Why I am not a radical traditionalist

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

[quote]I must say that this perfectly describes, though, certain persons who have recently joined or returned to Phatmass.[/quote]

[theculturewarrior]

[quote name='Sojourner' date='Aug 23 2005, 04:03 PM']Not to be rude ... but you did post it in the debate table.
[right][snapback]696080[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

That's because I wanted people to debate my policy statement. :

[Sojourner]

[quote name='theculturewarrior' date='Aug 23 2005, 04:28 PM']That's because I wanted people to debate my policy statement. :
[right][snapback]696135[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
OK.

[hierochloe]

I've also found that I experience the same feelings from contact with radical trads - uncharitable, negative, you're all goin' to hell.

BUT, I recognize these feelings are just the natural responses to sharp criticism and what seems to sometimes be fairly deviant opinions (a part of the nature of being a rad trad it would seem). Consequently, I would never go so far as to actually accuse anyone (even in my mind) of actually being uncharitable, spiteful, and looking to be hurtful of anything that doesn't jive with the way they think things should be, regardless of whether some of them may actually be all that bad stuff. I think the vast majority are only doing their best to hold true to their beliefs - respect to them for that.

[son_of_angels]

As someone who regularly attends a "Traditional" Latin Mass, I can say your observations are correct about many "traditionalists." Too often, "traditionalism" descends into the realm of "integralism" and "sedevacantism," etc. and promotes a generally Protestant understanding of the Magisterium and the Holy See. The Magisterium asks our obedience, not our cheek.

I also hate the terminology. Many people who follow so-called "traditionalism" are heretics and schismatics and should be called such. It is not for them to define the agenda of the Holy See. Use of the term "traditionalist" is hijacking a term that refers to all faithful catholics. Who here would dispute that the Friars of the Eternal Word (EWTN) or the Friars of the Renewal are anything but Traditionalist? It doesn't take a Tridentine mass to call them that. I would even call Pope Paul VI (gasp) a traditionalist, indeed the keeper of tradition.

To me its like the Greek Orthodox calling themselves "Orthodox." Umm, excuse me, the Catholic Church is the only Orthodox Church, so that is OUR term, thank you. The list goes on and on of titles hijacked by pretenders.

[qfnol31]

Oddly enough, I find the same attitude towards Traditionalists from many people who go to the Novus Ordo...

[Socrates]

[quote name='theculturewarrior' date='Aug 23 2005, 01:41 PM']I flirted with radical traditionalism for a while. One reason I am not still, is because I find that many of them lack charity, in a problematic way. In such a way, that I think it is beyond mere human nature, and it is something cultural. Maybe that's just my personal experience. I also find that there is a culture of despair. "Scandal!" is on the lips of so many traditionalists, and it seems as though many of them look for scandal, hunt it out, and then scandalize others by crying "scandal!" There seems to be very little hope for the future, for the Church, for mankind, for Christianity, etc., among those circles. Again, this may just be my personal experience.

I find that traditionalists exalt the form of the liturgy over the intention. Both are foundational. The Eucharist is unitive, it restores us to grace, it is the source of charity on earth and the foundation of our fraternal communion.

I find that many radical traditionalists throw the baby out with the bathwater, just as they claim Vatican II has done.
[right][snapback]695798[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Unfortunately, I find this overall to be a rather accurate description. Obviously, it does not in any way apply to all Traditionalists, but far too many tend in this direction.

Edited August 24, 2005 by Socrates

[Aloysius]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Aug 23 2005, 08:06 PM']Oddly enough, I find the same attitude towards Traditionalists from many people who go to the Novus Ordo...
[right][snapback]696392[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
amen.

[popestpiusx]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Aug 23 2005, 08:06 PM']Oddly enough, I find the same attitude towards Traditionalists from many people who go to the Novus Ordo...
[right][snapback]696392[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Yup. Even on this site.

[MC Just]

[quote name='popestpiusx' date='Aug 23 2005, 10:58 PM']Yup.  Even on this site. 
[right][snapback]696691[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


yep.

[theculturewarrior]

I would be considered a traditionalist by many people's standards. I prefer the Mass in Latin, with chant, incense, polyphony now and again. I also see the problems that have confronted the Church after Vatican II, although I don't blame the Council for this.

I think the line is drawn when one dissents from the Church. When somebody considers the Council invalid, or the Novus Ordo invalid. Also, I'm somewhat turned off by sectarianism. To some, I would be considered a "conservative Catholic," while I'm just trying to be a faithful Catholic!

Some people very dear to me refuser even to set foot inside a "Novus Ordo Church." However, if I have been uncharitable to any traditionalists, I apologize! :

[Paladin D]

[quote name='theculturewarrior' date='Aug 23 2005, 02:41 PM']I flirted with radical traditionalism for a while. One reason I am not still, is because I find that many of them lack charity, in a problematic way. In such a way, that I think it is beyond mere human nature, and it is something cultural. Maybe that's just my personal experience. I also find that there is a culture of despair. "Scandal!" is on the lips of so many traditionalists, and it seems as though many of them look for scandal, hunt it out, and then scandalize others by crying "scandal!" There seems to be very little hope for the future, for the Church, for mankind, for Christianity, etc., among those circles. Again, this may just be my personal experience.

I find that traditionalists exalt the form of the liturgy over the intention. Both are foundational. The Eucharist is unitive, it restores us to grace, it is the source of charity on earth and the foundation of our fraternal communion.

I find that many radical traditionalists throw the baby out with the bathwater, just as they claim Vatican II has done.
[right][snapback]695798[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Exactly.

[Brother Adam]

What ever happened to just being a good Catholic. Believing fully in the Catholic faith, attending mass, going to confession regularly and so on. Nuts to groups like charasmatics and traditionalists and modernists. Just give me plain ol' simple Catholic.

[popestpiusx]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Aug 24 2005, 11:06 AM']What ever happened to just being a good Catholic. Believing fully in the Catholic faith, attending mass, going to confession regularly and so on. Nuts to groups like charasmatics and traditionalists and modernists. Just give me plain ol' simple Catholic.
[right][snapback]697030[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


I would like nothing more.

[son_of_angels]

Going to confession, believing correctly, attending mass, these are all indeed good things to make one a good Catholic, but are they really things that make you a good Christian?
I say this not in doubt that any of the above things are good, required, and part of being Christian, but when Jesus gave the eight beatitudes not one of the things mentioned above were mentioned. I think above all we need to struggle for personal virtue and to conform our lives to the Christian lifestyle, to the teachings which Christ taught us from the beginning.
I am not saying this either to imply that emphasis should be taken away from such things as Confession, Mass, but so the right emphasis can be placed on them. Going to mass, but going only to receive Christ sacramentally and not spiritually, doesn't really make sense Biblically or in tradition. Saying a rosary, but never living into the prayer at the end, "that we may both imitate what they contain and obtain what they promise," doesn't really make sense either. Going to confession, but never committing to a life of charity is the surest way to Hell I can think of. Genuflecting and making copious signs of the cross, but never experiencing the Holy Spirit makes one no more pious than a heretic.

Just some thoughts.