"Traditional Catholicism"...problematic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JamalChristophr
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Is the reason there is confusion around the SSPX because neither the SSPX or the Vatican wants to define anything?
 
Basically. I would not put them in the same category as the SSPV, but there are issues that need to be resolved.
 
This is one area that is especially pertinent to my musing about the OP.

I see that some people who identify as traditional Catholics and are within the boundaries at least of accepting current papal authority and not being so critical of the second vatican council while others go beyond that and seem to align with those who have pushed themselves outside of papal obedience and strongly criticize or outright reject Vatican II.

It seems there might be a fine line in this area that is especially perilous for a Catholic to cross. I noticed that with one of my acquaintances at Church who was in that general sphere and vacillating very closely between that line of demarcation.

I think it’s a serious line to cross over, and this one of the components of this thread that I thought was worth considering.
 
Last edited:
AdamP88 said:
I don’t think the “traditional” Catholics care too much whether you attend Latin Mass or the Ordinary form. I’m pretty sure if I went to Latin mass and told someone I met there that I suppport abortion and gay marriage, but I love the Latin mass, they’d not be too pleased.

It’s less about what form of mass you attend and more about whether you accept Church teaching or not.
Click to expand...
Maybe “traditionalist” means something a bit different where you live? I am speaking purely from my experience with the “traditionalist” Catholics in my area. My parish is made up of good faithful people who accept Church teaching, but they are definitely not all “traditionalist.”
 
Last edited:
I also don’t see that much actual “traditionalist” stuff in the trad forum on here, or rather, there is a lot of stuff in that forum that isn’t just for “traditionalists”.

I was confused about what went there when I first joined. I remember starting a thread about an old devotion that dated back to early 1900s and getting told that the topic didn’t belong in the “Traditional Catholicism” forum, which I did not understand. It was old, traditional, and Catholic.

I’m honestly not sure what purpose that forum serves. I certainly don’t hate trad stuff and sometimes I go to the trad churches, but I don’t get why it needs its own forum.
 
Perhaps, in Dublin the latin mass parish just happens to attract a lot of families who would be well known in Catholic circles and some of whom would be involved in catholic/pro-life organisations etc.
 
On a positive note, I do like that, although Mel Gibson is a Sedvecantist. (I think he is, anyways.) , he produce a wonderful movie on the Passion that greatly inspired and edified all Catholics.

In one sense, he was a Sedvecantist that most all Catholics seemed to be able to identify with as to a large degree, a fervent Catholic, and not a schismatic.
 
Who says that people who identify themselves as traditionalists 'see themselves as separate and above?"

YOU don’t identify as ‘Traditionalist’ Jim. So how come YOU think you determine how ‘they’ are 'seeing themselves??
 
You know what? I see that some people who identify as either ‘progressive’ or even as “I’m 'just a Catholic” are within the boundaries of at least accepting current papal authority and are not so critical of the ‘reform of the reform’ as Pope Benedict put it, while others go beyond (often way beyond) and seem to align with those who have pushed themselves outside of papal obedience and strongly criticize or outright reject the teachings of the Catholic church.

It seems there might be a fine line in this area that is especially perilous for a Catholic to cross. I’ve seen several Catholics on these forums with this general kind of mindset who come close and even tip over into 'The Church must change", “I know that I’m disagreeing with this and that teaching, but the Church has changed before and it will again”. . .

I think it’s a serious line to cross over. . .
 
It’s how myself and others are treated by so-called “traditionalists.”

Sorry if this offends you.

Jim
 
I think that it is great, though some will disagree, that John Paul II, B16, and Pope Francis made a serious effort within some religious orders to pull the traditionalists who had crossed over the line or were on the cusp of moving outside what was acceptable by the Church back into the fold, to reign them in back into the flock. Some saw it differently, of course, saying it was overly harsh and anti-tradition, but I tend to think it was a good thing for these religious orders to be brought back closer to being more in unity with Catholicism that was unitive and not leading to division.

I really like that saying, “Don’t be more Catholic than the Pope” (Something like that, anyways.)
 
Last edited:
Right. Then I’m sure you would be the first person to understand the feelings of those who were treated incredibly badly by those who like to label 'traditionalist interested Catholics" in incredibly hurtful, judgmental ways over decades of time.
 
It’s been observed that they separate themselves from mainstream Catholics.
These labels are self-proclaimed.

St. Paul addresses fiery words to those who chose to view other churches with disdain.
History doesn’t repeat itself, but it sure does rhyme.

I’m out.
 
I see no problem at all, Op. on the contrary. It’s very good for one to show the world thathow much they value the Traditional way.
 
It looks like you shared these same quotes in January '17. I’m not familiar with the SSSP. What are they?
 
There’s a lady I dearly love who self-identifies as a traditionalist Catholic. She is very devout and charitable. I think too much zeal can sometimes serve as a temptation to a little spiritual pride and distancing from the masses.

(Not that I’m the one who ought to be pointing out a little spiritual pride in others. 🙂 As I may have more than them.)

Since I put this in the “spirituality” section, I suppose part of my query is the danger and to what degree, if any, the self-identification as T.C. can tend one towards spiritual pride, which many of the spiritual masters strongly caution against.
 
Last edited:
Most of New Masses I have attended seemed to be invalid. I’m not saying most of them in general are not valid, though. It’s just a personal observation.

Anyway, the New Mass must be celebrated as it was created. Step by step. No abuses, no variations. It’s even better when celebrated in latin.
 
For those of you who identify as T.C. here, I don’t mean to offend or assert that you need to jettison such a self-identification. T.C. means different things to different people. This topic is just meant to be a consideration of the idea and not a proclamation of judgment.
 
Huh. I guess I was asking if perhaps you had mistaken the abbreviation and it was really SSPV or SSPX or… I’ve no idea what SSSP is. In poking around online, it looks like it might be the Sacerdotal Fraternity of St. Peter (there are priests with this acronym following their names), which is the same as the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP), which is aligned with and approved by the Vatican.
 
Traditional Interested Catholics ?

That’s a new term I’ve never seen.

Traditionalists have been the one’s to attack Vatican II, the Novus Ordo and they take every chance they can get to attack Pope Francis

Of course they continue to bring up the “Clown Mass,” which was misrepresented when it was first reported decades ago

I’ve seen the attacks going back over 25 years, not only in this forum, but other Catholic Forums.

So-called Traditionalists drive pass multiple Catholic parishes to attend Mass at a parish which is over two hours away, because they feel it’s more reverent.

I’ve seen them walk out on a retreat, because they thought the priest was abusing the Mass by having the men stand around the altar during the consecration. They had no idea it was approved by the local Bishop and by Rome, for the Passionists who ran the retreats.

Don’t preach to me about how they’ve been treated badly.

Jim
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top