Hi again. Thanks for joining my thread!
I would argue because: a house cannot stand when divided against itself; because all are to accept Papal decrees; because Roman Catholics are supposed to aim for unity not aim for comfort in private clubs.
“And ‘Traditional Catholicism’ suggests, because of the word ‘traditional’, that to be a Traditional Catholic is to be somehow more reverent than other Roman Catholics, or more authentic somehow to the ‘traditions’ of the Church?.”
Both groups have the same jesus in their eucharist.there is no ‘more reverent’.
Faith and devotion determine reverence.
There is ONE holy apostolic catholic church.
Exactly my point : ONE! Not many different branches of, but ONE, holy Catholic and Apostolic Church as handed down to us with authority from St. Peter onwards.
" But if this is the case then can Traditional Catholics really call themselves Catholic if they don’t accept the decrees set by our Spiritual Fathers?
If they are baptised and believing, yes.
They have to believe that novus ordo is valid as this is catholic teaching.
I think pope benedict sixteenth sent motu proprio summorum pontificum, so they follow decrees of spiritual fathers
To be baptised is to accept all the teachings and decrees set by Rome in obedience, I thought? Not just to our spiritual fathers but also to our present Holy Father. I am not keen on people using Pope Emeritus in arguments for this because I do not think he would present himself from this angle in this way. He too is obedient to the Church and is open to growth.