happen at more than one chapel, and coupled with what you have said BBT, suggests that there are groups of Trads who are very annoyed with one another, but never in public, except on threads like this.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on October 02, 2019, 04:55:27 PM
So, Aeternitus, I did look up that book and started on a few sections... 

Truly great post, Munda, and one that is worthy of a reply.  I just don't have the time at the moment, but will over the next few days.  I think I agree with all of what you say, with just a few qualifications.    But I just wanted to say that you have no cause for scrupulosity. You are doing your best and that has been completely obvious the whole thread.  I hope you and your children will say a prayer for me!   
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: diaduit on October 03, 2019, 05:32:15 AM


2towers, did you go to the latin mass yet?
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Lynne on October 03, 2019, 07:15:33 PM


2towers, did you go to the latin mass yet?

 ::)

I wouldn't blame him if he fled the forum...
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Gardener on October 04, 2019, 10:08:35 AM


2towers, did you go to the latin mass yet?

 ::)

I wouldn't blame him if he fled the forum...

I've long operated under the baseline premise that people suck. That way, I can judge things which don't involve sucky people on the merits of the objective reality (for example, I think most people in freestyle rap suck as people, but the art form of freestyle rap is a fascinating thing unto itself). That sucky people attend the TLM is not part and parcel to the TLM, which is, on its own, the farthest thing from sucky on planet earth.

As for forums, not that beautiful, I only stick around for those who have surprised me by not sucking; hoping, therefore, to learn how to suffer/bear each others' faults (Col 3:13; Imitation, ch 16). In order to not exclude or include (and thus exclude) anyone from said category of "doesn't suck", I'll shall leave it to the reader to judge themselves. As for me, I thank you all for putting up with such a sucky person as myself.

Quote
Until God ordains otherwise, a man ought to bear patiently whatever he cannot correct in himself and in others. Consider it better thus– perhaps to try your patience and to test you, for without such patience and trial your merits are of little account. Nevertheless, under such difficulties you should pray that God will consent to help you bear them calmly.

If, after being admonished once or twice, a person does not amend, do not argue with him but commit the whole matter to God that His will and honor may be furthered in all His servants, for God knows well how to turn evil to good. Try to bear patiently with the defects and infirmities of others, whatever they may be, because you also have many a fault which others must endure.

If you cannot make yourself what you would wish to be, how can you bend others to your will? We want them to be perfect, yet we do not correct our own faults. We wish them to be severely corrected, yet we will not correct ourselves. Their great liberty displeases us, yet we would not be denied what we ask. We would have them bound by laws, yet we will allow ourselves to be restrained in nothing. Hence, it is clear how seldom we think of others as we do of ourselves.

If all were perfect, what should we have to suffer from others for God's sake? But God has so ordained, that we may learn to bear with one another's burdens, for there is no man without fault, no man without burden, no man sufficient to himself nor wise enough. Hence we must support one another, console one another, mutually help, counsel, and advise, for the measure of every man's virtue is best revealed in time of adversity– adversity that does not weaken a man but rather shows what he is.
http://catholicarchive.org/thomas_a_kempis/the_imitation_of_christ/1/16.html

Sadly, bloggers and talkers about unity and charity and civility (ya know, everything the Mass should inculcate but doesn't due to hardness of heart), supposedly daily readers of the above, don't seem to bear the cobbles of conversation a hundred yards, let alone a mile or two. Such folks don't don't-suck enough to realize that sharp stones of a person's path can only be worn down through patience and having trod it with them.

And alas, patience is the problem. One must wonder how loud the cacophony of their shrieking conscience must be to be so bothered by the whimpering of a child.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 04, 2019, 11:50:25 AM
And alas, patience is the problem. One must wonder how loud the cacophony of their shrieking conscience must be to be so bothered by the whimpering of a child.

Does bearing patiently with the faults of other include misrepresenting what they say?  What you wrote here and in the rest of your "people suck" post above demonstrates to me that you are in an over-emotional and highly reactive state and cannot think rationally about this topic.

If you and other posters here could think rationally, and had a rational argument to present, you would not stoop to misrepresentation, insult and personal attack, over and over again.  But that's all you've got it seems.

You can post passages from Thomas A Kempis as much as you like.  Since they apply to you too, you would do well to study them.  But I don't remember Thomas A Kempis advocating the kind of rage you keep spitting out here.

Do you ever attend Mass alone?
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 04, 2019, 11:52:39 AM
How often does the typical Trad parent attend Mass alone?

i) sometimes

ii) rarely

iii) never

I'm guessing never.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: bigbadtrad on October 04, 2019, 12:23:51 PM
To summarize we have a doctor of the Church, Church tradition, and the continued practice of the East as a living example of the tradition. We have pictures, stories from our grandparents and elders to prove children at Mass was normal. We also have priests who say "if the church isn't crying it's dying."

On the other side of the argument we have an innovation, a regional custom and a quote from a priest (and other priests to be fair as I've heard 2 trad priests talk about it in sermons) who admit children attend as  they "ought not to" which means they were present. Ought is not a command, it's a recommendation.

A recommendation vs tradition, recommendation, and a doctor. Those are facts.

As they say in tennis: game, set, match Tradition and doctor of the Church

Just wanted to make sure the scorecard is kept tidy so arguments don't try to confuse the facts.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 04, 2019, 02:37:08 PM
How long does the typical Trad parent at Mass spend attending to babies and toddlers and not the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar?

i) Most of the Mass

ii)  Half the Mass

iii)  About 10 minutes or less.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: orate on October 04, 2019, 09:49:49 PM
 :deadhorse:

I think it's time to just bury this dead horse.  If we all agreed to just stop further comment, maybe it could rest in peace.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: dellery on October 04, 2019, 11:56:44 PM
To summarize we have a doctor of the Church, Church tradition, and the continued practice of the East as a living example of the tradition. We have pictures, stories from our grandparents and elders to prove children at Mass was normal. We also have priests who say "if the church isn't crying it's dying."

On the other side of the argument we have an innovation, a regional custom and a quote from a priest (and other priests to be fair as I've heard 2 trad priests talk about it in sermons) who admit children attend as  they "ought not to" which means they were present. Ought is not a command, it's a recommendation.

A recommendation vs tradition, recommendation, and a doctor. Those are facts.

As they say in tennis: game, set, match Tradition and doctor of the Church

Just wanted to make sure the scorecard is kept tidy so arguments don't try to confuse the facts.

All that and your side still had to misrepresent the other side's argument?

Remember what started this? I'll refresh you.
Awkwardcustomer was criticizing
Quote
constantly crying babies and toddlers having tantrums.
during mass.

Your "side" didn't win anything. You couldn't even argue honestly. Just a bunch of white knighting and tilting at strawmen. Where was "the whimpering of a child" ever criticized?

Not only did your side totally misrepresent the other's argument, you did so in the most embarrassingly pathetic way.

"Come along little St. Francis, we can larp more after the chores are done."

"But mother, what about the whimpering children?"


How cringy.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 05, 2019, 07:45:43 AM
To summarize we have a doctor of the Church, Church tradition, and the continued practice of the East as a living example of the tradition. We have pictures, stories from our grandparents and elders to prove children at Mass was normal. We also have priests who say "if the church isn't crying it's dying."

On the other side of the argument we have an innovation, a regional custom and a quote from a priest (and other priests to be fair as I've heard 2 trad priests talk about it in sermons) who admit children attend as  they "ought not to" which means they were present. Ought is not a command, it's a recommendation.

A recommendation vs tradition, recommendation, and a doctor. Those are facts.

As they say in tennis: game, set, match Tradition and doctor of the Church

Just wanted to make sure the scorecard is kept tidy so arguments don't try to confuse the facts.

All that and your side still had to misrepresent the other side's argument?

Remember what started this? I'll refresh you.
Awkwardcustomer was criticizing
Quote
constantly crying babies and toddlers having tantrums.
during mass.

Your "side" didn't win anything. You couldn't even argue honestly. Just a bunch of white knighting and tilting at strawmen. Where was "the whimpering of a child" ever criticized?

Not only did your side totally misrepresent the other's argument, you did so in the most embarrassingly pathetic way.

"Come along little St. Francis, we can larp more after the chores are done."

"But mother, what about the whimpering children?"


How cringy.

The question is - what's driving the behaviour?
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: dellery on October 05, 2019, 08:00:30 AM
It probably wouldn't be possible, or even charitable, to accurately speculate on that.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: lauermar on October 05, 2019, 08:13:05 AM
This thread, in a nutshell.

I could not find video of this exchange without a bunch of left-wing nonsense included in it
.

I'd like to tie up Thunberg in a chair and make her watch an endless loop of Woody Allen's "The Universe Is Expanding " segment from Annie Hall until she can repeat it verbatim. If that doesn't work, then Lyndon LaRouche's people can try to indoctrinate her into eating babies.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 05, 2019, 08:34:51 AM
It probably wouldn't be possible, or even charitable, to accurately speculate on that.

On the other hand, there is clearly a deep disturbance that is being manifested in their SJW tactics.

And it could be something as simple and fundamental as being repeatedly disturbed and distracted at Mass and, as a result, never knowing the peace and recollection that comes from being fully absorbed in the Holy Sacrifice.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 05, 2019, 08:57:48 AM
This thread, in a nutshell.

I could not find video of this exchange without a bunch of left-wing nonsense included in it
.

I'd like to tie up Thunberg in a chair and make her watch an endless loop of Woody Allen's "The Universe Is Expanding " segment from Annie Hall until she can repeat it verbatim. If that doesn't work, then Lyndon LaRouche's people can try to indoctrinate her into eating babies.


Totalitarians of all varieties love using children and youth as cover.

Therefore you mustn't have a healthy, adult reaction to an insufferable brat.  Instead you must pray for patience, practice acceptance, let go of your preference for common sense and learn to recognise your place in the new social order in which children fronting for despots rule.  What's more, you're probably a bitter, twisted bigot into the bargain.

Greta is the future.  Suffer the little children etc etc.

God has given us youths to rule over us.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: mikemac on October 05, 2019, 10:51:17 AM
We need a cry room in this forum.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on October 05, 2019, 11:39:44 AM
So, Aeternitus, I did look up that book and started on a few sections.  I'll give you my honest opinion, but keep in mind that I do struggle alot with scrupulosity.  After reading even a few sections, I felt myself being pulled into despair, so I won't be finishing the book, even though I think St. Leonard is right in extolling the beauty and treasure in the Mass.  I just know, based on previous spiritual guidance from a priest, that some books are not good for my scrupulosity, and I can tell this will be one of them.  I also apologize in advance, because my thoughts are somewhat all over the place.  Hope you can hear with me through my thought process ;)

Munda, I know there has been a suggestion to cease contributing to this thread, but I owe you a response to your last post to me.   I admire you for having an open mind on such an emotionally contentious topic, close to your heart, and being willing enough to dip into the book.  I hoped St Leonard would be able to explain to you what I have been unable to convey, concerning the reverential silence that is required in Mass - and why.  I just wanted you to have a look at the “other side” presented by a Saint, no less. I certainly think he has touched a chord with you.  I would never suggest anything against your priest’s advice and you are quite right to follow his instruction.

Quote
Anyway, my very first thought after reading about the great lengths that St. Francis de Sales went to attend not only Sunday Mass but daily Mass really struck me.  It told me that merely having young children or a long distance to drive (in my comfortable, air conditioned Yukon, no less  ::)), definitely does not excuse us from attending Mass.  On the contrary, I should be doing everything I possibly can to go to Mass, even if it means bringing all of my children along and making sure they know how to be still and quiet. 
It also sounds like the book was saying that if we don't take every possible pain to get to Mass - Sunday AND daily Mass - then, we clearly don't recognize the treasure in it or love our Lord very much.


St Francis de Sales did not have any children, so his duties were not compromised in any way in attending Mass every day.  We can’t compare like with unlike.  If you aimed to attend Mass with your children every day, to the detriment of your duties of state, you would not be doing God’s will, but your own.  Bigbadtrad made this point, quite clearly, in his quote from St Alphonsus.  Not only that, you would be putting immense and unnecessary pressure on yourself, because you would have to oversee all your children on your own (if your husband is at work), and you would constantly be occupied with child-minding. Continual, daily stress means burn-out and illness.  Who looks after your brood if you are unwell?  The babies and toddlers are not missing out on anything by not attending daily Mass (or Sunday Mass) and your older children will only benefit, ultimately, if their mother’s health, strength and practices are in accord with providing them with care in all aspects of their lives. That is not to say I am opposed to daily Mass for mothers of older children.  It is a judgement call based on individual circumstances.   

Quote
Because if we did, we would never miss an opportunity, regardless of the obstacles.  I thought that was a little extreme, personally.  But, like I said, I tend to scrupulosity, so my lens of perception is kind of defective to start with.  Perhaps he was using exaggeration to prove his point, similar to how Our Lord said we should cut out our eyes and hands if they cause us to sin, rather than being literal.

Yes, I believe you are right.  The saints often used the same method as Our Lord, as in your example, to highlight a point.    Balanced judgement needs to be applied.  Obstacles which can be overcome, should be.  Obstacles that can’t be overcome, or compromise a higher duty, such as one’s duties of state, are nothing less than a clear indication of God’s will in the matter.  People should consult a knowledgeable and trusted spiritual guide over such issues and particularly those who tend to scruples.  Did you know there are numerous legitimate excuses for not attending Sunday Mass, apart from having to travel a long distance? Such as: when it hinders one’s duty of state; when one would suffer injury to their good name or possessions; if one has reason to think if they stay at home they will hinder sin.  And even if one lacks clothing befitting their social standing!  There are more.  So many legitimate reasons that apply to our ever changing, variable life events, because the Church is a loving, considerate Mother who chooses not to place unreasonable burdens upon Her children.  No, I am not advocating one apply these exceptions to themselves, without consultation!     

Quote
On the flip side, if we do attend Mass, we should be completely and utterly silent, no matter what.   One quote said that a priest didn't even tolerate coughing or the sound of breathing. 

Again, this is only used to illustrate the point about the level of reverential quiet that is requisite at Mass, which is evident from the context in which St Leonard wrote.   Everyone must breathe or else there would be no attendance at Mass at all, ever!!  Some people must cough, but if one is continually coughing due to illness, perhaps one shouldn’t be there at all.  They should be at home.  Or, at the very least, remove themselves to a place where the cough is not audible to the rest of the parish and reduce the possibility of passing on their illness to their neighbour.  But let’s say the cough is just a habit of clearing one’s throat, or that loud sigh is just an unnecessary attempt at a display of piety, etc., etc., etc.  I sneeze loudly.  Don’t know why.  I just do and always have.  But when at Mass, if I feel a sneeze coming on (generally caused by the eye-watering perfume of a lady sitting close by  :D), I strive to stifle it in my handkerchief.
 
Quote
Given all that, I don't see how anyone should dare to attend Mass, as even adults are incapable of making zero sound, however slight.  It made me think of the times when there were no pews.  How was that allowed?  From what I understand, it was done that way so people could have freedom of movement and posture.  That wouldn't foster stillness or complete silence, as people make slight noises as the move from standing to kneeling to lying prostrate; or if the walk from one place to another.  Pews seem more conducive to being completely still, yet those are considered Protestant innovations. 

I am not familiar enough with the early Church to know what the floor was made of or what their wore on their feet, but I’d bet a million there were no clicking high heels to be heard!  Perhaps they were barefoot?  Pews are constricting. People are quite crowded next to one another.  If one in the window seat of the pew needs to get out for whatever reason, it’s a mass exodus!  Not that I think anyone should move from the pew in Mass, but, let’s face it, they do and sometimes it is necessary – if one is feeling faint, for instance, due to the incense or lack of air in the church (another reason one is excused from Mass attendance), etc.   My feet don’t fit on the floor beside the kneeler when vacating the pew. One does, but the other has to walk along the kneeler to get out.  There is much noise when one walks on a movable plank of wood.    There is even noise going from standing or sitting to kneeling on a pew.  When 6 pairs of knees descend together, but at varying speeds, and consequently slightly varying times, there is noise.  I don’t have any difficulty believing that pew-less churches meant less noise.  There were also outer chambers where one stood, seating to the side, but probably not in a cramped row.  The women and children, as we know, “stood apart”.  My church is made up of wooden floors and carpeted areas.  I have always walked on tip-toe when on the wooden floor, as I am very conscious of the resounding noise I make otherwise.  I do walk heavily and quickly and it sounds like an invasion.       

Quote
So, basically, I walked away feeling damned if I do, damned if I don't.  Bring them along, and I'm a child-centered feminist who is displeasing to God.


I don’t think bringing them along because you have no other option makes you a child-centred feminist, at all.  And neither do I believe Awkward ever presented such a case.   Those that have options, but elect to ignore them, because of the totally misapplied and inappropriate use of Our Lord’s words: “suffer the little children to come unto Me”, might fall into that category, but you have not adopted that non-argument, to my knowledge.   Only last Sunday, you gave us an example of utilising your mother when this was available to you.  You do not dismiss options, as if they are unnecessary impositions placed upon over-burdened parents, by bitter, child-hating, uncharitable curmudgeons who need a crash course in patience and a hat passed around after Mass to buy them all ear-plugs.     

Quote
Stay home with them, because I have no feasible way of leaving them behind, and I don't love the Mass enough to overcome that obstacle.

People show their love of the Mass when they strive to understand it and attend it (appropriate to their duties of state) with requisite reverential silence, devotion and attention.  They also show their love of the Mass, by staying home when duty dictates and keeping the Sunday holy (reading the Mass prayers, etc).   

Quote
Honestly, I still stand by what I've said earlier in the discussion.  I do not think bringing children (of any age) is the problem.  The problem is when parents exert no effort at teaching, correcting, and expecting proper behavior of their children.  And they goes for at Mass or anywhere.  It's not expected of the parents by society at large, so the motivation to do so is pretty low.


And this is where I do part with you.  Certainly the problem is increased a thousandfold when parents do not rear their children correctly.  I don’t think anyone on this thread would fall into that category, though of course, I don’t really know. 

But I also believe it is an unreasonable to expect a young baby or toddler to remain quiet for the duration of Mass, yet we know that quiet during Mass is an expectation of the saints.  I do not think one should place unreasonable expectations on young babes and toddlers.  Nor do I think one should place unreasonable expectations on their parents to keep them totally still and quiet. When they have been trained to sit still and quiet for an hour, or more in the event of a sung Mass (training which can occur at home during family prayers and the rosary) then that expectation should be met by the child or there should be consequences imposed upon them to ensure there will not be a next time. If there are continual “next times” something is wrong – with the parents.   It goes without saying that if that child is unwell then they should be at home with their mother.    So, if there are options to keep the young at home with someone else, then that option is the most appropriate, for both the young one and the parent.   Just as it was with St Theresa, (and it didn’t prevent her from becoming a saint, or compromise the holiness of her parents) and even those on this thread who have stated they were kept at home also, until 4 years old, together with the recent examples I provided of others in the US, after a brief search.   

But, the fact remains, we are in an unprecedented crisis.  Things change as a result.  I have always acknowledged as much.  If people do not have options, as is the case with you most of the time, and others on this thread all the time, then you can only do your best.  You do have a Sunday obligation.  You do need to bring your baby along if only one Mass is available.  The even tougher job of keeping them quiet or going outside is then imposed upon you and all the more so if you have a true and necessary appreciation of the silence and attention the Mass demands.  It detracts from your own attention and devotion at the Mass, which is not, in any way, your fault and consequently, you will be pleasing to God, if you are diligent. Those who do have options, however, but choose not to use them, well, different story entirely.   I actually liked Coffeeandcigs idea of single people assisting.  But this wouldn’t work with only one Mass available. If there were two, and single women took turns to attend one Mass and mind the young children for the second Mass, well, that sounds like a positive solution, providing the babysitters were known to the parents and extremely competent and trustworthy.

Quote
I think of priests would raise the bar and teach the laity about the importance of reverence and quiet at Mass, then more people would fall in line, including parents and children
.

Agree 100%. I hold the priests responsible.  Priests are falling down on their job and I believe they are accountable. Young parents and many young priests today have grown up in this crisis.  They know nothing else.  They do not know what it was like in days of Lauermar, on this thread, who was kept at home until he was 4 years old.  Yes, infants did receive the sacraments in the early church, but that is not evidence they attended Mass.  They could have been brought in from an outer room, purely for this purpose, just as catechumens and penitents only attended part of the Mass.   So, how can these young parents/priests be blamed for what that don’t know and were never taught? BBT told us himself that he had to rebuke his own father for allowing his nephew to speak during Mass.  I have been blessed with many good priests who have insisted on pin-drop quiet.  Always the older priests.  More recently, I have noticed a trend away from that, probably due to an influx of younger priests.   My experiences do not compare in any way with Awkward’s and Max’s, which are, quite frankly, shocking.  I do not have an intolerance to noise or children, nor do I believe Awkward displayed any intolerance to children and any accusation against her on that score is pure and simple rash judgement. In fact, I have the ability to turn off completely whilst at home and work, which can be rather embarrassing when I have failed to respond to those who have spoken to me, when I am engrossed in something else. I also have an affinity with children and enjoy their company, sometimes more than adults.  My interest in this topic has always been concerned with undermining the dignity and sanctity of the Mass.

Quote
Of course, it wouldn't solve things completely.  We are dealing with fallen human nature, and sometimes you just have to sneeze.

Agreed.  One can usually feel a sneeze coming on and take steps to muffle it. People can avoid having to leave the Mass to go to the bathroom either themselves, or with their children, by making sure they have attended to this prior to Mass.  A medical condition may make this impossible, in which case one positions oneself to cause the least disturbance.   People can sometimes avoid bring babies and toddlers to Mass, by making other satisfactory arrangements.  But some choose not to.  Why?  They have not found the hidden treasure in the Mass that St Leonard describes so beautifully.  They do not realise that by not having the burden of overseeing and caring for the young ones, if possible, would mean they could assist at Mass with more attention and devotion and consequently reap the benefits for themselves and their families.  Yes, their highest duty is to care for their children and they will be judged according to how well they fulfilled this duty.  No one has ever suggested or expected otherwise.  When they are convinced it is ideal, but have no options available to them, well, they do their best.  But that best can only be attained if they instruct themselves in and never lose sight of the reverential silence that the dignity of the Mass requires, as made clear to us by the saints.  As Max said: “necessity is the mother of invention”, or to put it another way, where there is a will there is a way.

This 20 page thread has been conducted with eye-blinking robustness for much of it and the misapplication of principles and motives,  which I agree could easily be responsible for the initial poster fleeing in fear.  I enjoy and applaud robust debate when it is fair and directed at positions and not persons.  I deplore it when used in misrepresenting and attacking persons not positions.
     
Quote
We can't let perfection be the enemy of good; and virtue lies in the balance between two extremes.  We're all a work in progress, so we need to be understanding and compassionate in that regard....that applies to all people.

Perfection could never be the enemy of good.  God is perfect and he instructs us to be like him: “Be ye perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect”.  Perfection is not an extreme to be avoided, but a goal to be attained.  A false understanding of perfection is the enemy of good. 

Understanding and compassion are compulsory for all. We are living in the worst crisis the Church has ever endured.  We are all members of the Mystical Body of Christ, which is at present undergoing its Passion.  It is an indescribable, mind-blowing stupendous honour. To be chosen by God to be a Member of His Church now is akin to being chosen to be one of His friends and true followers during his Passion on earth.  And the extraordinary graces we need to suffer this crisis, fulfil our duties and persevere in doing so, until He resolves it (or our life’s end, whichever comes first) will be given to us in proportion to the attention and devotion with which we assist at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass - the ultimate source of all grace.

Thank you, once again, Munda, for dipping into St Leonard to the extent you could, which, judging from your post, has given you more understanding and compassion for the “other side” of this debate.  I hope it is clear that I have the same understanding and compassion for yours.   

Gosh, this is a long post!  Will never happen again!!



Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: 2Towers on October 05, 2019, 10:59:13 PM


2towers, did you go to the latin mass yet?

I am working towards that direction.  Today I went to a church that has a more conservative reputation than mine.  The pastor  said in an email to me that he promised the parish to keep to Church doctrine as closely as possible when he first came there.  It was nice, no holding hands at mass, that was nice.  They said the St. Michael prayer at the end of mass, that was a bonus.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: TheReturnofLive on October 05, 2019, 11:10:27 PM
Just wanted to be the one who hits the 290 mark for this thread.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: diaduit on October 06, 2019, 02:38:27 AM
Just wanted to be the one who hits the 290 mark for this thread.

Will we go for the big '300'

2towers, baby steps eh.....oooops did I mention 'baby'.  Sorry  :)
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Gardener on October 06, 2019, 09:30:16 AM


2towers, did you go to the latin mass yet?

I am working towards that direction.  Today I went to a church that has a more conservative reputation than mine.  The pastor  said in an email to me that he promised the parish to keep to Church doctrine as closely as possible when he first came there.  It was nice, no holding hands at mass, that was nice.  They said the St. Michael prayer at the end of mass, that was a bonus.

That's a step in the right direction, but what exactly does the bolded mean?

It's doctrine. How does one keep to it closely as possible? Why not just keep to it?

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 06, 2019, 11:58:16 AM
Sorry  :)

Why pretend?
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on October 06, 2019, 01:33:35 PM
It probably wouldn't be possible, or even charitable, to accurately speculate on that.

On the other hand, there is clearly a deep disturbance that is being manifested in their SJW tactics.

And it could be something as simple and fundamental as being repeatedly disturbed and distracted at Mass and, as a result, never knowing the peace and recollection that comes from being fully absorbed in the Holy Sacrifice.

Considering that you hear ever whimper, I doubt you know much about the peace and recollection that comes from being "fully absorbed" in the mass. Let me quote from a book by a priest on the revolution in Mexico:

     I was kneeling alone in the back of one of the local church...a little Indian, about 40 years old came in...he knelt down, kissed the floor, and knelt with arms outstretched for a long time. Something made me want to see his face. I will never forget the look in his eyes, they were looking straight ahead, they did not see me at all. His eyes were aflame, in the very ecstasy of devotion."

I suggest that you try harder to be fully absorbed in the mass, and allow others to attempt the same, free from judgement, false accusations, and assumptions of a desire to ignore/undervalue God and the Mass.
         "
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Reader on October 06, 2019, 03:10:38 PM
It probably wouldn't be possible, or even charitable, to accurately speculate on that.

On the other hand, there is clearly a deep disturbance that is being manifested in their SJW tactics.

And it could be something as simple and fundamental as being repeatedly disturbed and distracted at Mass and, as a result, never knowing the peace and recollection that comes from being fully absorbed in the Holy Sacrifice.

Considering that you hear ever whimper, I doubt you know much about the peace and recollection that comes from being "fully absorbed" in the mass. Let me quote from a book by a priest on the revolution in Mexico:

     I was kneeling alone in the back of one of the local church...a little Indian, about 40 years old came in...he knelt down, kissed the floor, and knelt with arms outstretched for a long time. Something made me want to see his face. I will never forget the look in his eyes, they were looking straight ahead, they did not see me at all. His eyes were aflame, in the very ecstasy of devotion."

I suggest that you try harder to be fully absorbed in the mass, and allow others to attempt the same, free from judgement, false accusations, and assumptions of a desire to ignore/undervalue God and the Mass.
         "

I was thinking that very thing this weekend as the children in attendance fussed at Mass. I didn't let it distract me; it wasn't that hard.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 06, 2019, 03:32:55 PM
It probably wouldn't be possible, or even charitable, to accurately speculate on that.

On the other hand, there is clearly a deep disturbance that is being manifested in their SJW tactics.

And it could be something as simple and fundamental as being repeatedly disturbed and distracted at Mass and, as a result, never knowing the peace and recollection that comes from being fully absorbed in the Holy Sacrifice.

Considering that you hear ever whimper, I doubt you know much about the peace and recollection that comes from being "fully absorbed" in the mass. 

You people just can't help yourselves.  You will never stop the misrepresentations and insults, will you?

Quote
Let me quote from a book by a priest on the revolution in Mexico:

     I was kneeling alone in the back of one of the local church...a little Indian, about 40 years old came in...he knelt down, kissed the floor, and knelt with arms outstretched for a long time. Something made me want to see his face. I will never forget the look in his eyes, they were looking straight ahead, they did not see me at all. His eyes were aflame, in the very ecstasy of devotion."

I could just as easily suggest this quote to you.

Quote
I suggest that you try harder to be fully absorbed in the mass, and allow others to attempt the same, free from judgement, false accusations, and assumptions of a desire to ignore/undervalue God and the Mass.

No, not a desire - I never said that.  Instead I'm suggesting that the insistence on babies and toddlers being present at Mass is the result of a lack of thought and reflection on the part of priests and parents alike, but particularly priests.  How can parents concentrate on the Mass if their attention is divided?

Parents who take babies and toddlers to Mass will have to spend a significant portion of their time baby/toddler minding.  This automatically means they spend less time attending to the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar. There's no way round it.

Since babies and toddlers are not required to be at Mass, but people insist on taking them, it follows that those individuals choose to attend Mass knowing that their attention will be divided.  I believe that a lack of thought and the misguided belief that the practice is beneficial are the problem.

So here's a suggestion for you - attend Mass with undivided attention for once, and you might begin to understand what you're missing.

Or keep attending Mass with your attention divided.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 06, 2019, 03:50:00 PM
Does divided attention at Mass receive divided attention in Heaven?

You know the answer.  So why do you insist on doing it?

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on October 06, 2019, 05:27:20 PM
Does divided attention at Mass receive divided attention in Heaven?

You know the answer.  So why do you insist on doing it?

See!!! INSIST??????   This is what we are talking about. No one has misrepresented you in the least. You are accusing all the parents with children of "insisting" on bringing children to mass. You are not sympathetically acknowledging that most have absolutely no way of leaving them with anyone, anywhere, or that the only have one mass and cannot "tag-team" the mass as suggested by others. You are painting a picture where we rip babies and toddlers out of the arms of the eager grandparents or nannies, who are begging to watch them, drive them to mass, march in, and smile as they disrupt, run wild, and sprinkle cheerios in the pew, all while saying "look at the little darlings, aren't they so cute when the express themselves." You are saying "Greta is the future..." as if we are bunch of hippies who don't care about discipline, and enjoy children who run wild. Most parents I know are very firm disciplinarians and keep their children in line. I'm afraid with this all-too-honest revelation of your feelings, who have lost any chance to pretend that you understand what parents are facing period. You may not be an old curmudgeon, but you are certainly ignorant of this entire situation; and have enjoyed your single life with all it's freedoms, silent moments, and intact china cats too long to turn a kind eye on parents or children. Sad...     Reality check in isle five...reality check in isle five please.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: dellery on October 06, 2019, 06:19:54 PM
At age 17 I was a single father, and never once was it difficult to keep my child from disrupting people at mass.
In fact, being so rude as to ever allow it to happen, would've been, and still is now, inconceivable. A little charitable consideration for the people next to you goes a long way.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on October 06, 2019, 07:08:14 PM
At age 17 I was a single father, and never once was it difficult to keep my child from disrupting people at mass.
In fact, being so rude as to ever allow it to happen, would've been, and still is now, inconceivable. A little charitable consideration for the people next to you goes a long way.

That's not what the discussion is about, though.  It's about whether young children should be there AT ALL, even if they are quiet, and despite the fact that in today's circumstances many parents have only 2 options: bring children to Mass; or, Mom has to miss Mass every Sunday until she is done having babies - which could be for quite a long time, if one is open to life and babies come every 2 years.
 Several of us have already mentioned that it's possible to keep even younger children quiet.  My husband and I manage it, and I've seen many other parents do so, as well, on a regular basis.  Several of us have also said that if a small child does start to make noise, then we step outside with the child.  I don't see the issue with that, assuming there is no option to leave the child behind. 

I even acknowledged in the original thread on this topic that it was wrong to allow my child's noise making to take precedence over everyone else's right to pray at Mass silently.  I agree that noisy children are a problem at Mass.  But, if children are quiet, I don't see why it's a problem for them to be there.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: dellery on October 06, 2019, 07:25:53 PM
At age 17 I was a single father, and never once was it difficult to keep my child from disrupting people at mass.
In fact, being so rude as to ever allow it to happen, would've been, and still is now, inconceivable. A little charitable consideration for the people next to you goes a long way.

That's not what the discussion is about, though.  It's about whether young children should be there AT ALL, even if they are quiet, and despite the fact that in today's circumstances many parents have only 2 options: bring children to Mass; or, Mom has to miss Mass every Sunday until she is done having babies - which could be for quite a long time, if one is open to life and babies come every 2 years.
 Several of us have already mentioned that it's possible to keep even younger children quiet.  My husband and I manage it, and I've seen many other parents do so, as well, on a regular basis.  Several of us have also said that if a small child does start to make noise, then we step outside with the child.  I don't see the issue with that, assuming there is no option to leave the child behind. 

I even acknowledged in the original thread on this topic that it was wrong to allow my child's noise making to take precedence over everyone else's right to pray at Mass silently.  I agree that noisy children are a problem at Mass.  But, if children are quiet, I don't see why it's a problem for them to be there.
You're right, I fully agree with you. When I was a young father going to mass alone wasn't an option. I wouldn't have wanted to go alone anyway.

Awkwardcustomer takes an extreme position that I dont entirely agree with, but can completely sympathize with. She wants to adore God in His house, undisturbed, in respectful silence. She wants to do what we all should already be doing. If more people had the same consideration you do she would probably feel differently.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on October 06, 2019, 07:44:56 PM
Quote
Idon’t think bringing them along because you have no other option makes you a child-centred feminist, at all.  And neither do I believe Awkward ever presented such a case.

Actually, that is exactly what she said, word for word.  Please see post #209.  That's where I got the idea from.

Quote
Perfection could never be the enemy of good.  God is perfect and he instructs us to be like him: “Be ye perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect”.  Perfection is not an extreme to be avoided, but a goal to be attained.  A false understanding of perfection is the enemy of good.

Yes, of course, you are correct.  When I said to not let perfection be the enemy of good, I meant it in the sense that very rarely do people obtain perfection all at once, or even in this life at all.  It is some that we are constantly striving for in this life, and cannot obtain on our own.  Only God can work perfection in us, with our cooperation.  I just meant we need to be careful not to have an "all or nothing" attitude towards our spiritual life.  If we waited until we were perfect or "worthy" to attend Mass, none of us should ever attend.  St. Francis de Sales says that we must be patient with both our own imperfections and those of others.  He even says that "to attain perfection, we must be patient with our own imperfections....suffer it with patience ... humility is fortified in suffering.... God, who is infinitely good, is content with our little works, and the preparation of our heart is agreeable to Him.".  So, yes, we should absolutely strive for perfection, but not be so consumed with the idea of being perfect that we give up on the work of attaining it.  We apply this to ourselves, and to those around us.  So, while we should definitely not be neglectful of our growth in holiness, we should expect the weeds of imperfection to show up.  Sometimes, it's through our own weakness and fallen human nature; others it's just Divine Providence that the ideal cannot be met, and we have to accept that for what it is and do the most with what we have.  I simply cannot, in good conscience, allow myself to miss Mass for an indeterminate amount of time, merely because I have small children. For one, I need the graces of the sacraments to be able to fulfill my duties well.  I can't do that on my own.  For another, yes, I admit to selfishishly wanting that time in Mass to be with Our Lord in peace for an hour a week.  Our kids are quiet enough for this to happen, so I'm afraid we have to agree to disagree here.  I absolutely understand the beauty and treasure of the Mass...well, as much as my fallen nature can.  And I also understand the importance of having reverance and quiet at Mass.  Even before I read portions St. Leonard's book I understood that.  I have compassion for both sides. I think alot of people, in general, could and should work harder at increasing their reverance at Mass (myself included).  But, I also think that God is not as displeased with slight, unintentional noises from the congregation as we might think He is.  If we are intentionally lazy or negligent, of course that is different.  But, the occasional sneeze, cough, clearing of the throat, shuffling of feet, slight baby/toddler/child sounds, etc ...things that are just part and parcel of human life (like the previous quote about comparing the quiet of Mass to nature), I do not think stirs up His wrath.  If we do our best to be as quiet and still as possible, so that we can love and adore Him as much as our feeble human hearts can muster then I think He is pleased with our efforts, even if we are not as perfect as we would like to be; even if we have small children in arms; even if we have to sometimes divert our attention to said smalt child. 

In Mass today, there was far more clearing of throats and the occasional coughs than noise from small children.  I am not offended by those adults at all, and I don't think Our Lord is, either.  It didn't even really bother me or distract me from praying, even though I did notice it.  I think He is pleased with their effort to give Him due worship as best as they can.  It wasn't 100% silence and complete lack of noise, though.   I think to expect that level of silence will only set one up for disappointment. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: dellery on October 06, 2019, 08:02:53 PM
Quote
Idon’t think bringing them along because you have no other option makes you a child-centred feminist, at all.  And neither do I believe Awkward ever presented such a case.

Actually, that is exactly what she said, word for word.  Please see post #209.  That's where I got the idea from.


I'm pretty sure she was referring to the way she's being treated/argued against, by those holding a different opinion.
That's the way it appears to me at least.
Because I too have seen very uncharitable, and cringeworthy, behavior directed toward her, that definitely can be considered effeminate and catty. For example, people (not you) basically accusing her of being a crazy cat lady type of person because she doesn't want to be distracted by screaming children while she's trying to adore God. There's also some virtue signaling going on here too, by which posters tell everybody how much better they are than everybody else because screaming children dont bother them, which is also pretty effeminate. The aforementioned antics are what drew me in to replying here, because the virtue signaling and downright bullying was too much to ignore.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 06, 2019, 08:44:22 PM
Just to clarify, background sounds like sneezing, coughing, shuffling, dropping things on the floor, don't even constitute noise as far as I'm concerned. I have no memory of even referring to this kind of human background noise on this thread.  Several posters have referred to this as if I would object to someone sneezing.  I doubt if even I could live up to the standards of St Leonard or St Ambrose, although I would love to try.

The 'beautiful silence of the Mass' which I have referred to, is more like a stillness.  There can be quite a lot of movement during the Mass, people from other parts of the Church coming to look, confessions being heard nearby, kneeling and standing, queuing for Communion, but somehow it all happens peacefully.  Sometimes that stillness is almost tangible and it seems as if everyone there is part of it.

However there are certain noises that will disturb that stillness and if those noises are prolonged, they will shatter it.  Babies and toddlers crying is one such noise, as are fire alarms, groups of tourists who suddenly appear talking at the tops of their voices, anything coming over the loudspeaker from the main body of the church.

Secondly, for the last couple of decades I have been acutely aware of the problems currently faced by Trad families.  How could I avoid hearing about them?  How could I avoid contact with them?  And I'm aware that Trad priests are ultimately responsible for the current practice because they have given up on making conversions and are relying on demographics to resolve the crisis.

Whatever the situation is now, if the priests of the various Trad groups had from the beginning given priority to preserving the stillness, reverence, silence and attention of the Mass, then things would have turned out differently and Trads would view that situation as normal as the current situation.  And so it is a choice.  The current practice exists because people accept and defend it. 

And I think it's a disgrace.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: The Curt Jester on October 06, 2019, 10:30:18 PM
Far too many generalizations.  Do we know for a fact that trad priests have given up on conversions?  Or is that just an opinion?

My first experience at a Tridentine Mass, I was immediately struck by how SILENT the Mass was.  For about ten years, I attended Mass at that one church and one could pretty much hear a pin drop at all times.  Funny thing is the church was also filled with young families with lots of children and quite a few of them toddlers and babies.  The biggest disturbance that ever happened in those ten years were caused by an older boy who had a mental disability.  I can't remember seeing any of the parents remove a child from church (aside from that one boy), although I am sure it happened.  It's just that the parents were certainly very discreet about it.

Another interesting point is that sheer number of people who were converts who attended at that church.  About fifty percent of the families/individuals who were attending at that time were converts (or one member was).  Maybe that particular priest wasn't personally responsible for them (who knows?), but those converts came from somewhere.  Can anyone honestly say that trad priests have given up on converts?  Really?  Playing the demographics game does not exclude converts. And, hey, why shouldn't we go for lots of children?  After all, isn't example one of the best ways to convert people? When people see large families, they see an example of a family that (wonder of wonders) doesn't practice contraception in this wacky world.

Stop with the speculation and get back to reality.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Traditionallyruralmom on October 06, 2019, 11:36:10 PM
Im amazed this is still going, and its the second post on the topic to boot!!  :cheeseheadbeer:
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Maximilian on October 07, 2019, 12:07:11 AM
Do we know for a fact that trad priests have given up on conversions? 

Another interesting point is that sheer number of people who were converts who attended at that church.  About fifty percent of the families/individuals who were attending at that time were converts (or one member was). 

Yes, this is a good point. The 4 adults with whom I usually converse during coffee after Mass are all converts, some with really miraculous bolt-out-of-the-blue stories.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on October 07, 2019, 12:17:28 AM
Im amazed this is still going, and its the second post on the topic to boot!!  :cheeseheadbeer:

It's a good distraction when you're almost nine months pregnant.  Surely, you understand ;)
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Aeternitus on October 07, 2019, 12:43:04 AM
Quote
Idon’t think bringing them along because you have no other option makes you a child-centred feminist, at all.  And neither do I believe Awkward ever presented such a case.

Actually, that is exactly what she said, word for word.  Please see post #209.  That's where I got the idea from.

Awkward’s post #209 was in response to the immediate earlier posts with the “suffer the little children…” quote.  A quote which had no place at all in this debate, yet it was repeated and high-fived continually.   It was a diversion, making others think that the issue was about children attending Mass, thus garnering the expected sympathy vote and with the obvious implication that Awkward had a problem with children.    And it worked, to an extent, with some.  It was clear to me that Awkward’s comment was not addressed to those who had no option, as she did try to explore options, including asking someone how much a babysitter would cost, only to be told that the person who raised the babysitter option wasn’t being serious, but instead, facetious.  And this facetious post did what it was bound to do and prompted further facetious replies directed at Awkward.  Domino effect…   
 
Awkward #95 Meanwhile, I have another solution.  You, and others, could stop taking this so personally.  You, and others, could try not reacting so emotionally to this problem and start to accept that there's an issue here that might, just might, be open to a discussion that could lead to reasonable and nuanced solutions. 

Quote
Yes, of course, you are correct.  When I said to not let perfection be the enemy of good, I meant it in the sense that very rarely do people obtain perfection all at once, or even in this life at all.  It is some that we are constantly striving for in this life, and cannot obtain on our own.  Only God can work perfection in us, with our cooperation.  I just meant we need to be careful not to have an "all or nothing" attitude towards our spiritual life.  If we waited until we were perfect or "worthy" to attend Mass, none of us should ever attend.  St. Francis de Sales says that we must be patient with both our own imperfections and those of others.  He even says that "to attain perfection, we must be patient with our own imperfections....suffer it with patience ... humility is fortified in suffering.... God, who is infinitely good, is content with our little works, and the preparation of our heart is agreeable to Him.".  So, yes, we should absolutely strive for perfection, but not be so consumed with the idea of being perfect that we give up on the work of attaining it.  We apply this to ourselves, and to those around us.  So, while we should definitely not be neglectful of our growth in holiness, we should expect the weeds of imperfection to show up.  Sometimes, it's through our own weakness and fallen human nature; others it's just Divine Providence that the ideal cannot be met, and we have to accept that for what it is and do the most with what we have.  I simply cannot, in good conscience, allow myself to miss Mass for an indeterminate amount of time, merely because I have small children. For one, I need the graces of the sacraments to be able to fulfill my duties well.  I can't do that on my own.  For another, yes, I admit to selfishishly wanting that time in Mass to be with Our Lord in peace for an hour a week.  Our kids are quiet enough for this to happen, so I'm afraid we have to agree to disagree here.  I absolutely understand the beauty and treasure of the Mass...well, as much as my fallen nature can.  And I also understand the importance of having reverance and quiet at Mass.  Even before I read portions St. Leonard's book I understood that.  I have compassion for both sides. I think alot of people, in general, could and should work harder at increasing their reverance at Mass (myself included).  But, I also think that God is not as displeased with slight, unintentional noises from the congregation as we might think He is.  If we are intentionally lazy or negligent, of course that is different.  But, the occasional sneeze, cough, clearing of the throat, shuffling of feet, slight baby/toddler/child sounds, etc ...things that are just part and parcel of human life (like the previous quote about comparing the quiet of Mass to nature), I do not think stirs up His wrath.  If we do our best to be as quiet and still as possible, so that we can love and adore Him as much as our feeble human hearts can muster then I think He is pleased with our efforts, even if we are not as perfect as we would like to be; even if we have small children in arms; even if we have to sometimes divert our attention to said smalt child. 

In Mass today, there was far more clearing of throats and the occasional coughs than noise from small children.  I am not offended by those adults at all, and I don't think Our Lord is, either.  It didn't even really bother me or distract me from praying, even though I did notice it.  I think He is pleased with their effort to give Him due worship as best as they can.  It wasn't 100% silence and complete lack of noise, though.   I think to expect that level of silence will only set one up for disappointment.


Munda, I am not sure what it is we are supposed to be disagreeing on!  Except I believe, if possible, young babies and toddlers should stay at home with a reliable relative/friend (who had attended an earlier available Mass themselves) because it is the most appropriate option for the young ones and their parents.    If you don’t agree, that’s fine, but that would be the only thing we don’t agree on! 

I certainly don’t think you should not attend Mass and have never thought that.  I likened you to the example of my friends who successfully kept their own babies and toddlers quiet or immediately removed them.  They placed themselves in the best spot to do that, which sometimes meant the mother and father did not sit together.  They did this because they did have a thorough understanding of what was required and also because their priest would have taken them to task had they not!  Their children, most of whom are adults now, are exemplary, and yours sound so too.     

I read St Leonard probably 30 years ago now and it contributed to forming how I attend Mass.  I do sneeze loudly.  I make myself jump sometimes, so I am not prepared to startle the little old lady sitting next to me!  I do walk on tip-toe on the wooden floor because otherwise it does sound like the cavalry are coming.  I am aware of it and where I am, so consequently I do what I can to reduce any unnecessary noise.  I don’t have a problem with noise per se, or people sneezing or having to cough when necessary or making normal movements, although I do find myself wincing when voluntary noises are made during the consecration.  Can’t help it.  They clear their throat at that very precise moment and I wince.   In addressing coughs/sneezes/breathing I was simply trying to help you work through your thought processes on the topic, after you dipped into St Leonard, using the examples you provided, in a bid to differentiate between voluntary and involuntary.  In reading St Leonard again, as a result of this thread, I was shocked at how much of it I had forgotten.  Sure, muffling my sneezes and tip-toeing on the wooden floor has become a part of me and I do so unthinkingly.  I had just forgotten a lot of the reasons behind my taking those decisions so many years ago.  It was a timely reminder to myself how the most precious things can so easily be taken for granted.

Now, if you are almost 9 months pregnant, I hope you are reading and contributing to this thread with your feet up!       
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 07, 2019, 04:48:15 AM
This might be the time to ask - what are the requirements re the Sunday Mass obligation in an emergency situation?  Everyone agrees that we are indeed living in an unprecedented, emergency situation.  And yet they cite the Sunday Mass obligation as if the times were entirely normal.

Are Catholics in an emergency situation required to attend Mass every Sunday NO MATTER WHAT.  If the typical Trad parent spends half their time at Mass placating babies and toddlers, they can tick a box saying they were there, and yet they were only half there.  If Trad parents took it in turns to stay at home with babies and toddlers while the other spouse attended Mass with the older children, they wouldn't be able to tick the weekly box. But they could be fully present at Mass every fortnight.

So half present at Mass every Sunday or fully present at Mass every fortnight?  Which would be most beneficial to those parents, not to mention everyone else?   And how would the liturgy benefit from all the stillness, attention and reverence that would result?

My suggestion of allocating earlier Low Masses to Catholics wishing to adore God in peace, in parishes that could support more than one Sunday TLM, was shouted down on the other thread.  A Mass which restricted attendance to Catholics who had reached the age of reason - termed a 'grump' Mass by one poster - would be 'divisive' it was claimed.  No, people like me who want to adore God without a toddler screaming in their ear are 'divisive grumps' and should learn to put up and shut up, or wear ear plugs.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: diaduit on October 07, 2019, 05:57:00 AM
At age 17 I was a single father, and never once was it difficult to keep my child from disrupting people at mass.
In fact, being so rude as to ever allow it to happen, would've been, and still is now, inconceivable. A little charitable consideration for the people next to you goes a long way.

That's not what the discussion is about, though.  It's about whether young children should be there AT ALL, even if they are quiet, and despite the fact that in today's circumstances many parents have only 2 options: bring children to Mass; or, Mom has to miss Mass every Sunday until she is done having babies - which could be for quite a long time, if one is open to life and babies come every 2 years.
 Several of us have already mentioned that it's possible to keep even younger children quiet.  My husband and I manage it, and I've seen many other parents do so, as well, on a regular basis.  Several of us have also said that if a small child does start to make noise, then we step outside with the child.  I don't see the issue with that, assuming there is no option to leave the child behind. 

I even acknowledged in the original thread on this topic that it was wrong to allow my child's noise making to take precedence over everyone else's right to pray at Mass silently.  I agree that noisy children are a problem at Mass.  But, if children are quiet, I don't see why it's a problem for them to be there.
You're right, I fully agree with you. When I was a young father going to mass alone wasn't an option. I wouldn't have wanted to go alone anyway.

Awkwardcustomer takes an extreme position that I dont entirely agree with, but can completely sympathize with. She wants to adore God in His house, undisturbed, in respectful silence. She wants to do what we all should already be doing. If more people had the same consideration you do she would probably feel differently.

Everyone who has posted on this thread DOES the same as munda, we take our children outside if they are making noise.  I have repeated here and previous thread about standing in a freezing damp vestibule time and again (weather here is awful in winter) and nursed a 15lb baby in my arms while standing to avoid causing a disturbance to others. 
Why are you selective about who is doing their best?

Why are you selective about who is dishing out the cattiness, its on both sides?



I have empathised with Awkward and still do about noise sensitivity and in previous thread as I have it too, there is no empathy coming back, its stay at home with your babies and toddlers or leave them at home with someone, why can she not accept the best and only option for those who cannot leave kids at home, which is what we are doing now---- removing a fussy baby during mass so as not to disturb the peace (this gets sidelined during the thread all the time), its a WORKABLE solution in the current situation.  Can she not accept that as an option?  It works fine in our church and again yesterday, the peace was surreal even with lots of little children.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 07, 2019, 06:36:52 AM
Everyone who has posted on this thread DOES the same as munda, we take our children outside if they are making noise.  I have repeated here and previous thread about standing in a freezing damp vestibule time and again (weather here is awful in winter) and nursed a 15lb baby in my arms while standing to avoid causing a disturbance to others. 

Think about what you're saying here.  Ask yourself how present at Mass you really are if you have to keep taking your babies and toddlers (not children) outside.

Why are you arguing for the right to do this, to attend Mass with your babies and toddlers and yet only be partly present at that Mass because of the babies and toddlers you bring?

Quote
I have empathised with Awkward and still do about noise sensitivity and in previous thread as I have it too, there is no empathy coming back, its stay at home with your babies and toddlers or leave them at home with someone, why can she not accept the best and only option for those who cannot leave kids at home, which is what we are doing now---- removing a fussy baby during mass so as not to disturb the peace (this gets sidelined during the thread all the time), its a WORKABLE solution in the current situation.  Can she not accept that as an option?  It works fine in our church and again yesterday, the peace was surreal even with lots of little children.

This has little to do with the noise sensitivity you claim I have and that you share.  This is about the reverence and attention owed to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. 

You advocate as a workable solution the coming and going of parents as they step outside whenever their babies and toddlers cause a disturbance.  But matter how diligent and considerate you are as a parent - and I'm sure you are - the coming and going you are advocating is still a disturbance.  How long does it take you to decide whether or not to make the decision to step outside?  How long does the crying go on before you decide whether your baby or toddler will settle down or not?  5 minutes, 10 minutes?  And when you do eventually step outside, how many other parents are in the process of making the same decision, waiting to see if the crying will settle down or not?

And what's it all for - so you can fulfil your Sunday Mass obligation, even if it means being only half present at that Mass?  I've actually sat behind the parents and grandparents of a toddler as they barely glanced at the altar during the entire Mass, so engrossed were they in attending to a single two year old who, I swear, loved the undivided attention he was getting and had little or no incentive to stop his antics.

Why wouldn't you prefer to attend Mass every other Sunday, with your older children, so that you could at least be fully present at the Masses you attend?  Why would it be such a hardship for you and your husband to take it in turns to attend Sunday Mass, leaving babies and toddlers at home with the remaining spouse?  And if you tell me that a baby cannot endure being left with his father for a couple of hours once a fortnight until he is at least two years old, I simply won't believe you.

I think the Sunday Mass obligation is being misapplied in this emergency situation we all agree we're in, with the result that it is now deemed more important to be at half at Mass, if that,  once a week, than fully at Mass once a fortnight. And that despite the noise and disturbance that babies and toddlers inevitably cause no matter how diligent their parents are, their presence is considered more important than preserving the reverence, attention, silence and stillness of the TLM

It's madness.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 07, 2019, 07:35:00 AM
I'm afraid with this all-too-honest revelation of your feelings, who have lost any chance to pretend that you understand what parents are facing period. You may not be an old curmudgeon, but you are certainly ignorant of this entire situation; and have enjoyed your single life with all it's freedoms, silent moments, and intact china cats too long to turn a kind eye on parents or children. Sad...     Reality check in isle five...reality check in isle five please.

"intact china cats" - ah, yes, my single life is full of those. You know nothing about my life, nothing.

And you want a reality check!  Come here, and I'll show you reality as I know it.  You wouldn't last 5 minutes.

Now let me guess, you live in a nice suburban/rural house and have two cars, like most Trads. But where are the Trads from the Projects?  Nowhere to be found, I bet.  So enough of your hardships as if only yours matter.

I've had 20 years of hearing about the problems faced by Trad families and about how we must all cater to you.  Enough already, especially when I've had to endure one vicious insult after another when daring to raise the subject of the appalling loss of reverence, attention silence and stillness at Mass that we all have to endure. 

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on October 07, 2019, 07:46:34 AM
I'm afraid with this all-too-honest revelation of your feelings, who have lost any chance to pretend that you understand what parents are facing period. You may not be an old curmudgeon, but you are certainly ignorant of this entire situation; and have enjoyed your single life with all it's freedoms, silent moments, and intact china cats too long to turn a kind eye on parents or children. Sad...     Reality check in isle five...reality check in isle five please.

"intact china cats" - ah, yes, my single life is full of those. You know nothing about my life, nothing.

And you want a reality check!  Come here, and I'll show you reality as I know it.  You wouldn't last 5 minutes.

Now let me guess, you live in a nice suburban/rural house and have two cars, like most Trads. But where are the Trads from the Projects?  Nowhere to be found, I bet.  So enough of your hardships as if only yours matter.

I've had 20 years of hearing about the problems faced by Trad families and about how we must all cater to you.  Enough already, especially when I've had to endure one vicious insult after another when daring to raise the subject of the appalling loss of reverence, attention silence and stillness at Mass that we all have to endure.

One car...and trust me, I could take it just fine.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on October 07, 2019, 08:00:19 AM

Why wouldn't you prefer to attend Mass every other Sunday, with your older children, so that you could at least be fully present at the Masses you attend?  Why would it be such a hardship for you and your husband to take it in turns to attend Sunday Mass, leaving babies and toddlers at home with the remaining spouse?  And if you tell me that a baby cannot endure being left with his father for a couple of hours once a fortnight until he is at least two years old, I simply won't believe you.

I think the Sunday Mass obligation is being misapplied in this emergency situation we all agree we're in, with the result that it is now deemed more important to be at half at Mass, if that,  once a week, than fully at Mass once a fortnight. And that despite the noise and disturbance that babies and toddlers inevitably cause no matter how diligent their parents are, their presence is considered more important than preserving the reverence, attention, silence and stillness of the TLM

It's madness.

Firstly, following the ten commandments have nothing to do with what we "prefer." If it was, the novus ordo people and Fr. Martin would all be in your boat. Fun... You can not "apply" or "mis-apply" the Sunday obligation, it is a command from God; not tradition, custom, local preference, or anything else where the term "apply" is appropriate.

Secondly, if we are in such an emergency, as you say we are, and the time of the anti-christ is now, which you have repeatedly said you think it is, and there will be no period of peace, which you have also said...then should we not all be going to mass as often as possible. The children were not left home because mass was in the catacombs. Children were not left home because mass in Ireland was out in a field, in the snow, and everyone was constantly watching for British soldiers trying to sneak up on them and kill them. Families would sneak to mass together during to communist persecution in Mexico. Those were real emergencies. We may be in the midst of a liturgical crisis, but that has nothing to do with children at mass. I also disagree that this would have been different pre-Vatican two in terms of solutions for parents. Any time you had a young family without grandparents/extended family around, you had this problem...ma Ingalls could never have gone to mass alone, they were isolated from everyone. This isolation of young families because of moving for work, parents dying, etc repeats itself throughout history no matter the liturgical clime. Also, anytime there was only one mass you had this same situation no matter how much family was around. No mother would want her sister/aunt/mother/friend missing Holy Mass, everyone has a Sunday obligation.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 07, 2019, 08:01:22 AM
Do we know for a fact that trad priests have given up on conversions? 

Another interesting point is that sheer number of people who were converts who attended at that church.  About fifty percent of the families/individuals who were attending at that time were converts (or one member was). 

Yes, this is a good point. The 4 adults with whom I usually converse during coffee after Mass are all converts, some with really miraculous bolt-out-of-the-blue stories.

I'm a convert.  So yes, there will always be a trickle of converts to Tradition.

But the overwhelming majority of Catholics are barely aware that Traditionalism exists.  As a convert, I had to seek out Tradition and yes, there are some like me who find it eventually.  But I hardly think that attracting a tiny number of new converts is a substitute for active conversion, which I have never known any Trad group engage in.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on October 07, 2019, 08:10:11 AM


I've had 20 years of hearing about the problems faced by Trad families and about how we must all cater to you.  Enough already, especially when I've had to endure one vicious insult after another when daring to raise the subject of the appalling loss of reverence, attention silence and stillness at Mass that we all have to endure.

Vicious...really??

Trust me, no one has to cater to us at all. We don't want special treatment, we don't want anything extra. It is simply that our attendance at mass is constantly questioned and sighed about. No one would question the right of a single person to attend mass, or a couple. It is simply families that are constantly taken to task for daring to obey God...He did not say "keep holy the sabbath day...if you have no kids, or two masses, or are not in an emergency."

I will also say this. At every single parish I have ever been part of it is the mothers of large families who are responsible for every potluck, every party, every procession, everything; which the single people all attend of course. It is they who teach their sons Latin tirelessly for hours so they can reverently serve mass. It is they who mend vestments, clean alter linens, get wax stains out of countless surplices. It is they who most likely raised the parish priest of every person on this forum. I would spend more time thinking about the numerous ways in which mothers contribute to parish life and the church in general, and less time berating them for wanted to obey God's commandments; no matter how difficult.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 07, 2019, 08:23:34 AM
Secondly, if we are in such an emergency, as you say we are, and the time of the anti-christ is now, which you have repeatedly said you think it is, and there will be no period of peace, which you have also said...then should we not all be going to mass as often as possible.

This is actually a very good question, one that I have thought about.

Given the times we live in, I think we should be concentrating on making every Mass count.  We are told that the graces received at Mass are proportional to the disposition of the individual.  Attend Mass with full attention and reverence and the graces received will multiply.  Now I'm definitely not saying that parents who take babies and toddlers to Mass don't have the best of intentions.  Okay? But they cannot have full attention, it's impossible.

So let me ask, how can you be certain that having divided attention at every Mass you attend doesn't affect the graces you receive?  You assume that Christ will make up for any lack because He is so pleased with you for being there?  How can you be certain that He is pleased with your divided attention at Mass? 

So, no, I think every Mass should always count and that the spiritual fruits from realising this and making it happen at least some of the time would be considerable.

And we need those spiritual fruits now more than ever.  Besides, when you die and stand before God, you will be alone.  Your family won't be there.  So why not get used to it now?

Quote
The children were not left home because mass was in the catacombs. Children were not left home because mass in Ireland was out in a field, in the snow, and everyone was constantly watching for British soldiers trying to sneak up on them and kill them. Families would sneak to mass together during to communist persecution in Mexico. Those were real emergencies.

How do you know?  Were you there?

I would have thought it more sensible to leave babies and toddlers somewhere safe rather than expose then to the dangers of the catacombs or the Mass Rock, given that those attending could have been arrested at any time.  For the older children, well that's a different matter and I don't know if parents are obliged to expose their children to danger in such a way.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 07, 2019, 08:30:24 AM
Vicious...really??

Yes.  Haven't you read them.  Here's what I am according to some posters on this thread:

-  bitter,
-  twisted,
-  an old curmudgeon man,
-  or a nasty, singleton woman who collects china cats,
-  the kind of person who lives in an apartment building and complains about the neighbours' kids, the irony being that I DO live in     an apartment building and my next door and downstairs neighbours both have children, 
- someone who hates or has a problem with children wherever they are,
- someone with a searingly bad conscience who objects to the 'whimpering of children'.

So yes, vicious.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: nmoerbeek on October 07, 2019, 10:20:31 AM
Before I got married, I was told by the traditional priest to raise my kids according to what was written by a Russian Saint, Theophan the Recluse, I have tried to follow his instructions.  His writings on the impact of Grace upon the soul's of Children, even from infancy, have in my experience been competently true.  Among the things he demands from Parents is that they take their Kids not just to Divine Liturgy, but also to the smaller liturgies as well, even when they are infants.

I know that their is going to be some inclination against St. Theophan, because he was Russian Orthodox, but he is the only author that has written extensively on the impact of Grace upon Children from infancy that I know of.    My oldest is turning 9, and has been going to daily mass for years, even as an infant. I also, spent years going to daily Mass by myself.  So I know the difference between what it is like to go by myself and go with a large family.  I take 5 children with me to Mass daily and Vespers, the youngest is 2.

There is a confusion here between tranquility of mind and a spirit of peace.  A spirit of peace can manifest itself at any time and circumstance, feelings of tranquility of mind can be found when circumstances are laid out to put an exterior part of us at rest.  A person can experience profound tranquility of mind at Mass, or at a piano recital, or even fishing.  It is very pleasurable and beneficial that a mind be put at ease. Shrieking children do not put the mind at ease.

However, it does not damage the fruit of Grace from the Mass, a person can go to Church surrounded by shrieking infants and receive more grace that will help them overcome sin and keep the commandments, then if they want to a priest mass of absolute silence in a monastery that was more to their liking.  The same is with mental prayer, one person might suffer horrible dryness and distractions, and yet they receive real grace to be better, while another spends 30 minutes in tranquility of mind, and yet walk away worst then they started because there prayers are viewed by God as self indulgent.

We should all take pains to make the Mass reverent, parents need to punish their children when they act up, which St. Theophan recommends.  However, I am totally opposed to the idea they should not be allowed to receive the Graces of the Mass which act upon their souls even without their intellectual participation.  It violates the commandment to do unto others as they would have them do unto you, if you want to receive Graces from the Mass then you should wish that all people, even infants, be able to receive them as well.



Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 07, 2019, 11:06:45 AM
Shrieking children do not put the mind at ease.

You're right.

Quote
However, it does not damage the fruit of Grace from the Mass …..

Are you sure?

Quote
….. a person can go to Church surrounded by shrieking infants and receive more grace that will help them overcome sin and keep the commandments, then if they want to a priest mass of absolute silence in a monastery that was more to their liking. 

Perhaps the monasteries should open up their Masses and bring in the shrieking infants to help the monks overcome their sin and keep the commandments. 

I wonder why the monasteries haven't thought of that already?

Think of the marvellous opportunities they are missing as a result of their love of silence and their rules to enforce it.  Poor things.

Quote
The same is with mental prayer, one person might suffer horrible dryness and distractions, and yet they receive real grace to be better, while another spends 30 minutes in tranquility of mind, and yet walk away worst then they started because there prayers are viewed by God as self indulgent.

You've no way of knowing how God views someone else's prayers.


Quote
We should all take pains to make the Mass reverent, parents need to punish their children when they act up, which St. Theophan recommends.  However, I am totally opposed to the idea they should not be allowed to receive the Graces of the Mass which act upon their souls even without their intellectual participation.  It violates the commandment to do unto others as they would have them do unto you, if you want to receive Graces from the Mass then you should wish that all people, even infants, be able to receive them as well.

The Church does not require infants under the age of reason to attend Mass, so there is that. 

You and Saint Theophan the Recluse think that babies and toddlers should attend Mass. The Church thinks differently and you throw the commandments at me.

You take it upon yourself to bring infants to Mass, despite the Church not requiring you to do so and despite the inevitable disturbance they will cause.  And you're telling me how to receive Graces from the Mass!!!!
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on October 07, 2019, 11:13:16 AM
Secondly, if we are in such an emergency, as you say we are, and the time of the anti-christ is now, which you have repeatedly said you think it is, and there will be no period of peace, which you have also said...then should we not all be going to mass as often as possible.

This is actually a very good question, one that I have thought about.

Given the times we live in, I think we should be concentrating on making every Mass count.  We are told that the graces received at Mass are proportional to the disposition of the individual.  Attend Mass with full attention and reverence and the graces received will multiply.  Now I'm definitely not saying that parents who take babies and toddlers to Mass don't have the best of intentions.  Okay? But they cannot have full attention, it's impossible.

So let me ask, how can you be certain that having divided attention at every Mass you attend doesn't affect the graces you receive?  You assume that Christ will make up for any lack because He is so pleased with you for being there?  How can you be certain that He is pleased with your divided attention at Mass? 

So, no, I think every Mass should always count and that the spiritual fruits from realising this and making it happen at least some of the time would be considerable.

And we need those spiritual fruits now more than ever.  Besides, when you die and stand before God, you will be alone.  Your family won't be there.  So why not get used to it now?


As a parent your first responsibility is to raise your children for God. When you are raising your children for Our Lord, according to His Will, you are doing the most perfect thing you can do. When St. Paul said to pray without ceasing, he meant that even when we are not formally praying, we should be offering up everything we are doing to God, thereby making it a prayer, and continuing our "ceaseless praises" of God. There are plenty of writings about how we can find God among the pots and pans, etc. So I put it to you that when a mother is at church and is directing her child in prayer, or teaching them about God, that she is in the middle of her ceaseless prayers to God and therefore wholly engrossed in the Mass and the very point of Mass; the salvation of souls. I don't think, especially considering the mass illiteracy of the majority of Catholic faithful until VERY recently, that following along in the missal is the gauge for participation. I think a women who comes, humbly, MODESTLY, and reverently to Mass, and spends the time praying, offering up her children and husband to God, and teaching her babies about Our Lord is getting all the graces available.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: nmoerbeek on October 07, 2019, 11:19:15 AM
Shrieking children do not put the mind at ease.

You're right.

Quote
However, it does not damage the fruit of Grace from the Mass …..

Are you sure?

Quote
….. a person can go to Church surrounded by shrieking infants and receive more grace that will help them overcome sin and keep the commandments, then if they want to a priest mass of absolute silence in a monastery that was more to their liking. 

Perhaps the monasteries should open up their Masses and bring in the shrieking infants to help the monks overcome their sin and keep the commandments. 

I wonder why the monasteries haven't thought of that already?

Think of the marvellous opportunities they are missing as a result of their love of silence and their rules to enforce it.  Poor things.

Quote
The same is with mental prayer, one person might suffer horrible dryness and distractions, and yet they receive real grace to be better, while another spends 30 minutes in tranquility of mind, and yet walk away worst then they started because there prayers are viewed by God as self indulgent.

You've no way of knowing how God views someone else's prayers.


Quote
We should all take pains to make the Mass reverent, parents need to punish their children when they act up, which St. Theophan recommends.  However, I am totally opposed to the idea they should not be allowed to receive the Graces of the Mass which act upon their souls even without their intellectual participation.  It violates the commandment to do unto others as they would have them do unto you, if you want to receive Graces from the Mass then you should wish that all people, even infants, be able to receive them as well.

The Church does not require infants under the age of reason to attend Mass, so there is that. 

You and Saint Theophan the Recluse think that babies and toddlers should attend Mass. The Church thinks differently and you throw the commandments at me.

You take it upon yourself to bring infants to Mass, despite the Church not requiring you to do so and despite the inevitable disturbance they will cause.  And you're telling me how to receive Graces from the Mass!!!!

I am certain of the point that a shrieking infant does not diminish the grace of a Mass.

I assume that the triple exclamation point was meant to portray indignation at me?  Why, the graces of the Mass act upon all those in a State of grace, a christian should not be seeking to deprive other Christians of those graces. If you do wish to deprive others of graces then you should not expect God to bless you.

I attend Mass at a Monastery daily with Children, and St. Theophan the Recluse was a monk. 

The Monks love my Children coming, and if you don't believe it you can come visit me and ask them yourself. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: JeanVianney on October 07, 2019, 11:54:16 AM
The only Latin Mass in Metro Atlanta is about thirty minutes away.  I have never been to one.  I hate to leave my home Church but I am giving it some thought.  Am I over reacting?  Do they get into hand holding and pass the peace in the Latin mass?
Sir I have to travel over 2 hours then I have to wait for the beginning of the Mass 7 hours and after the mass I have to wait 2 hours for the train then I move to another city, where I wait over hour for bus to my homecity. But it is worth of it. The fruits of tridentine mass are enormous in my life.I recomend you to attend the only true mass the tridentine mass The novus ordo remebers me of my former status of being Lutheran. No more Novusordo for me
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: orate on October 07, 2019, 12:01:06 PM


You and Saint Theophan the Recluse think that babies and toddlers should attend Mass. The Church thinks differently....



Are you sure?  The Church thinks differently is just your OPINION.  The Church does not require infants and toddler to attend Mass.  Not requiring them to attend is NOT the same as thinking that they should not be there.

Please show us Church documents to back up your assertion that Holy Mother the Church thinks that infants and toddlers should not attend Mass, and that it is not efficacious for them to do so.

While you are at it, show us any Church teaching that says that parent's who are minding their children, of any age, receive less Grace when assisting at Mass than one who is blessed to be able to concentrate fully.

I am not saying that screaming children should not be removed from Mass, or that peace shattering noise is acceptable, only that it is efficacious for all Catholics of any age to be allowed to assist at Mass. Show me any Church document to the contrary.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on October 07, 2019, 12:35:27 PM
Quote
Idon’t think bringing them along because you have no other option makes you a child-centred feminist, at all.  And neither do I believe Awkward ever presented such a case.

Actually, that is exactly what she said, word for word.  Please see post #209.  That's where I got the idea from.


I'm pretty sure she was referring to the way she's being treated/argued against, by those holding a different opinion.
That's the way it appears to me at least.
Because I too have seen very uncharitable, and cringeworthy, behavior directed toward her, that definitely can be considered effeminate and catty. For example, people (not you) basically accusing her of being a crazy cat lady type of person because she doesn't want to be distracted by screaming children while she's trying to adore God. There's also some virtue signaling going on here too, by which posters tell everybody how much better they are than everybody else because screaming children dont bother them, which is also pretty effeminate. The aforementioned antics are what drew me in to replying here, because the virtue signaling and downright bullying was too much to ignore.

To be honest, lack of charity and compassion has been displayed on both sides.  So has the misrepresentation of views and the accusation of ulterior motives.  It cuts both ways, so both sides should be defended on that account.  Of course, this does not make it right, for either side, to behave that way, and it certainly doesn't make for a very fruitful discussion about what is objectively true about younger children at Mass and parents Mass obligations. However, it is obviously a hot button topic that causes emotions to get heated (again this applies to both camps). I certainly understand why everyone is frustrated.  But, objectively, I don't think that we can honestly say that bringing children (of any age) to Mass is inherently wrong, nor that it will inevitably cause noise and shrieking.  Many of us have given anecdotes to show that, yes, even babies and toddlers can be quiet for the duration of Mass.  Yet, awkward keeps insisting that it is impossible.  I've asked before, if the babies and toddlers are quiet, what is the problem with them being there?

I personally think that people are allowed a difference of opinion on this issue.  It's ok if one prefers younger children to not be at Mass.
But, it's also ok if they are there, provided they are quiet, or the parents step out of they are not.  That document from the 3rd century that states young mothers with children should stand apart (like in the back or another room - say, a crying room), is exactly what many mothers with younger children do.  So, I don't see the issue with it.  If slight adult noises, such as sneezing and the like is not a violation to silence and recollection at Mass, then I don't see how slight baby sounds are, either.  Screams and cries, yes; but small sounds, no. 

Also, I realize this was not one of your arguments, dellery,  but I did want to answer akward's question about having Mom and Dad swap weekends for watching the little ones, once the baby turns two.  First of all, she said asked if it's that difficult for Dad to watch a two year old for an hour or two.  No, it isn't.  However, for many, it's not just 1 or 2 hours....it's more like 4-6, round trip, including driving time.   I'm genuinely not convinced that a longer than average drive time abrogates one from Mass, under the current circumstances.  More than 2 hours, I would say it does.  Less than that, I think it just depends on the scenario and one should consult a priest before excusing himself from Mass.  I'm not trying to be obstinate on that, either.  I've seriously thought about it, and even prayed about it at Mass yesterday (quietly,I might add, with my 10, 8, 6, 5, and almost 3 year olds in the pew; plus other families' babies and toddlers in the church.... there was zero tantrums or shrieking).  Another point about Mom and Dad being unable to do alternating Masses is that typically, if a growing Catholic family is not contracepting or using NFP, then by the time one baby  makes it to 2, there is already another baby behind that one, so Mom would have to stay behind, anyway.  My personal experience is that since I had my first 15 years ago, I have always been pregnant, nursing, or both.  Many families I know have babies even closer to two years apart, so it would be impossible for Mom to ever go to Mass, if there is only one available.  It could certainly work for some families, but I wouldn't recommend doing that without speaking to a priest first. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: queen.saints on October 07, 2019, 01:18:29 PM


I am certain of the point that a shrieking infant does not diminish the grace of a Mass.



This Sunday a Dominican monk gave an excellent sermon about the importance of silence in the spiritual life and how the Low Mass fits into this. He had a quote from St. Thomas that said that silence is not the absence of noise, but the absence of noise leads to silence and is a necessary element of it. He said when we attend Mass we are supposed to be leaving one world and inhabiting another- God’s world. He said we develop silence by practicing it and this is why the Church provides us with the Low Mass, in which there are long stretches of silence.


A shrieking child does not diminish the grace present in God’s world at the Mass, but it does inhibit our ability to enter that world and benefit from those graces.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Miriam_M on October 07, 2019, 01:34:09 PM
Also, anytime there was only one mass you had this same situation no matter how much family was around. No mother would want her sister/aunt/mother/friend missing Holy Mass, everyone has a Sunday obligation.

I mostly bowed out of the contention many posts ago  :) .
However, I just want to point out, as the mother of a former restless/noisy/headstrong toddler attending Mass, that when a parent considerately brings said young child out of the nave, that parent is, in substance and involuntarily, missing Mass.

I say this because I remember having to do this and feeling guilty about resenting what I was missing, including if it was "just" the homily.

Again, if there is more than one TLM in a location, parents can tag-team it, which was always my preference, when possible.  In my current location, there are at least 5 Sunday TLM's within an hour's (or less) driving distance, so today it would have been possible to split the parental responsibilities and enjoy freedom from childcare during Mass.  But this is not the norm for others, I realize.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Miriam_M on October 07, 2019, 01:44:35 PM
...adding that, in the spirit of constructive suggestions that I made pages ago but was criticized for it, I think that one of the best steps parents can take -- when this is viable -- is to suggest to the TLM celebrant that an early morning Mass (if only one TLM can be offered) would do wonders for calming children.  If the suggestion comes from parents of young children it will not be viewed as a complaint but as a plea.  No later than an 8:30 start, preferably earlier. And obviously that probably only works if the drive is an hour or less.

Choices are not always possible, depending on the situation, especially if it's a diocesan indult Mass working around a fixed N.O. schedule, etc.  But there are a number of stand-alone TLM's on Sundays when a priest does have an option, even if he's traveling to the location.  That's true in my location, perhaps in some of yours, too.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on October 07, 2019, 01:54:38 PM
...adding that, in the spirit of constructive suggestions that I made pages ago but was criticized for it, I think that one of the best steps parents can take -- when this is viable -- is to suggest to the TLM celebrant that an early morning Mass (if only one TLM can be offered) would do wonders for calming children.  If the suggestion comes from parents of young children it will not be viewed as a complaint but as a plea.  No later than an 8:30 start, preferably earlier. And obviously that probably only works if the drive is an hour or less.

Choices are not always possible, depending on the situation, especially if it's a diocesan indult Mass working around a fixed N.O. schedule, etc.  But there are a number of stand-alone TLM's on Sundays when a priest does have an option, even if he's traveling to the location.  That's true in my location, perhaps in some of yours, too.

Firstly, if it was possible, I am sure people would be exploring that option. It is impossible for me.

Secondly, if you are spending more then ten minutes TOTAL outside of mass with a child older than 9 months, I suggest to any mother that she start learning to discipline that child properly.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: nmoerbeek on October 07, 2019, 02:36:51 PM


I am certain of the point that a shrieking infant does not diminish the grace of a Mass.



This Sunday a Dominican monk gave an excellent sermon about the importance of silence in the spiritual life and how the Low Mass fits into this. He had a quote from St. Thomas that said that silence is not the absence of noise, but the absence of noise leads to silence and is a necessary element of it. He said when we attend Mass we are supposed to be leaving one world and inhabiting another- God’s world. He said we develop silence by practicing it and this is why the Church provides us with the Low Mass, in which there are long stretches of silence.


A shrieking child does not diminish the grace present in God’s world at the Mass, but it does inhibit our ability to enter that world and benefit from those graces.

Silence is so important to the spiritual life that we should not delegate our time for silence and recollection with God to our weekly attendance at low Mass.

You are wrong when you say "our ability to enter that world and benefit from those graces."  We have no ability to enter into the life of grace by our own efforts, God has to invite us, move us, and then keep us there.    If God, in His providence allows a child to shriek during the Canon of the Mass how do you know that God has taken his Grace from you, or now there are graces you will not receive?  You don't all you know is that your senses have been disturbed. 





Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Miriam_M on October 07, 2019, 02:38:23 PM
...adding that, in the spirit of constructive suggestions that I made pages ago but was criticized for it, I think that one of the best steps parents can take -- when this is viable -- is to suggest to the TLM celebrant that an early morning Mass (if only one TLM can be offered) would do wonders for calming children.  If the suggestion comes from parents of young children it will not be viewed as a complaint but as a plea.  No later than an 8:30 start, preferably earlier. And obviously that probably only works if the drive is an hour or less.

Choices are not always possible, depending on the situation, especially if it's a diocesan indult Mass working around a fixed N.O. schedule, etc.  But there are a number of stand-alone TLM's on Sundays when a priest does have an option, even if he's traveling to the location.  That's true in my location, perhaps in some of yours, too.

Firstly, if it was possible, I am sure people would be exploring that option. It is impossible for me.

Secondly, if you are spending more then ten minutes TOTAL outside of mass with a child older than 9 months, I suggest to any mother that she start learning to discipline that child properly.

That's pretty judgmental on a couple of counts.  First, this was discussed several pages ago, and no, it wasn't necessarily obvious to everyone that an earlier hour considerably reduces the need for parental intervention throughout Mass.  So the suggestion was made for those who hadn't considered that possibility, not for those who already knew the option was impossible.  Third, you wouldn't know how I, Munda, or any other parent here does or does not already know "how to discipline that child properly."  An exceptionally disruptive child by temperament is one that can be challenging to subdue without being severe.  I include not only myself -- who has no problem disciplining children -- and you wouldn't know that because you do not know me or my children, but also parents I respect and admire in church -- one of whom several years ago gave birth to an exceptionally restless/difficult child, even though the previous several had required only the standard kinds of discipline.  Previously, they had been successful with all of their children.  There was nothing they needed to "learn" about discipline.

Yes, some mothers & fathers do a poor job of discipline even outside of Mass (making the transition to Mass expectations even more difficult), but for you to assume that a parent who needs to remove a child needs to "learn how to discipline" is highly uncharitable and rashly judgmental of you.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: queen.saints on October 07, 2019, 03:40:17 PM


I am certain of the point that a shrieking infant does not diminish the grace of a Mass.



This Sunday a Dominican monk gave an excellent sermon about the importance of silence in the spiritual life and how the Low Mass fits into this. He had a quote from St. Thomas that said that silence is not the absence of noise, but the absence of noise leads to silence and is a necessary element of it. He said when we attend Mass we are supposed to be leaving one world and inhabiting another- God’s world. He said we develop silence by practicing it and this is why the Church provides us with the Low Mass, in which there are long stretches of silence.


A shrieking child does not diminish the grace present in God’s world at the Mass, but it does inhibit our ability to enter that world and benefit from those graces.

Silence is so important to the spiritual life that we should not delegate our time for silence and recollection with God to our weekly attendance at low Mass.

You are wrong when you say "our ability to enter that world and benefit from those graces."  We have no ability to enter into the life of grace by our own efforts, God has to invite us, move us, and then keep us there.    If God, in His providence allows a child to shriek during the Canon of the Mass how do you know that God has taken his Grace from you, or now there are graces you will not receive?  You don't all you know is that your senses have been disturbed.

It’s the most essential and important time for inhabiting God’s world. If even this time is spent without silence, then that is a serious issue for our spiritual lives.

It’s not my opinion. It’s the way God has chosen to work. According to this priest and the saints, God has chosen silence as a necessary door to enter His world. He could have chosen noise, but He didn’t.

What I know is that there is not silence.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: nmoerbeek on October 07, 2019, 04:13:56 PM


I am certain of the point that a shrieking infant does not diminish the grace of a Mass.



This Sunday a Dominican monk gave an excellent sermon about the importance of silence in the spiritual life and how the Low Mass fits into this. He had a quote from St. Thomas that said that silence is not the absence of noise, but the absence of noise leads to silence and is a necessary element of it. He said when we attend Mass we are supposed to be leaving one world and inhabiting another- God’s world. He said we develop silence by practicing it and this is why the Church provides us with the Low Mass, in which there are long stretches of silence.


A shrieking child does not diminish the grace present in God’s world at the Mass, but it does inhibit our ability to enter that world and benefit from those graces.

Silence is so important to the spiritual life that we should not delegate our time for silence and recollection with God to our weekly attendance at low Mass.

You are wrong when you say "our ability to enter that world and benefit from those graces."  We have no ability to enter into the life of grace by our own efforts, God has to invite us, move us, and then keep us there.    If God, in His providence allows a child to shriek during the Canon of the Mass how do you know that God has taken his Grace from you, or now there are graces you will not receive?  You don't all you know is that your senses have been disturbed.

It’s the most essential and important time for inhabiting God’s world. If even this time is spent without silence, then that is a serious issue for our spiritual lives.

It’s not my opinion. It’s the way God has chosen to work. According to this priest and the saints, God has chosen silence as a necessary door to enter His world. He could have chosen noise, but He didn’t.

What I know is that there is not silence.
Could you tell me what specific thing I said that you disagreed with?  I don't understand your reply in context to my own to you.


Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on October 07, 2019, 05:16:10 PM
...adding that, in the spirit of constructive suggestions that I made pages ago but was criticized for it, I think that one of the best steps parents can take -- when this is viable -- is to suggest to the TLM celebrant that an early morning Mass (if only one TLM can be offered) would do wonders for calming children.  If the suggestion comes from parents of young children it will not be viewed as a complaint but as a plea.  No later than an 8:30 start, preferably earlier. And obviously that probably only works if the drive is an hour or less.

Choices are not always possible, depending on the situation, especially if it's a diocesan indult Mass working around a fixed N.O. schedule, etc.  But there are a number of stand-alone TLM's on Sundays when a priest does have an option, even if he's traveling to the location.  That's true in my location, perhaps in some of yours, too.

Firstly, if it was possible, I am sure people would be exploring that option. It is impossible for me.

Secondly, if you are spending more then ten minutes TOTAL outside of mass with a child older than 9 months, I suggest to any mother that she start learning to discipline that child properly.

That's pretty judgmental on a couple of counts.  First, this was discussed several pages ago, and no, it wasn't necessarily obvious to everyone that an earlier hour considerably reduces the need for parental intervention throughout Mass.  So the suggestion was made for those who hadn't considered that possibility, not for those who already knew the option was impossible.  Third, you wouldn't know how I, Munda, or any other parent here does or does not already know "how to discipline that child properly."  An exceptionally disruptive child by temperament is one that can be challenging to subdue without being severe.  I include not only myself -- who has no problem disciplining children -- and you wouldn't know that because you do not know me or my children, but also parents I respect and admire in church -- one of whom several years ago gave birth to an exceptionally restless/difficult child, even though the previous several had required only the standard kinds of discipline.  Previously, they had been successful with all of their children.  There was nothing they needed to "learn" about discipline.

Yes, some mothers & fathers do a poor job of discipline even outside of Mass (making the transition to Mass expectations even more difficult), but for you to assume that a parent who needs to remove a child needs to "learn how to discipline" is highly uncharitable and rashly judgmental of you.
Jeepers, it was just a suggestion. In my long years of experience there are two basic kinds of parents outside churches. The ones who come out quietly, discipline junior, remind them to be good/quiet for Jesus/etc, and then go back in church. Then you have the mothers who bring out the kids and play with them, let them chat, maybe the moms even chat with someone...no/little discipline, junior runs around a little, quite a large portion of mass missed. Don't think I am blaming just the moms, oh no, many are the dads perched on the edge of the pew waiting for junior to screech or whine so they can "take them out" aka watch them run around outside while they smoke and chat with anyone else who happens to be outside, dashing back in just in time for communion. You do have a middle variety that sit in a cry room and chat a little with other moms and let their kids roll around on the floor/play/climb on things, etc. I am sure there are a few mothers and dads who have special needs children, and this hardly applies to them; but I'll leave it at that. This is not being a jerk, I am old, I have a lot of children of many different temperaments. I have intimate relationships with families of 8-13-20 who all have many children of different temperaments and you can draw a line right down the middle when looking at the behavior of said children in families where there is strict CONSISTENT discipline, or not. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 07, 2019, 07:34:31 PM
I am certain of the point that a shrieking infant does not diminish the grace of a Mass.

I assume that the triple exclamation point was meant to portray indignation at me?  Why, the graces of the Mass act upon all those in a State of grace, a christian should not be seeking to deprive other Christians of those graces. If you do wish to deprive others of graces then you should not expect God to bless you.

I attend Mass at a Monastery daily with Children, and St. Theophan the Recluse was a monk. 

The Monks love my Children coming, and if you don't believe it you can come visit me and ask them yourself.

You dare to suggest that I wish to deprive other Christians of graces and then wonder why I am indignant at you!!!

Perhaps if you went to Mass alone for a change and devoted all your attention to the reason you are there in the first place, you might get off your 'oh so reasonable but really quite catty' high horse.

And the monasteries of today are an inspiration to us all - not. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 07, 2019, 07:37:31 PM
Please show us Church documents to back up your assertion that Holy Mother the Church thinks that infants and toddlers should not attend Mass, and that it is not efficacious for them to do so.

Please show me documentation to show that Holy Mother Church thinks that babies and toddlers SHOULD be at Mass.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 07, 2019, 07:50:02 PM
I think a women who comes, humbly, MODESTLY, and reverently to Mass, and spends the time praying, offering up her children and husband to God, and teaching her babies about Our Lord is getting all the graces available.

Why do you think that? 

Why don't you think that a women who comes, humbly, MODESTLY, and reverently to Mass, and spends all the time praying and adoring Our Lord is getting all the graces available, offering up her loved ones of course, but being able to devote ALL her attention to the very reason she is there - the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar?

Does Our Lord demand that you teach your babies about Him while at Mass?  Why do you think it is necessary to do this when you could, instead, teach them about Our Lord at some other time, leaving you free to be wholly absorbed in Him while at Mass?

Surely it should be your priority to be being entirely present for Our Lord at Mass.  Everything else flows from that.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 07, 2019, 08:13:08 PM
Many of us have given anecdotes to show that, yes, even babies and toddlers can be quiet for the duration of Mass.  Yet, awkward keeps insisting that it is impossible.  I've asked before, if the babies and toddlers are quiet, what is the problem with them being there? 

If babies and toddlers are quiet, then there is no problem with them being at Mass, or at the theatre, or at the cinema, or in a library.  Except they're not quiet, are they, which is why they are only at Mass (these days) and not the theatre, cinema or library.

Your anecdotes are different from mine.  You keep insisting that babies and toddlers can be quiet at Mass, but do you mean YOUR babies and toddlers?  At any rate, in 20 years I have barely known it to be the case that the presence of babies and toddlers at Mass didn't inevitably result in crying and disturbance for the majority of the Mass.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: dellery on October 07, 2019, 08:24:30 PM

Everyone who has posted on this thread DOES the same as munda, we take our children outside if they are making noise.  I have repeated here and previous thread about standing in a freezing damp vestibule time and again (weather here is awful in winter) and nursed a 15lb baby in my arms while standing to avoid causing a disturbance to others. 
Why are you selective about who is doing their best?

Why are you selective about who is dishing out the cattiness, its on both sides?



I have empathised with Awkward and still do about noise sensitivity and in previous thread as I have it too, there is no empathy coming back, its stay at home with your babies and toddlers or leave them at home with someone, why can she not accept the best and only option for those who cannot leave kids at home, which is what we are doing now---- removing a fussy baby during mass so as not to disturb the peace (this gets sidelined during the thread all the time), its a WORKABLE solution in the current situation.  Can she not accept that as an option?  It works fine in our church and again yesterday, the peace was surreal even with lots of little children.

Why are you taking this so personally?
I never said, nor implied, that you, or others in this discussion, are personally disturbing people at mass by not attending to your children. I'm talking about how, in general, screaming, ill behaved children are permitted by their parents to disrupt mass in many places.

I'm also not being selective, and stated I didn't agree with awkwardcustomer's position here, but can sympathize with it. What's your problem with this?

Many of us assist at mass in old chapels with acoustics meant to amplify the choir because microphones weren't invented, or in wide use, when they were built. When a parent will sit in the pew with their crying children echoing all over the place, in chapels such as these, If you're sitting close enough it will hurt your ears and possibly even give you a headache. This is a problem where I normally assist at, and it's a problem for other people as well, so stop trying to delegitimize this issue. From what you say you're not even guilty of the behavior I'm describing, so what's your problem here? Is it that I didn't join the crowd in insinuating awkwardcustomer is a crazy cat lady casting hatred on whimpering children?

And so what you cant change Awkwardcustomer's mind? Deal with it.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: orate on October 07, 2019, 08:28:01 PM
delete
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: orate on October 07, 2019, 08:58:56 PM
Please show us Church documents to back up your assertion that Holy Mother the Church thinks that infants and toddlers should not attend Mass, and that it is not efficacious for them to do so.

Please show me documentation to show that Holy Mother Church thinks that babies and toddlers SHOULD be at Mass.


I'm done with this topic.  Awkwardcustomer let's just accept that you and I will never agree about this.  Neither of us was around for the first 2000 years of the Church, so both of our opinions are just conjecture.  We can each come up with what we think is proper documentation until the cows come home and we will not convince each other.

And this is for all of us--not just awkwardcustomer. The level of cattiness and name calling---and I include myself in this--is a scandal (in the true meaning of the word, ie. to lead others to sin) to all who have followed this and the other thread on this topic.

This is why I am finished.

Not just with this topic, but perhaps with the entire forum itself.

I just don't find these kinds of cat fights to be edifying, and I would not wish to lead others to sin.

God's ways are not our ways.  I suppose we'll find out what is truly God's Will in all of this when we see Him face to face.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Non Nobis on October 07, 2019, 10:41:13 PM

This is why I am finished.

Not just with this topic, but perhaps with the entire forum itself.

I just don't find these kinds of cat fights to be edifying, and I would not wish to lead others to sin.

God's ways are not our ways.  I suppose we'll find out what is truly God's Will in all of this when we see Him face to face.

Don't leave, at least not the forum. Stay around to be a good example, orate.

The cat fights are horrible, but it seems to me that there are a lot of good intentions on both sides too.

This forum is a lot more edifying than 99.9% of the internet, despite its flaws.  I can understand why some leave, when the flaws are just too much to handle. But staying to make it even much more edifying (or less unedifying) is another option to consider. Think of all the truly edifying posts that ARE posted.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Gardener on October 07, 2019, 10:54:43 PM
Please show us Church documents to back up your assertion that Holy Mother the Church thinks that infants and toddlers should not attend Mass, and that it is not efficacious for them to do so.

Please show me documentation to show that Holy Mother Church thinks that babies and toddlers SHOULD be at Mass.

It’s a logical deduction from the requirement of their parents to be at Mass and no specific proscription to the contrary or release from the obligation therein, with the exception of illness. Since you’re not a liberal democrat, I assume you don’t count infancy as an illness, though you could have fooled most of us.


Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on October 08, 2019, 05:01:08 AM
I think a women who comes, humbly, MODESTLY, and reverently to Mass, and spends the time praying, offering up her children and husband to God, and teaching her babies about Our Lord is getting all the graces available.

Why do you think that? 

Why don't you think that a women who comes, humbly, MODESTLY, and reverently to Mass, and spends all the time praying and adoring Our Lord is getting all the graces available, offering up her loved ones of course, but being able to devote ALL her attention to the very reason she is there - the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar?

Does Our Lord demand that you teach your babies about Him while at Mass?  Why do you think it is necessary to do this when you could, instead, teach them about Our Lord at some other time, leaving you free to be wholly absorbed in Him while at Mass?

Surely it should be your priority to be being entirely present for Our Lord at Mass.  Everything else flows from that.

First of all, a large portion of Mass is already dedicated to teaching people about Our Lord... see readings, gospel, sermon. My point is that when you are taking care of your children you ARE fully absorbed in Him according to your state in life. You are at mass exactly the way you are supposed to be. A nun at mass with a child is NOT, she is supposed to be at mass alone. Do you see my point? Our spiritual lives have different definitions of perfect contemplation in different seasons of our lives. A prayerful woman, modestly dressed (and I keep stressing this because I don't think an immodestly dressed women of any age or season of life is disposed to receive graces at mass, and it is important) with her children (her vocation) around her, on her lap, etc...is contemplating Our Lord in exactly the way she ought. Periods of long silence and so forth are for another season.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on October 08, 2019, 05:03:49 AM

for you to assume that a parent who needs to remove a child needs to "learn how to discipline" is highly uncharitable and rashly judgmental of you.

I NEVER said that. I said spending more than ten minutes outside Mass, two utterly different things. Taking a kid out, discipline, and pep talk is a two/three minutes operation. If a parent is doing this more than two or three times in mass then yes, they should focus on discipline a little more.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: dellery on October 08, 2019, 07:06:52 AM
This is all being very over thought.
Its nobody's business what parents do with their children, or where they bring them, as long as their children are not disruptive to others.

If during mass, a parent is too lazy and rude to prevent their children from disrupting others, if not EVERYBODY in the chapel for that matter, a priest should address the issue with them after mass. If the behavior continues, those in the parish should not associate with the rude disruptive parents, and use the strength of social pressure to correct their selfish behavior. Make them feel like THAT family, you know, the family that cant concern themselves with their parishioners well being, but want to be included in the parish, and enjoy all this has to offer.
"Hey, nevermind the fact that I sat idle while my shrieking 18 month old gave you a headache at mass this morning. Wanna show me that rental you were talking about? You're still deducting $100 from rent for parishioners, right?"
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 08, 2019, 07:52:45 AM
I think a women who comes, humbly, MODESTLY, and reverently to Mass, and spends the time praying, offering up her children and husband to God, and teaching her babies about Our Lord is getting all the graces available.

Why do you think that? 

Why don't you think that a women who comes, humbly, MODESTLY, and reverently to Mass, and spends all the time praying and adoring Our Lord is getting all the graces available, offering up her loved ones of course, but being able to devote ALL her attention to the very reason she is there - the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar?

Does Our Lord demand that you teach your babies about Him while at Mass?  Why do you think it is necessary to do this when you could, instead, teach them about Our Lord at some other time, leaving you free to be wholly absorbed in Him while at Mass?

Surely it should be your priority to be being entirely present for Our Lord at Mass.  Everything else flows from that.

First of all, a large portion of Mass is already dedicated to teaching people about Our Lord... see readings, gospel, sermon. My point is that when you are taking care of your children you ARE fully absorbed in Him according to your state in life. You are at mass exactly the way you are supposed to be. A nun at mass with a child is NOT, she is supposed to be at mass alone. Do you see my point? Our spiritual lives have different definitions of perfect contemplation in different seasons of our lives. A prayerful woman, modestly dressed (and I keep stressing this because I don't think an immodestly dressed women of any age or season of life is disposed to receive graces at mass, and it is important) with her children (her vocation) around her, on her lap, etc...is contemplating Our Lord in exactly the way she ought. Periods of long silence and so forth are for another season.

Your vision of the mother at Mass - "with her children (her vocation) around her, on her lap, etc" - differs from that of the pre-Vatican II mother of a friend of mine, who went to Mass alone in order to be fully with Our Lord and couldn't bear to be distracted from the Mass even for a moment. Your vision has not always been shared by all mothers, although I expect most here would agree with you.

So why the difference?  Was my friend's pre-Vatican II mother wrong?  From the anecdotes I have heard, many pre-Vatican II mothers did not share your idea of how they should be present at Mass.  Something has clearly changed.

Your post reminds me of nmoerbeek's post.  You both seem to find it essential to be at Mass with your infants and children, as if this is the greatest expression of your vocation and your adherence to it.  But the greatest expression of your vocation, of everyone's vocation, which is to save our souls, is to adore Our Lord with every fibre of our being, even to the exclusion of everything else.  Attendance at Mass with 100% devotion, attention and stillness, was once considered more appropriate than being at Mass surrounded by distracting babies and toddlers.

The question is - why do you and nmoerbeek hold the image of the parent at Mass surrounded by his/her brood as the ideal?  And why doesn't the image of the parent who deliberately goes to Mass without accompanying infants in order to be alone and undistracted with Our Lord not appeal to you?

I blame the priests.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on October 08, 2019, 09:25:35 AM
Many of us have given anecdotes to show that, yes, even babies and toddlers can be quiet for the duration of Mass.  Yet, awkward keeps insisting that it is impossible.  I've asked before, if the babies and toddlers are quiet, what is the problem with them being there? 

If babies and toddlers are quiet, then there is no problem with them being at Mass, or at the theatre, or at the cinema, or in a library.  Except they're not quiet, are they, which is why they are only at Mass (these days) and not the theatre, cinema or library.

I could care less if babies and toddlers are not allowed at theaters/cinemas/libraries.  Those are places of leisure and entertainment.  Nobody is required to go. For me, the issue isn't about children's rights at all.  It's about giving due worship to God, obeying God and The Church, and making sure that Catholics who have reached the age of reason are allowed access to the sacraments, including parents of young children. 

Quote
Your anecdotes are different from mine.  You keep insisting that babies and toddlers can be quiet at Mass, but do you mean YOUR babies and toddlers?  At any rate, in 20 years I have barely known it to be the case that the presence of babies and toddlers at Mass didn't inevitably result in crying and disturbance for the majority of the Mass.

Yes, my experience is different than yours.  That is correct.  Which means, your experience is not necessarily the one that applies to all and every situation.  The same applies to mine.  My experience does not negate yours and yours does not negate mine.  If your parish has a problem with noisy babies and toddlers (or even adults, for that matter), then your priest should address it.  If he refuses to, then that is another issue. He has a duty to expect due reverance at Mass, and to teach and admonish his flock about that. 

Please don't misrepresent what I said.  I never said my younger children and only my children are capable of being quiet at Mass.  Several other posters have said their children are capable, as well.  As I've said before, I've witnessed it on a regular basis from many other parents, too.  When parents teach their little ones to be quiet, then parents are able to focus their entire attention ob Mass, and not on tending to the child, because the child is quiet.  Currently, I have only 1 toddler in tow at Mass.  The others are all past toddler age.  She either sleeps on her Dad's shoulder, or sits quietly in his lap, looking at a small children's missal.  We both ignore her the whole time, in favor of paying attention to Mass.  I've seen many families accomplish this same thing, on a regular basis.

So, I keep insisting it's possible, because I've seen it in practice.  That doesn't mean where parents neglect to keep their kids quiet that it's not a problem.  It is.  I've admitted several times that if parents take their kids to Mass, then they have a serious duty to teach them how to behave.

Finally, in regards to your friend who used to leave her young children home.  I'm glad she was able to find a way to make that work for her.  Not all parents can, and that's ok.  It doesn't mean she was wrong, though.  She wasn't.  It also doesn't make those of us to do bring our children to Mass wrong, either.  I understand that we will likely just have to agree to disagree on this, though, and that is fine, too.  The Church, in her wisdom, allows for plurality of thought on certain things, and I think this is one of those issues that she allows parents the freedom to choose what is best for them.  I've yet to see arguments on either side that show me that the Church says young children are forbidden to come to Mass OR that young children have a right to be there.  From what I can tell, she is silent on the issue of bringing children to Mass, in and of itself, which means parents are allowed to decide for themselves.  She is clear that we must be quiet, though. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on October 08, 2019, 12:53:45 PM
This is all being very over thought.
Its nobody's business what parents do with their children, or where they bring them, as long as their children are not disruptive to others.

If during mass, a parent is too lazy and rude to prevent their children from disrupting others, if not EVERYBODY in the chapel for that matter, a priest should address the issue with them after mass. If the behavior continues, those in the parish should not associate with the rude disruptive parents, and use the strength of social pressure to correct their selfish behavior. Make them feel like THAT family, you know, the family that cant concern themselves with their parishioners well being, but want to be included in the parish, and enjoy all this has to offer.
"Hey, nevermind the fact that I sat idle while my shrieking 18 month old gave you a headache at mass this morning. Wanna show me that rental you were talking about? You're still deducting $100 from rent for parishioners, right?"

We all know THAT family...this was very funny. Thanks for a laugh.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on October 08, 2019, 01:01:21 PM
I think a women who comes, humbly, MODESTLY, and reverently to Mass, and spends the time praying, offering up her children and husband to God, and teaching her babies about Our Lord is getting all the graces available.

Why do you think that? 

Why don't you think that a women who comes, humbly, MODESTLY, and reverently to Mass, and spends all the time praying and adoring Our Lord is getting all the graces available, offering up her loved ones of course, but being able to devote ALL her attention to the very reason she is there - the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar?

Does Our Lord demand that you teach your babies about Him while at Mass?  Why do you think it is necessary to do this when you could, instead, teach them about Our Lord at some other time, leaving you free to be wholly absorbed in Him while at Mass?

Surely it should be your priority to be being entirely present for Our Lord at Mass.  Everything else flows from that.

First of all, a large portion of Mass is already dedicated to teaching people about Our Lord... see readings, gospel, sermon. My point is that when you are taking care of your children you ARE fully absorbed in Him according to your state in life. You are at mass exactly the way you are supposed to be. A nun at mass with a child is NOT, she is supposed to be at mass alone. Do you see my point? Our spiritual lives have different definitions of perfect contemplation in different seasons of our lives. A prayerful woman, modestly dressed (and I keep stressing this because I don't think an immodestly dressed women of any age or season of life is disposed to receive graces at mass, and it is important) with her children (her vocation) around her, on her lap, etc...is contemplating Our Lord in exactly the way she ought. Periods of long silence and so forth are for another season.

Your vision of the mother at Mass - "with her children (her vocation) around her, on her lap, etc" - differs from that of the pre-Vatican II mother of a friend of mine, who went to Mass alone in order to be fully with Our Lord and couldn't bear to be distracted from the Mass even for a moment. Your vision has not always been shared by all mothers, although I expect most here would agree with you.

So why the difference?  Was my friend's pre-Vatican II mother wrong?  From the anecdotes I have heard, many pre-Vatican II mothers did not share your idea of how they should be present at Mass.  Something has clearly changed.

Your post reminds me of nmoerbeek's post.  You both seem to find it essential to be at Mass with your infants and children, as if this is the greatest expression of your vocation and your adherence to it.  But the greatest expression of your vocation, of everyone's vocation, which is to save our souls, is to adore Our Lord with every fibre of our being, even to the exclusion of everything else.  Attendance at Mass with 100% devotion, attention and stillness, was once considered more appropriate than being at Mass surrounded by distracting babies and toddlers.

The question is - why do you and nmoerbeek hold the image of the parent at Mass surrounded by his/her brood as the ideal?  And why doesn't the image of the parent who deliberately goes to Mass without accompanying infants in order to be alone and undistracted with Our Lord not appeal to you?

I blame the priests.

Ugh, if you say that we find it "essential" again, I'm gonna scream. We have been down this road...no option...
You are single, your job is to save your soul. I am a mother, my vocation is to save my children's souls, by which act I will save my own. Succinct.

I find your use of the term "brood" very negative. You have repeatedly talked about how big families are "playing a demographic game" and blah blah. Do you think couples should have big families? Do you think people should get married period? Sometimes it seems like you don't think we should even exist.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Miriam_M on October 08, 2019, 01:10:01 PM

for you to assume that a parent who needs to remove a child needs to "learn how to discipline" is highly uncharitable and rashly judgmental of you.

I NEVER said that. I said spending more than ten minutes outside Mass, two utterly different things. Taking a kid out, discipline, and pep talk is a two/three minutes operation. If a parent is doing this more than two or three times in mass then yes, they should focus on discipline a little more.

They are not two 'utterly different things."   Where is it written that 11 minutes with a child is proof of the mother's incompetence in discipline? You did say that more than 10 minutes was supposed proof, from your regal position, that the mother is incompetent at discipline.  You don't know that.  It depends on the child in question.  Some are unruly beyond what we would consider normal for their age.  And the point is that I speak much more from empathy than even from experience with my second child, who was more physically active than many boys her age.  So this is not about self-defense as much as defense of others and about judgments neither you nor I has divine insight to pronounce.

What you and I can say is that some parents are poor at discipline, and that weakness may be apparent in non-church environments as well, if we were to spend several days with the family. But neither you nor I can make absolutist and quantitative statements about children and parents who are strangers to us. You are setting yourself up as some absolute authority.  In the example I cited earlier -- of the large family who had not had previous problems with their young children -- I can tell you that this excellent mother for whom I have nothing but respect, often spent more than 10 minutes redirecting and calming her child outside of the pew.  Collectively, she could have spent easily 30 minutes in total at a High Mass.  Since then, nature seems to have taken over and he is much more self-controlled than he once was.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on October 08, 2019, 03:24:05 PM

for you to assume that a parent who needs to remove a child needs to "learn how to discipline" is highly uncharitable and rashly judgmental of you.

I NEVER said that. I said spending more than ten minutes outside Mass, two utterly different things. Taking a kid out, discipline, and pep talk is a two/three minutes operation. If a parent is doing this more than two or three times in mass then yes, they should focus on discipline a little more.

They are not two 'utterly different things."   Where is it written that 11 minutes with a child is proof of the mother's incompetence in discipline? You did say that more than 10 minutes was supposed proof, from your regal position, that the mother is incompetent at discipline.  You don't know that.  It depends on the child in question.  Some are unruly beyond what we would consider normal for their age.  And the point is that I speak much more from empathy than even from experience with my second child, who was more physically active than many boys her age.  So this is not about self-defense as much as defense of others and about judgments neither you nor I has divine insight to pronounce.

What you and I can say is that some parents are poor at discipline, and that weakness may be apparent in non-church environments as well, if we were to spend several days with the family. But neither you nor I can make absolutist and quantitative statements about children and parents who are strangers to us. You are setting yourself up as some absolute authority.  In the example I cited earlier -- of the large family who had not had previous problems with their young children -- I can tell you that this excellent mother for whom I have nothing but respect, often spent more than 10 minutes redirecting and calming her child outside of the pew.  Collectively, she could have spent easily 30 minutes in total at a High Mass.  Since then, nature seems to have taken over and he is much more self-controlled than he once was.

I would point out that a child who is unruly beyond what is considered normal has not had enough discipline, and needs more, especially more CONSISTENT discipline.

There are way way too many parents who talk about how they have tried "everything" and their child is still unruly. It is like the fat lady who goes on Biggest Loser claiming that she has tried "every diet" and nothing works. Miraculously when she starts working out and eating smaller portions loses 5/6 pounds a week. I have never met one of these mysterious unruly children who do not respond to CONSISTENT discipline. Now, that being said, I have gone through periods in my life when, because of illness, pregnancy homeshooling, etc, I haven't had time to really focus on discipline and I have paid for it. You can see the difference in a matter of days when you let the ball drop. I would never blame a mom for dropping the ball a little. I GET IT. I am just saying, that if a mother is having a very hard time with Mass, and the child is truly disrupting the majority of Mass, then focus on discipline.

P.S. When I was a young mother, and even now, I have never had a problem seeking out mentorship from older more experienced mothers. I have always valued and learned a lot from these women. I couldn't put a value on some of the talks, guidance, etc. Why is it that when a mother gives some advice about discipline, or anything else, it is considered so "judgemental." I am speaking from long years of experience. There is no need to get in a huff. Like every bit of advice in the world, some will take it, some won't. Nothing applies to everyone equally. I have seen many many "problem children" or "temperamental" children  become calm, obedient, and much happier as a result of good discipline. I think people (myself very much included) do a huge disservice to their children when they neglect really good discipline. You short change yourself and your child. Anyway...that's all about discipline, really, it was just a little suggestion that might make Mass easier.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Davis Blank - EG on October 08, 2019, 06:23:26 PM
Just noting that from her posts I gather that Miriam's children are all adults.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 08, 2019, 08:53:26 PM
Ugh, if you say that we find it "essential" again, I'm gonna scream. We have been down this road...no option...
You are single, your job is to save your soul. I am a mother, my vocation is to save my children's souls, by which act I will save my own. Succinct.

Yet another outburst from a wounded ego, just like so many others on this thread.  You say I have a "job" but you have a "vocation".  This is despite the fact that the Church considers the single life to be a vocation.  What arrogance. 

It's not entirely your fault. You have been encouraged by misguided, spineless priests to believe that you belong to a special category of Catholic who is going to save the Church - the Traditional Catholic Family who must be appeased by lesser Catholics like me.  This probably explains your selfish and angry responses on this thread to any challenge to this absurd fantasy.

And enough of your "ughs". Most Trads I am familiar with live in cities or close to them. They have a number of TLMs to choose from which are 1hr or less away.  And they have family support nearby.  And they still insist on taking their babies and toddlers to Mass.  You live miles away from everything.  Who's problem is that, exactly?

I've sorry I don't agree with the elevated role you have been foolishly allocated and which you obviously embrace.  It must be hard to have your ego bubble pricked.

You have my sympathies.

But like so many other posters on this thread, you haven't a clue what's been lost.  There are exceptions, thank goodness, but as usual, those who insist that babies and toddlers should be at Mass always shout the loudest.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: MundaCorMeum on October 08, 2019, 09:09:00 PM
Quote
You say I have a "job" but you have a "vocation".  This is despite the fact that the Church considers the single life to be a vocation.

This may very well be opening another can of worms, but....technically, the traditional teaching is that neither marriage nor single life is a vocation.  They are states in life that one may choose, if they are not called to either the vocations of the priesthood or religious life:

https://catholicism.org/is-marriage-a-vocation.html
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 08, 2019, 09:39:44 PM
Quote
You say I have a "job" but you have a "vocation".  This is despite the fact that the Church considers the single life to be a vocation.

This may very well be opening another can of worms, but....technically, the traditional teaching is that neither marriage nor single life is a vocation.  They are states in life that one may choose, if they are not called to either the vocations of the priesthood or religious life:

https://catholicism.org/is-marriage-a-vocation.html

Thank you.

It was the pulling of rank that annoyed me.  But I suppose if people are willing to let a baby or toddler dictate how much attention they give to Our Lord at Mass, then ranks and their various designations can't mean much.

Babies and toddlers rule at Mass now, and we must all know our place.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: mikemac on October 08, 2019, 09:50:25 PM
Hey why not open another can of worms.  She's already got the record for the longest derailment of a thread in the forums history.  By just continually repeating herself to boot.  All she is doing is continually trying to push buttons.  You should just ignore her so this stupid thread can die.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 08, 2019, 10:05:27 PM
Hey why not open another can of worms.  She's already got the record for the longest derailment of a thread in the forums history.  By just continually repeating herself to boot.  All she is doing is continually trying to push buttons.  You should just ignore her so this stupid thread can die.

So why don't you lead by example and stop posting your nasty comments?  Because I'm not going to stop responding to the bile you and others keep directing at me.

On two occasions I have been ready to stop posting on this thread and, after a day or two, there's been another bunch of posts which insult me and misrepresent what I have said in true toddler tantrum like fashion.  And these will usually include an especially nasty post by you.

So go on then.. off you go, you unbearably unpleasant man?

Be the beginning of the end that you wish to see and depart now.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: orate on October 08, 2019, 10:20:37 PM
“Make a sacrifice by not saying the nasty word or answering an insulting remark. For in that way, we lower ourselves to the vulgarity we condemn. No one will ever get ahead of us so long as he stays behind to kick us.” Archbishop Fulton Sheen (Wartime Prayer Book)
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: Miriam_M on October 08, 2019, 11:24:39 PM

I would point out that a child who is unruly beyond what is considered normal has not had enough discipline, and needs more, especially more CONSISTENT discipline.

You have arbitrarily decided for the entire human race "what is considered normal."  You actually quantified it.  But you are not a universal or absolute authority on the discipline of children.

I also think you don't understand my point:  It is that I refuse to judge other mothers until I see plainly that they are unable or unwilling to discipline their children.  I pointed out much earlier in the thread an example, at a N.O. Mass, of a truly clueless mother, who in that case was unwilling to discipline, considered her children's antics a form of entertainment, albeit misplaced, and cared nothing for her neighbors.  The child utterly derailed the Mass, which was a great act of selfishness on the mother's part.

But rather than limit your condemnation to such clear violations that would probably be universally criticized, you're willing to set an arbitrary time limit and assume that anyone who can't meet that must be an ineffective or weak mother.  This is not about me.  (Yes, thank you, Davis, my children are not tiny any more!)  And what was more difficult for me was not my child's noise -- she wasn't very noisy -- but her restlessness, because I knew that would be distracting to others.

I'm not an incompetent mother.  I'm known for being custodial, watchful, and alert. I've been told my children are exceptionally well behaved and always were in school.  I don't need your advice, and wouldn't have needed it when my younger was very little.

But even that is not the point.  it's that I am simply unwilling to assess anyone's parenting abilities until I have sufficient evidence.  Spending 11 minutes with a child outside of the pew is not sufficient evidence on which to base a negative judgment.

Quote
There are way way too many parents who talk about how they have tried "everything" and their child is still unruly.

Correct, but it is not always evident in a church setting who those parents are.  I also don't think you've read the thread from the start because some of us covered various situations which we do find intolerable -- such as (for me) fathers of large families leaving 100% of the pew oversight to his wife whom we assume has only two hands.  I don't consider it "manly" of men to do this. I consider it selfish and lazy.  Fortunately, this only applies to a couple of fathers in my parish.

I have learned that overall, I need to work more on my own level of tolerance and charitable assumptions than others need to work on allowing me a perfect Mass experience with children who behave like angelic beings (which most of them do, actually, at very early Masses).

I hope someday you will get there as well.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: diaduit on October 09, 2019, 06:30:35 AM
This is all being very over thought.
Its nobody's business what parents do with their children, or where they bring them, as long as their children are not disruptive to others.

If during mass, a parent is too lazy and rude to prevent their children from disrupting others, if not EVERYBODY in the chapel for that matter, a priest should address the issue with them after mass. If the behavior continues, those in the parish should not associate with the rude disruptive parents, and use the strength of social pressure to correct their selfish behavior. Make them feel like THAT family, you know, the family that cant concern themselves with their parishioners well being, but want to be included in the parish, and enjoy all this has to offer.
"Hey, nevermind the fact that I sat idle while my shrieking 18 month old gave you a headache at mass this morning. Wanna show me that rental you were talking about? You're still deducting $100 from rent for parishioners, right?"

I actually think this is on the mark. 
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on October 09, 2019, 09:24:08 AM
Ugh, if you say that we find it "essential" again, I'm gonna scream. We have been down this road...no option...
You are single, your job is to save your soul. I am a mother, my vocation is to save my children's souls, by which act I will save my own. Succinct.

Yet another outburst from a wounded ego, just like so many others on this thread.  You say I have a "job" but you have a "vocation".  This is despite the fact that the Church considers the single life to be a vocation.  What arrogance. 

It's not entirely your fault. You have been encouraged by misguided, spineless priests to believe that you belong to a special category of Catholic who is going to save the Church - the Traditional Catholic Family who must be appeased by lesser Catholics like me.  This probably explains your selfish and angry responses on this thread to any challenge to this absurd fantasy.

And enough of your "ughs". Most Trads I am familiar with live in cities or close to them. They have a number of TLMs to choose from which are 1hr or less away.  And they have family support nearby.  And they still insist on taking their babies and toddlers to Mass.  You live miles away from everything.  Who's problem is that, exactly?

I've sorry I don't agree with the elevated role you have been foolishly allocated and which you obviously embrace.  It must be hard to have your ego bubble pricked.

You have my sympathies.

But like so many other posters on this thread, you haven't a clue what's been lost.  There are exceptions, thank goodness, but as usual, those who insist that babies and toddlers should be at Mass always shout the loudest.

Don't take this as an insult at all, it really isn't meant to be. However I am pretty sure...being "single" is not a vocation. Dedicating yourself as a single person (consecrated virgin/etc) witnessing to Christ in the world is a vocation. Waiting around to get married and then it never happens...not a vocation. These are perhaps not "vocations" per se, as in monastic or priestly callings, but the "vocations" many saints and spiritual writers talk about.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on October 09, 2019, 09:39:42 AM
Ugh, if you say that we find it "essential" again, I'm gonna scream. We have been down this road...no option...
You are single, your job is to save your soul. I am a mother, my vocation is to save my children's souls, by which act I will save my own. Succinct.

Yet another outburst from a wounded ego, just like so many others on this thread.  You say I have a "job" but you have a "vocation".  This is despite the fact that the Church considers the single life to be a vocation.  What arrogance. 

It's not entirely your fault. You have been encouraged by misguided, spineless priests to believe that you belong to a special category of Catholic who is going to save the Church - the Traditional Catholic Family who must be appeased by lesser Catholics like me.  This probably explains your selfish and angry responses on this thread to any challenge to this absurd fantasy.

And enough of your "ughs". Most Trads I am familiar with live in cities or close to them. They have a number of TLMs to choose from which are 1hr or less away.  And they have family support nearby.  And they still insist on taking their babies and toddlers to Mass.  You live miles away from everything.  Who's problem is that, exactly?

I've sorry I don't agree with the elevated role you have been foolishly allocated and which you obviously embrace.  It must be hard to have your ego bubble pricked.

You have my sympathies.

But like so many other posters on this thread, you haven't a clue what's been lost.  There are exceptions, thank goodness, but as usual, those who insist that babies and toddlers should be at Mass always shout the loudest.

First, see first bold portion. Think for just a minute about what it is you think we lost after Vatican II. Now think about the largest group of trad Catholics that are living and working together with a convent, school, church, and essentially Catholic town. Now think about the trad seminaries and convents that are bursting at the seams. Every vibrant trad parish is full of families, priests come from families, nuns come from families, monks come from families. Why exactly is it that you have a problem looking at this from a demographic standpoint? The Archbishop himself said that families were saving the church, families were the future of the Faith. I am not saying families should be worshiped. (I went over this before you and refused to answer my posts)

Even if the answer to the future was not demographics what is the solution? I know you are saying that we need converts, that is fine. I love converts!! A lot of what you have said though seems like you don't want big families (I also said this to you already). Do you think we need a church full of single converts? Would they then not get married? Is the whole future about conversion; like every twenty years we just have to convert a few hundred thousand more single people and that is the future? Even if the future was conversions, those people would become Catholic, and raise Catholic families right?

Secondly, see second bold portion.  :deadhorse:
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on October 09, 2019, 09:42:17 AM
Hey why not open another can of worms.  She's already got the record for the longest derailment of a thread in the forums history.  By just continually repeating herself to boot.  All she is doing is continually trying to push buttons.  You should just ignore her so this stupid thread can die.

So why don't you lead by example and stop posting your nasty comments?  Because I'm not going to stop responding to the bile you and others keep directing at me.

On two occasions I have been ready to stop posting on this thread and, after a day or two, there's been another bunch of posts which insult me and misrepresent what I have said in true toddler tantrum like fashion.  And these will usually include an especially nasty post by you.

So go on then.. off you go, you unbearably unpleasant man?

Be the beginning of the end that you wish to see and depart now.

That is really unfair. I actually responded two or three times to you with neutral thoughtful posts and you ignored them completely. Don't ignore the neutral or even nice posts and then get crabby about the mean ones...that is hardly fair.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 09, 2019, 11:01:26 AM
Don't take this as an insult at all, it really isn't meant to be. However I am pretty sure...being "single" is not a vocation. Dedicating yourself as a single person (consecrated virgin/etc) witnessing to Christ in the world is a vocation. Waiting around to get married and then it never happens...not a vocation. These are perhaps not "vocations" per se, as in monastic or priestly callings, but the "vocations" many saints and spiritual writers talk about.

I was annoyed with you pulling rank, although you are not the only person to have done this.  I mean, look at what else you said here.  "Waiting around to get married and then it never happens...not a vocation."  Can you not see the disdain in that comment, or is it me who is taking things too personally?  At any rate, vocation or state of life - I don't care.  But I'm not so keen on being associated with the idea of being single simply because I couldn't get a man.  Would you?

Besides, according to the link posted by Mundacormeum, marriage isn't a vocation either.  It's a state of life.

Quote
This may very well be opening another can of worms, but....technically, the traditional teaching is that neither marriage nor single life is a vocation.  They are states in life that one may choose, if they are not called to either the vocations of the priesthood or religious life:

https://catholicism.org/is-marriage-a-vocation.html

This surprised me, so I clicked on another Catholic website which said that marriage IS a vocation.

https://faithandmarriage.org/marriage-is-a-vocation/

So I'm none the wiser on marriage as vocation or state of life, but I'm fine with state of life for not being called to marriage.

Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 09, 2019, 11:20:19 AM
Hey why not open another can of worms.  She's already got the record for the longest derailment of a thread in the forums history.  By just continually repeating herself to boot.  All she is doing is continually trying to push buttons.  You should just ignore her so this stupid thread can die.

So why don't you lead by example and stop posting your nasty comments?  Because I'm not going to stop responding to the bile you and others keep directing at me.

On two occasions I have been ready to stop posting on this thread and, after a day or two, there's been another bunch of posts which insult me and misrepresent what I have said in true toddler tantrum like fashion.  And these will usually include an especially nasty post by you.

So go on then.. off you go, you unbearably unpleasant man?

Be the beginning of the end that you wish to see and depart now.

That is really unfair. I actually responded two or three times to you with neutral thoughtful posts and you ignored them completely. Don't ignore the neutral or even nice posts and then get crabby about the mean ones...that is hardly fair.

It's impossible for me to answer every post, even the nice ones.  There have been a number of posts I would have like to reply to, but I didn't have the time or energy.

Besides, some forum members want this discussion to end.  And you've just asked me three more questions, which is fine, and I assumed you wanted a response.  I'm just saying that the option is available to branch off into a pleasant discussion about states of life and vocations and leave this touchy subject alone.  If you like.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on October 09, 2019, 12:48:34 PM
Don't take this as an insult at all, it really isn't meant to be. However I am pretty sure...being "single" is not a vocation. Dedicating yourself as a single person (consecrated virgin/etc) witnessing to Christ in the world is a vocation. Waiting around to get married and then it never happens...not a vocation. These are perhaps not "vocations" per se, as in monastic or priestly callings, but the "vocations" many saints and spiritual writers talk about.

I was annoyed with you pulling rank, although you are not the only person to have done this.  I mean, look at what else you said here.  "Waiting around to get married and then it never happens...not a vocation."  Can you not see the disdain in that comment, or is it me who is taking things too personally?  At any rate, vocation or state of life - I don't care.  But I'm not so keen on being associated with the idea of being single simply because I couldn't get a man.  Would you?

Besides, according to the link posted by Mundacormeum, marriage isn't a vocation either.  It's a state of life.

Quote
This may very well be opening another can of worms, but....technically, the traditional teaching is that neither marriage nor single life is a vocation.  They are states in life that one may choose, if they are not called to either the vocations of the priesthood or religious life:

https://catholicism.org/is-marriage-a-vocation.html

This surprised me, so I clicked on another Catholic website which said that marriage IS a vocation.

https://faithandmarriage.org/marriage-is-a-vocation/

So I'm none the wiser on marriage as vocation or state of life, but I'm fine with state of life for not being called to marriage.

Like I said, it is not disdainful and it is not meant to be mean. There are plenty of LOVELY single people in the world who might get married if the opportunity presents itself, they may not. They are not sitting around desperate to get married, they may even be thinking they probably don't want to get married. I know plenty of women like this. All of those things are fine. My only point was that unless they say "I am definitely not getting married, I am consecrating myself to God as a single person" then it isn't a "vocation" yet; it is just them being single.
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: awkwardcustomer on October 09, 2019, 02:30:21 PM
Don't take this as an insult at all, it really isn't meant to be. However I am pretty sure...being "single" is not a vocation. Dedicating yourself as a single person (consecrated virgin/etc) witnessing to Christ in the world is a vocation. Waiting around to get married and then it never happens...not a vocation. These are perhaps not "vocations" per se, as in monastic or priestly callings, but the "vocations" many saints and spiritual writers talk about.

I was annoyed with you pulling rank, although you are not the only person to have done this.  I mean, look at what else you said here.  "Waiting around to get married and then it never happens...not a vocation."  Can you not see the disdain in that comment, or is it me who is taking things too personally?  At any rate, vocation or state of life - I don't care.  But I'm not so keen on being associated with the idea of being single simply because I couldn't get a man.  Would you?

Besides, according to the link posted by Mundacormeum, marriage isn't a vocation either.  It's a state of life.

Quote
This may very well be opening another can of worms, but....technically, the traditional teaching is that neither marriage nor single life is a vocation.  They are states in life that one may choose, if they are not called to either the vocations of the priesthood or religious life:

https://catholicism.org/is-marriage-a-vocation.html

This surprised me, so I clicked on another Catholic website which said that marriage IS a vocation.

https://faithandmarriage.org/marriage-is-a-vocation/

So I'm none the wiser on marriage as vocation or state of life, but I'm fine with state of life for not being called to marriage.

Like I said, it is not disdainful and it is not meant to be mean. There are plenty of LOVELY single people in the world who might get married if the opportunity presents itself, they may not. They are not sitting around desperate to get married, they may even be thinking they probably don't want to get married. I know plenty of women like this. All of those things are fine. My only point was that unless they say "I am definitely not getting married, I am consecrating myself to God as a single person" then it isn't a "vocation" yet; it is just them being single.

Okay.

I've been wanting to ask you - is your coffeeandcigarette user name meant to be ironic, or do you actually enjoy a coffee and a cigarette from time to time?
Title: Re: My liberal church finally went over the edge.
Post by: coffeeandcigarette on October 10, 2019, 11:28:52 AM
Don't take this as an insult at all, it really isn't meant to be. However I am pretty sure...being "single" is not a vocation. Dedicating yourself as a single person (consecrated virgin/etc) witnessing to Christ in the world is a vocation. Waiting around to get married and then it never happens...not a vocation. These are perhaps not "vocations" per se, as in monastic or priestly callings, but the "vocations" many saints and spiritual writers talk about.

I was annoyed with you pulling rank, although you are not the only person to have done this.  I mean, look at what else you said here.  "Waiting around to get married and then it never happens...not a vocation."  Can you not see the disdain in that comment, or is it me who is taking things too personally?  At any rate, vocation or state of life - I don't care.  But I'm not so keen on being associated with the idea of being single simply because I couldn't get a man.  Would you?

Besides, according to the link posted by Mundacormeum, marriage isn't a vocation either.  It's a state of life.

Quote
This may very well be opening another can of worms, but....technically, the traditional teaching is that neither marriage nor single life is a vocation.  They are states in life that one may choose, if they are not called to either the vocations of the priesthood or religious life:

https://catholicism.org/is-marriage-a-vocation.html

This surprised me, so I clicked on another Catholic website which said that marriage IS a vocation.

https://faithandmarriage.org/marriage-is-a-vocation/

So I'm none the wiser on marriage as vocation or state of life, but I'm fine with state of life for not being called to marriage.

Like I said, it is not disdainful and it is not meant to be mean. There are plenty of LOVELY single people in the world who might get married if the opportunity presents itself, they may not. They are not sitting around desperate to get married, they may even be thinking they probably don't want to get married. I know plenty of women like this. All of those things are fine. My only point was that unless they say "I am definitely not getting married, I am consecrating myself to God as a single person" then it isn't a "vocation" yet; it is just them being single.

Okay.

I've been wanting to ask you - is your coffeeandcigarette user name meant to be ironic, or do you actually enjoy a coffee and a cigarette from time to time?

When I was in uni, and throughout my life, I have seen people trying to be "intellectual." Sitting around smoking in cafes and talking about Kant, or whatever they learned five seconds ago in class...LOL. It is ironic. It is a reminder not to let myself get either too involved, or too pompous. Also, a reminder to hardly ever come on here and indulge my love of debate and Cath chat. I feel like these forums are a blessing and curse. On one hand, they give isolated trads (all trads...lol) a chance to talk about important issues, vent, and empathize. On the other hand, they are an opportunity to spend hours a day bitching about the church, and feeling very superior, while what they really need to be doing to grow in holiness is spend time in prayer. How many people on forums feel really catholic because they discuss "issues" all the time, but hardly ever lead their family in prayer, crack open a spiritual book, or go to adoration. I think a little less chat, a little more action would be good. What example should people set for their children? Loving God in prayer and growing in holiness, or chatting about the Church/world and getting more angry, bitter, and hopeless by the year? So there is the deep reason, LOL, for my silly forum name. Now, since I have totally over indulged myself in this particular topic...I should probably go away for a while. My normal logins here are once-monthly for a few minutes, but as you know, I've been very bad this week. ;)