What is your opinion on Traditionalism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bill6
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Are you really that concerned for our dear thrasher? This sounds more like your offended and being condescending because he won’t receive from an EMHC at mass.
 
Last edited:
Bill6 said:
I hear many Catholic writers/theologians/apologists/clergy say different things. Do you identify as a Traditionalist? If so, why? If not, why not? What is your opinion on Traditionalism?
Thank you and God Bless you
Click to expand...
Pope Benedict XVI said to stop putting labels on Catholics.
There are only two types of Catholic - those in a state of grace and those in a state of mortal sin.
 
Well, my girlfriend is currently at Emory St. Joseph’s Catholic Hospital, and I hope to be there when my time comes. A Priest is on duty 24/7.
 
Bill6 said:
Do you identify as a Traditionalist? If so, why? If not, why not?
Click to expand...
No, I really don’t care for the labels. I’m just a Catholic (though I do like many traditional practices). Because there aren’t special categories of Catholic, and people who refer to themselves as “trads” or “traddies” are annoying. (I love you all, but please stop already with the “trad” label stuff.) 😊
Bill6 said:
What is your opinion on Traditionalism?
Click to expand...
I find “Traditionalism” as a movement rather concerning, because in practice it often feels much like Baptist fundamentalism, just in Catholic form. I support bringing back many of the beautiful Catholic traditions that we lost or chucked aside in the last 50 years, absolutely. But the “Traditionalism” has a very “us against them” mentality and is often disparaging of other Catholics, even faithful orthodox Catholics who prefer the Ordinary Form. You hear lots of disparaging terms like “neo-cons” and “Novus Ordo Catholics,” to name a few of the milder ones. It isn’t something I want to get involved in; I just want to serve God side by side with fellow Catholics and not get caught up in dividing everyone in camps.
 
Last edited:
I believed the concern that you wouldn’t receive from an EMHC was feigned and it’s source was offense that had been taken.

Btw, I believe a deacon could distribute communion in the old rite. He would be an extraordinary minister, whereas he’s now ordinary.

Now as to the reception of the sacrament, it was always the custom in the Church of God, that laymen should receive the communion from priests; but that priests when celebrating should communicate themselves; which custom, as coming down from an apostolical tradition, ought with justice and reason to be retained.
Sacred and Ecumenical Council of Trent
Session XIII (11 October 1551)
Chapter VIII
 
Last edited:
Although I wouldn’t call myself a traditionalist, most of my closest Catholic friends are (they regularly attend our diocesan TLM), so I have a good amount of affinity and understanding towards their position. I’m still working out exactly how I feel about their critique of Vatican II.
 
I’m traditional, not traditionalist.
To shun the Mass of Papa St Paul VI is the heresy of traditionalism, and smells of quasi sedevacantism, I.M.O.
In my country there is not one TLM parish, yet eucharistic adoration, even 24/7/365 adoration is prevalent, as is the Rosary, Divine Mercy, say-the-black-do-the-red, etc. We do have guitar music and very commonly computerized keyboard music (cringeworthy synthetic pop acconpaniment)… also communion in the hand, and so forth. It’s a mixed bag. We need a reform of the reform, that is true, but the distance is not far away.
I believe this can be achieved with just two decisions by the Bishop’s Conference: (1) promote kneeling and tongue communion [it doesn’t need to be mandatory for ppl to follow through], and (2) promote a capella singing [the introduction of hymn singing was so the ppl coukd participate, so it woukdn’t be hard to argue that loud pop-band accompaniment does not help the objective of participation].
 
Last edited:
This category is almost as difficult to define as Protestantism.
Traditionalism is as traditionalism does.
 
Annie said:
What upsets me about a certain type of Traditionalist is that they focus on the rightness of their way in the superficial–how Mass is performed, etc., while ignoring the tradition of what they claim to embrace.

They didn’t bring out the amazing parts of our Faith that were lost track of in the tumult of the aftermath of V2, they just criticized those who disagreed.
Click to expand...
I disagree. At least on experience. It’s true that the Mass is the most grievous example of the changes after Vatican II and it will be the most visible marker of a traditional parish but! In my experience most traditionally minded groups try to bring back the spirituality and especially the Faith as experienced before the council.
A lot of us feel that something must have been lost in translation, even if we weren’t around. 😉
 
To a point, I do (identify as a traditionalist). I’m not a very good Catholic, not good at things I ought to do, like pray the rosary every day. I think traditional forms are more compatible with serious attempts to abide by what needs to be done in order to conform with serious attempts to grow spiritually like those in The Interior Castle. I wish all masses were in Latin as they were when I was a child.

I was an atheist for roughly 30 years, and I want to go 180 degrees from that now. I want to get into the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th mansions. So far, it’s all I can do to just edge into the 3rd mansion once in a blue moon, and then of course I fall back and have to start all over.

That said, non-traditionalist things don’t bother me other than that they make God have a changing appearance, something that is incompatible with the past. It isn’t difficult to reconcile, but the reconciliation, as ought to be obvious, is that those attempting to bring change, are laboring to bring about those negative events prophesied by the BVM in her apparitions. Then, when it comes to giving an opinion about things like the pachamamas, well, I can only say that it looks like syncretism and idolatry, and then people are upset, and for me to remain silent would be wrong too.

I would honestly prefer to say nothing about such things, but the BVM doesn’t like it if you so much as change/hide your brown scapular so as not to draw attention to it. So what am I supposed to do other than call it as I see it? I guess I will have to speak of such things in exactly the way I would were she here (which she is, although not in the flesh).

Honestly, I would just prefer to quietly pray rather than be bothered with all of this social commentary stuff. If only God or the BVM would give me a sure sign that I get to just forget about it all, I would happily do so.
 
Last edited:
Yes. My cathedral uses the altar rail and it goes very quickly even with a big crowd.

Yes, we use the altar rail for the OF Mass. 7 Masses on Sunday and 4 each weekday… altar rail is far more efficient. (Mind you those who prefer standing can go up the centre aisle - its usually about half and half between those who stand and those who kneel at the rail).
 
EnglishTeacher said:
But the “Traditionalism” has a very “us against them” mentality and is often disparaging of other Catholics, even faithful orthodox Catholics who prefer the Ordinary Form. You hear lots of disparaging terms like “neo-cons” and “Novus Ordo Catholics,” to name a few of the milder ones.
Click to expand...
And that’s too bad, really. But I think as a self-styled Traditionalist there is name calling and pride on both sides.

We get it with the pharisee and the publican already. 😅 People just need to remember the thing about the branches and eyes, too:eyes:
 
I don’t see why you mock me. I simply don’t understand such extreme preferences on matters that are regarded as neither right nor wrong. To put so much emphasis and energy on avoiding a practice which is fine would seem to stem from a place of pride.
 
  1. I don’t identify as a “Traditionalist”. I’m a Moderate in the middle.
    I like traditional devotions, traditional hymns, traditional-looking churches and the occasional TLM. My approach to prayer is also more aligned with the traditionalists than the modernists.
    But I am also open to some modern devotions, modern hymns, modern churches, and most Masses I attend are OF. I think OF is generally the better, more utilitarian Mass for daily use.
    I follow both the old calendar and the new calendar and will venerate saints listed on both calendars (and occasionally the calendar of a particular order as well) on their feast day.
  2. I don’t care if people like traditional practices. I also don’t mind if they want to do traditional practices exclusively.
    However, I don’t really like the polarization or the suggestion that either traditional practices or modern practices should be preferred for any reason.
    I don’t like the victimization stance that one side or the other takes when they don’t get “their way” with respect to their preferred practice.
    I think both sides occasionally go a little too far.
    I think making a big deal out of whether one stands or kneels after Communion, or whether or not a woman covers her head, is ridiculous whether you’re taking a traditional or a modern stance on it.
    And if a priest’s preferences differ from yours, then the choice is either a) live with it and be glad you have a Mass to go to because in some areas they don’t, or b) find another Catholic parish that does things the way you want.
 
Last edited:
Bill6 said:
What is your opinion on Traditionalism?
Click to expand...
Traditionalism, in itself is fine…except when
  • It is militant to the extent that it judges those following other Catholic beliefs, teachings, and liturgy that are acceptable to the Church.
  • When Traditionalism becomes an act of trendy nostalgia like fashions such as horned rimmed glasses and cardigan sweaters.
 
Just don’t tell me that the Ordinary Form is “inferior” or “not a real Mass” and we’re all good.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top