FE and Traditionalism in the Francis/Trump Era
#21
(02-05-2019, 04:41 AM)VoxClamantis Wrote:
(02-05-2019, 03:40 AM)richgr Wrote: Or even more local questions like, why are my daughters turning out to be feminists despite my best intentions to raise them in a traditional and conservative environment? 

One problem I see with some (not all) traditionalists is overreaction in the opposite direction with regard to feminism. Instead of recognizing and honoring general differences between men and women as groups, some are hyper-rigid in their thoughts about gender roles (which are rooted in nature), and unnecessarily stifle outliers, which causes resentment. Hyper-rigidity and a general lack of joy will cause resentment and send kids running away from parents and Church when they're 18. There are also the matters of overprotectiveness, mistaking ignorance for innocence, and not showing enough concern for kids' desires to fit in with -- or at least not feel like freaks among -- their peer group (e.g., by dressing them like little Amish kids or what have you). It's sad and radically counterproductive.

Yeah, it's the old trope that you see of the kids rebelling against their overly conservative and rigid religious parents. I think it's important for parents to teach their kids to love their Faith and to want to live it without it feeling forced. Kids need a bit of a slack to let them see the world with the hope that you've raised them well enough that they chose the virtuous things rather than the opposite. That they choose to do good out of love of God and of their parents with a strong respect for both and a desire not to disappoint them.
Blood of Christ, relief of the burdened, save us.

“It is my design to die in the brew house; let ale be placed in my mouth when I am expiring, that when the choirs of angels come, they may say, “Be God propitious to this drinker.” – St. Columbanus, A.D. 612

[Image: 2lq3.png]
Reply
#22
Yeah it's damned hard raising kids these days. Damned hard.
"Not only are we all in the same boat, but we are all seasick.” --G.K. Chesterton
Reply
#23
Another problem that is becoming ever clearer with each passing day is how fragmented the Traditionalist movement is. I think one effect of the Francis/Trump era has been to draw out these divisions even further. Look at any comm box on almost any established traditional Catholic website, and see the division and differences of opinion. These are almost consistently framed as flame wars accusing others of heresy. How can the Traditionalist movement hope to save anything if there can't even be agreement about what constitutes the "basics"?

I'm becoming more and more convinced that each family has to protect itself and focus on taking responsibility for their own lives, their own families, and to receive from the traditional Sacraments what strength they can. Any hope in a larger mobilized movement is completely misplaced hope. The movement is too all over the place, physically and intellectually and spiritually.
Reply
#24
IMO, what constitutes "traditional Catholicism" is laid out on this page. These are, to me, the basics, the sine qua non of the "movement": https://www.fisheaters.com/traditionalca...sm101.html
T h e   D u d e t t e   A b i d e s
[-] The following 1 user Likes VoxClamantis's post:
  • JacafamalaRedux
Reply
#25
https://sspx.ca/en/publications/newslett...ors-letter

Here is a good article on the statistics of trad youths. 


TL;DR: Send your children to an SSPX school and put them in a youth group.
Reply
#26
(02-06-2019, 07:01 PM)For Petes Sake Wrote: https://sspx.ca/en/publications/newslett...ors-letter

Here is a good article on the statistics of trad youths. 


TL;DR: Send your children to an SSPX school and put them in a youth group.

With all due respect to Fr. Couture, whom I esteem very highly for his work and ministry, those statistics are propaganda.

For us to make any sense of those percentages, we need to have the full details of the so-called study. There are so many ways to poke holes into these percentages and show that, without having the full breakdown of numbers, they can represent absolutely anything you want them to.

For example, regarding: "And when we consider these three criteria together—a happy marriage, a traditional Catholic school and a serious youth movement—we reach a perseverance level of 98.6% among these young people!" 98.6% of how many people? And over what period of time? Are they still practicing today in AD 2019? How many of the approx. 200 young people studied (and what are the exact age ranges?) in this 17 year long study, which ended in 2002 by the way—17 years ago as if nothing has changed since then?—fall within this 98.6%? There has been a whole new generation of traditional Catholics in the meantime! Quite misleading to call it a "recent study." This very nice percentage is completely at odds with the sentence in the first paragraph noting, "In so many of our families, few young people survive spiritually, that is, continue to practice their faith seriously when they reach adulthood." So what exactly are they trying to tell us? 

I know someone who surveyed 3 generations of traditional Catholics from four large families (ranging from people who became traditionalists as far back as the '70s to their grandchildren born in the early 2000s) to explore how the faith was handed on, explained, and practiced in each generation. How traditionalism is conceptualized (its importance, its place in society, its content, etc.) was very different with each generation and with each family.

Another problem is the definitions and groups surveyed. What constitutes a "happy marriage"? What is a "serious youth movement"? Why does this Canadian study (or is it international) only explicitly mention the French and German youth movements? Did they even look at Canada or the US? As someone who has spoken to many priests and laity involved in the organization of the youth groups in the US district and also having spoken to multiple Germans who have been active in KJB, I can assure you that things are not as rosy as this study would have you believe.

And as an aside, it's already well established that the participation of the father in practicing a religion has big positive influences on whether his children will maintain their religious practices into adulthood, but I guess it's nice that this SSPX study also confirms that.
[-] The following 2 users Like richgr's post:
  • For Petes Sake, jovan66102
Reply
#27
(02-06-2019, 12:05 AM)VoxClamantis Wrote: IMO, what constitutes "traditional Catholicism" is laid out on this page. These are, to me, the basics, the sine qua non of the "movement": https://www.fisheaters.com/traditionalca...sm101.html

What I think you do both with Fish Eaters and in moderating this forum and what the vast majority if not all the regular users here do very well compared to other traditionalist forums and websites is keeping the focus on essentials and on "conversion of the heart." Like I said, if you go to any number of traditionalist websites, forums, comm boxes, you'll find endless debates that usually begin and end with people calling each other heretics. And the persistent attitude, one that shockingly parallels the liberals, is to blame everyone else for their own problems, a victimhood mentality. I think this forum and Fish Eaters does a great job at nipping that in the bud. There is a healthy dose of reality here because of the wider variety of people commenting. At some forums, you'll have people who have been too deeply and exclusively within the trad bubble, and it's easy to lose a sense of perspective.

The consequence of that is that this forum doesn't have "juicy" threads, where we're gossiping about the latest scandals within traddom. We stick to news and public matters that affect every Catholic, whether traditional or not. This is appealing to a wide audience, especially conservative Catholics who are starting to lean traditionalist in the Trump/Francis era. But admittedly, it doesn't make for an exciting forum, where one can go down all the endless rabbit holes of traddie virtue signaling and purity proofs, etc. One sees these ubiquitous debates about minutiae on philosophical and theological topics that really no lay person is competent to discuss, especially not on a forum, and I wonder where people have the free time to read and debate these things. Of course, we have our share of debates that pop up, global warming, geocentrism, etc., but the tone is relatively much more tame and civil.

This is why I spend time on this forum and not others. I can find reliable and good commentary on Catholic and political news and leave my computer feeling relatively edified and informed rather than frustrated and confused. So I think FE has been doing well during this time when we compare relatively, but of course, everyone is being affected by the growing darkness in the world.

One problem I think is coming more and more to the surface is that becoming a traditionalist is not a panacea. It is not an excuse to expect perfect or easy outcomes and especially not to blame others or place responsibility on others for one's own duties. This is one reason why I responded to the SSPX "study" strongly. It's not simply putting one's kid in a SSPX school or in a youth group (not that For Petes Sake was saying this exactly; I'm making a general point here of an attitude I've come across frequently). These external organizations cannot do the work of parenting, and to hope that they will is a sure route to disaster. That is not to say these groups are useless. They provide us laypeople the sacraments and the spiritual guidance we need so that we can do OUR jobs as laypeople. The knowledge that makes a person a traditionalist must lead to action, to taking responsibility. It should not lead to a quasi-Protestant attitude of if I am a trad Catholic, then I'm saved--a variation of "once saved always saved."
[-] The following 2 users Like richgr's post:
  • JacafamalaRedux, jovan66102
Reply
#28
(02-09-2019, 04:22 PM)richgr Wrote: What I think you do both with Fish Eaters and in moderating this forum and what the vast majority if not all the regular users here do very well compared to other traditionalist forums and websites is keeping the focus on essentials and on "conversion of the heart." 

Thanks, Richgr. I'm so glad you think I'm pulling it off here Smile

Quote:Like I said, if you go to any number of traditionalist websites, forums, comm boxes, you'll find endless debates that usually begin and end with people calling each other heretics. And the persistent attitude, one that shockingly parallels the liberals, is to blame everyone else for their own problems, a victimhood mentality. I think this forum and Fish Eaters does a great job at nipping that in the bud. There is a healthy dose of reality here because of the wider variety of people commenting. At some forums, you'll have people who have been too deeply and exclusively within the trad bubble, and it's easy to lose a sense of perspective. 
 
The "trad bubble" -- a place I'd hate to be. I've said it before, but I'd hate to live in a "trad enclave" given what I've seen from too many trads at other places (and some here, back in the day). Rigidity, judgmentalism, gossip, scrupulosity, real misogyny (as opposed to the made-up stuff feminists claim to see everywhere), an apparent happiness at the thought of souls burning in Hell forever, lack of humility, thinking the Faith has all answers to all things (including scientific matters, not that there is or can be a conflict between good science and the Faith) and that what it doesn't answer doesn't matter, Ludditism, lack of subtlety of thought, the mistaking of "modern" for "modernist" and of "ignorance" for "innocence," nastiness toward those who suffer from same sex attraction, uptightness about about sexual matters (I remember a few people spelling "Vagina Monologues" as "V***** Monologues" LOL),  the escapist LARPing -- just WEIRDNESS. Then there are the (actual) antisemites and racists on the fringe (as opposed to those who might engage in charitable, prudent talk about "the JQ" in, say, the way E. Michael Jones handles it, or prudently talking about general racial differences and not taking them to mean that one group is "superior" or "inferior" to another, or more or less beloved by God, owed charity, etc., and then going on to rant about "miscegenation" -- shudder). Ugly stuff. Really ugly. And tedious! I think that that stuff doesn't at all characterize the majority of traditionalists, but the ones that are out there like that are loud, and they can lead others to think that that is what "traditionalism" is like, which would defeat the very purpose of this place (to bring souls to the Church and Tradition). These are people who haven't "face their shadows" and who engage in a lot of defense mechanisms. They can hang out elsewhere.
 
Quote:The consequence of that is that this forum doesn't have "juicy" threads, where we're gossiping about the latest scandals within traddom. We stick to news and public matters that affect every Catholic, whether traditional or not. This is appealing to a wide audience, especially conservative Catholics who are starting to lean traditionalist in the Trump/Francis era. But admittedly, it doesn't make for an exciting forum, where one can go down all the endless rabbit holes of traddie virtue signaling and purity proofs, etc. One sees these ubiquitous debates about minutiae on philosophical and theological topics that really no lay person is competent to discuss, especially not on a forum, and I wonder where people have the free time to read and debate these things. Of course, we have our share of debates that pop up, global warming, geocentrism, etc., but the tone is relatively much more tame and civil.

I hope it's seen as tame and civil. I do wish it were "juicier" around here in the sense of being more lively, having "fresh blood" and more posting, though. Me, I don't post much these days. I'm old, sickly, busy, and, maybe most of all, after all these years, I've said everything a million times already, so I bore myself, and tend to use the Twitter timeline to give folks something to read. I wish everyone reading this would invite 3 new people to come post. That'd be nice.

Quote:This is why I spend time on this forum and not others. I can find reliable and good commentary on Catholic and political news and leave my computer feeling relatively edified and informed rather than frustrated and confused. So I think FE has been doing well during this time when we compare relatively, but of course, everyone is being affected by the growing darkness in the world.
 
Thanks, Rich. I'm glad you're here Smile

Quote:One problem I think is coming more and more to the surface is that becoming a traditionalist is not a panacea. It is not an excuse to expect perfect or easy outcomes and especially not to blame others or place responsibility on others for one's own duties. This is one reason why I responded to the SSPX "study" strongly. It's not simply putting one's kid in a SSPX school or in a youth group (not that For Petes Sake was saying this exactly; I'm making a general point here of an attitude I've come across frequently). These external organizations cannot do the work of parenting, and to hope that they will is a sure route to disaster. That is not to say these groups are useless. They provide us laypeople the sacraments and the spiritual guidance we need so that we can do OUR jobs as laypeople. The knowledge that makes a person a traditionalist must lead to action, to taking responsibility. It should not lead to a quasi-Protestant attitude of if I am a trad Catholic, then I'm saved--a variation of "once saved always saved."
 
Exactly! Life is a lot messier than some folks want it to be (well, me included, as far as that goes). I think the modern world is SO messy, so diabolically disoriented, confusing, pazzo, etc., -- from the Pope on down, these days -- that some people want to cling to something that "makes everything OK." But no matter whether you're Catholic or not, life's a bitch. It's a gift -- a beautiful one -- but it's also hard and complicated. People are complicated. Even in the ideal trad enclave of so many's dreams, you'll have the gay guy, the child molester, the porn junkie, the illegitimate pregnancies, the thief, the gender dysphoric, the lazy, the spouse beater, the sick, the paranoid (ha, likely lots of those), etc. There'd probably be a lot fewer of them since we wouldn't be consciously inculcating all that, and the Sacraments and Church teaching would be front and center, but they'd be there nonetheless. They always have been. And denial, projection, displacement, and all the rest of the things people do to not face the ugly won't make them go away. I want this place to be a place where we "keep it real" and are basically --well, "cool," to be vernacular about it. "Cool" not in the James Dean sense (that's kid stuff), but in the "it's a place for people who don't tend to be insane jerks" sense.
T h e   D u d e t t e   A b i d e s
[-] The following 1 user Likes VoxClamantis's post:
  • jovan66102
Reply
#29
(02-05-2019, 03:40 AM)richgr Wrote: ... why are my daughters turning out to be feminists despite my best intentions to raise them in a traditional and conservative environment? 

Sometimes a parent can do all the right things in trying to teach the faith and their children still not accept it and then there are parents who are very poor at teaching the Catholic faith and their children turn out to be great Catholics. 
 
Then sometimes you just have to give them time to make the faith their own as they mature.

Plus there is a lot of peer pressure for women to be feminists and when one has moved out on their own they want to make their own decisions and fit in to the world and the world around them is strong with feminism but I can say as an ex-feminist, Catholic revert, keep praying.  With prayer and time, many return to the faith.
[-] The following 1 user Likes MagdalenaRita's post:
  • jovan66102
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)