Is Your Kid On...

[Gabriela]

I agree human beings can adapt to all kinds of traditions. But it is not insignificant when someone has no natural community/culture in which to grow, and have to seek out something alien (e.g., a Westerner going to Tibet and becoming a Buddhist monk, an American leaving the country and living among the Eskimos, etc.). And there is also the fact that, as you say, traditionalism is often a refuge from disillusionment, so not only is it alien to their "native" environment, but it is alien to the religion itself, a conscious movement to be more truly or authentically Catholic from the institutional church and the vast majority of Catholics who experience the religion through it.

 

The world is a big place. Subjective experiences of community, belonging, authenticity, etc. are always personal and relative. I don't doubt many Jehovah's Witnesses find community, belonging, authenticity, etc. But at the same time, there are sociological experiences that should be considered in those experiences. A person in a charismatic prayer group or a social justice parish feels the same things you mention, and of course, why would they want to leave that?

 

It's great that young people find something they were missing in their native environments. But personally, I'm more interested in why our native environments are failing us, than in the many different "intentional communities" we create. Most people don't choose to retreat to an intentional community, so I think native environments have to be the starting point always. And even those who do retreat always carry within them their native environments; in the best cases, they gradually build a new way of life with new assumptions, but often, the new way of life becomes a mask that covers the failures of their native environment (escapist idealism, pious romanticism, lack of experience, etc.).

 

This is why movements should be taken seriously, not to validate everyone within them, but because they do not exist on their own. Traditionalism is a child of the modern world and contemporary Catholicism, and has a lot to teach us about all of our experiencs, the positive and the negative.

 

You're making one big assumption here: That the "institutional Church" is "more authentic" than the "non-institutional Church". I don't even know what "the institutional Church" means, because the Church has never been a monolith. There have always been many ways of being Catholic, and so, "many Catholicisms". So, when you say "the institutional Church", what I think you mean is "mainstream parish life". In which case your argument boils down to: "These Catholics are being inauthentic because they're not being Catholic the way the majority of Catholics are." Which is pretty pointless.

 

Also, in returning to Catholicism from Judaism, I actually felt like I was being MORE authentic to my "cultural roots", because even though the mainstream culture around me is so corrupt and depraved, I can still see the Catholic roots in it. So, to me, comparing a return to traditional Catholicism with going to Tibet or Eskimos is just absurd. Even though traditional Catholicism is no longer mainstream, we still feel it all over the place, unconsciously. How much more is that the case for a born Catholics who have grown up in the Church turning to traditional Catholicism.

 

I agree that our "native environments" are failing us, and also that looking at why people leave them and what they leave them for can help us to figure out why they're failing us. I totally agree that this is especially true for traditionalist Catholicism. But you make it sound like "intentional communities" are a bad thing just because they and 100% of the people who join them aren't perfect with perfect motivations. Consider that most "native communities" started as "intentional communities".

[Era Might]

You're making one big assumption here: That the "institutional Church" is "more authentic" than the "non-institutional Church". I don't even know what "the institutional Church" means, because the Church has never been a monolith. There have always been many ways of being Catholic, and so, "many Catholicisms". So, when you say "the institutional Church", what I think you mean is "mainstream parish life". In which case your argument boils down to: "These Catholics are being inauthentic because they're not being Catholic the way the majority of Catholics are." Which is pretty pointless.

 

Also, in returning to Catholicism from Judaism, I actually felt like I was being MORE authentic to my "cultural roots", because even though the mainstream culture around me is so corrupt and depraved, I can still see the Catholic roots in it. So, to me, comparing a return to traditional Catholicism with going to Tibet or Eskimos is just absurd. Even though traditional Catholicism is no longer mainstream, we still feel it all over the place, unconsciously. How much more is that the case for a born Catholics who have grown up in the Church turning to traditional Catholicism.

 

I agree that our "native environments" are failing us, and also that looking at why people leave them and what they leave them for can help us to figure out why they're failing us. I totally agree that this is especially true for traditionalist Catholicism. But you make it sound like "intentional communities" are a bad thing just because they and 100% of the people who join them aren't perfect with perfect motivations. Consider that most "native communities" started as "intentional communities".

 

Sorry, I'm referring to Catholicism as an historical experience, which for most people, is based on what is, not what can be. Most Catholics experience the religion through their parishes, the religious traditions of their country, the theological emphases of their age, etc. The word "authentic" only means something if you're looking at this from a theological perspective, which I'm not. I don't really care about the religious arguments of traditionalists, but their relationship to the larger religion and world in which they choose to identify themselves. In the world which is usually lionized in traditionalism, there has not always been "many ways of being Catholic." The post-Tridentine Catholic world was very much focused on institutional coherence. Obey the Pope, listen to your priests, follow the rules, etc. Catholics weren't online talking about whether the Pope met their standards of Catholicism. They took the church as it was. And when they didn't, they were noted for it, because they were peculiar, maybe dangerous (Americanists, Liberals, etc.).

 

Whether you feel more authentic to your religion is your personal experience. I'm not telling you how you feel. But you assume that because your community looks like the 1950s, that therefore it is "authentic" and indistinguishable from where it imagines it came from. That I don't agree with. Traditionalism is always a movement trying to stem the tide of the institutional church (i.e., the parishes, priests, bishops, traditions, etc. since the 1960s). The church in the 1950s was not a movement, it was the institutional church. That's the difference, and a huge one.

 

I think intentional communities can be excellent. It's one of the historical virtues of Catholicism, its ability to be flexible (and that's precisely one of the ways in which I think traditionalism lacks, because for the most part it does not see itself as a "flavor" of the religion but a remnant holding out for the True Faith).

[Gabriela]

Sorry, I'm referring to Catholicism as an historical experience, which for most people, is based on what is, not what can be. Most Catholics experience the religion through their parishes, the religious traditions of their country, the theological emphases of their age, etc. The word "authentic" only means something if you're looking at this from a theological perspective, which I'm not. I don't really care about the religious arguments of traditionalists, but their relationship to the larger religion and world in which they choose to identify themselves. In the world which is usually lionized in traditionalism, there has not always been "many ways of being Catholic." The post-Tridentine Catholic world was very much focused on institutional coherence. Obey the Pope, listen to your priests, follow the rules, etc. Catholics weren't online talking about whether the Pope met their standards of Catholicism. They took the church as it was. And when they didn't, they were noted for it, because they were peculiar, maybe dangerous (Americanists, Liberals, etc.).

 

Whether you feel more authentic to your religion is your personal experience. I'm not telling you how you feel. But you assume that because your community looks like the 1950s, that therefore it is "authentic" and indistinguishable from where it imagines it came from. That I don't agree with. Traditionalism is always a movement trying to stem the tide of the institutional church (i.e., the parishes, priests, bishops, traditions, etc. since the 1960s). The church in the 1950s was not a movement, it was the institutional church. That's the difference, and a huge one.

 

I think intentional communities can be excellent. It's one of the historical virtues of Catholicism, its ability to be flexible (and that's precisely one of the ways in which I think traditionalism lacks, because for the most part it does not see itself as a "flavor" of the religion but a remnant holding out for the True Faith).

 

I still don't see how you aren't just conflating "the institutional Church" with "what most Catholics do". And if you are doing that, then your argument is circular.

[Era Might]

I still don't see how you aren't just conflating "the institutional Church" with "what most Catholics do". And if you are doing that, then your argument is circular.

 

I'm not sure I have an argument. What is it you think my argument is?

[Socrates]

I don't know if anyone keeps stats on this, but I'd being willing to bet a much higher percentage of "moderate" or "liberal Catholics" than "Trads" become atheists.

 

Most of the orthodox/conservative Catholics I knew growing up (not all "Trads") are still very much Catholic.  I don't personally know any ex-Traditonalist atheists (though I'm sure they exist).  

Some atheists become orthodox Catholics too.  So what?