K
Kathleen18
Guest
As someone who is in RCIA, please excuse my ignorance. What is Traditional Catholicism? Thank you! Merry Christmas! 
Kathleen
Kathleen
Last edited:
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
S
stpurl
Guest
Youāll hear about as many definitions as there are persons, but as somebody who feels that she is drawn to many traditional practices, I believe a traditional Catholic, as opposed to a 'just plain Catholic" or a 'modern Catholic ('plain and modern not being the same), is a person who believes in the āthree legged stoolā of Sacred Scripture, big-T Tradition, and the Magisterium, who while being perfectly content and appreciative of the O.F. (ordinary form or āvernacularā Mass) yet appreciates the E.F. (extraordinary or Latin Mass) and its gifts as well; who appreciates little-T traditions which existed for centuries yet have been neglected over the last 40-50 years, things such as women with headcoverings, devotions to the Sacred Heart, things like ember and rogation days, the traditions of the liturgical year (things like knowing that the month of December is dedicated to the Immaculate Conception and the month of January to the Childhood and Holy Name of Jesus), Saturdays dedicated to the Virgin, the age-old tradition (with indult in the U.S.) for Friday abstinence from meat, First Fridays and First Saturdays, an appreciation of things like chant, family rosaries, etc.
Now with the probable exception of headcoverings, I am sure that both ājust plain Catholicsā and progressive modern Catholics are aware of and even practice or have practiced some of the above. So Iām not saying that those who appreciate tradition are somehow incredibly different or better, or are informed while others are ignorant. Not at all.
I am saying that it will most likely be those who either self-identify as traditional or who find themselves appreciating a majority of the things above and other practices which were once common in our grandparents day as devotions and traditions in the Church who will be practicing some or all of the above. And that the ājust plainā Catholic will most likely practice only that common to his or her family culture (i.e., the Catholic of Italian heritage will probably celebrate the Feast of St. Anthony on June 13, but be less likely to celebrate ember or rogation days, while the modern Catholic of Italian heritage may not think of St. Anthony at all, or will find the āold fashioned processionsā quaint and even problematic, ārigidā, lacking relevance in the modern diverse world. Again, of course, these are broad generalizations and obviously you can find people who identify as one of the three groups above who go against ātypeā.
Now with the probable exception of headcoverings, I am sure that both ājust plain Catholicsā and progressive modern Catholics are aware of and even practice or have practiced some of the above. So Iām not saying that those who appreciate tradition are somehow incredibly different or better, or are informed while others are ignorant. Not at all.
I am saying that it will most likely be those who either self-identify as traditional or who find themselves appreciating a majority of the things above and other practices which were once common in our grandparents day as devotions and traditions in the Church who will be practicing some or all of the above. And that the ājust plainā Catholic will most likely practice only that common to his or her family culture (i.e., the Catholic of Italian heritage will probably celebrate the Feast of St. Anthony on June 13, but be less likely to celebrate ember or rogation days, while the modern Catholic of Italian heritage may not think of St. Anthony at all, or will find the āold fashioned processionsā quaint and even problematic, ārigidā, lacking relevance in the modern diverse world. Again, of course, these are broad generalizations and obviously you can find people who identify as one of the three groups above who go against ātypeā.
S
stpurl
Guest
Continued from above:
What youāll also find is a lot of anger directed at ātraditionalā Catholics by non-traditional Catholics who will complain the traditional person is holier than thou, toxic, fixated on rituals, rigid, mean, and hateful. And again, there probably exist people who fit that definition, because the way one chooses to practice oneās faith has absolutely no bearing on the personās personality, if you will. A mean, hateful person can be traditional, ājust plain, or progressive --or any other āthing/ismā and those things do not make the person mean or hateful; the person is simply ābornā or has made himself that way in every other aspect of life. There are plenty of ājust plainā and āmodernā Catholics who are every bit and then some as āhateful and meanā in their attitudes and again, it is not because they are āplainā or āmodernā, but because they have chosen that attitude or are inclined to that attitude and it colors the way they practice their faith. So donāt be turned off by hearing that "Well, when I spoke to Tammy Traditional she was mean and hatefulā, because Tammy might simply, poor woman, have that kind of personalityāand if she werenāt exploring a contemplative traditional spirituality she might even be more hateful! who knows? And it could be that Jean Just plain herself is the mean hateful person who simply projects her own attitude onto others without realizing it.
Take the time to read, listen with an open (but not so open things fall out) mind and heart, discern on the teachings and not the āteachersā, and be not afraid.
What youāll also find is a lot of anger directed at ātraditionalā Catholics by non-traditional Catholics who will complain the traditional person is holier than thou, toxic, fixated on rituals, rigid, mean, and hateful. And again, there probably exist people who fit that definition, because the way one chooses to practice oneās faith has absolutely no bearing on the personās personality, if you will. A mean, hateful person can be traditional, ājust plain, or progressive --or any other āthing/ismā and those things do not make the person mean or hateful; the person is simply ābornā or has made himself that way in every other aspect of life. There are plenty of ājust plainā and āmodernā Catholics who are every bit and then some as āhateful and meanā in their attitudes and again, it is not because they are āplainā or āmodernā, but because they have chosen that attitude or are inclined to that attitude and it colors the way they practice their faith. So donāt be turned off by hearing that "Well, when I spoke to Tammy Traditional she was mean and hatefulā, because Tammy might simply, poor woman, have that kind of personalityāand if she werenāt exploring a contemplative traditional spirituality she might even be more hateful! who knows? And it could be that Jean Just plain herself is the mean hateful person who simply projects her own attitude onto others without realizing it.
Take the time to read, listen with an open (but not so open things fall out) mind and heart, discern on the teachings and not the āteachersā, and be not afraid.
K
Kathleen18
Guest
Thank you so much for taking the time to answer my question! Especially with so much information and depth. I am going to investigate more about the traditions you mentioned. God Bless and Merry Christmas!
E
Edmundus1581
Guest
I think that stpurl has summed it up well.
āTraditional Catholicā is broad spectrum, and most Catholic parishioners are in some sense ātraditionalā, in that they will observe and value traditions which are beyond what is strictly required.
One pivotal issue which the OP may not be familiar with is the Second Vatican Council of the 1960ās. This introduced many changes in the Churchās liturgy, practice, and doctrinal emphases (eg, emphasising commonality with other Christians as our āseparated brethrenā, sharing one baptism, over our differences). Essentially, it āmodernizedā the church which until then had preserved traditions and practices almost unchanged for centuries. If you see any old movies depicting Catholicism before 1965 youāll get the idea.
āTraditionalismā in Catholicism then largely refers to retaining aspects of the Church from pre-Vatican II. Obviously the doctrines and fundamentals of liturgy have not changed. Most of what @stpurl refers to are non-binding, but commendable, aspects of life before Vatican II.
Liturgy is sometimes contentious, unfortunately. There are conflicts between āTraditionalistsā and āProgressivesā over liturgy and what is actually required can be lost to personal preferences for the old, or for the new. IMO, the ānewā are more likely to want change for the sake of it, and to make changes not approved by the Church.
So, in some ways āTraditionā is just a benign word for a point of view, but it can also be a bone of contention, even a serious one.
Then there are other āextremeā Traditionalists who have broken with the Church, rejecting Vatican II itself, and all changes since then. Sorry to confuse you with this, but you may encounter or hear of them also.
āTraditional Catholicā is broad spectrum, and most Catholic parishioners are in some sense ātraditionalā, in that they will observe and value traditions which are beyond what is strictly required.
One pivotal issue which the OP may not be familiar with is the Second Vatican Council of the 1960ās. This introduced many changes in the Churchās liturgy, practice, and doctrinal emphases (eg, emphasising commonality with other Christians as our āseparated brethrenā, sharing one baptism, over our differences). Essentially, it āmodernizedā the church which until then had preserved traditions and practices almost unchanged for centuries. If you see any old movies depicting Catholicism before 1965 youāll get the idea.
āTraditionalismā in Catholicism then largely refers to retaining aspects of the Church from pre-Vatican II. Obviously the doctrines and fundamentals of liturgy have not changed. Most of what @stpurl refers to are non-binding, but commendable, aspects of life before Vatican II.
Liturgy is sometimes contentious, unfortunately. There are conflicts between āTraditionalistsā and āProgressivesā over liturgy and what is actually required can be lost to personal preferences for the old, or for the new. IMO, the ānewā are more likely to want change for the sake of it, and to make changes not approved by the Church.
So, in some ways āTraditionā is just a benign word for a point of view, but it can also be a bone of contention, even a serious one.
Then there are other āextremeā Traditionalists who have broken with the Church, rejecting Vatican II itself, and all changes since then. Sorry to confuse you with this, but you may encounter or hear of them also.
Last edited:
K
Kathleen18
Guest
Oh yeah. I have definately heard of the āExtremeā traditionalists. LeFebere? Is that right? But thank you also for the feedback! Peace be with you! Merry Christmas!
T
thistle
Guest
Pope Benedict XVI said people should STOP using labels for different Catholics.
There are only two types of Catholic - those in a state of grace and those in a state of mortal sin.
There are only two types of Catholic - those in a state of grace and those in a state of mortal sin.
S
stpurl
Guest
Labels are one thing, qualifiers are another. If I use progressive or traditional to disparage, or breed contention, that is labeling. If I use them to explain, inform, or āqualifyā something about the Faith, that is not labeling.
Suppose that Tammy Traditional, who attends the EF (but does not disparage the OF), Terry Toxic (who also attends the EF but is contemptuous of the OF and says so on all occasions) both introduce themselves to Jenny Just plain Catholic and Peter Progressive, all 'Hi, Iām a Catholic, how are you"? Jenny and Tammy get together and chat, Tammy tells Jenny that she attends the EF and invites her to come with her next Sunday, and that she (Tammy) will attend Jennyās parish the following week.
Terry and Peter start to talk and are soon in a heated argument as Terry sneers at Vatican 2 and Pope Francisā āblasphemiesā. Peter OTOH is scathing in his denunciation of rigid fools who attend the Latin Mass which, according to Peter, should never have been brought back (forgetting for the moment āwho is he to judgeā). . .
Later Jenny tells Peter about how nice Tammy was and that sheās going to attend the EF with Tammy --and Peter tells her that OBVIOUSLY Tammy was just trying to āfakeā being nice because all those āEF peopleā are nasty and Pope haters. Jenny is appalled and calls Tammy to cancel.
You see, even just introducing as āplain Catholicā is not going to stop the hate, on either side, or the labeling even if it goes from "traditionalā or āprogressiveā to āEF peopleā and "OF peopleā or "that rigid groupā or āthat heretic groupā; there will always be that kind of label.
But as for traditional/oldfashioned and/or 'progressive/modern, those are perfectly good words that have been turned into labels.
I say itās time to take them back and use them as the qualifiers/modifiers/information words that they are, and letās get honest. If Peter who is rude and hateful to all but āhis peopleā, it is not the 'progressive" who is hateful, it is Peter.
If Terry is rude and hateful to all but āhis peopleā, it is not the ātraditionalistā who is hateful, it is Terry.
And Peter and Terry are the problems in their practice of Catholicism, not ātraditionalismā and not āmodernismā.
Suppose that Tammy Traditional, who attends the EF (but does not disparage the OF), Terry Toxic (who also attends the EF but is contemptuous of the OF and says so on all occasions) both introduce themselves to Jenny Just plain Catholic and Peter Progressive, all 'Hi, Iām a Catholic, how are you"? Jenny and Tammy get together and chat, Tammy tells Jenny that she attends the EF and invites her to come with her next Sunday, and that she (Tammy) will attend Jennyās parish the following week.
Terry and Peter start to talk and are soon in a heated argument as Terry sneers at Vatican 2 and Pope Francisā āblasphemiesā. Peter OTOH is scathing in his denunciation of rigid fools who attend the Latin Mass which, according to Peter, should never have been brought back (forgetting for the moment āwho is he to judgeā). . .
Later Jenny tells Peter about how nice Tammy was and that sheās going to attend the EF with Tammy --and Peter tells her that OBVIOUSLY Tammy was just trying to āfakeā being nice because all those āEF peopleā are nasty and Pope haters. Jenny is appalled and calls Tammy to cancel.
You see, even just introducing as āplain Catholicā is not going to stop the hate, on either side, or the labeling even if it goes from "traditionalā or āprogressiveā to āEF peopleā and "OF peopleā or "that rigid groupā or āthat heretic groupā; there will always be that kind of label.
But as for traditional/oldfashioned and/or 'progressive/modern, those are perfectly good words that have been turned into labels.
I say itās time to take them back and use them as the qualifiers/modifiers/information words that they are, and letās get honest. If Peter who is rude and hateful to all but āhis peopleā, it is not the 'progressive" who is hateful, it is Peter.
If Terry is rude and hateful to all but āhis peopleā, it is not the ātraditionalistā who is hateful, it is Terry.
And Peter and Terry are the problems in their practice of Catholicism, not ātraditionalismā and not āmodernismā.
E
edwest211
Guest
That is the correct answer.
E
edwest211
Guest
A very good answer. The Church is not a political organization. We should engage each other respectfully. Labels are divisive. We should also have an answer for those who question the Church after Vatican II. There is still some confusion.
H
Hereiam
Guest
Opposite of New Fangled Catholic?
Actually there is no such thingā¦were all Catholics.
Kinda like Irish American, Mexican American, African Americans are all Americans!
Taking on the title ourselves is as bad as hanging it on someone else.
Actually there is no such thingā¦were all Catholics.
Kinda like Irish American, Mexican American, African Americans are all Americans!
Taking on the title ourselves is as bad as hanging it on someone else.
A
Acolyte
Guest
Traditional Catholicism means the Latin Mass, the Baltimore Catechism, the Summa Theologica, no meat on Fridays including outside of Lent, emphasis on Advent and not pre-mature Christmas celebrations, emphasis on the Holy SACRIFICE of the Mass and not merely a meal, etc.
Traditional Catholicism is the Catholicism of the Missionary, Lost, GI and the early Silent generations and NOT that of the Boomer, the Gen Xr, the Millennial and the upcoming Homelander generations.
Traditional Catholicism is the Catholicism of the Missionary, Lost, GI and the early Silent generations and NOT that of the Boomer, the Gen Xr, the Millennial and the upcoming Homelander generations.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.