What does "traditional (not Roman) Catholic" mean

  • Thread starter Thread starter carol_marie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It implies Roman Catholic, but usually on te right-side of the spectrum. Occasionally (though ultra-traditionalist is used more often in this case) it refers to a marked desire to return to the pre-Vatican II Church.

Most likely these nuns still wear habits and observe all of the strictures of convent life.
 
The “not Roman” part could indicate a schismatic group like the SSPX.
 
Wait, “not Roman” was part of the article? Terribly sorry, disregard my first reply.
 
Servus Pio XII:
Wait, “not Roman” was part of the article? Terribly sorry, disregard my first reply.
Click to expand...
They are not SSPX.

This appears to be their website. Their members celebrate the Tridentine Mass. They have a copy of the CCC on their site. And their founder was apparently consecrated in the Thuc line of bishops which makes some people doubt their valididty (but the Holy See has never to my knowledge ruled these ordinations to be invalid).

James
 
40.png
James0235:
They are not SSPX.

This appears to be their website. Their members celebrate the Tridentine Mass. They have a copy of the CCC on their site. And their founder was apparently consecrated in the Thuc line of bishops which makes some people doubt their valididty (but the Holy See has never to my knowledge ruled these ordinations to be invalid).

James
Click to expand...
Thanks for their website James.

I looked it over but I still don’t understand. In my RCIA class we briefly covered the different types of Catholics… but I thought if someone was “not Roman” that meant they were Orthodox (like Greek?) which meant they weren’t under the Pope (but different from the SSPX)

I go a a regular Catholic Church - are they just like me only their mass is in Latin? Or - since they aren’t “Roman” have they broken away? I guess that’s why I’m confused… I get the “tradional” part - (they do wear the long black outfits) but I don’t get the “not Roman” part???
 
carol marie:
I go a a regular Catholic Church - are they just like me only their mass is in Latin? Or - since they aren’t “Roman” have they broken away? I guess that’s why I’m confused… I get the “tradional” part - (they do wear the long black outfits) but I don’t get the “not Roman” part???
Click to expand...
In what context was the “not Roman” part used. Could it be that it was not a quote from the sisters but something added by the reporter. He or she might have figured that since they are not affiliated w/ the diocese then they are not Roman Catholic as he understands the term.

From their website it looks bery much like they would consider themselves to be traditional Roman Catholics. It looks like their group’s bishop was illicitly consecrated. But that doesn’t necesarrily mean that the whole group is in schism. And even if they are a schismatic group they may still be Roman Catholics. The faithful who attend SSPX chapels are still Roman Catholic. It is their bishops who were excommunicated, not them.

James
 
What does illicitly consecrated mean?

Does it mean he didn’t go through the proper procedures to become a Bishop so it doesn’t count?

Why wouldn’t someone who is obviously very holy & dedicated to God not become a Bishop the normal way so everyone recognized he’s a Bishop?

this is all so confusing… I wish they covered it in greater detail in RCIA because before I converted I hated the way the Protestant churches were so split up… but now that I’m Catholic it seems like we have many divisions as well and at least as a Protestant I knew the difference between a Methodist & a Lutheran but it’s all so murky to me here… :confused:
 
carol marie:
What does illicitly consecrated mean?

Does it mean he didn’t go through the proper procedures to become a Bishop so it doesn’t count?
Click to expand...
Illicit means illegal in church-speak. For instance, if a priest introduces Liturgical abuses into a Mass then that Mass is illicit. It is still a valid Mass but it is an illegal Mass according to Church law.

So, a bishop who is illicitly consecrated is one who was illegally consecrated. Basically he didn’t have permission to become a bishop. But illicit consecrations are still valid. So, he is a bishop.

(And I really don’t want to get into the validity of consecrations performed by Thuc, a viatnamese bishop. Some people say that ordinations performed by him were invalid. But the Holy See has not said so).
carol marie:
Why wouldn’t someone who is obviously very holy & dedicated to God not become a Bishop the normal way so everyone recognized he’s a Bishop?
Click to expand...
I haven’t spent much time at the website but it looks like the founder of the order claims to have seen appartions. So, he may have thought that he was told to do so by a higher power.
carol marie:
this is all so confusing… I wish they covered it in greater detail in RCIA because before I converted I hated the way the Protestant churches were so split up… but now that I’m Catholic it seems like we have so many divisions as well and at least as a Protestant I knew the difference between a Methodist & a Lutheran but it’s all so murky to me here… :confused:
Click to expand...
Most Catholics will never encounter groups like this. So, even in the best of RCIA programs it is unlikely to be covered. The thing about these independent Catholic groups is that most of them actually hold the entire Catholc faith. They have seperated themselves from the Church for other reasons. In their eyes, if a pope makes a bad decisions (which as Catholics we are permitted to believe is possible) then they think he must not be a true pope. So, among these independant Catholic groups it is usually a problem of not wanting to accept authority and not one of not wanting to accept doctrine.

The situation is different among protestant groups. Each head of a denomination and in fact each pastor of each local church is, in effect, his own “pope” - creating and even changing doctrine at will. This is something the real pope cannot do and never has done.

God bless,

James
 
Thanks James.

I understand a bit more now. That’s my problem… now that I’m “officially” Catholic… I want to know ALL there is to know about every single part of the Church. It’s just not possible after a few months (or maybe ever ?) It’s just so HUGE… with a history of 2,000 years - and full of people… which don’t always fit into neat little boxes.

I appreciate your responses. 🙂

God Bless,
CM
 
carol marie:
What does illicitly consecrated mean?

Does it mean he didn’t go through the proper procedures to become a Bishop so it doesn’t count?

Why wouldn’t someone who is obviously very holy & dedicated to God not become a Bishop the normal way so everyone recognized he’s a Bishop?

this is all so confusing… I wish they covered it in greater detail in RCIA because before I converted I hated the way the Protestant churches were so split up… but now that I’m Catholic it seems like we have many divisions as well and at least as a Protestant I knew the difference between a Methodist & a Lutheran but it’s all so murky to me here… :confused:
Click to expand...
It is sad and confusing. I would have to assume this particular aspect of the Church would never be covered in RCIA. Briefly I will try to explain what happened .

In the early 1960s the Church embarked on what could best be described as a modernization process. A council was called by the Pope, that came to be called Vatican II. This council met once a year for I believe either 3 or 4 years. As a result of these meeting a number of douuments and decrees were issued which essentially changed the face of the Catholic Church.

It was claimed at the time that a breath of spring was in the Church and that hopefully all Christians could now re-unite under one banner. The church for better or worse, a matter of opinion, did an abrupt 180 degree turn in many areas. Some of these changes were obvious and others very subtle. Much more freedom was given to the Bishops to run their Dioceses. The teaching that the Catholic Church was the only way to salvation was scrapped, the churchs position on sexuality was re-examined, and probably the biggest bone of contention, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass was re-thought, and various reccomendations made to allow more freedom in the celebration of it.

While there were no real concrete guidelines about how some of these changes were to take place certain people and certain groups implemented numerous changes. For instance, many sisters gave up the habit, moved out of the convents and established what could be descrbied as communities. Many within the church started to become involved in Charismatic and Healing organizations. The Church re-emphasized it’s committment to the poor, and the biggest change in the minds of many the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass was changed.

Around 1965 or so the Church in many areas started to celebrate the Mass in the vernacular rather than in Latin as had been the case. In 1970 a new missal came out, which substantially altered the Mass, Many of the more sacrificial aspects were deleted, the rubrics changed, the role of the Priest was de-emphasized amd the laity was invited to more fully participate. The readings were now done by the laity, communion could be given by the laity in some circumstances, the music was modernized, and the priest in his new role now faced the people instead of the altar The altar came to known as the communion table etc. These changes greatly upset many, and caused a distinct level of confusion to say the least. Continued
 
This group is somwhat intresting. They are technically schismatic, but like the SSPX, they do not deny that Pope Benidict XVI is the legitimate Pope, and unlike other Traditionalist groups, they are centered on charitable casuses. They main issues here is the supposed private revelations the Bishop that heads this order has had.
carol marie:
I visited a French Bakery in a suburb of Chicago that is owned & staffed by Nuns… The Sisters of the Fraternite of Notre Dame. All of the proceeds go to help feed the poor. A story about them was featured in the Chicago Tribune today and the nuns were described as “traditional (not Roman) Catholic.” What does that mean?

chicagotribune.com/features/lifestyle/q/chi-0509250510sep25,1,37949.story
Click to expand...
 
Some people felt rightly or wrongly that the church had gone to far Others said the Church had fallen into heresy. Different groups came forth each claiming to be the remnant of the true church that had been abandoned by Rome. Other groups, notably the Society of Saint Pious X were formed to keep alive the traditional approach to the church. While in the process of meeting with Rome on the possibility of re-uniting with Rome the Bishop of SSPX Marcel Lefebrve, consecrated several Bishops without the approval of Rome and thus, became amanable to excommunication. Which he and some of his followers were.

BEFORE ANYONE SAYS ANYTHING, YES I KNOW IT IS AN EXTREMELY SIMPLE EXPLANATION, BUT I’M DOING THIS FROM MEMORY

Still more groups sprang up advocating a return to the Traditional practice of Catholicism mainly in the celebration of the Mass.Some of these groups ordained priests and bishops without the approval of Rome. These consecrations are invalid. I believe in 1982 or 84, then Pope John Paul II, mey he rest in peace, issued what is termed the indult, which allowed for the celebration of the Mass in the traditional manner, often called Tridentine. This allowed priests to celebrated the Mass with the approval of their respective Bishops. Thus the traditional Mass today is more available to the people, legally.

This did not in any way satisfy some of the Traditional groups who put forth well reasoned in some cases and in others utterly absurd arguments against the indult and whether or not one was needed. Some said there was no need for an indult anyway since the Traditional mass had never been “officially” disallowed. Many people felt the church had fallen into heresy and apostacy and refused to comply with Rome. Several other groups were formed with the Vaticans approval to keep the traditioanl mass alive. The Priestly Society of St Peter comes to mind.

AGAIN, I KNOW VERY SIMPLE

So, the current situation is BASICALLY this. The nornative mass of the Church is called the Novus Ordo. The traditional mass, sometimes called Tridentine, is legally celebrated under the trems of the Indult, where permission has been given by the Bishop. Numerous groups, including SSPX continue to celebrate the traditional mass without the approval of Rome. Some say you can legally attend a SSPX chapel to satisfy your Sunday obligation if there is no indult facility available. I never have and I’m not sure as to its’ legality anyway. It is wildly rumored and anticipated that Pope Benedict XVI will grant what is termed the universal indult so that the Traditional Mass can be more widely celebrated.

Many groups have sprung up over the years in an attempt to keep the traditional church alive. Some valid others not. As I said a sad and confusing situation. You have to be very careful who you deal with. Some of these groups are sede vecantist in nature, That means they believe there is no valid Pope and hasn’t been since 1958. Avoid them. Their literature and web sites usually, though not always, identify themselves in that fashion.

I hope this has answered some of your questions. There are many on this forum whose knowledge in this area far exceeds mine so hopefully they can answer the questions better.
 
palmas85,

I hope you continue… (this is facinating… I had no idea so many changes were made? I thought it was mostly just a pitch the Latin thing)
 
palmas85,

Thanks so much… excellent job explaining it by the way. For those who think your explanations are too “simplistic” - anything more would have been over my head - trust me! 🙂

In reading what took place over the past 40 years or so… I’m left feeling a bit sad? Not really sure why… maybe because I never got to experience what it was like Pre-VAT II - honestly, these nuns in this bakery were the FIST nuns I’ve seen - up close & personal - looking like what I’ve imagined nuns to look like.

The “old Catholic traditional sort of life” where everyone had 10 kids and being “Catholic” meant you stood out - seperate from the world - and divorce was a rare thing… it just sounds so much better - like the good old days… & maybe it’s just because things always seem more rosey in the past but I can’t help but wonder if maybe the changes were too dramatic & too fast & something was lost in the process that the Catholic Church just won’t get back?

Maybe I’m way off base here… I suppose the people who can best give an opinion are the old-timers (?) who were around before & after Vat II ???

At any rate, my thanks.
 
In Kansas City “traditional” means schism and heresy. SSPX schismatics have cultivated rancor among Catholics dissatisfied with “the spirit of Vatican II” abuses. St. Vincent’s in KC is not affiliated with Peter, is not Catholic. The bishops of KCKS and KCMO adopted the Indult Mass through the lobbying of Mrs. Patricia Ziglinski, a grand lady. The unfaithful did not return to the fold.

What did happen was that TFP/Tradition, Family & Property, a heretical cult founded in Brazil, secretly infiltrated the Indult Mass communities, bringing more rancor to promote their agenda. TFP aka America Needs Fatima is condemned in Brazil. They are anti-priest, and TFP has had no priestly vocations in their decades of allegedly shaping the formation of young men. TFP and ANF and a splinter group, Tradition in Action, takes kids and turns them into Catholic Moonies always on the make for money. St. Mary’s in rural Kansas is the hotbed of radical traditionalist looters fronted by “traditional” nuns.

Please note that Lutherans and Anglicans thought of themselves as the better Catholics. But out is out. The Great Apostasy will come from the cultural Catholics who reject Peter for smells and bells. NO PETER, NO CHURCH. Those toxic “radical traditionalist” Catholics who have had their land and cash and even their children alienated from them are reaping the just punishment for their infidelity to Peter.

Cultural Catholicism has existed in America since the “Old Catholics” split over Marian dogma they didn’t like. This isn’t new. SSPX is still searching for the Rock of Peter on their land, despoiling the mission field with their pit of schism. TFP is still mudslinging on the internet and begging cash via postcards sent to America Needs Fatima even though they pray litanies to the founder’s mom, not the Virgin Mary. TFP still awaits founder Plinio’s promised resurrection from the dead. And I pray for God to preserve us from these “traditional” wolves like those who have decimated Kansas City Catholics. BEWARE!
 
carol marie said:
palmas85,

Thanks so much… excellent job explaining it by the way. For those who think your explanations are too “simplistic” - anything more would have been over my head - trust me! 🙂

In reading what took place over the past 40 years or so… I’m left feeling a bit sad? Not really sure why… maybe because I never got to experience what it was like Pre-VAT II - honestly, these nuns in this bakery were the FIST nuns I’ve seen - up close & personal - looking like what I’ve imagined nuns to look like.

The “old Catholic traditional sort of life” where everyone had 10 kids and being “Catholic” meant you stood out - seperate from the world - and divorce was a rare thing… it just sounds so much better - like the good old days… & maybe it’s just because things always seem more rosey in the past but I can’t help but wonder if maybe the changes were too dramatic & too fast & something was lost in the process that the Catholic Church just won’t get back?

Maybe I’m way off base here… I suppose the people who can best give an opinion are the old-timers (?) who were around before & after Vat II ???

At any rate, my thanks.
Click to expand...

Throughout history the church has faced trials and tribulations. It will survive. There are a lot of problems in the Church today, but there always were. Please don’t fall into the belief that the Church itself is bad or somehow lacking these days. It isn’t. One of the good things that came out of Vatican II was a deep sense of moral justice and compassion that wasn’t always there before. And yes I am a Pre-Vatican II type of person.

While I have been described as an ultra traditionalist with thinking not in line with the current spirit of the church, I believe deeply in the faith, have allegiance to the Holy Father and the Holy Catholic Church and would never for a second think of leaving her. .I hope and pray that you do the same. The traditional mass ends with the following prayers:

Hail Holy Queen, Mother of Mercy, our life our sweetness and our hope. To theee do we cry, poor banished children of Eve, To thee do we send up our sighs mourning and weeping in this valley of tears. Turn then most gracious afvocate thine eyes of mercy towards us, and after this our exile show us the blessed fruit of thy womb Jesus. O clement , O loving O sweet Virgin Mary, Pray for us o Holy Mother of God that we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ.

Holy Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle, be our protector against the wickedness and snares of the Devil may God rebuke him we humbly pray and you Prince of the heavenly host, by the power of God cast into Hell Satan and all the evil spirits who wander through the world seeking the ruin of souls

Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us
Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us
Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us

You will be in my prayers. As they used to say when I was a kid, KEEP THE FAITH BABY
 
40.png
nordskoven:
Those toxic “rad trad” Catholics who have had their land and cash and even their children alienated from them are reaping the just punishment for their infidelity to Peter.
Click to expand...
I think its against the rules here to say “rad trad”, I may be wrong though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top