Traditionalist criteria for Orthodox, Anglicans, Lutherans …

[spedteacherita]

You know you’re a trad Lutheran when:

• You have a spare 1941 TLH tucked away in case your current one wears out. (guilty!)
• You have the “page 5” and “page 15” services completely memorized and can hum all the chants.

I soooo miss the TLH and pages 5 and 15!! (And I’m a convert)

As well as the Communion Hymn 315 - “I Come O Savior to Thy Table” which had how many verses??? Some of my books are boxed up in a storage unit…grrrr.

God bless all!!

Rita

 

[cheezey]

Complicated.

(I am watching this one…)

Carry on…

 

[GKC]

(I am watching this one…)

Carry on…

I’ll confuse it further, in the usual fashion.

 

[JustaServant]

For those who are Orthodox, Anglican, Lutheran, etc, what would qualify someone as “traditionalist”?

Needless to say (or is it?) I’m not looking for some kind of absolute black-and-white definition. Just any sort of helpful criteria. By way of illustration, among Catholics answers to the same question would depend greatly upon whom you ask; but there would be some common agreement, e.g. a Catholic would generally not be considered “traditionalist” if he/she was not at least somewhat negative toward the state of the liturgy since the Second Vatican Council. (I say “at least” because often it would be a matter of strong objections or even flat-out rejection.)

I think historically, among Protestants, they would have been called ‘fundamentalists’. And yes, in the early days of fundamentalism it included Lutherans and Episcopals.

 

[Jon_Mallory]

I love Charismatic Catholics and I consider myself a traditional Catholic. They have a fervor for Christ and the gospel that can only be good for the Church.

 

[Peter_J]

Not necessarily.
I know you were referring to Catholics here, but “charismatic” and “traditional” go together a lot more than they disagree, across the denominations.

The traditional Catholic is, or maybe used to be, off put by some of the unfamiliar forms of charismatic worship. However, when the traditional Catholic, or traditional Lutheran or Anglican, show up to picket the abortion clinic, they may well find themselves next to charismatics. Traditional Christians of all types tend to emphasize the supernatural, the transcendent dimension of doctrine, worship, healing, and practice of Christian life.

So do charismatics!

When Pope Francis speaks about the reality of Satan acting in the world, I bet that rings a bell of familiarity and agreement both to traditionalists of all stripes, and charismatics across the board of Christianity. This puts both groups on one side; on the other side are liberal Catholics and Protestants, who believe all the problems of the world can be solved by equality, discussions, standardized testing, and more government.

But that doesn’t, necessarily, preclude despising. (Which is also not to say that *every *“trad Catholic” despises charismatics …

I love Charismatic Catholics and I consider myself a traditional Catholic. They have a fervor for Christ and the gospel that can only be good for the Church.

.)

 

[JonNC]

I soooo miss the TLH and pages 5 and 15!! (And I’m a convert)

As well as the Communion Hymn 315 - “I Come O Savior to Thy Table” which had how many verses??? Some of my books are boxed up in a storage unit…grrrr.

God bless all!!

Rita

I was raised LCA. The old Service Book and Hymnal’s liturgical settings were very much the same as the TLH. Even the music.
Of course, we could never have the same hymnal, though. After all, the other synod (from yours) used the wrong translation for A Mighty Fortress

Jon

 

[cmodrmac]

wow""

in the Episcopal Church since we are rapidly getting rid of our Traditions it would be hard to define a Traditionalist

I suspect the members of ACNA (the former Episcopaleans who reverted to be called Anglicans) would be Traditionalists -representative group wold be those who split in South Carolina

or anyone who agrees with at least 15 of the 39 Articles ( which 15 does not matter)

as a rhetorical questions the OP is interesting -however being a Traditionalist in and of it self does not imply that the person is correct in his/her beliefs

the more I think of it the roman catholic Nuns who continue to wear their habits rather than street clothes would be afficiniados of tradition-below are some others

the Carthusians

the Society of Pius the 5th

any members of the Orthodox Churches

those guys who handle snakes in Tennessee

the list could be endless

 

[spedteacherita]

I was raised LCA. The old Service Book and Hymnal’s liturgical settings were very much the same as the TLH. Even the music.
Of course, we could never have the same hymnal, though. After all, the other synod (from yours) used the wrong translation for A Mighty Fortress

Jon

I was raised on Davey and Goliath - I was disappointed in “our” version!

 

[Reuben_J]

Traditional Catholics - attending Latin Mass, Receive on the tongue, despise Charismatic Catholics.

Not necessarily.

Agreed. I corrected that in another post.

To support both of us, here is proof that not all Traditional Catholics hate Charismatics:

I love Charismatic Catholics and I consider myself a traditional Catholic. They have a fervor for Christ and the gospel that can only be good for the Church.

And thanks Jon. God bless you.

I know you were referring to Catholics here, but “charismatic” and “traditional” go together a lot more than they disagree, across the denominations.

The traditional Catholic is, or maybe used to be, off put by some of the unfamiliar forms of charismatic worship. However, when the traditional Catholic, or traditional Lutheran or Anglican, show up to picket the abortion clinic, they may well find themselves next to charismatics. Traditional Christians of all types tend to emphasize the supernatural, the transcendent dimension of doctrine, worship, healing, and practice of Christian life.

So do charismatics!

When Pope Francis speaks about the reality of Satan acting in the world, I bet that rings a bell of familiarity and agreement both to traditionalists of all stripes, and charismatics across the board of Christianity. This puts both groups on one side; on the other side are liberal Catholics and Protestants, who believe all the problems of the world can be solved by equality, discussions, standardized testing, and more government.

The bold part … There were some Traditional Catholics, being put off by Charismatic worship, who would go to the extreme to vilify and make life really hard for their fellow Charismatic Catholics. This was especially so, especially when the clergies (priests and bishops) made an active choice to be anti-Charismatics.

Perhaps I was too young to remember the seventies or the eighties, but the amount of despising, and ones have to be Charismatics, the receiving ends, to really know how much the Church was fragmented and suffered, due to the hostility of the so-called Traditional Catholics against them.

Thanks God, now most Catholics, whether they are Traditional, conservatives or neutral, have perhaps accepted that Charismatics are very much a part of the Church, sharing many same values that you mentioned. The support of the previous Popes of the Charismatics certainly helped to calm the antagonism to come to boiling point publicly. Old wounds much have disappeared and I can see they are working together again within the Church.

God bless.

 

[Reuben_J]

But that doesn’t, necessarily, preclude despising. (Which is also not to say that *every *“trad Catholic” despises charismatics …

Thanks Pete.

My post was made tongue in cheek and it could be a digression to your thread. But I couldn’t help noticing those ‘turbulent days’ the Charismatics experienced at the hand of Traditional Catholics, I just got to mention that.

 

[total_Catholic]

Traditional Anglicans tend to use the 1928 bcp. Can come in both high liturgy and low liturgy. High=incense, thurifer, deacons and subdeacons, as many vestments as the Priest can afford, Eucharist weekly and will often call the service a mass, have a tabernacle w/reserved Eucharist and often hold to 7 Sacraments and address the Priest as Father. Low=usually minimal vestments(cassock, surplice & tippet), often 2 candles but sometimes not, morning/evening prayer are the primary Sunday service, Holy Communion once a month and often adhere strongly to the 39 Articles (2 Sacraments) and often address the Minister by first name.

It’s a mix. I briefly went to a trad Anglican church, in an office building bless their hearts, and they have Eucharist weekly but no incense, no deacons, etc. Good people. I do love the language of the 1928 BCP.

 

[Peter_J]

wow""

in the Episcopal Church since we are rapidly getting rid of our Traditions it would be hard to define a Traditionalist

I suspect the members of ACNA (the former Episcopaleans who reverted to be called Anglicans) would be Traditionalists -representative group wold be those who split in South Carolina

or anyone who agrees with at least 15 of the 39 Articles ( which 15 does not matter)

as a rhetorical questions the OP is interesting -however being a Traditionalist in and of it self does not imply that the person is correct in his/her beliefs

the more I think of it the roman catholic Nuns who continue to wear their habits rather than street clothes would be afficiniados of tradition-below are some others

the Carthusians

the Society of Pius the 5th

any members of the Orthodox Churches

It can definitely seem that way sometimes.

But, seriously, I can assure that it isn’t so – any more than it would be true to say that every member of the TEC thinks like Spong

 

[commenter]

…

the Society of Pius the 5th

…

those guys who handle snakes in Tennessee

Um, snake handling is traditional in what tradition? I know you are referring to the persons, not the activity, but I can’t imagine the people who do this, also refer often to foundational Confessions, or Articles, or whatever traditional canons of Protestantism. I think snake handlers are of American origin, or else it flourished only here. I would tend to regard traditionalists as having roots in Europe, in a specific Reformation tradition or EO or Catholicism. Maybe that’s too narrow a definition. I don’t think you can be a generic traditional Christian; a non denominational traditionalist is contradictory.

re: SSPV, they are essentially defined by Sedevacantism. But Sedevacantism itself is a fairly recent phenomenon. But they also hold other beliefs, which are old. So, a mixed bag.

 

[Peter_J]

Um, snake handling is traditional in what tradition? I know you are referring to the persons, not the activity, but I can’t imagine the people who do this, also refer often to foundational Confessions, or Articles, or whatever traditional canons of Protestantism.

This isn’t altogether related, but I was just thinking about a few years ago when Pope Benedict was talking about changing some things in the liturgy, and some told him he couldn’t because “it’s been that way for forty years!!”

 

[JustaServant]

I agree that it is very unchristian. I find it hard to understand why people can be so unchristian especially when these same people seem to be very religious. There is nothing wrong with disagreeing with each other, but when it is despising, you think there is persecution even among ourselves in the Catholic Church.

And you can see it on open display on a certain trad forum with the initials FE. When I pointed out their unchristian posts to them I was promptly cursed out by one these ‘good traditional Catholics’ and promptly banned.
I love the Latin Mass and traditional worship. But most of the people I have noticed who are super trads aren’t old enough to remember the Latin Mass (I am). Most are younger converts from fundamentalism who have simply transferred their hate to a new venue.
Being traditional is much more than the smells and the bells.

 

[GKC]

It’s a mix. I briefly went to a trad Anglican church, in an office building bless their hearts, and they have Eucharist weekly but no incense, no deacons, etc. Good people. I do love the language of the 1928 BCP.

And the variety continues. That traditional Anglican church might have been middle of the road, and eschewed incense, but deacons would be found in all flavors of the Anglican spectrum. Unless the parish had none. My parish is traditional Anglo-Catholic. Incense is sporadic, but is a pleasure to experience: thurifer censing around the world, censing of the altar, the clergy, the people, the Missal, the occasional parishioner coughing. But descriptions like this are useless, in trying to define what "traditional means to an Anglican. Depends on what sort of Anglican you are thinking of, as to what would constitute traditional.

The 28 Book is a thing of beauty. But you can find traditionalists who manage with the 79 thing. Not for me.

 

[Reuben_J]

And you can see it on open display on a certain trad forum with the initials FE. When I pointed out their unchristian posts to them I was promptly cursed out by one these ‘good traditional Catholics’ and promptly banned.
I love the Latin Mass and traditional worship. But most of the people I have noticed who are super trads aren’t old enough to remember the Latin Mass (I am). Most are younger converts from fundamentalism who have simply transferred their hate to a new venue.
Being traditional is much more than the smells and the bells.

Sad but true. Can’t say much. We are supposed to be meek and turn the other cheek.

But at least, should not deny as if it did not happen.

 

[Peter_J]

super trads

Speaking of which, I’d like to throw out a corollary to my original question: How do you distinguish between “regular trads” and super (or hard-core or whatever other term) trads?

 

[ChurchSoldier]

Speaking of which, I’d like to throw out a corollary to my original question: How do you distinguish between “regular trads” and super (or hard-core or whatever other term) trads?

Personal opinion: when the style of Mass, or language used, seems to outsiders to take precedence over Jesus you have entered the realm of the “super-trad”.