FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums
ORthodox perspective of Traditionalist Catholics - Printable Version

+- FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Church (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Forum: Catholicism (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: ORthodox perspective of Traditionalist Catholics (/showthread.php?tid=55113)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9


ORthodox perspective of Traditionalist Catholics - UnamSanctam - 05-12-2012

A pretty interesting short read. It is essentially the paradox of groups like the SSPX. My emphasis added:

Quote:Question:
In what way do Old Calendarists differ from traditionalist Roman Catholics, who want to preserve their Church customs? The Catholic Church considers them renegades. Why do you object when the New Calendarists say the same about you? (M.R., TX)

Answer:
Your question is an important one. The Orthodox Church believes that the Church exists where: 1) there is Apostolic Succession; 2) where the traditions and canons of the Church are preserved; 3) and where a right-believing Bishop in Apostolic Succession shepherds his people in good order according to these traditions and canons. While we may have a complex structure of Patriarchates, national Churches, and various autocephalous Church bodies, these basic elements define the Church. All other aspects of the Church are essentially administrative, and the Church's unity is ultimately preserved by everyone’s strict and unyielding commitment to Holy Tradition.

In the Roman Catholic Church, Apostolic Succession itself resides in the person of the Pope, who is Christ’s Vicar on earth. While modern Latin theologians have tried to restate or even reject it, and while the ecumenical pronouncements of the Latin Church have tried to downplay the significance of Papocentrism, it is the fundamental dogma of Roman Catholicism and a principle repeatedly defended by the present Pope. Even collegiality and shared primacy with the Eastern Patriarchates are subject to the magisterium of the Papacy.

Thus, when Roman Catholic traditionalists separate from Rome over issues of traditional practice, they obviously separate themselves from the very source of Roman Catholic authenticity. One can persuasively argue that since, unlike Orthodox, they do not attribute primacy to Holy Tradition, Roman Catholic traditionalists have no foundation on which to justify their schism from the Mother Church of Rome, especially when such separation is forbidden by the Pope himself, the very criterion of authenticity.

Orthodox traditionalists, on the other hand, are not only justified for separating from Churches or Bishops which violate the dictates of Holy Tradition, but are required by the Holy Canons to do so. Any Church (or Bishop) which preaches heresy places itself in danger; and those who see that danger, whether laymen or clergy, must separate from it. We see, then, the basic and fundamental difference between Roman Catholic and Orthodox traditionalists. Traditionalist groups in the Roman Catholic Church are obliged to violate the ultimate authority in their Church to be where they are. We Orthodox traditionalists, however, must heed the ultimate authority in the Church to be where we are. And herein lies one of the most important differences between the Latin and Orthodox Churches in general: the Latin Church’s appeal to the authority of the Roman See and the Orthodox Church’s dependence on the authority of the wholeness of ecclesiastical tradition, the very Body of the Church.

Thus, how to what do the SSPX cling to that they consider themselves the Church? How is what they have done not schism? How does actions and teachings of recent Popes and Councils, which seems to depart from Tradition, stand to be believed. On the one hand, some Catholics claim Papal supremacy to the extent that teachings can be changed. Other Catholics reject popes who change doctrine even though they are the succesors of Peter. In the middle you have Catholics who stumble between Tradition and contradictions of current magesterium and try to reconcile the irreconcilable. So what do you do? Do you cling to the Faith of the Fathers, or to the succession and visible Church?


Re: ORthodox perspective of Traditionalist Catholics - Phillipus Iacobus - 05-12-2012

Why are you only considering the SSPX. They are not the only traditionalist Catholics.


Re: ORthodox perspective of Traditionalist Catholics - UnamSanctam - 05-12-2012

(05-12-2012, 01:39 PM)Crusader_Philly Wrote: Why are you only considering the SSPX. They are not the only traditionalist Catholics.

Because they rejected Pope John Pauls authority in excommunications. The same goes for those sedevacantists groups, yes.


Re: ORthodox perspective of Traditionalist Catholics - Unum Sint - 05-12-2012

What the Orthodox think or do not think matters very little as far as I am concerned.


Re: ORthodox perspective of Traditionalist Catholics - Mithrandylan - 05-12-2012

Unam, are you considering "going Orthodox?"  That's the impression I've gotten from your recent posts.


Re: ORthodox perspective of Traditionalist Catholics - Gerard - 05-12-2012

(05-12-2012, 01:44 PM)UnamSanctam Wrote:
(05-12-2012, 01:39 PM)Crusader_Philly Wrote: Why are you only considering the SSPX. They are not the only traditionalist Catholics.

Because they rejected Pope John Pauls authority in excommunications. The same goes for those sedevacantists groups, yes.

Not his authority, they rejected his accuracy concerning the facts.  Had JPII excommunicated Hans Kung for virtually anything he believes, they would have understood and recognized it as a legitimate use of papal authority. 

The SSPX didn't "separate themselves" from anything.  The post-conciliar Popes have separated themselves from their duty to confirm the brethren and uphold the faith and they have separated themselves from their willingness to invoke the Magisterial authority of the Church.  In essence, the Pope likes a policy that is akin to social engineering, he gives a speech that is mainly political with religious words thrown in, it gets passed on mistakenly as authentic teaching and the Pope does not want to contradict his personal interests with his papal authority.  So, he leaves the magisterial element out of the equation and allows the errors to fester as policies.  That is why there will be no magisterial syllable on incorrect interpretations of Vatican II.  He doesn't want to correct the errors.  The errros are bound by human respect for the person of the Pope, not the keys of Peter.


Re: ORthodox perspective of Traditionalist Catholics - kingtheoden - 05-12-2012

Typical Eastern nonsense.

They are working from a deeply wounded perspective, construct their arguments upon this faulty foundation, and being that they are outside of Church, lack the gift of Wisdom.  The first few lines are jumbled nonsense meant to attack authentic Catholicism: of course they are in favor of the Novus Ordo over us, as in doing so this puffs up their assertion of diffused authority.

For example, this tract makes absolutely no sense:

Quote:Thus, when Roman Catholic traditionalists separate from Rome over issues of traditional practice, they obviously separate themselves from the very source of Roman Catholic authenticity. One can persuasively argue that since, unlike Orthodox, they do not attribute primacy to Holy Tradition, Roman Catholic traditionalists have no foundation on which to justify their schism from the Mother Church of Rome, especially when such separation is forbidden by the Pope himself, the very criterion of authenticity.

This is full of contradictions: If traditionalists have become separatists for disobeying the Pope (who according to this hetetical schismatic writer is the source of tradition), what does that say of the Easterners who to this day claim to excommunicate the Holy Father? 

In addition, this assessment betrays a rather blunt and profound confusion regarding the Papacy, as well as the importance of tradition in the Church.  It is just plain wrong and there is no need to delineate the specifics.

Easterners have a massive pride problem that approaches the blindness of the Jews.  They scream and cry about 1204 without any regard for the horrible murders of the pro-union and rightful leaders some years before.  The loss in 1453 was, in my view, Divine punishment for their intrigue against the West, who came to their aid and fought their own ****ing wars.  It was my ancestors in France, England and Italy who fought in the Holy Land while these scumbags were busying themselves with fantasies as to why the Roman Church was the seat of the enemy.  Not to mention trading with the enemy.

Of course many in the East honestly kept the Faith and the last Emperor died a martyr to the Catholic Church.  His people sadly rejected the sweet yoke of Christ in favor of the heavy load of the Sultan (if people want to read about corrupt prelates, take a look at the clergy in the East under the Turks and other Mohammedan regimes.  Spicey reading.)


Re: ORthodox perspective of Traditionalist Catholics - Crusading Philologist - 05-12-2012

(05-12-2012, 06:39 PM)kingtheoden Wrote: This is full of contradictions: If traditionalists have become separatists for disobeying the Pope (who according to this hetetical schismatic writer is the source of tradition), what does that say of the Easterners who to this day claim to excommunicate the Holy Father? 

The author's point is that the SSPX is in a difficult position because Catholics supposedly view the Pope as the ultimate authority in the Church. In contrast, the Orthodox see tradition as the ultimate authority. He is saying that members of the SSPX contradict their own core beliefs as Roman Catholics. Obviously, if you do not accept papal infallibility and supremacy in the first place, then you are not contradicting yourself when you break of from him in order to defend tradition.


Re: ORthodox perspective of Traditionalist Catholics - kingtheoden - 05-12-2012

(05-12-2012, 06:48 PM)Crusading Philologist Wrote:
(05-12-2012, 06:39 PM)kingtheoden Wrote: This is full of contradictions: If traditionalists have become separatists for disobeying the Pope (who according to this hetetical schismatic writer is the source of tradition), what does that say of the Easterners who to this day claim to excommunicate the Holy Father? 

The author's point is that the SSPX is in a difficult position because Catholics supposedly view the Pope as the ultimate authority in the Church. In contrast, the Orthodox see tradition as the ultimate authority. He is saying that members of the SSPX contradict their own core beliefs as Roman Catholics. Obviously, if you do not accept papal infallibility and supremacy in the first place, then you are not contradicting yourself when you break of from him in order to defend tradition.

The entire article is a postive attact on traditionalists; the whole reason for it being written is to apologize for the Orthodox line that seeks, by the author's own admission, to disparage our right perspective and position.

So again, the writer is being typically contradictory for this actual breakaway.


Re: ORthodox perspective of Traditionalist Catholics - Crusading Philologist - 05-12-2012

Right, I didn't mean to imply that I think the author of this article is correct.