S
Sarcelle
Guest
I confess to doing that.
Now I realize that my faith not my politics should be in charge.
Now I realize that my faith not my politics should be in charge.
Is it just me or is Traditional Catholicism (especially online) hijacked by a Pharisee spirit?
- Status
P
PatienceAndHumility
Guest
I think Pharisaical in this context (with Traditionals) is more so about the adherence to the letter of the Law than its spirit. Therefore by definition it is more applicable to Traditionals than Liberals, though not mutually exclusive. (To reiterate I reluctantly use the terms trad and lib!)
S
Sarcelle
Guest
I think the term “Legalistic” would more fitting for those people who think that their way of doing things and perceiving things is the only valid way.Tis_Bearself:
I think Pharisaical in this context (with Traditionals) is more so about the adherence to the letter of the Law than its spirit. Therefore by definition it is more applicable to Traditionals than Liberals, though not mutually exclusive. (To reiterate I reluctantly use the terms trad and lib!)
I agree with you on your definition of pharisaical.
S
stpurl
Guest
So much of this is based on perception and anecdotes and assumptions. What one person sees as a concern for serving the Lord to the best of one’s ability and witnessing verbally to same, another person will see as “somebody trying to be holier-than-thou’ and ‘somebody who’s all about the letter of the law’.
Just as what somebody sees as ‘meeting people where they are’ and ‘many paths to God’ are indifferentism and relativism.
However, let’s try to be truly fair here.
Do you really think that labeling an entire group of people whose only ‘crime’ is that they prefer a rite which has never been abrogated, who like traditional practices such as ember days, saying the Liturgy of the hours, family rosaries, modesty, etc. as being ‘pharisees’ because, and this is the crux of the matter, they have the appearance In doing so of doing more than the person viewing them THINKS is appropriate for another Catholic?
Just as the person who seldom attends Mass or whose practices are a vague “cultural Catholicism’, whose poor catechesis leads to an indifferentist and universalist position would find someone who tells them that Sunday Mass attendance is ‘an obligation’ and whose insistence that Jesus Christ was the only Way (both of which positions are in the catechism and represent authentic Catholic teachings) it is easy to imagine such a person feeling that the latter is a “Pharisee’, a rigid letter of the law person. Isn’t it? But is the person who is simply stating authentic teaching the real Pharisee? Isn’t the first person, glorying in his ‘real spiritualism’ and his “all embracing tolerance which is so much more Christlike’ and his ‘free, not coerced worship; actually the true Pharisee?
Aren’t many of those tarring “trads” truly standing there thanking God that THEY aren’t “like those horrible nasty trads with their rigidity and hatefulness?
Pot, meet kettle.
Just as what somebody sees as ‘meeting people where they are’ and ‘many paths to God’ are indifferentism and relativism.
However, let’s try to be truly fair here.
Do you really think that labeling an entire group of people whose only ‘crime’ is that they prefer a rite which has never been abrogated, who like traditional practices such as ember days, saying the Liturgy of the hours, family rosaries, modesty, etc. as being ‘pharisees’ because, and this is the crux of the matter, they have the appearance In doing so of doing more than the person viewing them THINKS is appropriate for another Catholic?
Just as the person who seldom attends Mass or whose practices are a vague “cultural Catholicism’, whose poor catechesis leads to an indifferentist and universalist position would find someone who tells them that Sunday Mass attendance is ‘an obligation’ and whose insistence that Jesus Christ was the only Way (both of which positions are in the catechism and represent authentic Catholic teachings) it is easy to imagine such a person feeling that the latter is a “Pharisee’, a rigid letter of the law person. Isn’t it? But is the person who is simply stating authentic teaching the real Pharisee? Isn’t the first person, glorying in his ‘real spiritualism’ and his “all embracing tolerance which is so much more Christlike’ and his ‘free, not coerced worship; actually the true Pharisee?
Aren’t many of those tarring “trads” truly standing there thanking God that THEY aren’t “like those horrible nasty trads with their rigidity and hatefulness?
Pot, meet kettle.
S
Sarcelle
Guest
Who in this thread did that?
Can you point to which specific posts tarred all Catholics who prefer the Latin mass?
S
Stephen_says
Guest
I am reading the comments in this post with an “Us vs Them” attitude that saddens me. I get frustrated when one group of Catholics calls another a “Pharisee”. if we’re just piling on, without knowing them and not reaching out to them for fraternal correction, what’s even the point of posts like this?
Last edited:
P
PatienceAndHumility
Guest
Fwiw I attend tlm, but our preference is irrelevant to this topic. The topic at hand is the hijacking of Traditionals by a Pharisaical spirit- do you not agree that this is a valid concern?
These are truisms we can all agree on. The topic at hand is the hijacking of many good traditional minded Catholics by a Pharisaical spirit.
The Pharisee is the one who adheres to the strict letter of the law, forsaking its spirit. By definition this is more endemic in Traditionals rather than Liberals, without being mutually exclusive. Authentic teaching can of course be stated, yes. But it’s practice must be founded upon Charity, else the heart is absent. This is the threat many Traditionals currently face
P
PatienceAndHumility
Guest
Of course, both spectrums of Catholic thought fall prey to comparable issues. These being not mutually exclusive. However, the lukewarmness/indifference of one side juxtaposes the Pharisaical of the other. Generally speaking there is a different composition of issues on either side.
P
PatienceAndHumility
Guest
This is brilliantly put, thanks.
M
Maximian
Guest
Perhaps one problem is the definition of what is charitable and loving. It is not charitable or loving or merciful to allow a child to play near a cliff edge, however fun it looks. The motger who says no! will be perceived as harsh, rigid, uncharitable etc. But she will in fact doing what a loving mother should do.
P
PatienceAndHumility
Guest
Indeed dear Brother/Sister in Christ. This summarises it perfectly I think.
Yes- I think it’s primary application is to the fundamentalist interpretation of Law and it subsequently stretches to relativism of said terpretation.
I speak as what one might call a Traditional. Hence why I think I understand some of the spiritual challenges prominent in the community.
As to your comment. @pnewton summarises this very well above. “Traditionalism lends itself to legalism, just as Progressive Catholicism lends itself to indifferentism. Maybe all good things have a wrong direction they can be taken to”
Fraternal correction is precisely what is being sought- I do realize that generalisations can be offensive but that is not the intention. It is for the sake of argument. Pax Christi!
P
PatienceAndHumility
Guest
This analogy is true but not relevant to the topic. Do you not agree that Traditionals suffer a particularly prevalent temptation/tendancy to adopt a Pharisee spirit? I.e. Placing the letter of the law above its spirit?
Tis_Bearself
Patron
I’m not a trad, but I don’t find that as a group they’re in need of “fraternal correction”. Occasionally there is an individual Catholic who may come from any group, who needs correction of some sort.
No, I don’t.
And these statements are starting to look like you have an agenda to criticize Traditionalists. Seems a bit divisive. Perhaps have some “Patience and Humility” with those you don’t care for?
Last edited:
P
PatienceAndHumility
Guest
I attend TLM. Does that make me a traditional? The labels Traditional and Liberal are loosely used for the sake of argument… Sorry if you’re offended. Pax Christi!
M
Maximian
Guest
No I don’t agree, and it IS relevant because this perception that traditionalists are pharisaical arises from a misunderstanding of why traditionalists are strict about the things they are.
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself
Patron
I’m not “offended.” I disagree with your apparent blanket conclusions about trads and like I said I’m starting to find this topic a bit divisive.
I like Latin, go to a few TLMs a year, am happy about Summorum Pontificorum, and enjoy praying old devotions. I also like guitar Mass and CITH, mostly attend OF, and I don’t hate Fr. Martin. I don’t consider myself a trad. You are free to define yourself how you please.
Last edited:
S
stpurl
Guest
Respectfully, I disagree. Traditionals have not been ‘hijacked by a Pharisaical spirit’ any more than Progressives have. Just as in any group Individuals sometimes go to extremes and further, unfortunately, some individuals are **Perceived ** as extremists to those who are, themselves, extreme in a different way which they have come to believe is itself ‘normal’. That’s why to a person who is, let’s say, an authoritarian personality, a person with a permissive personality can seem ‘letting kids run wild’, while to the permissive personality, the authoritarian person can be seem to ‘stifle the child completely.
And yet, both can be perfectly normal (these types are normal variants) raising happy healthy children. And if the people are sensible enough to realize that just because they have some style differences that the one isn’t a ‘pharisee’ because he seems ‘rigid’ and the other isn’t an indifferentist because he seems ‘loose’, things go well.
Ideas that promote “trads” and “Traditional Catholics’ as being ‘rigid’ and Pharisees are not at all helpful. They are hateful and divisive, painting only one ‘group’ as having any problems, and do absolutely nothing positive. In fact, it keeps feeding the bias and preaching to the choir of the majority of people who are not ‘traditionalists’ and giving them both an unhealthy and incorrect view of traditionalism itself.
The fact that with regard to any other group of Catholics people fall over backward in their efforts at kindness (doubting Catholics? Let’s not ‘judge’ them, etc) but ONE group is met with constant charges of their rigidity and hatefulness simply due to their ‘traditional Catholicism’ should, for God’s sake, be a wake up call not to the supposed ‘sins’ of this group but to the real and ugly bias of those who ‘sit in judgment’ on their fellow Catholics.
You attempt to claim that Traditionals are by nature ‘letter of the law people’, but the sin of the Pharisees was not following the letter of the law (Jesus Himself spoke of following the law to every jot and tittle), but in demanding that other people not just follow the law that way, but that they do MORE than that. “The Pharisees lay heavy burdens on others but do not accept the burden themselves”. THAT is the Pharisee. And that is NOT the average Traditional Catholic.
And yet, both can be perfectly normal (these types are normal variants) raising happy healthy children. And if the people are sensible enough to realize that just because they have some style differences that the one isn’t a ‘pharisee’ because he seems ‘rigid’ and the other isn’t an indifferentist because he seems ‘loose’, things go well.
Ideas that promote “trads” and “Traditional Catholics’ as being ‘rigid’ and Pharisees are not at all helpful. They are hateful and divisive, painting only one ‘group’ as having any problems, and do absolutely nothing positive. In fact, it keeps feeding the bias and preaching to the choir of the majority of people who are not ‘traditionalists’ and giving them both an unhealthy and incorrect view of traditionalism itself.
The fact that with regard to any other group of Catholics people fall over backward in their efforts at kindness (doubting Catholics? Let’s not ‘judge’ them, etc) but ONE group is met with constant charges of their rigidity and hatefulness simply due to their ‘traditional Catholicism’ should, for God’s sake, be a wake up call not to the supposed ‘sins’ of this group but to the real and ugly bias of those who ‘sit in judgment’ on their fellow Catholics.
You attempt to claim that Traditionals are by nature ‘letter of the law people’, but the sin of the Pharisees was not following the letter of the law (Jesus Himself spoke of following the law to every jot and tittle), but in demanding that other people not just follow the law that way, but that they do MORE than that. “The Pharisees lay heavy burdens on others but do not accept the burden themselves”. THAT is the Pharisee. And that is NOT the average Traditional Catholic.
P
PatienceAndHumility
Guest
These might appear blanket conclusions but are more so generalisations for the sake of argument. The topic is not intended to be divisive in a bad way. Of course, difference in opinion is to be expected.
Cool- we don’t disagree on anything on this front. My preference is TLM and I am lucky to be able to attend that. But it has no relevance to the topic at hand. Pax Christi!
P
PatienceAndHumility
Guest
Traditionals are right on many things. Where the Pharisee spirit arises, as mentioned in op, is where insubordination prevails, as a result of fundemantalist interpretation of the letter of the law rather than its spirit. SSPX as an example.
Last edited:
So much for patience and humility, and charity and grace. Hmmmmmmmmmmm.
- Status