The “Masculine” Church: Be Careful What You Wish For

Be careful what you wish for - you just might get it.

Recently, I read a post online that really…well, bothered me.

It was a short post in support of the Latin Mass (yay!) but the author, in my humble opinion, did the legendary Mass of the Ages a great disservice by explaining his reason for liking it so much:

  • To him, he found the Extraordinary Rite to be so great precisely because it is so masculine.

*Pauses to bang head into wall – will explain why soon (once I recover).*

He then went on to say that he believes the reason behind why so many seemingly “good” Catholics lash out at the Tridentine Mass is because of this “masculinity.”

While the first part of his text left me needing migraine medicine for the rest of the evening (just kidding – but I will explain more soon), I would have to agree with his second viewpoint wholeheartedly: I think he is right.

But not for the the reasons that he seemed to think.

Now I am not by any means a theologian. I am simply a lay person, with two Master’s degrees wherein Catholic spirituality, writings, texts, and thought played a role in my curriculum.

But I am not a theological scholar, and I naturally submit all of my opinions to the magisterium of the Catholic Church and will change them if they are found by those with the correct authority to be incorrect.

With that said, I do not believe that such an opinion is carved in dogmatic stone, and therefore I would like to present a little friendly criticism…because I think it is extremely important.

The Trouble With Imbalance

So why did his stance bother me so much?

What is wrong with liking the Mass because one feels it is “masculine?”

Aren’t more and more of us growing tired of the huggy, touchy-feely, kumbaya party going on at our local the-hippy-generation-is-not-over-yet, church?

Wouldn’t I be more inclined to agree with all that he said?

Yes, and no.

While I am all in favor of masculinity (hey, I am a girl! Masculinity is nice.), I find there to be a great problem that arises when we take either form of the Mass (Extraordinary or Ordinary) and send it leaning too strongly in one direction or the other.

And that is what I have seen happen time and time again, in more places than just one.

Someone will point out that the “effeminate” church is bad (agreed), focus on how masculinity needs restored to its proper place (agreed)…but then they close their case.

End of story.

Time, and time, and time…again.

Eventually, at some point, I began to question: what ever happened to reclaiming the dignity of the feminine as well? Rescuing it from the land of “effeminite-ness?” (Ok, I just made up a word.) That is an intrinsically valuable element that cannot be left out of the equation.

I felt that by focusing on the one, to the exclusion of rescuing and reclaiming the other, that a very dangerous path was being set out upon.

For those like our author, all that they seem to both see and, most of all, appreciate (based on their words – I am not judging their interior intention) is the masculine element of the Mass – to the exclusion of anything positive regarding the feminine.

This sort of mindset, IMHO, places Traditionalism on a very slippery slope – one that should be stopped, cut short, and prevented from continuing immediately.

Why?

Because a repeated harping upon the glories of the masculine, combined with an utter refusal to recognize the positive qualities of the feminine, threatens to lead us in the opposite direction too strongly – thereby turning Traditionalism into a hyper-masculine, overly legalistic, the-devil-is-in-the-details, fringe group of macho-Catholics, ready to stare down their pointy noises, and wave their law-abiding sword, at any little “improper” urchin who dares wander into the four walls of their lovely church.

You know, the type who cruelly berate people for wearing shorts, or make snarky comments at them for not wearing a mantilla, or jump all over them and play politics if they say one little thing that someone does not “like.”

A people with plenty of legalistic justice – but completely lacking in any sense of mercy.

The type of individuals who turned so many against us Christians centuries ago, and provided a catalyst for the discontent that has helped spawn a hideous New World Order, increasingly devoid of authentic Christianity and the possibility for true salvation.

It is, therefore, comments like those of this unknown man that worry me, because they never seem balanced.

They seem reactive.

They seem quick to react to, and criticize, the weaknesses of the “overly feminized” Church (which I absolutely agree needs changed), but then they throw themselves heavily into glorifying far too much the ideals of the “masculine.”

Is this not but the same problem, reacting by unhealthily swinging the scales to the other far end of the spectrum?

If so, why do we think that there will not be problems there as well?

Why do we think that a church heavily focused on masculinity will somehow be better than the overly feminine one that so many of us long to escape?

In fact, is it not possible that such a church could be even worse?

Keeping the Scales Balanced

What I really wish is that the anonymous poster had taken a much more balanced approach.

If only he had found that the Latin Mass appealed to him because it contains a perfectly healthy understanding of how to incorporate both the masculine and the feminine (without leaning to either extreme) into one amazing liturgy.

If only his comment had taken a little bit more of a turn in this direction:

  • “I discovered that I enjoy the Latin Mass because it is so perfectly balanced – a true display of dignity before the eyes of God on every level. The elements of the feminine were neither overly celebrated or negated, but raised to the true worth and appreciation that they deserve, such as a correct understanding of mercy, beauty, mystery, and the luminous interior wonder of a soul reaching out to its creator . The masculine also flourished in a most extraordinary way, providing a balanced, timeless structure / foundation of tradition and protective guidelines that gave one a deep sense of security, while helping prevent the feminine elements from becoming too soft and “gushy.” Overall, it was a perfect celebration because neither the masculine nor the feminine was in a state of imbalance. They both kept the other in check with their proper use. All was in perfect harmony and working together for a higher good. It was dignity and true worship at its highest level.”

If only he had seen that.

But instead?

Everything was all about how masculine it was.

And that, in my opinion (after banging my head into the wall at such an unhealthy swing), is just as risky a door to open as focusing too much on the feminine.

An Imbalanced Church – “Macho” Style

Just for a moment, lets give the anonymous author just what he seems to like so much: an entirely masculine service.

Be careful what you wish for - you just might get it.

Be careful what you wish for – you just might get it.

Try to imagine such an experience if you can, by taking away from it everything that could possibly be classified as “feminine.”

In such a place, he would naturally have four walls to house his worship (the masculine, being protective and foundational, inherently provides the basic structure), but they would be pretty barren.

Any art that existed (if any did at all – for lets face it, art is beautiful and beauty is quite feminine), such as statues, paintings, carvings, altars, etc., would be very harsh.

The edges would be cold, color would not be present (remember, there is nothing “feminine” to fill in the foundation provided with color, tenderness, and beauty), faces would not warmly and tenderly smile, hearts would not flame in imagery of love – all would be skeletal, bare bones. There would be nothing but the most minimal outline, with a greyish cast – something akin to the ugly modernist “art” that so many Traditionalists love to hate.

As our lone pilgrim sits in this stark, cold, almost barren church, maybe gazing upon a few lingering statues with war-like faces, he might notice that the congregation slowly filtering in seems very stiff.

He quickly notices that everyone seems very worried and focused on the legalistic forms of what they are doing – how they are dressed, how everyone else around them is dressed, what books they are using, how they are sitting, etc.

A woman walks in without a mantilla on, and they practically attack her, almost chasing her out the door with the harshest of words.

A man enters dressed in rags, and they proceed to do the same to him.

“Ma io sono San Francesco!,” comes the cries of the man, whose body seems to shine with an eerie luminescence, yet no one seems to notice as he is pushed violently out the door.

Our pilgrim glances at his watch, and notices that it is time for the High Mass to begin.

As the music begins to play, it catches his attention right away that the composition seems very dark, for the tones are only on the base end of the musical scale. He waits for a gentle, high note to dance on the edge of his ears, adding that sweet beauty that touches a soul in the most intimate of ways – but it never comes.

The music thunders, and all sounds like a masculine battle cry worthy of any fierce gladiator, but the heart never opens and the tears never dare to flow.

The choir is, naturally, composed of all men, which only adds to the one-sided feeling of all that he hears.

As the procession moves in an almost rhythmic march down the aisle, he sees that there is nothing particularly appealing about it either.

It seems brave, and bold – very masculine – but it does not touch his heart in a special way.

The cross that is carried is not gilded in some lovely, shining gold, bronze, or silver with elegant artistry – instead, it is completely geometrical, with only harsh edges and a greyish effect.

The vestments of the priest as he passes by shock our “masculine” devotee – they are also entirely grey, and devoid of any beauty. No lovely patterns, no artwork, no Christian symbolism – there is a complete lack of color, and certainly nothing like gold trim or sparkling fabric.

Even a warrior in an army would have something appealing in his garb.

As the Mass officially begins, he notices that the only words in his prayerbook are about justice and punishment, strength and war. He finds nothing there to speak to his heart of tenderness, forgiveness, mercy, beauty, consolation – or intimate closeness with the mystery of God.

The “God” that is being celebrated before him is devoid of anything “feminine” – his world is one of fire and stone – harsh, brutal, war-like, legalistic, foundational, and focused on the letter of the law.

He demands justice while he flexes his spiritual muscles, and nothing that anyone does can ever appease his wrath.

But then, the worst thing of all happens – the point where the consecration should begin is reached, and the priest stops.

He pauses, as if he knows not what to do.

  • The priest nervously, almost fearfully, turns a few pages, shuffles a few bookmarks, coughs in a trembling way, and quickly passes on to the end of the service.

Our masculine observer is perplexed.

What happened to the consecration?

What happened to the sacrifice of mercy and love offered by Christ on the Cross?

Where is the redemption and love for mankind that he remembers?

Even the overly “effeminate” church that he disliked so much had at least that.

The Mass ends, without a blessing (for who can deserve such a thing?), and as the dour celebrants process out of the grey, dreary church, to the sound of thundering music that makes one tremble but leaves nothing to warm the heart, our observer decides to approach the priest and ask why everything seems so strange in this colorless, heartless church.

Yet when he does so, he is taken aback, for no one will even let him anywhere near the presiding priest.

He asks the people who bar his way why they are doing so, and what is their response?

“You are just a mere man, a sinner like us. How dare you try to approach a priest of God who has just descended from the great altar. Humble yourself, and ask permission of us first, and then we will see if you are worthy enough for him to condescend to speak with one defiled by the world, such as yourself.”

They shove into his hands some leaflets on the justice of God, the laws that he must follow, and how all must be done to a “T”without a single mistake.

For there is no room for mercy here.

This is an entirely masculine church.

God is a God of justice, punishment, fire, brimstone, war and masculine strength.

But there is no room here for the feminine – no room for beauty, consolation, tears, intimacy, warmth and love.

A Church No One Would Want

Now I do not know about you, but I imagine that this man would probably never want to return to this thoroughly masculine “church” – ever again.

And why?

For the exact reasons that the anonymous poster seemed to celebrate a little too much – it is all masculine, without a trace of the feminine.

It is a church without a heart.

It is a church with a great deal of intellect (man is, after all, the head) – and a great deal of structure, rigidness, rules, theories, etc.

But there is no heart.

There is nothing to fill in (and thus balance) the masculine structure that has been created with the feminine qualities of color, beauty, life and love.

This is a church that no one would want – and while I am not a fan of the “effeminate” church, I have to admit that even our anonymous reader would probably prefer the biggest celebration of touchy, feely, “kumbaya-ness” after such a terrible experience as the one above.

While my example is clearly extreme, I wanted to strip away all elements of the feminine for a moment to show why an overemphasis on the masculine just makes no sense – for, as I attempted to reveal, if we  cease to appreciate and thus remove the proper feminine elements, the balance is also removed.

In other words, a “macho,” like an “effeminate” church, is a pretty bad proposition, to say the least.

Stay Balanced – Stay Sane – Save The Church

So what is to be done?

I would suggest that the more Traditional minded amongst us stop reacting by swinging to the other end, sit down, and take a good, honest look at the Latin Mass for what it truly is: an incredibly balanced expression of both masculine and feminine aspects, raised to their correct dignity, and turned to the worship of God accordingly.

If they do this, and are able to properly communicate it to the world, they will have a healthy “edge” on the “effeminate” church that no one will want to “rebel” against (as our masculine poster pointed out earlier – see above.)

They will draw all hearts in easily, for there all will see the restored dignity and beauty of both the masculine and the feminine – and they will be saved from unhealthy, extreme positions that can cause the heart to become either too mushy – or too cold and legalistic.

Our modern world desperately needs such a place to turn to.

It needs a place where the masculine is strong, but not overemphasized and leading towards that dreaded “machismo”.

It needs a place where the feminine is tender and compassionate, but also not overemphasized and made “effeminate.”

It needs a place where both the masculine and the feminine thrive together, each one balancing the other, creating a healthy dance of strength and beauty, justice and mercy, protection and love.

We need to work on correctly restoring both of these elements to the dignity that they deserve.

If Traditionalists can succeed in seeing this within their own world, and communicate such a vision effectively, how easily (and quickly) they will win.

So please, stop overemphasizing one over the other.

It is just too dangerous.

~*~

© Copyright 2013 Reclaiming the Sacred. All rights reserved.

The ideas expressed on this site are the intellectual

property of the author and may only be used with permission.

 

, , , , , , ,

About Reclaiming the Sacred

Can we do it? Can we as a culture reclaim the sacred, against all of those who would try to forbid us, while there is still time? Join the journey, experience the travels, and live outside all that you have ever been told. ReclaimingtheSacred.com

View all posts by Reclaiming the Sacred

Follow Reclaiming the Sacred!

Follow Reclaiming the Sacred on Twitter, YouTube, and other social media. Just click on the icons below to choose one, or more!

33 Comments on “The “Masculine” Church: Be Careful What You Wish For”

  1. NEO Says:

    Bingo, very well done. Over on our side of the aisle, we tried it. What else would you call Cromwell and company, including our own Pilgrims. Noting that by about 1650s somewhere in the neighborhood of 50% of the Massachusetts colonists were no longer believers. Or at least so say some historians.

    A balance is required, ying and yang and all that, it takes both, the church is a human institution (celebrating God, yes, but you know exactly what I mean) and humans come in both male and female, both are critically important.

    Thanks.

    Reply

    • Reclaiming the Sacred Says:

      Thank you NEO! Yes, some of the things that went on with the early pilgrims were just horrifying, and definitely helped spawn many anti-Christian sentiments. I never heard the figure that you mentioned, but I believe it.

      You are right – balance is so important. I know us girls can sometimes be too sentimental and sensitive (heck, I feel bad when someone squashes a bug!), and guys can take the other extreme on their end. But that is what is so GREAT when they work together – the masculine gives the feminine a structure to color and vivify, while keeping it from going outside of the lines so to speak and turning into a puddle of mush, and the feminine inspires the masculine to make sure that the lines it draws are in the right place and for the right reason.

      It is such an incredibly healthy balance, when it is done right. :-) I hope that more people can see that, and stop making it all about one or the other.

      Reply

      • NEO Says:

        I just heard it myself, from a historian I’ll be featuring in tomorrow’s post. I didn’t fact-check him but it sure seems plausible.

        That a very good way to describe it, like I’ve always said, as an artist I’m a good engineer, I tend to work in structure and lines, the rendering is not something I do often (or well). Doesn’t mean I can’t or don’t appreciate it, it just not something I don’t do well at all.

        Balance is the key I think, and you make the case well, I think :-)

        Reply

  2. Marc Says:

    Oh, you had to bring BALANCE into this didn’t you?! :)

    In my days as a yute, my Plan A was going to be an airline pilot and I had several certificates and licenses for flying small aircraft. When I was learning to fly under Instrument Flight a Rules* (IFR) I learned a lot about gradual course corrections vs flopping from one side of the glidepath vs the other. The former was much more orderly and controlled (thereby not getting your passengers to toss their lunch) vs the latter reactive and choppy.

    As I read your post, I thought of this flying analogy. Not perfect but I think the same idea. My natural sanguine/choleric-ness puts me in the reactive/masculine mode very easily but need to temper that through whatever will I have :) Ohh..this is what makes child rearing so difficult at times too! Bad behavior=Instant and harsh punishment…no, wait! Be cool :)

    Now there was some professional rambling! ;-)

    *IFR flying simply means you fly without referencing the visual ground and/or horizon. You rely strictly on the instrumentation in the cockpit and established procedure and charts to get where you need to go (and land, too) when the weather is foggy, heavy rain/snow etc.

    Reply

    • Reclaiming the Sacred Says:

      Hi Marc! That is a good analogy – it makes sense. I have a friend who is a pilot – he would probably like that too. I can definitely see where, in that situation, keeping cool and keeping balanced would have a very positive result. :-)

      I think it is good to want to restore the masculine elements to the Church – they are needed, so there is nothing wrong with that. But everyone seems to miss that the feminine needs “restored” too – and brought out of its improper use to where its true dignity can also be seen. Both need their dignity restored, IMHO, so that a real dynamic appreciation for the Traditional can be achieved.

      Oh, I understand about bad behavior and instant correction. While I do not have children, I have a small dog that I raised from “puppy hood” – he can be one crazy little patience tester! :-)

      IFR flying: sounds like a good analogy for faith too!

      Reply

  3. Servus Fidelis Says:

    I read the short letter to Fr. Z that you mention and simply did not get the same reaction as you obviously did, my friend. I was more reminded of the words of Cardinal Heenan after he went to the first Novus Ordo said specifically for the Cardinals of Vatican II. He said words to the effect that if this Mass becomes the only Mass the Church will be left to women and children. That, in fact, has almost happened in the Novus Ordo churches I’ve been to: the attendance by men for devotionals etc. is almost extinct and most of the men that attend Mass are merely going to please the wife.

    Since the Church Herself is a feminine aspect that most of us understand at least sub-consciously if not cognitively, and our the same can be said of our very souls: it is no wonder that the feminism of the 60′s has pushed their agenda to wanting women priestesses and girl altar servers and ushers — the last two which are now common in our local parishes. When the ‘duty’ and ‘service’ of men is REQUIRED, men will step up to the plate and serve. If women respond and take over a duty, men are happy to let them and abandon any desire to meet their obligations. Men and especially young boys need to feel a sense of ‘manliness’ in their service – or they will simply not participate. I think that this is what we are seeing all over the place — and it is sad.

    In the Traditional Mass one feels that men are being asked to defend and fight for the good and the honor of their heart and soul’s love: the Church, the teachings of the Faith, and their beloved Christ. The warrior aspect of the Christian life is mostly lost on the Novus Ordo crowd: and men have noticed. We used to have leaders who were strong men (e.g. “Real men love Christ”) and now we need bumper stickers to remind them that they are to serve Christ as well.

    I think perhaps this ‘anonymous’ writer of the letter to Fr. Z may have sensed what was stated fairly well in a article I reposted here: http://servusfidelis.wordpress.com/2013/08/10/rorate-caeli-the-devirilization-of-the-liturgy-in-the-novus-ordo-mass-exclusive-article/

    I don’t think you are wrong as you speak about balance; all I’m saying is that the balance has always been there and we now see a more effeminate Church being spawned in the often poor Masses that we see in our local parishes – which is now ‘imbalance’ personified. For the life of me, if that is all I knew of the Church, I do not see anything within the Novus Ordo that would attract me to the Church.

    Reply

    • Reclaiming the Sacred Says:

      Yes, I agree completely that I do not think that is what the guest poster was trying to say intentionally. And I do think that the masculine does need to be restored, for the same reasons that you said above.

      However, that said, I have seen this sort of language used so much in so many places within the Traditionalist movement – but I never see any sort of balance to go with it.

      I hear a great deal of reclaiming masculinity, and how the overly feminine is bad, but I never hear that the masculine and the feminine both have a dignity that needs to be properly reclaimed and restored.

      It is because of this endless, repetitive format that I have heard time and time again, that I cannot help but see an overall imbalance.

      No one ever seems to speak of the positive nature of the feminine that also needs restored. They hang on the masculine, negate the overly feminine, but never mention anything else.

      I think it would be far more healthy, IMHO, to stress equally that both the feminine and the masculine need restored to their dignity, rather than harping on one (which is what I have noticed time and time again – and which the guest poster followed suit with).

      Both the masculine and the feminine desperately need reclaimed and restored – the feminine needs rescued from being over effemenite, and the masculine needs restored from its place of “loss” as well.

      They both have a dignity that needs to resurface – I just worry that if everyone seems to only focus on restoring the masculine (as the guest poster did, and so many others do), they will end up at some point leaning too far the other way – which would be bad as well.

      But I do agree that he was not intentionally doing what he did – which is why I think it needs pointed out. :-)

      Thanks for commenting and helping to clarify.

      Reply

      • Servus Fidelis Says:

        I do agree mostly with all you say about our rescuing both the masculine and feminine; though I don’t think it is the over-effeminitism of women we need to worry about. My experience seems to echo that which is rampant in the secular world: the making of women as being more masculine. Hollywood revels in movies with women who beat the daylights out of men and save the sniveling and cowering men; governments keep pushing the limits of women to fight on the front lines; and continually try to blur the differences between men and women. And for my take, ‘viva la difference.’ I think our young men feel emasculated and I think our young ladies no longer look to men for much at all. The complementarity of men and women is disappearing and it almost seems that many of our youth are confused about their role in life and what it means to be a man or a woman. Restoration is definitely needed. I guess I see the blurring of roles being mirrored in the Novus Ordo which doesn’t help the situation.

        Reply

        • Reclaiming the Sacred Says:

          Oh, I totally agree. I see that too. I think it is a complete result of so many issues that come out of a terrible decay of both the masculine and the feminine.

          People are, like you said, so confused – and that is where I believe Traditionalism could offer them so many answers, if we can reclaim the sacred character and dignity of both the masculine and the feminine in the right way.

          But that character always shines best when in relation to each other and how they balance one another and bring out the best in each other. They are created to give – to one another, so that one can shine and be appreciated where the other lacks, and vice versa. In the end, it is such a beautiful balance, that I do not think the worst feminist in the world could deny it, if she truly saw it for what it is.

          Anything else leads to disaster, IMHO. I really should write a post on this. :-)

          Reply

  4. Matt Says:

    RTS,

    I believe you may have read too much into the guest post, and I will say that I did not get the same impression at all. What we need to do first is analyze what “wasn’t said” by the guest. The guest never makes mention that the feminine is bad, he only asserts that he likes the masculinity of the extraordinary form. There is no doubt that the Catholic Mass, whatever the form, contains both the elements of the masculine and feminine.

    Secondly, masculinity and machismo are very different things. Machismo is a very misogynistic attitude of male dominance. This is specifically found in cultures where women are subjugated. Masculinity consists of traits- protectiveness, leadership, confidence, courage, and responsibility. I believe this is what the guest may have been reaching towards.

    In summary, masculine may have not been the best terminology to use, precisely because society has blurred the lines between masculinity and femininity- even men and women. The description of the Mass in that respect, however, is quite valid when we look in traditional terms. The God Man Jesus Christ dies for all on the cross. The Priest offers up to God the unbloody sacrifice on the alter in union with the entire church. Heaven and Earth meet on the alter in a memory of the redeeming sacrifice. Men and women are then prepared for battle as the Church Militant. God is the general, the Priests are his Lieutenants, and we are the soldiers in great awe of this leadership. This does not negate the mercy and love aspects of the Mass, but it may identify the void in his soul that the guest had filled by attending the Extraordinary Form Mass.

    Peace.

    Reply

    • Reclaiming the Sacred Says:

      Hi Matt, thanks for commenting.

      Yes, I agree that the guest poster did not seem to be setting out to be negative towards the feminine, or lead to a form of “machismo.” I understand that he saw a healthy version of masculinity in the Latin Mass – and I agree with him wholeheartedly. He is right. I was happy that he saw that. (See my comments above for how I was relating “machismo” to his post – I knew he was not doing it purposely, but that over time such a viewpoint could lead there.)

      What troubled me was that, like so many others that I have heard time and time again, he did not see the amazing balance between the masculine and the feminine – which I find in Traditionalism, and think can be incredible.

      In fact, I think the balance is so amazing that if it was seen, even many feminists would loose their arguments against it and become “true women.”

      I think the terms masculinity and femininity are great to use in relation to the Mass – but I know that we just have to get them right. We have to be careful not to celebrate just the proper understanding of the masculine, and forget to also reclaim the correct understanding of the feminine too. (Leaning too much in one direction, over a period of time, even without the intent to do so, can lead to “machismo,” even if not purposely done, and that is what I was attempting to show.)

      We have to both reclaim masculinity – and rescue the feminine from the state of being too effeminite.

      We need masculine men to do that – and the more they understand the gift of their authentic masculinity, the more they should want to do both and not just focus on one, IMHO.

      But that is because I appreciate true masculinity, and I think that is how it should work. :-)

      Reply

  5. Fool 3 Says:

    Many years ago I read something about the pagan idea of virtue in the ancient Roman world and how some things were considered ‘masculine’ virtues and other things ‘feminine’ virtues. The point of the article was that the Christian virtues were all in the category that the pagan world would consider feminine virtues. Ties in with your post a bit.

    Reply

    • Reclaiming the Sacred Says:

      Thanks for the comment – I appreciate it, and that is interesting to know.

      While I am not a theologian, I do believe that some (if not many) of the Catholic theologians from the Middle Ages used the mental strategies of various ancient pagan philosophers to help them think critically about theology. While some of what the pagan philosophers wrote was discarded by the theologians, some things were respected – so that gives light onto another angle that might be beneficial. Thank you for sharing that!

      Reply

  6. justme Says:

    Well, I remember reading an article, forgive me can’t remember where, but a Bishop
    when the New Order Mass came out said and this I can quote ” with this Mass we will
    have only women and children in the pews.” unquote. He was right.

    Reply

    • Reclaiming the Sacred Says:

      Hi, and thank you for commenting.

      Yes, I have heard that before, and I believe it is, for the most part, true. One certainly does see more women than men at such a Mass.

      The Novus Ordo is an unfortunate imbalance – a complete lack of harmony.

      We, as traditionalists, contain not only a rite, but a way of life, that is so infinitely harmonized, when properly understood, that if we can grasp that harmony, and share it with the world, there will be none left who can say we are wrong – unless they simply have not understood the truth, and continue to dwell in lies.

      It is my prayer that the traditionalist movement will come to see that, grab a hold of it with the great strength of the masculine that it contains, and with the beauty of the feminine, and an understanding of the great harmony both possess – march forward in a battle cry that is certain to win.

      But only if we can see it – only if we can find it – only if we can understand, and not do what the Novus Ordo did – and lean too far in one direction that we become a disjointed truth.

      We have so much to offer. :-)

      Reply

I am glad that you are here, and I would love to know your thoughts! Please leave a comment, and politely join the conversation. I look forward to hearing from you! :)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 219 other followers