The "traddie attitude"

  • Thread starter Thread starter valoriuslobo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
V

valoriuslobo

Guest
I was reading the comments on a post from Fr Z’s blog. One incensed person wrote that they were no longer a traditionalist because they were tired of the stories of people driving hours to a TLM not for nourishment but because of disdain for women with uncovered heads, etc amongst other gripes.

Do you think this is a fair assessment? Personally, I’ve never met such an uncharitable person at a TLM save for a rather stern father who was emotionally abusing his rambunctious kids at Mass & another gentleman who openly admitted to being a former schismatic without remorse. Most people I see are young even.
 
He wasn’t even trad to begin with, it was clear the way he qualified his post.
 
I was reading the comments on a post from Fr Z’s blog. One incensed person wrote that they were no longer a traditionalist because they were tired of the stories of people driving hours to a TLM not for nourishment but because of disdain for women with uncovered heads, etc amongst other gripes.
Click to expand...
Do you think this is a fair assessment? Personally, I’ve never met such an uncharitable person at a TLM save for a rather stern father who was emotionally abusing his rambunctious kids at Mass & another gentleman who openly admitted to being a former schismatic without remorse. Most people I see are young even.
Click to expand...
This is a fair assessment. There is a very vocal, evangelical faction in the traditionalist movement with very fundamental beliefs. What is more, the mercy of God is sparse and hard to obtain to these people.
 
Ceil-1 said:
This is a fair assessment. There is a very vocal, evangelical faction in the traditionalist movement with very fundamental beliefs. What is more, the mercy of God is sparse and hard to obtain to these people.
Click to expand...
Are you talking about the person who posted the comment or bunching all of us who preffer the EF for spiritual nourishment? Basicall what I am asking is “you people? What you mean you people?”
 
archangel04 said:
Originally Posted by Ceil-1 View Post
This is a fair assessment. There is a very vocal, evangelical faction in the traditionalist movement with very fundamental beliefs. What is more, the mercy of God is sparse and hard to obtain to these people.
Click to expand...
I can’t answer for Ceil-1—but I have come across in Traditional sites–where Traditionalists are taking notice that there is a faction of “Traditionalists” – who in reaction to modernism/liberalism are going far to the right —that they are falling off the edge. This may be what Ceil-1 was referring to.
Click to expand...
 
You mean, by “these” people. Be careful. You are not the only one who prefers the EF. So, please don’t try to do to me what you are trying to imply I’m doing.

By “these people”, I meant the vocal, evangelical types who are very fundamentalist conservative.

I am not talking about liking a veil. I am talking about women being subservient, and dressing like they live on the praire in 1870. I am talking about people who bash every body who does not agree 100% with their opinions about the “modernist” world.

Now, all that I can forgive. I cannot forgive criticizing good priests, attempting to call out and ostracize dissenters from the most extreme view. I am talking about dour, mean-spirited people who are rude to anyone they deem not meeting up to their extremist standards.

While I’m at it, I went to a visiting priest whom I should have known better, since he was one of the few this bunch did not criticize, who proceeded to make me feel worse afterward than I felt going in.

That, to me, spells a spirit other than the Holy Spirit, but, I am just now learning about the Jansenist heresy, which, I suspect these people are on the borderline thereof.

Of course, there are many wonderful, holy people who just want to worship God right and live according to good, old-fashioned Catholic principles. I am not referring to them. But, they seem to be a silent minority. And, the Jansenists chase away many who are otherwise attracted to the EF. Maybe more than minority, but, certainly quieter. And, certainly not in charge. The attitude seems to be very infectious.
 
Ceil-1 said:
You mean, by “these” people. Be careful. You are not the only one who prefers the EF. So, please don’t try to do to me what you are trying to imply I’m doing.

By “these people”, I meant the vocal, evangelical types who are very fundamentalist conservative.

I am not talking about liking a veil. I am talking about women being subservient, and dressing like they live on the praire in 1870. I am talking about people who bash every body who does not agree 100% with their opinions about the “modernist” world.

Now, all that I can forgive. I cannot forgive criticizing good priests, attempting to call out and ostracize dissenters from the most extreme view. I am talking about dour, mean-spirited people who are rude to anyone they deem not meeting up to their extremist standards.

While I’m at it, I went to a visiting priest whom I should have known better, since he was one of the few this bunch did not criticize, who proceeded to make me feel worse afterward than I felt going in.

That, to me, spells a spirit other than the Holy Spirit, but, I am just now learning about the Jansenist heresy, which, I suspect these people are on the borderline thereof.

Of course, there are many wonderful, holy people who just want to worship God right and live according to good, old-fashioned Catholic principles. I am not referring to them. But, they seem to be a silent minority. And, the Jansenists chase away many who are otherwise attracted to the EF. Maybe more than minority, but, certainly quieter. And, certainly not in charge. The attitude seems to be very infectious.
Click to expand...
I agree with you. Since I have Traditional leanings–I took the time to read various Trad sites—and I’ve come away with the conclusion that there is definitely something not good growing within the Traditional movement. At this point I don’t know whether this is also making its way into the FSSP.
 
Ceil-1 said:
You mean, by “these” people. Be careful. You are not the only one who prefers the EF. So, please don’t try to do to me what you are trying to imply I’m doing…
Click to expand...
Relax, that was more of a joke.
Ceil-1 said:
By “these people”, I meant the vocal, evangelical types who are very fundamentalist conservative.

I am not talking about liking a veil. I am talking about women being subservient, and dressing like they live on the praire in 1870. I am talking about people who bash every body who does not agree 100% with their opinions about the “modernist” world.

Now, all that I can forgive. I cannot forgive criticizing good priests, attempting to call out and ostracize dissenters from the most extreme view. I am talking about dour, mean-spirited people who are rude to anyone they deem not meeting up to their extremist standards.

While I’m at it, I went to a visiting priest whom I should have known better, since he was one of the few this bunch did not criticize, who proceeded to make me feel worse afterward than I felt going in.

That, to me, spells a spirit other than the Holy Spirit, but, I am just now learning about the Jansenist heresy, which, I suspect these people are on the borderline thereof.

Of course, there are many wonderful, holy people who just want to worship God right and live according to good, old-fashioned Catholic principles. I am not referring to them. But, they seem to be a silent minority. And, the Jansenists chase away many who are otherwise attracted to the EF. Maybe more than minority, but, certainly quieter. And, certainly not in charge. The attitude seems to be very infectious.
Click to expand...
Ok that is what I wanted to know, you made your self cleared, I was not trying to say you were offending those who preffer the EF, I just needed clarity. We have a lot of people who post negative comment, but try to hide them with vague wording. I was not trying to offend you at all and thank you for making it clear.
 
Walking_Home said:
I agree with you. Since I have Traditional leanings–I took the time to read various Trad sites—and I’ve come away with the conclusion that there is definitely something not good growing within the Traditional movement. At this point I don’t know where this is also making its way into the FSSP.
Click to expand...
Fr. Z blog is very good, he has his opinions but I’ve never seen him lead his flow away from the Church. He is a harsh criticizer of those who wish to distort the liturgy whether that be OF or EF.
 
archangel04 said:
40.png
Walking_Home:
I agree with you. Since I have Traditional leanings–I took the time to read various Trad sites—and I’ve come away with the conclusion that there is definitely something not good growing within the Traditional movement. At this point I don’t know where this is also making its way into the FSSP.
Click to expand...
Fr. Z blog is very good, he has his opinions but I’ve never seen him lead his flow away from the Church. He is a harsh criticizer of those who wish to distort the liturgy whether that be OF or EF.
Click to expand...
Yes–I am familiar with Fr. Z’s blog. While he may be Trad friendly–I don’t think his blog quite falls in with what is usually called Trad.
 
At_Trent said:
“traditude”

a new word ? 😛
Click to expand...
Ha! That’s good.

I see I opened up a can of worms with this one. As I said, my experiences with fellow traddies has been on the whole good, save for those behavior of those two I mentioned in my earlier post.

As for the poster who said people want women to look like prairie folk, I personally havent seen that. Maybe you mistook their advocating for modesty. With the way people like Lady Gaga encourage female type people to dress, maybe the prairie style wouldn’t be all that bad anyway.😉
 
Well, I’d say that the concept of “Say the Black, Do the Red” is very traditional.

There are always extremitists in every group. It is unfortunate that sometimes these extremists are assumed to speak for the ENTIRE group.

Let’s take our friends the “liberal” or progressive Catholics. I would venture to say that most of them are orthodox in their belief but have a certain affinity or prediliction for certain causes or practices.

However, the most ‘extreme’ form of the ‘liberal’ Catholic is often stated, or labelled, to be one of ‘dissent, in favor of abortion, vegetarian, only concerned with social justice and nothing else, cafeteria Catholic, indifferentist, relativist’… etc.

So the ‘average’ liberal Catholic might justifiably take offense at being ‘classified’ and boxed in with the ‘extremist’ as though that is the only possible definition of ‘liberal’.

The average “traditionalist” Catholic is not a sedevacantist, not hell-bent (literally and figuratively) on dragging Catholics back to the Middle Ages, not a ‘liturgy police’, not reactionary, not mind-numbingly conservative in politics and everything else, not rigid or Pharistical or mired in rules’. . .but unfortunately, to entirely too many people, the words "Traditionalist Catholic’ ONLY call up that kind of stereotype. And it does a disservice to the average traditionalist, just as the stereotypes for the “liberal” and "conservative’ Catholics do to THEIR average members.
 
valoriuslobo said:
Ha! That’s good.

I see I opened up a can of worms with this one. As I said, my experiences with fellow traddies has been on the whole good, save for those behavior of those two I mentioned in my earlier post.

As for the poster who said people want women to look like prairie folk, I personally havent seen that. Maybe you mistook their advocating for modesty. With the way people like Lady Gaga encourage female type people to dress, maybe the prairie style wouldn’t be all that bad anyway.😉
Click to expand...
I agree with Ciel-1 on the “prairie” folk manner of dress for women. I’ve come across extremists promoting it in various Trad forums. I agree with her whole post. Since the sites I’ve read include people from various groups— FSSP, SSPX, diocesan EFs—even some Sedes mixed in–actually one site is more sede than anything else. As I said prior—I don’t know if this extremist mentality is also making its way into FSSP. What Ciel-1 said–is there within the movement.
 
Ceil-1 said:
You mean, by “these” people. Be careful. You are not the only one who prefers the EF. So, please don’t try to do to me what you are trying to imply I’m doing.

By “these people”, I meant the vocal, evangelical types who are very fundamentalist conservative.

I am not talking about liking a veil. I am talking about women being subservient, and dressing like they live on the praire in 1870. I am talking about people who bash every body who does not agree 100% with their opinions about the “modernist” world.

Now, all that I can forgive. I cannot forgive criticizing good priests, attempting to call out and ostracize dissenters from the most extreme view. I am talking about dour, mean-spirited people who are rude to anyone they deem not meeting up to their extremist standards…
Click to expand...
Yes, I have seen dour, mean spirited and rude at my FSSP masses, but not that many.
 
Tantum_ergo said:
The average “traditionalist” Catholic is not a sedevacantist, not hell-bent (literally and figuratively) on dragging Catholics back to the Middle Ages, not a ‘liturgy police’, not reactionary, not mind-numbingly conservative in politics and everything else, not rigid or Pharistical or mired in rules’. . .but unfortunately, to entirely too many people, the words "Traditionalist Catholic’ ONLY call up that kind of stereotype. And it does a disservice to the average traditionalist, just as the stereotypes for the “liberal” and "conservative’ Catholics do to THEIR average members.
Click to expand...
I’ve read one Traditional site–where this right wing extremism was discussed. I believe the site is populated by mostly SSPX attendees. The name given to this right wing extremism was the “Perfectionism” heresy. Included in this heresy were the sedes and what is called the neo-puritans. An attribute of the neo-puritans is creating a sin – where there is non.
 
This thread is uncharitable all the way around. What good can come of discussing all these subjective ideas?
 
jeanannemarie said:
This thread is uncharitable all the way around. What good can come of discussing all these subjective ideas?
Click to expand...
Just because something might be subjective doesn’t make it uncharitable, or unfit for discussion.

But if you mean labeling, I agree. Labeling is not good. However, bringing up reasons why something should NOT be labeled, or is mislabeled, is helpful, don’t you think?
 
I think what sometimes happens is the most extreme version of an idea gets associated with a group because they put themselves forward as the only real examples.

So, in a totally different direction, fundamentalists will sometimes let on that they are the only real Christians, because others don’t make the cut. And some people who don’t know better believe it.

In this case, the extremists tend to look down on even moderate traditionalists as not really traditional. So they have more prominence as bastions of the movement than their numbers suggest.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top