Tradition = vocations – It isn’t rocket science

[Dempsey1919]

LAST POST ON THIS THREAD:

Discernment means discovering the will of God for your life. A big indication are desires that the Lord gives people. Monks know the monastic life is their calling because they have an initial desire for that life. That’s the first sign of vocation. God doesn’t call people into vocations that would make them lose their supernatural joy.

I know I’m not called to serve God in the OF. I came back to the Church because I found the Traditional Rite and it’s spirituality. Any potential vocation I have is to the traditional priesthood as lived before Vatican II. I know this because the Lord has revealed it to me. It would be against the will of God for me to enter a seminary dedicated to the OF, just as it would be against the will of God for a future monk to become a diocesan priest.

I’m a traditional Catholic and I pray for the full restoration of the Roman Rite. The idea that I could enter a modernist seminary and change things is very unrealistic. To finish, men are heading to traditional seminaries in droves. The heterodox seminaries and dioceses are dying for want of priests. The Lord still calls priests but vocations are killed off by Modernists. That’s a fact. And I have nothing more to say.

 

[Tim_D]

I know this because the Lord has revealed it to me.** It would be against the will of God for me to enter a seminary dedicated to the OF**

This should be the final nail in the coffin of any sympathy in regards to your original post. There is a word for people who maintain that Mass celebrated in the Ordinary Form is less than acceptable or that it is sinful to participate. If nothing else, I feel vindicated by my position on this thread.

 

[Lamentation]

wdtprs.com/blog/2017/08/tradition-vocations-it-isnt-rocket-science/#comments

Also in the comments section a link to a great video was posted about a parish as an example…

youtube.com/watch?v=P26jjOCv4PY&feature=youtu.be

I started laughing out loud at the beginning of the blog post: “and the new guys were measured for birettas.” In all honestly, what lunacy. Tell me what purpose it serves now? Do we still wear hats when outside and take them of when entering buildings? Excepting perhaps the military and police in this and the previous question, are hats used as a means of identification in the public square? For most places, I would venture to say that the answer is a resounding no.

To be rather frank: we are experiencing an uptick in [answered] vocations, but the question I often ask of my peers (and, as a reality check, sometimes myself) is “how many guys are here to play dress-up?”

Time and time again, I hear yet another guy talk about keeping things from Human Formation or giving them what they want to hear; ostensibly so that they can further their agenda (whatever it may be) instead of working organically through the system. This results in a man who is no better off than he was when he entered; and for the future priest, yet another burnout in the cycle of unending complaint about the diocese/order.

Yes, a more traditional seminary offers security against error than a more contemporary one (I’ve lived/studied at both), but at the risk of ignoring the reality of the world (and the Church) as it is today. What you gain at the seminary is directly correlated with how willing you are to collaborate with the Grace of God - if you’re answering His call in your own way, you’re going to fall flat on your face (or become so jaded that you wish you had washed out).

The traditional orders (FSSP, ICKSP, etc) all exist to minister to those who, for various reasons, feel better edified by the rites of the 1962 Missal. They explicitly do not attempt to make the 1962 Missal into a defacto Ordinary Form - it is Extraordinary to the Church, and these orders specifically promote the Extra-Ordinariness of the 1962 Missal by making it their charism to promote.

I understand what you’re saying, but my counterpoint is that the easy way isn’t necessarily the best way. An identity is integral (I don’t contest that, and in fact actively promote it), but today’s identity. Otherwise we risk being reenactors of a history not our own.

 

[reggieM]

If our seminarians are there just playing dress-up that is not good.

 

[Col103]

I started laughing out loud at the beginning of the blog post: “and the new guys were measured for birettas.” In all honestly, what lunacy. Tell me what purpose it serves now? Do we still wear hats when outside and take them of when entering buildings? Excepting perhaps the military and police in this and the previous question, are hats used as a means of identification in the public square? For most places, I would venture to say that the answer is a resounding no.

I could be wrong here, but I’m pretty sure the biretta is only meant for liturgical use. So I don’t really get this argument. If we were talking about saturnos…

The traditional orders (FSSP, ICKSP, etc) all exist to minister to those who, for various reasons, feel better edified by the rites of the 1962 Missal. They explicitly do not attempt to make the 1962 Missal into a defacto Ordinary Form - it is Extraordinary to the Church, and these orders specifically promote the Extra-Ordinariness of the 1962 Missal by making it their charism to promote.

This doesn’t seem to accurately describe the FSSP, ICKSP, and other traditional order priests I have met. While they definitely accept the validity and licitness of the new mass, they certainly would be very happy to see the 1962 missal completely replace it.

 

[Lamentation]

This doesn’t seem to accurately describe the FSSP, ICKSP, and other traditional order priests I have met. While they definitely accept the validity and licitness of the new mass, they certainly would be very happy to see the 1962 missal completely replace it.

Without disagreeing with you at all, my point was to the order’s viewpoint, which, in order to be faithful to the magisterium, must hold the Extraordinary Form as being Extraordinary (for the Church at large).