It would be interesting to know how many started this class of 3. In my year, we started with 21 and ended with 3. My personal judgment was that 15-16 of the vocations were legitimate.
Some of the dismissals were political. It wasn’t enough [Sean] to be a Trad Catholic. If you didn’t think like the regime in power in every way, you were at risk of dismissal. Imagine the how the neo-SSPX might regard someone who thought like the Resistance. He would likely not last long. Or if you were a geo-centrist who objected to Fr. Robinson’s thinking. Back in my day, you were suspect if you believed the Thomistic position that explicit faith in Christ and the Holy Trinity are necessary for salvation. So, yes, tons of politics regarding questions that might rightly be disputed among Catholics. I could go on for hours. Heck, if you didn’t think like the French, you were considered suspect. Remind me to relate the hilarious “showering” saga.
Also, there’s a real problem with the type of priesthood the men might be called to. In the pre-V2 days you had dozens of choices: secular vs. religious, and then among the religious: Dominican, Benedictine, Jesuit, etc. etc. Church has always known that one style doesn’t fit everyone. But with most Trad groups there’s a single variation in the vocation. I myself did not relish the prospect of the SSPX priestly lifestyle and probably would have felt more suited to being a Benedictine of Dominican ... or a more contemplative order. I thrive in silence and would not have done well with the hustle and bustle of the mission priest lifestyle that nearly all Trad priests end up in.
Yet the attitude of STAS was that if you’re not suited to the SSPX priestly lifestyle, then you have no vocation. There was never any thought of “Maybe you have a vocation to be a Benedictine.” ... but rather, if you don’t relish being an SSPX priest then you have no vocation.
I recall repeatedly thinking and even saying out loud that I wish there were a vocation to be a permanent seminarian ... where you prayed and studied in a quiet state of quasi-contemplation. What I really had in mind without having been able to clarify the thought was a Benedictine or Dominican type of life. I probably should have been steered toward that. But they didn’t think that way at all there.
So, the shower saga. When we got there, we had to read the SSPX seminary rule. There was a rule in there that you were supposed to shower once a week. This was a big sacrifice to most of us, who didn’t feel clean most days without a shower. After a couple months, this got back to Bishop Williamson. So he took a minute to clarify it during his weekly spiritual conference. That rule was for the French and meant that you had to shower AT LEAST once a week, since a lot of them didn’t like to bathe often. You could hear a collective sigh of relief. That evening, the showers ran non-stop in my wing of the seminary for a couple hours. No American would ever believe you had to mandate a weekly shower, that you would specify it in the rule unless it meant ONLY once a week.
Topic: Where’s the Vocations? (Read 1442 times)