My liberal church finally went over the edge.

[awkwardcustomer]

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?

[bigbadtrad]

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.

[awkwardcustomer]

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. 

[Jacob]

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!

[Miriam_M]

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.

[Prayerful]

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.

[awkwardcustomer]

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.

[2Towers]

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]

[Traditionallyruralmom]

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

[2Towers]

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.   

[Traditionallyruralmom]

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!

[Ascetik]

We're in the same diocese. I sent you a PM OP.

[Miriam_M]

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.

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. 

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.

[awkwardcustomer]

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.

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.

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.

[Michael Wilson]

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.