The Traditional Catholic "Movement"

  • Thread starter Thread starter skyvia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

skyvia

Guest
A “traditional Catholic” (or “traditionalist Catholic”) is a Catholic who recognizes the above errors in the presentation of Catholic teaching, who sees unwise pastoral decisions for what they are, and who does all in his power to preserve the Holy Faith in a manner consistent with how it has always been understood, and to preserve all of the liturgical rites and customs of the Church as they were before the “spirit of Vatican II” revolution. Traditionalists are not some “branch of the Church,” or (necessarily) some “splinter group”; they are usually and quite simply Catholics to whom the adjective “traditional” applies.

Traditional Catholics fall into three main categories:

The first and by far the largest group consists of those Catholics who accept the acclaimed Pope and his recent predecessors as true Popes and who believe that the Second Vatican Council was a valid, albeit problematic, Council. In this group are included:

those who attend parishes where Masses are offered in accordance with Pope Benedict XVI’s Motu Proprio “Summorum Pontificum”, most often celebrated by priests of the Fraternal Society of St Peter (F.S.S.P.) or the Institute of Christ the King (I.C.K), and

those who attend chapels or oratories where Masses are offered by priests of the Priestly Society of St. Pius X (S.S.P.X.) and other such priestly fraternities outside of ordinary diocesan structures.

The second group consists of those who are unsure about the status of the acclaimed Pope. Many such Catholics worship at Masses offered by the Society of Saint Pius V (S.S.P.V.).

The third and smallest group consisists of “sedevacantist” Catholics, that is Catholics who believe that the Catholic Church has not had a true Pope for some time (most consider Pope Pius XII as the last true Pope) and who, depending on the time they see as the moment the “Chair of Peter” (sede) became empty (vacante), may or may not see Vatican II as a valid Council. Many sedevacantists attend Masses offered by the Congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen (C.M.R.I.).
 
From where do you copy&paste?

Or to what does *the above errors in the presentation of Catholic teaching *refer?

tee
 
A “traditional Catholic” (or “traditionalist Catholic”) is a Catholic who recognizes the above errors in the presentation of Catholic teaching, who sees unwise pastoral decisions for what they are, and who does all in his power to preserve the Holy Faith in a manner consistent with how it has always been understood, and to preserve all of the liturgical rites and customs of the Church as they were before the “spirit of Vatican II” revolution. Traditionalists are not some “branch of the Church,” or (necessarily) some “splinter group”; they are usually and quite simply Catholics to whom the adjective “traditional” applies.

Traditional Catholics fall into three main categories:

The first and by far the largest group consists of those Catholics who accept the acclaimed Pope and his recent predecessors as true Popes and who believe that the Second Vatican Council was a valid, albeit problematic, Council. In this group are included:

those who attend parishes where Masses are offered in accordance with Pope Benedict XVI’s Motu Proprio “Summorum Pontificum”, most often celebrated by priests of the Fraternal Society of St Peter (F.S.S.P.) or the Institute of Christ the King (I.C.K), and

those who attend chapels or oratories where Masses are offered by priests of the Priestly Society of St. Pius X (S.S.P.X.) and other such priestly fraternities outside of ordinary diocesan structures.

The second group consists of those who are unsure about the status of the acclaimed Pope. Many such Catholics worship at Masses offered by the Society of Saint Pius V (S.S.P.V.).

The third and smallest group consisists of “sedevacantist” Catholics, that is Catholics who believe that the Catholic Church has not had a true Pope for some time (most consider Pope Pius XII as the last true Pope) and who, depending on the time they see as the moment the “Chair of Peter” (sede) became empty (vacante), may or may not see Vatican II as a valid Council. Many sedevacantists attend Masses offered by the Congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen (C.M.R.I.).
this seems pretty accurate to me.
 
I think the Fisheaters site does a good job. I also like the Wikipedia ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditionalist_Catholic )explanation:Traditionalist Catholics are Roman Catholics who believe that there should be a restoration of many or all of the liturgical forms, public and private devotions and presentations of Catholic teachings which prevailed in the Catholic Church before the Second Vatican Council (1962–65).[1] They are most commonly associated with an attachment to the Mass liturgy in general use in that time period (often called the Tridentine Mass, the Traditional Mass or the Latin Mass), but their theological and practical concerns are broader in scope and in some cases go so far as to consider the present-day Church teaching heretical.

The Wikipedia article includes an additional category to the one’s used in Fisheaters:Priests and laypeople stemming from the sedevacantist movement who have given recognition to a nominee of their own as the true Pope are categorized as conclavists. Because they hold that the see of Rome is no longer vacant, they are not, strictly speaking, sedevacantists. But they are often classified as such because they reject the official papal succession for the same reasons as sedevacantists.
 
Thanks for the blog’s paste.

Let’s hear about the “Labeled-Catholic Movement”, those who feel compelled to wear a label and hyphenate their soul and split the unity of the Church in their minds. “I am a LABELED-Catholic, and am so generous and humble in spirit that I accept the acclaimed Pope and his recent predecessors as true Popes! (but I understand and sympathize with those who renounce the Pope or who are unsure of the status of the acclaimed Pope.)”

As for doing “all in one’s power to preserve the Holy Faith” that is the purview of the Holy Spirit, whom most of the faithful innately trust to do a good job. Each of our jobs is to preserve our own individual faith.
 
A “traditional Catholic” (or “traditionalist Catholic”) is a Catholic who recognizes the above errors in the presentation of Catholic teaching, who sees unwise pastoral decisions for what they are, and who does all in his power to preserve the Holy Faith in a manner consistent with how it has always been understood, and to preserve all of the liturgical rites and customs of the Church as they were before the “spirit of Vatican II” revolution. Traditionalists are not some “branch of the Church,” or (necessarily) some “splinter group”; they are usually and quite simply Catholics to whom the adjective “traditional” applies.

Traditional Catholics fall into three main categories:

The first and by far the largest group consists of those Catholics who accept the acclaimed Pope and his recent predecessors as true Popes and who believe that the Second Vatican Council was a valid, albeit problematic, Council. In this group are included:

those who attend parishes where Masses are offered in accordance with Pope Benedict XVI’s Motu Proprio “Summorum Pontificum”, most often celebrated by priests of the Fraternal Society of St Peter (F.S.S.P.) or the Institute of Christ the King (I.C.K), and

those who attend chapels or oratories where Masses are offered by priests of the Priestly Society of St. Pius X (S.S.P.X.) and other such priestly fraternities outside of ordinary diocesan structures.

The second group consists of those who are unsure about the status of the acclaimed Pope. Many such Catholics worship at Masses offered by the Society of Saint Pius V (S.S.P.V.).

The third and smallest group consisists of “sedevacantist” Catholics, that is Catholics who believe that the Catholic Church has not had a true Pope for some time (most consider Pope Pius XII as the last true Pope) and who, depending on the time they see as the moment the “Chair of Peter” (sede) became empty (vacante), may or may not see Vatican II as a valid Council. Many sedevacantists attend Masses offered by the Congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen (C.M.R.I.).
Based on the descriptions provided, those who accept the beliefs of the second and third groups are simply not Catholic.
 
Based on the descriptions provided, those who accept the beliefs of the second and third groups are simply not Catholic.
They are certainly not practicing Catholics or good Catholics. They are no better than any other so-called Cafeteria Catholic who want to pick and choose what to believe in, be it birth control or abortion or gay marriage or euthanasia or the SSPX or the Pope.
 
Let’s hear about the “Labeled-Catholic Movement”, those who feel compelled to wear a label and hyphenate their soul and split the unity of the Church in their minds. “I am a LABELED-Catholic, and am so generous and humble in spirit that I accept the acclaimed Pope and his recent predecessors as true Popes! (but I understand and sympathize with those who renounce the Pope or who are unsure of the status of the acclaimed Pope.)”
The Wikipedia article I cited above addresses this point:Traditionalist Catholics generally prefer to be referred to either simply as Catholics or, if a distinction must be made, as “traditional Catholics” (with a lower-case T). However, since Roman Catholics in general consider themselves to be “traditional” in the sense of being faithful to historical Catholic teaching,[2] the term “traditionalist Catholics” is used in this article as a means of clearly distinguishing them from other Roman Catholics.

I suspect that most people who identify themselves as traditional Catholics just want a convenient term to distinguish themselves from other Catholics. There is no reason to assume they want to split the unity of the Church or look down on others. It is a movement within the Church with identifiable characteristics and when people want to talk about it they need a name for it. I’m sure that whoever set up this forum with the name “Traditional Catholicism” had no intention of splitting the Church, but if you really think this label is such a bad thing, you probably should not be posting in the forum.
 
They are certainly not practicing Catholics or good Catholics. They are no better than any other so-called Cafeteria Catholic who want to pick and choose what to believe in, be it birth control or abortion or gay marriage or euthanasia or the SSPX or the Pope.
…and considerably worse than Latter Day Saints, Freemasons, Jehovah’s Witnesses and other groups who charitably select distinctive names to identify *their *particular brand of non-Catholicism…
 
I’d like to draw attention to this statement in the OP:
The first and by far the largest group consists of those Catholics who accept the acclaimed Pope and his recent predecessors as true Popes and who believe that the Second Vatican Council was a valid, albeit problematic, Council.
It is interesting that discussion in this thread seems to focus, not on this majority, but on the minority that rejects the Pope. In general, I have noticed many people associate “traditional Catholicism” with this rejection. It seems to be one of the first things they think of. It is unfortunate that those of us who are attached to the Extraordinary Form of the Mass should so frequently be coupled with the beliefs of this minority.
 
I’d like to draw attention to this statement in the OP:
The first and by far the largest group consists of those Catholics who accept the acclaimed Pope and his recent predecessors as true Popes and who believe that the Second Vatican Council was a valid, albeit problematic, Council.
It is interesting that discussion in this thread seems to focus, not on this majority, but on the minority that rejects the Pope. In general, I have noticed many people associate “traditional Catholicism” with this rejection. It seems to be one of the first things they think of. It is unfortunate that those of us who are attached to the Extraordinary Form of the Mass should so frequently be coupled with the beliefs of this minority.
It does seem odd (and sad) that there’s even a defining statement saying that self-ascribed traditionalst Catholics “accept the acclaimed Pope and his recent predecessors” as if that were some grand charity on their part, or as if there’s any doubt. Then again, the reason for the statement is clear - not all accept the Church.
 
It does seem odd (and sad) that there’s even a defining statement saying that self-ascribed traditionalst Catholics “accept the acclaimed Pope and his recent predecessors” as if that were some grand charity on their part, or as if there’s any doubt. Then again, the reason for the statement is clear - not all accept the Church.
You have a remarkable ability to come up with the most negative interpretation possible of any statement concerning Catholics attached to the EF. While it is remarkable, it is neither charitable nor beneficial to discussions.
 
“Catholics attached to the EF” are one thing. Self-ascribed ‘traditionalists’ who sympathize with people who are enamored with disobedience and a schismatic mindset are another.
 
A “traditional Catholic” (or “traditionalist Catholic”) is a Catholic who recognizes the above errors in the presentation of Catholic teaching, who sees unwise pastoral decisions for what they are, and who does all in his power to preserve the Holy Faith in a manner consistent with how it has always been understood, and to preserve all of the liturgical rites and customs of the Church as they were before the “spirit of Vatican II” revolution. Traditionalists are not some “branch of the Church,” or (necessarily) some “splinter group”; they are usually and quite simply Catholics to whom the adjective “traditional” applies.

Traditional Catholics fall into three main categories:

The first and by far the largest group consists of those Catholics who accept the acclaimed Pope and his recent predecessors as true Popes and who believe that the Second Vatican Council was a valid, albeit problematic, Council. In this group are included:

those who attend parishes where Masses are offered in accordance with Pope Benedict XVI’s Motu Proprio “Summorum Pontificum”, most often celebrated by priests of the Fraternal Society of St Peter (F.S.S.P.) or the Institute of Christ the King (I.C.K), and

those who attend chapels or oratories where Masses are offered by priests of the Priestly Society of St. Pius X (S.S.P.X.) and other such priestly fraternities outside of ordinary diocesan structures.

The second group consists of those who are unsure about the status of the acclaimed Pope. Many such Catholics worship at Masses offered by the Society of Saint Pius V (S.S.P.V.).

The third and smallest group consisists of “sedevacantist” Catholics, that is Catholics who believe that the Catholic Church has not had a true Pope for some time (most consider Pope Pius XII as the last true Pope) and who, depending on the time they see as the moment the “Chair of Peter” (sede) became empty (vacante), may or may not see Vatican II as a valid Council. Many sedevacantists attend Masses offered by the Congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen (C.M.R.I.).
Gee then, what am I?
I prefer the Latin Mass, but I don’t think the OF is defective.
I despise ‘folk Masses’, but I don’t see what the big deal is about Altar girls.
I take COTT, but I am not going to anathamize CITH.

I am one screwed up individual.:eek:
😃
 
Gee then, what am I?
I prefer the Latin Mass, but I don’t think the OF is defective.
I despise ‘folk Masses’, but I don’t see what the big deal is about Altar girls.
I take COTT, but I am not going to anathamize CITH.

I am one screwed up individual.:eek:
😃
No, you’re just in the first group. The funny thing about these “groups” are that they comprise, respectively, something like 99.8%, 0.199%, and 0.001% of Catholics. It’s like saying, “There are three main categories of Americans: those who have never attempted the violent overthrow of the government, those who are in the active employ of hostile foreign states, and those who have actually been convicted of treason.”
 
Gee then, what am I?
I prefer the Latin Mass, but I don’t think the OF is defective.
I despise ‘folk Masses’, but I don’t see what the big deal is about Altar girls.
I take COTT, but I am not going to anathamize CITH.

I am one screwed up individual.:eek:
😃
Well, whatever we are, we gotta stick together. :hug3:

Heck, I don’t even *despise ‘folk Masses’ *so much as I despise much of the mainstream folk music catalogue.

tee
 
Gee then, what am I?
I prefer the Latin Mass, but I don’t think the OF is defective.
I despise ‘folk Masses’, but I don’t see what the big deal is about Altar girls.
I take COTT, but I am not going to anathamize CITH.

I am one screwed up individual.:eek:
😃
Lol that is a good one.
I prrefer the EF as well, but I see the OF valid and attend it sometimes as well.
I also despise 'folk Masses;, but I do have a big problem with “Altar girls”.
I also take COTT, and wish CITH would be taken away
I wish eucharisitc minister would be abolished, but I understand that there are those who serve that position by Faith.
I don’t see the porblem with allowing some married Catholic men to become priest
So maybe your not the only one who is scewed up?
 
Gee then, what am I?
I prefer the Latin Mass, but I don’t think the OF is defective.
I despise ‘folk Masses’, but I don’t see what the big deal is about Altar girls.
I take COTT, but I am not going to anathamize CITH.

I am one screwed up individual.:eek:
😃
I was with you up to COTT and CITH. What are they?
 
Gee then, what am I?
I prefer the Latin Mass, but I don’t think the OF is defective.
I despise ‘folk Masses’, but I don’t see what the big deal is about Altar girls.
I take COTT, but I am not going to anathamize CITH.

I am one screwed up individual.:eek:
😃
I was thinking the same thing! And what about those that adhere to the traditions of the Church, and do not view Vatican II as problematic?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top