Do you think its time to end the tradtitional forum?

[Walking_Home]

This forum was formed to be able to corral all those who needed corralling away from other sections of the CA forums where they were causing trouble. but maybe that was a bad idea? what do you all think?

---

Better idea—“Corral” those who start threads and/or contibute to threads to incite trouble — in the Traditional forum.

 

[Daprato]

If there is division it is, in large part, due to Trad-baiters. Most of the folks on this forum are familiar with them. I have most of them on ignore. They constantly post items that are intended to inflame the average Trad. They interject themselves into discussions with the most controversial (at least to Trads) posts.

Perhaps rather than closing the Traditional Catholic forum, we Trads should stop even responding to such attacks. Put them on ignore, and let’s just enjoy the company of our fellow Trads with discussion that helps our faith to grow.

Good grief, do you identify as a Catholic Christian or a “Trad?”

 

[thechrismyster]

---

Better idea—“Corral” those who start threads and/or contibute to threads to incite trouble — in the Traditional forum.

thats cute.

a lot of one line zingers in the traditional forum carry the same condescending tone.

this isn’t about inciting trouble, or causing it, rather, this thread is to discuss the traditional forum itself, and the topics i’d originally posted. If you have nothing to add, please refrain from giving wordy testament to the fact.

to the other posters so far, some responses are interesting, some defend the traditionalist position well.

but it still seems as though the traditional forum is the hotzone for controversy and rudeness. That is not by accident.

for every 5 traditionalists are are genuine and well intentioned, they don’t give proper balance to the 20 others who serve no purpose other than to separate themselves from the flock by bad attitude and anti-Catholic viewpoints.

case in point the self proclaimed “trads” - you’re Catholic. nothing more, nothing less.

 

[I_Believe]

Aside from the divisiveness you note, the other problem I see is that this forum does not distinguish between Catholicism that is in communion with the Church and the teachings of Vatican II, and “Catholicism” that is not. Thus there is the constant presentation of ideas that are not in line with the Church’s teachings and disciplines that are presented as being in line because they are in line with the group that is presenting them who self-identify as Catholic, though in varying degrees of communion with the Church and the Pope. This leads greatly to further confusion and divisiveness and perhaps to people being drawn away from the Church because they make assumptions that people are presenting views of the Church when in fact they are not necessarily so.

While I am not accusing anyone of intentional dishonesty, there are unquestionably those who do not want to acknowledge their actual allegiance so that people can make informed decisions about how much weight and credibility to give statements made by differing posters. There are “traditionalists” here who hold solidly to the Church and just prefer the EF and some or all of the pre-Vatican II traditions, while not opposing Vatican II itself. There are others who consitently want to find Vatican II to be in conflict with previous statements of doctrine but accept the Pope, though possibly with reservations. There are still others who reject that there is a valid Pope. And there are many at different points along the spectrum. Since there is no way to know where someone stands if they don’t self-identify, it is especially difficult for those who don’t have a strong education in doctrine, history, and the “buzzwords” that go with the different groups.

I don’t personally find much constructive use of the forum as it does indeed seem mostly a place to either do the “my Mass is better than yours” or to complain about Vatican II or dispute its validity. Any of those purposes, IMHO, are distractions and unfairly tar some who simply have preferences for the more traditional as being radicals.

I am constantly saddened to see that division occurring among people who claim to follow the Catholic faith and the Prince of Peace. Providing a place to further that division seems counter-productive to the aims of the site.

Peace,

But there again John, we have VII used as a reason to trump Tradition. Right here in the Traditional Catholicism forum. It is constantly thrown at us.

I started a thread asking those who prefer the pre concilliar Church to share what they saw as good things that were a result of VII. I also invited Concilliar minded folks to share any thought on what they saw as negative results of VII.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=193311

It was an attempt to discuss VII, instead of arguing about VII. I was fishing for non biased opinions. It went pretty well but died off after only two days. Guess there wasn’t enough drama lol.

 

[Cat]

I find it extremely discouraging to read some of the nasty, snide comments that people make about each other in this Section of the Board. It breaks my heart to see such childishness. Are we Don Rickles here? Or Phylis Diller? But it’s not funny when it’s done off a stage.

Some of the posters excuse themselves by saying that they are just being sarcastic, and that Jesus was sarcastic, too. But Jesus died for the ones that He was sarcastic toward.

If all the Catholics I knew were like some of the mean people in this Section, I would probably leave the Catholic Church. Yes, I love the Lord, but I have to live with His people. No wonder so many Protestants are opting for “churches of one.” A human being can only take so much scourging before they die.

I would be ashamed to invite Protestant friends of mine to come to Catholic Forums and discover this Section of the Board. They would use this Section of the Board to prove that Catholics are just as divided among themselves as Protestants.

I’ll be honest–after spending several months visiting this Section of the Board and listening to the Traditionalists, I have no interest whatsoever in ever attending a TLM. I wish I could just ignore all the nasty people, but I can’t. I know that there are plenty of nice TLMers, but I can’t get past the nasty ones.

I happen to know a couple of those TLMers in my city, and they seem just as unfriendly and judgmental as the nasty people in this section of CAF. The only reason I would attend a TLM at this point in my life is if it was the only option available to receive Our Lord in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, or if the Pope eliminated NO. But then all of the “nice” Catholics would be at the TLM, too, and we would outnumber the mean people!

I think that this Section should be allowed to continue, but with a very pronounced WARNING about potentially divisive threads. And no one should be allowed to visit this section who is not a Catholic. It’s too hurtful.

 

[pnewton]

Do you think its time to end the tradtitional forum?

Why? Is there an electron shortage? Most of the posters here are not divisive. There are schismatic sects represented, just like there are the baiters that come here just to rattle traditionalists. I am in the latter category.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with this forum existing. I think more germaine questions might be rather to ban schismatic discussion and whether to ban sedevacantist discussion. I would be opposed to the first and in favor of the second. I would at least like to see sedevacantism moved to nonCatholic religions.

 

[fix]

Also, if some posters cannot tolerate a scholarly critique of their preffered mass, be it OF or EF, they should simply avoid this subforum, not call for its elimination.

This makes sense. Not every time someone complains of mean spiritedness or division is legitimate.

 

[universalindult]

If there is division it is, in large part, due to Trad-baiters. They constantly post items that are intended to inflame the average Trad.

…we Trads should stop even responding to such attacks. Put them on ignore, and let’s just enjoy the company of our fellow Trads with discussion that helps our faith to grow.

 

[thechrismyster]

If there is division it is, in large part, due to Trad-baiters. Most of the folks on this forum are familiar with them. I have most of them on ignore. They constantly post items that are intended to inflame the average Trad. They interject themselves into discussions with the most controversial (at least to Trads) posts.

Perhaps rather than closing the Traditional Catholic forum, we Trads should stop even responding to such attacks. Put them on ignore, and let’s just enjoy the company of our fellow Trads with discussion that helps our faith to grow.

so define yourself as a separate group, self identify and isolate yourself with other like minded people. Ignore people with opposing views and proclaim your own truth…

Society of St. Pius X beat you to that game.

Nothing new under the sun, after all. whats old is new.

 

[I_Believe]

so define yourself as a separate group, self identify and isolate yourself with other like minded people. Ignore people with opposing views and proclaim your own truth…

Isn’t that exactly what you are proposing ?

You’ve already described this sub-forum as an idea to corral us.

Make up your mind please.

Do you honestly think you can sell hot dogs in front of a five star steakhouse ?

 

[jj2011]

As time goes on, the Tridentine Mass will become increasingly “mainstream” again. There are even reports that PCED may ask every seminary to teach TLM rubrics to seminarians. “Traditional Catholicism” can’t be kept in the ghetto forever.

 

[parvenu74]

I also find it curious that the forum has a specific sub-forum for a group that is generally critical of the current (i.e. last 50 years) Church leadership.

Are we talking about the folks who are critical of the Church for not ordaining women or allowing priests to marry or to be “less oppressive” on questions of reproductive rights and end of life questions? You make it sound as though traditionalists are the only group in the Church who would like to see things change. Sure, we want some pretty significant changes: we want every bishop, priest, religious, and lay person to actually follow the infallibly defined rules of Faith. We’re not asking for a revolution here, just to stay the course that was established by Christ Himself.

Also, while not disagreeing that most traditionalists accept that the NO is both licit and valid, I have heard both that it is illicit and invalid on threads here.

I think this demonstrates a lack of understanding of what makes a traditional Catholic a traditional Catholic. The Mass is important, but it’s not even the biggest point of “traditionalism.”

Another way to look at it: would should CAF have subforum called Progressiver (or Liberal) Catholicism, or one called Obedient Catholicism (or whatever the main stream Catholics would be called)? Then why have this one?

Now you’re into an interesting question. A fundamental problem with message forums like this is that there is no check or balance against someone writing something which is in error. Lest we forget: error has no rights. By opening up a medium of communication to everyone without it being subject to prudent censorship, you implicitly promote the humanistic idea that we can decide what is right: it’s an enshrinement of democracy in the realm of Faith and Morals… and this is most retrograde to the eternal teachings of the Church!

However, to be intellectually consistent, it would make total and complete sense to open sub-fora for Prograssive/Liberal/Feminist/whatever Catholics. Maybe the CAF moderators will put it to a vote.

 

[parvenu74]

There are even reports that PCED may ask every seminary to teach TLM rubrics to seminarians.

rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2007/11/important-ecclesia-dei-to-ask.html

 

[markadm]

Isn’t that exactly what you are proposing ?

You’ve already described this sub-forum as an idea to corral us.

Make up your mind please.

I agree. The original post did not necessarily make sense; hence, is it worth continuing this decision? There seems plenty desire and reason for this subforum to continue.

 

[Daprato]

I find it extremely discouraging to read some of the nasty, snide comments that people make about each other in this Section of the Board. It breaks my heart to see such childishness. Are we Don Rickles here? Or Phylis Diller? But it’s not funny when it’s done off a stage.

Some of the posters excuse themselves by saying that they are just being sarcastic, and that Jesus was sarcastic, too. But Jesus died for the ones that He was sarcastic toward.

If all the Catholics I knew were like some of the mean people in this Section, I would probably leave the Catholic Church. Yes, I love the Lord, but I have to live with His people. No wonder so many Protestants are opting for “churches of one.” A human being can only take so much scourging before they die.

I would be ashamed to invite Protestant friends of mine to come to Catholic Forums and discover this Section of the Board. They would use this Section of the Board to prove that Catholics are just as divided among themselves as Protestants.

I’ll be honest–after spending several months visiting this Section of the Board and listening to the Traditionalists, I have no interest whatsoever in ever attending a TLM. I wish I could just ignore all the nasty people, but I can’t. I know that there are plenty of nice TLMers, but I can’t get past the nasty ones.

I happen to know a couple of those TLMers in my city, and they seem just as unfriendly and judgmental as the nasty people in this section of CAF. The only reason I would attend a TLM at this point in my life is if it was the only option available to receive Our Lord in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, or if the Pope eliminated NO. But then all of the “nice” Catholics would be at the TLM, too, and we would outnumber the mean people!

I think that this Section should be allowed to continue, but with a very pronounced WARNING about potentially divisive threads. And no one should be allowed to visit this section who is not a Catholic. It’s too hurtful.

There is a certain “bunker-mentality” that is pervasive through this forum. Very much a “we versus them” attitude which can be sickening given that we are all Catholic Christians – or at least most of us. Some of the dialogue is troubling.

Sadly this mentality DOES seem to also exist at the Tridentine Mass that I attend. NOT from the priestly celebrants, but from those who huddle outside or in the hall after Mass, bemoaning the “liberals” and “modernists.” It truly would be funny if it were not so clear just how much of a toll their hatred is taking on their collective faiths.

My experience may be a “local-only” thing, but there is NO WAY I can walk across the parish hall after Mass for a cup of coffee without hearing the terms “modernists”, “liberals”, “NO Mass” etc. used in the most bitter of ways. This is 5 mins after Mass – when people should be HAPPY and THANKFUL.

But I still believe the forum should continue if possible.

 

[ncjohn]

Also, if some posters cannot tolerate a scholarly critique of their preffered mass, be it OF or EF, they should simply avoid this subforum, not call for its elimination.

I think that in those cases where it does engender scholarly debate–or answers questions that people have about the EF or traditional sacramental forms–it serves a valuable purpose.

Unfortunately, the norm seems to be more of the constant trotting out of the same old documents to try to “prove” that Vatican II somehow “changed” or is inconsistent with previous doctrine. Or trying to “prove” that the abrogation of the 1917 Canon Law didn’t really <wink, wink> mean to abrogate ALL of the Code. And unfortunately these attempts almost always include very derogatory remarks about the faithfulness, intelligence, or literacy of anyone who doesn’t agree with those positions and chooses to follow the Church’s interpretations.

To be fair, there is more than ample negative and uncharitable response to those posts–and even some intentional baiting from the other “side”, as has been noted–but I think that’s the point of the original post. When you have two or three–or more–versions of “traditional Catholicism” competing with each other, the divisiveness and backbiting is pretty much the only foreseeable result.

I think there is a valid purpose to a forum for discussions of “traditional”–vs Traditional–Catholicism. I do personally take issue though with the co-opting of the term Traditional because of the way it implies that Catholics who prefer the OF are against Tradition. Having a difference in preference as to “tradition” is simply a preference while being against Tradition is something else completely. Unfortunately, the way the term is used that negaitve implication is there and very Orthodox Catholics are being put on the defensive just for not wanting to be lumped with those who prefer the EF and the older sacramental forms.

I don’t know how to bring about the necessary civility, though many of the more thoughtful posters do in fact abide by common courtesy. If we can’t come to some kind of civil discussion though, the anti-traditional feeling that many have will only increase and the division within the Church will only widen. Since Christ is One and cannot be divided, I just personally don’t see that as a viable option. Both groups have much to offer, both to each other and to a wounded and weary world. I’d love to see more of this forum trying to figure out how to bring the Body of Christ together rather than the hands refusing to work with the feet.

Peace,

 

[paramedicgirl]

This post is nothing more than the manifestation of the hatred you claim to despise. The nature of this topic guarantees the us vs them attitude you describe and begs us to rekindle it once again.

The worst examples you offer (and yes I’ve seen them) are not a reflection of the views of the majority of regular posters here. They are your own assumptions based on your rage over a few select posts.

Your last paragraph is a blatant slap in the face to the majority of those who frequently post here.

Catholicism is a beautiful Faith. Centuries of devotion to this Faith have instilled, in some of us, a love for Catholicism as it was for a very long time.

The Church has seen fit to preserve nearly every traditional devotion that, at face value, is undeniably Catholic. The veneration of relics, the remembrance of saints, the faith in the rewards of indulgences, are but a few examples of what we dare not discard.

But the one thing that would seem to be the most profound display of our Faith, the signature of the Catholic Church if you will, was pushed aside in the spirit of “active participation of the faithful”.

Anyone informed regarding the TLM knows that the Faithful did indeed assist and participate. The TLM is a deliberate expression of the Catholic Faith. The Prayers At The Foot Of The Altar immediately set the tone and direct the focus of the Faithful. It is all about God. The priest humbly ackowledges his own faults and begs permission to dare approach the Altar of God. There is no doubt from then onward for what purpose we have assembled. No ambiguity, no options, just a deliberate and plainly observed manifestation of the Catholic Faith in the Salvation we are offered through every drop of blood and tear Christ shed for us.

If traditionalists are to be frowned upon for holding this level of devotion dear, so be it.

Of all the posts in this thread, this is the one that makes the most sense. It bears re reading.

 

[thechrismyster]

Isn’t that exactly what you are proposing ?

No, i’m proposing forcing the traditional crowd to fall back in line with the UNIVERSAL Church they’ve fallen away from. Mingle as CATHOLICS instead of self identified groups.

see the group i’m asking the traditionalists join is a large one… called CATHOLIC.

Do you honestly think you can sell hot dogs in front of a five star steakhouse ?

so what you’re implying is that the TLM is a steakhouse and the N.O is a hot dog cart?

 

[cam100]

I see absolutely nothing wrong with this forum existing. I think more germaine questions might be rather to ban schismatic discussion and whether to ban sedevacantist discussion. I would be opposed to the first and in favor of the second. I would at least like to see sedevacantism moved to nonCatholic religions.

The problem with this proposal is that sedevanctists see themselves as completely Catholic. So why would they post their views in the forum for discussion of non-Catholic religions?

I think dialogue with sedevanctists and SSPX supporters is educational and beneficial. I have studied both positions and I try to explain the problems with their viewpoints by posting in this forum. Without free dialogue, such explanations are difficult to do. One needs a springboard for discussion. I also gain considerable benefit by reading how others respond to such positions, as well.

 

[thechrismyster]

I agree. The original post did not necessarily make sense; hence, is it worth continuing this decision? There seems plenty desire and reason for this subforum to continue.

my original post was so cryptic that 33 respnses were generated before someone called it’s meaning into question? No.

My original post is dead on accurate to this forum.