FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums
A Problem of Traditionalism - Printable Version

+- FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Archives (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Theology and Philosophy (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=13)
+--- Thread: A Problem of Traditionalism (/showthread.php?tid=31775)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18


A Problem of Traditionalism - nsper7 - 11-01-2009

One of the practical/logical arguments used against Protestants is that Protestantism, since the "Reformation" (more like deformation), has fractured to where we now have thousands of "denominations" each claiming to be true. This was, for me personally, one of the arguments that helped cement my faith in the Catholic Church.

Now, looking at Traditional Catholics, one notices a similar fracturing since the fracturing that occurred Post-Vatican 2. For example, on this site alone, one sees (for least radical to most):

1) Neo-Conservative/Neo-Orthodox Catholics w/ Traditional leanings (I guess I would fall into this category)

2) Diocesan Traditionalists (i.e. they have found a Diocesan Priest who celebrates the TLM)

3) FSSP/ICK/Canons-Regular of St. John Cantius/other "Ordered" or "Societied" Traditionalists who are good standing with the Church

4) SSPX Traditionalists

5) SSPV/CMRI/Sedevacantist and Sedeprivationist types

6) "Independent" Traditionalists (who knows what they believe, but they certainly reject anything but themselves)

7) Conclavists (i.e. they have their own "Pope" [really Anti-Pope])

In dealing with the various Traditionalists, one sees arguments over the 1958 vs. 1962 Roman Missal, the 'validity' of recent Popes, obedience to the Church/Rome (this was what caused the FSSP to split from the SSPX), views on the Salvation of those who are not visibily connected to the Church (Feeneyism vs. others, including +Lefebvre), the view on the validity of the Novus Ordo, etc.

Isn't this a logical problem of Traditional Catholicism? Just as Protestantism has fractured, so has Traditional Catholicism to the point where you have those who (like Non-Denominational Protestants) pretty much go it alone against everyone else (Independents), those who are to varying degrees disobedient to the hierarchy, etc. Does this serve as a logical proof against the fruits of Traditionalism (I am not arguing that the rest of the Church is doing great, we certainly see liturgical abuse and a number of Priests who give heterodox homilies).

EDIT: These groups also judge each other. For example, 1, 2 and 3 will judge the rest as disobedient. 4, 5, 6 and 7 will judge 1, 2, and 3 as too modern or conciliar. 4 comes under fire from the various other groups for being either disobedient or too conciliatory.


Re: A Problem of Traditionalism - Historian - 11-01-2009

(11-01-2009, 06:58 AM)nsper7 Wrote: One of the practical/logical arguments used against Protestants is that Protestantism, since the "Reformation" (more like deformation), has fractured to where we now have thousands of "denominations" each claiming to be true. This was, for me personally, one of the arguments that helped cement my faith in the Catholic Church.

Now, looking at Traditional Catholics, one notices a similar fracturing since the fracturing that occurred Post-Vatican 2. For example, on this site alone, one sees (for least radical to most):

1) Neo-Conservative/Neo-Orthodox Catholics w/ Traditional leanings (I guess I would fall into this category)

2) Diocesan Traditionalists (i.e. they have found a Diocesan Priest who celebrates the TLM)

3) FSSP/ICK/Canons-Regular of St. John Cantius/other "Ordered" or "Societied" Traditionalists who are good standing with the Church

4) SSPX Traditionalists

5) SSPV/CMRI/Sedevacantist and Sedeprivationist types

6) "Independent" Traditionalists (who knows what they believe, but they certainly reject anything but themselves)

7) Conclavists (i.e. they have their own "Pope" [really Anti-Pope])

In dealing with the various Traditionalists, one sees arguments over the 1958 vs. 1962 Roman Missal, the 'validity' of recent Popes, obedience to the Church/Rome (this was what caused the FSSP to split from the SSPX), views on the Salvation of those who are not visibily connected to the Church (Feeneyism vs. others, including +Lefebvre), the view on the validity of the Novus Ordo, etc.

Isn't this a logical problem of Traditional Catholicism? Just as Protestantism has fractured, so has Traditional Catholicism to the point where you have those who (like Non-Denominational Protestants) pretty much go it alone against everyone else (Independents), those who are to varying degrees disobedient to the hierarchy, etc. Does this serve as a logical proof against the fruits of Traditionalism (I am not arguing that the rest of the Church is doing great, we certainly see liturgical abuse and a number of Priests who give heterodox homilies).

EDIT: These groups also judge each other. For example, 1, 2 and 3 will judge the rest as disobedient. 4, 5, 6 and 7 will judge 1, 2, and 3 as too modern or conciliar. 4 comes under fire from the various other groups for being either disobedient or too conciliatory.

No, that is not a problem. There is one Church. One True Church. Don't try to classify the Church like a human organisation.




Re: A Problem of Traditionalism - BrevisVir55 - 11-01-2009

I am not denying that there are factions of sorts within the Traditionalist camp but there are certainly factions of equal or perhaps greater division in the larger Church. Every faith, religion, and philosophy on earth has these factions, it is human nature. I do not see it as a problem as much as a rather sad fact. We are all fallen after all. All of these groups as far as I can see have had the best of intentions to serve God and the Church, but these groups are made up of individuals who can become all too disillusioned and confused so that they are unable to see which way is up or point to which direction is Rome...


Re: A Problem of Traditionalism - BrevisVir55 - 11-01-2009

(11-01-2009, 07:45 AM)Rosarium Wrote:
(11-01-2009, 06:58 AM)nsper7 Wrote: One of the practical/logical arguments used against Protestants is that Protestantism, since the "Reformation" (more like deformation), has fractured to where we now have thousands of "denominations" each claiming to be true. This was, for me personally, one of the arguments that helped cement my faith in the Catholic Church.

Now, looking at Traditional Catholics, one notices a similar fracturing since the fracturing that occurred Post-Vatican 2. For example, on this site alone, one sees (for least radical to most):

1) Neo-Conservative/Neo-Orthodox Catholics w/ Traditional leanings (I guess I would fall into this category)

2) Diocesan Traditionalists (i.e. they have found a Diocesan Priest who celebrates the TLM)

3) FSSP/ICK/Canons-Regular of St. John Cantius/other "Ordered" or "Societied" Traditionalists who are good standing with the Church

4) SSPX Traditionalists

5) SSPV/CMRI/Sedevacantist and Sedeprivationist types

6) "Independent" Traditionalists (who knows what they believe, but they certainly reject anything but themselves)

7) Conclavists (i.e. they have their own "Pope" [really Anti-Pope])

In dealing with the various Traditionalists, one sees arguments over the 1958 vs. 1962 Roman Missal, the 'validity' of recent Popes, obedience to the Church/Rome (this was what caused the FSSP to split from the SSPX), views on the Salvation of those who are not visibily connected to the Church (Feeneyism vs. others, including +Lefebvre), the view on the validity of the Novus Ordo, etc.

Isn't this a logical problem of Traditional Catholicism? Just as Protestantism has fractured, so has Traditional Catholicism to the point where you have those who (like Non-Denominational Protestants) pretty much go it alone against everyone else (Independents), those who are to varying degrees disobedient to the hierarchy, etc. Does this serve as a logical proof against the fruits of Traditionalism (I am not arguing that the rest of the Church is doing great, we certainly see liturgical abuse and a number of Priests who give heterodox homilies).

EDIT: These groups also judge each other. For example, 1, 2 and 3 will judge the rest as disobedient. 4, 5, 6 and 7 will judge 1, 2, and 3 as too modern or conciliar. 4 comes under fire from the various other groups for being either disobedient or too conciliatory.

No, that is not a problem. There is one Church. One True Church. Don't try to classify the Church like a human organisation.

I would agree here, one must exercise caution in speaking of the Church as one would of a corporation or secular government. We are dealing with the Body of Christ not a board of executives.


Re: A Problem of Traditionalism - glgas - 11-01-2009

(11-01-2009, 07:45 AM)Rosarium Wrote: No, that is not a problem. There is one Church. One True Church. Don't try to classify the Church like a human organisation.

The Church is ONE, but there is a problem, the Church is ill. The illness means internal division, instead of looking from the same goal: to represent out Lord in the earth, the partitions fight each other. This started with schism, followed by the reformation. The Roman Catholics were save as the main body, and until recently remainded undivided.

We cant do nothing with the Protestants, there is a distant hope for the unity with the Orthodox, a close one with the traditional group of the Anglicans, but as for the Roman Catholics we shall constantly pray with our Lord: 'Ut unum sint', let them be united. In the process for the unity the humility is the most important: we are not God, we cant clearly distinguish between good and evil, so the emphasis should be not on the doctrinal issues, but on working together for the same goal; to represent our Lord in the world.

The traditional criterium for the ONE Church is the Unity with the Holy See.Outside of that unity or with conditional unity there is no survival. The waters of the godless world wash out those, who are not on the rock.


Re: A Problem of Traditionalism - Lagrange - 11-01-2009

The Catholic Church is essentially one - if unity goes, the Church has defected, which is impossible. The gates of hell will not prevail.

I can't remember off the top of my head a simple definition of what constitutes the Church, but I believe it goes something like this: it is that Body, founded by Christ, united in true Faith, the Mass, and the Sacraments, under submission to the Roman Pontiff.

So just generally, when it comes to 'categorising' Catholics, this can only be done to an extent. If any of the above is compromised, then there is not the Catholic Church.

But we can speak of points of disunity (not effecting the essential unity required in the Church), i.e.: in areas of free opinion, schools of theology, and different ideas on prudential discipline and Church governance, etc. That's where the comparison with Protestants is not correct, because there's no real unity of faith, i.e.: they are really separate sects.

With the trad issue I admit it gets complex and depends on one's perspective as to where to draw the line, i.e.: these 'trads' are legitimately Catholic, and those...are just whacko. Here's my 2cents. Throw the Conclavists in the whacko category. Sedevacantists...well... they are schismatics inasmuch as they clearly separate themselves from the reigning Roman Pontiff. And the very idea of an ''independent'' Catholic goes right against the sensus Catholicus. And so we are down to first 4. Since the SSPX are not schismatics (it's been declared they aren't), they are definitely in the Church (even if in a state of dispute with the Hierarchy - and I don't condone their mentality in this regard, but I'm the first to admit they are in the Church).



Re: A Problem of Traditionalism - CatholicThurifer - 11-01-2009

What is the point of this thread?


Re: A Problem of Traditionalism - CollegeCatholic - 11-01-2009

(11-01-2009, 10:56 AM)CatholicThurifer Wrote: What is the point of this thread?

Bash trads, probably.


Re: A Problem of Traditionalism - jovan66102 - 11-01-2009

(11-01-2009, 10:56 AM)CatholicThurifer Wrote: What is the point of this thread?

Just an opportunity for nsper7 to push more of his modernist NO bullcrap! :)


Re: A Problem of Traditionalism - voxxpopulisuxx - 11-01-2009

(11-01-2009, 02:45 PM)jovan66102 Wrote:
(11-01-2009, 10:56 AM)CatholicThurifer Wrote: What is the point of this thread?

Just an opportunity for nsper7 to push more of his modernist NO bullcrap! :)

LOL
[Image: 1238512678_thread_wrecker.gif]