Can someone explain traditionalism to me?

[garysibio]

Other than a preference for the Latin (Tridentine) Mass, what makes a Traditionalist a Traditionalist? I know you accept Benedict XVI as the pope and accept the validity, if not the implementation, of the Second Vatican Council, but is there anything else?

Gary

 

[PaulAndrew83]

We disagree with Communion in the Hand, the Assisi gathering, and pretty much everything that would have been generally frowned upon before the council.

Paul

 

[franklinf]

Other than a preference for the Latin (Tridentine) Mass, what makes a Traditionalist a Traditionalist? I know you accept Benedict XVI as the pope and accept the validity, if not the implementation, of the Second Vatican Council, but is there anything else?

Gary

Well put.

WhollyRoamin wrote a pretty good paragraph that relates to this. I hope he doesn’t mind me borrowing it, but here it is:

"A traditional Catholic is not a person who “prefers” the old Latin Mass. Neither are they people simply passed Catechism class.

They are people who adhere to a type of spirituality that is largely lost in the 21st Century Catholic Church.

Truthfully, it’s easier to describe their outward signs than their character: the old Latin Mass is the biggest identifier… though there are certainly traditional Catholics who are marooned in Novus Ordoland; there are likewise non-traditional Catholics who go to the TLM.

Trads are people who listen to Catholic Radio… skeptically. They might have a blog. They can list their “top-five” favorite Ecumenical Councils… none of which will rhyme with “Attican Shoe”. Their friends think they’re fuddy-duddys. They’ve got Holy Water fonts in all the bedrooms and by the front door. They quote the Douay Rheims bible. They have an opinion on offering Mass in baroque vestments while in a gothic chapel. They’re tired of tinfoil hat jokes. They may not like Bishop Williamson, but concede that sometimes he’s right, and when he’s right, he’s really right. They can tell you about Assisi. When they’re at a Novus Ordo Mass, they’ve got their hands folded like a Catholic during the Our Father. The women have an extra mantilla in the van-- just in case. The men have an opinion on the best type of pipe tobacco for any occasion. The boys have their own cassock and surplice hanging in the closet. The girls know how to play Dies Irae on the organ. They wear a t-shirt while they go swimming so their brown scapular doesen’t float away. They’re willing to drive an hour to go to Mass… every Sunday. They know the confession times of at least 4 churches. They invite priests over to play cards and smoke cigars. They pray to saints that you think may not really exist. They ask you to finish the sentence when you say “John Paul the Great”… the great what? They might own a live chicken. When they’re at a Novus Ordo Mass, everyone watches them to figure out why they’re hitting themselves during the “Lamb of God”. They’re kneel after Mass to pray… and miss out on the fun gladhanding with Father by the parish gift shop. They scoff when they pass the Masonic Lodge. They cross themselves when they pass a Catholic church. They mutter something about the “poor souls” when they pass a cemetary. They mutter something about St. Michael when an ambulance passes them. Their girls’ first names are Mary. Their boys’ middle names are Mary. Cappa Magma doesn’t sound like a drink at Starbucks to them. They’ll tell you at length why being “charitable” isn’t always being nice and friendly."

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=300666

 

[Cider]

I’ll just nod in agreement with the PPs except I can’t name my top 5 councils LOL

 

[Cluny]

Eastern Catholics are traditional, too.

 

[garysibio]

We disagree with Communion in the Hand, the Assisi gathering, and pretty much everything that would have been generally frowned upon before the council.

Paul

Thanks for your reply. What is/was the Assisi gathering?

Gary

 

[garysibio]

Well put.

WhollyRoamin wrote a pretty good paragraph that relates to this. I hope he doesn’t mind me borrowing it, but here it is:

"A traditional Catholic is not a person who “prefers” the old Latin Mass. Neither are they people simply passed Catechism class.

They are people who adhere to a type of spirituality that is largely lost in the 21st Century Catholic Church.

Truthfully, it’s easier to describe their outward signs than their character: the old Latin Mass is the biggest identifier… though there are certainly traditional Catholics who are marooned in Novus Ordoland; there are likewise non-traditional Catholics who go to the TLM.

Trads are people who listen to Catholic Radio… skeptically. They might have a blog. They can list their “top-five” favorite Ecumenical Councils… none of which will rhyme with “Attican Shoe”. Their friends think they’re fuddy-duddys. They’ve got Holy Water fonts in all the bedrooms and by the front door. They quote the Douay Rheims bible. They have an opinion on offering Mass in baroque vestments while in a gothic chapel. They’re tired of tinfoil hat jokes. They may not like Bishop Williamson, but concede that sometimes he’s right, and when he’s right, he’s really right. They can tell you about Assisi. When they’re at a Novus Ordo Mass, they’ve got their hands folded like a Catholic during the Our Father. The women have an extra mantilla in the van-- just in case. The men have an opinion on the best type of pipe tobacco for any occasion. The boys have their own cassock and surplice hanging in the closet. The girls know how to play Dies Irae on the organ. They wear a t-shirt while they go swimming so their brown scapular doesen’t float away. They’re willing to drive an hour to go to Mass… every Sunday. They know the confession times of at least 4 churches. They invite priests over to play cards and smoke cigars. They pray to saints that you think may not really exist. They ask you to finish the sentence when you say “John Paul the Great”… the great what? They might own a live chicken. When they’re at a Novus Ordo Mass, everyone watches them to figure out why they’re hitting themselves during the “Lamb of God”. They’re kneel after Mass to pray… and miss out on the fun gladhanding with Father by the parish gift shop. They scoff when they pass the Masonic Lodge. They cross themselves when they pass a Catholic church. They mutter something about the “poor souls” when they pass a cemetary. They mutter something about St. Michael when an ambulance passes them. Their girls’ first names are Mary. Their boys’ middle names are Mary. Cappa Magma doesn’t sound like a drink at Starbucks to them. They’ll tell you at length why being “charitable” isn’t always being nice and friendly."

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=300666

Frankly your answer confuses me more than I was at the start. You start off saying it’s a form of spirituality but then you list a bunch of outward signs that an atheist could do although probably wouldn’t. Maybe I’m fortunate but the Catholic radio I’ve heard is quite good 99% of the time. I have no special love for archaic language so I stay away from the D-R just as I stayed away from the KJV when I used to be a Protestestant Evangelical.

I can see advantages to the Mass being in Latin since I attend a parish that must have at least 30 different languages and dialects spoken in the home but I have absolutely no problem with the Mass in English either. Catholic does mean “universal”, not “stuck in medieval Europe.”

I’m not trying to pick a fight, I have better things to do than that, but I am disturbed at a lot of what I see going on in the Church. Things which have been brooding for quite some time but brought to a head recently with the nonsense at Notre Dame.

I don’t have a problem with Vatican II and wonder about those who do. It is possible, after all, to fall off the boat on the right side as easily as it is on the left.

What is this spirituality of which you speak?

Gary

 

[StGerardMajella]

Gary - This question is difficult, because “tradition” has a different meaning to different people. Nevertheless, there are some generally common strains of beliefs, preferences, and advocacies that you will encounter within the traditionalist movement:

• As you indicated, a definite preference for the Extraordinary Form of the Mass (“Latin Mass/Tridentine Mass”, etc.) and all the “outer trappings” that this Mass entails: Communion at the rail, not in the hand; women wearing veils to Mass, Gregorian Chant, etc.
• Heightened criticism and distaste for the Novus Ordo Mass in terms of liturgical style
• A strong desire to return the Novus Ordo to the Extraordinary Form whenever and wherever possible.
• Very loyal, devout approach to Catholicism in general - Daily Rosaries, Weekly confessions, vigorously incorporating traditional Catholic practices into one’s daily routine, etc. I would go so far as to say that a large percentage of traditionalists take their faith very seriously, and are quite devoted to their faith. Best word: Zealous.
• A preference for home-schooling their children.
• A very pro-family, anti-abortion, anti-contraception stance
• An advocacy for the Douay-Rheims as the most “authentic” version of the Bible
• A generally highly critical attitude towards ecumenical efforts of the Pope
• A certain segment of the traditionalist movement hold anti-semitic views - as in the case of the radical anti-semitic beliefs of Holocaust-denier Bishop Williamson of the SSPX. This is by far one of the worst characteristics of the movement in general, and a major detraction from its positive elements.
• A generally highly critical attitude towards the liturgical and “philosophical” changes that have taken place within the Church since Vatican II. If not overt, certainly an underlying current of anti-Vatican II criticism and rhetoric among its adherents.
• A very strict, literal interpretation of pre-Vatican II Church doctrine and teachings without taking into account historical context or later changes that have taken place within the Church. Adherence to the “literal” interpretation instead of the “spirit” of the teaching.
• A very narrow, insular, almost stubborn outlook towards others that disagree with their “traditionalist” views, such that traditionalists can sometimes come across as extremist and harsh

Again, I am speaking in general terms. Not all traditionalists fall into this category, but if you spend any time studying the subculture of this very tiny sect of the Catholic Church, you will certainly encounter some or all of the above.

Traditionalists are a very tiny minority of the Catholic Church, but certainly one of the most vocal.

What makes a “traditionalist a traditionalist” is some combination of some or all of the above preferences, beliefs, and advocacies in varying degrees. The list is not all inclusive, and certainly is not all encompassing. There are great positives, and some glaring negatives. There is no one singular element, but this will give you a general snapshot of the movement in general.

 

[OhMalley]

We disagree with Communion in the Hand, the Assisi gathering, and pretty much everything that would have been generally frowned upon before the council.

Paul

That’s not true. I am a traditional Catholic and I prefer communion in hand. I find it to be a more ancient practice. I also fully support the reforms of VC2.

 

[OhMalley]

Gary - This question is difficult, because “tradition” has a different meaning to different people. Nevertheless, there are some generally common strains of beliefs, preferences, and advocacies that you will encounter within the traditionalist movement:

• As you indicated, a definite preference for the Extraordinary Form of the Mass (“Latin Mass/Tridentine Mass”, etc.) and all the “outer trappings” that this Mass entails: Communion at the rail, not in the hand; women wearing veils to Mass, Gregorian Chant, etc.
  - Heightened criticism and distaste for the Novus Ordo Mass in terms of liturgical style
  **- A strong desire to return the Novus Ordo to the Extraordinary Form whenever and wherever possible. **
• Very loyal, devout approach to Catholicism in general - Daily Rosaries, Weekly confessions, vigorously incorporating traditional Catholic practices into one’s daily routine, etc. I would go so far as to say that a large percentage of traditionalists take their faith very seriously, and are quite devoted to their faith. Best word: Zealous.
• A preference for home-schooling their children.
• A very pro-family, anti-abortion, anti-contraception stance
  - An advocacy for the Douay-Rheims as the most “authentic” version of the Bible (this smacks so hard of KJV-onlyism!!! ARGH!!!)
  - A generally highly critical attitude towards ecumenical efforts of the Pope
  - A certain segment of the traditionalist movement hold anti-semitic views - as in the case of the radical anti-semitic beliefs of Holocaust-denier Bishop Williamson of the SSPX. This is by far one of the worst characteristics of the movement in general, and a major detraction from its positive elements.
  - A generally highly critical attitude towards the liturgical and “philosophical” changes that have taken place within the Church since Vatican II. If not overt, certainly an underlying current of anti-Vatican II criticism and rhetoric among its adherents.
  -** A very strict, literal interpretation of pre-Vatican II Church doctrine and teachings** without taking into account historical context or later changes that have taken place within the Church. Adherence to the “literal” interpretation instead of the “spirit” of the teaching.
• A very narrow, insular, almost stubborn outlook towards others that disagree with their “traditionalist” views, such that traditionalists can sometimes come across as extremist and harsh

Again, I am speaking in general terms. Not all traditionalists fall into this category, but if you spend any time studying the subculture of this very tiny sect of the Catholic Church, you will certainly encounter some or all of the above.

Traditionalists are a very tiny minority of the Catholic Church, but certainly one of the most vocal.

What makes a “traditionalist a traditionalist” is some combination of some or all of the above preferences, beliefs, and advocacies in varying degrees. The list is not all inclusive, and certainly is not all encompassing. There are great positives, and some glaring negatives. There is no one singular element, but this will give you a general snapshot of the movement in general.

Thank goodness you’re not in charge of defining what a traditional Catholic is! I wish CA would simply try to define it once and all for use on these forums as this is getting quite ridiculous…

 

[DixitDominus]

Traditionalism is the heresy which denies that God can be known through the natural light of human reason. This heresy was condemned by Vatican I. If you were aware of this other meaning of the word “traditionalism”, then you truly a trad!

 

[Cat]

What is the deal with cigars and traditionalists? Yucky.

 

[garysibio]

Again, I’m not trying to pick a fight but I just want to try to understand your point of view.

Based on the answers I’ve been given there seems to be a certain amount of spiritual “arrogance” among Traditionalists. We’re better Catholics because we go to a Latin Mass or study a 500+ year old translation of the Bible which is actually a second-hand translation since it went from the Hebrew/Greek to English by way of the Latin Vulgate.

I have a lot of problems with what has happened in the Church since V2, some of which I see getting fixed, however slowly, but not all change is bad. I don’t mean doctrinal change but changes in the outward trappings. How does the Eucharist change because you receive it in the hand? How is the Mass any less a re-presentation of Jesus’ sacrifice at Calvary because it’s not in a language it wasn’t in originally? In short, why are these things you guys have mentioned an issue? Who cares? Is there anything of any real substance that differentiates Traditionalists from the rest of the Church?

Gary

 

[Seamus_L]

In simplest terms, we’re like the entire Catholic Church was before all the craziness of the 1960’s. Back then the term Traditional Catholic would have made no sense because we were all the same back then.

 

[garysibio]

In simplest terms, we’re like the entire Catholic Church was before all the craziness of the 1960’s. Back then the term Traditional Catholic would have made no sense because we were all the same back then.

I unerstand that. My question is “Why”. I’m old enough that I remember the Church prior to V2. I also remember the insanity which followed it. I want to know why the answer to the insanity is to lock yourself in at 1963.

Gary

 

[RosaryCrusader]

**Again, I’m not trying to pick a fight **but I just want to try to understand your point of view…

…**Based on the answers I’ve been given there seems to be a certain amount of spiritual “arrogance” among Traditionalists. **

…In short, why are these things you guys have mentioned an issue? Who cares? Is there anything of any real substance that differentiates Traditionalists from the rest of the Church?

Gary

Sounds like you’re just wanting to pick a fight to me…

 

[Blessed_Karl]

With all due respect, we are NOT spiritually arrogant as you put it.

Nor do we believe in locking the Church in 1963.

I went to my first TLM and it was amazing! The reason for our love of the ancient form of the mass is: latin-mass-society.org/dietrich.htm

Dietrich von Hildebrand, one of the best moral philosophers of the 20th century, wrote that. Pope Pius XII called him a “modern doctor of the Church” (unofficially).

The traditional form of the mass does HAVE something to offer the contemporary church! This is the way Catholics worshipped for 1500 years! It establishes an amazing sense of the sacred, a sense of the supernatural.

The TLM will develop as will the NO.

Give the TLM a try mate! I’m 19 and didn’t see the post-conciliar changes. But I am loving the TLM.

 

[palmas85]

There is no definition for it. The word itself merely means someone who adheres to tradition as opposed to modernization. Thats it in a nutshell.

In the Church the term is fraught with division and cannot even begin to explain or define those that call themselves traditionalists.

It can describe someone who is a raving sedevacantist or someone who prefers communion the hand as being a more ancient practice. It can describe the members of the SSPX or conversely the FSSP. It can and often is used as a perjorative to belittle those not comfortable with the changes that took place after Vatican II… It is also used as a label by those who feel they are following the true path. It is a complex issue and not easily defined.

I would offer the following. In the aftermath of Vatican II there was a general rush to strip Catholicism of everything and everything that was distinctly Catholic in nature. That included changes in the Mass and Liturgy to make it more accomodating and allegedly more relevent to the people and to other faiths, Churches were modernized, altars moved and changed, and religious art moved removed or in some cases destroyed. There was a change in the emphasis on personal sin. Sin became thought of as more societal than personal in nature and as a result the use of confession by the faithful plummeted. It just wasn’t your fault anymore.

Catechisis suffered as the old Baltimore Catechism used for many years was suddenly no longer good enough. But there was nothing to replace it, so anyone with any inclination to do so could publish their own catechisms and many did. There were some real beauties floating around.

Devotions practiced for years, Novenas, Rosaries, 40 Hours, First Fridays, First Saturdays, Expositions Benedictions, Corpus Christi Processions etc pretty much disappeared. You just didn’t need these things anymore. They were unnecessary and maybe even harmful. Devotion to the Blessed Mother in particular took a nose dive and has really only recently started to make a comeback.

Latin for years described as a unifying force within the Church was removed from the Mass and replaced with the vernacular’ But Latin was kept as the official language of the Church and was supposed to retain a place of prominence within the Church

The Mass itself came to be thought of as more of a communal meal than the Eternal Sacrifice and was treated accordingly. Since it was no longer primarily the re-presentation of Christs death at Calvary, why pay any particular reverence when attending?. It was primarily a social gathering and peoples attitudes reflected that understanding.

For some reason, not really well explained by anyone, Holy Communion came to be distributed with the faithful standing and received in the hand, rather than on the tongue.The standing allegedly was done to imitate the Eastern Churches manner of reception. Receiving in the hand has never been adequitely explained.

So I would say a Traditionalist is one who doesn’t agree with the above changes, none of which were mandated by Vatican II by the way and laments the passing of those traditions which clearly showed the world that we were Catholics and helped to solidify our identity. Traditionalists feel something unique has been lost and needs to be recovered.

I attended a Corpus Christi procession last year in New Orleans. It was very nice, slightly over a mile in length and went from the Immaculate Conception Church to the St Louis Cathedral and was led by the Archbishop. There were probably over 500 people in the procession. While walking I struck up a conversation with an African American woman who was walking also. She told me that she was so happy that there were Corpus Christ processions again and remarked that as a small girl she really enjoyed seeing them and participating in them. Then she floored me. She said that even though she wasn’t Catholic, she loved the way that Catholics had never been afraid to show what they were, were not afraid to proclaim their faith and belief in what the Church taught and were not ashamed to show it in such a fashion as the processions. She said that she was so glad that Catholics seemed to be re-discovering what they were and what made the Catholic faith so unique…

I have never heard it stated any better.

 

[StGerardMajella]

Nor do we believe in locking the Church in 1963.

Traditionalist Catholics generally believe that there should be a restoration of most (if not all) of the liturgical forms and Catholic teachings which prevailed in the Catholic Church before Vatican II.

Some traditionalists go so far as to consider the present-day Church teachings as heresy.

Typically, traditionalists are identified as falling into 1 of 4 categories:

Traditionalists enjoying the favor of the Pope
Traditionalists not enjoying the favor of the Pope
Sedevecantists who view the Pope and bishops as having fallen into heresy
Conclavists who have given recognition to a nominee of their choice as the true Pope

With all due respect, we are NOT spiritually arrogant as you put it.

Rejecting the current Pope and Vatican II is the very pinnacle of spiritual arrogance. Not all traditionalists reject the Pope and Vatican II, but definitely certain subsections of the traditionalist movements do - sedevecantists and conclavists in particular.

 

[rfpapcun]

That’s not true. I am a traditional Catholic and I prefer communion in hand. I find it to be a more ancient practice. I also fully support the reforms of VC2.

As I’ve said before on this bb, there is great confusion here about what a traditional Catholic is. You may think you’re a “traditional” Catholic when you are really a “conservative” Catholic. Those are two very different animals.

No traditional Catholic that I know ever receives Holy Communion in hand. None accepts the “reforms” of Vatican II. No traditional Catholic attends the Novus Ordo. By contrast, conservative Catholics do all these things.