Help! I need to talk to someone who's Traditional!

[tabsie3210]

This is me:

My best friend is Pagan, and I accept this. I want to love her unendingly and be a good Catholic in the hopes of converting her. I’m afraid that she may die in her sins and cast herself into Hell. I do believe that her sentence will be absolutely fair and that God will show the utmost mercy He may (without making a travesty of justice) because of the situations that caused her to become Pagan.

My mother is Jewish and holds to the Old Covenant, but when I asked her, she said she doesn’t really know if Christ is God, but she wouldn’t be surprised at all if it turned out He was, and she has no objections to that. Again, I know that God will be 100% fair and just, as well as considerably more merciful than any human being.

So I read the Vatican II documents and those explicitly state that we are never to bash anyone of a different religion, but give them the freedom to have their own religion while extending loving arms to them in the hopes of bringing them into the One True Church.

I read the CCC which states that certain people who through no fault of their own are not Catholic may possibly be saved by God, but that people who reject God outright don’t fall into that category. Again, I’m reminded that God is way more fair and loving than I am.

Just because I’m friends with someone doesn’t mean I have to believe that they’re going to go to heaven when they die. Just because I love someone doesn’t mean I have to believe that God will judge as I would judge them.

So here’s my concern - nothing I read in there said you have to believe that people of other religions (not even Protestants) go to heaven when they die. The paperwork I read just says that we have to be loving toward other people, remember that some of the Truth is in their religions, and to keep dialogue open.

But I keep finding these websites that talk about how horrible (and in some cases, heretical) the Vatican II papers are. I don’t get it - if you don’t have to believe that other people go to heaven, and all it’s saying is that in order to love our enemies, we have to remember that God made them, too, and that they’re not 100% wrong in everything, then why the anger toward Vatican II?

I mean, don’t get me wrong - I realize that a lot of people (especially here in the USA) started spouting out about “social justice” and have gotten some really weird ideas, and those should be rooted out of our belief structure, but as far as I knew, the only reason that we address freedom of religion and religious tolerance (in other words, tolerating others, without being pluralistic) is to make it easier for us to talk to non-Catholics and bring them into the fold. They weren’t put in for pluralism and it is heretical to turn toward pluralism.

So help! I want to know where the Traditionalists are coming from so that I understand better, because I’m confused.

 

[Julian0404]

It took my mom 25 years of watching my dad go to Mass and pray the rosary with their children before she came into the Church.
Don’t judge your friend, for Jesus forbid us from judging other peoples souls. Love her with kindness and with the example of you going to Mass and praying. Perhaps, on occassion she would be open to attending Mass as well, but do not push her.
Your logic is correct. Salvation is to God alone, and He will save whom He will save. However, we must also recognize that He has not cast us out alone, to wander in confusion. He has created a Church, the Catholic Church to provide for all souls a home and refuge while we reside on this earth.
I think you have a good heart and well intentions for your friend, and I think God has placed in her in your good care to love her and by example, over time, perhaps a long time, to show her that Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life for all sous.
Add the salavation of the soul of your friend to your morning offering each day.

 

[tabsie3210]

It took my mom 25 years of watching my dad go to Mass and pray the rosary with their children before she came into the Church.
Don’t judge your friend, for Jesus forbid us from judging other peoples souls. Love her with kindness and with the example of you going to Mass and praying. Perhaps, on occassion she would be open to attending Mass as well, but do not push her.
Your logic is correct. Salvation is to God alone, and He will save whom He will save. However, we must also recognize that He has not cast us out alone, to wander in confusion. He has created a Church, the Catholic Church to provide for all souls a home and refuge while we reside on this earth.
I think you have a good heart and well intentions for your friend, and I think God has placed in her in your good care to love her and by example, over time, perhaps a long time, to show her that Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life for all sous.
Add the salavation of the soul of your friend to your morning offering each day.

Thank you very much. I love her dearly and pray for her every chance I get. All I want is for everyone to get into heaven. Barring that, I’ll take what I can get, and leave salvation up to God.

My reason for phrasing everything as I did was that I was trying to show that I didn’t see where there was herecy in the Vatican II documents, but a lot of people say that Vatican II ruined the Mass and added herecy to the Catholic church. I’m totally confused by this, and need help to understand what the problem is and how we Catholics can fix it.

 

[rwoehmke]

Is it possible that three Popes have been wrong about the Council and that lots of people who call it heritical are correct in their evaluation? I will cast my vote with the Papacy.

 

[tabsie3210]

Is it possible that three Popes have been wrong about the Council and that lots of people who call it heritical are correct in their evaluation? I will cast my vote with the Papacy.

That’s how I feel, too, but I’m completely baffled. I know one guy personally who believes that we haven’t had a Pope for three Popes! Doesn’t that go against everything that Christ told us about His Church?

So I wonder what happened to make so many people dislike Vatican II. That’s why I was asking the traditionalists so many questions - because I like traditionalism but I don’t know as much about it, and I want to know where things break apart to see how they can be fixed.

I’m so confused!

 

[fish90]

The problem that these Traditionalists have rests with a wrong interpretation.

Ordinary Form of the Mass:
A problem that Traditionalists have with the Ordinary Form is that they see the liturgical abuses that take place. They want Latin, they want the priest to face away from the people, they want bad Latin translations to be thrown away (for the many vs. for all), male altar servers and others. Those excommunicated Traditionalists will say the Eucharist is invalid due to the translation.

Vatican II:
For Traditionalists, the doctrine of “No Salvation Outside the Church” is a big one. From my own opinion, the “Spirit of Vatican II” must be exorcised. Please read: scdiocese.org/files/Pastoral_Letter_updated100809.pdf. The largest point to remember is that Vatican II as an ecumenical council cannot teach error. If Vatican II did, the Church would be in grave trouble (I do not even know the term). Traditionalists see the work of Vatican II, decrease in vocations, Catholic schools closing, priest shortage and heretical Catholics, and determine the worth of Vatican II as such. I do agree that this “Spirit of Vatican II” is partly to blame, but then logically I cannot exclude the pragmatism, relativism, materialism and other huge societal trends in the world today.

I plea to you that you keep your head on the side of the Church. Vatican II is problematic in its implementation but cannot be in its truth. Vatican II is an ecumenical council and it is infallible.

Avoid what Traditionalists like the SSPX and other groups who discredits Vatican II will say. For example, I heard the argument that the Pope who ordered the Council’s start said that it was pastoral council. I started a thread, forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=402091, and found these theories must be in error.

Be careful and please remember Traditionalist Catholics are great but those excommunicated Traditionalists are very dangerous for your soul

 

[RosaryCrusader]

Please read: scdiocese.org/files/Pastoral_Letter_updated100809.pdf.

Any document that starts with “Dear Sisters and Brothers” etc. should immediately be tossed in the compost pile.

 

[tabsie3210]

fish90 -

I can’t go into details but I’d talked with people who disbelieve that the Pope is really the Pope and who don’t celebrate Mass on Sundays because they think the clergy is all heretical. It blew my mind.

The complaint of, “No Salvation Outside the Church” doesn’t make much sense to me - obviously the Chruch is the only instrument in the salvation of souls. It’s the rock that Christ founded.

This is what it says in the Lumen Gentium ( vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html ):

“Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.(19*) Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life. Whatever good or truth is found amongst them is looked upon by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel.”

Maybe I’m just more literal in my reading, but what I gathered from this was that the Church is meant to reconcile all people to God, but where the Church is unable to do so (take, for instance, the former Soveit Union, where religion was outlawed and people who would be Catholic could not be, because there were no churches, no place to go to learn the Gospel), God is able to bring Salvation, so long as he is not willfully rejected.

I don’t see anything in here that says, “All men are going to be saved.” All I see here is that people who do not know the Church may still be a part of the Church, since God doesn’t want anyone to go to hell.

I’m just amazed and shocked that any Catholics at all would think that the Pope isn’t really the Pope.

 

[tabsie3210]

Any document that starts with “Dear Sisters and Brothers” etc. should immediately be tossed in the compost pile.

That statement might express your opinion very well, but it doesn’t give me any facts to work with. Can you explain why this particular greeting means that the letter is not valid in some fashion?

 

[fish90]

Any document that starts with “Dear Sisters and Brothers” etc. should immediately be tossed in the compost pile.

The bishop of Sioux City, R. Walker Nickless, is not somebody to be trusted, then eh?
lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/oct/09101606.html

tabsie3210, please do not forget that Catholics are still called to evangelize. A Catholic who knows the Catholic Church is the one true Church jeopardizes his/her soul should he/she willfully decide to leave. Vatican II says nothing about neglecting to evangelize the world from what I know, but to respect the position of invincible ignorance these people experience and to understand God can save anyone. The Church’s job is to lead all willing souls to heaven. The ultimate judgment is and always will be left for God.

The problem with Vatican II is that it cannot teach error but people seem to think it does due to improper education on the matter. Catholic.com answers many of the Traditionalist questions regarding Vatican II doctrine.

 

[bpbasilphx]

\Just because I’m friends with someone doesn’t mean I have to believe that they’re going to go to heaven when they die. Just because I love someone doesn’t mean I have to believe that God will judge as I would judge them.

So here’s my concern - nothing I read in there said you have to believe that people of other religions (not even Protestants) go to heaven when they die. .\

**St. Anthony the Great used to say, “All will be saved, and I alone condemned.”

St. Silouan (Silvanus) of Mt. Athos said, “Keep your mind in hell and despair not.”

In other words, know that they have a better chance of being saved in their ignorance, than you do who claim the fulness of truth.**

 

[Tracy_Spenst]

fish90 -

I can’t go into details but I’d talked with people who disbelieve that the Pope is really the Pope and who don’t celebrate Mass on Sundays because they think the clergy is all heretical. It blew my mind.

I’m just amazed and shocked that any Catholics at all would think that the Pope isn’t really the Pope.

Tabitha,

Most likely you’ve run into an even smaller “Rad-Trad” group called the SSPV. They are sedavacantists (can’t get the right spelling!). In other words, they think we have an “empty see.” There’s all kinds of stuff that goes into what they believe, but they are a heretical group and should not be taken as typical Traditionalists. There are other groups as well–one even elected their own pope!

The problem most Traditionalists have with Vatican II is the abuses that have taken place. These abuses have not just been about the liturgy, but towards them, personally, for wishing to retain the Traditional Mass. The Church has experienced a pendulum swing since the close of the Council. I believe we’re on the way back to proper balance, but some folks are still hurting and need time for healing and understanding.

When you come across folks like this, it’s best to listen and then let it go. When they’re open to hearing the truth, they’ll ask.

Tracy in ND

 

[FightingFat]

Just because I’m friends with someone doesn’t mean I have to believe that they’re going to go to heaven when they die. Just because I love someone doesn’t mean I have to believe that God will judge as I would judge them.

I think the truth is, you don’t know. Neither do I incidentally, all any of us can do is offer best guess. I think it is fair to say that the Church has never said x is in Hell, it merely points out when you are wandering dangerously close and putting your eternal life in danger.

There is plenty in Sacred Scripture to show that the initiative in our relationship lies with God’s love. Jesus says to His Apostles, “You did not choose Me, but I chose you” (Jn 15:16). In John 6:44, Jesus says, “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him.”

Sometimes it appears that God chooses one rather than another, in the NT as well as the OT- so Jesus seems to exclude Judas from His choice in Jn 13:18: “I am not speaking of you all; I know whom I have chosen; it is that the Scripture may be fulfilled.” At other times, it seems that God does not have favourites (Acts 10:34) and His call is not restricted to only some. Look again at Jn 12:32.

So Scripture encourages us to recognise our dependence on God’s initiative, but warns us to be careful when we try to talk about His plan. We must not place restrictions on His love and loyalty, but on the other hand we must not be naively universalist.

So here’s my concern - nothing I read in there said you have to believe that people of other religions (not even Protestants)

NOT EVEN PROTESTANTS!!



I think we must all work out our salvation in fear and trembling. I also think that the Church consistently teaches that the safest way to get to Heaven is by following it’s Apostolic teaching…Even then, it comes down to you really doesn’t it? Your disposition, what you accept in your heart, how well you live the Gospel? Just going through the motions means very little, at least that’s the message we take from the Bible I think.

go to heaven when they die. The paperwork I read just says that we have to be loving toward other people, remember that some of the Truth is in their religions, and to keep dialogue open.

Yes, in Truth and Tolerance, Joseph Ratzinger teaches that there are shards of God’s truth in all religions because God reaches out to all men through their own culture. The culmination of this reality is in Jesus Christ, who perfectly reveals the Father.

But I keep finding these websites that talk about how horrible (and in some cases, heretical) the Vatican II papers are. I don’t get it - if you don’t have to believe that other people go to heaven, and all it’s saying is that in order to love our enemies, we have to remember that God made them, too, and that they’re not 100% wrong in everything, then why the anger toward Vatican II?

There’s comfort in absolutism. Many think the Church is like that; it is a place where there are prescribed forms of behaviour which will lead you to Heaven…Sound like anyone group from the Bible? It’s just part of human behaviour. I like to think of the Catholic Church as the best university. It’s all in God’s plan and our job is to do the best we can to figure out what He wants for us and maintain the commandments He gave us- love Him and love each other.

the only reason that we address freedom of religion and religious tolerance (in other words, tolerating others, without being pluralistic) is to make it easier for us to talk to non-Catholics and bring them into the fold. They weren’t put in for pluralism and it is heretical to turn toward pluralism.

There can be no compulsion in religion, we are each on our own journey. As Catholics we believe that something is not true because God said it, but God says something because it is true; in other words, we trust to faith and to reason. People must be allowed to work it out for themselves, and, given a fair crack, why wouldn’t they?

In Introduction to Christianity, Ratzinger suggests that sometimes the Church itself has been at fault for not giving a good example, many who have been let down by the Church and left it cannot be considered to be Hell bound by a completely just God.

“the aspect of Christ’s holiness that upset his contemporaries was the complete absence of a condemnatory note–fire did not fall on the unworthy, nor were the zealous allowed to pull up the weeds they saw growing luxuriantly on all sides. On the contrary, this holiness expressed itself precisely as mingling with the sinners whom Jesus drew into his vicinity; as mingling to the point where he himself was made “to be sin” and bore the curse of the law in execution as a criminal–complete community of fate with the lost (cf 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13). He has drawn sin to himself, made it his lot, and so revealed what true holiness is: not separation, but union; not judgement, but redeeming love.”

Joseph Ratzinger; Introduction to Christianity, (Ignatius, San Francisco, 2004), p. 342.

 

[tabsie3210]

\Just because I’m friends with someone doesn’t mean I have to believe that they’re going to go to heaven when they die. Just because I love someone doesn’t mean I have to believe that God will judge as I would judge them.

So here’s my concern - nothing I read in there said you have to believe that people of other religions (not even Protestants) go to heaven when they die. .\

**St. Anthony the Great used to say, “All will be saved, and I alone condemned.”

St. Silouan (Silvanus) of Mt. Athos said, “Keep your mind in hell and despair not.”

In other words, know that they have a better chance of being saved in their ignorance, than you do who claim the fulness of truth.**

Bless you! Thank you for offering me hope for her. I love her dearly, like my own sister. As for me, I just keep prayign for God to give me the Grace to accept his Grace. I’m not Protestant - I don’t believe I’m “saved,” I just trust in God’s eternal mercy.

The only reason I mention all that is that from what I’ve read, a lot of people who take issue with V2 complain that all of a sudden, anyone can be saved no matter what, and the emphasis was taken off of being part of the One True Church. I was just pointing out that even me, someone who would have a lot of stake in saying, “My best friend can get into Heaven no matter what,” can’t honestly say that after reading the documents.

 

[tabsie3210]

Tabitha,

Most likely you’ve run into an even smaller “Rad-Trad” group called the SSPV. They are sedavacantists (can’t get the right spelling!). In other words, they think we have an “empty see.” There’s all kinds of stuff that goes into what they believe, but they are a heretical group and should not be taken as typical Traditionalists. There are other groups as well–one even elected their own pope!

The problem most Traditionalists have with Vatican II is the abuses that have taken place. These abuses have not just been about the liturgy, but towards them, personally, for wishing to retain the Traditional Mass. The Church has experienced a pendulum swing since the close of the Council. I believe we’re on the way back to proper balance, but some folks are still hurting and need time for healing and understanding.

When you come across folks like this, it’s best to listen and then let it go. When they’re open to hearing the truth, they’ll ask.

Tracy in ND

Tracy-

Ironically, I thought that he was SSPX, but turns out he thinks they are heretics, too! In fact, he hasn’t found a Single Group he believes isn’t heretical, which is why he just gets together with his friends on Sunday. No Mass at all, not even an SSPX version.