Is Traditional Catholicism an impediment to The Roman Catholic Church Today?

[spn82756]

I dont buy into the idea that equalizing all religions for the sake of dialogue or peace in being worth negating faith in Jesus no…

That is the first thing that comes to mind… I also fear the inevidability of psuedo-messianism… Which I believe is Catholic DOGMA and is in the CCC para 675…

It talks about a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers… It talks about man glorifying himself in place of God and of his messiah come in the flesh.

I read it to say the CC is specifically condemning that. That it is a part of the anti-christ’s plan. I think that Vatican II is too open to other faiths…muslims and jews. But I do think that all Christians…however imperfect their worship is are a part of the plan of salvation.

I think we’re departing from the object of the thread. Perhaps you can start another with this as its subject.

 

[littlequestion]

michaeldaniels,

Why do you call yourself a Traditional Catholic while A. opening threads with no purpose other than to polarize Traditionals vs modernists and B. attempting to introduce modern innovations under the Traditional umbrella? Don’t you have anything like a Traditional devotional life to tend to?
:compcoff:

It is not censorship for Mr. Eastin to close your threads that are clearly deceitful in attempting to mislead naive readers about the actual elements of the pre-Vat II traditions and the innovations that were introduced later. It is simple common-sense that anyone who knows that “Traditional Catholic” means “preference for pre-V-II practices” and does not mean “introducing OF practices into the EF form so that it becomes indistinguishable from the OF”

Who are you trying to fool? Extremists among the modernists did in fact manage to nearly destroy the Roman Catholic Church from inside by perverting the intent of V-II, and now apparently some of you are thinking you can be stealth modernists inside the Traditional movement?

Well, someone else put up an interesting survey that identifies types of spirituality with types of theology & practice, and I found it very interesting that those who were told we were similar to Thomas Aquinas in style (“Thomistic”) were also told that this style, with its heavy emphasis on truth and its analytical approach, tends to prefer pre-VII liturgy.

Most Traditionals do not object to most OF Masses. I am not aware of any parish that has introduced the TLM only to have anyone try to remove the other forms. Traditionalists are not separatists and are not hostile to other Catholics.

Obviously the tendency of the Thomistic approach easily gets caught up in the occasion of sin that appears whenever people post polarizing threads with no intent except to instigate as much division and rancor as possible among Catholics of all stripes.

I’ll be saying extra Hail Maries :byzsoc: to get a jump start on my penance for when I have to confess I entered the occasion of sin of reading yet another one of these hateful polls.

 

[Rence]

After reading numerous threads and post on this forum, I get the impression that a lot of people feel that traditionalists think they are better than them and feel they aren’t Catholics, etc…fill the blank in with whatever cliche you would like. I know we get upset when we see no reverence being shown for The Most Blessed Sacrament, etc…but we are all still one big Catholic Family.

My question is for all you self acknowledged progressives, modernists, liberals…or whatever moniker you may consider yourself. Do you think that those of us who are traditionalists, furthermore…that the practice of traditional Catholicism is an impediment to the future growth and success of The Catholic Church, not only in the US but in the world?

Answer honestly…this is an opportunity for two groups of people to discuss differences charitably.

In my life I’ve seen many people fall away from the Church. It’s not Traditional Catholicism, or the practice of Traditional Catholicism, that is an impediment - at all. The people I know that fell away from the Church did so because they did not want to practice traditional catholicism and they resented when traditional catholics tried to impose it on them. People don’t like to be told what to do and what to think. They don’t like to be told that the Church will do the thinking for them, that all they have to do is believe blindly. They don’t like to be told that the morals and values that they hold for themselves are “evil”. So they fell away rather than towed the line. Some converted, some just said they weren’t catholic anymore, and some still say their catholic but don’t follow any of the rules of the Church, and of course, there are those who pick and choose what they will adhere to and what they won’t.

Liberal Catholics don’t care whether people are traditional or liberal, and they don’t care of there are latin masses available or not, they just want the freedom to be liberal themselves and they resent the Church trying to impose their ‘authority’ over them. And while I can’t see the Church condoning or accepting the liberal lifestyle of course, that’s what drove the people I know of away.

Here in the Bible Belt I find that people don’t like Catholics and they joke with sarcasm about how nice Catholics are and how they are mindful of others’ views. When I first met people and told them I was Catholic they were leery of me. I didn’t get why at first, because while I wouldn’t say I’m very liberal, I certainly am mindful of other religions and people with no religion. It wasn’t until I started to get to know people that they actually came out and said that Catholics were the most judgemental and arrogant people they knew, and it was very embarassing.

As to TLM, I think if it were the only option available, more people would stop going to Church rather than it pulling people towards going to Church. I believe the concensus on this board of it being the opposite just reflects the fact that there is a large amount of traditional catholics on this board. IRL, from my perspective, traditional catholics are in the minority. I don’t know anyone in my ‘circle’ who would like to attend a Mass in Latin, except for my mom. Though I do like a more traditional Mass, I prefer it in English because it helps me stay focused. If I don’t understand the language, I just don’t pay attention. But I don’t like contemporary masses at all. IMOHO, TLM and the traditional mass in English both should be available at all parishes. So if there are three or four masses on a sunday, I think there should be a latin mass and a tradtional mass available.

No, Traditional Catholicism is not an impediment to the RCC. While there are things I don’t understand or agree with in the RCC, I understand that the RCC has to protect Her teachings and can’t just accept people who want complete anarchy. She can’t change her teachings or she wouldn’t be the RCC. I think she can (and probably will) change some things down the road, but I can’t see things like condoning premartial sex, changing the creeds, etc. People who don’t want to follow traditional catholicism make the choice not to. And you’re not going to bring them back with an iron fist. You have to make them want to come back.

IMOHO a big part of it is that lack of Catholic education these days. People don’t understand the CC anymore because care isn’t taken to pass it down to the next generation anymore.

 

[edwest2]

There are certainly those who care very much and who are not lukewarm. It is far easier to go with the mainstream but the mainstream is far more against Traditional Catholicism than it was 40 years ago.

The changes did not occur because of changes in the Mass but due to outside individuals who appeared among us offering what they said was “a better way.”

Too many Catholics have been conditioned to A) accept change, and B) expect change. As we have seen with the Church, change is not always good or inevitable. Or worth keeping.

What did God tell the Israelites so often? To return to Him and to turn away from sin? That message holds for today, in the middle of these modern times that still find men struggling with the same things: fornication, adultery, and so on. As the Bible told us then, there are men with eyes who don’t see, and those with ears who do not hear.

No, God will not force you to love Him but you must seek Him while He can still be found.

Peace,
Ed

 

[juliamajor]

Like many movements -its not the movement that scares people.It is the people in the movements who scare people off. A crummy attitude gets in the way of teaching people anything no matter how much truth they are being told.Be better ambassdors and people wouldn’t feel threatened, be confident , happy and at peace.
I really don’t think “modernist” is the correct name for OF Catholics.That implies heresy.If you use subtle pricks against people they will still feel a pinch.

 

[spn82756]

Though I do like a more traditional Mass, I prefer it in English because it helps me stay focused. If I don’t understand the language, I just don’t pay attention. But I don’t like contemporary masses at all. IMOHO, TLM and the traditional mass in English both should be available at all parishes. So if there are three or four masses on a sunday, I think there should be a latin mass and a tradtional mass available.

IMOHO a big part of it is that lack of Catholic education these days. People don’t understand the CC anymore because care isn’t taken to pass it down to the next generation anymore.

I think a start may be that some Novus Ordo Masses have the priest facing the altar during the Eucharistic Prayer. That to me is great. But that’s just my opinion.

BTW…music at my church has suddenly become atrocious! I feel like I should get up and dance.

 

[littlequestion]

I really don’t think “modernist” is the correct name for OF Catholics.That implies heresy.If you use subtle pricks against people they will still feel a pinch.

I am using the word to mean those who prefer the modern innovations and nothing more. It is not derogatory. It is unfortunate that every word from a Traditional mouth is received by some people as if it were an insult, but perhaps the insult is simply that Traditional mouths speak at all.

I was careful to indicate the fact that MOST modernists don’t worry about the Traditional Mass. They know that if their parishes have one occaqsionally or even make a weekly slot available, it doesn’t interfere with their form.

Every time I criticize Novus Ordo I make it very clear that I only criticize the extremely “creative” instances, in which completely external elements (external to Christian doctrine) are introduced or in which there is sacrilege. I do not consider the Novus Ordo form itself to be sacrilege, because when done PROPERLY, it is reverent and it does in fact have roots in Church history.

Everyone in America is familiar with the extremes of political correctness which have led schoolchildren to be fearful of using pronouns like “he” and “she” among other cultural atrocities. The way our ability to think and speak is destroyed is by labeling EVERYTHING someone says as “offensive”.

“In the beginning was the Word”… God chose “Word” as a form in which to show Himself to us because words are indeed powerful, and we must not let ourselves be intimidated into not using them properly by others who want only silence.

“Modernist” is a simple description that should be as much complimentary as anyting else. “Traditionalist” after all could mean “unable to grow”, but that does not change its actual meaning which has more to do with the healthy roots of a tree’s growth. Modernism can be the healthy branches of that same tree.

 

[michaeldaniels]

Your accusations against me are far fetched and do not describe me or my beliefs in the least bit. I am sorry, the polarization already exist, I am simply trying to find out why. What modern innovations have I tried to produce? What have I done that is contrary to The Church’s teachings or contrary to The Gospel…I charge you to answer me, otherwise you are slandering my name I demand an apology.

Lets see, in one post you:
1)accused me of purposely trying to polarize
2)that I have no substance or purpose in my posts
3)that I lack a devotional life
4)I am attempting to introduce innovations
5)I am trying to fool people…I must be a scam artist
6)accused of being a stealth modernist inside the traditionalist movement (which I am dumbfounded because that is an oxymoron and completely asinine)
7)apparently I object to the OF of the Mass
8)I am a separatist
9)I am hostile to other Catholics

Yeah…I would recommend confession…when you blatantly lie about someone and slander them, that is a serious violation of God’s law. If you would just take the time to read everything I have ever posted, you would feel so foolish…because you are wrong about me. God Bless my friend

michaeldaniels,

Why do you call yourself a Traditional Catholic while A. opening threads with no purpose other than to polarize Traditionals vs modernists and B. attempting to introduce modern innovations under the Traditional umbrella? Don’t you have anything like a Traditional devotional life to tend to?
:compcoff:

It is not censorship for Mr. Eastin to close your threads that are clearly deceitful in attempting to mislead naive readers about the actual elements of the pre-Vat II traditions and the innovations that were introduced later. It is simple common-sense that anyone who knows that “Traditional Catholic” means “preference for pre-V-II practices” and does not mean “introducing OF practices into the EF form so that it becomes indistinguishable from the OF”

Who are you trying to fool? Extremists among the modernists did in fact manage to nearly destroy the Roman Catholic Church from inside by perverting the intent of V-II, and now apparently some of you are thinking you can be stealth modernists inside the Traditional movement?

Well, someone else put up an interesting survey that identifies types of spirituality with types of theology & practice, and I found it very interesting that those who were told we were similar to Thomas Aquinas in style (“Thomistic”) were also told that this style, with its heavy emphasis on truth and its analytical approach, tends to prefer pre-VII liturgy.

Most Traditionals do not object to most OF Masses. I am not aware of any parish that has introduced the TLM only to have anyone try to remove the other forms. Traditionalists are not separatists and are not hostile to other Catholics.

Obviously the tendency of the Thomistic approach easily gets caught up in the occasion of sin that appears whenever people post polarizing threads with no intent except to instigate as much division and rancor as possible among Catholics of all stripes.

I’ll be saying extra Hail Maries :byzsoc: to get a jump start on my penance for when I have to confess I entered the occasion of sin of reading yet another one of these hateful polls.

 

[littlequestion]

michaeldaniels,
anyone can read my posts and see that I did not say most of what you list.

I do believe that the rash of polls that polarize discussions lately are being posted by some people because they have found a way of promoting strife against Traditionals.

As for the mention of introduction of Novus Ordo elements into Traditional Form ( which is what I said, the exact opposite of what your list says I said) I was referring to the threads that have been posted by some people and closed by Patrick Eastin, in which the manner of Traditional Eucharist was confused with the manner of Novus Ordo in-the-hands Eucharist.

I did not slander anyone. I merely pointed out that these kinds of threads are misleading to any new reader who does not know that they are suggesting elements of the Traditional Mass that are NOT elements of the Traditional Mass.

Polls are, in general, a type of gauntlet. They are designed to force people to take sides and start fighting.

The other questions are the same thing insofar as they are like the notorious “have you stopped beating your wife?” type of question in which there is no quick response that would be immune to being quoted out of context. Trick questions, in other words. Trick questions are always, IMHO, destructive to communication.

 

[Moscati]

I am using the word to mean those who prefer the modern innovations and nothing more. It is not derogatory. It is unfortunate that every word from a Traditional mouth is received by some people as if it were an insult, but perhaps the insult is simply that Traditional mouths speak at all.

I was careful to indicate the fact that MOST modernists don’t worry about the Traditional Mass. They know that if their parishes have one occaqsionally or even make a weekly slot available, it doesn’t interfere with their form.

Every time I criticize Novus Ordo I make it very clear that I only criticize the extremely “creative” instances, in which completely external elements (external to Christian doctrine) are introduced or in which there is sacrilege. I do not consider the Novus Ordo form itself to be sacrilege, because when done PROPERLY, it is reverent and it does in fact have roots in Church history.

Everyone in America is familiar with the extremes of political correctness which have led schoolchildren to be fearful of using pronouns like “he” and “she” among other cultural atrocities. The way our ability to think and speak is destroyed is by labeling EVERYTHING someone says as “offensive”.

“In the beginning was the Word”… God chose “Word” as a form in which to show Himself to us because words are indeed powerful, and we must not let ourselves be intimidated into not using them properly by others who want only silence.

“Modernist” is a simple description that should be as much complimentary as anyting else. “Traditionalist” after all could mean “unable to grow”, but that does not change its actual meaning which has more to do with the healthy roots of a tree’s growth. Modernism can be the healthy branches of that same tree.

Not to pick a fight, littlequestion, (I’m still licking my wounds from my last foray into the Traditional Catholicism board), but for those who study philosophy, “modernist” has a very specific definition. It doesn’t simply mean “of the present time”–it’s all tied up with Machiavelli and Nietzche, God being dead, morality being relative, etc etc. Pope Leo (which one escapes me) called THAT modernism “the heresy of heresies”–it cannot be healthy. It’s really, really, really bad.

Political correctness aside (and I share your distaste for the cultural idiocy some of it has spawned), it’s just confusing. It’s a conflation of terms. Of course you didn’t mean it that way. It’s just a suggestion. Take it or leave it.

 

[littlequestion]

Thank you Moscati, for the clarification, but I’m sure most people don’t get that deep into etymology (or entymology? One is bugs, one just bugs me ) and we do have to be able to use plain English in a plain manner.

I stopped using “Novus Ordo” because it gets similarly conflated with the political “new order” concepts as well as the “new age” concepts, and that is not fair to the reverent N-O rites.

But in reality, it does not matter what we say. The people who keep coming in here to promote fights want to pretend every word out of a traditional mouth is poison. They know we are not excommunicated but they keep reposting that same lie and then the long involved and obscure canonical arguments that get posted in response scare almost anyone who is not a PHD philosophy major away.

 

[Patrick_Eastin]

Please stick the topic not each other.

 

[fish90]

Traditional Catholicism is only an impediment when they discriminate “NO Catholics” or hold borderline sedevacantist views. Other than that, the great wealth of doctrinal knowledge and their desire for reverent masses cannot be considered bad.

Best,
fish90

 

[GKaplan]

Traditional Catholicism is only an impediment when they discriminate “NO Catholics” or hold borderline sedevacantist views. Other than that, the great wealth of doctrinal knowledge and their desire for reverent masses cannot be considered bad.

Best,
fish90

Exactly. Without TC existing, I would not have had my faith renewed. However, the almost inevitible flirting with bitterness and even sedevacantism can come close to ruining it.

I don’t think the NO mass is evil, but I do think a lot of the abuses and innovations are. Well, maybe the fruits of those innovations (communion in the hand —> less belief in the real presence).

What I ultimately rejected was the idea that the NO mass is fundamentally invalid, even though I agree the Latin Mass is superior for a variety of reasons.

What I would like to see is Traditional Catholics who are not consumed by the “us vs. them” mentality reach out more, formally and officially. I think if more NO parishoners were exposed to the traditional mass and educated in Traditional catholic perspective, they would bring that to NO.

In an ideal world, every church would offer one NO mass, or NO parishes would be available in most diocese. I don’t think that’s ridiculous, I think it has that much appeal. But the idea that it is ever anything more than side by side or a choice, I think that has to be let go.

If more Traditional catholics, at least the most vocal ones, were engaged with NO members, instead of always trying to “defeat” the NO mass or look down on NO members, I think it would advance their cause for wider availability, AND greatly improve the quality of the NO Mass.

I would like to see Communion rails back, communion in the mouth, the priest facing away, chant, no more hand holding and clapping, etc in the NO. I think a lot of people would as well, but they’ve never been exposed to it, and would never even guess why they shouldn’t be holding hands, taking communion in the hand, etc. It’s totally foreign, and the traditionals are the only ones that understand that and why. But they really aren’t that interested unless people are going to abandon the NO altogether.

I picture a day, and I don’t think it’s unattainable in my lifetime, where most good size churches with five masses have every Sunday: one Traditional Latin mass, three devout reverential proper NO masses, and one hippie mass like almost all are now.

But I don’t know how many Traditionalists would share that goal. And unfortunately, it’s kind of a one way street - it’s up to them to start the outreach. The rest of us can’t demand something we don’t even know.

 

[littlequestion]

Traditional Catholicism is only an impediment when they discriminate “NO Catholics” or hold borderline sedevacantist views. Other than that, the great wealth of doctrinal knowledge and their desire for reverent masses cannot be considered bad.

Best,
fish90

My experience offline with Traditional people is that there is absolutely none of this sedevacantism or borderline-sede stuff. We greet each other with happy smiles when we bump into each other shopping, etc. We go to the Mass and sometimes stop by the church hall for coffee. I make sure to go when I have something I want blessed. Our traditionalist priest is usually not even there, but our regular post-V-II pastor usually is along with others who are generally active in the church, a couple of the studious types of young men who seem similar to some of the more erudite scholars in this board, but they don’t argue with anyone and seem downright friendly as they compare editions of some book or other that they just aquired.

Discussions range from small talk about how hard the priest and core assistants work to keep the Mass going to excited talk about the recent appearance of the Fatima statue on its travels, questions about going to this or that event, inquiries after health and work, etc.

I think that when we are online it is important to keep in mind that the personalities of internet “regulars” do not necessarily reflect the personalities of many of the people who are actually the flesh and bones of the traditional Roman Catholic community. I doubt there are more than one or two in the several hundred that are usually at Mass who come online and participate in forums like this one. Online participants are by nature more verbal than those who don’t care to spend time reading and posting to each other. The online traditional community does not include all the variety of humanity that shows up every Sunday.

 

[Holly3278]

I love traditional Catholicism but that doesn’t mean I want to do away with the Novus Ordo Mass or Vatican II or any of those sorts of things. Personally, I’ve never been to a traditional Latin Mass but I have seen clips of one on Youtube and it is just so beautiful. That is how I know that I’d make a traditional Catholic.

 

[pnewton]

Of course it is not an impediment to the Church. It might be an impediment to an individual if it caused an arrogant pride, but that can be said of anything. Likewise, it might prove an invaluable spirituality to a more contemplative prayer life. The Traditional element of the Church, those that always resist change are vital to the Catholic Church, lest it run away with novelty. Likewise, those that seek change to respond to the times and deal pastorally to bring more to the Kingdom of God are important, lest the Church stagnate. The Church also changes as it deepens its collective theological understanding. Both elements of change and stability play their role.

 

[archangel04]

Thanks for posting this question.
Since becoming a member of this forum I have learned a great deal of not only the Church, but of the traditional ways, and for that I am very thankful to those who opened up. In saying that, I have also felt that some “traditionalist” tend to think they are better, because they celebrate a Mass that is older then the OF. From what I notice from these members is that they tend to be closed minded and maybe even afraid of change. Now I am not speaking of change in Dogma, or other very important teachings, but in change as in our Church growing throughout the ages.
As a 25 year old man who grew up in a very liberal generation. As I return to my faith I am more disappointed in her members, because of the bigger division that exist in her. I’ve attended all my life the OF, but have also been to the EF and Eastern liturgies. There is no doubt that the OF has a problem when it comes to reverence, and that problem is that there is not enough instruction for the laity. The laity feel it’s open game to bring in their agendas, or even show off their “talents” i.e. music. I have been shun down by my priest for requesting to receive communion on my knees and I even think he doesn’t like me for speaking about the TLM. I have been told by many people in church (even my parents) that I have no right to criticize the music or lack of reverence at Mass. I am currently trying to figure out how to bring the EF to my parish, but the problem is that most people don’t know about it, and I don’t really think my priest would like the request lol.

Now the reason I want the EF at my parish is not because I prefer it over the OF, how can I, when I only go to Mass to pray and receive my Lord! Everything else is 2nd to me. But I also want people to have more options, just like I wish every Catholic would know about the Eastern Churches, to show how grand and multi-cultural our Church truly is. In going back to the questions, the EF needs to be more available, not just for traditionalist, but for all Catholics. The OF needs better direction in some cases, but it is NOT a 2nd class or invalid MASS as some people here have told me through private messages. As for our “liberal” or “progressive” Catholics, we need to pray and educate them in the true teachings and purpose of the Church, but just as my mom always said, not matter the person, one can always learned something new from them. Liberals, in my opinion tend to be charitable to the poor and needy, something that I’ve seen many conservative lack. This is my opinion on this, I am not here to offend anyone, and if I have to categorize myself, I would say, I am just an unworthy person who can call God by Father.
is.

 

[Lycorth]

Traditional Catholicism is the salt of the earth of the Church. The Traditionalists preserve and promote the traditional practices and disciplines that made the Church vigorous and gave it life and fire for so many centuries.

I go to an OF parish, but I bring traditional reverences with me to the Mass regardless. This is incumbent upon all of us who are not fortunate enough to attend a church where the EF is offered. I will do my best to display traditional reverence and not treat my church like a casual meeting hall where I might as well bring a cup of coffee in and chat on my cellphone before Mass begins.

The only way Traditional Catholicism can be an impediment is to those who mean to modernize and perhaps even deliberately subvert the Faith. It is a boon otherwise.

 

[fish90]

My experience offline with Traditional people is that there is absolutely none of this sedevacantism or borderline-sede stuff. We greet each other with happy smiles when we bump into each other shopping, etc. We go to the Mass and sometimes stop by the church hall for coffee. I make sure to go when I have something I want blessed. Our traditionalist priest is usually not even there, but our regular post-V-II pastor usually is along with others who are generally active in the church, a couple of the studious types of young men who seem similar to some of the more erudite scholars in this board, but they don’t argue with anyone and seem downright friendly as they compare editions of some book or other that they just aquired.

Discussions range from small talk about how hard the priest and core assistants work to keep the Mass going to excited talk about the recent appearance of the Fatima statue on its travels, questions about going to this or that event, inquiries after health and work, etc.

I think that when we are online it is important to keep in mind that the personalities of internet “regulars” do not necessarily reflect the personalities of many of the people who are actually the flesh and bones of the traditional Roman Catholic community. I doubt there are more than one or two in the several hundred that are usually at Mass who come online and participate in forums like this one. Online participants are by nature more verbal than those who don’t care to spend time reading and posting to each other. The online traditional community does not include all the variety of humanity that shows up every Sunday.

I agree. The problem is when you go on a Traditional Catholic forum and argue that some discipline is not wrong in principle. Afterward, you are attacked and are left with a very poor view of Traditional Catholics.

I remember the first time I went to an EF Mass. A very kind lady lent me her extra missal and showed me the place in the missal where we were at. If this kind of charity and Christian kindness were present, the Traditional Catholic movement in my opinion would blossom.

Best,
fish90