Is Traditional Catholicism the only true Catholicism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ahimsa
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Ahimsa

Guest
Is Traditional Catholicism the only true Catholicism? If not, then why be Traditional? If so, then are non-Traditionals heretics? If neither, then I don’t know what to say.
 
Ahimsa said:
Is Traditional Catholicism the only true Catholicism? If not, then why be Traditional? If so, then are non-Traditionals heretics? If neither, then I don’t know what to say.
Click to expand...
No it’s just a preference for the TLM and the Latin traditional practices, like the rosary, the via crucis, the litanies, benediction etc.

Just as Byzantines prefer their Divine Liturgy over the OF of the Latin rite.

Whatever form of the Holy Sacrifice you attend, the Catholic faith is the same.

Why I prefer the TLM or the EF of the Latin rite?

Because of the silence, the prayerfulness, the reverance, the Gregorian chant, the beauty, the Latin, the many genuflections, the many signs of the cross, the prayerful ladies in their chapel veils, the wonderful music of Palestrina, Mozart etc. The reverent comportment of the priest, whom I don’t have to face all the time.
The absence of EMHCs, the absence of female servers.
I could go on…
 
eelpis said:
No it’s just a preference for the TLM and the Latin traditional practices.
Click to expand...
The TLM (in its current form) only dates back 440 years or so to the Council of Trent in 1570 (i.e. the 16th century).
:highprayer:

I should think a true Traditionalist would exhibit a preference for an even older rite, such as one of the following:
a) Sarum (dating to 11th century),
b) Mozarabic (dating to 7th-8th century), or even
c) Gallican (already well established by the 5th century)
😃
 
Erich said:
The TLM (in its current form) only dates back 440 years or so to the Council of Trent in 1570 (i.e. the 16th century).
:highprayer:

I should think a true Traditionalist would exhibit a preference for an even older rite, such as one of the following:
a) Sarum (dating to 11th century),
b) Mozarabic (dating to 7th-8th century), or even
c) Gallican (already well established by the 5th century)
😃
Click to expand...
The TLM dates back (in all essentials) to pope St Gregory the Great so it’s more like 1500 years.😃
The OF dates back to 1969.
I don’t dislike the NO, I attend it regularly, and since I started attending the TLM my experience of the NO has indeed been given more depth. The mystery celebrated is the same.
 
Dear Ahimsa,

You ask a tricky question–or at least the way you have worded your question it becomes kind of tricky.

By definition, I think, or at least as part of the definition, Catholicism is Traditional. All Teachings about Faith and Morals have as their very Foundation Our Lord Jesus Christ, as received from Him by the Apostles, and passed on to us by their Successors in the persons of the Pope and Bishops.

Since the Second Vatican Council–a true and accepted Ecumenical Council of the Catholic Church–there have been a lot of debate between those who interpret her Documents according to Traditionally accepted bases, and those who interpret her Documents according to novel bases (please read ‘bases’ as the plural of the word ‘basis’).

All Catholics, whose intent is to be Catholic, receive the Sacraments with the hope of receiving Grace have the same Hope: eternal Beatitude in Heaven.

May God have Mercy on us all.
 
eelpis said:
No it’s just a preference for the TLM and the Latin traditional practices, like the rosary, the via crucis, the litanies, benediction etc.

Just as Byzantines prefer their Divine Liturgy over the OF of the Latin rite.

Whatever form of the Holy Sacrifice you attend, the Catholic faith is the same.

Why I prefer the TLM or the EF of the Latin rite?

Because of the silence, the prayerfulness, the reverance, the Gregorian chant, the beauty, the Latin, the many genuflections, the many signs of the cross, the prayerful ladies in their chapel veils, the wonderful music of Palestrina, Mozart etc. The reverent comportment of the priest, whom I don’t have to face all the time.
The absence of EMHCs, the absence of female servers.
I could go on…
Click to expand...
I pray rosary, litanies, I like silence, reverence, Gregorian chant, Mozart’s music etc… but I don’t think I am a “traditional”. I simply pick and choose what is good. Besides, I wouldn’t qualify as a traditionalist, because I don’t complain about Vatican II and have nothing against it.
 
I could perhaps add the insistence on traditional Latin discipline, like the (longer) Eucharistic fast, the observance of Friday abstinence from meat, frequent confession, more rigorous fasting rules etc. Frequently these practices are shared by many OF Catholics as well.
 
antimon said:
I pray rosary, litanies, I like silence, reverence, Gregorian chant, Mozart’s music etc… but I don’t think I am a “traditional”. I simply pick and choose what is good.
Click to expand...
All Catholics share the same faith.
That’s why it’s so important that we open our heart to one another and that we don’t mariginalize eachother, or anyone else for that matter. Let’s follow the invitation of our wonderful Holy Father Benedict XVI to love one another. Whatever our liturgical preferances.😉
 
As one Lefeverite (now a Tridentine Rite Congregationalist) said, “Love, compassion, humility, charity, patience, and forbearance are traditional, too.”
 
eelpis said:
No it’s just a preference for the TLM and the Latin traditional practices, like the rosary, the via crucis, the litanies, benediction etc.

Just as Byzantines prefer their Divine Liturgy over the OF of the Latin rite.

Whatever form of the Holy Sacrifice you attend, the Catholic faith is the same.

Why I prefer the TLM or the EF of the Latin rite?

Because of the silence, the prayerfulness, the reverance, the Gregorian chant, the beauty, the Latin, the many genuflections, the many signs of the cross, the prayerful ladies in their chapel veils, the wonderful music of Palestrina, Mozart etc. The reverent comportment of the priest, whom I don’t have to face all the time.
The absence of EMHCs, the absence of female servers.
I could go on…
Click to expand...
BRAVO!! May I add a few reasons that I prefer Traditional Catholicism & the TLM Mass?:

**The Theology of the Tridentine Mass & it’s emphasis on Sacrifice & Penitence.
**The Beautiful Prayers, especially the Roman Canon.
**Emphasis again…this time on the Communion of Saints.
**The fact that the priest also begs forgiveness by saying his own Confiteor. The servers then also say the Confiteor in our name.
**The prayers at the foot of the Altar.
**The fact that the priest faces the Tabernacle (YES, God’s home is actually on the altar) instead of me. It’s as if he, too, is praying to the Almighty one…just like I am.
**kneeling to receive the Eucharist on the tongue. It isn’t handled by any but consecrated hands.
**My hand shaking is done in the hall, after Mass.
**The absence of the “Communal Meal” type of atmosphere.

I, too, could go on & on… but, I’ll just give my answer to the question from the OP. Yes, Catholicism IS traditionalist Catholicism. While the Novus Ordo Mass is valid & licit, what we’ve seen during the last 40 yrs., isn’t. The great majority of the New Order Masses have little resemblence to the one promulgated at Vatican II. No “pride of place” for Gregorian Chant, no preservation of the Latin language, & the scores of EXTRAordinary Eucharistic Ministers??? Pullleeezzzzeeeee!!
 
“Is Traditional Catholicism the only true Catholicism?”

No. If it were, the Church would have decreed it so.

“If not, then why be Traditional?”

Respect for and fascination with that part of our heritage.

“If so, then are non-Traditionals heretics?”

No. Again, making that kind of judgment is up to the Church, not the laity. No such judgment has been made.

“If neither, then I don’t know what to say.”

It doesn’t sound as though your views are aligned with the teachings of the Church. I know the feeling. I’m a bit of a rebel myself.
 
Erich said:
The TLM (in its current form) only dates back 440 years or so to the Council of Trent in 1570 (i.e. the 16th century).
:highprayer:

I should think a true Traditionalist would exhibit a preference for an even older rite, such as one of the following:
a) Sarum (dating to 11th century),
b) Mozarabic (dating to 7th-8th century), or even
c) Gallican (already well established by the 5th century)
😃
Click to expand...
I would love to see the Sarum Rite! Hopefully we will if the TAC comes into full communion. Btw, anyone know anything about that?
Ahimsa said:
Is Traditional Catholicism the only true Catholicism? If not, then why be Traditional? If so, then are non-Traditionals heretics? If neither, then I don’t know what to say.
Click to expand...
No, all true Catholics are Traditional, some choose to be traditional. T= following the Faith in its entirety. t= following some of the more traditional practices such as the EF and Latin prayers, etc. There are some Catholic communities who are not at all Traditional(T) and they are not true catholics, they are in heresy, and they are seperated from the Church. Im not just talkin about the hippie liberal churches (like California) but also some of the extremely traditional groups like the Siriites. Although it is sad that the extremely traditional sects are out of communion with Rome, but the hippie liberal dioceses and parishes are some how still in full communion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top