Hi, Randy —

Good question.

Due to a lack of proper catechesis and poor spirituality, you've stumbled across a real problem we have within the Church. Don't let this lower your spirits though as this is a matter of bad behavior within the Church, not incorrect teachings from the Church.

From my view, there are three groups, two bad ones, one good one. Both bad groups scandalize Christ and the Church He founded on St. Peter and His successors.

On the far left, you have those that wish to change the teachings of the Church to fit their immoral behavior and lifestyle. This would include people like:

• Pro Abortion catholics
• Anti-Traditional Marriage catholics supported by gay groups, and
• catholics who wish the Church would allow women priests, and others

On the far right, you have the group of people you have come across. Some are in good standing with the Church while others are not in good standing with the Church.

Those who are not in good standing with the Church.

Unlike those on the far left, this group of Traditional Catholics (I hate using that term.) believe in most of the moral teachings of the Church with the except of a few key ones. For this reason, they are a much greater danger to the unity of the faithful within the Church, especially to new converts or uncatechized Catholics who admirably hold to high moral Christian standards. Basically, these people think they are more Catholic than the Pope.

Sadly, some of these people are also priests. Most, if not, all the time, they are schismatic's: people who have broken away from the Church and deny the papacy. They'll say different things about the Church, recent popes, and Vatican II and Her teachings based on who they are with, in order to always please their current audience. Despite what Our Blessed Lord states to St. Peter in Matthew 16:13-19, they think the gates of Hell did prevail and Jesus broke His promise to be with us to the end of time. Therefore, as they have claimed, the election of Pope St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI, were not guided by the Holy Spirit.

Again, they are not in good standing with the Church.

Like I said earlier, they believe in most of the moral teachings of the Church, unlike those on the far left, but they deny Papal authority:

• to decide what is, and is not, a valid Mass, and
• to oversee and guide valid Councils of the Church, including any documents generated from the First Council of Nicea to the Second Vatican Council.
  

Basically, they think the Holy Spirit stopped guiding the Church. An anti-Pope is a false claimant to the papacy. That said, they are saying that a false claimant to the papacy, Pope St. John Paul II, has been beatified by another false claimant to the papacy, Pope Benedict XVI.

This is ridiculous and shows what happens when we let pride get ahead of us. In my talks with some of these people, some will encourage you to dialogue and debate with them.

• Why?
  

Because they are trying to show you, they are Catholics in good standing, when they are not!
I believe this is because they doubt, themselves, if they are Catholics in good standing within the Church.

That said, there are others who also call themselves Traditional Catholics who are in good standing with the Church.

Between the two valid forms for celebrating the Mass:

• the Ordinary form or Novus Ordo Mass, and
• the Extraordinary form or (Tridentine/Latin) Mass
  

their preference would be to the celebrate the Extraordinary form or (Tridentine/Latin) Mass, which Pope Benedict has promoted and asked the bishops of the world to make more available to the faithful. If your friends are associated with the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP), you know they are associated with a faithful organization. The Latin Mass was the only Mass celebrated prior to the Council of Trent going back to the Early Church when I think it was celebrated in Greek, hence they call themselves Traditional Catholics.

The difference between these two traditional Catholics, is that the group in good standing with the Church would never:

1. deny Papal authority
2. say Pope John Paul II was an antipope
3. say Pope Benedict was an antipope
4. say the Ordinary form, or Novus Ordo Mass was an invalid Mass
5. say there are heresies in the documents of Vatican II (something you may run into), or
6. say the Catechism of the Catholic Church has errors (something else you may run into).

If they empathize with any of the above six issues, stay away from them like the plague.
They are not in good standing with the Church.

In this post millennium age, the Church welcomes everyone to join the Church, but would caution the friendships one develops.

Yes, there are members in the Church on the far left.
Yes, there are members in the Church on the far right.

What the practicing Catholic has to do is:

• discern far left behavior and thinking, when they see it
• discern far right, schismatic behavior and thinking, when they see it, and
• be faithful, right down the middle.
  

St. Paul backs this up in his first letter to the Corinthians:

33 Do not be deceived: "Bad company ruins good morals."

1 Corinthians 15:33

My Bible translation says:

33 Do not be deceived: "Evil companionships corrupt good morals."

1 Corinthians 15:33

Having a daily prayer life is key to making these discernments; I recommend praying the Rosary.

If you are unsure whether a person or priest is faithful to the Church or is a far right schismatic, ask them questions from my would never list above, like whether they are faithful to the Magisterium of the Church and the Pope. If they are a priest, and you are still unsure, call the local diocese to see if they are in good standing with the Church.

Let me say a final word on the term: a Traditional Catholic.

I truly hate this term because it implies that there are some Catholics, who love the Church, follow all the teachings of the Church, and live a prayerful, sacramental life, yet are not Traditional Catholics because they go to the (Ordinary form or) Novus Ordo Mass. This is rubbish.

Whether one goes to a Novus Ordo Mass or (Tridentine/Latin) Mass, those who actively preach and believe, by word and deeds, an active Catholic faith including all the Teachings of the Church from the First Council of Nicea through to the Second Vatican Council and beyond are Traditional Catholics!!

We both believe and adhere to all the:

• traditional Church councils and their teachings
• documents generated from those councils, understood correctly
• the Early Church Fathers and Saints, and
• the traditional prayers and devotions, etc.

Period!

The only rationale for using the term Traditional Catholic is to distinguish a personal preference for a Catholic in good standing who desires going to a (Tridentine/Latin) Mass over a Novus Ordo Mass. That said, any Catholic in good standing would obviously go to a Novus Ordo Mass in case of an emergency or circumstance where they cannot attend the (Tridentine/Latin) Mass (they usually go to).

To say there is something wrong with the Novus Ordo Mass, when celebrated correctly, is to say the Church has erred on an issue of faith and morals.

Hope this helps,

Mike

Hi, Randy —

These people are not reading the writings of earlier Popes in a manner consistent with the mind of the Church, with other writings, or in the context of the period. They are basically Catholic fundamentalists, in that they seize on a particular preferred interpretation, which is contrary to the way the Holy Spirit interprets them through the Church and contrary to:

• the context
• history, and
• so forth.

When you read these documents that they bring up, you have to look at the disputes that they are addressing and the positions of the people they are opposing. They are intended to narrowly address specific errors and shouldn't be interpreted more broadly than intended.

For example, even the 1917 Catholic Encyclopedia, which is by no means liberal, explains one of these texts:

You can't pit the Church against the Church. The Church is indefectible; She cannot fall away, and the Church, itself alone, has the authority to interpret what She said. It's as if you said something and someone started using your words against you in an argument with you, citing what you said, but applying a meaning you did not intend, to prove that you are wrong. You'd get frustrated.
So these people are not interpreting these documents in the light of the tradition of the Church, but are twisting them to mean something they were not intended to mean.

There are a lot of arguments these people present. We can't refute them all here but we can give you general principles. Basically these people are out to divide, to set people against the Church; they are of a schismatic spirit. They take the most conservative interpretation of these earlier Papal documents and compare them against the most liberal interpretation of Vatican II.

They play word games in order to divide and conquer. Do not listen to them.

Eric