Single RadTrad Catholic Seeks Same

by Jimmy Akin

in The Church


As someone who has surveyed the various Catholic singles sites and even posted a profile on one of them, I know the difficulty of finding marriageable like-minded Catholics. Although the Internet match services are somewhat distasteful for me — although the ticking of my biological clock overrode that personal distaste for a while — they have been very successful in matching people who would otherwise never have met. I know couples who have been the beneficiaries of the good these sites can accomplish and so I’m hardly one to seek to tear down good services.

That said, I couldn’t help but roll my eyes when I surfed into, a site that seeks to match you with the RadTrad Catholic man or woman of your dreams:

"Begin meeting other Traditional Catholic singles from around the country today. With a full membership, you are able to email and chat with other members and post on our Message Boards; plus, you’ll be notified of new emails as you receive them, as well as upgraded services our website will offer in the coming months.

"The owners of this website are Traditional Catholics, and we, as well as many all over the world, continue to pray that the Traditional Latin Mass and Catholic Faith will be made available to all for the salvation of souls."


"Michelle," you might be murmuring, "Aren’t you being a bit harsh? Just because these proprietors like the Latin Mass and think the Catholic faith should be spread throughout the world hardly makes them RadTrads."

True. That’s why you need to know that the site links to the schismatic Society of St. Pius X, the sedevacantist Society of St. Pius V, and the sedevacantist Novus Ordo Watch. It hosts an article that seriously proposes that the canonization of John Paul II would be "a large slap in the face to all the saints who did defend the Catholic faith."


"Okay, okay," you’re saying, "The site’s loony. You’re not going to find the man of your dreams there. But why do you care if RadTrad Catholics do find the man or woman of their dreams at that site?"

Fair question.

I care because it saddens me that there are Catholics so isolated from the mainstream of life within the Church that they cannot find marriage partners on a mainstream Catholic singles site. And I care because the couples that form on that site will likely perpetuate that sense of isolationism into the next generation.  A Catholic isolated from his own Church is like a blood cell isolated from the body through which it is supposed to flow.  The more Catholics who are so isolated, now and in future generations, the more blood there is being drained from the mystical body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:12-27).

If you liked this post, you should join Jimmy's Secret Information Club to get more great info!

What is the Secret Information Club?I value your email privacy


Brent Brown February 27, 2006 at 10:44 am

It is sad. However it seems to be the norm. All throughout Church history there have been groups that have isolated themselves, convinced that their own theories are somehow more trustworthy than Christ’s promise to guide his Church. There’s comfort to be had in seeing how this has happened in the past, and how the Church has always been protected.
As far as the single sites, I would have been ALL OVER that back when I was looking for my bride. I don’t think there should be a stigma attached to that at all. God helps those who help themselves, as they say… 😉

Breier February 27, 2006 at 11:32 am

You’re overreaching. Yes there’s a page of links to the fringe, which no doubt reflects the views of whoever set up the website. But that tells you nothing about the people who have actually set up profiles there. Most of the profiles I looked at were hardly “radtrad” at all. It’s a forum for people attached to the Latin Mass, but being a “radtrad” is not a sine qua non. It’s an error to impute views of a webmaster to everyone who visits a website.

Breier February 27, 2006 at 11:37 am

As for subgroups setting up matching websites, would you have a difficulty with a “Republican” or “Democrat” dating service? People naturally want to find similarity and complementarity in a prospective spouse.
Would you excorciate an “Eastern Catholic” dating service that catered to helping Eastern Catholics find someone who shared their distinctive traditions?
Then what’s wrong with a “Traditional Catholic” website, which reflects people who follow the pre-conciliar traditions, which are at such cultural variance from contemporary mores.
By the same token, I wouldn’t be bothered by charismatics hosting their own dating website, or Opus Dei folks, or anyone else. People have a right to be as picky as they chose.

Breier February 27, 2006 at 11:41 am

Most “mainstream” Catholic dating sites reflect the mainstream appaling ignorance of Catholic catechetics, doctrine, and cultural traditions.
The traditional Latin Mass, and the concomitant traditions it enshrines, is de facto, though not de jure, a separate rite from the Novus Ordo. I have no problem with people looking for someone from their own “rite.”
And this is very practicial. There are many homes that are split by the “reform of the liturgy,” with a husband going to the New Mass, and the wife to the Old, or vice versa. This is not an ideal circumstance, and unless you force people to go to one or the other, you can blame folks for looking for commonality among the things they hold most precious.

Michelle Arnold February 27, 2006 at 11:41 am

I think it is fair to state that the “leanings” of those who set up profiles on the site can be determined by the site’s own philosophy. It says something about a person’s beliefs when he chooses to identify himself as a “constituent” of a site that promotes societies in schism and those that believe in sedevacantism. At the very least, it demonstrates a large measure of imprudence for a mainstream traditional Catholic to choose to try and find a marriage partner on such a site.

Breier February 27, 2006 at 11:53 am

I can understand your concern, but I still think it a mistake to impute a monolithic view to all the members of a website.
Just as it would be wrong to assume that everyone who reads the blog agrees with it, or that everyone who subscribes to a magazine endorses it in toto, so too would it be wrong to impute the views of a web-creator to everone who takes advantage of it.
If I took out a personal ad in the New York Times, would that be a failure of prudence, because the Times is a liberal paper? Would I be a patron of liberalism? Of course not.
Would it be wrong for a Catholic to set up a personnel ad on a non-Catholic website? It’s not apparent to me. There might be some good Catholic readers on that generic website.
Similarly, there is no single emporium of orthodox Catholic singles. People are spread all over the place. Many of the profiles on the Traditional Catholic site are also on other mainstream sites. People want to have their bases covered.
There is no “non-rad-trad” Latin Mass singles website, as far as I know of, so I see nothing bothersome about posting an add on that website. It’s the only available forum of its kind.

Breier February 27, 2006 at 12:00 pm

In short, Michelle’s views would be correct if the only people on the website were “rad-trads.” Why go to a website that only has people you can’t marry?
But of course this is not the case. The website is not a monolithic mass of radical traditionalism. There are many other reasons people would go to it, for instance, it’s the only Latin Mass singles website out there.
Therefore it’s quite possible to go there with the intention of finding a “non-rad-trad,” as it were.
Further, it is not true that paying money to someone means you endorse their views. If that were true we could only buy and sell from orthodox Catholics, which is absurd.

Sifu Jones February 27, 2006 at 12:14 pm

Not to step on Michelle’s toes here, but Breier, it seems like you might be missing the larger point.
While I agree with you about not attributing the views of a particular website to all those who frequent it, it seems like common sense to admit that, while there are many faithful catholics like you and, at times, me that don’t prefer the N.O., most aren’t serious enough about it to seek out a “no N.O.” dating site.
The fact that they go to THAT site, and not some other orthodox Catholic site, shows that people using it are particularly valuing that aspect which makes the site unique. Not to say that they all value the Latin Mass more than they do the church, only that their mindset is very likely predominately “anti-N.O.”
Even if one believes in papal authority all the way up to Benedict XVI but thinks the N.O. was a terrible juridical mistake, why would you want to found a relationship based on something that is, basically, nonessential to your faith?
Unless they think it IS essential to their faith, which then makes them, at heart, sede or schismatic.
So their either sympathizers, closet sympathizers, or not very wise about how relationships work. Seems to me like that’s three good reasons to find another site.

Breier February 27, 2006 at 12:47 pm

Your objections could equally be appled to a Byzantine Rite Catholic, in union with Rome, who wants to meet someone who is also a Byzantine Catholic.
It could also apply to an ethnic group, like Italians, who want to meet someone of the same ethnic and cultural background.
It could also apply to people who want to marry non-smokers and non drinkers.
All these would be subject to the objection, “why would you want to found a relationship based on something that is, basically, nonessential to your faith?”
Isn’t the answer clear? Of course you want to build your relationship on faith, but having the same faith is not enough to make a relationship work. There has to be more.
So there is no problem with people wanting to marry someone who shares their liturgical heritage, any more than there is with a Republican who wants to marry a Republican.
I agree with you that there’d be a problem if being “anti-NO” was the prime consideration, and the expense of more important things.
But practically speaking, this is no idle question. Families are frequently split by where they go to Mass. I can hardly blame people for looking for someone who will go to Mass with them.

Michelle Arnold February 27, 2006 at 12:53 pm

Okay, Breier, your objections to my post are understood and duly noted. Please now refer to Rule 2. Thanks!

Inquisitor Generalis February 27, 2006 at 12:57 pm

Great. More trad baiting, that’s just what this site needs. Anyway, allow us to make a couple of points:
1. The SSPX is not in schism. Cardinal Hoyos has made this clear already. Neo-Catholics who keep repeating this are bearing false witness and condemning themselves.
2. That’s a pan-traditionalist site that pretty much includes the full spectrum of Tradition. Some of the ppl who post their profiles there are indult trads, some SSPXers and independents, and some are sedes. So what if they want to exclude Novus Ordinarians from their list of potential dating partners? That’s completely understandable. The Novus Ordo is insane.

Suscipe February 27, 2006 at 1:20 pm

“I care because it saddens me that there are Catholics so isolated from the mainstream of life within the Church that they cannot find marriage partners on a mainstream Catholic singles site.”
If this saddens you perhaps you should direct your concern at the mainstream Catholics. The fact is that Catholics who hope to find love at the site are probably shunned by the mainstream Catholics at their local parish. The isolation is not necessarily self imposed.
“A Catholic isolated from his own Church is like a blood cell isolated from the body through which it is supposed to flow. The more Catholics who are so isolated, now and in future generations, the more blood there is being drained from the mystical body of Christ”
Good metaphor but lets take this further and describe what led to the cell’s isolation. In this instance we are talking about the heart being thrust from the body. The Latin Mass is that heart and, with its separation, the bleeding is profuse. Really, it is the “blood cells” who have stayed with or flowed to the heart that are attempting to save the mystical body. The “mainstream” seems to care less.

Inocencio February 27, 2006 at 1:23 pm

Inquisitor Generalis,
The five named clerics of the SSPX committed a schismatic act as publicly documented by Pope John Paul II. The pope’s authority does not come from us, but God. And cardinals do not have more authority than the pope and neither do you. The only one who can clear up the matter is Pope Benedict XVI. Hopefully he will very soon.
Take care and God bless,

jimroche February 27, 2006 at 1:23 pm

I have to say that if I was single then I would prefer to marry someone I would attend Mass with.
That would mean a traditionalist. On a very practical level there is the question of the wedding itself.

Inquisitor Generalis February 27, 2006 at 1:57 pm

Exactly, Jim. It absolutely has to be the Traditional Mass for the wedding.

jimroche February 27, 2006 at 2:11 pm

I don’t know about you guys but I have attended some Novus Ordo weddings that a pagan would be embarrassed by let alone a Catholic.
I really don’t blame the couples who are invited to become liturgists and more or less make up their own ceremony.

Cin February 27, 2006 at 2:19 pm

Christ is the heart of the Church, not a particular type of Mass. Period.
Besides, there is more to trad worship than the Latin Mass. Have you been to a Byzantine Catholic rite, where everyone gets down on the floor at the end and prostrates themselves in front of the Eucharist? WOW!

Tim J. February 27, 2006 at 2:21 pm

“The Latin Mass is that heart and, with its separation, the bleeding is profuse.”
The Latin Mass is the heart of the Body of Christ?
Whatever did the poor Christians of the first several centuries do without it?
I developed, you know, and was not dropped into our laps directly from heaven.
I love the Latin Mass. I want it back. I think it kicks the Novus Ordo’s tail, but being that it was developed by human beings, it probably has its flaws, too.
I see in some an unhealthy obsession with with the Latin Mass that reminds me of the Protestant obsession with the Bible. Both wonderful things, great things, indescibable gifts… but not the be-all and end-all that they are made out to be.

joe February 27, 2006 at 3:02 pm

I agree Tim. Someone mentioned to me which parish they were a member of last night. I replied, “that’s a nice parish.” He replied, “they are all nice parishes.” On one level he was right. It never hurts to be reminded not to confuse the vehicle for the content. Recently been reading about those pesky donatists–guess we all have to be conscience of everyday flaws in thinking.

Breier February 27, 2006 at 3:21 pm

Noone is denying the validity of sacraments administered by sinful priests. In one sense you’re quite right, whererever you go, provided there’s valid matter, form, and intent, you find the sacraments. But we can’t content ourselves with sacramental minimalism. To do so is to deny the value and important of liturgy, of beauty, and of so much else that enriches and nourishes the Catholic spiritual life.
Moreover, valid sacraments do not cure the dangers of a heretical or sacreligious context. Hence the validity of the Mass is no reason to endanger one’s faith, and charity, by sitting through a manifestly heretical sermon week after week.
Our experience of the sacraments, and the grace we derive from them, is largely dependent on externals independent of the sacrament’s validity. We receive according as we are disposed. And in that regard, all parishes are not equally.

Michelle Arnold February 27, 2006 at 3:32 pm

You’ve posted over a quarter of the comments to this thread in progress (so far) and most of those in rapid succession. Please, refer to Rule 2. Per Jimmy’s rules, if the subject is broached again, you’ll be more than welcome to contribute again. Thanks!

Jason February 27, 2006 at 3:57 pm

“If once again we succeed in pointing out and living the fullness of the Catholic religion with regard to these points, we may hope that the schism of Lefebvre will not be of long duration.” (Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, 1988)
Sure sounds like a schism to me.

bill912 February 27, 2006 at 4:54 pm

Jason and Tim J, don’t you know that it is terribly gauche to point out inconvenient facts? Next thing you know, Inocencio will quote “Ecclesia Dei” again and rudely remind us what Pope John Paul the Great said on the subject.

hippo354 February 27, 2006 at 6:04 pm

Well, to get back to the original topic of the Traditional dating website, I think it ought to be shunned for it’s dreadful religious art. That picture of Jesus with the ringlets and rosy cheeks and low muscle tone is scary.
BTW, I know a couple that met on Ave Maria Singles and both attend the Latin Mass exclusively. I never asked whether they allow you to specify though.

dymphna February 27, 2006 at 8:20 pm

Here we go again. It seems like every three months somebody of the various blogs just has to take a poke at the trads. Fr. Groeschel was talking about this kind of thing (in a round about way) on his show last night. He mentioned that both sides need to remember what the Church teaches about charity.

Inquisitor Generalis February 28, 2006 at 1:11 am

“That picture of Jesus with the ringlets and rosy cheeks and low muscle tone is scary.”
To tell you the truth, we weren’t fans of that one, either. Nonetheless, Michelle should learn to leave trads alone.

joe February 28, 2006 at 5:04 am

I got the impression that Michelle is saddened primarily by disunity within the body of Christ; not by faithful catholics who prefer the latin mass.

John February 28, 2006 at 5:40 am

I find this offensive, labeling someone who prefers the Traditional Mass and worshiping and following scripture and catechisms untainted by the 1960’s and the liberal culture as being “Radical”. Traditional Catholics take their marriage vows seriously and many that I have known over the years have little or no divorce in their family, except for those children who rejected the tradtional church in favor of the Novus Ordo because it is “More Loving” and have had children out of wedlock, divorce, you name it.
I met my wife through a traditional Catholic where she was attending and after 10 sessions of 2 and 3 hour pre-cana’s with a traditional priest, and readings and tests, I knew what I was getting into
I suggest maybe the Vatican takes note of what is working in the Traditionals and maybe want to follow suit, the age of “Love” was a nice concept, but living in a world of sin, one must have their catechism and receive proper sacraments to ward off those evil temptations, and then one can easily Love

tim February 28, 2006 at 6:46 am

“I care because it saddens me that there are Catholics so isolated from the mainstream of life within the Church…”
With respect, St. Athanasius and the few others who adhered to the truth of the Catholic faith in the face of the Arian heresy would also have been out of the mainstream of the day. Perhaps we should focus, not on demographics, but on the truth.
And if your response is that those like St. Athanasius were really the mainstream, and that the majority of Arians was outside the mainstream, then I would respectfully apply the same standard today.
There is so much error countenanced by Catholics today– and not necessarily through their own fault, but just by being brought up in the wreckage caused by 40 years of poor or intentionally bad catechesis– that we should focus on what the Church actually teaches, and have the courage to ask for God’s grace to accept it. It is time to pull together to fix the mess.

Sean S. February 28, 2006 at 7:16 am

“Nonetheless, Michelle should learn to leave trads alone.”
Maybe you should try leaving “neo-Catholics” alone, then….

bill912 February 28, 2006 at 7:35 am

Tim, St. Athanasius was obedient to the authority of the Holy Father. The Arians were disobedient, like the SSPX and other schismatics. Ubi Petrus, ibi Ecclesia.

joe February 28, 2006 at 8:21 am

Tim and Bill, It appears you agree with eachother. It seems that if the sory of the Arians proves anything, it’s that the fulcrum–the successor to Peter–is indeed the rock, even amidst a whirling storm of heterodoxy within the ranks of fellow bishops.

tim February 28, 2006 at 8:46 am

joe and bill,
my only point about the arians/athanasius analogy was to focus on the “mainstream” argument. I am not a member of the sspx, but consider myself a traditionalist. I do my best to follow the timeless teachings of the Church, and I will maintain to the grave that the traditional Mass is VASTLY superior to the novus ordo, even the mythical, non-existant “properly celebrated” novus ordo. I obey the Pope, because he is Peter. Vatican II cannot err, but it can be distorted, and has been– perhaps that was the intent of many of the Council Fathers themselves. Of course, being a council of the Church, it can be, and must be, read in a way to square it with the dogmas of the faith.
But remember, the teachings of the Church we must follow; the opinions of Church leaders, we may with just reason decline to agree.
For all those who desire the holiness of the timeless Mass, fidelity to the Holy Father, and consistent adherence to the truths fo the faith, I urge you to check out the Institute of Christ the King, Sovereign Priest, at
God bless.

Maureen February 28, 2006 at 9:31 am

It sounds to me as though there’s a crying need for a dating site for non-rad Catholics of a traditional bent.
Also, it sounds to me like someone needs to write a song for traditional Catholic ladies looking for love: “At Mass I’ll Leave My Hat On”. :)

Brian February 28, 2006 at 10:55 am

I agree that traditional Catholics are “isolated” to a greater or lesser extent from the rest of their Church, but I would not necessarily say that they have “isolated themselves”. At the moment I`m studying in the south of Germany. At the “student Masses” at the university church they sometimes play Beatles songs on a CD player in place of a sermon (I’m not kidding). Two weeks ago at the largest Catholic church in the town, the priest in his homily said that only an “unloving God” would have given the prescriptions regarding leprosy in the book of Leviticus, and that the first reading that morning was not God’s Word.
At another town in the region, an Indult Mass in the traditional rite is celebrated twice a month. I go there and back by train. It’s expensive and time-consuming, but if I didn’t do it I think I’d go mad. I feel very isolated, but I don’t think that it’s my fault.
In the present state of things, where I frequently find myself questioning the sanity of many high and mighty ones in what SSPXers call “the conciliar Church”, I can fully understand and sympathise with the desire of traditional Catholics to meet with like-minded people over the net.

Mary Alexander February 28, 2006 at 10:58 am

You wonder why Traditional Catholics need their own website? What do you think the % of Catholic who obey the Church on birth control is on your mainstream catholic website? Probably pretty close to the national average of 2-10%
You should be thrilled at the prospect of Traditional catholics marrying and having families. It’s the only chance we have of not letting the Muslims overrun us completely.
Family life is the key here and 2 kids and 2 cars and 2 careers in a subdivision doesn’t cut it for authentic Catholic culture.

bill912 February 28, 2006 at 11:06 am

“What do you think the % of Catholic(sic) who obey the Church on birth control is on your mainstream catholic(sic) website? Probably pretty close to the national average of 2-10%”
Please show us the evidence you have to back up your accusation that only 2-10 % of Catholics who comment on this website obey the Church’s teachings on birth control.

joe February 28, 2006 at 11:14 am

“What do you think the % of Catholic who obey the Church on birth control is on your mainstream catholic website? Probably pretty close to the national average of 2-10%”
With all due deference,I’d be awfully suprised if that were true. From everything I’ve read of Jimmy, Michelle, and persons affiliated with catholic answers, they are people faithful to God’s Word, both in scripture & tradition. If they are mainstream–Wow: wouldn’t that be great. I don’t know about anyone else, but the individuals I associate with the unfortunate mainstream, those whom Fr. John Carrapi affectionately refers to as “butt catholics”; I’m Catholic, but I contracept; I’m Catholic, but I’m pro-choice; I’m Catholic, but there is nothing wrong with my daughter living with her boyfriend. These individuals definitely would squirm if presented with the sound and faithful messages presented by Catholic Answers and here at JA.

Michelle Arnold February 28, 2006 at 11:15 am

“Please show us the evidence you have to back up your accusation that only 2-10 % of Catholics who comment on this website obey the Church’s teachings on birth control.”
Bill, I believe Ms. Alexander was referring to mainstream Catholic singles sites like Catholic Match and Ave Maria Singles and not to Even so, it is a sweeping generalization based upon an absence of evidence (particularly since AMS, for one, specifically caters to Catholic singles who are orthodox on matters of doctrine and morals).

bill912 February 28, 2006 at 11:18 am

Michelle, she wrote: “YOUR mainstream Catholic website”. I took that to mean JA.O

Michelle Arnold February 28, 2006 at 11:42 am

“Michelle, she wrote: ‘YOUR mainstream Catholic website.’ I took that to mean JA.O”

A reasonable conclusion, but to give her the benefit of the doubt I think she was speaking in the manner of “your [average] mainstream Catholic website.”

John March 1, 2006 at 4:45 am

You seem to have an issue with the Traditional Catholic woman who wear veils/hats while attending mass, out of reverence, as the men who attend come in suit and tie or at least slacks and jacket for the most part compared to the New Mass where flip flops, t-shirts and shorts are the norm
Dont forget Our Lady was never seen without a head covering of some sort and this goes back to OT and was followed by the church for 1970 years, but I guess the need to break with “tradition” and implore feminism into the church was just to much for Bugnini and Paul VI to resist. Shameful when the church feels the need to compromise time tested traditions with biblical standards to conform to the secular world instead of imploring the secular world to find the strength to be more like the church. This is the main argument of Traditionalists, it has nothing to do really with Latin and sedevacantism really does not matter to most traditionalists that I know, just a discussion piece and a divisive ploy that many who are against the Traditionalists try to throw at them to make them look “radical”. But the one thing that all traditionalists have in common, and the movement is really less than 20 years old, is that they know something is rotten in Denmark so to speak with all of these changes and there has been a huge push with SSPX and SSPV and other websites to bring the traditionalists under one banner.
I will be attending an ordination ceremony at my wifes uncles church along with my entire family for new traditional priests being ordiained into the priesthood as I find these old ceremonies amazing and makes me feel proud to be called CATHOLIC

bill912 March 1, 2006 at 6:12 am

Maureen, I like the line. But, of course, I realize that you were engaged in a little light-hearted humor.
And the guy should wear a white sportcoat and a pink crustacean (or carnation, or something like that).

Mary Alexander March 1, 2006 at 7:47 am

Dear Michelle,
I was referring to mainstream “Catholic” websites and not Jimmy Akin. The 2-10% number is fairly standard and I’m sure I could come up w/ a dozen references to it in the major media if you are really that incredulous. But honestly amongst the “Catholics” that you know, would you say the number is higher?
The reason I bring this up is that my sister who has joined some of the dating websites has found this to be the case. Naively or optimistically, she believed that those who endorsed contraception would be in the minority. Sadly that has not been the case. In fact, I remember vividly that when she was dating a “good Catholic” who had come to visit us and our (at the time) four children asked her earnestly if we “didn’t know about NFP?” Because clearly 4 was way too many. And he saw himself as an obedient Catholic. I guess someone should explain to him the difference between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law.
I think you must have a very wonderful group of Catholic families that you know who are all informed and obedient to the Church’s teaching on birth control. I am so glad to hear that. Here in the Northeast I am surprised to find that many, many Catholics (and I know only because they insist on telling me) do not share the Church’s views on openness to life.
To the person who kindly pointed out all my errors- thank you. I was nursing my 8th child while I typed. She is sleeping now so I’m able to be more attentive.
I do wonder why it is that we must attack one another, rather than error or heresy.
Mary Alexander

bill912 March 1, 2006 at 7:53 am

Mary Alexander, sorry for my misread of your prior post. (“What we got he-yah is fail-ya t’communicate.”) (Do I have to spend a night in “The Box”?)

Mary Alexander March 1, 2006 at 7:54 am

Here’s a link to an article about Bishop Olmstead’s requirement that Catholic couples hoping to marry must take an NFP course.
It states that 9 out of 10 women America Catholic women have been on the pill and 65% of lay people and 40% of priests do not think that contraceptive use is always sinful.

Vivian March 1, 2006 at 11:43 am

Mary is totally correct
All of my Catholic friends as well as my sisters all church goers but not Traditionalists are using some form of contraception and and I know for a fact 2 of them have had abortions back in the late 1970’s or early 80’s when in our teens
Is that any more obedient than a traditionalist who wants to worship God in the most reverent way and attends the TLM either at a SSPX or SSPV church? I say not

bill912 March 1, 2006 at 11:49 am

We finally agree, Vivian. Disobedience is disobedience.

joe March 1, 2006 at 11:49 am

Good Post!

Inquisitor Generalis March 1, 2006 at 11:55 am

“Disobedience is disobedience.”
Ah, yes, the simple minded, black/white thinking of the neo-Catholics… Catholicism does not teach this.

bill912 March 1, 2006 at 12:01 pm

Words of wisdom from the one who commented: “I can’t even think about (Pope John Paul II) without going into a violent rage.” Pray for IG.

bill912 March 1, 2006 at 12:05 pm

Come to think of it, Truth IS a black and white thing.

hippo354 March 1, 2006 at 12:15 pm

Curiously, the only people I know who have had an affair are from the local SSPX chapel.

Margaret March 1, 2006 at 12:20 pm

I guess what frustrates me the most about someTraditionalists (not all so don’t jump all over me!) is the tone that implies that they are simply the last bastion of faithful Catholicism. These Traditionalists are basically willing to paint all other “Novus Ordo” Catholics with the same brush– disobedient, contracepting, impious, picking-and-choosing, etc. etc. etc.
I hope everyone can understand that this line of thinking would be rather offensive to those of us “Novus Ordo” Catholics who do, actually, struggle daily to live as truly faithful Catholics. Many of the commenters on this website are raising large families, pray the Rosary, strive to pass on the faith whole and intact to our children, go to confession regularly, etc. Yet the dismissive tone of some Traditionalists simply…. dismisses us. We don’t exist.
So while we certainly need avoid snide or uncharitable comments towards the Traditionalists, I do wish the Traditionalists would avoid dividing the whole world into Faithful (them) versus Cafeteria (us) Catholics.

Mary Alexander March 1, 2006 at 1:57 pm

Dear Margaret,
I think you make some excellent points. I guess, speaking as someone who would consider myself a Traditionalist, we often feel dismissed by people like you. If I had a dollar for for every Catholic who thought that ANYONE who attends a Latin Mass anywhere is a schismatic, well I wouldn’t need to play the lottery anymore. The reason I have stopped attending N.O. Masses was a series of bad experiences I had. First the priest started talking about how reading Playboy Magazine was good because women are beautiful creations. Something I could deal with but my children didn’t need to hear. The sermons continue to decline and became consistently crude and vulgar. Last year I attended a N.O. Mass in Toronto where we had travelled b/c my fil was dying of cancer. The priest refused to give me Communion b/c I didn’t want to receive in the hand. The fact that I was carrying a one year old baby I “thought” would mitigate his anger. It didn’t. I was told that I would spread disease by receiving on the tongue. I wrote to the Bishop quoting Redemptoris Sacramentum and was told that the priest was correct b/c there was obviously something “about me” that made him think I should not receive. When you have these types of experiences and then add the disapproval of those who think having anymore than 2 children is foolish, we start to cleave to people who are more like us. We become comfortable in our ghettoes.
You sound like a wonderful person that I would be glad to know. I don’t think any less of you for attending the N.O. or more of myself for attending the TLM but I find that it helps my spirituality and that of my children.
But I would like to point out that what started this discussion was a post criticizing Traditional Catholics. I think it would be fascinating to go on some Catholic dating sites and do a sampling of how many people are open to life and against birth control.
Wish I had the time! LOL

joe March 1, 2006 at 2:17 pm

Great series of posts.
I squirm whenever liturgical abuses occurr. I say to my wife,” if I hear the priest rattle of “creator, redeemer and the Holy Spirit” one more time instead of saying “Father Son and Holy spirit” I am going to blow smoke out of my ears. it would be nice if more people of your persuasion and fidelity would remain in the pew in front of me–maybe we could be more forceful about affecting obedience within our parishes. On the other hand, I don’t see how anyone, yourself included, should feel obliged to stay; much like I don’t expect to send my child to the local catholic school to beef up the much lacking orthodoxy. Sorry if this is a ramble…

Stephen L.M. Heiner March 2, 2006 at 4:50 am

I’ve heard rumbles of this article here and there, and while I disagreed with some of the premises and conclusions, it was the silly and pedantic direction that the comments took that grabbed my attention.
Everything from randomly quoting Cardinal Ratzinger from 1988 to say there is a schism (when such information, based on documents from Rome, are absolutely not current) to the veering off to discuss what percentage of whom does or does not practice birth control, to who had affairs with whom…
Let’s step back for a moment and realize what’s going on here. NeoCatholics and Traditional Catholics have and are continuing to watch a disaster occur in the mainstream Church. When I was a Novus Ordo Catholic more than 10 years ago, I remember I was forced to choose: Go to my parish, or find a conservative alternative. I chose the latter, as many conservatives did (and do). If that choice bothers you, that’s your problem.
Don’t take it out on those of us who’ve taken your choice to the next logical step – going back to the original Roman Rite, a privilege allowed to all Catholics, backed up by JPII, and seen in the public Tridentine celebrations of the former Cardinal Ratzinger, now Benedict XVI.
Just because it’s not your choice doesn’t mean it’s not a legitimate choice (being Traditionalist). Live with that. That’s Catholic.
Stephen L.M. Heiner

bill912 March 2, 2006 at 7:19 am

“to say there is a schism” is to state a fact. There are those who wish to ignore inconvenient facts to avoid having to own up to their disobedience. The choice has nothing to do with being a “traditionalist”; the choice is between being a loyal, obedient Catholic(traditionalist or otherwise) or being a disobedient schismatic.

Stephen L.M. Heiner March 2, 2006 at 7:27 am

When there is a Roman document informing me that I am schismatic or disobedient by attending the Tridentine Mass, I will give it some actual thought.
Until then, I will consider it pointless conjecture.

Tim J. March 2, 2006 at 7:28 am

‘zackly, bill912.
We need more traditionalists in the Church.
Traditionalism that is not united with and obedient to the Pope is a cut flower.

bill912 March 2, 2006 at 9:15 am

Stephen Heiner: I have no idea whether you are a schismatic or not. Attending the Tridentine Mass does not make one a schismatic (I don’t know of anyone who says it does; I certainly didn’t). But the SSPX and SSPV are in schism due to the disobedience of their leaders. See Ecclesia Dei for Pope John Paul II’s words on the subject, or read Inocencio’s relevant quote from it on a recent prior thread.

bill912 March 2, 2006 at 9:25 am

Inocencio’s quote can be found in the Feb 8 post “Schism and Confirmation”

John March 2, 2006 at 10:01 am

Question I have for those who like to actually bash those who adhere to the faith of yesteryear, when it was actually the Vatican and Paul VI who felt the need to change (akin to Luther, Calvin, Bucer, etc)-who is really the schismatic and who is holding fast to the faith and traditions, as St Paul directed us to?
The church has had other periods of eclipse, which she is entering or has been with the drop off in every statistic of catholic indictors, not to mention the quality of the Catholic she is producing. Would one be proud to say that John Kerry, Mario Cuomo, Guiliani, Geraldine Ferraro, Kennedy(s) are “Catholic” with their vices and pro murder/abortion stances (while they are still allowed to be in “Communion” with the church) -Or is someone proud to say that Pat Buchanon and Mel Gibson are Catholic, and unfortunately one must make the distinction that they are TRADITIONAL Catholics.
That is the difference

Will March 2, 2006 at 12:31 pm

“I care because it saddens me that there are Catholics so isolated from the mainstream of life within the Church that they cannot find marriage partners on a mainstream Catholic singles site.”
Sorry to jump into this thread so late, but I has some thoughts. Isn’t the existence of Ave Maria singles also saddening? Isn’t the very idea that a conservative catholic has a better shot of finding their soulmate on a website than at their local parish a bit sad? I can’t speak for others, but the young men and women at my local church don’t seem to think or act any differently than the young people at my public university. I doubt I’m alone in this situation, that’s why Ave Maria singles and this Traditionalist website exist, right? Sociologically speaking, aren’t we conservative Catholics (both “neo” and “trad”) who actually follow the Church’s teachings on family issues outside of the mainstream.
I’m not a traditionalist, but I see no problem with this site. I’d certainly marry a traditionalist sooner than I would your average Catholic.

Michelle Arnold March 2, 2006 at 12:36 pm

Thanks for all the input, everyone. :) The comments are now closed.

Previous post:

Next post: