What does it mean to be a Traditional Catholic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter friardchips
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

friardchips

Guest
Dear Catholics, in my spiritual journey so far I have come across this term a lot: Traditional Catholicism. Being someone who is quite young in the Church I would really like to know what this term means? I am a member of the Roman Catholic Church and attend a parish church where the newer Holy Mass is celebrated. Has the term Traditional Catholicism got something to do with the old Mass - Traditional Rite, or is there more to it?

Thank you.
 
My above post seems to gives across the wrong angle from which I am presenting this question. My thread opener below is more forthright so please respond to the one below. Thank you:
friardchips said:
Dear Catholics, in my spiritual journey so far I have come across this term a lot: Traditional Catholicism. I can’t help feeling the term to be something of an Oxymoron.

My reasoning is this: the term ‘Catholic’ means universal, right? ‘Roman’ Catholic because our leadership is based in Rome stretching outwards to the world, right? How can one be Traditional anything and Catholic? Is this not to say: “I am a Traditional Universal Christian, with our leadership in Rome, and yet I believe something different to other Roman Catholics that gives me a right to term myself as ‘Traditional’ - something unique - but they do not”? Isn’t to be part of the R.C Church to be traditional?

Is this term used purely because of the Old Rite Mass, which you wish to preserve, or does it mean more than this?

Thank you, muchly.
Click to expand...
 
Again, it depends largely on who uses the term. It can denote Catholics who prefer or exclusively attend the Latin mass, but it also can refer to those who look down on and prefer Catholic attitudes held prior to Vatican II, and this range between remaining in communion with Rome but holding onto formerly held disciplines no longer enforced to being a part of splinter “ultra-Catholic” groups like the Society of Saint Pius X.
 
“Traditional”, it seems to me, refers to the worship style, piety and theology most popular from Trent (1545) to Vatican II (1965).
 
friardchips said:
Dear Catholics, in my spiritual journey so far I have come across this term a lot: Traditional Catholicism. Being someone who is quite young in the Church I would really like to know what this term means? I am a member of the Roman Catholic Church and attend a parish church where the newer Holy Mass is celebrated. Has the term Traditional Catholicism got something to do with the old Mass - Traditional Rite, or is there more to it?

Thank you.
Click to expand...
As its commonly used, it indicates an attachment to the traditional (preconciliar) liturgical, devotional, and theological patrimony of the Roman rite.
 
Valiente88 said:
Again, it depends largely on who uses the term. It can denote Catholics who prefer or exclusively attend the Latin mass but it also can refer to those who look down on and prefer Catholic attitudes held prior to Vatican II, and this range between remaining in communion with Rome but holding onto formerly held disciplines no longer enforced to being a part of splinter “ultra-Catholic” groups like the Society of Saint Pius X.
Click to expand...
But does having a personal or even shared preference legitimise Traditional Catholics branding themselves with a label of their own?

And ‘Traditional Catholicism’ suggests, because of the word ‘traditional’, that to be a Traditional Catholic is to be somehow more reverent than other Roman Catholics, or more authentic somehow to the ‘traditions’ of the Church?. But if this is the case then can Traditional Catholics really call themselves Catholic if they don’t accept the decrees set by our Spiritual Fathers?
 
sw85 said:
As its commonly used, it indicates an attachment to the traditional (preconciliar) liturgical, devotional, and theological patrimony of the Roman rite.
Click to expand...
Dear sw85, thank you for this clear description. But can you reply to my second introduction message as this is the angle I am coming from, please? Apology for the confusion.

Although, I would like to pick up on what you mean by the word ‘attachment’?
 
Michael_Mayo said:
“Traditional”, it seems to me, refers to the worship style, piety and theology most popular from Trent (1545) to Vatican II (1965).
Click to expand...
Many thanks! So from your answer, do you mean piety in the sense of worship - priest facing the front when saying Mass? How do you mean traditional theologically speaking?
 
I think that the term traditional Catholic is redundant since Catholicism is all about preserving apostolic tradition. Some use the term to mean orthodox or faithful to the Church, in opposition to those who would change fundamental Church teachings. Some may also use the term to refer to those who prefer the Latin liturgy, chant, etc…
 
PaulfromIowa said:
I think that the term traditional Catholic is redundant since Catholicism is all about preserving apostolic tradition. Some use the term to mean orthodox or faithful to the Church, in opposition to those who would change fundamental Church teachings. Some may also use the term to refer to those who prefer the Latin liturgy, chant, etc…
Click to expand...
So Traditional Catholics are really Unorthodox Orthodox Christians? At present unless enlightened drastically I would have to agree for reasons clarified above. If people prefer the Latin Mass as in the LMS, okay, but does anyone have the right in my mind to add a class system of hierarchy, which is what this special term appears to denote, to the R.C Church? At what point does opposition to so-called fundamentalism end up doing exactly what it sets out to oppose - (irony?)
 
“But does having a personal or even shared preference legitimise Traditional Catholics branding themselves with a label of their own?”

I don’t see why not.

“And ‘Traditional Catholicism’ suggests, because of the word ‘traditional’, that to be a Traditional Catholic is to be somehow more reverent than other Roman Catholics, or more authentic somehow to the ‘traditions’ of the Church?.”

Both groups have the same jesus in their eucharist.there is no ‘more reverent’.
Faith and devotion determine reverence.
There is ONE holy apostolic catholic church.

" But if this is the case then can Traditional Catholics really call themselves Catholic if they don’t accept the decrees set by our Spiritual Fathers?

If they are baptised and believing, yes.
They have to believe that novus ordo is valid as this is catholic teaching.
I think pope benedict sixteenth sent motu proprio summorum pontificum, so they follow decrees of spiritual faathers
 
friardchips said:
Dear sw85, thank you for this clear description. But can you reply to my second introduction message as this is the angle I am coming from, please? Apology for the confusion.

Although, I would like to pick up on what you mean by the word ‘attachment’?
Click to expand...
I presume attatchment means preference.

“New mass is invalid” belief incurs excommunication according to council of trent.
 
friardchips said:
So Traditional Catholics are really Unorthodox Orthodox Christians? At present unless enlightened drastically I would have to agree for reasons clarified above. If people prefer the Latin Mass as in the LMS, okay, but does anyone have the right in my mind to add a class system of hierarchy, which is what this special term appears to denote, to the R.C Church? At what point does opposition to so-called fundamentalism end up doing exactly what it sets out to oppose - (irony?)
Click to expand...
I think I answered this question too in #12
 
friardchips said:
But does having a personal or even shared preference legitimise Traditional Catholics branding themselves with a label of their own?

And ‘Traditional Catholicism’ suggests, because of the word ‘traditional’, that to be a Traditional Catholic is to be somehow more reverent than other Roman Catholics, or more authentic somehow to the ‘traditions’ of the Church?. But if this is the case then can Traditional Catholics really call themselves Catholic if they don’t accept the decrees set by our Spiritual Fathers?
Click to expand...
I’ll admit I get that vibe quite often, I’m not a Catholic but I attend the Latin Mass with my traditionalist husband. It’s not church teaching at all but some traditionalists (moreso the “split” Sedevacantist groups and the SSPX) believe that the Novus Ordo (vernacular post-Vatican II style mass) is protestant and somehow less pleasing to God than the Tridentine Mass.

Another mark of the traditionalist is the mantilla, the Catholic veil. Traditionalists will argue that it is in obedience with Pauls commandment for a woman not to pray with her head uncovered or a way of getting into the mood of prayer, “progressive” Catholics (if there is such a term) will argue it is oppressive and an attempt to be holier than thou.

It’s hookum, they’re both acceptable and equally “worthy” as far as the magesterium is concerned.
 
Jack007 said:
“But does having a personal or even shared preference legitimise Traditional Catholics branding themselves with a label of their own?”

I don’t see why not.
Click to expand...
Hi again. Thanks for joining my thread!

I would argue because: a house cannot stand when divided against itself; because all are to accept Papal decrees; because Roman Catholics are supposed to aim for unity not aim for comfort in private clubs.
“And ‘Traditional Catholicism’ suggests, because of the word ‘traditional’, that to be a Traditional Catholic is to be somehow more reverent than other Roman Catholics, or more authentic somehow to the ‘traditions’ of the Church?.”
Click to expand...
Both groups have the same jesus in their eucharist.there is no ‘more reverent’.
Faith and devotion determine reverence.
There is ONE holy apostolic catholic church.
Click to expand...
Exactly my point : ONE! Not many different branches of, but ONE, holy Catholic and Apostolic Church as handed down to us with authority from St. Peter onwards.
" But if this is the case then can Traditional Catholics really call themselves Catholic if they don’t accept the decrees set by our Spiritual Fathers?
Click to expand...
If they are baptised and believing, yes.
They have to believe that novus ordo is valid as this is catholic teaching.
I think pope benedict sixteenth sent motu proprio summorum pontificum, so they follow decrees of spiritual fathers
Click to expand...
To be baptised is to accept all the teachings and decrees set by Rome in obedience, I thought? Not just to our spiritual fathers but also to our present Holy Father. I am not keen on people using Pope Emeritus in arguments for this because I do not think he would present himself from this angle in this way. He too is obedient to the Church and is open to growth.
 
“So Traditional Catholics are really Unorthodox Orthodox Christians?”

may I generalise

We have faith and practice
Faith cant be changed, eg trinity of god.
Practice can, eg liturgical vestments, mysteries of rosary.

All catholics have same faith.
Pre vatican II practice followers call themselves traditional because nothing else is good.
Orthodox :would suggest others are heretics.
Old catholics: there is another group with this name.
Non vatican twoers: this would suggest they belive new mass is blasphemous
 
Someone who is waiting for the 70s to shuffle off the mortal coil.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top