Another TradCath Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter J_Dudycha
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

J_Dudycha

Guest
Okay please bear with me here:

I’ve been puzzling lately over what it means to be a “traditional Catholic” (aka TradCath). It seems like a lot of people who style themselves as “TradCaths” tend to harken back to a mythical “golden age of Catholicism” when everything was peaches and cream. Overall they seem to be somewhat reticent towards Vatican 2, usually don’t like the last few Popes, and completely distrust the current Pope Francis.

My question is, if they are truly Catholics, and trust in the Lord’s promise that Catholicism is the one true Holy and Apostolic church upon which the gates of Hell shall never prevail, then, why do they seem to fight/resist so much of the “modernism” that’s taking place in the church ?? Shouldn’t TradCaths still trust the Pope and the Magisterium in matters of church governance ?? Doesn’t obedience to the Church mean not getting so frazzled over what’s happened/happening in the Church today ??

Someone recently mentioned to me on Facebook that ‘Ultramontanism’ is relevant to this topic. Can anyone shed some light on that ??

Personally, I get the strong impression that TradCaths’ border upon outright defiance of Catholic teaching, in which case they can no longer call themselves Catholic, right ? Or ??

Of course, I could be completely wrong on this. I’m merely a soon-to-be catechumen, and I’m just trying to understand the different currents of Catholicism.
 
J_Dudycha said:
if they are truly Catholics, and trust in the Lord’s promise that Catholicism is the one true Holy and Apostolic church upon which the gates of Hell shall never prevail, then, why do they seem to fight/resist so much of the “modernism” that’s taking place in the church ??
Click to expand...
For this, I’d suggest reading Saint Pope Pius X encyclical (quoted below) and link at the bottom
ST POPE PIUS X: 2. That We make no delay in this matter is rendered necessary especially by the fact that the partisans of error are to be sought not only among the Church’s open enemies; they lie hid, a thing to be deeply deplored and feared, in her very bosom and heart, and are the more mischievous, the less conspicuously they appear. We allude, Venerable Brethren, to many who belong to the Catholic laity, nay, and this is far more lamentable, to the ranks of the priesthood itself, who, feigning a love for the Church, lacking the firm protection of philosophy and theology, nay more, thoroughly imbued with the poisonous doctrines taught by the enemies of the Church, and lost to all sense of modesty, vaunt themselves as reformers of the Church; and, forming more boldly into line of attack, assail all that is most sacred in the work of Christ, not sparing even the person of the Divine Redeemer, whom, with sacrilegious daring, they reduce to a simple, mere man.
Click to expand...
Though they express astonishment themselves, no one can justly be surprised that We number such men among the enemies of the Church, if, leaving out of consideration the internal disposition of soul, of which God alone is the judge, he is acquainted with their tenets, their manner of speech, their conduct. Nor indeed will he err in accounting them the most pernicious of all the adversaries of the Church. For as We have said, they put their designs for her ruin into operation not from without but from within; hence, the danger is present almost in the very veins and heart of the Church, whose injury is the more certain, the more intimate is their knowledge of her. Moreover they lay the axe not to the branches and shoots, but to the very root, that is, to the faith and its deepest fires. And having struck at this root of immortality, they proceed to disseminate poison through the whole tree, so that there is no part of Catholic truth from which they hold their hand, none that they do not strive to corrupt. Further, none is more skilful, none more astute than they, in the employment of a thousand noxious arts; for they double the parts of rationalist and Catholic, and this so craftily that they easily lead the unwary into error; and since audacity is their chief characteristic, there is no conclusion of any kind from which they shrink or which they do not thrust forward with pertinacity and assurance. To this must be added the fact, which indeed is well calculated to deceive souls, that they lead a life of the greatest activity, of assiduous and ardent application to every branch of learning, … …
Click to expand...
http://www.vatican.va/content/pius-...-x_enc_19070908_pascendi-dominici-gregis.html
 
Last edited:
When you give a catechumen this advice you should also give them a clue about who to trust when they don’t like the teachings of the Pope. It seems very wrong to me to tell them ‘just do your own research’ because very few people are capable of gathering the gamut of history, theology that informs a Church teaching.
 
Just to set the record straight, I also wrote this in my post:

“I would recommend acquiring a solid foundation on the teachings of the Church first. Read the Baltimore Catechism and the Catechism of St. Pius X as a start, as the question-and-answer format is extremely comprehensive; after becoming familiar with the Church’s teaching and developing a good sensus catholicus, it is much easier to distinguish truth from error in any of these ‘currents’.”

The Baltimore Catechism and the Catechism of St. Pius X are sources from the Church, so I’m not seeing where I told the poster simply to “do his own research” without giving an indication of “who to trust”. Catechisms written in a comprehensive question-and-answer format are easily understandable by children, and it requires no extensive theological training; I say this as a former catechist myself. I also said nothing about not liking the teachings the pope, so I’m sorry, but I don’t see the relevance of your comment.
[/quote]

It concerns me when so many converts and reverts justify their dissenting attitude by citing Catherine of Sienna as if she had a beginners grasp of the catechism. I think it’s a real failure to not stress to these people that they can trust and be moulded and shaped by the Church without fear.
 
J_Dudycha said:
Shouldn’t TradCaths still trust the Pope and the Magisterium in matters of church governance ?? Doesn’t obedience to the Church mean not getting so frazzled over what’s happened/happening in the Church today ??
Click to expand...
I’m sure that same question was probably asked by those who lived during the time of corrupt Popes and clergy. Obedience isn’t the same as trust. The Holy Spirit was sent to guide and safeguard our church from error. Our clergy can freely choose to ignore and fight against the spirit of truth.

For every McCarrick, . . . we have holy men like Cdl Burke and Cdl Sarah and Fr. Mike Schmitz. There’s a constant struggle to fight against the forces of darkness that seek to topple the pillar and foundation of truth.

There are men of the cloth that have fallen away and some of these men take innocent laity with them. Don’t be fooled into thinking that just because a man wears the collar, his thoughts and views are centered around authentic Catholic teachings and traditions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
J_Dudycha said:
I’m merely a soon-to-be catechumen, and I’m just trying to understand the different currents of Catholicism
Click to expand...
Perhaps as a Catechumen try to avoid talking about those things. Act as if such problems never existed and teach the faith to them from Traditional Catechisms, nobody can accuse you of anything for doing that.

As a ICKSP priest once said to me, “we just don’t talk about them things”. Obviously you will disagree with modernist error, but you don’t need to talk about it publicly necessarily. Just teach the faith, as if these things were not happening.
 
Last edited:
po18guy said:
Any mass in a storm.

I say again: It’s not how we receive, it’s Who we receive.
Click to expand...
At this point I would go to any Mass available. I don’t care if it’s the most formal Latin Mass ever with Gregorian chant and incense, or the most modern Mass ever with everybody holding hands (okay, maybe not holding hands since we have this virus still going around) and singing Kumbaya and Joy is Like the Rain with guitars and tambourines.
 
It’s Holy Saturday. Instead of concerning on issues that divide, could you possibly find something positive about Catholicism that you’d like to celebrate and address and want to know more of, instead of contributing to posts that will hurt many others?

For example, “Traditional Catholics” like me really enjoyed the EWTN special today venerating the Shroud of Turin. Did you get a chance to watch? There’s a lot of information and questions about the Shroud. That would be a neat topic to pursue.
 
Last edited:
The debate often comes down to what is “essential” and whose place it is to decide that.
 
I don’t think there is just one definition of “traditional Catholic.”

They can be someone who:
  • wants the 1962 Latin Mass
  • wants English with English chants
  • just doesn’t want new music
  • wants the pre-1955 Latin Mass
  • is simply devout and prays lots of devotions
  • someone who uses traditional prayer books at home and has Crosses and/or statues
  • simply follows many other culturally Catholic traditions
  • a Catholic family with 4+ kids
  • etc
Yes - we often (here on CAF) think of the Traditional Catholic Mass, but to the average Catholic who has never met someone who attends the Latin Mass, “traditional Catholic” could mean anything.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for this. I’m among those who think “traditionalist” is in fact a useful label, but it’s not absolute. There’s a gradation, I suppose, of it. Same with all the other labels: “conservative”, “liberal”, “charismatic”, “Life Teen”, even something I’ve heard recently “ecumenical Catholic”.

The idea that we cannot in any way shape or form attach adjectives to our Catholicism I think is going a little too far, but that we exist in these discrete sub-units of Catholicism is also silly.

I’ve come around in the past few years to self-identifying as a “Trad”, but don’t let that make you think we’re some monolithic group. Go take a look at #CatholicTwitter. We’re anathematizing each other quicker than the Black Death could’ve ever knocked us off.
 
I have attended traditional Catholic parishes and more liberal ones. I have found strength and beauty in both.
 
Great. A potential convert to Catholicism comes here to learn a little about what is going on in the faith, and instead he is bombarded by divisive commentary, suggestions he eschew the current Catechism in favor of older forms, reminders that the Pope can make mistakes (with all the implications of that), and generally given a terrible impression of the state of the Church. Poor guy is probably running for the hills at this point. Good way to evangelize!
 
Please read @(name removed by moderator) quote and deal with that not anything else. The person you are responding to is talking about using multiple different cathechisms that the Church created. Don’t understand why you are trying to make an issue with this.
 
Did Saint Paul disobey Pope Saint Peter. Or did he respectfully disagree with where St Peter was leaning to?
 
Why can’t one read older cathechisms with the current Cathechism of the Catholic Church? This is a artifical conflict between the new one and the older ones that one doesn’t need to fight. Some people’s learning sytle can benefit from different cathechism (which are written in different manners).
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top