Why the Traditionalists Are Wrong

I then urge my fellow Catholics to re-learn these lessons that they have taught me so many years ago. It is not sufficient to rally against the protestants’ errors, if you do not remain vigilant to not fall in the same traps, even if the bait is different.

Trying to uphold Tradition while fostering dissent from the pope is just as untenable a position as trying to defend Scripture while fostering defiance to the scriptural authority of the petrine and apostolic faith. It is a paradoxical endeavor. No good will come out of it. Because one of the more traditional tenets of our Catholic faith is precisely the obedience due to our pope.

~ Pedro Gabriel, "Sola Traditio", Where Peter Is, 2/8/18

The Traditionalists are wrong for one, simple reason:  Although they peg themselves as the defenders of the historic Catholic faith, their distinctive position in fact contradicts and opposes the Catholic faith.

Let me be more specific, however.  When I speak of "Traditionalists" in this context, I am thinking of those self-proclaimed advocates of historic Catholic Tradition who dissent from the teaching of the Church and disobey her authority in certain areas.  I do not have in mind those of the faithful who simply prefer more "traditional" modes of worship, pious practices, etc., such as the Latin Mass or communion on the tongue, but who are also faithful and obedient to the authority of Church and do not oppose any of her teaching or disobey her rules.  There is nothing wrong with this obedient form of "traditionalism".

According to the Catholic faith--the faith of the Catholic Church--the preservation and guardianship of the divine revelations rests on the three-legged stool of Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium.  Scripture is the Word of God written.  Tradition is the Word of God passed down by the Church in other ways--preaching, teaching, living, and worshipping.  The Magisterium consists of the college of bishops together with the head of that college, the Bishop of Rome, who is the Successor of St. Peter.  Scripture and Tradition are the sources of the divine revelation, while the Magisterium is the God-guided guardian and interpreter of that revelation.  Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium are all necessary to properly preserve, interpret, and apply the divine revelation.  As the analogy of the three-legged stool suggests, all three are essential.  By God's guidance and grace, all three are in harmony and work together to convey the revelation of God.  They cannot be pitted against each other.  To pit one against the others is to destroy the very foundation of the Catholic epistemology.

Sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture form one sacred deposit of the word of God, committed to the Church. Holding fast to this deposit the entire holy people united with their shepherds remain always steadfast in the teaching of the Apostles, in the common life, in the breaking of the bread and in prayers (see Acts 2, 42, Greek text), so that holding to, practicing and professing the heritage of the faith, it becomes on the part of the bishops and faithful a single common effort.

But the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on, has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church, whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed.

It is clear, therefore, that sacred tradition, Sacred Scripture and the teaching authority of the Church, in accord with God's most wise design, are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand without the others, and that all together and each in its own way under the action of the one Holy Spirit contribute effectively to the salvation of souls.  (Dei Verbum, 10, footnotes removed)

As I mentioned above, the Magisterium consists of the entire college of bishops united to the Pope.  Magisterial authority resides in the Pope as the Successor of St. Peter, in the entire college of bishops united with and in agreement with the Pope, and in the individual bishops so long as their teaching is in agreement with the rest of the college of bishops and with the Pope.

But the college or body of bishops has no authority unless it is understood together with the Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter as its head. The pope's power of primacy over all, both pastors and faithful, remains whole and intact. In virtue of his office, that is as Vicar of Christ and pastor of the whole Church, the Roman Pontiff has full, supreme and universal power over the Church. And he is always free to exercise this power. The order of bishops, which succeeds to the college of apostles and gives this apostolic body continued existence, is also the subject of supreme and full power over the universal Church, provided we understand this body together with its head the Roman Pontiff and never without this head. This power can be exercised only with the consent of the Roman Pontiff. For our Lord placed Simon alone as the rock and the bearer of the keys of the Church, and made him shepherd of the whole flock; it is evident, however, that the power of binding and loosing, which was given to Peter, was granted also to the college of apostles, joined with their head. This college, insofar as it is composed of many, expresses the variety and universality of the People of God, but insofar as it is assembled under one head, it expresses the unity of the flock of Christ. In it, the bishops, faithfully recognizing the primacy and pre-eminence of their head, exercise their own authority for the good of their own faithful, and indeed of the whole Church, the Holy Spirit supporting its organic structure and harmony with moderation. The supreme power in the universal Church, which this college enjoys, is exercised in a solemn way in an ecumenical council. A council is never ecumenical unless it is confirmed or at least accepted as such by the successor of Peter; and it is prerogative of the Roman Pontiff to convoke these councils, to preside over them and to confirm them. This same collegiate power can be exercised together with the pope by the bishops living in all parts of the world, provided that the head of the college calls them to collegiate action, or at least approves of or freely accepts the united action of the scattered bishops, so that it is thereby made a collegiate act. . . .

Bishops, as vicars and ambassadors of Christ, govern the particular churches entrusted to them by their counsel, exhortations, example, and even by their authority and sacred power, which indeed they use only for the edification of their flock in truth and holiness, remembering that he who is greater should become as the lesser and he who is the chief become as the servant. This power, which they personally exercise in Christ's name, is proper, ordinary and immediate, although its exercise is ultimately regulated by the supreme authority of the Church, and can be circumscribed by certain limits, for the advantage of the Church or of the faithful. In virtue of this power, bishops have the sacred right and the duty before the Lord to make laws for their subjects, to pass judgment on them and to moderate everything pertaining to the ordering of worship and the apostolate.  (Lumen Gentium, 22, 27, footnotes removed)

Just as Scripture and Tradition are divinely protected so that they convey the revelation of God faithfully and accurately, so the Magisterium is given by God divine protection so that it faithfully proclaims the truth of God without error.  Therefore, all magisterial teaching is authoritative and requires assent from the Catholic faithful.  And the faithful are also required to submit to the rules and decrees of the Magisterium.

Bishops, with priests as co-workers, have as their first task "to preach the Gospel of God to all men," in keeping with the Lord's command. They are "heralds of faith, who draw new disciples to Christ; they are authentic teachers" of the apostolic faith "endowed with the authority of Christ."

In order to preserve the Church in the purity of the faith handed on by the apostles, Christ who is the Truth willed to confer on her a share in his own infallibility. By a "supernatural sense of faith" the People of God, under the guidance of the Church's living Magisterium, "unfailingly adheres to this faith."

The mission of the Magisterium is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ. It is this Magisterium's task to preserve God's people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates.  (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 888-890, footnotes and number-headings removed)

Among the principal duties of bishops the preaching of the Gospel occupies an eminent place. For bishops are preachers of the faith, who lead new disciples to Christ, and they are authentic teachers, that is, teachers endowed with the authority of Christ, who preach to the people committed to them the faith they must believe and put into practice, and by the light of the Holy Spirit illustrate that faith. They bring forth from the treasury of Revelation new things and old, making it bear fruit and vigilantly warding off any errors that threaten their flock. Bishops, teaching in communion with the Roman Pontiff, are to be respected by all as witnesses to divine and Catholic truth. In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent. This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will. His mind and will in the matter may be known either from the character of the documents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking.  (Lumen Gentium, 25, footnotes removed)

All the Christian faithful are obliged to observe the constitutions and decrees which the legitimate authority of the Church issues in order to propose doctrine and to proscribe erroneous opinions, particularly those which the Roman Pontiff or the college of bishops puts forth.  (Code of Canon Law, 754)

(For more on the unfailing reliability of all magisterial teaching, see here.)

I sometimes refer to the dissenting Traditionalists as "semi-Protestants", because they, like Protestants, oppose the teaching authority of the Church in favor of their own private (non-magisterial) interpretations of certain aspects of Scripture or Tradition.  The difference between Protestants and Traditionalists is that Protestants take Scripture and oppose it to Tradition and the Magisterium, while the Traditionalists tend to take both Scripture and Tradition and oppose them to the Magisterium.  So they are not Protestants, but they are akin to Protestants, in that, like Protestants, they break up the three-legged stool of Catholic epistemology by pitting some of the legs against others.  (I highly recommend Pedro Gabriel's article, "Sola Traditio", quoted in the quotation at the top of this article, for its masterful way of making this point.  And here is another one I wrote up.)  Since the Catholic faith puts forward the three-legged stool as its foundational epistemology, the Traditionalists, like the Protestants, are opposed to the Catholic faith in this area, and are therefore wrong.

One of the most important and influential founders of modern Traditionalism was Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.  In 1976, Pope St. Paul VI sent a letter to Lefebvre, exhorting him to give up his disobedience to magisterial authority and return to submission to the Church.  He urged him to cease to treat himself as the ultimate interpreter and guardian of the Church's Tradition and to return to trust in the Magisterium which Christ himself appointed for that purpose.  I would urge all Traditionalists, all those influenced by Traditionalism, all those tempted or swayed by it, and all those interested in it, to take the time to read through this letter.  It embodies in a powerful way the Church's response--the response of the Successor of St. Peter, the ultimate guardian of the true faith appointed by Christ--to the whole Traditionalist enterprise.  His words are not just applicable to Archbishop Lefebvre or to the specific movement he directly founded, but they apply to all forms of Traditionalism.  They constitute a powerful, heartfelt, and authoritative exhortation to all the Catholic faithful to give our full assent and trust to Christ himself to define the faith of his Church, and therefore to the ministers he has appointed as the authentic guardians and interpreters of that faith.  You can find the letter here.

P.S. One of the common tactics of Traditionalists is to attempt to pit past statements of the Magisterium against current statements of the Magisterium in order to claim obedience to the Magisterium while disobeying what it actually teaches today (like a child who disobeys mother's commands today in favor of mother's commands yesterday, thereby claiming to be an obedient child in the very midst of disobedience).  This tactic is addressed in the letter from Pope St. Paul VI that I linked to just above:

. . . a single bishop without a canonical mission does not have in actu expedito ad agendum, the faculty of deciding in general what the rule of faith is or of determining what tradition is.  In practice you are claiming that you alone are the judge of what tradition embraces. . . . You say that you are subject to the Church and faithful to tradition by the sole fact that you obey certain norms of the past that were decreed by the predecessor of him to whom God has today conferred the powers given to Peter. That is to say, on this point also, the concept of “tradition” that you invoke is distorted. . . . It is up to the pope and to councils to exercise judgment in order to discern in the traditions of the Church that which cannot be renounced without infidelity to the Lord and to the Holy Spirit—the deposit of faith—and that which, on the contrary, can and must be adapted to facilitate the prayer and the mission of the Church throughout a variety of times and places, in order better to translate the divine message into the language of today and better to communicate it, without an unwarranted surrender of principles. . . . Hence tradition is inseparable from the living magisterium of the Church, just as it is inseparable from sacred scripture.

As Pope St. Paul VI says, there are certain unchangeable elements in the Church's teaching and practice, but there are other elements that are subject to legitimate differing prudential applications by the Church at different times and in different places.  This is something Traditionalists often confuse and distort.  Another thing they often do to support their positions (intentionally or unintentionally) is to take snippets of older Magisterial teaching out of context in order to make it look like it opposes later teaching.  Sometimes this out-of-context-quoting can be egregious, and so I want to briefly call attention to a couple of examples in order to provide a bit of a warning to those who might be influenced by the Traditionalists.  Caveat Emptor!  Let the Buyer Beware!

These two illustrations come from a Traditionalist friend of mine, who was recently trying to argue that communion received in the hand (rather than on the tongue) is inherently wrong and opposed to the reverence required in receiving the Eucharist.  In order to support her position, she gave a long string of short snippets of quotations from earlier documents.  One of those documents was from the Council of Trent.  Another was from Pope St. John Paul II.  Starting with Trent and then moving on to John Paul II, I will give the snippet she provided, and then I will provide the fuller contextual quotation, so readers can see how my friend took her quotations totally out of context to making them say something completely different from what they were originally saying.  Readers who observe what my friend has done will hopefully be made wary when in discussions with other Traditionalists in the future who may try to sell such misleading "information".

Upon being challenged that she was relying on her private interpretations of earlier magisterial writings instead of submitting to the Church's interpretations, she replied, "[I]t is not I that claims it ... As my original post says it, it comes from the Council of Trent among others like these," and then followed her string of quotations.

Here is her quotation from the Council of Trent:

The Council of Trent (1545-1565): "The fact that only the priest gives Holy Communion with his consecrated hands is an Apostolic Tradition."

And here is more of the original context of this quotation:

Now as to the use of this holy sacrament, our Fathers have rightly and wisely distinguished three ways of receiving it. For they have taught that some receive it sacramentally only, to wit sinners: others spiritually only, those to wit who eating in desire that heavenly bread which is set before them, are, by a lively faith which worketh by charity, made sensible of the fruit and usefulness thereof: whereas the third (class) receive it both sacramentally and spiritually, and these are they who so prove and prepare themselves beforehand, as to approach to this divine table clothed with the wedding garment. Now as to the reception of the sacrament, it was always the custom in the Church of God, that laymen should receive the communion from priests; but that priests when celebrating should communicate themselves; which custom, as coming down from an apostolical tradition, ought with justice and reason to be retained. And finally this holy Synod with true fatherly affection admonishes, exhorts, begs, and beseeches, through the bowels of the mercy of our God, that all and each of those who bear the Christian name would now at length agree and be of one mind in this sign of unity, in this bond of charity, in this symbol of concord; and that mindful of the so great majesty, and the so exceeding love of our Lord Jesus Christ, who gave His own beloved soul as the price of our salvation, and gave us His own flesh to eat, they would believe and venerate these sacred mysteries of His body and blood with such constancy and firmness of faith, with such devotion of soul, with such piety and worship as to be able frequently to receive that supersubstantial bread, and that it may be to them truly the life of the soul, and the perpetual health of their mind; that being invigorated by the strength thereof, they may, after the journeying of this miserable pilgrimage, be able to arrive at their heavenly country, there to eat, without any veil, that same bread of angels which they now eat under the sacred veils.  (Council of Trent, Thirteenth Session, Chapter VIII, taken from the Hanover Historical Texts Project website at Hanover College, page number removed)

As you can see, the original quotation from Trent was not addressing communion on the hand vs. the tongue at all, but was only asserting that communion is to be given to the people by the priests, while the priests administer communion to themselves.

Here is my friend's quotation from Pope St. John Paul II:

Pope John Paul II: "To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained." (Dominicae Cenae, 11)

And here is more of the original context of the quotation:

In some countries the practice of receiving Communion in the hand has been introduced. This practice has been requested by individual episcopal conferences and has received approval from the Apostolic See. However, cases of a deplorable lack of respect towards the eucharistic species have been reported, cases which are imputable not only to the individuals guilty of such behavior but also to the pastors of the church who have not been vigilant enough regarding the attitude of the faithful towards the Eucharist. It also happens, on occasion, that the free choice of those who prefer to continue the practice of receiving the Eucharist on the tongue is not taken into account in those places where the distribution of Communion in the hand has been authorized. It is therefore difficult in the context of this present letter not to mention the sad phenomena previously referred to. This is in no way meant to refer to those who, receiving the Lord Jesus in the hand, do so with profound reverence and devotion, in those countries where this practice has been authorized.

But one must not forget the primary office of priests, who have been consecrated by their ordination to represent Christ the Priest: for this reason their hands, like their words and their will, have become the direct instruments of Christ. Through this fact, that is, as ministers of the Holy Eucharist, they have a primary responsibility for the sacred species, because it is a total responsibility: they offer the bread and wine, they consecrate it, and then distribute the sacred species to the participants in the assembly who wish to receive them. Deacons can only bring to the altar the offerings of the faithful and, once they have been consecrated by the priest, distribute them. How eloquent therefore, even if not of ancient custom, is the rite of the anointing of the hands in our Latin ordination, as though precisely for these hands a special grace and power of the Holy Spirit is necessary!

To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained, one which indicates an active participation in the ministry of the Eucharist. It is obvious that the Church can grant this faculty to those who are neither priests nor deacons, as is the case with acolytes in the exercise of their ministry, especially if they are destined for future ordination, or with other lay people who are chosen for this to meet a just need, but always after an adequate preparation.  (Pope St. John Paul II, Dominicae Cenae, 11)

As you can see, my friend completely distorted this quotation in order to make it look like it is saying the exact opposite of what it actually says.  (Actually, I'm sure she didn't twist this quotation herself.  She simply took it from some Traditionalist website without bothering to check its accuracy.)

You've been warned!  Watch out for such behavior from Traditionalists (or from anybody, for that matter)!  Caveat Emptor!

Published on the feast of St. Angela Merici