Tuesday, April 16, 2013
The Trad Plea Post Continued...
Like many of my commenters I've always taken "Rad Trad" to be a derogatory term for someone who prefers the EF and has more traditional tastes in other areas of their life as well.
Some of you have explained that the term is actually used only in reference to sedevacantists or those who reject the authority of the second Vatican Council.
Therein I think lies a huge problem with the discussion. We aren't all using the same terms here. Bloggers may very well be using the term "Rad Trad" to mean someone who rejects the authority of the Pope and the council, but since the term isn't out there in some dictionary clearly defined their readers may not know exactly what their definition is.
Which, in my opinion, is another point in favor of just not calling each other names... although I understand that that idea will be completely ignored because when we're right and someone else is wrong name calling is just oh so much fun, even if it does nothing to add to the discussion (and I'll be the first to admit that I'm certain I've done it in the past when I'm on a tirade... and will likely, unfortunately do it again in the future, despite my best intentions...).
The other point that comes up, and which I touched on briefly in the last post for the sake of brevity, is whether "Traditionalists" are obligated to speak out every single time some unhinged person who has an affinity for the Latin Mass (see me trying not to use name calling? I wrote "crack pot" and deleted it) says something offensive.
Here's my take on it. I have a limited amount of blogging time each day. Let's say it's an hour. I try not to rant all the time, because it's exhausting, and probably not exactly healthy, or that fun to read. I see two stories. One is about some crazy guy in some corner of the world who denied that the holocaust happened. The other is about some crazy guy in my state who killed hundreds of babies.
I pause. Which should I write about with the finite time I have set before me? Then I start reasoning away at this problem:
Everybody knows the first person is crazy. The holocaust happened. The vast majority of society knows that it happened. Who doesn't? Are we talking about .1% of the population here, who holds this historically inaccurate view? Yes, it's wrong to say that it didn't happen. Very, very wrong. But will my writing about it change either the minds of the sliver of the population who completely rejects history to believe this totally baseless claim? Absolutely not.
I then turn my mind towards the other story... abortion. I make my choice, based on the fact that about half the people in our country think that it's okay to kill a baby in his mother's womb. For a moment the handbag of the woman who seems uncomfortable every time I arrive at dance class with Sadie flashes through my mind and I see the words "I Heart Planned Parenthood" and have the sickening realization that there are people who "Heart" abortion enough to have it emblazoned on a bag... and they're a much more significant number in the population.
So at the end of the day, with my finite writing time, I would choose to write about the second story. And that was my issue with the article that said as a "Traditionalist" you're obligated to tell the whole world that you vehemently disagree, every single time you see this particular evil rear it's ugly head. If you want to write about a subject that's great... But telling Traditionalists everywhere that they're obligated to do the same seems to me to be taking it a bit far... and frankly, I don't like giving that random holocaust denier a platform on my blog, where many people never would have heard the particular brand of crazy he's sending out into the world.
If that special sort of falsehood rears it's ugly head in my vicinity you can bet I'll be speaking out against it. But am I going to track it down to the far corners of the earth and have it translated so that I can respond, when I've never actually met anyone in my entire life who believes it?
I guess that's my explanation for why I don't write about every single evil that I come across, even when it most definitely is evil... time is finite. Blogging time is especially so. I'm pretty sure my husband would tell you I've already crossed over in the blogging time line this fine morning. And so I weigh the damage that those evils are doing in this immediate moment, and pick and choose what I write about. Hopefully that doesn't make people think I'm complicit in some sort of "Traditionalist" club where we all have to correct each other all the time, even if we've never met and believe entirely different things... but in some eyes, I'm sure it will.