Traditional Discernment?

  • Thread starter Thread starter notredame_999
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thank you for the responses. I’m still thinking and praying about this so I’m not sure yet. Lately my parents have been really concerned about me going to this traditional n.o. parish as they unfortunately have been brought up in that baby-boomer liberal catholic education era. On the first Saturday’s of the month when I admit I go to confession I can tell it really upsets them and makes them uncomftorable; it seems they have a hard time distinguishing the sacraments Christ founded from the scandulous errors and scandals pushed by some of its leaders. This is hard for me as well because I’m living in their home. In the end, I try to remind myself that my soul is accountable to Christ not to them. They also have a hard time with American Conference of Catholic Bishops stance on the death penalty and illegal immigration. I myself believe that the death penalty should be used in particularly heinours offenses. I also believe that when Christ said render unto Ceasar unto Caesar he essentially meant obey the secular laws unless they contradict God’s law, which means in my opinion the American government has a right to enforce its borders. This might get me in trouble if I was ever assigned to a parish with a large hispanic laity that expected me to push “comprehensive immigration reform.” Finally, I am still in that process of discerning between a genuine interest in church history and theology from that of a committment to Christ that includes giving up a wife, sex, children, and money. I’ll be honest- the very existence of married priests in the eastern rites in addition to the ordinations of formerly protestant ministers makes this difficultfor me to comprehend.
Piece of advice:

Do not let your individual predilections color your priesthood. Especially in terms of politics.

Id est, the Church needs another Fr. Coughlin like it needs another Kueng.

The traditional movement should not be turned into a warren of reactionary politics and [predominantly] old school American whites who want a return to an antediluvian Golden Age–socially/politically–before Vatican II.

This is coming from someone who thinks Francisco Franco was a hero, and that Pyotr von Wrangel was one of the single greatest statesman-generals of the 20th century.
However, the struggle of the traditional movement for a pure liturgy and a return to the timeless Church must not be shackled to temporal issues like whether the signs at Home Depot are in English or Spanish.

The trads might be overwhelmingly white and conservative, but they should be willing to stick out their necks for fellow Catholics, even if it means violating the integrity of Caesar’s kingdom with the image of a greater kingdom in mind.
Food for thought.
 
Well you should really pray to God and see where He wants you. In my opinion (take it with a grain of salt) would recommend FSSP if you really just wan’t to celebrate the EF, but I feel it’s better if you went to seminary and get your education and learn Latin as well. This way you can learn how to celebrate the EF and introduce it to what ever parish you are in, thanks you the Holy Father. What ever you do, do it for God’s Will not yours or anyone else.
Pretty sure the FSSP has their own seminary, with their own instructors, and Pontifical degrees, like everywhere else.
 
Piece of advice:

Do not let your individual predilections color your priesthood. Especially in terms of politics.

Id est, the Church needs another Fr. Coughlin like it needs another Kueng.

The traditional movement should not be turned into a warren of reactionary politics and [predominantly] old school American whites who want a return to an antediluvian Golden Age–socially/politically–before Vatican II.

This is coming from someone who thinks Francisco Franco was a hero, and that Pyotr von Wrangel was one of the single greatest statesman-generals of the 20th century.
However, the struggle of the traditional movement for a pure liturgy and a return to the timeless Church must not be shackled to temporal issues like whether the signs at Home Depot are in English or Spanish.

The trads might be overwhelmingly white and conservative, but they should be willing to stick out their necks for fellow Catholics, even if it means violating the integrity of Caesar’s kingdom with the image of a greater kingdom in mind.
Food for thought.
I agree in your praise of Franco. I do not understand your dislike in “reactionary politics” whatever that means. The only reason I mentioned illegal immigration is because I see the priesthood primarily as administering the sacraments, not promoting a twisted view of “social justice.” Yes I am Roman Catholic, but I am also an American. The two do not contradict unless the laws of America start to go against Natural Law- ex. Roe v. Wade. In regard to immigration, the reason why our Lord was born in Bethlehem and not Nazareth was because Our Lady and St. Joseph were following an inconvenient repatriation law. Although the law was definetly inconvenient, as deportation is inconvenient for foreign illegal aliens, it was not against Natural law.
 
I thought it would be good to hear from some other traditional catholics on this. I’m a young man who is possibly considering priesthood, but I have some serious doubts to the type of priest I would wish to be if I decided to do it vs. the type of priest this post-vatican II church expects me to be. Currently I attend a Novus Ordo mass because the TLM is just too far from my home. However, the Novus Ordo mass I do go to is very traditional- alter rails for communion, no modern music, no holding hands, sermons on sin, hell, and Fatima. If I were to become a priest, this is the type of Novus Ordo mass I would say. In particular the alter rails is very important to me. I also disagree with the concept of lay eucharistic ministers and female alter servers. My sermons would often involve Fatima and devotion to Our Lady. As a priest would I be able to make these types of decisions in my mass? Another conept I dont get is the church becoming the bride of the Christ, as if Christ has or even needs a bride? Is that a doctrine that has always been taught? It should also be said that I have no intention of joining the SSPX until they are fully received back into communion with Rome, even though I agree with 99% of what they believe.
what about the FSSP? 🙂 Perfectly in communion with the Church, very traditional, they have the Latin Mass… great parishes overall:thumbsup:
 
I agree in your praise of Franco. I do not understand your dislike in “reactionary politics” whatever that means. The only reason I mentioned illegal immigration is because I see the priesthood primarily as administering the sacraments, not promoting a twisted view of “social justice.” Yes I am Roman Catholic, but I am also an American. The two do not contradict unless the laws of America start to go against Natural Law- ex. Roe v. Wade. In regard to immigration, the reason why our Lord was born in Bethlehem and not Nazareth was because Our Lady and St. Joseph were following an inconvenient repatriation law. Although the law was definetly inconvenient, as deportation is inconvenient for foreign illegal aliens, it was not against Natural law.
You say that you are an American. Well. And you say that you are a Roman Catholic. Good.

But I am writing, with a priest in mind. A priest must explain and advocate for the Things which are not of this world. This cannot happen effectively if he has a serious interest in a nation’s ‘territorial boundaries’–which, in the eyes of the Almighty, we can only imagine as being less than a joke.

Look, I made the point about ‘reactionary politics’ because I am probably the most classic example of what the popular mind thinks a traditionalist Catholic is, especially politically–but even so, I say that the traditionalist movement must be unsullied by temporal practicalities.

If you want to be a priest, its time to forget about nature and natural laws. Man’s ‘nature’ is shackled to the millstone of original sin, so if it is permissible to chase what is natural without instruction from the Church, then maybe you should revise what you think Catholicism is about, eh?
 
And as for that little snippet about “… not promoting a twisted view of social justice.” in some cases, I couldn’t agree with you more. But erasing the excesses of last generation’s hierarchs cannot be started by indulging in more excesses in the opposite direction.

Keep in mind that the Church is international, transnational, and–ultimately–
‘meta’-national, to sound pretentious. It transcends nations, and the concerns of nations generally run counter to its spirit: consider only the following, that if Americans need or require the reduction of illegal immigration, why do we not secure our borders? Simply put, America doesn’t have the will or the spirit to control its borders, and the laws were probably made simply to placate nativists.

Catholic should support Catholic–render to Caesar what is Caesar’s can’t justify what’s happening in Arizona.
 
You say that you are an American. Well. And you say that you are a Roman Catholic. Good.

But I am writing, with a priest in mind. A priest must explain and advocate for the Things which are not of this world. This cannot happen effectively if he has a serious interest in a nation’s ‘territorial boundaries’–which, in the eyes of the Almighty, we can only imagine as being less than a joke.

Look, I made the point about ‘reactionary politics’ because I am probably the most classic example of what the popular mind thinks a traditionalist Catholic is, especially politically–but even so, I say that the traditionalist movement must be unsullied by temporal practicalities.

If you want to be a priest, its time to forget about nature and natural laws. Man’s ‘nature’ is shackled to the millstone of original sin, so if it is permissible to chase what is natural without instruction from the Church, then maybe you should revise what you think Catholicism is about, eh?
There is much that entails the issue of immigration and the Catholic Church. Nevertheless, ‘territorial boundaries’ are something that cannot be merely ignored. For example, catholicnewsagency.com/news/migration-laws-must-respect-national-sovereignty-and-individual-rights-pope-urges/

Lastly, notredame_999, I wish you a productive period of discernment.
 
Keep in mind that the Church is international, transnational, and–ultimately–
‘meta’-national, to sound pretentious. It transcends nations, and the concerns of nations generally run counter to its spirit: consider only the following, that if Americans need or require the reduction of illegal immigration, why do we not secure our borders? Simply put, America doesn’t have the will or the spirit to control its borders, and the laws were probably made simply to placate nativists.

Catholic should support Catholic–render to Caesar what is Caesar’s can’t justify what’s happening in Arizona.

Don’t think for a minute I don’t have sympathy for the illegal alien, because I do I have worked with them. Most of them want just a better life for their family and work extremely hard. But the fact is they’re not American citizens. Dont get me wrong its not like I’d report them to to INS but I’m also not going to get involved with this “comprehensive immigration reform.” And another thing to remember is that hispanics are leaving the Church in numbers that correlate to whites- in particular for pentecostalism. I wonder what your opinion is of illegal immigration in europe from the muslims? Do you have the same approach?

you also said America doesn’t have the will or the spirit to control its borders, and the laws were probably made simply to placate nativists. I suggest reading up on warnings from another traditionalist Catholic- Patrick J. Buchanan who warned of this for decades and nobody listened to him. That lack of willpower you are referring to is not coming from the American people- poll after poll reflect American’s dissaproval of illegal immigration. The real lack of willpower comes from Corporate America who for the almighty dollar will exploit these poor people for slave wages, while simultaneously shafting the American workforce.
 
Keep in mind that the Church is international, transnational, and–ultimately–
‘meta’-national, to sound pretentious. It transcends nations, and the concerns of nations generally run counter to its spirit: consider only the following, that if Americans need or require the reduction of illegal immigration, why do we not secure our borders? Simply put, America doesn’t have the will or the spirit to control its borders, and the laws were probably made simply to placate nativists.

Catholic should support Catholic–render to Caesar what is Caesar’s can’t justify what’s happening in Arizona.
Don’t think for a minute I don’t have sympathy for the illegal alien, because I do I have worked with them. Most of them want just a better life for their family and work extremely hard. But the fact is they’re not American citizens. Dont get me wrong its not like I’d report them to to INS but I’m also not going to get involved with this “comprehensive immigration reform.” And another thing to remember is that hispanics are leaving the Church in numbers that correlate to whites- in particular for pentecostalism. I wonder what your opinion is of illegal immigration in europe from the muslims? Do you have the same approach?

you also said America doesn’t have the will or the spirit to control its borders, and the laws were probably made simply to placate nativists. I suggest reading up on warnings from another traditionalist Catholic- Patrick J. Buchanan who warned of this for decades and nobody listened to him. That lack of willpower you are referring to is not coming from the American people- poll after poll reflect American’s dissaproval of illegal immigration. The real lack of willpower comes from Corporate America who for the almighty dollar will exploit these poor people for slave wages, while simultaneously shafting the American workforce.

Given that–as I have just said in no uncertain terms–I am pro-Catholic identity and not pro-illegal immigration clearly my reaction to the influx of Mohammadans is extreme repulsion, when not tempered by the thought that these people too can come over to the Lord.

And you wonder why Hispanics leave the faith in such tremendous numbers–it is because fellow believers will not stick out their necks for them, not even their own clergy in some cases.

If you think that the only people who should shoulder the blame for America’s little immigration problem are the timeless-but-vague ‘greedy corporate fat cats,’ you are mistaken. The average American is afraid of holding firm positions on immigration, because they are uncool, remote to most of our lives, and difficult to provide a concise justification for without sounding like a racist kook. If Americans wanted these things changed, they could get out in the streets to protest, start political parties, and ‘vote with their dollar.’

Also, many of the employers of immigrants are small businesses and contractors–surprise, surprise, the great and infallible middle class is also culpable!

If you think its bad now, have a look at the anti-immigration scene in Britain.

At any rate, I’ve read Pat Buchanan, and I agree with him–American-ness and our unique way of life will be lost, and immigration is partly responsible. But there are other things to ask, namely:
-If the American spirit is so unique, won’t it demonstrate this by defending itself against dilution by immigration? So far it hasn’t, and America looks tired.
-Which is more important, the Catholic world or the American world? So far Hispanics have helped build and support the Church to a nearly unrivaled extent. Perhaps we could learn a thing or two from these people.
-Finally, the real source of this headache was the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1956–if you want to save American values, good luck building a time machine and opposing this.

Ultimately, you’re going to have to choose whether you support the Church at all costs or America at all costs.
 
There is much that entails the issue of immigration and the Catholic Church. Nevertheless, ‘territorial boundaries’ are something that cannot be merely ignored. For example, catholicnewsagency.com/news/migration-laws-must-respect-national-sovereignty-and-individual-rights-pope-urges/

Lastly, notredame_999, I wish you a productive period of discernment.
‘Territorial boundaries’ are things that men go to die for, parliaments go to loggerheads over, and macro-states neglect almost every day. They shift like sand on a breezy day. Every piece of human knowledge falls into the purview of the Church, but the territorial integrity of a nation probably shouldn’t be a moving concern of a Catholic priest–nationalism demands something that most good Christians cannot give.

Lastly, the link you posted does not make mention of anything except our Holy Father’s pronouncements on the importance of dialogue between borders and the fair treatment of migrants (prob. with reference to the harvest-season migrants from Africa that were beaten and abused by Italian nativists not long ago).
 
The average American is afraid of holding firm positions on immigration, because they are uncool, remote to most of our lives, and difficult to provide a concise justification for without sounding like a racist kook. If Americans wanted these things changed, they co
uld get out in the streets to protest, start political parties, and ‘vote with their dollar.’
.

They are afraid? Why do you think the McCain-Kennedy-Bush Immigration Bill failed? How do you explain 70% of Arizonans favoring their new Immigration law?
 
**
Too little, too late.**

Going back to what I was saying, its not appropriate for a priest–especially a traditionalist priest–to get involved in this democratic rabble-rousing… except to add moderation to the dialogue, which so far the Vatican has been excellent at doing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top