How Did The Priesthood Change After Vatican II?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dempsey1919
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I do not say this to be mean, but I never thought that a man became a priest simply to say Mass; it is to serve the Church and Her members.

I would be very skeptical of someone who says they want to be a priest but not say the OF or only wants to use the “traditional” sacraments (what the heck does that mean?) instead of realizing the obedience and service that will be expected of them.

When we’re young we may pretend to be a priest because it seems fun but when we become mature we should realize the awesome responsibility and even the thanklessness of being a priest. It isn’t all about saying Mass and hearing confessions…I think any priest will tell you that.

Lastly, an anonymous internet forum is hardly the ideal place to get such information.
 
I would be very skeptical of someone who says they want to be a priest but not say the OF or only wants to use the “traditional” sacraments (what the heck does that mean?) instead of realizing the obedience and service that will be expected of them.
Click to expand...
I don’t understand the paranoia here. Is a brain surgeon going to perform oral surgery just because someone asked him too? Would you expect an OF priest to say the Divine Liturgy? There are priests who can say the OF, EF, and some of the Eastern Rites too (in fact initially the order of St. John Cantius was formed to say all three) but I don’t think a priest should be reprimanded because he won’t say a form he is not comfortable with or in a language he doesn’t know. Some get the rites confused and some priests don’t say Mass at all. As you say there are other duties of priests but he’s still a priest.
 
Timothysis said:
I do not say this to be mean, but I never thought that a man became a priest simply to say Mass; it is to serve the Church and Her members.

I would be very skeptical of someone who says they want to be a priest but not say the OF or only wants to use the “traditional” sacraments (what the heck does that mean?) instead of realizing the obedience and service that will be expected of them.

When we’re young we may pretend to be a priest because it seems fun but when we become mature we should realize the awesome responsibility and even the thanklessness of being a priest. It isn’t all about saying Mass and hearing confessions…I think any priest will tell you that.

Lastly, an anonymous internet forum is hardly the ideal place to get such information.
Click to expand...
I agree with you…

God Bless You…
 
I do tend to agree with Timothy…and wonder what the real intent is.
 
It was considerably weakened by what was being taught in seminaries, those being ordained had very little prayer life and little or no devotion to the Blessed Mother, they did not believe in transubstantiation; they did not believe in the transcendent. Also, some of their behaviors were atrocious. Much of what occurred after Vatican II was already in place by the 1940s and 1950s.
 
Back to Post#14. You are correct about the differences in the two Seminary curriculum.

And I’m really sorry to see folks denying that there is not two camps within the church,(actually there are more than two camps). And I say these not to be devisive. Its just a fact of life. I will always favor the EF Mass and tend to avoid the OF and eastern forms. But that doesn’t mean that I will speak against them. Yes, I know that some people do speak against the others and on all sides of the aisle. I have been attack (verbally) by Byzantines, OF Catholics and Greek Catholics and I have heard EF Catholics attack the others. But our Holy Father has said that we are ONE and so I’ll shut my mouth and learn to be a little charitable.

But I will favor the EF Mass and I firmly believe that a young man can be called to be either an EF, OF, eastern. He doesn’t have to say all forms, unless he so chooses. If fact can you imagine a Dominican priest celebrating a Byzantine Divine Liturgy? Think not.
 
Before VCII the Catholic priest’s primary purpose was to offer propitiatory sacrifice to God on behalf of the people. He was the custodian of the Blessed Sacrament and only his consecrated hands touched the Holy Host. He distributed Holy Communion to reverent and modest lay Catholics on the tongue kneeling at an altar rail. Priests’ homilies were meant to help the laity save their souls.

After VCII the priest’s primary purpose is to act as a presider at a communal meal. Laypersons perform a lot of his liturgical duties for him, touching the consecrated hosts at will and reading the readings. He is reduced to nothing more than a social worker giving watered down homilies to irreverent and immodest congregations on politically correct social justice topics.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top