What's in a name?

I would like to link back to a good post on Joseph Shaw's blog about the vocabulary used for the extraordinary form of the Latin Rite. There are many people who react against the word 'traditional' for instance. The word 'tradition' is derived from the latin 'tradere' which means 'to hand down'. The best biblical precedent in the New Testament comes from St Paul, who uses this very same word in the Vulgate translation (1 Cor 15:3);

For I delivered unto you first of all, which I also received

The whole of this chapter is worth reading to grasp this aspect of Catholicism. Indeed, in this respect all Catholics should be 'traditional', in that the doctrine (the deposit of faith given by our Lord) has been handed down and preserved.

What most people acknowledge in various degrees is that in the latter half of the 20th century, there has been a widespread rupture in this process of 'handing down'. Nowhere is this more evident in the catechesis of Catholic doctrine. And visibly in most Catholic churches around the world, there has also been a rupture in the way Liturgy is conducted. These are the topics at the heart of those who are referred to as 'traditionalist', who adhere to the form of Mass which has been very much handed down, without artificial discontinuities.

On the other side of the coin there are 'liberal Catholics' who also acknowledge a discontinuity, but prefer a wholesale rejection of tradition. This will include doctrine and our public display of Catholic beliefs in the Mass.

So it would be nice if we all knew where we were, but when viewing the Catholic world as a whole, it can be a very confusing place where discord is rife! I think it would be far more easier to embrace the Faith of our forefathers, especially those who died in this country for their faith, rather than the modernists who would simply have the Church become 'updated' to the modern world, and eschew all notion of listening to the wisdom of the dead!

I suppose there is also another view that the Church is still in complete continuity. Perhaps the term would be 'neo-conservative' (ie conservative to the new state of affairs). This would probably be a group of Catholics who take an ultra-montanist view on papal infalliability and in my opinion leave the laity looking sadly deficient in intellectual stamina or a desire to progress at all. It must be a hard pressure on the Pope trying to please all these different groups, as well as the non-Catholics and secularists! Our prayers should always be with him, to discern the will of the Holy Spirit, and best safeguard the deposit of Faith, which is the best nourishment for his flock.

Update: A quote from Newman which has appeared on today's blog entry:

I allow, then, that the Church, certainly, does ‘insist,’ when she speaks dogmatically, nay or rather she more than insists, she obliges; she obliges us to an internal assent to that which she proposes to us … And I admit that she obliges us in a most forcible and effective manner, that is, by the penalty of forfeiting communion with her, if we refuse our internal assent to her word. We cannot be real Catholics, if we do not from our heart accept the matters which she puts forward as divine and true. This is plain.