A Problem of Traditionalism
(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])

Your comparison of these groups to the Protestant denominations is untenable and doesn't help clarify anything.

Quote: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).

Can you explain to me how disagreements among groups of people can ever be a logical proof against....... fruits?

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)