Author Topic: Do Trads have any principles about the Faith, Vatican 2, the Mass? (Read 749 times)

Matthew · « **on:** January 03, 2021, 09:23:06 AM »

Quote from: Clemens Maria on January 02, 2021, 07:49:32 PM

In my experience, Traditionalist Catholics are the least likely to be swayed by human respect.

Except when they are -- or when it's a subject (like Mass and chapels) that they frankly don't care a whole lot about.

Because the objective reality is that most SSPX Catholics just go with the flow. And that is what, 90% of Trads, or 60% of Latin Mass attendees nationwide?

Just read the CCCC thread and/or Sean Johnson's book -- the SSPX has changed in a major way. But how many stayed put, changing their position to "FSSP" -- and how many left to join the Resistance?

So it's not my personal anecdotal experience, or even the experience of everyone in the San Antonio area -- just look at SSPX chapels nationwide. How many chapels were emptied out, as Trads stubbornly stuck to their principles, and left the SSPX chapels to found Resistance chapels with the same position "they signed up for" years ago? No chapels had to be closed as 90% of their congregation left, as far as I know. How many individuals left to protest the serious changes in the SSPX at each chapel? A relatively small percentage. Less than a third -- and that number varies widely by chapel. Some chapels lost less than 5%. But not all of these were principled, as they didn't all go to the Resistance (which would be "staying put" position-wise for them), as I will get to in a minute.

The SSPX is the 800 lb. gorilla in the Trad world, or The Lions Share of trad Catholics. Based on events in the past 8 years, it's clear that the SSPX could change their position on the Pope from "Recognize and Resist" to "Recognize" or sedevacantist. They could change their position on Vatican 2 from "Vatican 2 delendum est" to "it's 90% good". They could also change their Missal version, start using Dialogue Mass exclusively, or any other similar change and 99% of their congregation would stay put, because they have their cozy Sunday morning habit going on, and their relatively convenient Mass (all Trads are used to an hour drive on Sunday morning; most count their blessings in this department). They don't rise up or protest over "little things", which is, unfortunately, pretty much anything regarding the Faith or the Mass.

Furthermore, of those SSPX Catholics who left the SSPX, how many went for a group with the same position as the old SSPX? That's called the Resistance BTW. All those who left and joined the Indult or a Sede chapel obviously don't have any principles. They were just annoyed by the SSPX "politics" or something. Seriously! The SSPX is becoming Indult, so to protest, you leave and join the literal Indult location in your area? I've seen it though. The Resistance did NOT gain anything close to 100% of those who left the SSPX -- as it should be, if Trads were as principled as you say.

Clemens Maria · « **Reply #1 on:** January 03, 2021, 02:00:38 PM »

Quote from: Matthew on January 03, 2021, 09:23:06 AM

Except when they are -- or when it's a subject (like Mass and chapels) that they frankly don't care a whole lot about.

Because the objective reality is that most SSPX Catholics just go with the flow. And that is what, 90% of Trads, or 60% of Latin Mass attendees nationwide?

Just read the CCCC thread and/or Sean Johnson's book -- the SSPX has changed in a major way. But how many stayed put, changing their position to "FSSP" -- and how many left to join the Resistance?

So it's not my personal anecdotal experience, or even the experience of everyone in the San Antonio area -- just look at SSPX chapels nationwide. How many chapels were emptied out, as Trads stubbornly stuck to their principles, and left the SSPX chapels to found Resistance chapels with the same position "they signed up for" years ago? No chapels had to be closed as 90% of their congregation left, as far as I know. How many individuals left to protest the serious changes in the SSPX at each chapel? A relatively small percentage. Less than a third -- and that number varies widely by chapel. Some chapels lost less than 5%. But not all of these were principled, as they didn't all go to the Resistance (which would be "staying put" position-wise for them), as I will get to in a minute.

The SSPX is the 800 lb. gorilla in the Trad world, or The Lions Share of trad Catholics. Based on events in the past 8 years, it's clear that the SSPX could change their position on the Pope from "Recognize and Resist" to "Recognize" or sedevacantist. They could change their position on Vatican 2 from "Vatican 2 delendum est" to "it's 90% good". They could also change their Missal version, start using Dialogue Mass exclusively, or any other similar change and 99% of their congregation would stay put, because they have their cozy Sunday morning habit going on, and their relatively convenient Mass (all Trads are used to an hour drive on Sunday morning; most count their blessings in this department). They don't rise up or protest over "little things", which is, unfortunately, pretty much anything regarding the Faith or the Mass.

Furthermore, of those SSPX Catholics who left the SSPX, how many went for a group with the same position as the old SSPX? That's called the Resistance BTW. All those who left and joined the Indult or a Sede chapel obviously don't have any principles. They were just annoyed by the SSPX "politics" or something. Seriously! The SSPX is becoming Indult, so to protest, you leave and join the literal Indult location in your area? I've seen it though. The Resistance did NOT gain anything close to 100% of those who left the SSPX -- as it should be, if Trads were as principled as you say.

Again, I disagree. Most of the people coming to the sede chapel have done research and based their decisions on that. That is the definition of principled. Maybe in some or even in many cases these individuals were at some point lulled into a false complacency for some period of time. But others were always on the ball changing their position as they learned more about the crisis. Trads are the least likely to be unprincipled. It is rare in my experience to run across someone who doesn't care about the true doctrines of the Church. If they are wrong it is usually either because they were ignorant of something or because they had been misled by someone else. If you want to say that trads are not perfect, I would agree with that. But to say that 90% of trads are unprincipled is off the mark.

Last Tradhican · « **Reply #2 on:** January 03, 2021, 02:14:00 PM »

At my SSPX chapel the attendance has increased thee fold, that's 3 times the people we had before Covid 19. I'd say we have about 500 people attending mass on Sundays. The new people all came over from the Novus Ordo (N.O.), since their churches were closed or now they have to wear masks and sit 6 feet apart (at the N.O.). So, they are not traditionalists in the 1980's sense of the title, and they also are are not the normal newbies that actually come seeking tradition. Of the 1/3 that were attending before this, I would not really call more than 1/3 of them traditionalist. The traditionalist are mostly gone now, the majority are dead and the others that left, left with the resistance or went independent, or sede. I would not call my SSPX chapel of today an SSPX traditionalist chapel. In the language of the 1990's, I'd call our SSPX chapel a Fraternity of St. Peter or an indult community.

Carissima · « **Reply #3 on:** January 03, 2021, 03:05:33 PM »

Quote from: Last Tradhican on January 03, 2021, 02:14:00 PM

At my SSPX chapel the attendance has increased thee fold, that's 3 times the people we had before Covid 19. I'd say we have about 500 people attending mass on Sundays. The new people all came over from the Novus Ordo (N.O.), since their churches were closed or now they have to wear masks and sit 6 feet apart (at the N.O.). So, they are not traditionalists in the 1980's sense of the title, and they also are are not the normal newbies that actually come seeking tradition.

You know what though, the Novus Ordos who are choosing to attend the Latin Mass are doing a whole lot better than those choosing the ‘Covid19 Sunday Mass dispensation’ granted by Francis. They are also doing better than the ones who are going along with ‘the lie’ and putting on a face mask to enter a House of God.
Perhaps many are finding their way home by stumbling onto Tradition accidentally instead of on purpose. I know some who have found it like this even before covid.
As for my husband and I, we were attending a diocesan Indult for years before we even considered SSPX to be an option. For us, this all happened before the resistance started in 2012. Then in 2012 I accidentally ran into a Fr Hewko sermon video online. Things have not been the same since. As a matter of fact, each step along the way has been a life changing one (by the grace of God)
I’m just commenting that I have seen that the journey to Catholic Tradition can be a long one and not something that happens overnight. Many are just starting their journey and are in much need of prayers. Of course they may not all last, but with how bad things are getting in the world today, this could be the last of the souls being rescued before the deluge that is sure to come.

Yeti · « **Reply #4 on:** January 03, 2021, 03:22:21 PM »

Quote from: Last Tradhican on January 03, 2021, 02:14:00 PM

At my SSPX chapel the attendance has increased thee fold, that's 3 times the people we had before Covid 19. I'd say we have about 500 people attending mass on Sundays. The new people all came over from the Novus Ordo (N.O.), since their churches were closed or now they have to wear masks and sit 6 feet apart (at the N.O.). So, they are not traditionalists in the 1980's sense of the title, and they also are are not the normal newbies that actually come seeking tradition. Of the 1/3 that were attending before this, I would not really call more than 1/3 of them traditionalist. The traditionalist are mostly gone now, the majority are dead and the others that left, left with the resistance or went independent, or sede. I would not call my SSPX chapel of today an SSPX traditionalist chapel. In the language of the 1990's, I'd call our SSPX chapel a Fraternity of St. Peter or an indult community.

.
This sounds dire. Maybe you could suggest to your priest that he preach a few good, hot, roaring sermons on hell fire and the evils of impurity. That should clear out a lot of the chaff.

ByzCat3000 · « **Reply #5 on:** January 04, 2021, 10:09:46 PM »

While I understand what the OP is getting at, and its probably true in some cases, I can see some plausible, principled reasons for the phenomena that Matthew describes.

1: Some people might believe in the acceptability of a range of chapel options and/or they might not have access to a Resistance chapel so they might see it as acceptable to attend another Tridentine chapel whether Indult or Sede (or just staying put). SSPV leans sede but is not dogmatically sede, its easy to imagine someone taking the same position as the ressitance ideally speaking also thinking they could attend there for sacraments.

2: Someone could sincerely take the current SSPX line (as opposed to the indult line... there are still substantial differences) on Rome/Trad relations. I definitely get the impression Lefebvre himself leaned this way in the early 80s, though perhaps I'm wrong.

3: Lefebvre said if his work was blessed by God it would endure. Someone could legitimately see the SSPX, as the 800 lb gorilla of Tradition as it were, as being guided by the Holy Spirit in that the alternative could be seen as ecclesial defection.

4: As a corrolary to this, some people might think the SSPX is licit because it was formed with Rome's approval, and only later canonically suppressed, so they might not see other groups as licit.

I could probably think of others.

andy · « **Reply #6 on:** January 05, 2021, 11:11:13 AM »

I think that the sticky point is that SSPX affirms that Rome is still Catholic, although fallen deeply in the error and the sin, and they still have a chance. While Resistance and Sedes pretty much wrote NO off.

Seraphina · « **Reply #7 on:** January 05, 2021, 12:31:24 PM »

Many can’t join the Resistance formally because there is no chapel reasonably close to attend, say, once a month. Any less than that and the children will not have a stable spiritual life. Not everyone can start their own chapel. I dare say most lack the resources, financial, space, ability to bring in a priest on a regular basis. Example, where I’m staying right now, hunkered down, as +Bp. Williamson would say, would entail a full day’s (or night’s) travel, whether by plane, car, or both. Mass would have to be held outside; not feasible in the far northern US in winter or bad weather. One can only fit a half dozen people in a tiny cabin. Think, “Unibomber” homestead without the bombs! There’s no electric, no plumbing, just an outhouse. The last 18 miles are on a dirt/ice or snow covered/muddy/sandy/ rocky/chuckhole filled logging road. There is room for two small vehicles or one larger one to park. Furthermore, the nearest US airport is a five to six hour drive, season and weather depending. There is an airport slightly closer in Canada, but right now, getting through there with covidmania requires special permits and extensive quarantines. There are no traditional Catholics except for myself. In fact, there are few people living here at all!
It’s a great place to wait out for the S to HTF. But to sponsor Mass? No. Maybe if the FEMA camps are full and there are only a small number of Catholics on the loose that somehow get a priest and smuggle him in for a midnight Mass and out again by daylight.
Log 🪵 🌲 🏕

🐻 🦌 🦃 ❄️ ⛄️ ⛅️ ⛰ ⛰ 🛻 💦 🚶🏼 🌳

Matthew · « **Reply #8 on:** January 05, 2021, 02:06:55 PM »

That kind of proves my point. Going to a specific Trad chapel "for the kids sake" need not be a bad thing -- but it does suggest I'm right, that the person didn't sit down with a stack of books, and with the impartiality of a compass needle, decide which way they were going to go.

I'm not talking about the essentials of the Traditional Movement by the way -- only the "extras" or "accidentals" like Missale version, Pope question, Holy Week version, and Dialogue Mass or No. Even the more subtle elements of "what to consider Vatican II" -- as long as the New Mass isn't coming into the chapel in question, most parishioners don't care you have the extreme "Vatican II Delenda Est" position, or the more liberal "Vatican II is 90% good" of +Fellay, or the typical Indult/conservative position "Vatican II was never properly implemented"

My point is that Trads like to pretend that their whole position, essentials and accidentals, was reached impartially after much study, prayer, and consideration -- but usually it falls into your lap, due to your spouse, family situation (having kids, for example), geography, or countless other happenstances and coincidences.

Then after attending a chapel for years, you obviously aren't going to have an aversion to that chapel's official position, even if you agree somewhat. I knew Sedes who attended my old SSPX chapel -- but they weren't the dogmatic variety, or the Cekada style "anti-una cuм" variety, since they want to an R&R chapel every Sunday, where the priest mentioned the Pope in the Canon of the Mass. Even if such a Sede doesn't "convert" to the chapel's position, he will certainly develop a tolerance for it: they're not that bad, they're not the bad guy, not a big deal, or something along those lines.

Matthew · « **Reply #9 on:** January 05, 2021, 02:11:38 PM »

Quote

"Some people might believe in the acceptability of a range of chapel options"

Um, that's precisely what I'm talking about in this thread. That is the very definition of un-picky, or un-principled. Not getting to hung up on principles -- whatever you want to call it.

They're a solid practicing Trad Catholic maybe -- no plans to go to the Novus Ordo or join any other religion -- but other than that, they don't care. They prefer to spend a total of 1 hour (plus travel time) on "religion" each week -- and the Mass takes an hour. So they don't spend a lot of other time reading books, forums, or wasting valuable brain cells or brain electricity on questions of religion or the Crisis in the Church. A lot of Catholics are either too busy, they are just Sunday Catholics, or dare I say lukewarm.

Just look at what percent of Catholics regularly visit ANY "Traditional Catholic" forum. I would say less than 5% do. What about the rest? They get enough Catholic socialization in-person, because they live in a Catholic mecca like St. Marys, KS? I doubt it. They are obviously doing tons of socializing with pagans and heretics, so they must not have the Faith in the center of their life.

When you are a serious Catholic, with the Faith in the center of your life (who you are, what you do each day) you will NOT be able to happily mingle with pagans and not miss socializing with other Trads. If your day-to-day life is indistinguishable from that of the surrounding pagans, however...

Author Topic: Do Trads have any principles about the Faith, Vatican 2, the Mass? (Read 749 times)

Matthew

Do Trads have any principles about the Faith, Vatican 2, the Mass?

Clemens Maria

Re: Do Trads have any principles about the Faith, Vatican 2, the Mass?

Last Tradhican

Re: Do Trads have any principles about the Faith, Vatican 2, the Mass?

Carissima

Re: Do Trads have any principles about the Faith, Vatican 2, the Mass?

Yeti

Re: Do Trads have any principles about the Faith, Vatican 2, the Mass?

ByzCat3000

Re: Do Trads have any principles about the Faith, Vatican 2, the Mass?

andy

Re: Do Trads have any principles about the Faith, Vatican 2, the Mass?

Seraphina

Re: Do Trads have any principles about the Faith, Vatican 2, the Mass?

Matthew

Re: Do Trads have any principles about the Faith, Vatican 2, the Mass?

Matthew

Re: Do Trads have any principles about the Faith, Vatican 2, the Mass?