Vocation for a traditional catholic

[ethelzguy]

Why are you using the word prejudice to make it sound negative? The Church and the Pope approve of traditional priestly societies, you’re the one that has a problem with it.

Because the OP posted negatively toward the OF to begin with.

 

[strugglingalong]

Because the OP posted negatively toward the OF to begin with.

I make no apologies: I find the New Mass inferior (though valid) to the traditional Mass.

Now back to my question, do you think the FSSP and the Institute of Christ the King is against the Church because they offer only the TLM?

Pax Christi tecum.

 

[BrendanD]

Because the OP posted negatively toward the OF to begin with.

And? He is free to dislike the NO if he wants to. There are numerous traditional societies approved by the Church, all of whom are critical of the NO. Not to mention that this person said that he would be willing to say the NO, even though Rome doesn’t require it.

Some people think the TLM is better than the NO. Not their “preference”, not their “feeling”, but they believe that the Mass itself is better. It’s a view held by many priests in good standing.

 

[SisterSnowflake]

Perhaps the men who feeled called to celebrate the more traditional aspects of the Church should be looked at as having a “call within a call”…nothing wrong with that! We should be thankful and happy for all vocations…not only those that we understand or can relate to (can any of us really understand the mystery of God’s call, any way!?).

These gents did not seem to condemn anyone who are not of their same mindset/tradions/preferences, so why would anyone do that to them? Not very nice…we should all be on “the same team”, right?
“ In necessasariis, unitas; In dubiis, libertas; in omnibus, caritas.”
(In things essential, unity; in doubtful, liberty; in all things, charity.) -Thomas a Kempis, Imitation of Christ bk. I, ch. III

Also, for you guys discerning a more traditional community:
I just posted some information in the vocation thread entitled “Stuck.any advice?” that may be helpful…check it out!

God bless!

 

[ethelzguy]

I make no apologies: I find the New Mass inferior (though valid) to the traditional Mass.

Now back to my question, do you think the FSSP and the Institute of Christ the King is against the Church because they offer only the TLM?

Pax Christi tecum.

Nope

 

[ethelzguy]

And? He is free to dislike the NO if he wants to. There are numerous traditional societies approved by the Church, all of whom are critical of the NO. Not to mention that this person said that he would be willing to say the NO, even though Rome doesn’t require it.

Some people think the TLM is better than the NO. Not their “preference”, not their “feeling”, but they believe that the Mass itself is better. It’s a view held by many priests in good standing.

And I am free to be concerned by a person considering the priesthood with a stated prejudice toward the Ordinary Form of the Mass.

 

[BrendanD]

And I am free to be concerned by a person considering the priesthood with a stated prejudice toward the Ordinary Form of the Mass.

If you get a kick out of attacking priests in good standing with Rome by calling them rogues and heretics, that’s fine. But there’s no need to come into the Traditional Catholicism forum to insult traditional priests. For someone who often brags in this forum about how obedient he is, it seems odd to “take issue” with entire orders created and approved by the Pope.

 

[Dauphin]

I said that I take issue with the idea of a 31-year-old considering the priesthood with a definitive prejudice toward the NO/OF.

It’s not a prejudice; it’s a conviction. The New Mass, despite its validity and inherent holiness, is a less Catholic and less fitting liturgy than the Traditional Latin Mass. Its prayers, whether intentionally or not, de-emphasize or omit certain Catholic doctrines which are essential to the Mass.

Catholics are entirely free to hold this position, and no amount of griping from an old fogie desperate to salvage the credibility of the reforms can change that.

 

[ethelzguy]

If you get a kick out of attacking priests in good standing with Rome by calling them rogues and heretics, that’s fine. But there’s no need to come into the Traditional Catholicism forum to insult traditional priests. For someone who often brags in this forum about how obedient he is, it seems odd to “take issue” with entire orders created and approved by the Pope.

Another of your twisted manipulations.

I never said anything about “entire orders created and approved by the Pope”

Nice try, though

 

[BrendanD]

Another of your twisted manipulations.

I never said anything about “entire orders created and approved by the Pope”

Nice try, though

You “take issue” with and insult priests that decline to say the NO. The FSSP are mostly priests that decline to say the NO. I think anybody that wants to can figure out the conclusion here.

 

[ethelzguy]

It’s not a prejudice; it’s a conviction. The New Mass, despite its validity and inherent holiness, is a less Catholic and less fitting liturgy than the Traditional Latin Mass. Its prayers, whether intentionally or not, de-emphasize or omit certain Catholic doctrines which are essential to the Mass.

Catholics are entirely free to hold this position, and no amount of griping from an old fogie desperate to salvage the credibility of the reforms can change that.

Prejudice generally connotes a position AGAINST something.

Conviction generally connotes a position FOR something.

The OP clearly made a statement AGAINST the NO/OF

Nice try, though.

 

[BrendanD]

Prejudice generally connotes a position AGAINST something.

Conviction generally connotes a position FOR something.

The OP clearly made a statement AGAINST the NO/OF

Nice try, though.

Ah ok, so he’s not allowed to discuss the things he doesn’t like about the NO. But it’s ok for you to list off the things you dislike about the TLM, as you have in past threads.

 

[ethelzguy]

You “take issue” with and insult priests that decline to say the NO. The FSSP are mostly priests that decline to say the NO. I think anybody that wants to can figure out the conclusion here.

I didn’t take issue with “priests who decline to say the NO”.

I said that I take issue with someone considering the priesthood with a stated prejudice against the NO/OF.

:banghead:

 

[ethelzguy]

Ah ok, so he’s not allowed to discuss the things he doesn’t like about the NO. But it’s ok for you to list off the things you dislike about the TLM, as you have in past threads.

I am not posting on a forum that I am considering the priesthood, now, am I?

And, we all know the standards that the traditionalist crowd holds our priests to now, don’t we?

 

[PrayforMallory]

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

I would think that with Summorum Pontificum and the spread of the TLM, a discerning young man could pretty much licitly choose to say one form or the other, or both. At our parish, it’s all TLM. Baptisms are traditional, weddings, confirmation, etc. I don’t get why exclusively going to it would be a sin or something to question someone’s piety about. It’s not like exclusively going to the Novus Ordo and never trying the traditional Mass is a sin or something to be questioned. The argument has to at least cut both ways?

 

[Dauphin]

Prejudice generally connotes a position AGAINST something.

Conviction generally connotes a position FOR something.

The OP clearly made a statement AGAINST the NO/OF

Nice try, though.

Prejudice, incorporating as it does the prefix “pre” indicates a judgment formulated before the examination of a thing.

Nice try, though.

 

[BrendanD]

I am not posting on a forum that I am considering the priesthood, now, am I?

I don’t get it. Why is it ok for you to criticize a form of the Mass, but it’s wrong for him to do exactly the same thing that you do? The Church allows priests to criticize the NO and exclusively say the TLM, I would think an obedient Catholic would accept that.

 

[strugglingalong]

I said that I take issue with someone considering the priesthood with a stated prejudice against the NO/OF.

Don’t you think that maybe one day those who are now FSSP/ICK priests were discerning young men who said, maybe once or twice, “I would prefer to only offer the traditional Mass?” If so then you must take issue with the result of their discernment, the FSSP and ICK.

Pax Christi tecum.

 

[eelpis]

The name is a joke? Wow. That name has come from the Vatican itself, principally by the head of Ecclesia Dei there if I am not mistaken with the approval of the Pope.

The liturgy does originate with St. Gregory the Great so the name makes sense actually, to show that that liturgy originates not from the Ecumenical Council of Trent but rather from St. Gregory.

Pax Christi tecum.

I was reffering to the name of the forum, it seems almost as if when you state a traditional point of view you’re suddenly inundated with posters who attack it.

 

[strugglingalong]

I would think that with Summorum Pontificum and the spread of the TLM, a discerning young man could pretty much licitly choose to say one form or the other, or both. At our parish, it’s all TLM. Baptisms are traditional, weddings, confirmation, etc. I don’t get why exclusively going to it would be a sin or something to question someone’s piety about. It’s not like exclusively going to the Novus Ordo and never trying the traditional Mass is a sin or something to be questioned. The argument has to at least cut both ways?

What city is your parish? Is it FSSP or ICK? Just wondered.

Pax Christi tecum.