Why must I dance with the devil in order to serve God?

[porthos11]

Discernment doesn’t stop once you enter the diocesan seminary. Candidates must continue to discern God’s will until they are ordained. Part of that is recognizing if God wants the person studying for the diocese or for a religious order or priestly society.

And it should be discerned.

People should not cavalierly tell candidates to flee to another order just because of perceived heresy. Sometimes, they need to persevere so that a new generation of diocesan priests can rise to repair the damage left by THAT generation.

 

[reggieM]

And it should be discerned.

People should not cavalierly tell candidates to flee to another order just because of perceived heresy. Sometimes, they need to persevere so that a new generation of diocesan priests can rise to repair the damage left by THAT generation.

I fully agree.
But it also takes a special calling to be able to persevere in a certain environment where one’s faith may be at risk. Some can do it and we should encourage them to do so.
Others need to leave - they can be fruitful elsewhere.

 

[reggieM]

Nope. They are exponentially worse. The third generation has already taken the hit. And no one seems to care.

I don’t doubt what you’ve said - as frightening as it is.

 

[porthos11]

I fully agree.
But it also takes a special calling to be able to persevere in a certain environment where one’s faith may be at risk. Some can do it and we should encourage them to do so.
Others need to leave - they can be fruitful elsewhere.

And that goes back to my point above. What does he want to accomplish? What is his calling?

If he wants to make a difference in the diocesan sphere, then he will have to skillfully play through the system. If he wants to be more contemplative/religious, then he should go through the process.

It depends. But I just take exception to those posts above who just cavalierly suggest he seek another community. That’s the wrong motive. If he’s called to active ministry, then he shouldn’t seek out the Benedictines or whatever.

He needs to figure out what he wants and how he needs to go about it. Hence, my points here about learning to be politically savvy.

 

[setarcos]

It seems to me Gods being lost in all this ridiculous pedantry. Christ said everything he needed to say to us about our salvation didn’t he? Do this, don’t do that. So we try to do this and not do that. Then men come along and muck it all up with their elaborate and esoteric philosophies about things Christ never taught as essential to our salvation. Didn’t God imprint upon the hearts of man the desire for the good? If it feels wrong it probably is.
While we spend all our time debating this meaning or that meaning or whether we’re right and their wrong with all our imperfect chit chat we’ll look up one day and find Christ turned left on the path miles back while we kept on walking straight ahead with our eyes on the ground and our heads caught up in the wisdom of men.

 

[1neophyte]

It seems to me Gods being lost in all this ridiculous pedantry. Christ said everything he needed to say to us about our salvation didn’t he? Do this, don’t do that. So we try to do this and not do that. Then men come along and muck it all up with their elaborate and esoteric philosophies about things Christ never taught as essential to our salvation. Didn’t God imprint upon the hearts of man the desire for the good? If it feels wrong it probably is.
While we spend all our time debating this meaning or that meaning or whether we’re right and their wrong with all our imperfect chit chat we’ll look up one day and find Christ turned left on the path miles back while we kept on walking straight ahead with our eyes on the ground and our heads caught up in the wisdom of men.

Preach!

 

[JimG]

One wouldn’t be able to take much comfort from Father Peter Stravinskas’ words if he concluded by saying …

“… and the nightmare has continued for all of these forty years.”

A continuing nightmare seems to be a possibility.
From earlier in this thread:

Yes, the experience of Fr. Stravinskas is a comfort only because he experienced even worse heterodoxy in seminary and yet emerged as an orthodox and faithful Catholic priest. He says “I have never regretted for a single day having become a priest and, yes, would do it all over again – even amid the lunacy of the 60s and 70s.”

I have never heard any of our local seminarians tell of such things, but as I said, they tend to attend very reliably orthodox Catholic seminaries.

The “lunacy of the '70’s, was, I think, quite worse. It’s sad that there remain such factions in the Church, but they are not worse than in the past except that partisans of non-orthodoxy are a little more desperate today, perhaps because they are seeing more religiousy conservative young seminarians and priests.

 

[friardchips]

It seems to me Gods being lost in all this ridiculous pedantry. Christ said everything he needed to say to us about our salvation didn’t he? Do this, don’t do that. So we try to do this and not do that. Then men come along and muck it all up with their elaborate and esoteric philosophies about things Christ never taught as essential to our salvation. Didn’t God imprint upon the hearts of man the desire for the good? If it feels wrong it probably is.
While we spend all our time debating this meaning or that meaning or whether we’re right and their wrong with all our imperfect chit chat we’ll look up one day and find Christ turned left on the path miles back while we kept on walking straight ahead with our eyes on the ground and our heads caught up in the wisdom of men.

I tend to think that this is what drives many to reject Marian Dogmas.

Wouldn’t you agree?!

 

[Don_Ruggero]

The old “those who can, do, those who can’t, teach” maxim is most appropriate for seminary life.

The decision to send a priest forward for advanced degrees so that he can work in formation is a careful decision because of the time, cost and effort involved…as well as the sacrifice it will impose…all of this being stated from the diocesan perspective.

It is hardly “those who can, do, those who can’t, teach.”

The fact is, those who end up with those degrees will ultimately be central in the life of a diocese because of their knowledge and their expertise.

I (probably correctly) assume that you are studying for diocesan priesthood. It might be a good idea to look into some different orders that would fit you better.

In his original post, the poster speaks of novitiate…so your assumption that he is studying for the diocesan priesthood would also be wrong.

 

[setarcos]

I tend to think that this is what drives many to reject Marian Dogmas.

Wouldn’t you agree?!

Yes! Absolutely. Many simply cannot conceptualize the actual meaning of the Marian Dogmas put forth by the Catholic Church. Whether out of their own ignorance or from the failure of the clergy to properly present these Dogmas to the laity it causes a stumbling block for many people. Another non essential Dogma is the presentation of the trinity and the relationship of the persons within the Godhead. The human mind is simply not equipped to understand God and yet men continue to present ridiculously provincial theories involving love, family and relationships and impress them on his “being” which many find hard to digest but don’t realize are not necessary in their comprehension for salvation. I don’t need to know the exact nature of the Godhead in order to be saved for instance. Yet I cannot understand why the Catholic Church insists on a person professing belief in something which I cannot understand in its ineffable nature and whose comprehension is not essential to my salvation in order that I can become Catholic. An unnecessary stumbling block in my opinion. As for me I believe after studying the Dogmas, histories, and scripture that I have established sound logical reasoning for why the Church should abandon such Marian Dogmas but I understand that such things are not possible since they have become too entrenched into the framework of Catholic belief. Still I like to get feed back on my assertions but that is for another thread.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

I’ll be frank:

I was raised to love God and His one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. I’m a millennial so I didn’t receive the best catechesis growing up but both my parents had a simple, strong faith. When I got older I started watching EWTN and listening to Catholic Radio. I fell even deeper in love with the Church and decided I had a vocation to the priesthood and religious life.

But ever since I entered religious/priestly formation I have had to violate my conscience a number of times. I was told not to be so rigid when I pointed out liturgical abuses. In novitiate the priests had a huge occupation with everything new-age. We used the enneagram and talked about “panentheism.” At my seminary we are allowed to talk about the evils of capitalism and the death penalty, but not abortion, homosexuality, or relativism. Many times my classes feel like a systematic dismantling of anything the Catholic Church has timelessly taught.

Often times I don’t know why I’m still in religious/priestly formation. I think I would have left a long time ago if I weren’t so sure God was calling me to the priesthood.

Is this normal? Does anyone else think this is a weird experience to have when studying for the priesthood? Is it okay that I feel frustrated and demoralized from all of this?

I hope it’s okay for me to post all of this. I know I’m probably close to violating #19 of the “banned topics” list but I hope it’s okay since I’m not mentioning any seminary or religious order by name.

I would be equally frank with you.

It is not at all unusual to go through periods of being demoralized or frustrated when one is in formation. Indeed, it would be unusual not to have that experience…and even concerning for the formators. However, that is not at the heart of what you are discussing.

In all my years in formation work, one of the most recurring issues with seminarians was a tendency to choose a course of action and to pursue it relentlessly, when prudence would suggest otherwise. In part, it was idealism and the misplaced zeal of youth. They would attempt to comport themselves in a way to succeed through formation – or at least so they thought and hoped – when, in fact, what they were pursuing was not actually their vocation.

I remember an instance of a man being ordained and the man later said he really felt out of place throughout his formation but rather than open up about it, he was convinced that it would be all right once he was out of seminary. He would “make it through” and he would have “reached ordination” and then find himself working in a parish, which was his dream. All would be fine.

What did he find?

• That ordination is not the end…it’s the real beginning.
• That he belonged to a presbyterate that he was completely out of sync with, because all the things that troubled him in seminary were part and parcel of his brother priests.
• The bishop, moreover, was only giving him assignments that were the complete opposite of what he expected or desired and that only compounded his misery.
• Worst of all, he was facing this utter mismatch for the rest of his natural life with no prospect of it getting better, which prompted him to seek help.

Fortunately, there is excardination…but that is not an effortless process and requires much time and much effort on the part of many.

In some cases, what should have happened in the formation process – and been resolved in the formation process – did not lend itself to easy remedy in a now completely different phase of life.

I assume from your post that you have completed novitiate, are in temporary vows, and have not yet made perpetual vows/definitive incorporation.

Perhaps the problem is that you have tried your vocation with an Order/Religious Congregation/Society of Apostolic Life that is not a good match for you. You mention EWTN, for example. They have a congregation for male Religious that would seem more suited to your disposition than what you have described…which would be true for any number of institutes of consecrated life

You declare a certitude concerning a vocation to the priesthood. Of course, ultimately, that discernment rests with competent ecclesiastical authority. However, the vocation as a Religious – which must be the first and principal vocation – as well as a vocation to priesthood can be realised other than in the Institute of Perfection to which you presently belong. It is not a choice of this institute or nothing.

A couple of points of parting advice:

You have received the suggestion of “secret” or “underground” support groups. Such things would constitute grounds for dismissal in formation, if discovered by the formators or by the rector. I trust you know that.

I often read comments such as “you need to find another seminary”…as though one enrolled in a seminary the way a layperson chooses a university. That is not our way in a life of complete submission and obedience. The seminarian does not choose the seminary, it is chosen for him. That is one blatant example of a whole range of advice from people who have no actual experience with life in formation, with priestly life or Consecrated life or, for that matter, being a formator, which is very rare in this forum. Beware, therefore, of such counsel.

 

[friardchips]

Yes! Absolutely. Many simply cannot conceptualize the actual meaning of the Marian Dogmas put forth by the Catholic Church. Whether out of their own ignorance or from the failure of the clergy to properly present these Dogmas to the laity it causes a stumbling block for many people. Another non essential Dogma is the presentation of the trinity and the relationship of the persons within the Godhead. The human mind is simply not equipped to understand God and yet men continue to present ridiculously provincial theories involving love, family and relationships and impress them on his “being” which many find hard to digest but don’t realize are not necessary in their comprehension for salvation. I don’t need to know the exact nature of the Godhead in order to be saved for instance. Yet I cannot understand why the Catholic Church insists on a person professing belief in something which I cannot understand in its ineffable nature and whose comprehension is not essential to my salvation in order that I can become Catholic. An unnecessary stumbling block in my opinion. As for me I believe after studying the Dogmas, histories, and scripture that I have established sound logical reasoning for why the Church should abandon such Marian Dogmas but I understand that such things are not possible since they have become too entrenched into the framework of Catholic belief. Still I like to get feed back on my assertions but that is for another thread.

In that case, one needs to get off the path for the many and strive instead, for the path of the few.

The way to approach a truth which one cannot yet comprehend is to read about it and an excellent way of doing this is by starting with the Catechism. Before and after this, it would be advisable to pray. And one has to be honest with one’s questions to God, keeping them simple, lest we babble.

The reasons why we must at least try and learn why it is a truth is a truth:

• because truths open up the narrow path to seeming a lot wider than before although it is still the same narrow way. Truth makes the journey more bearable although the trials might bring the same ordeals.
• because it is an act of humility to learn why. And God rewards the humble.
• because each and every member of God’s family deserves the respect (or better word, love) which they themselves have been appropriated and too have expressed in their own lives as part of the family of God.

Indeed, to get more specific, would be the requirement of a new thread.

 

[Adam_Cook]

This was something that my teacher was talking about the other day. The Seminaries in the United States are too secular within their approach to priestly formation. The men coming out of the North American College are more spiritual and have a much more holistic approach to the scriptures, better able to tackle the problems pastorally. I would say find a different school, preferably not in the United States. Unfortunately, unless your at a Pontifical College, most of the studies focus on historical-critical method (secular exegesis) and therefore have a secular method of formation involved that is very liberal. I have heard this time and time again. Most times this does not prepare the man for what he is going to face in the real world. Furthermore, Catechetics is not taught to a large extent in US seminaries, neither is Evangelization. Most European Seminaries go into further depth on these topics.

 

[Lamentation]

I’ll be frank:

I was raised to love God and His one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. I’m a millennial so I didn’t receive the best catechesis growing up but both my parents had a simple, strong faith.

Often times, that is the best catechesis.

…if you think catechesis is at an all-time low, you’ve obviously not seen anything from the 70’s[1]

When I got older I started watching EWTN and listening to Catholic Radio. I fell even deeper in love with the Church and decided I had a vocation to the priesthood and religious life.

They’re helpful, but they’re also not the Magisterium.[2]

But ever since I entered religious/priestly formation I have had to violate my conscience a number of times. I was told not to be so rigid when I pointed out liturgical abuses.

As difficult a lesson as it has been for me, it is true in general. Yes, abuses are objectively wrong; subjectively, they may be lessened in importance. The guiding principle for me in such situations is that I conduct myself as I would at any other Mass (i.e. to show the reverence I feel is necessary, regardless of the… improvisations), and that it is not a reportable issue unless the validity of the Mass is in question (effectively, that the Words of Institution are said correctly and that proper matter of bread and wine was used).

The further you go in the seminary, the more you realize that the liturgy is an ongoing process - even if, objectively, Vatican II speaks pretty heavily against adding, removing, changing, etc.

In novitiate the priests had a huge occupation with everything new-age.

Yeah, that’s a red-flag for me; and a discernment moment for you. Don Ruggero covered this pretty well, and I agree with his sentiments.

For the love of all that is holy: Be (RESPECTFULLY) honest and straightforward with those charged in your formation process. Too many times have I seen exactly what Don Ruggero suggests - seminarians, novices, whoever telling Formation (and, rather soberingly, Spiritual Direction) what they think they want to hear, instead of what is actually the case. This hurts the Church more than many other things, including (I would argue) the liturgical abuses. How is one supposed to be formed/directed when the person being formed/directed is not even known?

We used the enneagram and talked about “panentheism.”

The enneagram, MBTI, and all other personality/psychological batteries can be very helpful, so long as they aren’t made into an idol of their own.

As to the panentheism… You’d have to explain that further. One could make that argument, depending on how one reads St. Thomas’s Summa(s); but that’s admittedly a big topic out of scope here.

At my seminary we are allowed to talk about the evils of capitalism and the death penalty, but not abortion, homosexuality, or relativism. Many times my classes feel like a systematic dismantling of anything the Catholic Church has timelessly taught.

I’ll admit I’m getting rather tired hearing about how women’s ordination is a possibility, how we “don’t believe in [the indelible mark of ordination] anymore”, and the virtues of various liberation theologies - including LGBT “so-called queer” theology. :compcoff:

At the same time, I’ve found it immensely helpful for when you’re out in a parish and somebody comes at you with how they think the Church has got it all wrong… At least you come prepared, having already pondered such subjedo notcts - and news flash: those people do not want to hear an answer which involves the catechism (or even Church teaching).:manvspc::banghead::takethat:

Often times I don’t know why I’m still in religious/priestly formation. I think I would have left a long time ago if I weren’t so sure God was calling me to the priesthood.

Is this normal? Does anyone else think this is a weird experience to have when studying for the priesthood? Is it okay that I feel frustrated and demoralized from all of this?

I hope it’s okay for me to post all of this. I know I’m probably close to violating #19 of the “banned topics” list but I hope it’s okay since I’m not mentioning any seminary or religious order by name.

Again, I recommend Don Ruggero’s post.

[1] Yes, I’m (somewhat) joking…
[2] Nor do they claim to be. They are, however, excellent resources from very helpful people trying to do their best to explain the faith to others. My point here being that EWTN/Catholic Radio should be seen just as authoritative as America Magazine.