Defintion of Traditonal Catholic

  • Thread starter Thread starter JW55
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
May I refer to myself as a traditional Catholic, because I don’t care what language the mass is in as long as it is done in keeping with papally approved rubrics. My traditional Catholicism is – if the Pope says it, do it.
Please note: that is not the traditional definition of a traditional Catholic.

There is some merit to the statement that language doesn’t matter: as maybe the Tridentine Mass (Gregorian/Extraordinary/whatever) could be offered in a vernacular language. That presumes that it is a faithful translation to the vernacular from Latin-- a problematic statement in itself. But at that point, you’re messing with novelty-- which is also not traditional. 🙂
 
None of these posts are very good answers.

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.

It’s complicated. Trads are not easily defined. You just kind of know them when you see them.
I just realized I was really smiling while reading this post. You brought out many things that have been “tossed” over the years.

Perhaps a traditional Catholic is one who does not “toss”.

Fr Ripperger calles them “monuments”… and you don’t tear down monuments, you protect and care for them

Anyway… enjoyed your post. Welcome to CAF.👍

.
 
Maybe I’m off a little bit, and I haven’t read the whole thread, but to me there is a difference between a “traditional” Catholic and a “traditionalist” Catholic, though I will have to say up front that I despise the idea of dividing Catholics by the use of labels at all.

To me a Catholic is “traditional” by virtue of being orthodox and being faithful to the magisterium. Many also observe many of the “t” traditions of the Church, such as not eating meat on Fridays, veiling, or receiving communion kneeling and/or on the tongue.

“Traditionalist” Catholics do seem to carry the immediate qualificaton of preferring the EF and in most cases at least questioning Vatican II in some way.

Maybe that distinction has now been lost also but it was what I saw claimed as recent as a couple years ago.

Either way, I would pray that for whatever preferences we might have in these matters that we can somehow put the greater good of bringing the gospel to a world that desperately needs it ahead of thoughts that “I believe better than you.”

Peace,
 
So, would I be erroneous in referring to myself as a traditional Catholic, because I have no problem with Vatican II?

**Not at all.

If obedience to the teachings of an Ecumenical Council and directives of the recent Popes isn’t traditional, what is?

Refusing to accept Church authority (in its extreme form, it’s sedevacantism) is NOT traditional by any means.**
 
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 Magna 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.

It’s complicated. Trads are not easily defined. You just kind of know them when you see them.
Definition is a very inexact science when it comes to people, but I think perhaps you’ve come the closest to an identifiable picture of Traditionalists* than anyone so far-- because you’ve included more than liturgical preferences (or convictions.)

(*And I say “Traditionalists” because, while I have no preference for the TLM and would not identify myself as a “Traditional Catholic,” I would consider myself a traditional Catholic, as it were.)

Many of the things you list are a part of a culture that continues to value any sort of past tradition and thus I know plenty of Catholics who wouldn’t identify as “Traditional Catholics” who have holy water fonts in every room etc., (and blessed salt in their cupboards) attend weekly confession, still use liturgical gestures that have been abandoned, own live chickens (yes, really!! :D)

Heck, I even know a Charismatic-type to whom much of the above applies and who has very definite opinions on pipe-tobacco!

Value of pious traditions is not a trait exclusive to Traditionalists.

Rather, I would say that Traditionalists are those who are more comfortable in and promote a spirituality (or maybe an amalgam of spiritualities and customs) that flourished in the beginning of the 20th century.

From an outsider’s perspective (which of course is very incomplete and perhaps mistaken) Traditionalists, in addition to their liturgical preferences; find ceremony and outward expressions in general beneficial in the spiritual life; are attached to some of the more outward public expressions of piety (special vestments, processions, etc.); tend (in my experience) to have a spirituality largely informed by certain saints from the years between 1700-1900-- St. Alphonsus Ligouri, St. Louis de Montfort, Pope St. Pius X, spring to mind (but not so much Therese of Liseaux.)

I have rarely met anyone who identifies with a monastic spirituality (Carmelite, Dominican, Franciscan, Benedictine) and identifies himself as a “Traditional Catholic.”

Of course, some of what I have listed will also apply to those who do not consider themselves Traditionalists…

(Edit: I want to add that I speak of non-Traditionalist Catholics, I mean believing, practicing, obedient Catholic who are striving for holiness. Lapsed and dissenting Catholics are another topic all together.)
 
So, would I be erroneous in referring to myself as a traditional Catholic, because I have no problem with Vatican II?

**Not at all.

If obedience to the teachings of an Ecumenical Council and directives of the recent Popes isn’t traditional, what is?

Refusing to accept Church authority (in its extreme form, it’s sedevacantism) is NOT traditional by any means.**
Respectfully, I think you’re setting up a false dichotemy. Traditional Catholics (at least, in theory) do not refuse to accept Church authority. They recognize Church authority, and they recognize that many authorities have wandered very far from the Church. Obedience is not the sole test of a Catholic!

At this point it gets hard to continue a simple discussion without parsing the question too far. Trads are a mixed lot; since the Church basically left them behind in the 60’s, they’ve become somewhat dysfunctional (cf. SSPX) and fractured. A traditionalist Catholic’s firing squad is in the shape of a circle.

I think there’s a lot of people here who are suffering from a lack of context and full understanding of traditional Catholicism-- but that doesn’t stop them from answering the questions anyway! Traditional Catholics are orthodox Catholics. They’re people who practice the Faith the way that Catholics practiced the faith for hundreds of years. They accept the Second Vatican Council, but they also accept that not all Ecumenical Councils are great councils.

Some councils are more important than others. The First Council of Nicaea (325) was tremendously important, it defined what it meant to be a Christian. The Second Council of Lyons (1274) was a pretty big deal, bridging the Roman and Greek Churches and establishing the format for electing popes.

But pop quiz: what happened at the Council of Chalcedon (451)? How about the Council of Vienne (1311)? Yeah, I thought so.

You can probably guess how I feel about the Council of Trent (1545). And presumably, the Second Vatican Council will turn out as one of those councils that leave an indeliable mark on Catholicism. But I fear that a little more than the bathwater went out through the Church’s newly open windows.

That’s what makes me a traditional Catholic. I accept V2, but I also can accept that 21st Century Catholicism isn’t the church that the Council envisioned.
 
My traditional Catholicism is – if the Pope says it, do it.
Unfortunately, many traditionalists would call you a “neocon” because you are supposedly putting obedience to the Pope over the Faith.

Not saying I agree with that… just repeating what’s been said to me.

Fwiw, I’m not a “traditionalist” going on the definition I posted earlier. I believe Vatican II happened for a reason.
  • Lisa
 
Maybe I’m off a little bit, and I haven’t read the whole thread, but to me there is a difference between a “traditional” Catholic and a “traditionalist” Catholic, though I will have to say up front that I despise the idea of dividing Catholics by the use of labels at all.
In practice, there is no difference between being a traditional Catholic and a traditionalist Catholic. They mean the same thing.

By the way, you’re spot-on about disliking the idea of dividing Catholics. It’s important to use the lowercase-t when discussiong traditional Catholicism. It’s an adjective, not a whole new religion. 🙂
 
None of these posts are very good answers.

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.

It’s complicated. Trads are not easily defined. You just kind of know them when you see them.
That is very funny and spot on!! I had a cousin who converted and you know what they say, no Catholic is more Catholic than a convert. He has totally lost his sense of humor, every conversation has to be on some point of Catholic teaching, theology, Catholic marriage, etc. All his friends are either converts or theologians and they are certainly a dour bunch and yes, there is that pipe smoking thing! Whats up with that??

And their wives - Good Lord I feel sorry for them - each has like 5 or 6 kids and they are only in their early thirties but are all sallow and overworked and stressed out for Jesus!!

All of the kids are home schooled and they dont play well with other kids at all. At one point, one wife revolted and sent her kids to regular parochial school and got counseling - thank heavens!!

I wish I could tell my cousin to chill out and lighten up in this life 'cause he wont see me in the next!! .:o
 
Yes, WRC’s response was delightful. You need to get that published somewhere, Joe.
  • Lisa
 
But pop quiz: what happened at the Council of Chalcedon (451)? How about the Council of Vienne (1311)?
Chalcedon affirmed that Jesus Christ is fully human and fully divine; equally Son of Mary and Second Person of the Blessed Trinity.

I had to look up Vienne. The Knights Templar are not an especial interest of mine.
Yeah I thought so.
Did you really?
 
Wait! You fail. Cheater! 😃
Slightly OT, and I am mindful of the grin smiley next to your response, but, really, is knowlege of the more obscure aspects of the Church’s official action a litmus test of how much one values tradition?

Because, I could compose my own quiz (something along the lines of “What is papal enclosure for monastics? What is constitutional enclosure?”) but I wouldn’t judge anyone as deficient in love/knowledge of the traditions of the Church because he/she didn’t know the answers…
 
Slightly OT, and I am mindful of the grin smiley next to your response, but, really, is knowlege of the more obscure aspects of the Church’s official action a litmus test of how much one values tradition?

Because, I could compose my own quiz (something along the lines of “What is papal enclosure for monastics? What is constitutional enclosure?”) but I wouldn’t judge anyone as deficient in love/knowledge of the traditions of the Church because he/she didn’t know the answers…
No, it was a light hearted quip, not a measure of Catholicity. I meant it this way: some Councils are big deals and some aren’t so much. History may judge the Second Vatican Council as a “first draft” for a Third Vatican Council, who knows? I’m not saying I hope for that, just acknowledging that it could happen.

If we’re both fessing up, I didn’t know the details of Lyons, Chalcedon or Vienna before I looked them up back in August for a related essay(whollyroamincatholic.com/2008/08/wherein_the_roman_missal_wasnt_built_in_a_day.html

Please don’t ask any questions about papal enclosures. I’d fail your exam. 🙂

My point was not an evaluative, it was explanatory.
 
Of course, if knowledge of all things Knights Templar is a part of the definition of a “Traditional Catholic,” then it’s a rather more narrow group than I imagined…😃
 
No, it was a light hearted quip, not a measure of Catholicity. I meant it this way: some Councils are big deals and some aren’t so much. History may judge the Second Vatican Council as a “first draft” for a Third Vatican Council, who knows? I’m not saying I hope for that, just acknowledging that it could happen.

If we’re both fessing up, I didn’t know the details of Lyons, Chalcedon or Vienna before I looked them up back in August for a related essay(whollyroamincatholic.com/2008/08/wherein_the_roman_missal_wasnt_built_in_a_day.html

Please don’t ask any questions about papal enclosures. I’d fail your exam. 🙂

My point was not an evaluative, it was explanatory.
Our posts are criss-crossing, I think. Gotcha 👍.
 
A traditional Catholic is someone that views the traditions of the Church not just as an optional extra to Catholicism but praciticing our faith and living our lives with the wisom passed on from our fathers in faith is a necessary and intrinsic part of Catholicism.

Of course, falling away from the infallible teachings of the Church is worse than falling away from the practices of the Church, but there is the idea that being a Catholic is not just about believing as the Church has believed but is also about worshipping God in the way the Church has passed down to us.

Tradition is a living thing that evoles, the way we practice our faith evolves but this evolution must take place with respect to what has gone before us and must build on it.

WhollyRoamin, I think you capture the traditionalist spirit very well.

In Domino,

JD
 
A traditional Catholic is someone that views the traditions of the Church not just as an optional extra to Catholicism but praciticing our faith and living our lives with the wisom passed on from our fathers in faith is a necessary and intrinsic part of Catholicism.

Tradition is a living thing that evoles, the way we practice our faith evolves but this evolution must take place with respect to what has gone before us and must build on it.
I agree. Here is how I have come at the question elsewhere:
As I have pondered the difference between self-styled traditionalist Catholics and other orthodox Catholics I have concluded that the primary difference is in their respective attitude toward change. If one does any significant reading in the Church Fathers, Doctors, and Popes one consistently finds a truly conservative attitude. That is, one sees that the attitude of orthodox Catholics through the centuries has been to cling tenaciously to that which has been handed on, both in belief and observance. Change itself is looked upon with suspicion and change for the sake of change or even to “get with the times” is unthinkable. Now here I can sense anti-traditionalist apologists ready to pounce, so let me say up front that I don’t in the least deny that there has been lots of legitimate development in the Catholic Church over the centuries, both doctrinal and practical. The Catholic Church is a living organism, animated by the Holy Spirit, and she has certainly developed and changed over the centuries while retaining in its fullness the deposit of revelation handed on to her by our Lord Jesus. This I readily grant.
What I am talking about instead is one’s prevailing attitude toward change. The Fathers, Doctors, and Popes did not see themselves primarily as innovators, but as conservators. They saw the Faith and those practices by which it was expressed, passed on, and guarded as an inheritance to be passed on to the next generation intact and, indeed, inviolate. They were not anxious to update the Faith, or to change perennial and venerable practices. For the most part, they viewed change—whether doctrinal or practical—with grave suspicion. They knew both instinctively and often by hard experience that changes in religious matters—even if seemingly minor—frequently bring about considerable upheaval in the life of the Church. . . .
Put simply, a Catholic traditionalist wishes to believe as his fathers believed, to worship as his fathers worshipped, and to pass on this belief and worship intact to his children. He does not oppose legitimate and organic developments. But he sees what is perennial, venerable, and established as a treasury of godly and holy wisdom and he views attempts to change or “update” this treasury of belief and practice with guarded reserve, if not suspicion.
From What is Traditional Catholicism?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top