Is it just me or is Traditional Catholicism (especially online) hijacked by a Pharisee spirit?

[Bill_B_NY]

I’d just add that we can take various positions regarding the bad attitudes and sins of fellow Catholics.

1. We avoid them, don’t like them, get miserable and gossip about them.
2. We can try to understand why they are like this
3. We can try to help them
4. We can try to have peace in our own soul regarding those who hurt us

Of the above, #1 is wrong - but we tend towards that usually.

The others, we should do.
Why are some traditionalists bitter, angry, egotistical and prideful, ridiculing of others?
These are not signs of confidence, peace, strength and faith.
But instead, they are signs of uncertainty, self-doubt, hurt, lack of confidence.
When a person props himself up by putting others down - it is because he has some loathing of himself, of his own life.
“Traditionalists are not the best and holiest of Catholics, they are they worst - that’s why they need more.” – quoted from an SSPX priest.
True or not, people have been abused. This is sad.
Heresy is an abuse of the Faith. It causes great damage.
People who have been abused, will lash out at others. They will be angry and hurtful.
We do not like this. It hurts us.
But we can try to heal it, with understanding, love, kindness and friendship.
We can try to listen to traditionalists, praise the good, gently correct the bad (if possible).

 

[pnewton]

Understood. But this real person is pointing to the moral flaws of others – our own fellow Catholics.

It is not pointing out the moral flaws of others to say that moral flaws of such a nature exist in some. Pope Francis did this. I could say that more than half Catholic do not go to Mass, for example. I am not point out the moral flaws of any person.

But we require means to reach the end. To say that “it doesn’t matter what the means are, just focus on Jesus” is to say that the means are unnecessary.

Of course not, and I never said that. And it is not a Protestant thing. They do not believe Jesus is present in the Eucharist.

FYI - I pretty much agree with most of what you have posted. I didn’t want to give you the wrong impression by responding. As I have said, back when posters here desired a TLM they could not get, my response was to join them in prayer for a wider practice for those who desire it.

 

[Bill_B_NY]

Those who believe that Christian life” must be taken so seriously” that they end by “confusing solidity and firmness with rigidity”. These “rigid Christians”, “think that to be a Christian it is necessary to wear mourning”, and always “ take everything seriously”, paying attention to formalities, just as the scribes and Pharisees did. These are Christians for whom “everything is serious.

I found this to be important. Counter-intuitive and very difficult for me to accept. I am one of those who will take everything seriously. I think of the final judgement, before our awesome Lord - His perfection, my sinfulness. It’s scary. But trying to be lighter and more joyful - it’s a big challenge. It’s more difficult. It’s actually a work of virtue that I don’t want or like - thus it is essential and necessary and the best thing.
This is one reason why people do not like traditionalists – you hit the nail on the head with it.
The other side, being too light-hearted about things, is the more common flaw.
I like the friendliness of Tim Staples, Scott Hahn, Trent Horn - they are wonderful guys who are welcoming. But I could offer a critique … I will not.
Many converts from Protestantism have a friendly spirit - it is admirable. But we have to mix the serious and light. That’s the hard part. Not all laughter, not all sorrow. The right balance. It’s very difficult to do it.
St. Therese Liseaux is an absolute master at this - a spiritual genius. She did it perfectly - balancing both joy and mature seriousness. Laughter and the cross.

 

[Bill_B_NY]

As I have said, back when posters here desired a TLM they could not get, my response was to join them in prayer for a wider practice for those who desire it.

That was a charitable and kind gift and I hope we all do it for each other - even if we don’t want the same intention that they are seeking.

 

[PrayForMe]

Those individuals you describe are scattered sheep, too, yes. Because they reject Church teaching outright.

But please, for the millionth time, I am not making a blanket statement such as “Traditionalists in general are more susceptible to disobedience”. I never said that. I said that the Traditionalists who reject authority are more prone to this than Catholics who accept authority.

 

[Servant31]

Also the problem is that people do not recognize that any individual Catholic can do the very same things that you attribute to ‘traditionalist movement’.

To me this is the challenge. I don’t think traditional Catholics are necessarily in a bad place. It’s their preference of worship, I respect it in a lot of ways tbh. But I think the issue is with the mentality, which is in no way limited to traditional Catholics. The mentality of “I’m right your wrong, I’m better, I can judge,” rigid and, quite frankly, arrogant, worldview.

I think we have a real problem today of lack of truth. If truth is whatever I say it is then everything simply becomes who yells the loudest, longest, or who is the most inflexible. Isn’t humility the opposite in many ways? It’s saying there is a God, I’m clearly not Him, and therefore He gets to make the rules, which are for everyone’s good.

And the first rule is to love God, then love each other. THEN we proceed to the rules (which are still very important). There is the letter of the law, but also the spirit of the law. One without the other leads to mercy without justice, whereas the opposite leads to justice with no mercy. In either case I believe they are out of context.

Edit: I in no way mean to say that the majority of traditional catholics are this way. I referring to the mentality that could exist in any area of the faith.

 

[stpurl]

And why must you insist on ‘traditionalists’ without stating others? Also, the whole point from the OP and the thread title itself all deal with supposedly “Traditionalists’ being more prone to Pharisee-like behavior. The goal post has now been moved to claiming that while everybody can have difficulties “let’s just talk about traditionalists because they’re the thread topic.:”
Don’t you see that all that does is take the whole correction that the OP needed (traditional Catholics are NOT more inclined than any others to Pharisee behavior, or to insubordination), and just ignore it?

Just bring it right back to discussing the supposed problems of “Traditionalist Catholics’ and their supposed insubordination, elitist behavior, etc. etc.

i have to head back from the short p.m. break now, but honestly, it just gets beyond tiresome. No matter how often people (and there are some people, thank you for the support) try to correct stereotypes and judgmentalism against ‘trads’, it seems that it’s just too tempting a topic for many Catholics to refrain from bashing, or damning with faint praise.

Oh right, they’ll say. Sure all Catholics can fail but TRADITIONALISTS are hard-wired. Traditionalists are most prone to do so. Traditionalists are the real problem. I know it’s a longish thread but read through and see how many posts go on and on and on about the problems with traditionalists.

 

[Bill_B_NY]

Sure all Catholics can fail but TRADITIONALISTS are hard-wired. Traditionalists are most prone to do so. Traditionalists are the real problem. I know it’s a longish thread but read through and see how many posts go on and on and on about the problems with traditionalists.

This is really a big problem. Perhaps we could say “liberal Catholics” do this or that. But in reality, liberal Catholics have diverse views and some are actually orthodox in belief, others are heretical.
I am going to start a new thread on a topic “Naming names” - is it always a bad thing?
That is, we are often “safe” by projecting criticism to a group. Then, we say “it’s just a bunch inside the group, not all”. Ok, but what about telling us the names of whoever you are talking about? Why not?

 

[Bill_B_NY]

Do you think Traditionalists are worse than Jews?
If yes, why?
If no, then would you offer a post saying “Some Jews have a very Pharisaical attitude and I really don’t like their behavior. On-line they are prideful”?

One person here on another thread told me that to criticize Judiasm in any way is a form of anti-semitism. But is criticising traditionalists ok? Or is it anti-Catholic?

Something for us to think about, perhaps.

 

[jeannetherese]

But please, for the millionth time, I am not making a blanket statement such as “Traditionalists in general are more susceptible to disobedience”. I never said that.

Perhaps the problem lies in readings of your thread title. It says: "Is it just me or is Traditional Catholicism (especiallly online) hijacked by a Pharisee spirit?
My initial reaction, looking at this headline is to see a general grouping under the capitalized heading Traditional Catholicism. You appear to be making a blanket statement. Thus, my response beocmes: “It’s just you”. I am not seeing a general group hijacked.
Discussion revolving around this topic seems to be focused upon outliers when agreement happens. I’m not seeing any posters saying that a general category has been hijacked.
Perhaps it’s time to say asked and answered and to move on?

 

[PrayForMe]

And why must you insist on ‘traditionalists’ without stating others? Also, the whole point from the OP and the thread title itself all deal with supposedly “Traditionalists’ being more prone to Pharisee-like behavior.

You just answered your own question. The thread asks whether Traditionalists are more prone, so I focused on them specifically.

Just bring it right back to discussing the supposed problems of “Traditionalist Catholics’ and their supposed insubordination, elitist behavior, etc. etc.

They can possess elitist behavior, there’s nothing “supposed” about it. Granted, the majority of such individuals in the Trad movement are in the sedevacantist, Resistance, etc. circles. But even some can exist in more mainstream Trad circles like FSSP or Insult Latin Masses. Have you ever been around any of them? I’m not sure you’ve encountered any of the Trads I refer to so you pass it off as some urban legend that doesn’t exist, but they DO exist, even if in small numbers. Again, most of them are not like this, but you will at times encounter some who think they are so pious because of their Traditional views and everyone who feels otherwise is beneath them. Yes, those on the progressive side of the spectrum can be the same way, except progressive Catholics are usually too caught up in the “mushy gushy let’s love everyone and never judge” line of thinking to come across that way.

It takes me back to something Peter Kreeft said in his book The God Who Loves You: “If the right’s image of God is ‘Here comes da judge!’, the Left’s is ‘I’m O.K., you’re O.K.’” (pg. 222). That, I think, accurately sums up the over-reactionary tendencies of those on the far-right (some Traditionalists) and those on the far-left (liberal Catholics).

Oh right, they’ll say. Sure all Catholics can fail but TRADITIONALISTS are hard-wired. Traditionalists are most prone to do so. Traditionalists are the real problem.

At this point, I think I’ve run out of ways to say I never said this about Traditionalists collectively.

 

[jeannetherese]

At this point, I think I’ve run out of ways to say I never said this about Traditionalists collectively.

That is because you are not acknowledging the contradiction evidenced in your thread title. Why not ask the moderators to change it? This should help to resolve the problems.

 

[stpurl]

Yes I think that would be an excellent idea. The question was from the OP whether Traditionalist Catholicism was more prone to Pharisee like behavior.

The answer is no. All individual Catholics can at some point be guilty of that and other wrong behaviors.

The goalpost was moved to “Traditionalists are more inclined to insubordination because they reject authority”. . .and after I had spewed out my tea in disbelief I addressed that, because “traditional Catholicism’ had somehow been redefined as ‘sedevacantism’ and rejection of the Pope.

Except for that tiny segment of people who like traditional things like Latin Mass, the majority of trads are in fact far more obedient to the Pope and to Catholic doctrine (and even the detractors were at pains to paint trads as ‘all about rituals, only the letter of the law’). In point of fact ‘progressive’ Catholics with their arguments about Catholic Doctrine from women priests (we say no they say yes) to Humanae Vitae (they say no way) etc are far more inclined to an insubordinate spirit.

The goalpost was then moved to “let’s go back to the topic which is all about traditionalists” (IOW, we can’t really refute your points) and once again try to assume the problem is all about traddy intransigence.

Isn’t it beyond tiresome? And frankly, if the same type and style of posting and this time aimed at “progressive’ Catholics had been going on, I would actually be sympathetic to the unrelenting ‘knock down’ and animus aimed at a group of Catholics and would be making the same argument to just stop already with the ‘Catholic view group X” is somehow ‘worse’ than any other Catholic group, let’s trash them.

@camoderator, isn’t it time to give this thread a stop—in the name of love?

 

[PrayForMe]

I’m not the one who started this thread.

 

[jeannetherese]

Eek! My bad! My apologies!
I’ll message PatienceandHumility.
May God bless you!
jt

 

[Neithan]

Don’t the Germans do that too, though? Even more so, I think. Or maybe theirs isn’t so much political (as in, partisan) as it is social.

 

[pnewton]

And frankly, if the same type and style of posting and this time aimed at “progressive’ Catholics had been going on,

There are a lot of threads that do this, even using the acronym CINO, on every topic from music to abortion, where Catholics are grouped together under the title of progressive or liberal Catholics. Ironically, they get called snowflakes, but I do not remember them trying to shut down threads over it. It might have happened. On a board where all one need to is mute a thread or don’t click on it, I do not see why there is this desire to shut down discussion. I do not want to simply assume it hits too close to home.

 

[stpurl]

Sir, we were not addressing whether this happens as you claim; rather, I said that if remarks were constantly addressed at any group of Catholics, no matter whom, which stated that Pharisee type behavior or a tendency to insubordination were endemic to that group simply by nature of the group itself, I would protest just as I do now.

 

[Bill_B_NY]

That is because you are not acknowledging the contradiction evidenced in your thread title. Why not ask the moderators to change it? This should help to resolve the problems.

I pointed out also that the topic shifts from sedevacantists to faithful traditionalists in union with the Holy See. That’s an unfair categorization.

 

[pnewton]

It’s not my call anyway. I think you are mistaken in your interepretation of the rules, that pointing out sin, in general, or addressing problems with groups in general constitutes the prohibition against attacking other posters. But again, not my call. I do not think though that shutting down discussion on a discussion board makes sense. Most of it has been rather polite on all sides.