Comments on: Traditional Catholicism, Winning in New York

By: Matt

Matt — Mon, 28 May 2012 02:58:01 +0000

On philosophy…I consider myself more Thomistic, because most of my reading is based on Thomas Aquinas’s works. But let’s not forget everyone else; it is unwise to ground oneself so narrowly.

By: Irene

Irene — Sat, 26 May 2012 11:46:32 +0000

If the projections in the post are accurate, we’ll have about 25 new priests over a 4 year period out of the Archdiocesan seminary. Now i know the seminary has recently combined with two other diocesan seminaries. Does the 25 number reflet the combined total of the three dioceses or just the priests for NY

We’re looking about 7 new priests a year? Our Archdiocese goes beyond NYC, as others mentioned; there are 10 counties, 400 parishes. How many new priests a year would we need to adequately staff the parishes and how many of those priests need to come out of the Archdiocese seminary?

I imagine it must be a lot more than 7.

By: Dan

Dan — Fri, 25 May 2012 21:26:46 +0000

Linus, my experience with philosophy in the seminary was rather positive on the whole, but negative in some serious regards. My experience in a Catholic college (St. Francis, Brooklyn) was a joy.

By: kelso

kelso — Fri, 25 May 2012 19:49:50 +0000

Bender, I agree that the labels put in the dual form liberal/traditional Catholic is wrong. Simply put: To be a Catholic is to be traditional, for the Faith (and the Bible) comes to us by tradition, passed on through the generations. Saint Vincent of Lerins put it well when he said that the Faith is that which has been held by the Church “always, everywhere, and by all.” There are no new doctrines, only new ways of communicating doctrine. Catholic means “universal” and the Faith is universal not only geographically by chronologically. I speak, of course, in general terms. The cross was planted in America long before Columbus came and also in Asia long before St. Francis Xavier.

By: thomas tucker

thomas tucker — Fri, 25 May 2012 19:26:36 +0000

I, OTOH, think that two years of philosophy and four years of theology is going overboard in emphasizing reason over faith. Better to take at least one of those years and spend them in learning how to preach effectively, how to lead and inspire people, and how to manage a parish and a budget. We produce too many diocesan priests who are overly-intellectual and have the personality of a bookish librarian. We need men who can be challenging, personable leaders, and who are on fire for the Faith, and who can stimulate others to be the same way.Hell, let ‘em spend a year watching Billy Graham videos if they need to.

By: Bender

Bender — Fri, 25 May 2012 16:52:37 +0000

Traditional Catholicism is Winning”

Sigh. Winning against what? Winning against others in the Church? Are we to see fellow Catholics, of whatever stripe, as adversaries?

We are one Church, one people, one faith. Language of division by “traditionalists” is as wrong as when it is used by “progressives.”

Properly understood, there is no “traditional Catholicism,” there is only Catholicism.

By: David Nickol

David Nickol — Fri, 25 May 2012 13:32:51 +0000

A Catholic who doesn’t believe a particular teaching of the Church is at most a heretic and at least in mortal sin, objectively speaking. It doesn’t matter if the teaching isn’t “infallibly declared” (e.g. ex cathedra). Dave, There is a problem here (more than one, actually), and that is how to know whether something is a teaching of the Church. For example, when I was in Catholic school, I am sure I would have been in deep trouble if I had said I did not believe in Limbo (for unbaptized babies). Now we find out that the existence of Limbo has never been an official teaching of the Church. What are we to make of the post above titled Is Vatican II Completely Binding on Catholics? Why is that even a question? To take another example, John Paul II was very clear about capital punishment, saying in Evangelium Vitae
It is clear that, for these purposes to be achieved, the nature and extent of the punishment must be carefully evaluated and decided upon, and ought not go to the extreme of executing the offender except in cases of absolute necessity: in other words, when it would not be possible otherwise to defend society. Today however, as a result of steady improvements in the organization of the penal system, such cases are very rare, if not practically non-existent.
The Catechism makes the same statement. And yet many conservative Catholics feel free to disagree.

By: David Nickol

David Nickol — Fri, 25 May 2012 13:11:32 +0000

John Paul ii closed the book. He spoke from the chair, declared the church has no power to ordain women. Jay, I am not really so much interested in the ordination of women as I am in what demands assent and what does not. But to the best of my knowledge, there are only two papal statements that are agreed to be ex cathedra infallible pronouncements—the Immaculate Conception and the Bodily Assumption of the Blessed Virgin. My understanding is that Ordinatio Sacerdotalis was not an infallible declaration by the pope, but according to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the faith, a restatement by John Paul II of a teaching that was deemed already to be infallible. Exactly by what reasoning the CDF has for holding it to be infallible I don't know, but obviously it is a very weighty statement even if there is no airtight case for its infallibility.

By: Mary S.

Mary S. — Fri, 25 May 2012 13:09:05 +0000

Putting aside the women’s ordination debate, which is a distraction, I would like to point out that the author is correct. There is an increase in vocations to the priesthood and the men answering that call are primarily orthodox, traditional Catholics. My son was ordained last year and he certainly fell into that category.

However, I would add that this is traditional with a small “t” as opposed to with a big “T”. This is not a revival of Traditionalism but rather it is a movement away from the heterodoxy and “liberalism” of the past fifty years. It is also true that up until recently, some bishops refused to admit orthodox men into their seminaries, with the result that vocations plummeted since there were (and are) fewer vocations among “liberal” Catholics. Now that the episcopate has become more orthodox, they are admitting orthodox men into the seminaries and vocations are increasing.

By: Esteban

Esteban — Fri, 25 May 2012 12:38:32 +0000

“There are nine other counties in the Archdiocese — Staten Island, the Bronx, Westchester, Rockland, Orange, Sullivan, Ulster, Putnam, Dutchess. Do any of the other parishes produce vocations?”

Based on the ordinations and seminary figures… no, they do not.

New York’s vocations pipeline is pathetic, especially compared to even smaller dioceses in the East.