Only you can answer that question. I have seen people participating in these threads on Charismatics identify themselves as being both. A lot of that depends on how you define ‘Traditional’ and ‘Charismatic’. I would think a person who takes part in traditional devotions (Frequent Mass attendance, Frequent reception of Holy Communion, Frequent reception of Confession, Rosary, Litanies, Morning Offerings to the Sacred and Immaculate Hearts, Stations of the Cross, Divine Office, Lectio Divina, Holy Hours, Exposition and Adoration, meditation/contemplation, etc) can be involved in CCR A Traditionalist (One who observes traditional devotions but also prefers TLM/EF and tends to avoid most post Vatican II devotions (like CCR), probably would NOT be both.
Hey, I’d correct you there on what you define as “traditional devotions”. Not that these aren’t traditional, but rather these aren’t traditional in the “traditionalist” sense, like most of the folks here. I should hope most people would be doing these things, these are normal Catholic devotions (for Roman Catholics anyway) that have immense spiritual significance. I’m sure you’ll find plenty of traddies and non-traddies doing all of those things.
I’d define traditional
practices as holding on to things that were generally either gotten rid of, or shoved aside in the wake of the liturgical changes after V2. Many of these were never officially removed, but either not required or shoved out by modernists. Like communion rails, mantillas, kneeling to receive communion, Latin, and especially the Traditional Latin Mass. Or celebrating Mass ad orientam, incense, cassocks and surplices for altar servers, patens, and in a huge way, traditional sacred music (and I guess traditional looking churches, as in beautiful churches instead of ugly pathetic excuses for them) And some older devotions as well, I guess. I support and participate in many of these, and apply the same mentality to them that I apply to things like the charismatic gifts: Why NOT? Is it a good thing? Yes. Why be against it then? It’s important! Keep it! Use it! The more the better!!!
Someone who conforms to these traditional practices, however, seems to often have a wrong mentality against legitimate change and doing things differently than they’ve always been done, especially when it requires a change in one’s level of participation and showing signs of enthusiasm and devotion. Let me give an example, something separate from the charismatic issue. I support receiving under both species, for the same reasons as I support most traditional practices. Why not? I have heard many traditionalists argue against it, trying to make the case that because it’s not necessary it shouldn’t be done. It seems they’re really against it because it’s a change that’s a deviation from the norms they were used to.
So, I can see people with that mentality being against the charismatic movement. It’s different, new, demanding. I don’t see how it conflicts with most traditional practices, but nearly every single “traditional Catholic” I’ve brought this up with (on and off the internet) seem to think that it conflicts with being a “traditionalist”. I don’t see how. As I say, I’m a traditional Catholic, meaning I follow most of these traditional devotions and practices. I’m also a charismatic.
We shouldn’t hold on to things for the sake of holding on to them, and especially to the point where it hinders us from doing different, but good and important, things.
