Can a 'traditional' Catholic prefer the OF?

[Claire_from_DE]

My basic Catholic formation was prior to Vatican II. Even my college theology courses in the late '60’s were taught by orthodox professors. A Benedictine sister I know once introduced me to someone as being a traditional Catholic. I think I am in most ways. I believe in scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium. I believe and accept everything the Church teaches and want to live my faith. I love the Eucharist and Eucharistic devotions and I think the Mass is the best way to worship God. I’m not a ‘liberal’ Catholic.

But I prefer the OF Mass. I liked Gregorian chant but I’m happy with songs in the vernacular as long as they don’t drift into heresy or feminism. I appreciate Communion in the hand. I don’t feel the need to wear a veil (but don’t have issues with those who do). I’m just happy being a Catholic and wish that everyone else was one too.

So am I a traditional Catholic? Or does a traditional Catholic have to prefer the Latin Mass, chant, veiling, Communion on the tongue, etc. I’d have no problem going back to that if the church required it, but it’s not my preference.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

This is why I dislike the labeling some seem to be into.

All Faithful Catholics are Traditional, prefering one set of Church allowed options does not change that.

 

[TrueLight]

This is why I dislike the labeling some seem to be into.

All Faithful Catholics are Traditional, prefering one set of Church allowed options does not change that.

Are all faithful Catholics traditional?

Wiki’s definition of a traditional Catholic

Traditionalist Catholics are Roman Catholics who believe that there should be a restoration of many or all of the liturgical forms, public and private devotions and presentations of Catholic teachings which prevailed in the Catholic Church before the Second Vatican Council (1962–65).[1] They are most commonly associated with an attachment to the Mass liturgy in general use in that time period (often called the Tridentine Mass, the Traditional Mass or the Latin Mass), but their theological and practical concerns are broader in scope.

Traditionalist Catholics are distinct from mainstream Catholics who have a broadly “traditional” or conservative outlook, since the latter tend to accept in general terms the legitimacy and appropriateness of the changes associated with the Second Vatican Council.

Do you disagree or agree with this definition?
Anyone have better definitions? I couldn’t find anything on newadvent.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

So is this a forum for Traditional (orthodox/non-liberal) or Traditionalist Catholics?

Do most of those posting here consider the changes in the Mass to be legitimate and appropriate even though they are drawn to the EF?

I like what ByzCath writes: All Faithful Catholics are Traditional, prefering one set of Church allowed options does not change that.

 

[Indyann]

Are all faithful Catholics traditional?

Wiki’s definition of a traditional Catholic

Do you disagree or agree with this definition?
Anyone have better definitions? I couldn’t find anything on newadvent.

Pope BenedictXVI is against Catholics “labeling” themselves.

I had the document bookmarked, in which he made the statement, but I lost it when my computer crashed. Now I cannot remember the name of the document.

Anyone know what it is?

But basically he said that we are all Catholics and there was no need to add any other description, other than Christian.

 

[TrueLight]

Pope BenedictXVI is against Catholics “labeling” themselves.

I had the document bookmarked, in which he made the statement, but I lost it when my computer crashed. Now I cannot remember the name of the document.

Anyone know what it is?

But basically he said that we are all Catholics and there was no need to add any other description, other than Christian.

I understand that labels are not always helpful and yet they help to elucidate and clarify.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Are all faithful Catholics traditional?

Wiki’s definition of a traditional Catholic

Do you disagree or agree with this definition?
Anyone have better definitions? I couldn’t find anything on newadvent.

Wikipedia is not a valid source.

Anyone can make up a definition.

Of course I disagree it as I have stated what I believe and will/do teach as a religious and priest (God Willing).

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Pope BenedictXVI is against Catholics “labeling” themselves.

I had the document bookmarked, in which he made the statement, but I lost it when my computer crashed. Now I cannot remember the name of the document.

Anyone know what it is?

But basically he said that we are all Catholics and there was no need to add any other description, other than Christian.

I have no problem with labels that tell us what sui iuris one belongs to, like Roman (or Latin), Melkite, Ukrainian, Maronite, and such.

 

[TrueLight]

Wikipedia is not a valid source.

Actually Wikipedia can be remarkably accurate – sometimes.

Nevertheless, I did say that’s all I found and asked if someone could post something better.

I believe before one can decide if a “traditional” Catholic can prefer the OF, one has to agree on the definition of "traditional’ Catholic.

Looking forward to more responses.

 

[Padraig1972]

OF is fine and a sunday High Mass can be really nice too. But for me, any Traditional Latin Mass is just fantastic and breathtaking.

Each thing to each it`s time and place.
But le me be honest, if i could have attended The Traditional Latin Mass on a daily basis, i would have been taking Latin classes a long long time ago.

 

[Indyann]

I have no problem with labels that tell us what sui iuris one belongs to, like Roman (or Latin), Melkite, Ukrainian, Maronite, and such.

Agreed. The Pope was referring to “traditional”, “liberal”, etc.

A Catholic is either orthodox, or herterodox. All faithful Catholics are traditional, and accept ALL the Church teaches. When one does not accept VaticanII, they become heterodox, in my opinion.

 

[TrueLight]

Agreed. The Pope was referring to “traditional”, “liberal”, etc.

A Catholic is either orthodox, or herterodox. All faithful Catholics are traditional, and accept ALL the Church teaches. When one does not accept VaticanII, they become heterodox, in my opinion.

Is there a difference between orthodox and traditional?

I actually agree with a lot of the Wikipedia article based on what I’ve seen on this forum, other traditional forums and speaking to people who label themselves as traditional.

We may say a traditional Catholic is a faithful Catholic over and over, but it doesn’t mean that the label has not taken on a certain meaning over the years, whether right or wrong.

 

[TrueLight]

So am I a traditional Catholic? Or does a traditional Catholic have to prefer the Latin Mass, chant, veiling, Communion on the tongue, etc. I’d have no problem going back to that if the church required it, but it’s not my preference.

In my very limited experience, I find that those who label themselves as traditional Catholics tend to lean towards preference for what you listed above. At least in the latin rite.

 

[GloriousOrder]

I am a very traditional person, almost what you might call a “traditionalist conservative”, “reactionary”, “high tory” (sans the “Papist” propaganda), etc., and I love the O.F. of Mass. My soul is caught up in great joy when imagining it said ad orientem, filled with incense, broken in two by an orthodox homily, and filled with the most glorious music in human history. It is simply the holy Mass, and prayers within it may be offered for Popes, kings, cardinals, and all men. There is nothing anti-conservative or non-traditionalist about a truly well-meant, well-prayed, and well-done O.F. celebration, in my opinion.

Can anyone conceive of a parish where the O.F. is prayed using chant for the Introit, Kyrie, Gloria, Epistle, Gospel, Credo, Preface, Sanctus, and Agnus Dei? Swirling incense, altar servers in cassocks/surplices, the only instrument accompaniment the organ (if it must be done… )? I’ve never seen or heard of such a thing, but it must exist. The celebrant might give a homily on St. John Chrysostom’s teaching, or the style of St. Paul, or the mannerisms of St. Bonaventure’s theology. So many beautiful things are possible in both forms of Mass… cutting attendees into convenient sects is… well, inconvenient.

 

[Indyann]

In my very limited experience, I find that those who label themselves as traditional Catholics tend to lean towards preference for what you listed above. At least in the latin rite.

Post #14 has the name of the document and the Pope’s words on calling yourself anything other than Catholic.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=482021

 

[TrueLight]

Post #14 has the name of the document and the Pope’s words on calling yourself anything other than Catholic.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=482021

Okay. Thank you. Makes a lot of sense.

Should we revise the name of this forum to Catholic Catholicism?

 

[CB_Catholic]

My basic Catholic formation was prior to Vatican II. Even my college theology courses in the late '60’s were taught by orthodox professors. A Benedictine sister I know once introduced me to someone as being a traditional Catholic. I think I am in most ways. I believe in scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium. I believe and accept everything the Church teaches and want to live my faith. I love the Eucharist and Eucharistic devotions and I think the Mass is the best way to worship God. I’m not a ‘liberal’ Catholic.

But I prefer the OF Mass. I liked Gregorian chant but I’m happy with songs in the vernacular as long as they don’t drift into heresy or feminism. I appreciate Communion in the hand. I don’t feel the need to wear a veil (but don’t have issues with those who do). I’m just happy being a Catholic and wish that everyone else was one too.

So am I a traditional Catholic? Or does a traditional Catholic have to prefer the Latin Mass, chant, veiling, Communion on the tongue, etc. I’d have no problem going back to that if the church required it, but it’s not my preference.

Claire, your post could have been written by me. It is exactly how I feel. I consider myself a traditional Catholic, but apparently, on these forums, you have to attend the EF to be considered that. I do not like such labels, and I really don’t think God is using the labels we give each other. I am going to be interested in the posts to this thread. I hope it stays civil.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Post #14 has the name of the document and the Pope’s words on calling yourself anything other than Catholic.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=482021

I know you gave a link to find it but after reading it I feel it is important enough to post it here.

You shouldn’t call yourself anything other than a Catholic.

Here’s a “traditional” pope on the topic. From HH Pope Benedict XV’s encyclical Beatissimi Apostolorum:

“24. It is, moreover, Our will that Catholics should abstain from certain appellations which have recently been brought into use to distinguish one group of Catholics from another. They are to be avoided not only as “profane novelties of words,” out of harmony with both truth and justice, but also because they give rise to great trouble and confusion among Catholics. Such is the nature of Catholicism that it does not admit of more or less, but must be held as a whole or as a whole rejected: “This is the Catholic faith, which unless a man believe faithfully and firmly; he cannot be saved” (Athanas. Creed). There is no need of adding any qualifying terms to the profession of Catholicism: it is quite enough for each one to proclaim “Christian is my name and Catholic my surname,” only let him endeavour to be in reality what he calls himself.”

 

[CB_Catholic]

Are all faithful Catholics traditional?

Wiki’s definition of a traditional Catholic

Do you disagree or agree with this definition?
Anyone have better definitions? I couldn’t find anything on newadvent.

The key word in the article is Traditonalist, as opposed to Traditional.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Okay. Thank you. Makes a lot of sense.

Should we revise the name of this forum to Catholic Catholicism?

In my personal opinion this sub-forum should not exist as all that is discussed could be discussed in the appropriate sub-forum that exists such as Liturgy & Sacraments or the others but no one at Catholic Answers asked me for my opinion.

I also understand their right to set up the forum as they wish and to define things as they wish but having a sub-forum called “Traditional Catholicism” is not the same as people labeling themselves as “Traditional Catholics”.

Do you notice the difference in the two terms?