Just having a little fun last night thinking about the relationship between the three "types" of Catholics in the Church today and the curious overlaps between them. Not sure if it works well, since I don't have a mathematical/statistical brain so it was the best I could do.
Comments are open, and I'm happy to engage!
I think of it this way. Progressives want Church teachings to change because they don’t want to change themselves, especially on teachings that challenge their personal ‘comfort zone’. Rather than use the term ‘Tradionalists’ for the other group I would label them ‘Authentic Catholics’. They would rather uphold the teachings of the New Testament (without discarding its relationship to the Old Testament), the Catechism and teachings of the Church throughout the centuries, even if it causes personal discomfort and requires ‘making changes’. Guess which group frequently goes to Confession? Which group doesn’t merely claim to believe in the True Presence but proves it by only receiving Our Lord in.a state of grace. As for liturgical worship, I would simply say that you can tell alot about the state of a person’s soul based on their prayer life and the liturgy they believe best serves God. Progressives have a hard time understanding that the liturgy was not designed for Man. It’s a continuation of the ancient sacrifices that were required by the God of all Ages, now in a mystical form through the sacrificial offering of His Son. I may have stepped outside the ‘original diagram’ proposal but I believe on Judgement Day rather than ‘sub groups’ and ‘overlaps’, each of us will be standing either on the left or the right.
ReplyDeleteThere is another group you completely excluded. Those Catholics who embrace Novus Ordo because the prayers can be understood and is the only Mass they have been exposed to in past 60 years.They go regularly to confession, believe the faith taught by the CCC. And are greatly offended by abuses in the church. They carry out spiritual and coporal works of mercy. So, traditional in most ways except Novus Ordo, and, unfortunately, receive the Holy Eucharist in their hand and standing, because that is what the bishop and priests encouraged and demanded. In no way would I consider these people luke warm or progressive.
ReplyDeleteYou bring up some good points, Anonymous (and keep in mind I sketched out this back-of-the-napkin diagram in two minutes, so I wouldn't give it too much credit). However, your comment does give the opportunity to highlight the distinctions between a Traditionalist and a conservative orthodox Catholic that many in the latter camp may not always be aware of. (Btw, I would not be considered a true Traditionalist in the way I will sketch out below in this comment, as I have written numerous posts which I will list below so that you can see where I am coming from).
DeleteSomeone who considers themselves a true traditionalist will not attend the Novus Ordo, often under any circumstances, because they see it as a rupture with the liturgical tradition of the Church which occurred in the late 1960's with the second Vatican council and the Missae of Paul VI...not a 'development' but a revolution. It is not about the Latin or being "traditional in most ways," as you say in your comment. It is a literal line in the sand in which they do not cross because they see the Mass as fundamentally different. The "Golden Unicorn" of the Novus Ordo celebrated ad orientum in Latin with chant is still window dressing on a faulty foundation, though it is objectively more reverent, like a beautiful veneer. Catholics who may be drawn to this Mass may consider themselves more "traditional" but they would not be Traditionalists in the strict sense of the word. Does that make sense?
I do not "embrace" the Novus Ordo as a matter of preference, but nor do I consider it invalid, and I try to very consciously not denigrate it. Even more those who attend it for whatever their reasons (as you mentioned, understanding the language or that it is the only Mass you have been exposed to for 60 years), many of whom would put me to shame in terms of faith and piety. However, I would just as soon refrain from Communion than receive in the hand as a matter of conscience, were a priest refuse to give Communion on the tongue. Thankfully this is not an issue in the Traditional Latin Mass which prevents such a thing by the rubrics of the Mass. This is one reason, among many, why I do not hesitate to encourage people to attend the Latin Mass if they are able and why I do so myself; something things are not always a matter of subjectivity, but objectivity.
I would not consider any faithful Catholic devoted to the works of mercy, prayer, confession, etc to be "lukewarm" or progressive, nor would I want to judge them. However, I do find the law of lex orandi, lex credendi at work in the liturgy I personally felt robbed of having the Novus Ordo be "the only Mass I have been exposed to" from when I became Catholic in 1998 to just five years ago. Thankfully the TLM is much more available now for those who are edified by it.
Thanks for taking the time to comment!
See also:
Here are the links I mentioned.
https://fatherofthefamily.blogspot.com/2022/11/the-novus-ordo-may-one-day-save-your.html
https://fatherofthefamily.blogspot.com/2021/12/the-problem-with-golden-unicorn.html