OF Supporters Please Stand Up!

[Cat]

**It is well known that is traditional/conservative minded men who are being attracted to the priesthood. ** I hope you are not suggesting that I am being prideful.
I only wish to serve Holy Mother Church, wherever that will take me. I am becoming more certain that it is within the priesthood.
It is a fact, men like me, that is, traditional and conservative minded Catholics are signing up for the priesthood.

My goodness, why would I want anyone to bend to my will?
That’s wonderful cat, but what does that have to do with me?

Brining more people to God and his most holy Church in order to save souls. That is what drives me to be a priest.
I disagree. Yes Christ accepted Mary Magdalene, but he did not meet her as a whore, but as a child of God.

Amen.

Boldface mine.

God is the One Who calls men to the priesthood. It is not “men who are attracted to the priesthood” that God necessarily calls.

And where is your proof that traditional/conservative minded men are the ones that are attracted to the priesthood or more accurately, that God calls to the priesthood? Do you have statistics?

Last week we received our diocesan newspaper with the personal testimonies of all the priests who were just ordained. There are TLM parishes in our diocese, but there don’t seem to be any more men called to be priests from these parishes as from the NO parishes. In fact, most of the men were born and raised in “modern” parishes, including the parish that I am privileged to be a member of.

 

[Freshman88]

Boldface mine.

God is the One Who calls men to the priesthood. It is not “men who are attracted to the priesthood” that God necessarily calls.

Oh please, don’t lecture me. I’m well aware of what a vocation is.

And where is your proof that traditional/conservative minded men are the ones that are attracted to the priesthood or more accurately, that God calls to the priesthood? Do you have statistics?

It is presented in the book “Goodbye, Good men”. I do not have the statistics on hand, but I’m sure they can be provided.

Last week we received our diocesan newspaper with the personal testimonies of all the priests who were just ordained. There are TLM parishes in our diocese, but there don’t seem to be any more men called to be priests from these parishes as from the NO parishes. In fact, most of the men were born and raised in “modern” parishes, including the parish that I am privileged to be a member of.

My home parish is an OF parish and I too was raised in an NO parish.

I said conservatives AND traditionalists, not just traditionalists. Perhaps I should use “orthodox” instead. I think it is more suitable anyway.

Really, there is no need for your hostility, and your quip on vocations was quite patronizing.

 

[rlg94086]

Here’s where I “stand”…
catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0540.html

Our parish’s Latin Mass pretty much matches what Fr. Fessio describes in this article, except our priest isn’t *ad orientum *during the consecration. My parish priest recommended I visit a Tridentine Mass, so my son and I did. The Pauline Mass at our parish, in Latin, was more reverent and there are more readings, etc. I think our priest was hoping I would prefer the OF and lend my voice to requesting it. Unfortunately, the two times he has said the Tridentine Mass has been on Thursdays when I was out of town on business.

The only change I would like to see is a little more Latin (right now we *only chant the Gloria, Credo, Sanctus, Mysterium Fidei, Pater Noster and Agnus Dei) and the priest ad orientum during the consecration. *This Sunday, for Corpus Christi, we chanted all of the common prayers in Latin. The Vicar for Clergy from our Archdiocese joined our priest, as he was there for our procession through town, as well. It was a wonderful day.

 

[EasterJoy]

Oh yes, because you clearly know the nature of my vocation. Do tell me why I believe I am called to be a priest?

I’m a psychic, I guess:

I only wish to serve Holy Mother Church, wherever that will take me. I am becoming more certain that it is within the priesthood.

…Brining more people to God and his most holy Church in order to save souls. That is what drives me to be a priest

---

It is well known that is traditional/conservative minded men who are being attracted to the priesthood…

Gee, and it only seems 20 minutes ago that all the men filling the seminaries were homosexuals…where does the time go?

Seriously, though, it concerns me that you are filled with such glee at the thought that the seminaries are filling with guys you have gauged to be like yourself. You aren’t one of those “we are the new breed” guys who think they are better and holier than the men that went before them, are you, the kind who think the Church would be perfect if there were only more priests whose holiness matched their own? You aren’t the kind that are certain they are going to set a new standard of sanctity, are you? You do realize that this is the way 16-year-olds think, not grown men? And perhaps you are just young…

Understand that this is not about conservatives or traditionalists. Liberals can do it, too! It is about how you congratulate yourself for being “one of” the holy ones. If you are as holy and obedient as those you look up to, sir, it has nothing to do with you. It is entirely the work of grace. Never forget that. Try to act as if you believe it, even if you don’t yet.

Good thing I haven’t signed up for medical school

Maybe you should re-think that. Some of them do a remarkable amount of good, even the ones who have more self-confidence than compassion.

After all, man who thinks he’ll never be a patient can still make a decent physician, even if he’ll never be among the best. A man who does not realize what a sinner he is, though, he has no business hearing confessions at all! A man who thinks he is worthy should not even approach the Eucharist, let alone dare to offer the Sacrifice of the Mass. This is what I’m getting at. It is in no way a liberal idea, but a very traditional one: You can never be “another Christ” until you get over yourself.

I disagree. Yes Christ accepted Mary Magdalene, but he did not meet her as a whore, but as a child of God.

You would do well to get over the habit of calling women “whores”.

You do realize that Jesus used the woman at the well, a woman divorced many times over and living with a man outside of marriage, a woman that a “good Jew” would not ever acknowledge, let alone talk to, as his means to send the Gospel into her town?

Jesus meets every sinner exactly as we are, however we are. If Christ did not see what horrible sinners we are, why would he have died for us? It was not because of any merit of ours. He will make a saint of you by using you, and will not wait to use you until he has made you a saint.

You have no merit whatsoever to become a priest, except by the gift of grace. I do not even have to know you to know that. Yet you do not write as if you know it. You write as if you think you’ve run up a pretty favorable tally with God, that He must be just as pleased as punch with how much better you are than the rest of the schmucks you have wasted your time with here.

Oh please, don’t lecture me. I’m well aware of what a vocation is…Really, there is no need for your hostility, and your quip on vocations was quite patronizing.

We have no intention to patronize you. We are concerned for you, though.

I cannot speak to your interior state. I hope that you will find the idea horrifying: that we could have gotten such an impression about you, when you only meant to express admiration for those you may hope to follow to seminary. I hope that the impression you gave is of some concern to you, though. Do you understand what we’re saying?

If not, we can all be sure that you’ll have direction at seminary. You seem very zealous and willing to be docile to the will of God. What we say here that convicts you, take to heart. As for the rest, do not harbor any ill will. We meant you no harm, and resentful thoughts will work against you. That is not anyone’s intention.

 

[SJP]

Would someone please refer me to a citation that dogmatically pronounces that Catholics are not allowed to question the wisdom of liturgical practices.

 

[EasterJoy]

Would someone please refer me to a citation that dogmatically pronounces that Catholics are not allowed to question the wisdom of liturgical practices.

Defining liturgy is the work of the Apostles and their successors. Assuming you are not a bishop, why don’t you find us the citation that pronounces that it is within your personal authority to have a say in it at all?

 

[SJP]

Defining liturgy is the work of the Apostles and their successors. Assuming you are not a bishop, why don’t you find us the citation that pronounces that it is within your personal authority to have a say in it at all?

If there are posters on this forum who claim that it is “disobedient” to question liturgical practice, then the onus should fall upon them to provide the evidence. So where is it?

 

[Our_Refuge]

=Freshman88;3729383]
It is presented in the book “Goodbye, Good men”. I do not have the statistics on hand, but I’m sure they can be provided

.
*Goodbye Good Men *is a real eye opener.

Stats ad2000.com.au/articles/1998/aug1998p12_554.html

1. There are currently nearly five times as many ordinations of diocesan priests per million active Catholics in **orthodox dioceses **as there are in **progressive dioceses **(53 vs. 11); and
2. The rate of ordinations of diocesan priests in orthodox dioceses shows a strong upward trend, while the rate in progressive dioceses, relatively low four decades ago, continues to decline. In orthodox dioceses, there were 34 ordinations of diocesan priests per million active Catholics in 1986, and 53 in 1996 - an increase of more than 50 percent. In progressive dioceses, the rate was 16 in 1986, and only 11 in 1996 - a one-third decrease.

 

[SJP]

On another note, the Pope does not have a blank check when it comes to the liturgy:

It seems to me most important that the Catechism, in mentioning the limitation of the powers of the supreme authority in the Church with regard to reform, recalls to mind what is the essence of the primacy as outlined by the First and Second Vatican Councils:** The pope is not an absolute monarch whose will is law**; rather, he is the guardian of the authentic Tradition and, thereby, the premier guarantor of obedience. He cannot do as he likes, and he is thereby able to oppose those people who, for their part, want to do whatever comes into their head. His rule is not that of arbitrary power, but that of obedience in faith. That is why, with respect to the Liturgy, he has the task of a gardener, not that of a technician who builds new machines and throws the old ones on the junk-pile. The “rite”, that form of celebration and prayer which has ripened in the faith and the life of the Church, is a condensed form of living Tradition in which the sphere using that rite expresses the whole of its faith and its prayer, and thus at the same time the fellowship of generations one with another becomes something we can experience, fellowship with the people who pray before us and after us. Thus the rite is something of benefit that is given to the Church, a living form of paradosis, the handing-on of Tradition.

Preface to The Organic Development of the Liturgy by Alcuin Reid, O.S.B. | by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger

 

[SJP]

Oh and by the way, I’m still waiting for a reply to my OP. Sorry, but “because the Pope said so” is not going to cut it.

So back to the original purpose of the thread.

1. Do you recognize the validity of the principle of Organic Development and its importance to Catholic worship?

1. Please provide one historical example of an instance in which the liturgy of the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church has been reformed to the extent that it was in 1970 (the creation of the OF of the Mass)

1. Please demonstrate (using historical examples) how the creation of the OF of the Mass could be considered an Organic Development.

 

[Freshman88]

Gee, and it only seems 20 minutes ago that all the men filling the seminaries were homosexuals…where does the time go?

Gee, I never did say that. Thanks though, your making me sound like a great guy, appreciate it.

Seriously, though, it concerns me that you are filled with such glee at the thought that the seminaries are filling with guys you have gauged to be like yourself. You aren’t one of those “we are the new breed” guys who think they are better and holier than the men that went before them, are you, the kind who think the Church would be perfect

I don’t think I’m better than anyone. I do know that I stick to Orthodox Catholcism, I stick to what has been taught and stay far far away from liberal Catholicism. I prefer the early Church fathers and St. Thomas Aquinas, and I rely on the documents of the Church and Her councils.

if there were only more priests whose holiness matched their own? You aren’t the kind that are certain they are going to set a new standard of sanctity, are you? You do realize that this is the way 16-year-olds think, not grown men? And perhaps you are just young…

I won’t justify this kind of smear with a proper response.

Understand that this is not about conservatives or traditionalists. Liberals can do it, too! It is about how you congratulate yourself for being “one of” the holy ones. If you are as holy and obedient as those you look up to, sir, it has nothing to do with you. It is entirely the work of grace. Never forget that. Try to act as if you believe it, even if you don’t yet.

It is exactly about Orthodox vs Heterdoxy, good vs. evil. It is indeed about the search for truth.

I have NEVER congratulated myself for being holy. In fact, I ask you apologize for this slander immediately.

“Even if I don;t yet?” ? EXCUSE ME!? Just who the hell are you?
How dare you question my faith!

Maybe you should re-think that. Some of them do a remarkable amount of good, even the ones who have more self-confidence than compassion.

Now I’m without compassion too? Your on a roll… don’t let me stop you.

A man who thinks he is worthy should not even approach the Eucharist, let alone dare to offer the Sacrifice of the Mass.

Now I think I’m worthy to receive the Eucharist? Fancy that, my spiritual director tells me I’m too scrupulous. Thanks again, let’s see how you’ll smear me next?

This is what I’m getting at. It is in no way a liberal idea, but a very traditional one: You can never be “another Christ” until you get over yourself.

Get over myself? I believe I am called to serve the Lord as a priest, and so I need to get over myself? Rich. Just absolutely rich.

You would do well to get over the habit of calling women “whores”.

Habit? I have no such habit - again, stop with this slander.

Tradition has St. Mary Magadelene as a prostitute. The great thing about her story is that she ended being one of the greatest saints.

You do realize that Jesus used the woman at the well, a woman divorced many times over and living with a man outside of marriage, a woman that a “good Jew” would not ever acknowledge, let alone talk to, as his means to send the Gospel into her town?

You do realize that this was the EXACT point I made with St. Mary Magdalene. No you don’t, your too busy slandering me.

Jesus meets every sinner exactly as we are, however we are.

Yes but he does NOT accept our sinful ways, this was the point I was making.

You have no merit whatsoever to become a priest, except by the gift of grace. I do not even have to know you to know that. Yet you do not write as if you know it. You write as if you think you’ve run up a pretty favorable tally with God, that He must be just as pleased as punch with how much better you are than the rest of the schmucks you have wasted your time with here.

Unbelivable.

We have no intention to patronize you. We are concerned for you, though.

So you slander and make horrible remarks about me? Wonderful.

I cannot speak to your interior state. I hope that you will find the idea horrifying: that we could have gotten such an impression about you, when you only meant to express admiration for those you may hope to follow to seminary. I hope that the impression you gave is of some concern to you, though. Do you understand what we’re saying?

The IMPRESSION IS SLANDEROUS AND UNFOUNDED!

If not, we can all be sure that you’ll have direction at seminary. You seem very zealous and willing to be docile to the will of God. What we say here that convicts you, take to heart. As for the rest, do not harbor any ill will. We meant you no harm, and resentful thoughts will work against you. That is not anyone’s intention.

No harm? No ill will?

That’s it.

I’m gone for good.

 

[EasterJoy]

Gee, I never did say that. Thanks though, your making me sound like a great guy, appreciate it.

I don’t think I’m better than anyone. I do know that I stick to Orthodox Catholcism, I stick to what has been taught and stay far far away from liberal Catholicism. I prefer the early Church fathers and St. Thomas Aquinas, and I rely on the documents of the Church and Her councils.
I won’t justify this kind of smear with a proper response.

It is exactly about Orthodox vs Heterdoxy, good vs. evil. It is indeed about the search for truth.

I have NEVER congratulated myself for being holy. In fact, I ask you apologize for this slander immediately.

“Even if I don;t yet?” ? EXCUSE ME!? Just who the hell are you?
How dare you question my faith!

Now I’m without compassion too? Your on a roll… don’t let me stop you.

Now I think I’m worthy to receive the Eucharist? Fancy that, my spiritual director tells me I’m too scrupulous. Thanks again, let’s see how you’ll smear me next?

Get over myself? I believe I am called to serve the Lord as a priest, and so I need to get over myself? Rich. Just absolutely rich.

Habit? I have no such habit - again, stop with this slander.

Tradition has St. Mary Magadelene as a prostitute. The great thing about her story is that she ended being one of the greatest saints.

You do realize that this was the EXACT point I made with St. Mary Magdalene. No you don’t, your too busy slandering me.
Yes but he does NOT accept our sinful ways, this was the point I was making.

Unbelivable.

So you slander and make horrible remarks about me? Wonderful.

The IMPRESSION IS SLANDEROUS AND UNFOUNDED!

No harm? No ill will?

That’s it.

I’m gone for good.

I’m very sorry that you replied so quickly. I deleted the full post a few minutes after posting it.

I hope you’ll come to see what I was getting at, though, because neither I nor anyone else here meant you any harm. What is inside you, we can’t say. I don’t think anyone doubts your desire to follow God’s will for you. What impression you gave, that is a different story. Take the posts about that for what they’re worth. Only you can discern what merit those impressions have. As for anything that doesn’t help or that causes resentment within you, try to forgive it as well-meaning nonsense, and let it go.

 

[ethelzguy]

If there are posters on this forum who claim that it is “disobedient” to question liturgical practice, then the onus should fall upon them to provide the evidence. So where is it?

It is not disobedient to ask questions as to liturgical practice.

But for the traditionalist crowd, it isn’t about questions, it’s about non-stop criticism.

There hasn’t been a question asked, that hasn’t been answered. You just refuse to accept that that is, is…

 

[ethelzguy]

Oh and by the way, I’m still waiting for a reply to my OP. Sorry, but “because the Pope said so” is not going to cut it.

So back to the original purpose of the thread.

I’m sure the Pope would be thrilled to know that his authority isn’t good enough for you.

 

[dessert]

Who said I was relying on scripture?

I’m well aware of the debate that goes on over St. Mary Magdalene. I personally subscribe to the tradition that she was a horrible sinner at one point even being a prostitute.

But she had many husbands, how does that make her a prostitute? I know people that have been married several times and stayed faithful while married. But they didn’t hang onto the marriage or were divorced and the man left for another woman.

 

[SJP]

I’m sure the Pope would be thrilled to know that his authority isn’t good enough for you.

Do you believe that every Pope in the history of the Church has always made perfect decisions?

 

[Joannm]

But she had many husbands, how does that make her a prostitute? I know people that have been married several times and stayed faithful while married. But they didn’t hang onto the marriage or were divorced and the man left for another woman.

I think you are confusing stories. Mary is the one who have 7 demons expelled from her. Most scholars would agree that people with certain mental or physical maladies were considered possessed in biblical times. So Mary could have had epilepsy or suffered from a mental illness. Either way the expulsion of demons was a healing act by Jesus.

The woman with many husbands was the Samaritan woman at the well.

 

[Timothysis]

Fancy that, my spiritual director tells me I’m too scrupulous.

I think that there is a wealth of information in that statement.

 

[SJP]

Okay, I’ll take your bait…

So, on to your questions…

1. Of course, I recognize the validity of organic development. The Pope himself has discussed it. Why would I challenge such?
2. Historical examples are not needed or required. The HMC has the authority to do as she wishes, whether the traditional crowd (or any other crowd for that matter) likes it or not. She does not have to prove herself to us. It is the other way around.

Really, then how do you explain the fact that Cardinal Ratziner stated the opposite:
**It seems to me most important that the Catechism, in mentioning the limitation of the powers of the supreme authority in the Church with regard to reform, recalls to mind what is the essence of the primacy as outlined by the First and Second Vatican Councils: **The pope is not an absolute monarch whose will is law; rather, he is the guardian of the authentic Tradition and, thereby, the premier guarantor of obedience. He cannot do as he likes, and he is thereby able to oppose those people who, for their part, want to do whatever comes into their head. His rule is not that of arbitrary power, but that of obedience in faith. That is why, with respect to the Liturgy, he has the task of a gardener, not that of a technician who builds new machines and throws the old ones on the junk-pile. The “rite”, that form of celebration and prayer which has ripened in the faith and the life of the Church, is a condensed form of living Tradition in which the sphere using that rite expresses the whole of its faith and its prayer, and thus at the same time the fellowship of generations one with another becomes something we can experience, fellowship with the people who pray before us and after us. Thus the rite is something of benefit that is given to the Church, a living form of paradosis, the handing-on of Tradition.

1. See answer to #2. Pope Paul was not required to provide proof of “organic development” to the traditional crowd to justify the NO.

Pretty simple, isn’t it?

The truth is that when it comes to Faith and Morals, the Church will never teach error. However, that does not mean that questioning liturgical practice is synonymous with “disobedience”.

Unless of course you can cite Church teaching that says otherwise… I’m all ears.

 

[AJV]

I’m very sorry that you replied so quickly. I deleted the full post a few minutes after posting it.

I hope you’ll come to see what I was getting at, though, because neither I nor anyone else here meant you any harm. What is inside you, we can’t say. I don’t think anyone doubts your desire to follow God’s will for you. What impression you gave, that is a different story. Take the posts about that for what they’re worth. Only you can discern what merit those impressions have. As for anything that doesn’t help or that causes resentment within you, try to forgive it as well-meaning nonsense, and let it go.

To be honest EasterJoy, this whole um, exchange, started because of the comment #20 “Finals must be over”. IMHO, people are entitled to their opinion that others like Freshman88 do not have experience and age enough to comment on issues. But to respond to a question with something like that doesn’t seem right on the forum.