Conservative and Traditional Catholicism Compared

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cranch
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
AlexV said:
I agree with the Jesuit who nicely said of him, “Joe, you were a liberal then, and you’re a liberal now.”
Click to expand...
Now I’ve seen it all. Thanks for another anonymous quote. I’d love to send the original along to “Joe” so see if he remembers this one.
 
BobP123 said:
Probably the only things visible in similarity between the conservative and traditionalist are their recognition of a celibate and male priesthood as well as abstinence from meat during Lenten Fridays. Everything else is the modernist Novus Ordo Magisterium.
Click to expand...
This just gets better and better. The modernist Novus Ordo Magisterium!:eek:
 
AlexV said:
There’s no such thing as “negative” infallibility in Catholic doctrine.

The misinformation of the digital age is amazing. Quote a few paragraphs and people are miniature experts in centuries of Catholic tradition.
Click to expand...
Not to mention liturgy.
 
elzoro said:
Conservatives believe that whatever the current Pope says IS tradition; Traditionalists say whatever the POPES say is tradition.

The best explanation of the differences can be fund in this link,it’s a MUST read:

latinmassmagazine.com/articles/articles_2001_SP_Ripperger.html
Click to expand...
While I dont agree with your oversimplified (and not quite accurate) definition above more importantly you need to differentiate between “conservative” and “neoconservative” and that article, to its credit, made such a distintinction.
 
elzoro said:
Conservatives believe that whatever the current Pope says IS tradition; Traditionalists say whatever the POPES say is tradition.

The best explanation of the differences can be fund in this link,it’s a MUST read:

latinmassmagazine.com/articles/articles_2001_SP_Ripperger.html
Click to expand...
Your distinction seems to assume that whatever the current Pope says can and could contradict what other Popes have already said, which is a dangerous proposition in itself, an opinion pretending to be a definition, as it could be used to promote the idea that a Pope can in fact become an apostate, quite unthinkable considering that the Church is indefectible and the Supreme Pontiff infallible. I remember a quote from St. Ambrose who said that
The Church is like the moon; it may wane, but never be destroyed; it may be darkened, but it can never disappear.
Click to expand...
And St. Anselm who said
the bark of the Church may be swept by the waves, but it can never sink, because Christ is there.
Click to expand...
 
I am simply saying that either these men are wrong and perhaps impious in critiquing the Novus Ordo Missae, or, rather, the Church has no intention of suppressing legitimate criticism as long as it does not make declarations about such things as validity or heresy which are proper to the Church.
Click to expand...
The disciplines of the Church cannot contain doctrinal error. This excludes as well a neglect of truth, impuning of truth, allowing obscurity in the more important truths of faith and morals, nor changing the sense of defined dogma, nor establishing harmful discipline…hence acquiescence is to be given to its judgment even in things not yet expressedly defined. [See Denzinger (1954 ed.) systematic index section II f.]

The Novus Ordo as I knew it was a harmful discipline. I had to avoid it. I know the Church is infallible in Her ordinary magisterium and cannot establish harmful disciplines.

The Novus Ordo could not have come from the Church. It came from elsewhere.

The idea that She would establish a discipline and then allow “legitimate” criticism of it is not a Catholic notion…especially since even the very earliest criticisms were regarding the infallible doctrinal component…not the practical judgment portion, which could be in error.

Yours in Christ,

Gorman
 
BobP123 said:
Probably the only things visible in similarity between the conservative and traditionalist are their recognition of a celibate and male priesthood as well as abstinence from meat during Lenten Fridays. Everything else is the modernist Novus Ordo Magisterium.
Click to expand...
So, the magisterium is modernist now? What else would follow? That Rome is now apostate?

Please be careful, as this is only a step away from outright sedevacantism.
 
So, the magisterium is modernist now? What else would follow? That Rome is now apostate?
Click to expand...
Or the modernists could just appear to be the magisterium.
Please be careful, as this is only a step away from outright sedevacantism.
Click to expand...
Yes, it logically leads there does it not? Is that what you are so afraid of?

The Church will endure to the end of time…but there is no need to deny facts and reality…God could certainly allow this situation don’t you think?
 
gorman64 said:
God could certainly allow this situation don’t you think?
Click to expand...
No. Until Christ returns, there will always be a Vicar of Christ, except for the interegnums when that Vicar is being chosen (however long it takes).
 
No. Until Christ returns, there will always be a Vicar of Christ, except for the interegnums when that Vicar is being chosen (however long it takes).
Click to expand...
How do you know this? Can you provide a source?
 
bear06 said:
He didn’t critique the Mass as called for. He critiqued what some did to it. He wouldn’t be critical of an Adoremus style Novus Ordo because this is what he wanted.
Click to expand...
What about:

“After the Council… in place of the liturgy as the fruit of organic development came fabricated liturgy. We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over centuries, and replaced it, as in a manufacturing process, with a fabrication, a banal on-the-spot product”
 
Is that what you are so afraid of?
Click to expand...
I’m not afraid of it for me.😦
The Church will endure to the end of time…but there is no need to deny facts and reality…God could certainly allow this situation don’t you think?
Click to expand...
Uh, if you’re asking if we’ve been in this situation other than the rather short break between the elections of the popes, no. I do not think we’ve been without a pope for 40 or so years nor do I think that God would allow the situation.
 
wynd said:
What about:
“After the Council… in place of the liturgy as the fruit of organic development came fabricated liturgy. We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over centuries, and replaced it, as in a manufacturing process, with a fabrication, a banal on-the-spot product”
Click to expand...
He may be talking about liturgical abuses/unauthorized innovations (“things that happen on the spot,” off the cuff as it were).
 
wynd said:
What about:

“After the Council… in place of the liturgy as the fruit of organic development came fabricated liturgy. We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over centuries, and replaced it, as in a manufacturing process, with a fabrication, a banal on-the-spot product”
Click to expand...
Here we go again. I’m not saying we’ve got an Adoremus style Mass everywhere and no, I’m quite confident that the Holy Father is against this type of Mass considering the fact that he and Fr. Fessio worked on this together. Again, he hasn’t critiqued the Mass as outlined in this article - please read it:
ignatiusinsight.com/featu…v2_1_jan05.asp
 
gorman64 said:
How do you know this? Can you provide a source?
Click to expand...
No, I have no source. Except for interegnums, we’ve always had a pope and I believe we always will.

I don’t believe that the pope can BE a heretic AS pope, so neither do I believe that the Chair of Peter has been vacant (except for the interegnums, be they long or short).
 
I do not think we’ve been without a pope for 40 or so years nor do I think that God would allow the situation.
Click to expand...
Why? Based on the conduct of the world in the past 100 years or so I would think that we might deserve such a chastisment…don’t you think?
 
I don’t believe that the pope can BE a heretic AS pope
Click to expand...
A formal heretic is not a member of the Church. A non-member cannot be the head of a body of which he is not even a member. Even the CE recognises this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top