Vocation for a traditional catholic

[Freshman88]

Petty? And just how “petty” would it be, for someone to pursue a priestly vocation while harboring a distaste for the Ordinary Form of the Mass.

What we don’t need, is more rogue priests working against Rome.

lol, so a young man who is not moved by the OF is a bad priest, even when it is the EF and EF alone that has moved him to be a priest? Could this not just be the Holy spirit directing him?

Why is it that my Eastern Catholic comaprison isn’t working for you? I’ve met several Ukrainian Catholic priests who are not of Ukrainian ancestry/are Ukrainian. These men all said they were attracted by the beauty of the Divine liturgy. But the even more interesting piece was that these stories mirrored vocational stories that i’ve heard from traditionalists.

I’ve visited traditionalist seminarians, and one thing I always asked was what is their opinion of the NO. All of them rejected this notion of equality between the two forms. Having this liberal notion of equality between the masses is NOT a requirement for the priesthood. I think this is the real problem with some of the posters here, they can’t imagine an actual traditionalist becoming a priest. … so I’ve wasted my time once again.

 

[peregrinator_it]

As to your problems with the argument that kneeling while receiving Our Lord and Gregorian Chant being inherent in the TLM and not in the NO: the issue is that the TLM requires these things.

I don’t believe the TLM does require either. I know for a certainty Gregorian chant is not mentioned in the rubrics. (And one sees the proliferation of TLM High Masses with settings by Mozart or Schuber or the old polyphonic settings.)

The emphasis on the preservation of chant is to be found in the writings of the Popes (mostly in 20th century; chant had been so out of favor in the 18th that it was almost completely lost) and the documents of the Second Vatican Council.

I am unfortunately separated (likely permanently ) from the bulk of my liturgical books; I don’t recall kneeling for Communion ever being mentioned in the rubrics for the TLM, but perhaps it is. If someone can verify it I stand ready to be corrected.

As far as I know, the use of Gregorian chant and kneeling for Communion are customs (good customs to be encouraged) not a part of the liturgy itself and no more “foreign” to the Pauline Mass than they are to the TLM.

Your experience of the Novus Ordo with Latin and chant and kneeling to receive Our Lord is a true blessing I am sure but it is by far the exception.

Yes, it may not be the norm (though it’s much more common than you think.) So what? Does that mean it didn’t happen? Does that mean the same thing couldn’t happen elsewhere? To say “but your experience is rare” is not to address my post at all.

I’m very grateful that my parish priests growing didn’t say things like “Latin and chant and kneeling belong in the TLM, not the Pauline Mass.” I’m glad they took a more generous attitude.

Finally, thank you for your encouraging words on my vocation. SNIP
It’s such a blessing to hear about getting debts paid off! I am trying to sell my car and get a far less expensive one (so if anyone wants to pray for that intention I’d be blessed by it) so I can pay more on my student loans. Your words encourage me to live a more frugal life and to make sure I get them paid down. One order I looked at today will take men up until age 40 so maybe I could get it paid off by then. I know when it comes down to it that if God wills it He’ll provide. I have to trust that.

Yes, God does provide. If He wants you for a priest He’s not going to be stopped by money !

 

[ethelzguy]

So according to ethel, a preference for the Gregorian Rite is now a mortal sin.

This forum really is out of control, but it isn’t the fault of the trads. That’s for sure.

You’re putting words in my mouth. I did not take issue with having preference for the “Gregorian Rite”. And, my wife Ethel has nothing to do with it. Nice try though.

I take issue with someone considering the priesthood who freely states a distaste for the NO Mass.

It makes you wonder what other Catholic practices such a person might reject as well.

It makes you wonder how such a priest might minister to the sheep of his flock.

 

[ethelzguy]

To those of you who feel offended by a Priest who only wishes to say one form of the Mass; * What say you to the Priests who now openly refuse to say the Extraordinary Form of the Mass*???

The key is, that the Novus Ordo is THE ORDINARY FORM of the Mass. The TLM is the EXTRAORDINARY form.

“Refusing” to say the ORDINARY FORM is a horse of a different color.

 

[ethelzguy]

so a young man who is not moved by the OF is a bad priest, even when it is the EF and EF alone that has moved him to be a priest?

I would certainly question the discernment of a young man who was not moved by the OF.

Yes.

Absolutely.

The Sacrifice of the Mass is central to our Catholic faith. To “not be moved” by what the Church has decreed to be the Ordinary Form of the Mass raises a signifcant red flag to be sure.

 

[BrendanD]

I take issue with someone considering the priesthood who freely states a distaste for the NO Mass.

It makes you wonder what other Catholic practices such a person might reject as well.

It makes you wonder how such a priest might minister to the sheep of his flock.

So you reject the FSSP and ICKSP, who are fully approved by the Church and the Pope? Sounds kind of sede.

 

[Freshman88]

I have been following this thread, waiting to see what sort of practical vocation advice would be given only to watch it fall victim to the inevitable liturgical sniping.

I have to say, I’m always mildly suprised when someone looking to pursue a religious/priestly vocation tries to pick an order based on liturgy alone. I would think determining whether you are called to the charism of the order (e.g. contemplation & preaching for the Dominicans; radical eremitic poverty & detachment for the Carmelites) would be more important. But that may just be a female perspective.

I think you should realize that liturgy is a BIG part to any persons vocation. Liturgy includes the rites not just for the mass, but all the sacraments and also the holy office. That is a huge part to any seminarians experience, they are absoultely submerged in the ltiurgy through the daily office and daily mass. Don’t forget too that when they become priests, they’ll be celebrating their particular liturgy. Not to mention that the different liturgies are vastly different. I should hope one would consider the Byzantine liturgy when looking at the Eastern orders, infact I should hope that it would be a strong motivating factor. This is exactly the same with Traditionalist orderrs.

Also, some orders have their own liturgical rites. That means that embedded into their charism they have liturgy.

If you realize that it is the Traditional/Eastern/Ordinary/Religious liturgy that you belong to, then you have to realize that they have a LIMITED selection. It’s because of their limited numbers that the Eastern and Traditionalist Churches don’t have many orders. Our selection for charisms is few, and so this is a delicate vocational process, because you must be sure that you can live according to the orders charism. For this matter, I know that the ICRSS has an almost mandatory year of pre-formation.

Also, don’t forget that the FSSP has the Traditionalist rite as their charism! It is in fact this orders determining factor for joining.

So I think you can now see that liturgy is a much bigger consideration then you would think. Of course for many Roman Catholics, it is clear that the OF is the obvious choice, and they won’t even consider anything else. It’s natural, because they’ve known nothing else any their vocation has grown within this rite. That’s great, but not every vocation is like that. I think you would find that many Eastern Catholic priests become as such, because they only realized their vocation in their liturgical rite. My vocation is similar, I never experienced a vocation in the OF, but when I went to Eastern liturgies I felt this strong calling.

 

[ethelzguy]

So you reject the FSSP and ICKSP, who are fully approved by the Church and the Pope? Sounds kind of sede.

Did I say “reject” ? No, that’s your word.

I said “I take issue”…

nice try though

 

[BrendanD]

Did I say “reject” ? No, that’s your word.

I said “I take issue”…

nice try though

Oh, so it’s obedient to “take issue” with a priestly society that is approved of and promoted by the Pope, call them rogues, discourage their vocations, suspect them of heresy, and accuse them of failing their flocks. Got it.

BTW, the CA members that attend FSSP parishes are probably pretty offended by the accusation that their priests reject Catholics practices and can’t minister to their flocks.

 

[Freshman88]

Oh, so it’s obedient to “take issue” with a priestly society that is approved of and promoted by the Pope, call them rogues, discourage their vocations, suspect them of heresy, and accuse them of failing their flocks. Got it.

It’s just another case of cafeteria Catholicism… I can hear the waiter now,… “Which religious order would like you with your burger?”

 

[ibkc]

Did I say “reject” ? No, that’s your word.

I said “I take issue”…

Take it up with Rome. Until you get a ruling in your favor, attacking and slandering those who are discerning vocations to fully-approved traditional orders is, in my opinion, way out line.

 

[BrendanD]

It’s just another case of cafeteria Catholicism… I can hear the waiter now,… “Which religious order would like you with your burger?”

No, the FSSP are the Cafeteria Catholics because they follow their charism as approved by the Church

 

[BrendanD]

Take it up with Rome. Until you get a ruling in your favor, attacking and slandering those who are discerning vocations to fully-approved traditional orders is, in my opinion, way out line.

So much for the idea that the two forms of the Mass are equal. This forum would never tolerate dissuading vocations to say the Novus Ordo, yet here we have dissuading vocations to say the TLM.

 

[Freshman88]

Take it up with Rome. Until you get a ruling in your favor, attacking and slandering those who are discerning vocations to fully-approved traditional orders is, in my opinion, way out line.

It’s absolutely disgusting is what it is.

 

[ibkc]

BTW, the CA members that attend FSSP parishes are probably pretty offended by the accusation that their priests reject Catholics practices and can’t minister to their flocks.

Indeed. I live just a bit too far away to be a member of the FSSP parish in my archdiocese, but I attend mass there at least twice a month and the pastor there is my preferred confessor. He and the PV are excellent priests who have built up a strong, devoted traditional community.

 

[peregrinator_it]

Of course I consider charism and apostolic work and type of community but if you’re going to serve Christ in a particular way and if you think the TLM is the best form of worship to God then you’d want them both.

I thought it was better to address this in a second post.

Please understand that these are just my muddled thoughts on the subject-- take them with an enormous grain of salt.

When you join a religious order (especially a monastic one) you join a way of life and bind yourself to a spirituality. I tend to think that, even if all things liturgical were equal, not everyone is fitted for every kind of life and spirituality.

For example, I’d make a terrible Carmelite. I find the writings of Teresa of Avila and John of the Cross obscure and unappealing; I find many aspects of Carmelite spirituality difficult and I would perform them very badly even with a lot of work. By contrast, the Benedectine way of life makes perfect sense to me, and though Benedictine practices are by no means easy, I feel they would draw me to more surely. I guess I’m trying to say that even with access the most profoundly beautiful liturgy, I’d stand a better chance of being a professional basketball player than a good Carmelite.

But maybe this is different for men (male religious are generally not as cloistered) and maybe it’s doubly different for priests…

This is not very articulate, but I can’t seem to come up with better at the moment…

 

[strugglingalong]

I guess I’m trying to say that even with access the most profoundly beautiful liturgy, I’d stand a better chance of being a professional basketball player than a good Carmelite.

But maybe this is different for men (male religious are generally not as cloistered) and maybe it’s doubly different for priests…

This is not very articulate, but I can’t seem to come up with better at the moment…

Sure. I’m not saying that if they have the traditional liturgy that their charism all of a sudden doesn’t matter. You have to discern what God is calling you to - be it to be a Carmelite, Dominican, Benedictine, etc. While I am very attracted to the Carmelite spirituality and rule of life, I’d suffer a lot and find it very difficult to not have access to the traditional Mass. It’d almost be better for me to remain in the world and have the traditional Mass than to join and be without it. So it comes down to what God wants one to do. I think it almost comes to discerning out of those orders that do have the traditional Mass and which of those God is calling one to join.

The liturgy is the highpoint of our spiritual lives so it’s a big issue.

Pax Christi tecum.

 

[ethelzguy]

So you reject the FSSP and ICKSP, who are fully approved by the Church and the Pope? Sounds kind of sede.

Is the OP a member of either?

Didn’t think so, your question is moot.

 

[ethelzguy]

Well the first claim that the Vatican II Council never dreamed of a New Mass, just read the council documents on the liturgy. Nothing in them calls for a new revision of the liturgy. Nothing calls for new prayers. What is called for is more vernacular but that Latin be retained.

That does not qualify your statement that “the Vatican II council never dreamed of a New Mass”.

You have no idea what they “dreamed” of.

 

[OnlyAmbrose]

Did I say “reject” ? No, that’s your word.

I said “I take issue”…

nice try though

How come you can “take issue” with that decision of Rome but we can’t “take issue” with a different one?