Traditionalist and non-traditionalist Catholics

Dansiph

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2018
1,349
1,001
UK
✟119,794.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Hello,

I have been reading about Catholicism. It wasn't long before I noticed a "divide" of sorts between traditionalist views and non-traditionalist views.

I am asking if anyone has information about both and also what exists in between.

Today, I saw an article about radical traditionalists or "RadTrads". I also found a book called Infiltration by Dr Taylor Marshall which claims that the Catholic Church has been infiltrated with the plan to "subvert the Catholic Church from within". This is all confusing.

There's all sorts of stances on this subject and I can't get a clear understanding. I'm not sure how to move forward. I got the advice from someone on a livestream to "Get a broader knowledge base of the Catholic Church before moving forward." That's helpful but I also want to tackle the issue. Is this even that big of an issue?
 

pdudgeon

Traditional Catholic
Supporter
In Memory Of
Aug 4, 2005
37,777
12,353
South East Virginia, US
✟493,233.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Republican
yes, going forward, it will become a big issue. Just FYI, "RadTrads" is a derogatory name. Better to go by Traditional Catholics, Modern Catholics, and Liberal Catholics. All three currently exist, so for a person who is new to the Catholic Church, it can become confusing.
 
Upvote 0

zippy2006

Dragonsworn
Nov 9, 2013
6,776
3,377
✟242,011.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Numbers-wise the traditionalist-progressive war makes up only a small percentage of the Church. As a newcomer you should probably just ignore people like Taylor Marshall and James Martin. The catechism and the liturgy are good entrance points into the Catholic world.
 
Upvote 0

Dansiph

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2018
1,349
1,001
UK
✟119,794.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
yes, going forward, it will become a big issue. Just FYI, "RadTrads" is a derogatory name. Better to go by Traditional Catholics, Modern Catholics, and Liberal Catholics. All three currently exist, so for a person who is new to the Catholic Church, it can become confusing.
The short article I read seemed to distinguish between traditionalist and radical traditionalist. They were fine with traditionalism but not the radical aspects. I just don't understand how all this fits in with the authority of the Church's teaching?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Basil the Great

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 9, 2009
4,766
4,085
✟721,243.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Green
You could do some reading about the SSPX group, but even that is somewhat confusing, as I am sure that those who attend SSPX chapels are not all on the same spot on the spectrum of Traditional/Ultra-Traditional Catholicism. A very, very small group of Catholics, probably less than 1% of 1%, believe that the chair of Peter has been vacant since Pope John and Vatican II.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Dansiph
Upvote 0

Rhamiel

Member of the Round Table
Nov 11, 2006
41,182
9,432
ohio
✟241,111.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Ok this is not official but you can kind of see it on a spectrum

extreme liberal, reject dogmas of the faith and substitute it with New Age/Secularist/non-Catholic teachings

Cultural Catholics, are Catholic because their family was nominally Catholic, might view catholicism as integral to their ethnic identity (latino, irish, Italian, whatever)

liberal Catholic, big fans of ecumenism, they have rather novel interpretations but not as far out there as Extreme Liberal camp, Fr James Martin would be an example of this group.

Novus Ordo Catholic, might have one or two liberal opinions and are big fans of mass in English and ecumenicism but are fairly solid on Dogma and the traditions of the Church (at least since 1960) Bishop Barron is an example though some of his views might have him dip over into the liberal camp slightly

Conservative Catholic, very firm on dogma and traditions of the church, might or might not prefer Latin Mass, mildly ecumenical but very cautious about it. Pope Benedict would be on the edge of this and Novus Ordo Catholic and Cardinal Burke would be firmly in the center of this.

Traditionalist, is highly critical of the Second Vatican council and the new order of Mass saying that the Latin Mass is unequivocally superior, very strict on dogma and opposed to false ecumenism instead seeking to convert people to the true Faith. bishop athanasius schneider would be close to this, and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre who died in 1991 would be on the far right of this category.

RadTrad, Totally rejects the authority of the current Pope (either saying Benedict is still Pope or that we have not had a Pope since 1958 or 1963, that last view is called sedevacantist)

So the main issues between these are theological innovations, traditional morality, acceptance of The Second Vatican Council and the changes in the Liturgy that followed, and Ecumenism (which is seen as being connected to Second Vatican council and a theological innovation)
 
Upvote 0

Dansiph

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2018
1,349
1,001
UK
✟119,794.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Ok this is not official but you can kind of see it on a spectrum

extreme liberal, reject dogmas of the faith and substitute it with New Age/Secularist/non-Catholic teachings

Cultural Catholics, are Catholic because their family was nominally Catholic, might view catholicism as integral to their ethnic identity (latino, irish, Italian, whatever)

liberal Catholic, big fans of ecumenism, they have rather novel interpretations but not as far out there as Extreme Liberal camp, Fr James Martin would be an example of this group.

Novus Ordo Catholic, might have one or two liberal opinions and are big fans of mass in English and ecumenicism but are fairly solid on Dogma and the traditions of the Church (at least since 1960) Bishop Barron is an example though some of his views might have him dip over into the liberal camp slightly

Conservative Catholic, very firm on dogma and traditions of the church, might or might not prefer Latin Mass, mildly ecumenical but very cautious about it. Pope Benedict would be on the edge of this and Novus Ordo Catholic and Cardinal Burke would be firmly in the center of this.

Traditionalist, is highly critical of the Second Vatican council and the new order of Mass saying that the Latin Mass is unequivocally superior, very strict on dogma and opposed to false ecumenism instead seeking to convert people to the true Faith. bishop athanasius schneider would be close to this, and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre who died in 1991 would be on the far right of this category.

RadTrad, Totally rejects the authority of the current Pope (either saying Benedict is still Pope or that we have not had a Pope since 1958 or 1963, that last view is called sedevacantist)

So the main issues between these are theological innovations, traditional morality, acceptance of The Second Vatican Council and the changes in the Liturgy that followed, and Ecumenism (which is seen as being connected to Second Vatican council and a theological innovation)
This is a very useful answer. Thanks!
 
Upvote 0

Stabat Mater dolorosa

Jesus Christ today, yesterday and forever!
Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
17,708
8,068
Somewhere up North
✟293,971.00
Country
Norway
Faith
Traditional. Cath.
Marital Status
Single
Ok this is not official but you can kind of see it on a spectrum

extreme liberal, reject dogmas of the faith and substitute it with New Age/Secularist/non-Catholic teachings

Cultural Catholics, are Catholic because their family was nominally Catholic, might view catholicism as integral to their ethnic identity (latino, irish, Italian, whatever)

liberal Catholic, big fans of ecumenism, they have rather novel interpretations but not as far out there as Extreme Liberal camp, Fr James Martin would be an example of this group.

Novus Ordo Catholic, might have one or two liberal opinions and are big fans of mass in English and ecumenicism but are fairly solid on Dogma and the traditions of the Church (at least since 1960) Bishop Barron is an example though some of his views might have him dip over into the liberal camp slightly

Conservative Catholic, very firm on dogma and traditions of the church, might or might not prefer Latin Mass, mildly ecumenical but very cautious about it. Pope Benedict would be on the edge of this and Novus Ordo Catholic and Cardinal Burke would be firmly in the center of this.

Traditionalist, is highly critical of the Second Vatican council and the new order of Mass saying that the Latin Mass is unequivocally superior, very strict on dogma and opposed to false ecumenism instead seeking to convert people to the true Faith. bishop athanasius schneider would be close to this, and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre who died in 1991 would be on the far right of this category.

RadTrad, Totally rejects the authority of the current Pope (either saying Benedict is still Pope or that we have not had a Pope since 1958 or 1963, that last view is called sedevacantist)

So the main issues between these are theological innovations, traditional morality, acceptance of The Second Vatican Council and the changes in the Liturgy that followed, and Ecumenism (which is seen as being connected to Second Vatican council and a theological innovation)

A great summary of where we're at Rhamiel. That being said im inclined to look at the entire life of the church in this same light. The terminology would be different obviously, but the differing perceptions of how to lead a catholic life is probably as old as the church itself. Where there are millions of catholics there will be millions of different views as to how one should adhere (or not...) to the dogmas of the church. I believe some of these trends came to be visualized in the emerging pluralism in western monastisism at the end of the first milenna. The first couple of groups mentioned has probably been a part of the catholic world for a long time too, its just that they had to sit still in previous times so to speak.
What makes these different camps so visible today is the democratic turn that evolved in the west. This was combined and fueld by the internet revolution in the nineties. Theological trends only lasts for so long though, which means that conservativism will once again return to the center stage. The next pope is going to be radically different from pope Francis, mark my words.
 
Upvote 0

Basil the Great

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 9, 2009
4,766
4,085
✟721,243.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Green
Ok this is not official but you can kind of see it on a spectrum

extreme liberal, reject dogmas of the faith and substitute it with New Age/Secularist/non-Catholic teachings

Cultural Catholics, are Catholic because their family was nominally Catholic, might view catholicism as integral to their ethnic identity (latino, irish, Italian, whatever)

liberal Catholic, big fans of ecumenism, they have rather novel interpretations but not as far out there as Extreme Liberal camp, Fr James Martin would be an example of this group.

Novus Ordo Catholic, might have one or two liberal opinions and are big fans of mass in English and ecumenicism but are fairly solid on Dogma and the traditions of the Church (at least since 1960) Bishop Barron is an example though some of his views might have him dip over into the liberal camp slightly

Conservative Catholic, very firm on dogma and traditions of the church, might or might not prefer Latin Mass, mildly ecumenical but very cautious about it. Pope Benedict would be on the edge of this and Novus Ordo Catholic and Cardinal Burke would be firmly in the center of this.

Traditionalist, is highly critical of the Second Vatican council and the new order of Mass saying that the Latin Mass is unequivocally superior, very strict on dogma and opposed to false ecumenism instead seeking to convert people to the true Faith. bishop athanasius schneider would be close to this, and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre who died in 1991 would be on the far right of this category.

RadTrad, Totally rejects the authority of the current Pope (either saying Benedict is still Pope or that we have not had a Pope since 1958 or 1963, that last view is called sedevacantist)

So the main issues between these are theological innovations, traditional morality, acceptance of The Second Vatican Council and the changes in the Liturgy that followed, and Ecumenism (which is seen as being connected to Second Vatican council and a theological innovation)

Rhamiel - Is there any real difference between the RadTrads and the Ultra-Traditionalists or are they effectively one in the same? Also, can we assume that many/most RadTrads and Ultra-Traditionalists would pretty much agree with the late Father Feeney on the EENS salvation doctrine issue?
 
Upvote 0

Gnarwhal

☩ Broman Catholic ☩
Oct 31, 2008
20,373
12,069
36
N/A
✟423,673.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Hello,

I have been reading about Catholicism. It wasn't long before I noticed a "divide" of sorts between traditionalist views and non-traditionalist views.

I am asking if anyone has information about both and also what exists in between.

Today, I saw an article about radical traditionalists or "RadTrads". I also found a book called Infiltration by Dr Taylor Marshall which claims that the Catholic Church has been infiltrated with the plan to "subvert the Catholic Church from within". This is all confusing.

There's all sorts of stances on this subject and I can't get a clear understanding. I'm not sure how to move forward. I got the advice from someone on a livestream to "Get a broader knowledge base of the Catholic Church before moving forward." That's helpful but I also want to tackle the issue. Is this even that big of an issue?

Welcome to OBOB!

I had a whole thing written up but then I saw @Rhamiel basically answered you perfectly so I really have nothing to add.

One thing I will say though is that online you tend to get higher concentrations of these groups in any given place. This sub-forum right here might actually be the most well-balanced I've seen thus far. There are a couple subs on Reddit that are very concentrated either towards traditionalism or modernism/liberalism.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Stabat Mater dolorosa

Jesus Christ today, yesterday and forever!
Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
17,708
8,068
Somewhere up North
✟293,971.00
Country
Norway
Faith
Traditional. Cath.
Marital Status
Single
Welcome to OBOB!

I had a whole thing written up but then I saw @Rhamiel basically answered you perfectly so I really have nothing to add.

One thing I will say though is that online you tend to get higher concentrations of these groups in any given place. This sub-forum right here might actually be the most well-balanced I've seen thus far. There are a couple subs on Reddit that are very concentrated either towards traditionalism or modernism/liberalism.

Yes indeed, the internet tends to draw attention to tiny but vocal fractions. As a side note, I believe its important to stress to newcomers and outsiders that both extremes err in their own respective ways. I'm not saying that being a RadTrad is as bad as being superliberal, but neither one of them are actually catholic in the strictest sense of the word.
To reject the pope is perhaps the least catholic thing a self identified catholic can do (yeah yeah - I've pleayed with the idea in the past myself. "Played with the idea is probably an understatement" though :p )
 
Upvote 0

Dansiph

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2018
1,349
1,001
UK
✟119,794.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Yes indeed, the internet tends to draw attention to tiny but vocal fractions. As a side note, I believe its important to stress to newcomers and outsiders that both extremes err in their own respective ways. I'm not saying that being a RadTrad is as bad as being superliberal, but neither one of them are actually catholic in the strictest sense of the word.
To reject the pope is perhaps the least catholic thing a self identified catholic can do (yeah yeah - I've pleayed with the idea in the past myself. "Played with the idea is probably an understatement" :p )
The rejection of the Pope was one of the most confusing aspects for me.
 
Upvote 0

Basil the Great

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 9, 2009
4,766
4,085
✟721,243.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Green
The rejection of the Pope was one of the most confusing aspects for me.
The rejection of the Pope is pretty much tied to the thinking of some that Vatican II issued teachings which were not in accord with the past teachings of the Church. Thus the only way that a small percentage of Catholics can reconcile what they see as a repudiation of historic Catholic teaching, is to believe that all Popes starting with Vatican II are invalid. While almost anything in life is a possibility, it seems extremely unlikely that the Vatican will ever repudiate the validity of the elections of the Vatican II Popes.
 
Upvote 0

Stabat Mater dolorosa

Jesus Christ today, yesterday and forever!
Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
17,708
8,068
Somewhere up North
✟293,971.00
Country
Norway
Faith
Traditional. Cath.
Marital Status
Single
The rejection of the Pope was one of the most confusing aspects for me.

No wonder! It's strange indeed. Their rejection of the pope/ popes is depending on their views and how they look at Vatican ii. Some fiercely reject the outcome of the council to such an extent that they consider the post counciliar church a quasi catholic cult - thus they despise it. Yes I know, its quite extreme! Some have even elected their own Pope, lol. Google Pope Michael and you'll see what I mean.
This however is a VERY small minority and as you can see they're no more catholic than any other cult known to man.
The most common version of papal rejection is a rejection of the current pope. As I'm sure you're aware of, pope Benedict resigned in 2013 and some believe that he did so due to internal pressure and dirty lobbying by a fraction of the cardinals. If so canon law dictates that the resignation should be considered invalid. Thing is pope Benedict have rejected any such notions over and over again.

So basically you have two types of radicals or extremes as Rhamiel phrased it. You have those who discredit the current pope and consider Pope Benedict to be a pope kept in captivity (LOL, Right?) and the other type of radicals who consider the post counciliar church to be illegitimate in its very essence. Both groups are in a state of schism with the church and the Holy See.

Its important to stress the fact that these groups are tiny, tiny minorities. Its not like the church is filled up with them in any way :)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Stabat Mater dolorosa

Jesus Christ today, yesterday and forever!
Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
17,708
8,068
Somewhere up North
✟293,971.00
Country
Norway
Faith
Traditional. Cath.
Marital Status
Single
The rejection of the Pope is pretty much tied to the thinking of some that Vatican II issued teachings which were not in accord with the past teachings of the Church. Thus the only way that a small percentage of Catholics can reconcile what they see as a repudiation of historic Catholic teaching, is to believe that all Popes starting with Vatican II are invalid. While almost anything in life is a possibility, it seems extremely unlikely that the Vatican will ever repudiate the validity of the elections of the Vatican II Popes.

Yes, some of the teachings (especially the HD and NA) requires some real theological gymnastics in order to fit with the church prior to the council.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Basil the Great

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 9, 2009
4,766
4,085
✟721,243.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Green
Yes, some of the teachings (especially the HD and NA) requires some real theological gymnastics in order to fit with the church prior to the council.
I have not seen a more accurate post on the CF website in many moons, Stabat.......
 
Upvote 0

Gnarwhal

☩ Broman Catholic ☩
Oct 31, 2008
20,373
12,069
36
N/A
✟423,673.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Yes indeed, the internet tends to draw attention to tiny but vocal fractions. As a side note, I believe its important to stress to newcomers and outsiders that both extremes err in their own respective ways. I'm not saying that being a RadTrad is as bad as being superliberal, but neither one of them are actually catholic in the strictest sense of the word.
To reject the pope is perhaps the least catholic thing a self identified catholic can do (yeah yeah - I've pleayed with the idea in the past myself. "Played with the idea is probably an understatement" though :p )

Very good point.

It is worth noting that some radtrads have a tendency to LARP when they pine for times long past to such an extreme that they refuse to acknowledge what might be good today. Modernists have their own issues, which like you said, are arguably worse because they're interwoven with heterodoxy and heresy.

Believe me, I prefer the old ways. In fact, I'm in the early development stages for a documentary about why traditional Catholicism is good for all aspects of life. But that's neither here nor there. I love the old ways, but I do still acknowledge that, for example, the Novus Ordo is a valid Mass. I attend it, I would just prefer the TLM were an option.
 
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,169
16,009
Flyoverland
✟1,224,061.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
The rejection of the Pope was one of the most confusing aspects for me.
While I have trouble with this current pope I do not reject that he is the valid pope and I have to respect his authority. Others, on the fringe, reject his authority and the validity of his election to be pope. Most of us here are, to varying degrees, troubled by this pope but accept his authority.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dansiph
Upvote 0

Dansiph

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2018
1,349
1,001
UK
✟119,794.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I love the old ways, but I do still acknowledge that, for example, the Novus Ordo is a valid Mass. I attend it, I would just prefer the TLM were an option.
Even with non-religious stuff I like anything with history and tradition. But Novus Ordo or what I understand of it appeals to me. However the church I'm probably going to attend has an option at 3:00pm for a Latin Mass. I also like the language used in the Douay Rheims if that's of any importance?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Stabat Mater dolorosa

Jesus Christ today, yesterday and forever!
Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
17,708
8,068
Somewhere up North
✟293,971.00
Country
Norway
Faith
Traditional. Cath.
Marital Status
Single
Even with non-religious stuff I like anything with history and tradition. But Novus Ordo or what I understand of it appeals to me. However the church I'm probably going to attend has an option at 3:00pm for a Latin Mass. I also like the language used in the Douay Rheims if that's of any importance?

Well if you're in love with the Douay Rheims edition you're in good company. I'm not loving it though, I find modern editions such as New American Bible and CTS to be more suitable to my english skills as its my third language. I bought a copy of the Douay Rheims edition a few years back, but it's hard for me to enjoy it and understand it properly.

As for TLM vs Novus Ordo, I'll recommend that you go to both of them. They're both beautiful in their own ways. The former is very rich in symbolism and has a certain reverence to it that you won't find elsewhere (in my opinion), and the latter is quite beautiful in its simplicity.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0