Universal Call to Holiness?

[jmj1984]

I see what you’re saying, but I’m not sure I completely agree with everything.

There are lay people who do that even with their secular responsibilities. Plus one can just go through the motions.

I agree with this.

Is this from the writings of Saint Paul?

I know through reading St Teresa and St Faustina’s books that all is not alway dandy in Religious life. You have people who have the same types of faults as you have in secular life: lack of charity, meanness, jealousy, etc. Then you have those Priests and Religious who are trying to live daily lives daily.

I don’t believe one can say that if you put a Priest or Secular person side by side, you can automatically say one is holier than the other.

Although I do believe to be a Priest or Religious is a high and unique calling indeed. What matters though is what you do with it.

Just as a lay, married person can live a humble life full of prayer, depending on God for everything.

Of course it depends if the person is actually fulfilling their duties but on average a religious or cleric will be holier than a layman, even a pious one and regardless of their personal holiness or otherwise they will always have the holiness of their vocation, that is laying hands violently on a cleric is punished so severely and why those who break their vows or those who cause them to commit sacrilege of sorts.

As for where its from, it most likely is from St Paul but I was more referring to the encyxlixal of pope pius XII on the state of virginity.

 

[Mike30]

I look to St Catherine if I ever get it into my head that the laity are not called to be holy.

Can you explain what the part I bolded means?

I believe it was JMJ who responded with an accurate analysis. What I mean in simple terms is that we do not approach God as a democratic mob, where everyone has the same roles responsibilities and attributes. We follow the hierarchy of the Church, led by the Pope and the clergy under him. We follow Her rules and owe obedience. I am not saying that every religious is a holier person solely by virtue of his or her vocation, but their calling is an objectively higher calling. That is what I meant.

 

[jpjd]

I can’t figure out which it is. Either people with a tendency towards imbalance are attracted to traditionalism, or traditionalism messes with people’s minds. Maybe both. There is something unhealthy going on.

Exactly what I’ve always thought.

 

[TrueLight]

I believe it was JMJ who responded with an accurate analysis. What I mean in simple terms is that we do not approach God as a democratic mob, where everyone has the same roles responsibilities and attributes. We follow the hierarchy of the Church, led by the Pope and the clergy under him. We follow Her rules and owe obedience. I am not saying that every religious is a holier person solely by virtue of his or her vocation, but their calling is an objectively higher calling. That is what I meant.

Ok Mike and JMJ. I can’t object to that.

 

[jmj1984]

I believe it was JMJ who responded with an accurate analysis. What I mean in simple terms is that we do not approach God as a democratic mob, where everyone has the same roles responsibilities and attributes. We follow the hierarchy of the Church, led by the Pope and the clergy under him. We follow Her rules and owe obedience. I am not saying that every religious is a holier person solely by virtue of his or her vocation, but their calling is an objectively higher calling. That is what I meant.

Glad I didn’t put words in your mouth.

Yes, democracy seems to get everywhere these days, neither heaven nor the Church is democracy.

 

[TrueLight]

All I know for sure is that the least shall be greatest.

 

[jmj1984]

Exactly what I’ve always thought.

‘**If the world hate you, know ye, that it hath hated me before you. If you had been of the world, the world would love its own: but because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. Remember my word that I said to you: The servant is not greater than his master. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you: if they have kept my word, they will keep yours also **’ Gospel according to St John Chapter 15 verses 18-20

 

[Edmundus1581]

Sigh, this forum gets more traditionalist bashing by the day

I don’t identify as a traditionalist, but in this thread I am with you, JMJ

 

[Mrs_Sally]

Of course it depends if the person is actually fulfilling their duties but on average a religious or cleric will be holier than a layman, even a pious one and regardless of their personal holiness or otherwise they will always have the holiness of their vocation, that is laying hands violently on a cleric is punished so severely and why those who break their vows or those who cause them to commit sacrilege of sorts.

As for where its from, it most likely is from St Paul but I was more referring to the encyxlixal of pope pius XII on the state of virginity.

I recently had it explained this way. In heaven there will be no marriage, so those in consecrated life, who have given up marriage, are living in a state more like heaven than those of us in the laity who have marriage as an option (even if we aren’t yet married).

Of course, the church values marrige, and we know that married people can be holy and have become Saints. It is possible that an ordinary married woman, dealing with her life with as much grace as possible, can be more holy than a cranky nun who allows herself to be spiteful, evenin the cloister. But on the whole, a consecrated religious (clergy, secular, nun, sister, brother, etc.) will have more graces because of their vocation and vows.

 

[Alfonsus]

Regarding universal call to holiness, I believe the Church teach that we must strive and called to holiness appropriate of our vocation and call. The call to be perfect, is for all.
Now, if we take the analogy of glasses (like the one explained to little St. Therese), some glasses are big some are small. Never the less, each is called to be filled to the brim.
Who has bigger capacity? We never know. Perhaps a grandma living off the street have bigger capacity than my parish priest. Only God knows.

But all of us are called to become saints, the Church said so, St. Bernard of Clairvaux said so too.
Here is his sermon, used for Office of Reading of All Saints.

Why should our praise and glorification, or even the celebration of this feast day mean anything to the saints? What do they care about earthly honors when their heavenly Father honors them by fulfilling the faithful promise of the Son? What does our commendation mean to them? The saints have no need of honor from us; neither does our devotion add the slightest thing to what is theirs. Clearly, if we venerate their memory, it serves us, not them. But I tell you, when I think of them, I feel myself inflamed by a tremendous yearning.

Calling the saints to mind inspires, or rather arouses in us, above all else, a longing to enjoy their company, so desirable in itself. We long to share in the citizenship of heaven, to dwell with the spirits of the blessed, to join the assembly of patriarchs, the ranks of the prophets, the council of apostles, the great host of martyrs, the noble company of confessors and the choir of virgins. In short, we long to be united in happiness with all the saints. But our dispositions change. The Church of all the first followers of Christ awaits us, but we do nothing about it. The saints want us to be with them, and we are indifferent. The souls of the just await us, and we ignore them.

Come, brothers, let us at length spur ourselves on. We must rise again with Christ, we must seek the world which is above and set our mind on the things of heaven. Let us long for those who are longing for us, hasten to those who are waiting for us, and ask those who look for our coming to intercede for us. *We should not only want to be with the saints, we should also hope to possess their happiness. While we desire to be in their company, we must also earnestly seek to share in their glory. Do not imagine that there is anything harmful in such an ambition as this; there is no danger in setting our hearts on such glory.
*[emphasis mine]

When we commemorate the saints we are inflamed with another yearning: that Christ our life may also appear to us as he appeared to them and that we may one day share in his glory. Until then we see him, not as he is, but as he became for our sake. He is our head, crowned, not with glory, but with the thorns of our sins. As members of that head, crowned with thorns, we should be ashamed to live in luxury; his purple robes are a mockery rather than an honor. When Christ comes again, his death shall no longer be proclaimed, and we shall know that we also have died, and that our life is hidden with him. The glorious head of the Church will appear and his glorified members will shine in splendor with him, when he forms this lowly body anew into such glory as belongs to himself, its head.

Therefore, we should aim at attaining this glory with a wholehearted and prudent desire. That we may rightly hope and strive for such blessedness, we must above all seek the prayers of the saints. Thus, what is beyond our own powers to obtain will be granted through their intercession.

 

[Ceil-1]

don’t identify as a traditionalist, but in this thread I am with you, JMJ

I don’t wish to go on and on about this, but, perhaps you have never felt the “bite” of rudeness and rejection from these people based on their quick judgements of you. An isolated incident from one or two people is one thing. Rote criticism and an attack on everyone, good priests included, who are not complete card-carrying lackeys in their camp are another altogether. And this by practically all members. Men, anyway. Women may not speak unless spoken too, apparently. Exceptions are rare.

Now, tell me that is not “group-think”.

Just recently, I visited an alternative therapy (quasi-chiropractic) practitioner for a class I’m taking. In front of the office was one of those big vans with Ave Maria, Gabriel Project and other pro-life stickers on it and tons of youn’uns spilling out of it. I thought, “these are my kind of people”. So, I stepped up to the van, which was in the path going up to the steps anyway.

I gave a friendly greeting, and asked if they belonged to our local homeschooling group. The children looked at me with daggers, and the lady in the passenger seat gave me an icy stare, and said something not so nice. I said, “I’m sorry, I wasn’t expecting such a cold reception” and turned on my heels to go. She called me back and explained she didn’t know who I was.

I told her I’d wanted to compliment her and give her encouragement. She explained she was visiting her sister, the mother of the children, and that her sister was “quite traditional” and probably doesn not belong to that group. I thought, “of course”.

Not for nothing, but, the children were dressed in frumpy, wrinkled Little House on the Prarie dresses. They were a bit grungy, and were obviously taught to look at me with suspicion. These children clearly had no social skills. This is a common behavior of traditionalists. What is the advantage? Where’s the love?

I’ve said enough. But, as one who was originally attracted to the movement and is heartbroken that it has to be inhabited by such mean-spirited, narrow-minded people, I think I speak for many when I say there is something unhealthy about it. Excuse me if I am bitter.

 

[TrueLight]

I don’t wish to go on and on about this, but, perhaps you have never felt the “bite” of rudeness and rejection from these people based on their quick judgements of you. An isolated incident from one or two people is one thing. Rote criticism and an attack on everyone, good priests included, who are not complete card-carrying lackeys in their camp are another altogether. And this by practically all members. Men, anyway. Women may not speak unless spoken too, apparently. Exceptions are rare.

Now, tell me that is not “group-think”.

Just recently, I visited an alternative therapy (quasi-chiropractic) practitioner for a class I’m taking. In front of the office was one of those big vans with Ave Maria, Gabriel Project and other pro-life stickers on it and tons of youn’uns spilling out of it. I thought, “these are my kind of people”. So, I stepped up to the van, which was in the path going up to the steps anyway.

I gave a friendly greeting, and asked if they belonged to our local homeschooling group. The children looked at me with daggers, and the lady in the passenger seat gave me an icy stare, and said something not so nice. I said, “I’m sorry, I wasn’t expecting such a cold reception” and turned on my heels to go. She called me back and explained she didn’t know who I was.

I told her I’d wanted to compliment her and give her encouragement. She explained she was visiting her sister, the mother of the children, and that her sister was “quite traditional” and probably doesn not belong to that group. I thought, “of course”.

Not for nothing, but, the children were dressed in frumpy, wrinkled Little House on the Prarie dresses. They were a bit grungy, and were obviously taught to look at me with suspicion. These children clearly had no social skills. This is a common behavior of traditionalists. What is the advantage? Where’s the love?

I’ve said enough. But, as one who was originally attracted to the movement and is heartbroken that it has to be inhabited by such mean-spirited, narrow-minded people, I think I speak for many when I say there is something unhealthy about it. Excuse me if I am bitter.

Wow. What a wonderful post.

I guess ‘traditionalist’ is synonymous with frumpy clothes, no social skills, narrow-minded and rude people.

You have anymore traditionalist bashing you’d like to do?

 

[Mrs_Sally]

I think any group who is trying to live outside of the mainstream, can begin to look on people suspiciously, simply because they have received more than their share of nasty looks, comments, etc.

Look how many threads we have about rude comments to families with only 3 or 4 kids! I’m sure this family (and even the sister) has had to deal with that quite often and so has their guard up.

We are all called to be patient, kind, and humble, but it’s HARD! People who are able to ‘turn the other cheek’ continuously in the face of questions, comments and mean suppositions are few and far between! Ceil-1 you did not have any malicious intent, but you may have caught this family on a bad day.

I do not intend to defend all interractions with traditionalist, because they have as many knee-jerk reactions and quick to judge comments as anyone else. I think though that we do need to give each other the benefit of the doubt more. If you and I begin by bein as charitable as possible in our interactions, and simply shaking our heads and moving on when things don’t go well, we will hopefully spread little pools of peace which can grow and become a huge ocean!

 

[fred_conty]

God calls everyone to holiness but He calls some more than others.
That means that God gives special graces to some, i.e. St. Paul, and
to some to be good people that leaven the bread of this world, slowly.
He told the parable of some producing 100 fold, some 60 fold, and then
of others less. But all produce the fruit of goodness, holiness, that is,
reflecting Him in their lives and lighting up the world.

Someone brought up asceticism. I believe the principles are all the same
for everyone, but that some know how and are willing to embrace them
more. For example, the spirit of poverty is for everyone, but it will be
done according to one’s calling. For example, a monk owns nothing but
everything in common with the other monks. Being a parent, I can truthfully
say I really own nothing because kids don’t know the words “mine” and “thine”
and if you lay something down, don’t expect it to be there when you return
for it. That’s poverty in a different way, but nonetheless, the monk can at
least expect to find a book he lays it down to be there when he returns.
The principles are the same, but carried out differently. And holiness very
much depends on carring them out with love and patience.

Just a thought.

 

[TrueLight]

Being a parent, I can truthfully
say I really own nothing because kids don’t know the words “mine” and “thine”
and if you lay something down, don’t expect it to be there when you return
for it. That’s poverty in a different way…

LOL… for real!

 

[jmj1984]

I don’t wish to go on and on about this, but, perhaps you have never felt the “bite” of rudeness and rejection from these people based on their quick judgements of you. An isolated incident from one or two people is one thing. Rote criticism and an attack on everyone, good priests included, who are not complete card-carrying lackeys in their camp are another altogether. And this by practically all members. Men, anyway. Women may not speak unless spoken too, apparently. Exceptions are rare.

Now, tell me that is not “group-think”.

Just recently, I visited an alternative therapy (quasi-chiropractic) practitioner for a class I’m taking. In front of the office was one of those big vans with Ave Maria, Gabriel Project and other pro-life stickers on it and tons of youn’uns spilling out of it. I thought, “these are my kind of people”. So, I stepped up to the van, which was in the path going up to the steps anyway.

I gave a friendly greeting, and asked if they belonged to our local homeschooling group. The children looked at me with daggers, and the lady in the passenger seat gave me an icy stare, and said something not so nice. I said, “I’m sorry, I wasn’t expecting such a cold reception” and turned on my heels to go. She called me back and explained she didn’t know who I was.

I told her I’d wanted to compliment her and give her encouragement. She explained she was visiting her sister, the mother of the children, and that her sister was “quite traditional” and probably doesn not belong to that group. I thought, “of course”.

Not for nothing, but, the children were dressed in frumpy, wrinkled Little House on the Prarie dresses. They were a bit grungy, and were obviously taught to look at me with suspicion. These children clearly had no social skills. This is a common behavior of traditionalists. What is the advantage? Where’s the love?

I’ve said enough. But, as one who was originally attracted to the movement and is heartbroken that it has to be inhabited by such mean-spirited, narrow-minded people, I think I speak for many when I say there is something unhealthy about it. Excuse me if I am bitter.

I’m sorry for your experiences but sadly they are nothing more than that, your limited experience. I can’t think it takes much to dig deeper and find lovely, welcoming, generous and Holy people like I did After all its not like the traditionalist movement here in the UK is very big and the majority of people I’ve met have been nothing like you described.

Some of what you described seems to be you judging them rather than the other way round, I have met many traditionalists who criticise non-traditionalists but do so charitably and truthfully. That is not wrong, especially as they often speak good of non-traditionalists as well. Frankly as a whole your post seems to be full of bitterness and anger towards a few people who haven’t reacted the way you wanted them to or who didn’t have the same views as you.

 

[Ceil-1]

Nice turn around. Why not take responsibility for the attitude being cultivated? I love countercultural. I would dress frumpy, Little House on the Prarie myself, except, I don’t want to be looked upon as unfriendly and meanspirited. Sorry, but my experience is not as limited as you think. I am not the only one who feels that way.

Why not be known for being loving and generous and courageous? Why must people separate themselves like Orthodox Jews, mean to everyone else?

In case you hadn’t noticed, the Amish separate themselves mucht the same way, but aren’t looked down upon because they are kind to others. They don’t sit there and bash–at least not in public. They have what is called charity. I’m just giving it as good as I get it, and it hurts.

 

[TrueLight]

Nice turn around. Why not take responsibility for the attitude being cultivated? .

What attitude is being cultivated?

Is there a Traditionalist class where rudeness and frumpy dressing are part of the syllabus?

You spoiled a perfectly nice thread.

 

[Ceil-1]

Why don’t you answer the question? Why can’t members of the movement be known for their love and warmth? Wouldn’t that be nice?

 

[TrueLight]

Why don’t you answer the question? Why can’t members of the movement be known for their love and warmth? Wouldn’t that be nice?

I’m not sure if I should even bother. Your mind is made up.

Most of the traditionalists I know are nice. In general, when I first started attending mass, I didn’t find most people to be friendly, whether old-time traditionalists or more modern Catholics.

The point is that you have to get to know people and not paint a whole group with a broad brush.

Now back to our topic of call to holiness.