How Did The Priesthood Change After Vatican II?

[ChurchTorch]

But how do these two “camps” differ from one another? How is the traditional priesthood or religious life different from the post Vatican II priesthood or religious life?

Those two different camps are only in your mind. Trying to make them functionally real is going to cause you a great deal of confusion and frustration.

 

[Joe_5859]

Here’s a (what may be a stupid) question. Does the FSSP have it’s own seminary? All you would have to do is contact an FSSP seminary and contact another seminary (I recommend Mount St. Mary’s) and ask them to send you their program of study. Then you could see if there are any differences.

I would still caution against emphasizing the differences too much. There is farmore in common between an FSSP priest and a diocesan priest than there are differences.

 

[jonpd]

Does the FSSP have it’s own seminary?

Yes, in Denton, Nebraska. fssp.org/en/seminaireD.htm

 

[Lypher]

It seems to me that many younger priest thought it was a license to interpreter the teachings of the church their own way, some not trying to be wrong, but in effect that is what happened.

Take Care God Bless… Pray…

 

[EasterJoy]

I am currently discerning a vocation to the priesthood.

I have a strong preference for the Extraordinary Form of the Mass and the other traditional Catholic devotions and prayers. For this reason, I am thinking about joining a traditionalist society or order such as the FSSP or The Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer. At the same time, I feel deeply attached to the Order of Preachers.

In order to come to a decision, I would like to know how the priesthood changed after Vatican II? How is a traditional priest different from a non-traditional priest? * I want to have an in-depth discussion on the priesthood before Vatican II and the priesthood after Vatican II.* What were priests like before Vatican II? Did the role of the priest change? Did the types of men becoming priests change? Why did the number of vocations to the priesthood decline after Vatican II? What are your memories of priests before Vatican II?

Also, would my preference for traditional Catholic customs and prayers cause me any difficulties in a non-traditionalist order or society? Would the seminaries frown upon my love for tradition?

Also, and forgive me for asking this question, but this is the only place I can really find the answer. I have heard it said that there is a homosexual subculture in many seminaries, and that these homosexuals do not promote a lifestyle of chastity and purity; this network of homosexuals has been referred to as the Lavender Mafia. Does the Lavender Mafia exist? Others have told me that there was a heterosexual exodus from the priesthood after Vatican II. Is this true?

*Please share your views on the priesthood before Vatican II and after Vatican II; if you don’t have any views, please share your recollections. Please help me decide whether I should undergo a traditional priestly formation. *

I know you’re asking about the priesthood, but I think you need to realize that this is an issue that goes everywhere. It isn’t the same being a pilot, a surgeon, a firefighter or even a husband and father any more, either. As an individual, you could be exactly what 99% of surgeons were in 1950, and your experience will be totally different than theirs was, because the world around you is so changed, even if you happened to be in a practice in 2010 that was all males. You could act and talk the same way, but will be taken differently, your responsibilities and relationships with co-workers will be totally different…well, you get the picture. Also, neither priests nor other men of the 1930s through 1950s were made in some masculine mold that hadn’t changed in centuries. So you have lots of things going on in your question besides rubrics changing.

Forget 1962. The TLM is back, that is good, but it doesn’t turn back the clock. Find yourself a priest or two that you see to be really holy, find some time to go fishing or out to dinner or bowling or something, and talk to them about being a priest now, in 2010. Talk about their vocation, talk about how to try to live a life of holiness. Make it a habit. That’s where you’ll get the guidance you need, I think, because you’re trying to decide whether to be a Dominican or to join the FSSP today, not 50 years ago. What your decision would have been back then isn’t even relevant.

 

[Dempsey1919]

Spreading misinformation like you are doing is a grave disservice to all Catholics.

You’re speaking about two forms (or “rites”) of the Mass not two forms of the actual (western/Roman) church rite.

NO!

Let’s re-read my post so that I can answer these questions and clarify my meaning:

There is one Roman rite (I clearly stated that there is one Roman rite) but there are two forms of the Roman rite, (The word “Form” is used to distinguish between the Tridentine Sacraments and the Sacraments of Paul VI; Summorum Pontificum uses the term “expression”) and these forms (expressions) are very different from each other; there are two forms (expressions) of Mass; two forms (expressions) of Ordination; different (expressions of the) sacraments; different vestments; different lectionaries; different calendars. The two forms are both equally valid, but they are different. For this reason, I think it is incorrect to suggest that there is only one form of the Roman rite; I think people need to realise that there are two forms (expressions) of the one Roman rite and that the two forms (expressions) are vastly different from each other. In reality, there are two camps within the Roman rite; one celebrates the extraordinary forms of the sacraments and the other celebrates the ordinary forms of the sacraments. While all priests of the Roman rite are free to celebrate all forms of the sacraments, those who undergo a traditional formation mainly celebrate the traditional sacraments, and those who undergo a non-traditional formation mainly celebrate the ordinary form of the sacraments.

I did not say that there are two Roman rites; I clearly stated that there is one Roman rite. I made reference to the two forms of the one Roman rite; Summorum Pontificum uses the word “expression” but this word is commonly substituted with “form;” people always refer to the Tridentine Mass as the Extraordinary Form and the Mass of Paul VI as the Ordinary Form. However, since this seems to cause confusion, I think we should use the term “expression” instead.

I think another point must be addressed. Some people seem to think that the Extraordinary expression refers only to the Mass; this is not true. There is an extraordinary expression of all seven sacraments, including the Roman Breviary:

Summorum Pontificum: Article 9
Art. 9. § 1 The pastor, having attentively examined all aspects, may also grant permission to use the earlier ritual for the administration of the Sacraments of Baptism, Marriage, Penance, and the Anointing of the Sick, if the good of souls would seem to require it.

§ 2 Ordinaries are given the right to celebrate the Sacrament of Confirmation using the earlier Roman Pontifical, if the good of souls would seem to require it.

§ 3 Clerics ordained “in sacris constitutis” may use the Roman Breviary promulgated by Bl. John XXIII in 1962.

Notice that the Pope referred to the extraordinary expressions of the Sacraments as “the earlier ritual.” Those who object to the term traditional used to refer to the Extraordinary Form should read this; earlier rituals are obviously traditional rituals; the use of the term when describing the Mass and Sacraments according to the liturgical books of John XXIII is justified.

 

[Dempsey1919]

I know you’re asking about the priesthood, but I think you need to realize that this is an issue that goes everywhere. It isn’t the same being a pilot, a surgeon, a firefighter or even a husband and father any more, either. As an individual, you could be exactly what 99% of surgeons were in 1950, and your experience will be totally different than theirs was, because the world around you is so changed, even if you happened to be in a practice in 2010 that was all males. You could act and talk the same way, but will be taken differently, your responsibilities and relationships with co-workers will be totally different…well, you get the picture. Also, neither priests nor other men of the 1930s through 1950s were made in some masculine mold that hadn’t changed in centuries. So you have lots of things going on in your question besides rubrics changing.

Forget 1962. The TLM is back, that is good, but it doesn’t turn back the clock. Find yourself a priest or two that you see to be really holy, find some time to go fishing or out to dinner or bowling or something, and talk to them about being a priest now, in 2010. Talk about their vocation, talk about how to try to live a life of holiness. Make it a habit. That’s where you’ll get the guidance you need, I think, because you’re trying to decide whether to be a Dominican or to join the FSSP today, not 50 years ago. What your decision would have been back then isn’t even relevant.

Thanks. This is a great post!

 

[Joe_5859]

Yes, in Denton, Nebraska. fssp.org/en/seminaireD.htm

Thanks!

Did you know about this, Dempsey? I think putting in a call to a few seminaries would be helpful.

 

[Joe_5859]

Thanks. This is a great post!

You’re right, that was a great post. Can I change my answer?

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Let’s re-read my post so that I can answer these questions and clarify my meaning:

There is one Roman rite

Yes, lets reread what you said and not just what you bold and underline.

You say there are two rites of the one Mass but then you say there are two Masses.

You also state that there are different sacraments. There are not different sacraments, just different forms to them.

You seem to have some confusion regarding all this.

Also, all priests are not free to celebrate all forms of the sacraments. Religious priests are not covered by Summorum Pontificum is addressed to bishops and secular priests.

 

[Dempsey1919]

You seem to have some confusion regarding all this.

I am not confused; in fact, I am well-informed about the Extraordinary expression of the Roman Mass. Furthermore, I have clarified and explained the meaning of my previous post. That being said, I no longer wish to continue this conversation.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I am not confused; in fact, I am well-informed about the Extraordinary expression of the Roman Mass. Furthermore, I have clarified and explained the meaning of my previous post. That being said, I no longer wish to continue this conversation.

Thats fine, you might not be confused but what you wrote is confusing and you do not address the questions I raised especially about the sacraments.

There are seven Sacraments in the Church. There are not different Sacraments for the Traditonalist crowd from what is there for everyone else.

There are different forms, just as there are two forms of the one rite of the Mass, not two Masses as you also state which is spelt out in the document you quoted.

 

[Adeodatus]

I say just go with the FSSP. It’s what you want and it’s a safe bet. I’m sure they’ll teach you plenty of Aquinas, who gives us all a nice link to the Order of Preachers.

 

[Dempsey1919]

If I am called to the priesthood, I think I’ll go to the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest. Does anyone know anything about this priestly society?

 

[Joe_5859]

This may be neither here nor there (and you’re probably already well aware of this fact), but I toss this out there as something to consider just in case it is helpful.

You don’t have to do all your discernment up front. The discernment will continue throughout life in the seminary. You do not need to make a final decision before you get started.

So, no need to put too much pressure on yourself at this point.

 

[Joe_5859]

Dempsey, I just noticed you’re from the UK, and here I’ve been going on and on about seminaries in the U.S. Sorry about that.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

If I am called to the priesthood, I think I’ll go to the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest. Does anyone know anything about this priestly society?

All I know is that their seminary is in Italy (I believe) and you must learn, I believe, French to study.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

This may be neither here nor there (and you’re probably already well aware of this fact), but I toss this out there as something to consider just in case it is helpful.

You don’t have to do all your discernment up front. The discernment will continue throughout life in the seminary. You do not need to make a final decision before you get started.

So, no need to put too much pressure on yourself at this point.

But if one is joining a religious order/community that takes vows one should be done with discernment by the time one makes first profession.

While at least the first 3 years is temporary vows they should not be viewed as that by the person entering.

 

[Joe_5859]

But if one is joining a religious order/community that takes vows one should be done with discernment by the time one makes first profession.

While at least the first 3 years is temporary vows they should not be viewed as that by the person entering.

Good points. I guess what I’m really tring to say is that it’s a process. You don’t have to make your final decision before you even start contacting religious orders or diocesan bishops.

 

[KathleenGee]

It sounds like you should continue on in studying, reflecting and praying, as well as seeking guidance from knowledgeable clergymen.

The Dominican pastor in Portland, OR prays the Novos Ordo as well as works to restore the traditional sacred liturgy----keeping in mind that we are one as Catholics, and both have purpose.

One charism of Vatican II was for the Church to become more pastoral and evangelical. There was great need for religious congregations to update and restore the original charism of their founders.

God bless you in this holy endeavor.