G
Genesis315
Guest
That’s about the Church’s role and mission in the modern world, it’s not about modernizing the Church.
- Status
E
estesbob
Guest
Well said. ! With Vatican II we went back to our roots. Mass in the language of the people attending and greater involvement of the laity being two of the major changes made. If you read descriptions of the early gatherings of Catholics (ast and 2nd centuries)you will see how much progress we have made to emulating that.
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
Baptista,
I would say that to pit Tradition against Vatican II is a false dichotomy. I agree with Pope Benedict XVI who, while still yet a cardinal, asserted:
“[Vatican II is] one part of the unbroken, the unique Tradition of the Church and of her faith.” (Cardinal Ratzinger’s July 13, 1988 remarks to the Bishops of Chile regarding the Lefebvre Schism)
“You may not, however, affirm that the conciliar texts, which are magisterial texts, are incompatible with the Magisterium and with Tradition.” (Cardinal Ratzinger letter to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre on July 20, 1983)
I would say that to pit Tradition against Vatican II is a false dichotomy. I agree with Pope Benedict XVI who, while still yet a cardinal, asserted:
“[Vatican II is] one part of the unbroken, the unique Tradition of the Church and of her faith.” (Cardinal Ratzinger’s July 13, 1988 remarks to the Bishops of Chile regarding the Lefebvre Schism)
“You may not, however, affirm that the conciliar texts, which are magisterial texts, are incompatible with the Magisterium and with Tradition.” (Cardinal Ratzinger letter to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre on July 20, 1983)
B
Baptista
Guest
Dave, I wasn’t doing that. I only asked a question because I wanted to be able to give an intelligent answer to a non-Catholic Christian who had worries about someone who had converted to “traditional” Catholicism, and she wanted to know the difference between the two.
As you can see, and as I found out, by the answers to this post, it seems that many people have different definitions of just what “traditional” means. In seeing this, I was able to go back to her and tell her this, and to tell her to ask her friend to explain exactly what she meant by “traditional”. And I was able to give her the link to the Vatican II documents. Which she is grateful for, by the way. So thanks for that!
And I am recommending books for her to read that will be easy to understand. She is glad of this also.
It seems like I opened a can of worms here, and believe me, that wasn’t my intention! I’m not stupid, but I can’t always think of a way to try to explain things in a good way to non-Catholics, so I thought it would be a good thing to check with you guys. I understand things, but I just cannot always explain them, if you know what I mean? Hmmm…I wonder if there’s a term for this these days? It’s like trying to explain a color to a blind person sometimes for me.
(I would never have been a good teacher…)
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
I didn’t think you were. I was just giving some info for you to respond to such a claim, by simply rejecting the false dichotomy, just as our own Pope Benedict XVI has.
B
Baptista
Guest
Misunderstood you, Dave! Sorry about that. I definitely agree with Pope Benedict XVI! As I said earlier in the post, according to some definitions of “traditional” Catholic, that is exactly what I am! But not everyone is using that word to describe the same thing. It’s confusing to a Catholic! Just think how my non-Catholic questioner felt!I didn’t think you were. I was just giving some info for you to respond to such a claim, by simply rejecting the false dichotomy, just as our own Pope Benedict XVI has.
At least I think I set her on the right track. 
A
Amado_de_Dios
Guest
Hello all,
I just want to say, that just recently I came back from that awful world of the radical traditionalist. Everyone was so bitter, and “more catholic than the Pope”. It is good to see people here have a more balanced view, while not rejecting the name “traditional”. It’ll be hard, however, to loose all my radical prejudices overnight. Patience, I beg you!
Sincerely
Amado
I just want to say, that just recently I came back from that awful world of the radical traditionalist. Everyone was so bitter, and “more catholic than the Pope”. It is good to see people here have a more balanced view, while not rejecting the name “traditional”. It’ll be hard, however, to loose all my radical prejudices overnight. Patience, I beg you!
Sincerely
Amado
L
Lorarose
Guest
Welcome back!
Any movement that contains so much anger, arrogance, divisiveness, and prejudice cannot be a fruit of the Holy Spirit.
May God be with you during your recovery.
B
Baptista
Guest
Amado de Dios:
Yes, welcome home, Amado!Hello all,
I just want to say, that just recently I came back from that awful world of the radical traditionalist. Everyone was so bitter, and “more catholic than the Pope”. It is good to see people here have a more balanced view, while not rejecting the name “traditional”. It’ll be hard, however, to loose all my radical prejudices overnight. Patience, I beg you!
Sincerely
Amado
F
frogman80
Guest
I would be careful with the words “roots” to many it can imply… back to its infancy…
V II was not meant to modernize the Church… nor was it meant to take us all back to what it was like in the early Church. V II was intended to give people (those who needed it) a kick in the pants to get them out of just going through the motions. The idea was to try to wake people up and get them more active in living out their faith.
The methods the council chose to do this “pant kicking” can be deemed wise or unwise. Regardless if the methods were or were unwise, many of the methodologies were largely misunderstood, and misinterpreted.
As Catholics we should all be Traditionalists… those who are labeled as traditionalist that have “crossed the line” actually tend to practice rare form of liberalism if you think about it.
- Status