“since writing the column, I have reviewed the website and listened to charges some have made against TradRecovery and the defenses of TradRecovery made by those involved with the “movement.” I have no intent to do a full critique of the “movement” here, but I have to say, the mish-mash of a website, the kind of evidence the organizers give regarding “traditionalism,” the lack of clarity of concepts, the idiosyncratic set of resources offered and the broad brush that they use to speak against widely disparate manifestations of “traditionalism” suggest that the movement may not be ready for prime time. This does not discredit worthy efforts to provide healing for those in need, but the organizers would have avoided a lot of negative feedback with a more refined approach.
As many have noted, even some of those involved in the conference, the choice of the term “traditionalism” is very unfortunate and is a source of a lot of the resistance to the project. Clearly the Church is wedded to tradition and thus in some way all Catholics are “traditionalists.”