FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: The Heretical Defects of the Traditionalists? Are there any?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
Are there any heretical defects of those who call themselves traditionalists?  I have my opinions that I will share after hearing what other people think.
(02-20-2017, 06:03 PM)EliRotello Wrote: [ -> ]Are there any heretical defects of those who call themselves traditionalists?  I have my opinions that I will share after hearing what other people think.

I'll take a first stab at this.  First, I think you need to define what you mean by "traditionalists," as there're many flavors.  However, there're 3 main groups: traditionalists who operate within the structure of the Church, groups like the SSPX, and finally, sedevacantist groups.

The traditionalists who operate within the Church, such as the FSSP and the Institute of Christ the King, are obviously not heretical, as they're in full communion with Rome.  I do not believe the SSPX to be heretical, either, as they adhere to all the doctrines of the Catholic Church, and recognize the pope, including Pope Francis, as the Supreme Pontiff, even though their status is still irregular.  On the other hand, I believe the sedevacantists are the group that's most predisposed to heresy.  They believe in all the doctrines of the Church - as far as I know - however, they do not recognize the popes after Vatican II.  Does that equate to heresy?  Maybe, but I'll leave that question to someone more knowledgeable than I.

Then you've got folks like the followers of Fr. Feeney, who reject baptism of desire, which would constitute heresy.  I've heard that some of them got regularized recently, though.  There're also other independent traditionalist priests, who may hold heretical beliefs, but I do not know enough about them.
(02-20-2017, 07:14 PM)AllSeasons Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-20-2017, 06:03 PM)EliRotello Wrote: [ -> ]Are there any heretical defects of those who call themselves traditionalists?  I have my opinions that I will share after hearing what other people think.

I'll take a first stab at this.  First, I think you need to define what you mean by "traditionalists," as there're many flavors.  However, there're 3 main groups: traditionalists who operate within the structure of the Church, groups like the SSPX, and finally, sedevacantist groups.

The traditionalists who operate within the Church, such as the FSSP and the Institute of Christ the King, are obviously not heretical, as they're in full communion with Rome.  I do not believe the SSPX to be heretical, either, as they adhere to all the doctrines of the Catholic Church, and recognize the pope, including Pope Francis, as the Supreme Pontiff, even though their status is still irregular.  On the other hand, I believe the sedevacantists are the group that's most predisposed to heresy.  They believe in all the doctrines of the Church - as far as I know - however, they do not recognize the popes after Vatican II.  Does that equate to heresy?  Maybe, but I'll leave that question to someone more knowledgeable than I.

Then you've got folks like the followers of Fr. Feeney, who reject baptism of desire, which would constitute heresy.  I've heard that some of them got regularized recently, though.  There're also other independent traditionalist priests, who may hold heretical beliefs, but I do not know enough about them.

I don't believe it is heretical to reject "Baptism of Desire." I don't reject it, but a Catholic is free to embrace it.

Sedevacantism isn't a "heresy" either; it's a judgment call. The "sede" is "vacante" every time a Pope dies, and those who see that aren't suddenly heretics.
(02-20-2017, 09:22 PM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: [ -> ]Sedevacantism isn't a "heresy" either; it's a judgment call. The "sede" is "vacante" every time a Pope dies, and those who see that aren't suddenly heretics.

I have mixed feeling on this, even as virtually every action of Pope Francis brings me closer and closer to the position. The Ecumenical Council of the Vatican on 18 July 1870 in its First Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of Christ discussed 'On the permanence of the primacy of blessed Peter in the Roman pontiffs' in the Second Chapter. The Fathers of the Council said,

Quote:1. That which our lord Jesus Christ, the prince of shepherds and great shepherd of the sheep, established in the blessed apostle Peter, for the continual salvation and permanent benefit of the Church, must of necessity remain for ever, by Christ's authority, in the Church which, founded as it is upon a rock, will stand firm until the end of time [45].

2. For no one can be in doubt, indeed it was known in every age that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, the pillar of faith and the foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our lord Jesus Christ, the savior and redeemer of the human race, and that to this day and for ever he lives and presides and exercises judgment in his successors the bishops of the Holy Roman See, which he founded and consecrated with his blood

I find it difficult to reconcile the 'permanency of the Petrine office' with the position that there has been no Pope since at least the death of HH Pius XII, of blessed memory, which is going on 60 years.
This isn't heretical, but one defect comes from the sedevacantists who are so extremely sede that they've all but set up their own personal magisterium and if you disagree with them on things like NFP, Baptism of Blood/Baptism of Desire, etc, they basically mentally excommunicate you and think you aren't Catholic. This is a very, very small section of the sede movement, though. They're very fringe. One of them is so out of his mind with it that he thinks we haven't had a Pope in around 900 years and thinks St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Pius V, and St. Pius X are all heretics. I kid you not.
(03-08-2017, 01:35 AM)In His Love Wrote: [ -> ]This is a very, very small section of the sede movement, though. They're very fringe. One of them is so out of his mind with it that he thinks we haven't had a Pope in around 900 years and thinks St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Pius V, and St. Pius X are all heretics. I kid you not.

So basically Orthodox...  :LOL:
(03-08-2017, 02:08 AM)Dominicus Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-08-2017, 01:35 AM)In His Love Wrote: [ -> ]This is a very, very small section of the sede movement, though. They're very fringe. One of them is so out of his mind with it that he thinks we haven't had a Pope in around 900 years and thinks St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Pius V, and St. Pius X are all heretics. I kid you not.

So basically Orthodox...  :LOL:
Yep, pretty much!  :LOL:

To answer your question straight-up, NO, there are no "heretical defects of the Traditionalists," at least qua traditionalists. Traditionalists believe what the Church has always taught, and worship as Catholics have worshiped for eons, so if we're in error, then the Church was in error for most of Her existence. See:  http://www.fisheaters.com/traditionalcatholicism.html

Some individual traditionalists might hold to heresies, as do most "Novus Ordo-ites," (for lack of a better phrase do) (see this page where you can learn, among other things, that 70% of Catholics between the ages of 18 and 44 don't believe in the Real Presenc - i.e., 70% of Catholics in that age group are material heretics. Your'e not going to find a trad who thinks that way!). Traditional Catholics tend much more to take the Faith seriously, and to know what it actually IS.
(03-08-2017, 01:35 AM)In His Love Wrote: [ -> ]This isn't heretical, but one defect comes from the sedevacantists who are so extremely sede that they've all but set up their own personal magisterium and if you disagree with them on things like NFP, Baptism of Blood/Baptism of Desire, etc, they basically mentally excommunicate you and think you aren't Catholic. This is a very, very small section of the sede movement, though. They're very fringe. One of them is so out of his mind with it that he thinks we haven't had a Pope in around 900 years and thinks St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Pius V, and St. Pius X are all heretics. I kid you not.

You mean Richard Ibranyi? Oh yes. What a fruitcake that man is. I have heard of him before and even the sedes that I know online would have none from him.
(03-08-2017, 02:37 AM)Neopelagianus Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-08-2017, 01:35 AM)In His Love Wrote: [ -> ]This isn't heretical, but one defect comes from the sedevacantists who are so extremely sede that they've all but set up their own personal magisterium and if you disagree with them on things like NFP, Baptism of Blood/Baptism of Desire, etc, they basically mentally excommunicate you and think you aren't Catholic. This is a very, very small section of the sede movement, though. They're very fringe. One of them is so out of his mind with it that he thinks we haven't had a Pope in around 900 years and thinks St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Pius V, and St. Pius X are all heretics. I kid you not.

You mean Richard Ibranyi? Oh yes. What a fruitcake that man is. I have heard of him before and even the sedes that I know online would have none from him.
Hey, Neopelagianus! Long time, no see. :)

Yes, that's who I mean. Yeah, he and the Dimond Bros seem to be in a world of their own.
Pages: 1 2 3