FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: An Open Letter to Karl Keating
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2

"Traditional Catholicism" is about more than preferring the traditional liturgical rites and engaging in traditional devotions, having large families if fertile and called to marriage, and skipping over the Luminous Mysteries when praying the Rosary. Traditional Catholicism has nothing whatsoever to do with the Jewish Holocaust, charismatic catholicism, or (necessarily) engaging in hyperbole, which, as a woman who runs the biggest trad site on the internet, I agree with you in believing that too many trads do speak, or at least write, hyperbolically, sadly. It has nothing to do with thinking that the human element of the Church was perfect before the Second Vatican Council, and since the Council of Trent, and that there was no need for any change whatsoever. It has nothing, in se, to do with nostalgia.

Traditional Catholicism involves believing that our very doctrine is being skewed since the Council. I would love for you to read the section "The Basics of the Errors" at the URL below and respond to them. It is these that traditional Catholics are concerned about, in addition to desiring a restoration of our liturgy and sacramental rites.


But these matters are very rarely discussed when our non-trad Catholic brothers and sisters talk about the traditionalist "movement." Things get stuck at the level of "those trads are so angry and bitter, always looking for something to get riled about!" (which I absolutely agree with and lament).

There is a lot of that hyperbole you mention in the trad world. I also think there is too much anger ("too much" meaning inordinate, and often displaced), animosity on the part of some toward our non-trad Catholic brothers and sisters for not knowing or caring about what we know (which says nothing about their holiness, something I wish more trads would remember), and an at least apparent lack of truly living the Gospel message with regard to warmth toward others. From the "other side," though, come some of the reasons for the anger: chalking up our mission to having a mere "preference" for the traditional Mass, confusing some very fringe attitudes with those of traditional Catholics' as a whole, and not having our concerns known, let alone seriously addressed.

I ask that you read the "The Basics of the Errors" section at the above URL and address them, because they are, in addition to wanting a liturgical restoration, what the traditionalist "movement" is all about.

Thank you.

Tracy
FishEaters.com
I posted the above on his Facebook page.

I also sent it to Mr. Keating via his website's "Contact Us" form, under the "Catholic Answers Live (Radio)" section.


I hope he reads it
(09-03-2013, 10:32 PM)salus Wrote: [ -> ]I hope he reads it

I hope he does, too. Conversations between non-trads and trads, and talk about trads by non-trads, always gets stuck. There's the bashing (which we do, too, and should regret and put a stop to), and then it gets to very wishy-washy talk about "Vatican II" -- whether we "accept Vatican II" (whatever that means!) or not. I think we and they need to get very specific. Talk about "Vatican II" is pretty meaningless. Accept -- what? What does that mean (to non-sedevacantists)? Accept that it happened? Well, of course we all believe it did. Accept that it as a Council convened by a true Pope? Well, all non-sedes believe that, too.  Accept its documents? Which parts of what documents and interpreted in what manner need to be accepted de fide? THOSE are the questions that need to be asked because anything less is, as said, absolutely meaningless.

Our hierarchs need to clarify all of that "in light of Tradition" in order for sanity to be restored (and they need to deal with in order for the SSPX to become regularized, too.) But no one's talking about it. There's nothing but vague accusations about "Vatican II" that amount to nothing but hot air on all sides. I hate loose talk about "Vatican II." Some trads talk about "rejecting" it, while non-trads talk about "accepting" it -- with no one defining what the IT is. I think the errors laid out on the FETradition page summarize things very nicely, and I wish folks would focus on those outlined errors in, at least, the presentation of Church teaching (since we all must believe that Church teaching cannot be changed such that it contradicts itself) instead of engaging in nebulous talk about "Vatican II, Whatever It and Its Documents Mean."


Terrific.  Thank you so much for your leadership in this.
Good job Vox.

Mr. Keating would be well served by watching this as well and framing a response to it.   


(09-03-2013, 09:52 PM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: [ -> ]"Traditional Catholicism" is about more than preferring the traditional liturgical rites and engaging in traditional devotions, having large families if fertile and called to marriage, and skipping over the Luminous Mysteries when praying the Rosary. Traditional Catholicism has nothing whatsoever to do with the Jewish Holocaust, charismatic catholicism, or (necessarily) engaging in hyperbole, which, as a woman who runs the biggest trad site on the internet, I agree with you in believing that too many trads do speak, or at least write, hyperbolically, sadly. It has nothing to do with thinking that the human element of the Church was perfect before the Second Vatican Council, and since the Council of Trent, and that there was no need for any change whatsoever. It has nothing, in se, to do with nostalgia.

Traditional Catholicism involves believing that our very doctrine is being skewed since the Council. I would love for you to read the section "The Basics of the Errors" at the URL below and respond to them. It is these that traditional Catholics are concerned about, in addition to desiring a restoration of our liturgy and sacramental rites.


But these matters are very rarely discussed when our non-trad Catholic brothers and sisters talk about the traditionalist "movement." Things get stuck at the level of "those trads are so angry and bitter, always looking for something to get riled about!" (which I absolutely agree with and lament).

There is a lot of that hyperbole you mention in the trad world. I also think there is too much anger ("too much" meaning inordinate, and often displaced), animosity on the part of some toward our non-trad Catholic brothers and sisters for not knowing or caring about what we know (which says nothing about their holiness, something I wish more trads would remember), and an at least apparent lack of truly living the Gospel message with regard to warmth toward others. From the "other side," though, come some of the reasons for the anger: chalking up our mission to having a mere "preference" for the traditional Mass, confusing some very fringe attitudes with those of traditional Catholics' as a whole, and not having our concerns known, let alone seriously addressed.

I ask that you read the "The Basics of the Errors" section at the above URL and address them, because they are, in addition to wanting a liturgical restoration, what the traditionalist "movement" is all about.

Thank you.

Tracy
FishEaters.com

Thank you for this. I pray he reads it.

If you would, and if you agree (obviously), please get in there on that Facebook page (linked to above in an earlier post) and "Like" my comment, will ya?  Thanks!
Good for you Vox! I hope he responds.
I suggest we all write to Mr. Keating and respectfully ask him to respond to Vox Clamantis' (Tracy's) Open Letter:

http://www.catholic.com/contact/contact-us
Pages: 1 2