tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2646436324392506494.post5579822762562034779..comments2022-01-28T20:11:16.954-06:00Comments on The Reluctant Traditionalist: What Is Traditional Catholicism?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2646436324392506494.post-11088309163508575822011-08-16T07:44:54.913-05:002011-08-16T07:44:54.913-05:00Darwin wrote:
"I have certain fears as to wh...Darwin wrote:<br /><br />"I have certain fears as to what some sort of sudden switch would do."<br /><br />I laugh. No fear of that, as long as the powers that be remain. There are still so many bishops opposed to the Traditional Latin Mass that many continue to disobey and ignore the Motu proprio. Then you've got mainstream Catholics who have had little experience with the TLM and many misconceptions about it, and frankly are largely ignorant of their patrimony, who will oppose any "sudden switch". That'll never happen.Christinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05205862627682998184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2646436324392506494.post-36832907845437483312011-08-15T19:57:57.368-05:002011-08-15T19:57:57.368-05:00"Why do we need the labels anyway? Isn't ..."Why do we need the labels anyway? Isn't just 'Catholic' enough?" <br /><br />you'd think. and you nailed it that it's not. In our diocese (as I'm sure others) to be "Catholic" means just about nothing - even if you happen to be a daily mass goer. I would say that a significant portion of our parishes and priests are actually protestant. By that I mean that they do not accept the orthodox Catholic faith. It's sad. I wish it were not this way, but it's true.Ben Andersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11895692497752102851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2646436324392506494.post-13071387336669697162011-08-15T11:02:54.822-05:002011-08-15T11:02:54.822-05:00Excellent post. Your wrote:
"We live in a ti...Excellent post. Your wrote:<br /><br />"We live in a time of crisis (and rebuilding) in the Catholic Church. I think every orthodox Catholic can agree on that."<br /><br />You'd be amazed how many orthodox Catholics deny there is any real crisis in the Church. Nevermind the fact that 90% of European Catholics don't attend Mass, and 75% of American Catholics do not--and of those who do, 2/3 of them don't even believe in the Real Presence. If that isn't a crisis, I don't know what is.Christinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05205862627682998184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2646436324392506494.post-26579019891034324342010-01-25T18:44:25.215-06:002010-01-25T18:44:25.215-06:00Dear Mr Miller,
You have posed three questions, n...Dear Mr Miller,<br /><br />You have posed three questions, namely:<br /><br /> 1. Is the Novus Ordo Mass valid?<br /><br /> 2. Is Vatican II a valid and binding Ecumenical Council?<br /><br /> 3. Is Pope John Paul II a valid pope? [Now, I presume, he would update this to Benedict XVI.]<br /><br />You have answered "Yes" to each question.<br /><br />I think a more accurate series of answers is:<br /><br />1. Yes. Provided the celebrating priest uses the right Form, Matter and has the Right Intention.<br /><br />2. No. It is easily demonstrated that VII was not a dogmatic Council and made no binding decrees.<br /><br />3. Yes. But I think a better question is "Was Pope John Paul II a validly elected Pope". Many of his actions as Pope have been decidedly uncatholic.<br /><br />Incidentally, I prefer the title Traditional Catholic rather than the wimpish traditional Catholic.<br /><br />Yours in the Names of Jesus and Mary<br />Lawrence (aka Laurie) Myers<br />website: http://www.capd.com.au<br />email: info@capd.com.au<br />26 January 2010<br />Sydney, AustraliaLaurie Myershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01151487243481167288noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2646436324392506494.post-49957515118386404522007-09-28T15:21:00.000-05:002007-09-28T15:21:00.000-05:00David,Having just read down all your posts to date...David,<BR/><BR/>Having just read down all your posts to date, I wanted to thank you for your clear thinking. <BR/><BR/>A thought that struck me in reading this post in particular: I might describe myself as being "traditionally-minded" as a Catholic, though perhaps you would assess me as more of a "neo-Catholic". <BR/><BR/>As such, I think that Bugnini and his committee went vastly too far in their reforms of the mass and the Divine Office. I of course consider them valid but I think that the changes made in many cases engaged in "change for change's sake" far beyond what was suggested by Vatican II itself. <BR/><BR/>However, as someone active in a "novus ordo" parish (indeed, I'm on the parish council) in which the current missal is celebrated reverently and exactly according to the rubrics, I am in some ways torn over the "going back" issue -- and for conservative reasons. I do very strongly want to see more Latin in the liturgy and want to see the missal moved back much more in keeping with the old one. And yet, having see the incredible damage caused by the sudden changes in 1965-1972, I have certain fears as to what some sort of sudden switch would do.<BR/><BR/>My hope is that Benedict XVI, as hinted at in his recent motu proprio, is beginning a process of bringing our liturgy slowly back into line with tradition, and that this will be done with sufficient catechesis and wisdom (and perhaps some welcome use of strength against the more resistant bishops and priests) that we can go about returning to tradition in a truly conservative manner.<BR/><BR/>As you note in your piece about "independant priests", one of the things that worries me at times when reading more stridently Traditionalist stuff is that in an attachment to traditional forms, people have lost a conservative and traditional attitude.Darwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.com