Talk:Traditionalist Catholicism/Archive 5

message: Please keep discussion focused on editorial collaboration. Wikipedia is foremost an encyclopedia and a community, not a battleground or message board; personal attacks of any kind are prohibited. All editors are further strongly encouraged to assume good faith; please don't make any accusations you are not ready to thoroughly defend. When speaking of or responding to other editors, try to set an example in civility and tolerance. Remember that the sole purpose of article talk pages is to collaborate in writing an article. If you wish to address another user, please do so on their talk pages (but remember to remain civil). // Pathoschild 18:45, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment guidelines 

message: ====Pro-traditionalist====
=====Websites=====
*Traditio
*OHCA
*A Brief Defense of Traditionalism
*The Great Facade review
*Review: The Great Facade
*Differing from other Councils... 
*Vatican II in the Dock
*Conservative vs. Traditional Catholicism article by Fr. Ripperger, F.S.S.P., from Latin Mass Magazine
*Open Letter to Confused Catholics
*[link removed] a website, devoted to promoting traditional Catholicism, with extensive instructions on traditional Catholic practices
*Society of St. Pius X in the USA
*The Problem of Liturgical Reform online book by priests and theologians. (.pdf format)
*How the liturgy fell apart: the enigma of Archbishop Bugnini
*The Catholic Counter-Reformation in the 21st century
* Patrick Henry Omlor, Questioning the Validity of the Masses Using the New, All-English Canon
*  Benns T Stanfill and Bawden Davin, "Will the Catholic Church Survive the Twentieth Century?"  http://www.WillCatholicChurchSurviv.Homestead.com/Book.html
=====Periodicals=====
*Catholic Apologetics International
*Lumen Gentleman Apologetics
*Latin Mass Magazine Published Quarterly.
*Angelus Magazine
*Si Si No No
*The Remnant Newspaper
*Seattle Catholic
*Christian Order British publication
*Catholic Family News
====Anti-Traditionalist====
*Outline of Treatise A Prescription Against Traditionalism
*"Traditionalist" and Schismatic Catholics
*Phatmass Catholic Defense Directory (Enter "traditionalist" in Search)
*The Latin Liturgical Tradition: Extending and Solidifying the Continuity
*On the Validity of the Mass of Paul VI
*‘Traditionalist’ Errors Syllabus Part II – On the Mass
*1995 official statement on Masses celebrated by the Society of St Pius X
*1998 official statement on Society of St Pius X
Just zis  Guy, you know? [T]/[C] AfD? 22:49, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There are some Papal documents that are properly linked, and links to the SSPX, ICK, and FSSP would be proper. The magazines all enjoy wide circulation. Dominick (TALK) 13:31, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds fine to me. I think anything to avoid the Spam Event Horizon on an article is a good thing. Dominick (TALK) 15:30, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I'm glad it's not just me.  I absolutely agree with Lima, where articles exist we should link to the articles not the websites, that is strongly preferred on WP.  I don't discount a smal number of authoritative links, but this lot seems to me to be well over the top. - Just zis  Guy, you know? [T]/[C] AfD? 16:38, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Opinions

message: *Outline of Treatise A Prescription Against Traditionalism
*"Traditionalist" and Schismatic Catholics
*Phatmass Catholic Defense Directory (Enter "traditionalist" in Search)
*The Latin Liturgical Tradition: Extending and Solidifying the Continuity
*On the Validity of the Mass of Paul VI
*‘Traditionalist’ Errors Syllabus Part II – On the Mass
*1995 official statement on Masses celebrated by the Society of St Pius X
*1998 official statement on Society of St Pius X
Just zis  Guy, you know? [T]/[C] AfD? 22:49, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There are some Papal documents that are properly linked, and links to the SSPX, ICK, and FSSP would be proper. The magazines all enjoy wide circulation. Dominick (TALK) 13:31, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds fine to me. I think anything to avoid the Spam Event Horizon on an article is a good thing. Dominick (TALK) 15:30, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I'm glad it's not just me.  I absolutely agree with Lima, where articles exist we should link to the articles not the websites, that is strongly preferred on WP.  I don't discount a smal number of authoritative links, but this lot seems to me to be well over the top. - Just zis  Guy, you know? [T]/[C] AfD? 16:38, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Anti-Traditionalist

message: Catholic traditionalism links here.  This page seems concerned chiefly with the groups that reject various reforms and movements that come out of Vatican II.  Should it be expanded with information regarding the traditionalist theological and political thought of Joseph de Maistre and other nineteenth century strains of Catholic monarchism and traditionalism?  Smerdis of Tlön 15:24, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting question.  In the Anglican communion, it seems to me that Anglican traditionalism is pretty much the complete opposite of traditionalist anglicanism (as in Continuing Anglican Movement). - Just zis  Guy, you know? [T]/[C]  AfD? 19:44, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Catholic traditionalism and traditionalist Catholicism 

message: How about John Rao's site, For the Whole Christ: Writings by Dr. John C. Rao? It's relevant and scholarly if often polemical, and would be useful to someone interested in exploring the issue and what could be said on various sides of it. Jim Kalb 22:51, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps more useful on a link about the Roman Forum or Una Voce, unless there is any particular article that you like. (JASpencer 20:42, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion for link 

message: If you are interested, please voice your opinion at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 January 26#Category:Catholic Traditionalism to Category:Catholic traditionalism.  I moved the motion for speedy rename (normal in a case of simple capitalization, usually) to a full discussion since there seems to be debate regarding this on this page. --Syrthiss 04:20, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category rename discussion referenced above...