My view of "traditionalists"

Listed below is my list on why I’m more than just a bit skeptical about those who proclaim themselves to be “Traditional Catholics” (whatever that means.)

No this certainly does not apply to all Catholics who attend the Tridentine Mass, but it applies to a great many who see the “tlm” as some sort of panacea, while denigrating the Novus Ordo Mass in the process.

  • Many are not Catholic Christians. They belong to groups like the SSPX and they are thus driven to denigrate the Church.

  • Many of those that are indeed Catholic tend to be extremely heterodox. To them it’s not what the Church actually teaches – it’s what they think the Church should teach.

  • Many unjustly attack the Church and the Pope of Rome.

  • Many exhibit the effects of extremely poor (and narrow) catechesis and more generally, in their basic education.

  • Many view the “tlm” as some sort of silver bullet that would instantly cure every ill – if only allowed to do so.

  • Many have no clue just how abused the celebration of the “tlm” had become prior to Vatican Council II in many (most?) situations.

  • Many denigrate the Novus Ordo Mass based on ignorance (and crazy websites) versus what the Church actually directs.

  • Many exhibit a bitter “bunker mentality.” It’s not about love for God, but “hatred for Mahony.”

  • Many (most?) have no clue what the terms “liberal” and “conservative” actually mean.

  • Their collective efforts actually suppress the wider propagation of the “tlm” within the Church.

  • And lastly, many attempt to project the idea that they are more holy or more pius or better parents, citizens, etc. simply because they are “traditionalists.”

Sorry Franciscum…I consider myself a traditionalist, but I don’t fit any part of your description. I love our Pope with all my heart, and I have never disputed his position or authority…He is the Holy Father and the person I look to for guidance. I love the TLM and I occassionaly attend it…but I go to the Novus Ordo just as much if not more…I don’t look at one as being better than the other…The whole purpose behind both of them is the Banquet and the Eucharist…I must admit, I personally enjoy the TLM more, but that doesn’t mean I think it is Supreme. I am in no way affilliated with SSPX or any other Sedevacantist Group and I would never be associated with them either. I know the TLM was abused prior to VII…some Priest would zip through a Mass in about 15-20 minutes and that is horrible…so yes, abuses can be present in both Masses. I do know the difference between liberal and conservative and I do not feel I am any better than the person that is next to me at Mass…regardless of which one I attend. I have a personal preference for the Latin Mass and I would not mind seeing it offered more throughout the nation…but I am not going to lose any sleep if it were to be eliminated all together. What I like to do is hold on to certain things that were not outlawed by VII such as the Latin Mass…periods of fasting before Mass, etc…That is my 2 cents on the subject.

[quote=dumspirospero]Sorry Franciscum…I consider myself a traditionalist, but I don’t fit any part of your description. I love our Pope with all my heart, and I have never disputed his position or authority…He is the Holy Father and the person I look to for guidance. I love the TLM and I occassionaly attend it…but I go to the Novus Ordo just as much if not more…I don’t look at one as being better than the other…The whole purpose behind both of them is the Banquet and the Eucharist…I must admit, I personally enjoy the TLM more, but that doesn’t mean I think it is Supreme. I am in no way affilliated with SSPX or any other Sedevacantist Group and I would never be associated with them either. I know the TLM was abused prior to VII…some Priest would zip through a Mass in about 15-20 minutes and that is horrible…so yes, abuses can be present in both Masses. I do know the difference between liberal and conservative and I do not feel I am any better than the person that is next to me at Mass…regardless of which one I attend. I have a personal preference for the Latin Mass and I would not mind seeing it offered more throughout the nation…but I am not going to lose any sleep if it were to be eliminated all together. What I like to do is hold on to certain things that were not outlawed by VII such as the Latin Mass…periods of fasting before Mass, etc…That is my 2 cents on the subject.
[/quote]

I guess I can only say ditto. I too consider myself a traditionalist. I can remember the good old days before I left the Church during Vatican II… and coming back to something I did not recognize. I value leaders like Bishop Sheen, Msgr Knox, Frs John Hardon, Groeschel, Straub, Corapi etc… and yes even Pope John Paul II. They are all wonderful…and imperfect like me and like Franciscum. But if I can aspire to their values, so much the better for me.http://forums.catholic.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Would that Franciscum get a clue and do the same.

Dumspirospero - I would not put you or anyone who looks at the TLM the way you do in the same category of “traditionists” that Franciscum is referring to. Preferring the TLM is allowed; saying ONLY the TLM is not. The TLM is a beautiful option but I would hazard a guess that it is consistently celebrated more reverently now than it was before VII. As is often the case with us humans, we only realize what we had when it is lost.

But I do agree with Francisum’s point that many? some? who support the TLM think that going back to the “good ole days” is the magic cure for all that ails the Church.

Kris

Franciscum, That is a horrible view of Traditionalists, as if you have done reading, from both sides, you can make more of an argument for the Traditional Mass than having the New Mass said. Groups like Saint Pius X I feel have been labeled incorrectly. If you read the council documents, Pope Paul VI and the council fathers never intended for what has happened to have happened as the pedulum has gone way far to the left and needs to come back to the right and settle somewhere near the middle. These people have been hurt by what has happened and they have not gone out and formed a new religion like Luther, but are actually holding the teachings and the mass as it was said before Vatican II, and in some ways that is admirable.

These Traditional Groups were forced away without warning from a belief they hold so dear to them, and I know many of them that , because they believe so strongly in the nourishment of the mass, rent out halls, with their own money, and have an independent Traditional (or in some cases Parish priest who can get himself in trouble like the Priest in Texas) come in and say the TLM. Can you imagine, a priest has to come in under the cover of darkness just to say a Mass that was the Mass for centuries? IT makes many like myself what is actually going on? The last group of nations that tried suppression of religion was the communists, and intelligent people start to say, hey, why is this mass being suppressed, is there something that the establishment fears? Reminds me of when I went to Rome on my honeymoon going into the catacomes to see where the early christians worshipped, that is what they have been relegated to and it is not fair in my view as I also have a family friend, a Priest who left his Parish to join Saint Pius X because he said that he was being told and encoraged to perform things he felt were not acceptable to church teachings as far as the liturgy, but he would not tell me what they were.

Many in my group of churchgoers go out to Traditional Chapels to hear the mass, they dont belong nor would I, but the prayers and the sacredness is a thing of beauty, and the worship for our Lord undenied. I have read all the books about the Protestant intent of the new mass, and I dont think that is totally true, but sometimes where there is smoke there is fire.

I do question though why our Holy father took almost 20 years from 1970-1988 to “allow” an “indult” which is still hard to get implemented and said, and that is only with permission from the Bishop, most of whom were seminarians in the 60’s and 70’s during the extreme changes and are extremely liberal in nature and liturgy and dont want anything to do with Tradition or the old TLM. But there is an extreme resurgance and I do think it will come back totally, maybe in the next 10-20 years. No it is not going to make people more religious, but it may bring back our Traditional Bretheren, who we need if we are going to be strong as a church as you can not have only a left wing and a center in the church, you also need the conservatives, sort of like the Government, thank God for Democrats and Republicans. Forget about bringing back Protestants, lets get our own faithful back into the pews as we need them to help defend the faith. My opnion here only, but I have many in my prayer groups who also feel the same. instead of more liberal, we should actually be more conservative

[quote=terrcatholic]That is a horrible view of Traditionalists, as if you have done reading, from both sides, you can make more of an argument for the Traditional Mass than having the New Mass said. Groups like Saint Pius X I feel have been labeled incorrectly. If you read the council documents, Pope Paul VI and the council fathers never intended for what has happened to have happened as the pedulum has gone way far to the left and needs to come back to the right and settle somewhere near the middle.

These Traditional Groups were forced away without warning from a belief they hold so dear to them, and I know many of them that , because they believe so strongly in the nourishment of the mass, rent out halls, with their own money, and have an independent Traditional (or in some cases Parish priest who can get himself in trouble like the Priest in Texas) come in and say the TLM. Can you imagine, a priest has to come in under the cover of darkness just to say a Mass that was the Mass for centuries? IT makes many like myself what is actually going on? The last group of nations that tried suppression of religion was the communists, and intelligent people start to say, hey, why is this mass being suppressed, is there something that the establishment fears?

Many in my group of churchgoers go out to Traditional Chapels to hear the mass, they dont belong nor would I, but the prayers and the sacredness is a thing of beauty, and the worship for our Lord undenied. I have read all the books about the Protestant intent of the new mass, and I dont think that is totally true, but sometimes where there is smoke there is fire.

I do question though why our Holy father took almost 20 years from 1970-1988 to allow an “indult” which is still hard to get implemented said and that is only with permission from the Bishop, most of whom were seminarians in the 60’s and 70’s during the extreme changes and dont want anything to do with Tradition or the old TLM, but there is an extreme resurgance and I do think it will come back totally. No it is not going to make people more religious, but it may bring back our Traditional Bretheren, who we need if we are going to be strong as a church as you can not have only a left wing and a center in the church, you also need the conservatives, sort of like the Government, thank God for Democrats and Republicans.
[/quote]

pretty well said…http://forums.catholic.com/images/icons/icon14.gif

I try, just my humble opinion, he seems quite angry

[quote=MrS]pretty well said…http://forums.catholic.com/images/icons/icon14.gif
[/quote]

[quote=dumspirospero]Sorry Franciscum…I consider myself a traditionalist, but I don’t fit any part of your description. I love our Pope with all my heart, and I have never disputed his position or authority…He is the Holy Father and the person I look to for guidance. I love the TLM and I occassionaly attend it…but I go to the Novus Ordo just as much if not more…I don’t look at one as being better than the other…The whole purpose behind both of them is the Banquet and the Eucharist…I must admit, I personally enjoy the TLM more, but that doesn’t mean I think it is Supreme. I am in no way affilliated with SSPX or any other Sedevacantist Group and I would never be associated with them either. I know the TLM was abused prior to VII…some Priest would zip through a Mass in about 15-20 minutes and that is horrible…so yes, abuses can be present in both Masses. I do know the difference between liberal and conservative and I do not feel I am any better than the person that is next to me at Mass…regardless of which one I attend. I have a personal preference for the Latin Mass and I would not mind seeing it offered more throughout the nation…but I am not going to lose any sleep if it were to be eliminated all together. What I like to do is hold on to certain things that were not outlawed by VII such as the Latin Mass…periods of fasting before Mass, etc…That is my 2 cents on the subject.
[/quote]

I don’t believe I have ever seen you make some of the amazingly ignorant and hateful remarks I have seen of other “traditionalists” either…

[quote=MrS]I guess I can only say ditto. I too consider myself a traditionalist. I can remember the good old days before I left the Church during Vatican II… and coming back to something I did not recognize. I value leaders like Bishop Sheen, Msgr Knox, Frs John Hardon, Groeschel, Straub, Corapi etc… and yes even Pope John Paul II. They are all wonderful…and imperfect like me and like Franciscum. But if I can aspire to their values, so much the better for me.http://forums.catholic.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Would that Franciscum get a clue and do the same.
[/quote]

Some of your previous comments have been most non-Catholic…

Even here you say “and yes even Pope John Paul Paul II.”

Traditionalism and the SSPX are in the overall view, fine and positive.

The people who are in attendance are people who don’t have a real lot of faith in the novus ordo. If the SSPX were dissolved, most of these folks would probably become part of the majority of Catholics today who only attend for funerals and weddings.

Considering the most likely alternative, I’d say that the SSPX and traditionalism is for the most part positive, attendance at SSPX chapels at least teaches the people something of their faith, particularly for the children who are dragged along, at lot more than stewing in one’s juices at home watching the Sunday morning talking heads on the tube.

[quote=kwitz]Dumspirospero - I would not put you or anyone who looks at the TLM the way you do in the same category of “traditionists” that Franciscum is referring to. Preferring the TLM is allowed; saying ONLY the TLM is not. The TLM is a beautiful option but I would hazard a guess that it is consistently celebrated more reverently now than it was before VII. As is often the case with us humans, we only realize what we had when it is lost.

But I do agree with Francisum’s point that many? some? who support the TLM think that going back to the “good ole days” is the magic cure for all that ails the Church.

Kris
[/quote]

Bingo, and bingo…

[quote=Franciscum]Some of your previous comments have been most non-Catholic…

Even here you say "and yes even Pope John Paul Paul II."
[/quote]

only in reaction, response, to your implications that traditionalists have some sort of problem with JPII

I don’t

[quote=Kielbasi]Traditionalism and the SSPX are in the overall view, fine and positive.

The people who are in attendance are people who don’t have a real lot of faith in the novus ordo. If the SSPX were dissolved, most of these folks would probably become part of the majority of Catholics today who only attend for funerals and weddings.

Considering the most likely alternative, I’d say that the SSPX and traditionalism is for the most part positive, attendance at SSPX chapels at least teaches the people something of their faith, particularly for the children who are dragged along, at lot more than stewing in one’s juices at home watching the Sunday morning talking heads on the tube.
[/quote]

First, the SSPX is not Catholic so it is not “find and positive.” The SSPX is extremely devisive.

Second. what is “Traditionalism?” You make it sound like it’s some sort of Rite within the Western Church.

Then you say: “The people who are in attendance are people who don’t have a real lot of faith in the novus ordo.” Faith in the “novus ordo?” What the heck does that even mean?

[quote=Franciscum]Bingo, and bingo…
[/quote]

is bingo still just a Catholic tradition?http://forums.catholic.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

A lot of Catholics don’t feel that the novus ordo is a true religious and Catholic experience, that’s what I mean by “not believing in it”.

And the SSPX is positive, if for no other reason, than the alternative, sitting at home is less positive. I don’t see them as divisive, because at the very minimum they are keeping Catholics more connected with the church than they would be.

[quote=terrcatholic]Franciscum, That is a horrible view of Traditionalists, as if you have done reading, from both sides, you can make more of an argument for the Traditional Mass than having the New Mass said. Groups like Saint Pius X I feel have been labeled incorrectly. If you read the council documents, Pope Paul VI and the council fathers never intended for what has happened to have happened as the pedulum has gone way far to the left and needs to come back to the right and settle somewhere near the middle. These people have been hurt by what has happened and they have not gone out and formed a new religion like Luther, but are actually holding the teachings and the mass as it was said before Vatican II, and in some ways that is admirable.
[/quote]

First, the SSPX is not Catholic, and I don’t treat them as such. They are an extremely devisive group that is seperated from the Church.

Poppycock! The SSPX did go out and form what amounts to another sect outside the Church. You are sadly mistaken.

By the way, what is a “Traditionlist?”

[quote=terrcatholic]These Traditional Groups were forced away without warning from a belief they hold so dear to them, and I know many of them that , because they believe so strongly in the nourishment of the mass, rent out halls, with their own money, and have an independent Traditional (or in some cases Parish priest who can get himself in trouble like the Priest in Texas) come in and say the TLM. Can you imagine, a priest has to come in under the cover of darkness just to say a Mass that was the Mass for centuries? IT makes many like myself what is actually going on? The last group of nations that tried suppression of religion was the communists, and intelligent people start to say, hey, why is this mass being suppressed, is there something that the establishment fears? Reminds me of when I went to Rome on my honeymoon going into the catacomes to see where the early christians worshipped, that is what they have been relegated to and it is not fair in my view as I also have a family friend, a Priest who left his Parish to join Saint Pius X because he said that he was being told and encoraged to perform things he felt were not acceptable to church teachings as far as the liturgy, but he would not tell me what they were.
[/quote]

Not so. I won’t even address the SSPX any longer because it’s not Catholic. As to those Catholics who “rent out halls” for the Tridentine Mass, etc. – they are precisely the type of people who suggest for the most part that the Tridentine Mass is a cure for all ills, yet all they are doing is causing more problems by being devisive.

Renting out halls sounds very Protestant to me – don’t like the church? just start your own!

[quote=terrcatholic]Many in my group of churchgoers go out to Traditional Chapels to hear the mass, they dont belong nor would I, but the prayers and the sacredness is a thing of beauty, and the worship for our Lord undenied. I have read all the books about the Protestant intent of the new mass, and I dont think that is totally true, but sometimes where there is smoke there is fire.
[/quote]

What’s a “Traditional Chapel?” Almost sounds like a new sect of Protestantism? Your comments about the “new mass” underscore your ignorance on the subject. I can just imagine what “all the books” means. Yuck. I’ll bet that does not mean the Bible, the CCC, the Code, the Early Church Fathers or the encyclicals of Pope JPII. I smell a Rose…

[quote=terrcatholic]I do question though why our Holy father took almost 20 years from 1970-1988 to “allow” an “indult” which is still hard to get implemented and said, and that is only with permission from the Bishop, most of whom were seminarians in the 60’s and 70’s during the extreme changes and are extremely liberal in nature and liturgy and dont want anything to do with Tradition or the old TLM. But there is an extreme resurgance and I do think it will come back totally, maybe in the next 10-20 years. No it is not going to make people more religious, but it may bring back our Traditional Bretheren…
[/quote]

Your comments from the last section pretty much defined you. No need to waste keystrokes here…

What I will say is the often bitter and just plain odd behavior of many “traditionalists” is the #1 reason why many bishops are unwilling to allow or expand the indult.

The last thing the Church needs are people who want to divide the Church. Look at your own comments. You refer to “Traditionalists” but not “Catholics” Scary…

Franciscum

If you know so much and continue to be so rude, then you should get with it and learn how to disagree in a nice way. And lets hear some of your incredible sources that you are so willing to throw down. I rely on many such sources such as Padre Pio, who refused to say the New Mass, Fulton J Sheen, Father Trugillio, and I have also read some of Archbishop Lefebvres works, and he has some valid points as well as the Ottavanni Intervention on the New Mass and its mistakes and there are points that need to be looked at.
A traditionalist in my opinion is anyone who holds dear the traditions of the church, whether they are Novus Ordo or in the groups that I guess you call schismatic. I dont want to go into whether or not Saint pius X is or even should be schismatic because like the Iraq war, the implementation of the new mass was handled horribly,not saying anything out of line, but it was done very poor as these men had no input what so ever on these changes. It was left up to a man who was fired by Pope John XXIII, some Protestants and others on a commission that was later banished by Pope Paul VI and this is fact, not Saint Pius X propaganda, so this leads many hard core catholics to question this, that all

[quote=Franciscum]First, the SSPX is not Catholic, and I don’t treat them as such. They are an extremely devisive group that is seperated from the Church.

Poppycock! The SSPX did go out and form what amounts to another sect outside the Church. You are sadly mistaken.

By the way, what is a “Traditionlist?”

Not so. I won’t even address the SSPX any longer because it’s not Catholic. As to those Catholics who “rent out halls” for the Tridentine Mass, etc. – they are precisely the type of people who suggest for the most part that the Tridentine Mass is a cure for all ills, yet all they are doing is causing more problems by being devisive.

Renting out halls sounds very Protestant to me – don’t like the church? just start your own!

What’s a “Traditional Chapel?” Almost sounds like a new sect of Protestantism? Your comments about the “new mass” underscore your ignorance on the subject. I can just imagine what “all the books” means. Yuck. I’ll bet that does not mean the Bible, the CCC, the Code, the Early Church Fathers or the encyclicals of Pope JPII. I smell a Rose…

Your comments from the last section pretty much defined you. No need to waste keystrokes here…
[/quote]

[quote=Kielbasi]A lot of Catholics don’t feel that the novus ordo is a true religious and Catholic experience, that’s what I mean by “not believing in it”.

And the SSPX is positive,** if for no other reason, than the alternative, sitting at home is less positive.** I don’t see them as divisive, because at the very minimum they are keeping Catholics more connected with the church than they would be.
[/quote]

Not a "true religious and Catholic experience?" What does that mean? Did you just make that up? C’mon, be honest…

The second item is a straw-man anlogous to: “It’s OK to beat people if it keeps you from shooting them.”

[quote=terrcatholic]Franciscum

If you know so much and continue to be so rude, then you should get with it and learn how to disagree in a nice way. And lets hear some of your incredible sources that you are so willing to throw down. I rely on many such sources such as Padre Pio, who refused to say the New Mass, Fulton J Sheen, Father Trugillio, and I have also read some of Archbishop Lefebvres works, and he has some valid points as well as the Ottavanni Intervention on the New Mass and its mistakes and there are points that need to be looked at.
A traditionalist in my opinion is anyone who holds dear the traditions of the church, whether they are Novus Ordo or in the groups that I guess you call schismatic. I dont want to go into whether or not Saint pius X is or even should be schismatic because like the Iraq war, the implementation of the new mass was handled horribly,not saying anything out of line, but it was done very poor as these men had no input what so ever on these changes. It was left up to a man who was fired by Pope John XXIII, some Protestants and others on a commission that was later banished by Pope Paul VI and this is fact, not Saint Pius X propaganda, so this leads many hard core catholics to question this, that all
[/quote]

Your comments illustrate my concerns perfectly.

It’s almost as if you want to label (Latin Rite) Catholics as either “traditionalist” or “novus ordo.” That’s very devisive.

The SSPX is schismatic (or worse.) I’m still not sure what a “traditonalist” is, because there are plenty of very tradtional Catholics who only attend the Novus Ordo Mass.

Your last sentance is tragic. You need to dig just a bit deeper before buying into the conspiracy theories that are so dear to many “traditionalists.”

Franciscum http://forums.catholic.com/images/statusicon_cad/user_online.gif vbmenu_register(“postmenu_376447”, true);
Regular Member

Your “list” was painted with a broadbrush, but all in all I commend you for the obvious time-consuming thought you must have given to it.

I think that I am a “Traditionalist”. No one has told me I am a “Tradionalist”. I don’t really know the definition of “Traditionalist”. I do know what “Old School” is in football parlance. It could be that “Old School” and “Traditionalist” are close to being cut of the same cloth.

I heard my first Mass in 1950 in Denver, CO at the Cathedral on Colfax Ave. I didn’t understand a word. But I knew it was something I wanted to understand. By 1955, with the aid of a St. Joseph’s Daily Missal I did understand. Latin was on the left page with English on the right page - I learned a little Latin that way. It was beautiful.

Why did I think it was beautiful? The reason was, here I was in 1955, hearing the same words that were used during worship 1900 years ago! It was the REAL THING. To me the fact that the very same original words were being said by the Priest carried me back closer to the first worshipers of God, Christ and the Holy Ghost. The closer the better.

If that makes me a “Traditionalist”, then so be it. Some few of you will say some words were changed, I don’t care…it’s the closest we have.

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