A letter to my neo-Protestant “Catholic” friend – Why tradition and orthodoxy matter

The Church's traditions help us to both reach eternity and understand who God is—how He desires to be worshipped, not how we prefer to worship Him. In other words, it is His preference that matters.

Image: Los nazarenos, by Joaquín Sorolla. The nazarenos are a brotherhood which performs penance rites during Holy Week in Spain (and in some Latin American countries such as Colombia and Guatemala). They parade wearing the clothing that conforms to the rules of the brotherhood. These outfits resemble the outfits the Ku Klux Klan later adopted, but precedes the Klan by centuries. My neo-Protestant friend would probably find this..erm … “a bit extreme”

Due to a convergence of complex circumstances, I find myself attending both a Novus Ordo parish and an SSPX priory. Needless to say, this arrangement presents constant challenges. This past week, tensions that had been simmering in the Novus Ordo parish over a small group of us receiving Communion on the tongue and while kneeling finally came to a head. What followed was unpleasant and bitter. A few days later, someone from the “other camp” requested a conversation with me. After two hours of discussion, I was compelled to write the following letter.

“Dear Friend,

Yesterday after Mass, you asked to speak with me, but you insisted that you did not want to engage in "the debate"—the debate, of course, being the question of whether one should receive Communion in the hand or in the manner the Church has upheld for nearly 1900 years. Ironically, what ensued was little more than a thinly veiled attack on tradition and orthodoxy.

Our conversation was so bewildering, contradictory, and astonishing that addressing every point would be both impossible and, I fear, fruitless. Nevertheless, I would like to highlight a few key issues before offering you a very simple catechesis on why tradition and orthodoxy matter.

But first, a few preliminary observations.

Throughout our conversation, and repeatedly over the past week, I have heard variations of the following phrases: “I prefer,” “I choose,” and “my preference.” The fact that you, a self-professed Catholic, do not see the grave problem with this language is deeply troubling. I receive Christ in the manner the Church has prescribed for centuries—not as a matter of personal preference, but because I believe in the Real Presence of Christ, the God-Man, and recognize that in Holy Communion, I am receiving the Lord and King of the Universe. That truth alone should have settled the matter, but sadly, it did not.

According to popes, saints, theologians, and Church documents, the traditional practice of receiving on the tongue and while kneeling has always been the proper and reverent way to receive our Eucharistic Lord. But beyond their testimony, I would argue that if one truly believed—really believed—that he or she was receiving the living, almighty God, there would be no need to consult anyone at all. The sheer gravity of that reality would dictate our response.

At one point in our discussion, you solemnly warned me against becoming “so fixated on knowledge and tradition that you forget what is most important.” You then informed me what is most important: “to love God, and more importantly, to love your fellow man.”

I sincerely hope this was merely an unfortunate slip of the tongue, but I suspect otherwise. While at first glance, your statement may sound pious and even noble, it is, in fact, an inversion of Christ’s teaching. Nowhere does Jesus say that loving one’s neighbor is more important than loving God. Furthermore, He never suggests that we are free to worship Him in whatever way we prefer or feel is best. That notion—the idea that personal sentiment should dictate how we worship—is, by definition, Protestantism. Worse still, your statement implicitly denies the authority of the Church Christ Himself established (Matthew 16:18), as well as St. Paul’s exhortation to hold fast to tradition (2 Thessalonians 2:15). And let us not forget Christ’s own words: “If you love Me, keep My commandments” (John 14:15). Love of God is not some vague, sentimental ideal—it is expressed through obedience.

But I am not entirely surprised that you hold these views. They are, after all, the natural product of the Second Vatican Council, and more specifically, the Novus Ordo Mass. The anthropocentric nature of the Novus Ordo, coupled with the corrosive influence of Modernism, has fostered—whether consciously or not—the belief that man, rather than God, is at the center of worship.

This brings me to a particularly troubling exchange we had. Despite being unable to name a single Church council besides Vatican II (and despite being unfamiliar with any of its documents), you confidently informed me that while you "know about the Holy Spirit and all that with regards to councils," you remain “unconvinced.” My friend, you should know that Protestants say the same thing.

You went on to argue that it does not matter whether we have a bad pope, since "it’s all about loving Jesus." But this is precisely the problem. Yes, it is all about loving Jesus, but bad popes lead souls astray, and it is precisely because of bad popes that the Church—and you, by extension—finds itself in its current spiritual crisis.

Perhaps the most revealing moment of our discussion was when you said, “For me, how I receive is not important—only who I receive.” On the surface, this may sound devout, but in reality, it makes no sense. If you truly understood the awesome majesty of Christ, you would never presume to take Him into your own hands as though He were an ordinary piece of bread. The Church’s traditions exist not as arbitrary customs, but as divinely inspired safeguards that help us both reach eternity and understand who God is—how He desires to be worshipped, not how we prefer to worship Him.

In other words, it is His preference that matters—not ours.

But as promised, herewith is a short and very, very simple catechesis on why tradition and orthodoxy matter. A lot.

For Traditionalist Catholics (and actually the “Traditionalist” should fall away, for being Catholic by definition means being traditional), orthodoxy and tradition are not mere theological preferences but the very foundation of the Faith. The Catholic Church, established by Jesus Christ, upholds that divine revelation is transmitted through both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. This unbroken transmission, safeguarded by the Magisterium, ensures that the deposit of faith remains unaltered.

The modern world, with its tendencies toward relativism, subjectivism, and rupture with the past, poses a grave threat to the integrity of Catholic teaching. From St. Paul’s exhortation to "hold fast to the traditions" (2 Thessalonians 2:15) to Pope St. Pius X’s condemnation of Modernism in Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907), the Church has consistently emphasized the necessity of doctrinal fidelity. Modern Traditionalist Catholic voices, such as Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, stress that abandoning tradition leads to theological confusion, moral decay, and liturgical disintegration.

The Biblical and Patristic Foundations of Orthodoxy and Tradition

1. Biblical Mandate for Tradition

The call to preserve and transmit tradition is evident throughout Scripture. St. Paul, writing to the Thessalonians, commands:

"So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us" (2 Thessalonians 2:15).

This verse affirms that divine revelation is communicated both in written form (Sacred Scripture) and orally (Sacred Tradition). The early Church did not rely on sola scriptura, a Protestant novelty, but upheld the authority of apostolic teaching passed down through the bishops.

Christ Himself condemns the Pharisees for distorting divine law with human traditions (Mark 7:8), but this must be distinguished from Sacred Tradition, which originates from God. The Church does not invent new doctrines but faithfully hands down what was received from Christ and the Apostles.

2. The Church Fathers on Tradition

The early Church Fathers strongly upheld the necessity of tradition. St. Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130–202), in Against Heresies, emphasized that the faith is preserved through apostolic succession:

"It is within the power of all, therefore, in every Church, who may wish to see the truth, to contemplate clearly the tradition of the apostles manifested throughout the whole world." (Against Heresies, III.3.1)

Similarly, St. Vincent of Lérins (d. 445) formulated the famous principle of doctrinal continuity:

"We hold that faith which has been believed everywhere, always, and by all" (Commonitorium, ch. 2).

These patristic testimonies reinforce the idea that true Christianity is not a product of innovation but of fidelity to what has been handed down.

The Magisterium’s Defense of Orthodoxy and Tradition

1. The Council of Trent and the Preservation of Tradition

I know you are not big on this council stuff, but throughout the centuries, the Church has upheld orthodoxy as a safeguard against heresy. The Council of Trent (1545–1563) definitively rejected Protestant errors, affirming:

"If anyone says that it is not by divine institution that the sacred and holy, universal Church has always had in its power to interpret the Sacred Scriptures... let him be anathema." (Session 4, Decree on Sacred Scripture)

Trent reaffirmed that Sacred Tradition, interpreted through the Magisterium, is essential for preserving Christian truth.

2. Pope St. Pius X and the Condemnation of Modernism

In Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907), Pope St. Pius X described Modernism as "the synthesis of all heresies" (how many times must I quote this in my writings !!?), warning that it seeks to undermine doctrine by promoting subjective interpretations, evolution of dogma, and rejection of traditional theological methods.

Pius X insisted:

"The teaching of the Church, whether in the realm of faith or morals, must be held to be that which has been handed down by the Apostles." (Pascendi, 28)

His Oath Against Modernism (1910) was a safeguard to ensure that clergy adhered to traditional Catholic teaching.

3. The Second Vatican Council and Its Aftermath

Vatican II (1962–1965) introduced theological ambiguity, particularly in Dignitatis Humanae (on religious liberty) and Nostra Aetate (on interfaith relations). These departures from prior teaching led to doctrinal confusion and moral relativism.

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre opposed what he saw as a rupture with tradition, declaring:

"We adhere with all our heart and all our soul to Catholic Rome, guardian of the Catholic Faith and of the traditions necessary to preserve this Faith." (Open Letter to Confused Catholics, 1986)

The Liturgical and Theological Consequences of Abandoning Tradition

1. The Novus Ordo Missae and Liturgical Rupture

The replacement of the Tridentine Mass with the Novus Ordo Missae in 1969 resulted in:

- A decline in belief in the Real Presence due to changes in rubrics and prayers.

- A loss of reverence, seen in widespread liturgical abuses.

- A Protestantization of Catholic worship.

Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, in the Ottaviani Intervention (1969), warned that the new Mass "represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from Catholic theology of the Mass as formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent."

2. Theological Confusion and Doctrinal Relativism

With the weakening of tradition, Catholic theology has become increasingly ambiguous, leading to dissent from Church teachings on issues such as contraception, divorce, and moral relativism.

St. John Paul II, in Veritatis Splendor (1993), warned against moral subjectivism, reaffirming that objective truth cannot change. Pope Benedict XVI lamented the “dictatorship of relativism,” calling for a return to doctrinal clarity.

The Impact of Orthodoxy and Tradition on the Holiness and Worship of the Common Layman

1. The Role of Tradition in Personal Holiness

For the average Catholic, tradition is not an abstract concept but the very means by which holiness is cultivated. The traditional Mass, sacraments, devotions (such as the Rosary and the Divine Office), and theological clarity provide a stable foundation for spiritual growth.

Pope Pius XII, in Mediator Dei (1947), affirmed:

"The worship rendered by the Church to God must be in complete harmony with her faith, otherwise it would be an empty and illusory cult."

Traditional Catholic worship fosters a deep reverence, instilling in the faithful a sense of the sacred that modern liturgical innovations often fail to provide.

2. The Need for Doctrinal Clarity in a Confused World

Lay Catholics rely on the Magisterium to guide them in faith and morals. When tradition is abandoned, the faithful are left disoriented, struggling to discern truth from error.

Cardinal Robert Sarah warns in The Day Is Now Far Spent (2019):

"Without tradition, faith is reduced to an ideology, a mere human opinion that evolves according to the times."

Thus, orthodoxy and tradition are not only vital for theologians and clergy but for every Catholic striving for holiness.

Therefore, my dear friend, orthodoxy and tradition are not mere preferences, but the lifeblood of the Catholic Church. Without them, the faith disintegrates into subjective interpretations, theological confusion, and moral laxity. From the Apostolic era to today, faithful Catholics have defended tradition as the surest safeguard of truth. As Pope St. Pius X declared:

"The true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries nor innovators, but traditionalists." (Notre Charge Apostolique, 1910)

The call for a return to tradition is not nostalgia but a necessity for preserving the one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic faith.

Ah, yes—before I go. The very day after our conversation, you responded to a social media post I made about the grave sacrilege of allowing particles of Christ’s body to fall due to reception in the hand. Your comment—“That’s a bit extreme,” accompanied by a broken heart emoji—captured everything perfectly. You see, my friend, you do find the Truth extreme. But for us “traditional” Catholics, the Truth is not merely an idea; it is a person—Jesus Christ. And I have come to understand that you, and those who share your beliefs, see Him and His Gospel as “a bit extreme.” After all, in the world today, man has made himself god.

I hope you return soon to this one, holy, Catholic and apostolic faith of the Lord Jesus Christ you claim to love,

Yours sincerely in Christ and Charity.”

A postscript for my readers: A few hours after writing this article/ letter (before even publishing it), I was refused communion kneeling. Needless to say I did not bow to the Modernist idol and the enemies of Christ. I honored my Lord by refusing to receive standing, got up off my knees, and walked away. I will not be receiving Communion there any longer.

Ave Christus Rex!

Recognise & Resist!

ALSO READ:

The Blessed Virgin Mary and the Crescent Moon of Islam

You have been a bad, bad pope… but how bad?

A beginner’s guide to problems with the Second Vatican Council

Playing Church Destruction Bingo with a mythical Masonic document

A bunch of ‘mentally imbalanced’ Popes, Saints, and Theologians begs to differ with Pope Francis

To obey, or not to obey – that is the question