NCRegister attacking Trads
#21
But sometimes "middle-ground" isn't the best choice. Would anyone approve of a "middle-ground" in regards to abortion?
Reply
#22
Post it!  For the World, rad trad is synonymous with Traditional Catholic.
Reply
#23
(01-12-2014, 06:08 PM)PrairieMom Wrote: I find the critisisms of both the trendies and the traddies to be sound. They are the two ends of the spectrum, and both have merit. But I do agree I think that he's referring more to toxic-trads, just like the trendies are more the extremes on that end too.

What I find hardest with this Pope is that while he clearly feels we should be in the middle ground, he provides no "ground" from which to base this on.

Don't want me to "obsess" about abortion? Fine, I can do that. But what does that mean? I shouldn't be a trendie or a traddie? Then that precisely does that mean?

One of the first rules of being a parent is you sometimes need to tell the child what he does need to do vs. what they need to stop doing.

"Pope Frank" tends to be a little light on the details, especially when he's asking us to rethink our disposition. I get a pretty good idea of what he DOESN'T want, but never about what we should be.

This is how I tend to feel too.  I often find myself agreeing with what a lot of what Pope Francis says... I think there are a lot of toxic trads out there that think they have a one-way ticket straight to Heaven simply because they go to a better Mass than everyone else.  I've also met some trads that are some of the most charitable people I've ever met so there is a big range.  But the "neo pelagians" are definitely out there and they need to be knocked off their high horses.  Trouble is these people are often the ones who don't believe Francis is really the pope anyway so who knows how effective this all is.

What I generally find irksome about Pope Francis is he is always saying things that do have a certain truth to them, except he fails to clarify the full truth and so he leaves ambiguity.  It would be nice if he made a distinction between the neo-pelagian crazy toxic trads who want to recreate the 1950's and your average not-nostalgic young trad who was born after Vatican II and just wants to restore all things in Christ.

I'd love to sit down with Pope Francis and talk this over with a cup of yerba mate.
Reply
#24
(01-12-2014, 11:42 PM)Chestertonian Wrote: What I generally find irksome about Pope Francis is he is always saying things that do have a certain truth to them, except he fails to clarify the full truth and so he leaves ambiguity.

I think you've explained it better than me. That's precisely how I feel, and I think ultimately that ambiguity is going to result in a lot of trouble for oh-so-many reasons.

(01-12-2014, 06:24 PM)Clare Brigid Wrote:
(01-12-2014, 06:08 PM)PrairieMom Wrote: What I find hardest with this Pope is that while he clearly feels we should be in the middle ground, he provides no "ground" from which to base this on.

The middle ground -- which infinitely transcends either of these impostures of Catholic life -- is the Gospel and the Person of Jesus Christ.

Pope Francis has made it abundantly clear that this is his focus.

I agree he has made that clear - as clear as he makes anything. When left to our own devices, the Gospel and the Person of Jesus Christ gets usurped by other worldly desires, or ambition, or pride, or a multitude of other things (see protestants). Part of his role, I think, as our Shepherd is to provide concrete guidance about who we are, but he has failed repeatedly to do so.
Reply
#25
(01-12-2014, 11:54 AM)austenbosten Wrote: Yeah I guess you're right  :blush:

That's why I didn't post my comment, because I didn't know if this was trad-bashing, or just toxic-trad bashing
It is a wake up call for us to fucus our energy on what is important.
Reply
#26
(01-12-2014, 12:57 PM)Tenmaru Wrote:
(01-12-2014, 12:25 PM)Miriam_M Wrote:
(01-12-2014, 11:45 AM)Tenmaru Wrote: What's wrong with that criticism of that particular kind of traddie?

That particularly described kind of traddie may indeed be a white-washed sepulcher.

Overwhelmingly, your (or Longenecker's) "particularly described kind of traddie" is rare if not non-existent. 

As a Traditional Catholic, I wish this were true. But maybe Trad-dom just has a hard time doing self-examination.

I don't think that type of trad is rare at all, sad to say. I think their number looks larger on the internet than it is "in real life," but they most definitely are there, are too numerous, and are dangerous because their number do seem to be larger than it is because they're so vocal.

Hopefully, they're rare at FE because I tend to get those kinds of posters gone. They're doing Tradition no good whatsoever.

Reply
#27
(01-13-2014, 07:31 AM)Vox Clamantis Wrote:
(01-12-2014, 12:25 PM)Miriam_M Wrote: Overwhelmingly, ...Longenecker's  "particularly described kind of traddie" is rare if not non-existent. 

I don't think that type of trad is rare at all, sad to say. I think their number looks larger on the internet than it is "in real life," but they most definitely are there, are too numerous, and are dangerous because their number do seem to be larger than it is because they're so vocal.

I will respectfully reply by reminding all here that every group has its fringes who do not represent the majority of that group, cause, etc.  Think, violent extremists of every morally upright cause in history, including civil rights activists, anti-abortion activists, political liberation activists in other countries, and much more. 

The rest of you may feel responsible or do a lot of hand-wringing about the lack of indefectibility within traditionalism, but please own your own sense of guilt.  I feel none.  I don't identify with haters and extremists.  And those terms are not to be confused with people who are very clear and very unapologetic about their positions, particularly with regard to Sacred Tradition.  If anyone here wishes to back-pedal and apologize for Tradition every time you post about it, feel free.  But I feel no such compulsion and no responsibility for invisible posters on the internet, who may or may not be employing multiple cyber-identities as the same individual, and who may or may not even be genuine Catholics, let alone observant ones. 

I have also never subscribed to Guilt by Association.  The very term is evil and reeks of injustice.
Reply
#28
(01-13-2014, 02:26 PM)Miriam_M Wrote:
(01-13-2014, 07:31 AM)Vox Clamantis Wrote:
(01-12-2014, 12:25 PM)Miriam_M Wrote: Overwhelmingly, ...Longenecker's  "particularly described kind of traddie" is rare if not non-existent. 

I don't think that type of trad is rare at all, sad to say. I think their number looks larger on the internet than it is "in real life," but they most definitely are there, are too numerous, and are dangerous because their number do seem to be larger than it is because they're so vocal.

I will respectfully reply by reminding all here that every group has its fringes who do not represent the majority of that group, cause, etc.  Think, violent extremists of every morally upright cause in history, including civil rights activists, anti-abortion activists, political liberation activists in other countries, and much more. 

The rest of you may feel responsible or do a lot of hand-wringing about the lack of indefectibility within traditionalism, but please own your own sense of guilt.  I feel none.  I don't identify with haters and extremists.  And those terms are not to be confused with people who are very clear and very unapologetic about their positions, particularly with regard to Sacred Tradition.  If anyone here wishes to back-pedal and apologize for Tradition every time you post about it, feel free.  But I feel no such compulsion and no responsibility for invisible posters on the internet, who may or may not be employing multiple cyber-identities as the same individual, and who may or may not even be genuine Catholics, let alone observant ones. 

I have also never subscribed to Guilt by Association.  The very term is evil and reeks of injustice.


I won't apologize for it, but I don't know exactly who Fr. Longnecker is referring to when he talks about "traddies" he used an extreme terms to refer to "trendies", such as being obsessed with New Age garbage...so perhaps he is referring to the fringes of "traddies" who really aren't trads, but just a bunch of neo-Protestants who wish to be their own Magesterium and interpret the Councils themselves and push sedevacantism or conclavism.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)