You might browse through the books at ChantCd.com or TanBooks.com and see what saint books are in print. You might see one that fits what you are looking for.

Obviously, different saints are helpful, depending on your state of life.

Matthew

'It seems wrong to me to impose non-obligatory sacrifices on people.'

No one is 'imposing' 'non-obligatory sacrifices' on anyone by encouraging, for instance, women who claim to be traditional Catholics to wear female clothing (dresses and skirts) as opposed to male clothing (pants).

That one a woman would consider wearing a skirt or a dress a 'sacrifice' of some sort is rather telling.  What is being 'sacrificed'?  To whom?

I think what is meant, in that case, is the encouragement of traditional Catholics -- men and women -- towards a higher, perhaps even holier, standard.  If you prefer to characterise that as being 'holier than thou', well, then that is your prerogative.

I tend to characterise it as not being a minimalist: i.e., only doing that which is absolutely required of me.  But, then being a minimalist would tend to lend itself towards being a Modernist Catholic, i.e. just going to the Novus Ordo Mass, putting up with the abuses, putting up with the scandalous behaviour, etc.

Because, afterall, *that* is all you are 'required' to do as a Catholic.  No one is 'required' (in the context of the Modern Vatican's apparent orientation) to attend the Traditional Catholic Mass.  Women arent required to wear Mantillas anymore.  No one is required to observe the traditional Fast & Abstinence requirements.

None of Catholic Tradition appears to be obligatory, anymore.  We traditional Catholics elect to do it *because we know it to be the right thing to do*.

That includes adhering to the traditional Faith, Mass, Sacraments, customs, and courtesies.  That includes otherwise 'unnecessary' things like wearing clothing traditionally associated with one's sex and vocation.

Elist?  Holier than thou?  Absolutely!  Our immortal soul is at stake: why not err on the side of caution by fully adhering to Catholic Tradition?  Upon the day of my particular judgement, I would prefer to be numbered among the 'elite' who get to go to Heaven... or even Purgatory... rather than the masses who appear to be destined for Hell, short of a fundamental change in their ways.


 'Personally, I'm guilty of some of the things you mention above (obsession with material possessions, watching television, though I HATE rock music), but I figure that I'm young and have plenty of time to overcome these obstacles.'

My life and my experiences havent been picture-perfect examples of orthodox, traditional Catholicism.  I came to the Faith kind of late in my life and had to correct and undo many of the things that I came to realise were not Catholic... ESPECIALLY my way of thinking!  It is a humbling experience to realise that one has been wrong about so many things, but I am grateful to God that He has shown me as much as I have learned about what is truly Right and what isnt.

There is a difference between recognising traditional Catholic ideals and trying to live up to them, recognising them and ignoring them, and not recognising them at all.  I try to be in the first category.

And I know that I dont measure up (yet) to all traditional Catholic ideals... but I am constantly seeking to improve myself and those under my authority (my wife and children) by learning about my Faith and actually practicing it.

To do so requires that one have a sincere desire to correct one's ways.  I think I have that, but I dont know really if I do.  I pray for the humility and the wisdom to know if I am doing the right thing for the right reasons.

I also pray constantly for God to give me the grace to remain humble and accepting of what I have learned is His Will.  I recognise that the principal sin -- that sin from which flow most if not all sins -- is Pride.  I recognise that many of my flaws are because of Pride.  Humility is a tough thing to learn, accept, and embrace.

So, if one recognises that one is guilty of being obsessed with material possessions, watching television, etc. that is actually a good thing... because one has realised that one is diplaying behaviour which is less than ideal.  The next step is, knowing what one is doing is less than ideal, to correct oneself.

That is the difficult part, again, because of Pride.  How often do those of us who own and watch televisions (myself included) rationalise having & watching a TV with one excuse or the other?  'I only watch 'good' movies'?  Or, 'I only watch the news and the weather'?  Or 'Well, I only watch game shows!'  Or whatever.  Such statements are based in Pride: one assumes that one knows better than warnings given by traditional Catholic authorities against television.

It's the same thing with women wearing men's clothing (i.e. pants).  It boils down to Pride.  'You're not going to tell me what to wear!'  Or 'There is no infallible definition concerning what I *must* wear!' Or 'The wearing of modest pants [by women] isnt immodest or sinful!'  Or 'I know I should wear skirts and dresses, but it is impractical!'  Or 'My faith isnt going to be imperilled by wearing pants!'

All of these 'excuses' have an underlying Prideful and minimalist nature to them: 'I know better than some stuffy, old, misogynistic, non-infallible cranks and, besides, I dont have to do it anyway!'

I will caution those who think they have 'plenty of time' to overcome sinful or questionable behaviour.  This is a sin of Presumption, i.e. that God will somehow give you the grace to do the right thing before you are called before Him at your death.  He will, but you have to work on it now, and not at your own pace.

It is also an enormous gamble.  If you are knowingly engaging in sinful or questionable behaviour and you are killed in an automobile accident, or die suddenly for some other reason, are you ready to be judged?  What will you tell Our Lord?  'Well, Lord, I meant to get around to it, but you see I enjoyed [fill in the blank with your favourite sinful or questionable behaviour] too much to get around to it right away!'

It's your immortal soul; you can do with it what you want.  For my part, I prefer to err on the side of caution.


Pax Domini sit semper vobiscuм.

I will caution those who think they have 'plenty of time' to overcome sinful or questionable behaviour.  This is a sin of Presumption, i.e. that God will somehow give you the grace to do the right thing before you are called before Him at your death.  He will, but you have to work on it now, and not at your own pace.

It is also an enormous gamble.  If you are knowingly engaging in sinful or questionable behaviour and you are killed in an automobile accident, or die suddenly for some other reason, are you ready to be judged?  What will you tell Our Lord?  'Well, Lord, I meant to get around to it, but you see I enjoyed [fill in the blank with your favourite sinful or questionable behaviour] too much to get around to it right away!'

It's your immortal soul; you can do with it what you want.  For my part, I prefer to err on the side of caution.

Hmmm, I will admit you have a point, I may indeed be guilty of presumption. Nevertheless, what I meant by what I said (or at least what I think I meant) was that I find as I get older, the things that were once so important to me have become significantly less so. For instance, I actually used to be enthralled with rock music--I knew every band and every song there was. Likewise, I used to play videogames obsessively. Now I despise rock music and couldn't tell you anything about it (my brother watches MuchMusic, the Canadian equivalent of MTV, and is always making a joke about some silly song I've never heard of), and I rarely play videogames, unless it's with my friends on occasion. I also watch a lot less television, though like you said, I usually rationalize it insofar as I only watch "the news and weather". I find that as I mature, I lose interest in the distractions of my youth. I think that is what I meant to say.

P.S. I try not to worry too much about sudden accidents and what have you. I have an anxiety disorder, and I find that if I worry obsessively about sudden death, the Second Coming, etc., I start to have panic attacks. So I generally try to avoid doing that and instead try to focus on how much my sins offend God. Of course, whatever works for you works for you, but as for me, reading books about death, Hell, etc. tend to do me more harm than good.

...Blessed Anna Marie Taigi ...
....
Her husband wanted her to be flashy, she did not, he relented finally.

What a feminist!

 :scratchchin:

Clare.

Two things about Vox's comments:

1.)  Her philosophy is all wrong:  greater numbers do NOT equal better morality.  Such a suggestion infers that morality is subjective.  Sorry, but this is the thinking of the modernists.

2.)  James Chapter 3.  There's a lot of venom being spewed on FE.  


And Clare:

Being a "traditional Catholic" certainly is subjective, and your posts emphasize that.  I think, however, that is only due to the fact that there are varying opinions on what defines the term, "tradiitional Catholic".   You define it by your parameters mentioned, others define it by living pre-VII morality in all that they do, which includes looking at the writings of the saints, especially the Church Doctors and Fathers, as to how they should live their lives, and interpret what is good and what is better, striving for what is better.  (Note:  "Better" being what is a choice more pleasing to God, rather than regard human respect.)  They are convinced, by grace, that they we are all called to be perfect, and they strive for this in humility.  They act only in accordance to their state in life which tempers them from going to said extremes, they actively look to make choices in all that they do, speak and think in what please God most.   They are often misunderstood, since what pleases God is not always what pleases their neighbors, and infact, their very way of life is a  chastisement to those who live according to the flesh.  Never-the-less, they can withstand the insults and mockery for being put down as "Puritan" or "out-dated", "judgemental", etc., etc., even if no one else defends them, since they are detached in the first place from human respect, with their hearts more set on Jesus Christ.    Such people often find pleasure in being set apart by such persecutions, only wishing that they be greater, as they see them as rewards for their closer following to our Lord.

Since someone dredged up this forum...

...The other day, I got to thinking about how over at FE when this debate was 'all the rage', the feminist (short hair & trousers) crowd posted a photo of some modern-looking female 'saint' who was wearing short hair, wearing pants, and looked like she was going skiing.

Then I got to wondering... when was she canonised?

OK, what I was trying to say was that I can't stand people trying to compromise between two things that are diametrically opposed.  Some people, like the feministas on FE, want both Catholicism and the world, and when they can't get it, they intentionally misperceive both so that they can live in their fantasy world.  This is why I have more respect for atheists than for liberal Catholics:  at least the atheists are consistent.  By far the second-most plausible way of life, after Catholicism, is undiluted secularism with no morality or God.  There's no way to justify some midway point.

But there is a whole lot of that going around these days, more oxymorons than you can shake a stick at.  Liberal Catholic, ʝʊdɛօ Christian, to name just a couple.  In some cases, such as the one you site, it is merely a case of having your cake and eating it, too.  It's not so much an ideology with them as an all out grasping at anything they want.  So they stand firmly on both sides of the fence.  Double minded about one thing they will soon be double minded about other things, shifting from one position to other according to whatever serves them at the moment.

But not all non-Catholics fit this mold, and this really points out another aspect of my development since discovering the non-mainstream sources of news and ideas, of which Cryptogon is only one example.  And by that I mean this:  in shifting way over to the Catholic far right, I've actually come into contact with society's far left (although I think that term is inadequate).  I'm talking about sites like Cryptogon, Prieur, norelpref.com, etc, who are most decidedly not Catholic, although they are living more like Catholics than even most trads, but their anti-government stance brings them in line in many important ways with the trad countercultural critique.  That is, they are not Catholic and wouldn't want to be (norelpref even mocks Masonic conspiracy theorists), but no one can accuse these guys of being mindless drones of the system.  They see the manipulation, but don't conclude that the answer is pre-V2 Catholicism.

Point is, they've gotten as far as they have without any religion at all, even being highly critical of it (and of course they wouldn't dream of making the trad/NO/prot distinctions that we do).  This has led to what could be called a mild crisis of faith in some sense for me over the last few months.   Basically, I've learned that one can be completely happy without reference to any divine being or other realm, or anything outside of oneself.  As Prieur says, "you can find the meaning of life under a rock."   Now, to be sure, I am still Catholic, but only to avoid hell.  And I don't mean in the scrupulous sense, but in what we may call the legal sense.  Assuming there is a heaven and hell, I most definitely want to be Catholic, but I perceive no other need that religion fulfills.  I've become Cryptogon with Catholic theology tacked on top, rather ad-hoc.  Most people who are religious are so only because they are incapable of constructing meaning and happiness for themselves, due to their lack of creativity, and so they look for these things in something pre-packaged for easy consumption.  (Of course, that doesn't mean Catholicism is false; it could just be that "most people" who are religious simply don't understand religion.)  But I'm the opposite.  I'm easily intellectually independent and limber enough to be happy without an institutionalized religion, but haven't found proof that that religion is false, so I'm kept in it by fear.  I want to be Catholic, but when you recover the deep genuine,  life that's been corroded over by government mind-control, public schools, TV, the medical establishment, etc., I find that that life, which so few get to truly live, offers everything I need.

So then the question becomes, why be Catholic, and I'm well aware of the apologetic tradition, but I've come to think of it this way:  the Catholic religion spread by civilization, and civilization is basically a history of nonsense, by which I mean essentially wars and killing.  Virtually every government in history, Catholic or not, came to power by war, and kept power for as long as it could through force.  Medieval western Christendom was particularly successful and actually lasted around a millenium (depending on which dates you choose), and so Catholicism became the religion of the West.   But historically it's been just one of many civilizations, all of which have had their births and deaths, and regarded their own histories and theologies as absolute.  Here are a lot of them:  http://www.darkage.fsnet.co.uk/PottedHistories.htm  It's hard to feel special after reading that.  And what are all of those little accounts on that site?  Mostly stories of conquest and demise, of peoples who through luck, cunning, or other nonsense became dominant for a time, milled around, and then perished forever.  Why are we not the same?