Traditional = orthodox

  • Thread starter Thread starter Wesley7
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

Wesley7

Guest
traditional = orthodox?

Does traditional mean orthodox? It would help me alot if someone will explain what Traditional Catholicism means. What does Traditional Catholicism actually mean?

. .
 
Wesley7 said:
traditional = orthodox?

Does traditional mean orthodox?
Click to expand...
Yes, but it depends on what you mean by tradition.

Sacred Tradition is the deposit of faith given by Jesus to the Apostles which has found its way down to us. I.e., the Sacred Tradition is the entirety of Divine Revelation. The Magisterium, the teaching authority of the Church, is the guardian of Sacred Tradition. It doesn’t really change.

The other tradition, which is what I think you mean by ‘traditional’, is not quite so sacred, but is still important. Everything (with a little hand waving on what exactly everything means) we (more hand waving) do (even more) should be done in light of this tradition and in continuity with it. It can change.

When I took a Sacraments class, the distinction was Tradition versus tradition (big t tradition and little t tradition). There would have been less confusion by just adding the word Sacred.

You may want to read the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation: Dei Verbum which speaks more to the topic of Sacred Tradition.
 
Wesley7 said:
traditional = orthodox?

Does traditional mean orthodox? It would help me alot if someone will explain what Traditional Catholicism means. What does Traditional Catholicism actually mean?
Click to expand...
Ah! You’ve edited your post! 🙂

I would say that Traditional Catholicism is tradition that is in continuity with not only Sacred Tradition, but also the second type of tradition that I mentioned. The problem is that we can argue about what exactly that means.

It is my perception that people who are a little loose, shall we say, with tradition also tend to be a little loose with Sacred Tradition. Then there are those who think that all tradition is trapped in time (such as the 1950s). Both positions, suffice to say, are ‘wrong’.

But that does not really answer your question, does it? 🤷
 
Around here, it usually draws those who want a return to the pre-Vatican II liturgies.

It more generally means those who want
(1) the authentic liturgies as approved by rome
(2) orthodox Catholic teaching
(3) reverent and proper participation in the liturgy

Within that context, I’m a traditionalist… bordering on vostochnik… I just happens that the Liturgy I’m wanting to be done authentically is the DL according to St John and the DL according to St. Basil, rather than the DL according to the Roman uses.

And don’t get me wrong; my home parish DOES do that, too.

But, at the same time, many claiming to be traditionalists reject one or more elements of church teaching… making this part of the board a bit of a minefield.
 
Traditional Catholic = a Catholic who follows the perennial teachings of the Church, rather than novelties of the current pontificate.

For example: John Paul II allowed altar boys who are girls. This was a complete aberration and had been condemned as “evil” by popes in the past. NeoCatholics accepted it, since it came from Rome. Traditional Catholics recognized it as total novelty and therefore not binding in conscience, and continue to follow what the Church has always practiced.

This is just one example.
 
UKcatholicGuy said:
Traditional Catholic = a Catholic who follows the perennial teachings of the Church, rather than novelties of the current pontificate.

For example: John Paul II allowed altar boys who are girls. This was a complete aberration and had been condemned as “evil” by popes in the past. NeoCatholics accepted it, since it came from Rome. Traditional Catholics recognized it as total novelty and therefore not binding in conscience, and continue to follow what the Church has always practiced.

This is just one example.
Click to expand...
So called “Traditional Catholics” are like those in the post above, who think that every pope after Pope Pius XII is a “modernest,” “liberal,” or “neoCatholic,” and the standard Missal of Pope Paul VI catholic is the same or even more so.

In truth, all of these labels are pretty much meaningless. Tradition is not, like noted earlier, locked in the 1950s. We see the continuation of Tradition today in Pope Benedict XVI and Pope John Paul II who upheld many of the churches traditional teachings. Now, did the more recent popes do things that aren’t looked at favorably by the so called “traditionalists” catholics of today? Sure they did, but if you look into the history of the popes of the last 100-150 years ago you will find that they supported things that would now be looked upon as “liberal.”

As to your question as to whether traditional = orthodox…if you look at some of the “traditionalists” communities out there I think you’ll see that, though they may be traditional in thought, they aren’t exactly orthodox in practice.
 
Timothysis said:
In truth, all of these labels are pretty much meaningless.
Click to expand...
If not meaningless, at least rather slippery. Yet in the context here “Traditional Catholicism” refers to the preference to the Latin Mass and especially the Tridentine Latin Mass. The term is slippery. Some believe that "traditionalism is all encompassing and reject almost all that has occured in the last two generations of the Church. Some even split with the Catholic Church over the differences and cling to the ghost of Catholic Church past. Others limit their Traditionalism to just the TLM, or even the normative Mass in Latin. Most traditionalists here are great people and solid Catholics. Only a few have fluttered off the deep end, but they usually end up getting banned.

“Orthodox” just means having correct doctrine. Traditionalists and non-Traditionalists may be orthodox or unorthodox. Pretty much most of the Catholics here strive for orthodoxy. That is the nature of this place.
 
Aramis said:
Within that context, I’m a traditionalist… bordering on vostochnik… I just happens that the Liturgy I’m wanting to be done authentically is the DL according to St John and the DL according to St. Basil, rather than the DL according to the Roman uses.
Click to expand...
They happen to serve these Divine Liturgies in the Orthodox Church. The Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom in the Russian Orthodox Church and St. Basil in the Coptic OC.
But, at the same time, many claiming to be traditionalists reject one or more elements of church teaching… making this part of the board a bit of a minefield.
Click to expand...
A serious traditional Catholic would believe and conform to -all- the orthodox doctrines and teachings of the Catholic Church.
 
A serious traditional Catholic would believe and conform to -all- the orthodox doctrines and teachings of the Catholic Church.
 
Wesley7 said:
traditional = orthodox?

Does traditional mean orthodox? It would help me alot if someone will explain what Traditional Catholicism means. What does Traditional Catholicism actually mean?

. .
Click to expand...
No way does “traditional” equate to orthodox. It seems the more extreme (traditional or progressive) one becomes then less orthodox they are.
 
Rickwood said:
No way does “traditional” equate to orthodox. It seems the more extreme (traditional or progressive) one becomes then less orthodox they are.
Click to expand...
That was a pretty extreme comment… does it apply to you to??:rolleyes:
 
UKcatholicGuy said:
Traditional Catholic = a Catholic who follows the perennial teachings of the Church, rather than novelties of the current pontificate.

For example: John Paul II allowed altar boys who are girls. This was a complete aberration and had been condemned as “evil” by popes in the past. NeoCatholics accepted it, since it came from Rome. Traditional Catholics recognized it as total novelty and therefore not binding in conscience, and continue to follow what the Church has always practiced.

This is just one example.
Click to expand...
That smacks strongly of anti-Catholic bigotry.
 
MrS said:
That was a pretty extreme comment… does it apply to you to??:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I don’t think it does and I pray that it never will. It’s amusing to read the heterodox opinions from those who label themselves as “traditional.” I don’t think most are even aware that they are heterodox.
 
Rickwood said:
I don’t think it does and I pray that it never will. It’s amusing to read the heterodox opinions from those who label themselves as “traditional.” I don’t think most are even aware that they are heterodox.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes: Yes, the comments here by some posters are amusing.
 
Wesley7 said:
They happen to serve these Divine Liturgies in the Orthodox Church. The Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom in the Russian Orthodox Church and St. Basil in the Coptic OC.
Click to expand...
Actually, the RO use both. The Coptic DL of St. Basil isn’t the same, tho it is close.

The Eastern Orthodox, however Tradition-bound, reject the Petrine ministry.

The Coptic Orthodox see the Patriarch of Alexandria as the Heir of Peter, not the Patriarch of Rome.
Wesley7 said:
A serious traditional Catholic would believe and conform to -all- the orthodox doctrines and teachings of the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
Agreed. But many who claim to be traditionalists are, in fact, not.
 
Instead of worrying about names that describe any of us, it would be better if each of us would look into our hearts and see how well we are following the teachings of the Church. If everyone did this and followed what is truly our obligation, we would all be traditional, orthodox, loyal, faithful Catholics or whatever else we would care to call ourselves. Do not put a description on someone else as this only tends to divide.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top