What makes a person and parishes traditional?

[BVMFatima]

What makes a person or a Parish " Traditional Catholic"? Wouldn’t that be Sedevacantistism?

 

[YoungTradCath]

Generally, most self-described traditional Catholics have some affinity for several or all of the following: the Extraordinary Form of the Mass, the Latin language to some degree, traditional iterations of Catholic architecture and vestments, traditional devotions, etc.

 

[BVMFatima]

Generally, most self-described traditional Catholics have some affinity for several or all of the following: the Extraordinary Form of the Mass, the Latin language to some degree, traditional iterations of Catholic architecture and vestments, traditional devotions, etc.

Is that what it means when.people say they are Latin Rite Catholics?

 

[YoungTradCath]

Is that what it means when.people say they are Latin Rite Catholics?

No, a Latin Rite Catholic is a Catholic who worships according to one of the Rites of the Latin Church (Roman, Ambrosian, Bragan, Dominican, Carthusian, etc.). The most widely used of the Latin Rites, indeed of all the Rites of the whole Catholic Church, is the Roman Rite, and this is what your average Joe thinks of when he hears the word “Catholic.”

The Catholic Church is composed of 23 semi-autonomous “Churches,” of which the Latin Church, the largest by far, is one. The other 22 are Eastern Catholic Churches. All 23 are in union with the Pope and are all equally Catholic, but there are liturgical and cultural differences, along with different ways of looking at theology.

The Roman Rite, which a majority of Catholics are accustomed to, has two Forms: the Ordinary and Extraordinary. The Ordinary Form is the Eucharist and other sacraments according to the liturgical books promulgated after Vatican II. The Extraordinary Form is the Eucharist and other sacraments according to the liturgical books promulgated roughly from 1570 and up to sometime close to Vatican II. Both forms are equally valid and are licit for use.

 

[BVMFatima]

My Church calls its self Roman Catholic since we belong to the Roman Church, but since I go to the Novus Ordo, would I be considered a " liberal Spirit of V II" Catholic? I’ve been told this by Traditionalists

 

[Mrs_Sally]

No, a Latin Rite Catholic is a Catholic who worships according to one of the Rites of the Latin Church (Roman, Ambrosian, Bragan, Dominican, Carthusian, etc.). The most widely used of the Latin Rites, indeed of all the Rites of the whole Catholic Church, is the Roman Rite, and this is what your average Joe thinks of when he hears the word “Catholic.”

The Catholic Church is composed of 23 semi-autonomous “Churches,” of which the Latin Church, the largest by far, is one. The other 22 are Eastern Catholic Churches. All 23 are in union with the Pope and are all equally Catholic, but there are liturgical and cultural differences, along with different ways of looking at theology.

The Roman Rite, which a majority of Catholics are accustomed to, has two Forms: the Ordinary and Extraordinary. The Ordinary Form is the Eucharist and other sacraments according to the liturgical books promulgated after Vatican II. The Extraordinary Form is the Eucharist and other sacraments according to the liturgical books promulgated roughly from 1570 and up to sometime close to Vatican II. Both forms are equally valid and are licit for use.

Excellent explanation.

 

[Pilgrim1701]

No, a Latin Rite Catholic is a Catholic who worships according to one of the Rites of the Latin Church (Roman, Ambrosian, Bragan, Dominican, Carthusian, etc.). The most widely used of the Latin Rites, indeed of all the Rites of the whole Catholic Church, is the Roman Rite, and this is what your average Joe thinks of when he hears the word “Catholic.”

The Catholic Church is composed of 23 semi-autonomous “Churches,” of which the Latin Church, the largest by far, is one. The other 22 are Eastern Catholic Churches. All 23 are in union with the Pope and are all equally Catholic, but there are liturgical and cultural differences, along with different ways of looking at theology.

T**he Roman Rite, which a majority of Catholics are accustomed to, has two Forms: the Ordinary and Extraordinary. ** The Ordinary Form is the Eucharist and other sacraments according to the liturgical books promulgated after Vatican II. The Extraordinary Form is the Eucharist and other sacraments according to the liturgical books promulgated roughly from 1570 and up to sometime close to Vatican II. Both forms are equally valid and are licit for use.

Though at times they do appear to be different rites. Usually parishes celebrate the Ordinary form, or Novus Ordo exclusively, and the Church building itself would not be able to accommodate the Extraordinary Form. One would assume that a church of a particular rite would be able to and as a matter of course practice its liturgy to the full. Not all priests are trained in both forms of the one rite:shrug:
It seems to me that the Extraordinary Form is a concession, an unforseen concession at the time of the reforms. It only remains because enough people refused to let it go, and was not the intention of VII to have it remain, but like I say, the Church as been forced to acknowledge it.

 

[corsair]

No, you would not necessarily be called a “liberal” Catholic. I personally go to the EF almost exclusively now. However, for the last 40 years I have gone to the Ordinary Form. It happens that I prefer the EF but I have attended many very reverent OF Masses. A lot depends on the priest’s attitude.

As far as the “liberal Catholic” thing goes, I believe a more accurate term would be a “progressive” Catholic or one who has nothing good to say about the EF and is always putting it down.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

My Church calls its self Roman Catholic since we belong to the Roman Church, but since I go to the Novus Ordo, would I be considered a " liberal Spirit of V II" Catholic? I’ve been told this by Traditionalists

No, if the parish or chapel where you attend Mass is part of your diocese (under the authority of your bishop), than you are just an ordinary run-of-the mill Catholic.

Folks who attend the EF (extraordinary form or TLM) Mass at a parish or chapel under the authority of the diocese and bishop are also ordinary run-of-the-mill Catholics.

Only if you attend a Mass at a place (or said by a priest) not under the authority or with the permission of the diocesan bishop do you have to worry. Then you may be in a place that is not in communion with the Pope. You don’t want to hang out there.

 

[BVMFatima]

Excellent explanation.

I agree, does this mean Roman Catholics should call themselves Latin instead of Roman

 

[hsmomforlife]

I agree, does this mean Roman Catholics should call themselves Latin instead of Roman

For what purpose?
Roman is usually used by non-Catholics…I have never heard of a Catholic call themselves a Latin Catholic, but I have heard ‘Roman Catholic’ used when separating a group of Catholics from a group of non catholics as a SERIOUS adjective!
Born and raised Catholic, I’m just ‘Catholic’ and I leave it up the the Holy Father in Rome to decide exactly whom is contained in that Catholic. He is much more learned and much wiser than I could ever hope to be, so I defer to his wisdom.

 

[Dubay]

I think its old school. For example neighborhoods in the 30’s would have German dominated churches and other areas Polish, Italian etc. My father was a Polish Catholic. Many times the church name was with a Saint of same nationality.

 

[YoungTradCath]

My Church calls its self Roman Catholic since we belong to the Roman Church, but since I go to the Novus Ordo, would I be considered a " liberal Spirit of V II" Catholic? I’ve been told this by Traditionalists

Terms like that are pejorative. I have personally experienced many situations in which a person accompanied to terrible liturgy in the OF* can be convinced, with some normal adult conversation, that the bad (and I do think it outweighs the good for now) of what happened after Vatican II was a terrible abuse of power and influence in some cases and pure ignorance in others.

I am not of the “people who go to the OF are terrible Satanists” crowd, and I don’t think most self-described traditionalists are either. My personal view is that most Catholics are, sadly, complacent in their faith because they were not taught the faith, and do not have more traditional preferences in the liturgy simply because they do not know these things exist and are victims of circumstance.

Traditionalists have been oppressed for a very long time, and so there are very often tensions in conversations. My advice is to, as always, overlook what this traditionalist told you. Then again, there are “traditionalists” who are really just hateful. I have the views that I have because I am convinced of them from an academic, historical and cultural point of view.

 

[TEPO]

No, a Latin Rite Catholic is a Catholic who worships according to one of the Rites of the Latin Church (Roman, Ambrosian, Bragan, Dominican, Carthusian, etc.).

What about the Sarum Rite? Some Anglicans and Episcopalians have converted to Catholicism, where they use a form of the old Sarum Rite, where Communion is taken kneeling down, there is chanting, and the Mass is very similar to the EF, but it’s not the same. The Traditions are Old English, sort of the way St Osmund set things up prior to the Church of England… Like a Latin Mass spoken in English.

That’s still a part of Lati Rite too, isn’t it? (There is a Church in my area that’s doing this now).

 

[TEPO]

I agree, does this mean Roman Catholics should call themselves Latin instead of Roman

You’ll find that there are some Eastern Catholics who take offense to being called “Roman Catholic”. They consider themselves “Byzantine” or “Maronite”, etc., which are nationalities other than Roman… This is why I personally choose to use the term “Latin Catholic” for anyone who is not part of the 22 eastern Churches -because Latin refers more to language than to a nationality or race.

At least this is how I’ve come to understand things. (but I’m still learning).

 

[YoungTradCath]

What about the Sarum Rite? Some Anglicans and Episcopalians have converted to Catholicism, where they use a form of the old Sarum Rite, where Communion is taken kneeling down, there is chanting, and the Mass is very similar to the EF, but it’s not the same. The Traditions are Old English, sort of the way St Osmund set things up prior to the Church of England… Like a Latin Mass spoken in English.

That’s still a part of Lati Rite too, isn’t it? (There is a Church in my area that’s doing this now).

The Sarum Rite does not operationally exist in the Catholic Church anymore. Anglicans/Episcopalians who convert to Catholicism can attend parishes which are specifically designed for them (Ordinariate parishes), and these parishes use a liturgy roughly similar to what you describe, but the Rite is not exactly the Sarum.

You’ll find that there are some Eastern Catholics who take offense to being called “Roman Catholic”. They consider themselves “Byzantine” or “Maronite”, etc., which are nationalities other than Roman… This is why I personally choose to use the term “Latin Catholic” for anyone who is not part of the 22 eastern Churches -because Latin refers more to language than to a nationality or race.

At least this is how I’ve come to understand things. (but I’m still learning).

The Latin Church is called what it is because the people who originally constituted it were the Latins, who happened to speak Latin. It did not get its name from the language, but from the people. They just happen to be called the same thing. At the same time, calling someone a Latin Catholic is not wrong, no.

 

[Pilgrim1701]

The Sarum Rite does not operationally exist in the Catholic Church anymore. Anglicans/Episcopalians who convert to Catholicism can attend parishes which are specifically designed for them (Ordinariate parishes), and these parishes use a liturgy roughly similar to what you describe, but the Rite is not exactly the Sarum.

The Latin Church is called what it is because the people who originally constituted it were the Latins, who happened to speak Latin. It did not get its name from the language, but from the people. They just happen to be called the same thing. At the same time, calling someone a Latin Catholic is not wrong, no.

Well I don’t know about that. The people of the Roman Empire were called Romans. The New Testament is full of them. I’ve never heard them referred to as Latins, aside from that tribe in Italy, but that is all in the time before Christ. Of course the liturgies were originally in Greek, Latin as a liturgical language began to be used in the 3rd century.

 

[BVMFatima]

For what purpose?
Roman is usually used by non-Catholics…I have never heard of a Catholic call themselves a Latin Catholic, but I have heard ‘Roman Catholic’ used when separating a group of Catholics from a group of non catholics as a SERIOUS adjective!
Born and raised Catholic, I’m just ‘Catholic’ and I leave it up the the Holy Father in Rome to decide exactly whom is contained in that Catholic. He is much more learned and much wiser than I could ever hope to be, so I defer to his wisdom.

When I said Roman Catholic, I meant Catholics who belong to the Church of Rome, not the whole church

 

[Rich_C]

Terms like that are pejorative. I have personally experienced many situations in which a person accompanied to terrible liturgy in the OF* can be convinced, with some normal adult conversation, that the bad (and I do think it outweighs the good for now) of what happened after Vatican II was a terrible abuse of power and influence in some cases and pure ignorance in others.

I am not of the “people who go to the OF are terrible Satanists” crowd, and I don’t think most self-described traditionalists are either. My personal view is that most Catholics are, sadly, complacent in their faith because they were not taught the faith, and do not have more traditional preferences in the liturgy simply because they do not know these things exist and are victims of circumstance.

Traditionalists have been oppressed for a very long time, and so there are very often tensions in conversations. My advice is to, as always, overlook what this traditionalist told you. Then again, there are “traditionalists” who are really just hateful. I have the views that I have because I am convinced of them from an academic, historical and cultural point of view.

This is a great post. I have wanted to articulate this before but I could never find the right words.

 

[Rich_C]

In response to the OP (what makes a person and parishes traditional?)

I would say it means believing, thinking, and praying like Catholics did 100 years ago, or even 1,000 years ago in many ways. Assisting at the traditional Mass is a mere symptom of that mindset: not everyone who is traditional can assist at it, and some who do are not very traditional at all.

It doesn’t make Catholics with a modern worldview “liberals” or bad Catholics, but in some sense they’ve lost a lot of their heritage, and I strongly believe that far from being optional external matters, that heritage gives life to the Faith and protects Catholics from competing (and heretical) worldviews. We’re stronger and happier with it and I feel the difference when I’m with Catholics who don’t have it.

It’s hard to explain, but I did my best.