Has anyone else noticed that the most vehement anti-Traditionalist and SSPX-hating posters on this forum seem to be either women or former non-Catholics? Is it possible that some of their animosity towards Traditional Catholicism may come from their fear of a return to some former era during which they imagine women, Protestants, Jews, etc. were mistreated or persecuted? Is this the main stumbling block in the way of them either accepting Traditionalism, or at least not coming onto this forum and constantly attacking it? Is there some way that we can allay their fears and reassure them that Traditionalists are not the Catholic answer to the Taleban?
Nope. It sounds more like nothing more than a veiled attack by you on those you disagree with or do not understand.
What is “Traditional Catholicism” (with a capital “T”) anyway? I definitely consider myself a traditionally-minded Catholic Christian but I in no way identify with the SSPX. Nor do I identify with what some like to call “Traditional Catholicism.”
The only fears I have with comments like your own is how they appear to others – particularly non-Catholics. The quality of your comments paint a fairly troubling picture of Catholicism.
I’m a former non-Catholic and I like the Traditional Mass. I’m not sure why people are like that, maybe it’s the same I was anti-Catholic - I knew the truth I was fighting it because I didn’t want to acknowledge that it was truth.
FYI, Traditionalists and SSPX are vastly different animals. In fact, many traditionalists here are the most outspoken against the SSPX. I have no fears to be allayed aginst the Traditionalists. As far as the SSPX, I can tell you and you are welcome to make an attempt, if you wish. Specifically, I have lived with the the division caused by everyone deciding for themselves what the bible teaches. With the SSPX, you have a section of people who decide for themselves what the Bible and tradition teaches.
Oh yes, you’re a paragon of traditional Catholicism! Especially with comments like this one:
Anyone have a spare grain of salt I can take with this?
Double nope. I am too young to have been through pre-Vatican 2 days myself, however those I know who have been through them seem not to have been in the slightest scarred by the experience.
For myself, it wouldn’t particularly bother me if Rome turned around and forbade women to be EMsHC, altar servers or readers, although I’ve been blessed to have served as a reader and EMHC in the past. Nor even if we were instructed to veil up again. Although I think such moves would be most unwise - if the problem with Vatican 2 was the suddenness and extent of the changes, it would be just as problematic to swing the pendulum back too far and too quickly the other way.
What does bother me about some traditionalists is a concern which funnily enough is the exact corollary of yours. If, as you surmise, some see pre-Vatican 2 times as some sort of dark, repressive ages, and for that reason are fearful of the TLM, in the same manner some traditionalists see Vatican 2 and what came afterwards as an era of chaos and hold the NO directly responsible for that.
In both cases I think the form of Mass (and the Council in the case of some traditionalists) is wrongly held to be the source of the problem. In the NO case, certainly the problems stemmed from the time period. Many institutions and most other mainstream Christian denominations went through their own problems in the 60s and following decades.
As for the SSPX, where do I start. I think it’s reasonable to be suspicious of any organisation that, while claiming loyalty to Rome and the Magisterium, levels the sort of unnecessary vitriol at it that Fellay and Williamson have in their recent statements. In this case it seems clear that Benedict has been working much harder and with much more success than could have been expected to address their concerns, and was holding out an olive branch with which he’s been beaten about the ears for his pains.
Riiiight! So vastly different, that the traditions they have been keeping alive for 38 years are now beginning to appear in Papal Masses and on EWTN!
This is somewhat confusing. What’s the mark of a small-t traditionally minded Catholic?
I don’t consider myself traditional-minded at all. I’m all for Vatican II and I’m open to all kinds of changes. But I do prefer the EF; I simply can’t pray at an OF.
You cannot support your original posting so you resort to an ad hominem attack?
Judging others now? Is that a “Traditional Catholic” trait? It’s frowned upon in actual Catholicism you know.
I don’t believe there is a “mark” of said Catholics…
I am definitely traditionally-minded and I embrace VC2 – as should all traditionally-minded Catholics.
You think they are the same? I speak for myself alone. I assure you that I have not an anti-traditionalist bone in my body. I believe the Catholic Church is big enough for all. On the other hand, I do oppose those who follow those priest who were excommunicated for their disobedience. But then I am just one of the one billion Catholics that have kept alive the tradition of obedience to the Holy Father. Also shown on EWTN.
As a woman who loves and attends the Latin Mass, I follow the example of a young heroic female and Fatima seer Bl. Jacinta Marto, who prayed for and loyally followed our Holy Father, the Pope. Since Jacinta died long before Vatican II, I have no fear of returning to a former era. Otherwise, I likely would have first thought to name Mother Teresa of Calcutta as being a loyal and exemplary model when it comes to following the Pope.
Long live Pope Benedict XVI!
Santo Subito … John Paul the Great!
~~ the phoenix
I think that’s part of it. I think it was also done during a particularly morally septic period and it was flat-out done poorly.
I don’t see any fear of the Tridentine Mass. I see growing disgust with the “Traditional Catholic” mentality though.
I did not make an “ad hominem” attack towards you. I am questioning your self-qualification as a “traditionally-minded Catholic”:
These are not the words of a traditionally-minded Catholic.
What “traditions”? I think the Tridentine Mass was largely suppressed for many years so as NOT to placate schismatics/heretics/apostates/whatever like the SSPX.
Another one of your “ad SSPX” attacks. Do you simply cut and paste them from one thread to another?
Attempts to suppress the Tridentine Mass were started even before Vatican II. The “schismatics” came later. The heretics, on the other hand, held picnics at Vatican II.
Come on, pnewton…how can you have “not one anti-traditionalist bone” in your body and oppose the SSPX? Had it not been for the SSPX, the modern church would of swallowed up tradition long ago…the SSPX is the biggest fear that the conciliar church has today…why else would they be working so hard to erase tradition from the radar screen?
Yes, they cut and paste and cut and paste and cut and paste…the attacks never subside. It is a quite blatant yet shallow approach that is easily recognized if you spend any time here at all…