Will Catholic "Traditionalism" eventually become redundant?

[PadraigPearce]

The idea of being a “Catholic traditionalist” has always seemed sort of funny to me. Before Vatican II there were no traditionalists, right? There were just Catholics. To be a Catholic meant that you were a traditionalist. The mission of Pope Benedict seems to be to reconcile the teachings of Vatican II with the two thousand year tradition of the Church. People have different opinions on the appropriateness of that approach, but does anyone think that eventually, 50 or 100 years from now, it will again be unnecessary to make a distinction between “Catholic” and “traditionalist”? Will there ever be a Church without Liberal and Conservative factions, one that’s just Catholic?

 

[rapunzel77]

Hopefully it will come to that point but since in these days of great confusion, you have to make better distinctions. I know it is sad but that is the state of the world in which we live in .

 

[josethekke]

now lot of confusion in catholic traditionalism as different rites observe different tradition even though all have same gospel and the same teachings it would be better all have a common following

 

[Jesus_123]

:bible1: Matthew 16:18
And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock **I **will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
​

. . . all for Jesus+​

 

[josethomas]

Actually the splinter groups which survive under the pretext of catholic traditionalism are creating much confusion. For example in our diocese in Kerala the local bishop changed the creed by deleting the word " and from the Son " after the words " proceed from the father and the Son". Now in this days of fast communication and the internet, it is highly inappropriate to create disunity under the guise of traditionalism. Traditionalism is good to the extent it brings us nearer to Jesus our Lord and Saviour, and not good if it creates confusion and disbelief.

JOSE THOMAS

 

[ncjohn]

Actually, I think if you look back through the Church’s history you will find that after pretty much every council there was at least one group that felt they were the “remnant” that was continuing to adhere to the “true” teachings of the Church while everybody else was going to apostacy.

Not saying at all that “traditionalists” in general fall into this category, though there are groups out there that do, but it is not a new phenomenon. There is always a settling in period after a council while things swing back and forth to some extent before finally stabilizing.

It would indeed be wonderful though if we could stop the infighting over the petty issues and focus on our universal mission of bringing the peace of the risen Lord to a worn and weary world.

 

[Genesis315]

The idea of being a “Catholic traditionalist” has always seemed sort of funny to me. Before Vatican II there were no traditionalists, right?

It depends how one defines “traditionalist.” Sure, all Latin Catholics worshiped according to what is now the “extraordinary form” (or something nearly identical) for centuries, but there have always been a minority disgruntled with the state of the Church who were more rigorist than others. Sometimes this attitude has been within the bounds of true Catholic piety and has been a force for good (e.g. the Franciscans, St. Peter Damian, St. Bernard, etc.) and sometimes it has not (e.g. the Donatists, Jansenists, or St. Hippolytus and his followers before their reconciliation).

 

[ljubim]

It does depend on the definition… but I’m with you, the phrase is already redundant. You’re either a Catholic who loves EVERYTHING about the Church (not the human failures - on all sides) or you’re a “catholic” by name only, who hates the True Church.

 

[awatkins69]

“Will Catholic ‘Traditionalism’ become redundant?”

Boy, I sure hope so!

 

[Layman]

As long as priests and bishops try to personalise the Mass and put their own spin on Doctrine, probably not.