What is Traditional Catholicism?

[Heavy_Cross]

I apologize for my ignorance, but I don’t understand where the lines between Catholicism and Traditional Catholicism exist. What defines a modern Catholic?

 

[Cider]

The sticky at the top of this forum is helpful

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=579186

 

[Rich_C]

I apologize for my ignorance, but I don’t understand where the lines between Catholicism and Traditional Catholicism exist. What defines a modern Catholic?

The short essay is hands down the best explanation:
fisheaters.com/ontraditionalcatholics.html

 

[Anna_Claire]

It’s unfortunate that we have divisions among Catholics and labels like traditional and progressive. That being said, Catholicism is based on many traditions so in a sense, we are all traditional.

 

[JRKH]

I apologize for my ignorance, but I don’t understand where the lines between Catholicism and Traditional Catholicism exist. What defines a modern Catholic?

There are so many terms (liberal conservative, orthodox, traditional, charismatic, blah blah blah) that are tossed around by so many people, that I don’t really know that there IS a line between a “Catholic” and a “Traditional Catholic”.

To me - a “traditional” Catholic is one who is obedient to the Church headquartered in Rome and administered through the local bishop.

As commonly used as a “label” the Traditional Catholic tends to prefer the EF (TLM) liturgy and music and other structures and disciplines as they were practiced Pre-Vatican II.

A Modern Catholic, in my mind, would be defined in the same way I define a “traditional Catholic”. One who is obedient to the Church.
That said, a “modern” Catholic is probably one who prefers the OF mass, the more modern song settings etc.

In either case, whether they lean toward traditional or modern, a Catholic needs to be orthodox in their beliefs. That the Pope is the Vicar of Christ, that they be obedient to the teachings of the Church and to the local bishop. Also, a Catholic should be active in parish life to the extent they are able, and to seek to hold true to the faith and the Loe of Christ.

Just my :twocents: on what can sometimes be a touchy subject.

Peace
James

 

[Rich_C]

In either case, whether they lean toward traditional or modern, a Catholic needs to be orthodox in their beliefs.

I think it really has a lot to do with religious worldview and Catholic culture, of which the older liturgy is but a very important part.

Ask yourself: would your great-grandparents recognize your worship and spirituality as familiar, or be shocked by how differently you express the Catholic Faith than they did?

 

[JRKH]

I think it really has a lot to do with religious worldview and Catholic culture, of which the older liturgy is but a very important part.

Ask yourself: would your great-grandparents recognize your worship and spirituality as familiar, or be shocked by how differently you express the Catholic Faith than they did?

Good point, but then how faith is expressed from generation to generation has never really been a static thing.

Peace
James

 

[Rich_C]

Good point, but then how faith is expressed from generation to generation has never really been a static thing.

Peace
James

No, but healthy change – what the Holy Father refers to as “organic development” – was gradual, it was probably hardly noticable at the time, though we see it with our long hindsight.

The rupture of culture that sets “traditional” Catholics apart today is as significant as was the Iconoclast controversy in the East or the Protestant revolt.

 

[JRKH]

No, but healthy change – what the Holy Father refers to as “organic development” – was gradual, it was probably hardly noticable at the time, though we see it with our long hindsight.

The rupture of culture that sets “traditional” Catholics apart today is as significant as was the Iconoclast controversy in the East or the Protestant revolt.

Yea - Interesting comparisons since, from a historical/cultural standpoint they are quite sharp and dramatic.
And indeed some of the things that occurred which led to the situation as it stands today were pretty dramatic or at least felt that way to the adults, especially the older adults at the time. I was pretty young and took it mostly in stride - with one exception…
I learned all the Latin to serve mass and then they abruptly switched to English before I ever actually served one…:crying:

Of course, in a sense that incident in my young life indicates how precipitous some of the changes were at that time - at least in my diocese - Which I think is part of your point…It wasn’t like the recent revision of the English missal where everybody talked about the coming change for more than a year.

So yes I can see what you mean about the changes being both dramatic and not “organic”. I’m sure - in fact I know - that for some they were quite “disturbing”.

I think that the leadership learned something from the fallout of that time though and that is why we see a more gradual and open approach to change today…

Peace
James

 

[mick321]

I apologize for my ignorance, but I don’t understand where the lines between Catholicism and Traditional Catholicism exist. What defines a modern Catholic?

Currently, there is NO SUCH THING as Traditional Catholicism.

 

[Rich_C]

Currently, there is NO SUCH THING as Traditional Catholicism.

Look Mick, even CAF chooses to use the term to define this forum. If you’re going to argue semantics, at least make that clear to the OP.

 

[codefro]

There are so many terms (liberal conservative, orthodox, traditional, charismatic, blah blah blah) that are tossed around by so many people, that I don’t really know that there IS a line between a “Catholic” and a “Traditional Catholic”.

To me - a “traditional” Catholic is one who is obedient to the Church headquartered in Rome and administered through the local bishop.

As commonly used as a “label” the Traditional Catholic tends to prefer the EF (TLM) liturgy and music and other structures and disciplines as they were practiced Pre-Vatican II.

A Modern Catholic, in my mind, would be defined in the same way I define a “traditional Catholic”. One who is obedient to the Church.
That said, a “modern” Catholic is probably one who prefers the OF mass, the more modern song settings etc.

In either case, whether they lean toward traditional or modern, a Catholic needs to be orthodox in their beliefs. That the Pope is the Vicar of Christ, that they be obedient to the teachings of the Church and to the local bishop. Also, a Catholic should be active in parish life to the extent they are able, and to seek to hold true to the faith and the Loe of Christ.

Just my :twocents: on what can sometimes be a touchy subject.

Peace
James

This is how I see it. I somewhat enjoy the NO from time to time, and I do enjoy the TLM but would not necessarily go every week. If I could find the tridentine liturgy spoken in English in my area then I would be stoked. That is why I am excited for the Anglican Ordinariate. There is a Norbertine Abbey close by and I wonder if they do that. They have a liturgy that says English High Mass, but I do not know what that would mean. Anyways, I would take Gregorian Chant over anything, but I am happy with my parish’s classical organ hymns. I would be disgusted with drums and guitar and bass settup. I need me my organ if any instruments at all. So I guess this makes me a slightly traditional modern Catholic? I just consider myself Catholic. Being Catholic is enough for me that I do not constantly need to be adding to my identity as a Catholic by adding a label in front. Being Catholic is being in unity, so labelling traditional vs. liberal doesn’t appear to be unifying. Individual errors should be treated as such, individual errors.

 

[Brooklyn]

I apologize for my ignorance, but I don’t understand where the lines between Catholicism and Traditional Catholicism exist. What defines a modern Catholic?

Don’t feel bad. I don’t know either. A Catholic is a Catholic is a Catholic, as far as I’m concerned. You’re either Catholic or you’re not. My feeling is that we get into trouble when we try to separate out what kind of Catholic a person is.

 

[Jegudiel]

It’s unfortunate that we have divisions among Catholics and labels like traditional and progressive. That being said, Catholicism is based on many traditions so in a sense, we are all traditional.

 

[Jegudiel]

No, but healthy change – what the Holy Father refers to as “organic development” – was gradual, it was probably hardly noticable at the time, though we see it with our long hindsight.

The rupture of culture that sets “traditional” Catholics apart today is as significant as was the Iconoclast controversy in the East or the Protestant revolt.

No way.

You’re trying to create a chasm that simply does not exist except in the minds of those wishing it existed. For quite some time, a number of extremists voiced their personal belief that the Ordinary form of the Mass is “not valid.” Being such a ludicrous assertion the Church never responded.

When the Church finally did, most (but not all) of the extremists backed away from questioning the “validity” of the OF Mass. What would become their rallying cry? The “organic argument” of course. As if somehow the EF is superior to the OF because of the time frame in which the two Masses developed. Almost as ridiculous as their earlier assertions of non-validity. Thankfully most have seen the silliness of the “organic argument” and have relegated it to the ash can.

 

[Jegudiel]

Currently, there is NO SUCH THING as Traditional Catholicism.

If anything the moniker “Traditional Catholicism” makes me think of labels like “Old Catholics”, “Anglican Catholics”, etc. In other words non-Catholics.

 

[Rich_C]

Unfortunately, ending the labelling won’t heal the division. Most Catholics (I grew up this way, too) are simply ignorant of the rich Catholic culture and worldview their ancestors had. They don’t know what we’ve largely lost. Others see it as extraneous, or have a vague notion that it was a nice thing once upon a time, while others deride it whenever they get the opportunity.

There is a great term called “Biege Catholicism” I read about in Fr. Andrew Greeley’s book on the Second Vatican Council. Simply put, it refers to modern Catholicism that stresses orthodoxy but counts beautiful liturgies, beautiful statuary, pious devotions and traditions, and a living, breathing Catholic culture as a far second.

I want color, pagentry, chant, polyphony, May crownings, Sacred Heart statues, home holy water fonts, processions, ember days, children who love the saints as well as the Blessed Trinity, etc.

Some people don’t.

It matters.

 

[Rich_C]

No way.

You’re trying to create a chasm that simply does not exist except in the minds of those wishing it existed. For quite some time, a number of extremists voiced their personal belief that the Ordinary form of the Mass is “not valid.” Being such a ludicrous assertion the Church never responded.

When the Church finally did, most (but not all) of the extremists backed away from questioning the “validity” of the OF Mass. What would become their rallying cry? The “organic argument” of course. As if somehow the EF is superior to the OF because of the time frame in which the two Masses developed. Almost as ridiculous as their earlier assertions of non-validity. Thankfully most have seen the silliness of the “organic argument” and have relegated it to the ash can.

I’m not talking about the Mass, I’m talking about Catholic culture.

Leave off the red herrings and a straw man arguments, would you?

 

[Diana_Catherine]

If anything the moniker “Traditional Catholicism” makes me think of labels like “Old Catholics”, “Anglican Catholics”, etc. In other words non-Catholics.

I can understand not liking labeling Catholics. I don’t either but traditional Catholics are not non-Catholics.

 

[Diana_Catherine]

Unfortunately, ending the labelling won’t heal the division. Most Catholics (I grew up this way, too) are simply ignorant of the rich Catholic culture and worldview their ancestors had. They don’t know what we’ve largely lost. Others see it as extraneous, or have a vague notion that it was a nice thing once upon a time, while others deride it whenever they get the opportunity.

There is a great term called “Biege Catholicism” I read about in Fr. Andrew Greeley’s book on the Second Vatican Council. Simply put, it refers to modern Catholicism that stresses orthodoxy but counts beautiful liturgies, beautiful statuary, pious devotions and traditions, and a living, breathing Catholic culture as a far second.

I want color, pagentry, chant, polyphony, May crownings, Sacred Heart statues, home holy water fonts, processions, ember days, children who love the saints as well as the Blessed Trinity, etc.

Some people don’t.

It matters.

Wow, I agree. Great way to put it.

I love all those great traditions also.