Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free
A place to learn, mingle, and share

This is the place to post any questions about the way that CatholicMatch works or make suggestions. This room is open to both free and subscribing members.

Saint Anthony is the patron of lost things and missing persons.
Learn More:Saint Anthony

Sep 05 new
(quote) Chris-906154 said: I don't care if it's changed or not, just please don't change 'Traditional Latin Mass' to 'extraordinary form.' It'll just rankle some of the old hardliners, including me. No point in stirring up something if it's not absolutely necessary. But as far 'Normal' or 'Ordinary' or 'Novus Ordo' go I don't have much of an opinion.
Hi Chris,
Just out of curiosity, what is the objection to the descriptor "extraordinary form"? "Normal" as far as I know is not official Catholic Church terminology, it is just the phrase used by the site. (If I'm wrong here, I stand to be corrected.) If the descriptor is official Catholic Church terminology, which "extraordinary form" is, then why is there controversy? I'm not trying to stir the pot, just wondering why hardliners would be opposed.
Sep 05 new
(quote) Angela-374523 said: Hi Chris,
Just out of curiosity, what is the objection to the descriptor "extraordinary form"? "Normal" as far as I know is not official Catholic Church terminology, it is just the phrase used by the site. (If I'm wrong here, I stand to be corrected.) If the descriptor is official Catholic Church terminology, which "extraordinary form" is, then why is there controversy? I'm not trying to stir the pot, just wondering why hardliners would be opposed.
Oh man. I wish I hadn't said anything now because I really don't want to tick anybody off. The point being that the terms implicitly put the two liturgies on the same level, just pick one and it's all the same. Basically, just another smorgasbord option, like choosing which Canon you want or what kind of music you will use. Within Universae Ecclesiae you will find a statement from PP Benedict XVI that "In the history of the Liturgy growth and progress are found, but not a rupture." Many would say that simply isn't the case when you look at the manner and extent of the changes. From there would have to go into specific criticisms of the New Mass, like the Ottaviani-Bacci intervention, Davies, Arbp. Lefebvre, Gamber, on and on.
Sep 05 new
(quote) Brian-278516 said: We always want to be accurate and using more precise terms is usually a good thing however in this case it is likely to cause more confusion than it is worth. We have used these terms almost as long as CM has been around and while that is not a reason alone not to change something it has to be pretty compelling. Catholics of all striped generally understand what we mean when we use the phrases we do vs. terms like ordinary from or extraordinary form. If you think that anyone there is an attempt to diminish any legitimate form of the mass especially the extraordinary form then you ought to look at my photos and think twice.
Well Brian, I want to start by saying that I think you honor the members of CatholicMatch by actually dropping by the forums every now and again to pay attention to our suggestions, given that your position probably places other demands on your time. I think that's very conscientious of you.

That having been said, I don't know what you're insinuating about me when you tell me I should have a look at some of your pictures, but if you think I browse the profiles of other men, well I think you should have a look at my 'Ideal Match' section in my profile where you will most assuredly note that the phrase "I browse the profiles of male members" is conspicuously absent.

See how potentially insulting it can be when you draw inferences which are not supported by the given set of premises from which they are drawn? I indicated nowhere in my suggestion the the phraseology used by CatholicMatch was evidence of a distaste on the part of administartors like yourself with the Extraordinary Form of the Mass. Secondly, is it not more than a bit presumptuous to insert oneself, that is, to personalize a helpful suggestion by implying that it is somehow an attack on you or your motives?

I would direct you to Jerry's post above. I was not attacking anyone's motives. I was suggesting that this was an oversight that should be rectified.

Finally, if a member can't select his/her liturgical preference, especially when the old designations are parenthetically attached to the new designations, maybe, just maybe, they ought to find another website? I mean someone that desperately in need of an introduction to the most fundamental Catholic terminology might need a bit of a primer in Catholicism 101 before jumping headfirst into a Catholic dating site, don't you think?

I mean this whole conversation over whether this change might confuse new members has stirrings of the stupid non-controversy about voter ID laws which presumes that poor people are too stupid and helpless to acquire a photo ID, even an ID which is a provided free of charge as a service of the government. I think new members on CatholicMatch are probably more intelligent than you give them credit for.
Sep 06 new
(quote) Chris-906154 said: Oh man. I wish I hadn't said anything now because I really don't want to tick anybody off. The point being that the terms implicitly put the two liturgies on the same level, just pick one and it's all the same. Basically, just another smorgasbord option, like choosing which Canon you want or what kind of music you will use. Within Universae Ecclesiae you will find a statement from PP Benedict XVI that "In the history of the Liturgy growth and progress are found, but not a rupture." Many would say that simply isn't the case when you look at the manner and extent of the changes. From there would have to go into specific criticisms of the New Mass, like the Ottaviani-Bacci intervention, Davies, Arbp. Lefebvre, Gamber, on and on.

No worries, I appreciate the explanation. At least I know where you are coming from now.

For what it's worth, just to throw in my two cents on the issue, if in the next round of updates to the site, admin decides to tinker with the question, I would personally have no issue with the use of official Catholic Church terminology being used as descriptors for that question. While I understand the attempt to use accessible language, "normal" may leave itself open to interpretation and can be a value-laden term, as there can be a tendency to view things that are not "normal" in a negative way. Is something that is not normal "abnormal"? scratchchin

With this being a Catholic site, it is understandable that CM members may have more to say on that than what can be provided in a drop-down menu, so people can still always provide greater detail on their preferences and views in the "My Own Words" section of their profiles. Also given the diversity of views amongst members of the Catholic community, and the fact that individual Catholics can be in different places in their faith journey, it is likely that regardless of how something is worded, someone will always have an issue with it. How people deal with not having everything in the world around them their own way also tells a lot about their personality.

Sep 06 new
I am not addressing my comments to anyone in particular above, but wanted to express my general opinion that although the choices in this matter may not be "official" in matching Church terminology, I think they are fairly clear. Could it be better? Perhaps.

I can appreciate the tread, for the sake of discussion and consideration. I will leave and trust the decision to the management of the site to decide what they do. If they really view it as an improvement, I trust they will make it. If not, so be it.

If some get bent out of shape over it, so be it. Objectors should simply make the clarification they deem important within their profile description.

Having said that, I suspect that some will use this to divide and argue and use the "search" engine features to do so.
Posts 11 - 15 of 15