How do Traditional Catholics Think

I have been wondering exactly how do true traditional Catholics think about other Catholics, the Church under Pope Benedict and the Eastern Rite Catholics.

I went to a website that appears from the comments that most of the posters are SSPX members.

I discussed the Anglican Use with them and although some who had been to an AU parish for Mass were delighted with the Mass, others could say nothing positive, but have never attended an AU Mass and don’t seem to have much knowledge about how the reunion was created.

They find fault with the Holy Father and most of the posts are very negative in nature.

They have no use no matter how the OF is celebrated for it being valid. They have nothing kind to say about the Orthodox.

I guess I am use to CAF, although people disagree at times, the posters are much more positive in the Faith.

I personally feel the need to separate the Traditional Catholics on this board from the ones on the other board.

They talk about the beauty of the EF form, but put down the AU Masses and say just because they have a beautiful Mass and wonderful vestments means nothing. I agree about the fact that beauty does not make a Mass valid, that really is not the point.

They keep talking about why the Anglicans who came into the Church under the Pastoral Provision didn’t just use the Sarum Use or go to a TLM Mass, at that time there were no TLM Masses celebrated in parishes. There are legitimate traditions of Anglicans that were in place before Henry the Eighth.

I researched the Sarum Use and although some of the wording is a little different, the canon of the Sarum Use is the same as the AU liturgy. Also other parts of the Mass are the same. I also looked at the 1979 Book of Common Prayer and found that the only parts that were used, were some very short responses that the Anglicans took from the OF. There are three prayers that come from the original Book of Common Prayer.

Also one of priests in an AU parish was instructed by the Bishop to celebrate the TLM Mass and he did, but for some reason he was told to stop. He said he would be willing again to celebrate it, if the Bishop again wanted it. He now has a Latin Mass each Sunday. To me to be Catholic is to be obedient to the Church. Of course if for some reason the Holy Father were to change the dogmas and doctrines of the Church to something that is protestant I would know that this is not of God. (This will never happen).

I thought that to be Catholic we are to submit to the Churches decisions. The AU liturgy is in the form that Rome chose. I understand that when this all started that the Anglicans who first approach Rome would have loved having the Sarum Use in English.

The priests are valid and AU Mass is valid so why such hostility? Do most traditioinal Catholics think that only the TLM is valid? There are other Uses in the Church which are not rites, but are actually uses within the Latin Rite.

The posters here seem to have a much more charitable attitude towards others and I was just wanting to know if you are not part of the SSPX are you also considered schismatic in the eyes of the SSPX.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary


I think I know the website with which you speak. Pretty useless posting there. I’ve gone there a few times over the past two years. Really have no desire to go back.
Good site to stay away from.

Hi Bernadette,

I do not speak for the Society. I just go to Mass at a Society chapel. The reason I go is because I became convinced about 4 years ago that they are not schismatic. I had wanted to go before. The question is about whether the Society is schismatic. I respect good Catholics who have concerns along this line. I had them. It is not an easy task for a dumb truck driver like me to try to untangle the propaganda from the canon law and the voices of reason from the voices of passion. I would immediately distance myself from the Society if I ever perceived that they considered the Society itself to be the Church, which is what it implies if they considered other Catholic schismatic.

The Society itself recognizes its own irregular situation within the Church. If the Society thought that the rest of the Church was schismatic would the SSPX bishops refrain from claiming jurisdiction in the places where chapels are established? My pastor has sought to meet with the bishop of the Archdiocese, just to let him know that he recognizes his authority when he lawfully exercises it. He just doesn’t believe the ordinary can prohibit the faithful from receiving the sacraments in the Tridentine rite.

But as a further example of how the Society views itself within the Church, the Society encourages the faithful to maintain the traditional penances associated with Lent. But a year or two ago when the Feast of St. Patrick landed on a Friday, and the diocesan archbishop dispensed his flock from doing penance, I asked Father about my own freedom, and he replied, “He is the archbishop,” confirming his authority over all of us. Does that sound like a priest who views non-SSPX Catholics as schismatic? I think not.


Thank you for your story, my friend.

I have been wondering exactly how do true traditional Catholics think about other Catholics, the Church under Pope Benedict and the Eastern Rite Catholics.

**It depends on what you mean by “true traditional Catholic.”

Many who post here either do not seem to be aware that the title of this forum is not “Traditional Latin Catholicism” or that it is assumed to be that.

More than once I’ve been told to get on the back of the bus and go back to my ghetto in the ECF forum.

Remember that Eastern Catholics are traditional, too. The quicker that self-labelled “traditional Catholics” get over the notion that the Roman rite has some kind of primacy or even intrinsic superiority, the quicker reconciliation will come with Orthodox and Non-Chalcedonian Churches.**

What would a True Traditional Catholic be?

I think I’m Traditional leaning and go to the TLM, but, I wear pants there (NO! I am NOT over it!). I’m alright with the Luminous Mysteries, I view the other 22 Rites as all right and do not look down on them, I think the Orthodox are in schism and we have primacy, but, I know that their priests have the authority of Transsubstantiation just as much as ours. I don’t like the OF Mass, BUT, I have seen it celebrated as it should be ONCE at St. John Cantius. They Celebrate the NO in English and Latin and Celebrate the High and Low Mass. I’m not a fan of the OF, BUT, I acknowledge that, done correctly, it is legit. If the priest is facing the congregation, though, it is not done correctly.

I am leary of the Society because of thier current status. So I tend to seek out Diocean approved TLMs. If and when the society is regularized I will have no problem attending thier parishes (although there are none down here in the Wv wilderness.
BTW, I looked at your bio and you have Hyles-Anderson on your lists of colleges! Were you once an IFB preacher?

It depends on what you mean by "true traditional Catholic."

You raise a good point. It would seem improbable for all to agree on who qualifies as the “true traditional Catholic”. But Bernadette seemed to be having questions about the views of the Society of St. Pius X so I thought I could offer some insight. I am one who assists at Society Masses who would never limit the qualifications only to those who do as myself. Surely the Eastern rites and indult attenders would ordinarily be thought to be traditional. But to a large degree every good Catholic who opposes the disdainful modernist hierarchy in its hatred of pre-Vatican II Christianity, would probably qualify as a “true traditional Catholic”, wherever they might go to Mass.

Hi JustaServant. I truly and thoroughly respect your leariness in connection with the Society. One does not want to be associated with excommunicated schismatics. I would rather any good Catholic be “leary” of the Society than to lightly shrug off the charges of schism and excommunication which are sometimes brought not just by liberals who hate tradition, but by well-meaning people who love Holy Mother Church.

So you have heard of my alma mater? Not an alumnus surely? I graduated in '85 and started a church the same year, (the one true church as I thought! haha.). Overall, I am not ashamed at all of some of the things we did in a short time which I never learned at HAC but were movements towards what I later discovered to be the Catholic Faith. But I had to leave in '92 because I was moving a little too fast for the congregation and finally came into the Church at the Easter Vigil in '95.

Don’t fail to tell me of your connection with Independent Baptists!



Just on another thread, I got told, “I hate when people bring up the Eastern Churches,” even though the article quoted at length brought them up, not I.

Just click the link in my siggy.
I was never part of the Hyles brand of IFB, I tended toward the Jerry Falwell/Bob Jones variety in those days. I did preach in a number of their churches. They lost me in one church when they started singing a hymn to the KJV. :eek:

As long as you go to one of their Masses out of love and attachment to the TLM…and not explicity for supporting schism, then it is not a problem to attend one of their Masses

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit