Why I am not a radical traditionalist

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Aug 24 2005, 04:58 PM']i owe the church fidelity. but i owe no fidelity to Vatican II
[right][snapback]697583[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Vatican II was an ecumenical council of the Church. Your statement doesn't make sense.
To deny the validity of an ecumenical council, ratified by the Pope, is the classic example of schism.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

i didn't deny the validity...

its fallibile

and it contains open error...........

[popestpiusx]

EENS,

Please choose your wording carefully. You and I probably agree on many things, but your presentation of these things dispays a certain haughtiness that does little for the traditionalist cause. Be precise. Bare polemic is inaccurate, misleading, and often causes scandal. Just a thought.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Aug 24 2005, 05:08 PM']i didn't deny the validity...

its fallibile

and it contains open error...........
[right][snapback]697595[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Actually it is infallible. It's an ecumenical council for crying out loud. I suppose there are elements of it that are not of a strictly doctrinal nature which are fallible. but you can't write off Vatican II as a "pastoral council", there is doctrinal stuff too. And what open error? That's messed up and I disagree. It seems much more likely that you are in error. The Holy Spirit protects ecumenical councils from teaching open error so either you have some clarifying to do or you are a heretic.

God bless.

[Cam42]

[quote name='theculturewarrior' date='Aug 23 2005, 02:48 PM']The keyword is "radical."
[right][snapback]695812[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Exactly.....there are those of us, myself included, who are traditionalist in the sense that we are to uphold Sacred Tradition within the Church. This is done in a myriad of ways. But holding an extreme or radical view is not one of them.

Knowing that the Roman rite has an indult, is a way for CERTAIN Catholics who feel called to such to find a more complete fulfillment for a particular feeling they have. It is not the norm. Being a traditionalist is quite simply holding to Sacred Tradition.

This means joining the Pope, bishops and the Church herself and promoting those things which she teaches.....ALL OF IT!!!! There was an ecumenical Council in the 1960's convened by all the bishops of the world. Last time I checked (yesterday), they were all validly ordained (even in the eyes of the sedevacantist) and they were all validly ordained (consecrated) bishops. This would by it's very nature, make the council valid, by the rules laid forth by the Church herself. They came together and they engaged in the promotion of the development of doctrine. This is very much in keeping with being a traditionalist.

A traditionalist is not necessarily a conservative, although the terminology has become almost synonomous. As a traditionalist, one must look for the defition of dogma (new) and the clarification and development of doctrine (both old and new)......for that is part of Sacred Tradition.

If one claims to be traditionalist and does not recognize these things then that person is less a traditionalist and more a reactionary. For those who are "radical traditionalist" are reacting to something they don't like. Notice the what......That is very prideful and that is very uneducated.....incidentally, if one reads Newman's work on the Development of Doctrine (which I recently paroused again, thanks for the reminder of that book JPIIIloveyou), one will see that this is precisely what is discussed. This book was written well before the 1960's.

So, I am a traditionalist.....I am not "radical." I accept what the Church teaches, I accept what the Church mandates and I accept what the Magisterial authority says....THAT is also being authentically traditionalist. If one doesn't do that.....one separates oneself from the Church to a greater or lesser degree.

[Cam42]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Aug 24 2005, 06:08 PM']i didn't deny the validity...

its fallibile

and it contains open error...........
[right][snapback]697595[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Proof please.

[Dave]

EENS:

Of course, disciplines can be changed and aren't infallible. It's quite possible that certain disciplines put forth by past ecumenical councils have been ill-advised.




BUT ...






Jesus said to His apostles, "Whoever listens to you, listens to me. Whoever rejects you, rejects me." He did NOT say that that would cease to be operative in the event of a bad disciplinary decision. As Catholics we are required to obey ALL Church disciplines -- no excuses. Remember the examples of some of the greatest saints. St. Padre Pio, for example, was forbidden to say Mass publicly or hear confessions for a time. Those orders from his superiors, considering the circumstances, were at best questionable. But he still obeyed. There are similar examples in the lives of other saints.

[Brother Adam]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Aug 24 2005, 05:58 PM']i owe the church fidelity. but i owe no fidelity to Vatican II
[right][snapback]697583[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

If you owe the Church fedility than you owe Vatican II fedility. It's as simple as that. To reject Vatican II is a Protestant act.

[qfnol31]

I do believe a great theologian of the last century said that there is "one way" and there are actually as "many ways as there are people," meaning that privately a Catholic can be anything he wants inside of faithful.

The problem comes in when they make that the public norm.

I'm not saying that the Mass isn't something that should be discussed, for that's different. But if one person privately prefers to pray in Latin and the other in tongues, that's probably fine. That knowledge really needs to stay between him and his spiritual director and confessor (and possibly some close friends).

To be a Traditional Catholic [I am not here referring to any arguments dealing with the Liturgy, that's a completely different story, and needs to be] vs. to be Charismatic is perfectly acceptable (as long as both are done within the confines of the Church and remain private) just as it's perfectly acceptable for me not to live the Little Way or to go out into streets like Blessed Teresa of Calcutta, but instead live at home and teach. Either way has the possibility of Sainthood.

[qfnol31]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Aug 24 2005, 04:25 PM']I like traditon[/quote]

Moi aussi. (I, too). I also like Tradition.

[quote]the old mass[/quote]

Moi aussi. I just went to a Mass by the S.S.J.C. which is a valid society as set up by Cardinal George (actually, in the same way S.S.P.X. was begun), whom I think you might like.

[url="http://www.societycantius.org/SSJC-Info.htm"]http://www.societycantius.org/SSJC-Info.htm[/url]

[url="http://www.societycantius.org/SSJC-Decree.htm"]http://www.societycantius.org/SSJC-Decree.htm[/url] (This is very interesting if you read it, but they are committed to both Latin Rite forms [words of the Bishop], which is excellent when you see them. They have a Tridentine Mass every day, plus an extra one First Fridays, Wednesdays, and Saturdays. They have more Tridentine than English by far (which is mostly reserved for weekdays anyways). They are excellent, and you might like them.


[quote]Truth[/quote]

I hope I do too 'cause I'm a philosphy major expecting a theology degree.

[quote]i don't like

false ecumenicism[/quote]

Ahh, yes, same here. If you read Pope Benedict on the subject, I think you might like his approach, but in a nutshell it is something along the lines of "finding that which is no longer loved within the Church," which isn't to say that it's not present, just not loved like it should be.

A good example is actually with SSPX, who love the Latin Mass and other such things. Schism forms around something that is no longer loved, and if you look at SSPX or even the East you can probably find the exact same thing there. They have many things that I like and that I know are true, but are no longer emphasized as much in the Latin Church (such as the Liturgy today isn't loved like it should be).


[quote]dancing popes[/quote]

Dancing is fine, but preferrably not during the Liturgy, but as you told cmom, judge the Papacy, not individual Popes. I mean, look at Pope Benedict, he doesn't care for that stuff very much...(at all...)

[quote]popes kissing the Koran[/quote]

I do believe he regretted this. Though it may possibly have been so far as an evil action, that's debatable. I wouldn't judge anything after Vatican II on the council itself, rather a poor implimentation of the council.

So many people give the council way too much credit...It didn't do that much except for reword a few things (and add a few things).

[quote]Popes praying with Apostates heretics and schismatics
[right][snapback]697551[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Well, in the case of schismatics, they do have some valid Sacraments, so their prayers don't go unanswered...We've been allowed to go to schismatic Liturgies for some time now. And believe me, heretics go to Mass, even at St. Peter's. Can't be helped.

And I think that as long as the Holy Father is in charge, it's all good. I can't remember him not really leading anything he was at, but that may just be me.

[theculturewarrior]

I really want to visit St. John Cantius. Last time I was in Chicago I didn't get a chance.

[Colleen]

[quote name='theculturewarrior' date='Aug 27 2005, 07:58 PM']I really want to visit St. John Cantius. Last time I was in Chicago I didn't get a chance.
[right][snapback]702015[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
You should! : I was there the other day (with qfnol31). It's absolutely beautiful -- the church itself is gorgeous and the Mass is celebrated so reverently there, too. I think you'd love it.

[Cam42]

I know Frs. Phillips, Issacson, Tremari, and several others.....

The SSJC is a great movement within the Church.

[journeyman]

“For the Son of Man has come to seek out and find the ones who are lost. To bring God’s saving love to them.”

[journeyman]

This might have made a little more sense if the post that prompted it had been included:

i don't like

<snip>

Popes praying with Apostates heretics and schismatics


[quote name='journeyman' date='Aug 27 2005, 11:10 PM']“For the Son of Man has come to seek out and find the ones who are lost. To bring God’s saving love to them.”
[right][snapback]702275[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]