This priest said that what I am doing is not sinful, but since he noted my continual obsessing torment over this question, he told me that if I have qualms about it, I should not do it if I feel like I am sinning - despite the fact that it is not intrinsically sinful.

You should follow your priest's advice, rather than relying on the internet. While many people have good intentions, their "experience" in moral theology often consists of nothing more than a good search engine, or a Catholic book or two. Soliciting advice in the absence of a good traditional priest is one thing, but it is not necessary when you have already spoken to one.

If you are doing this job for necessary income, pray to God to help you find another one that stresses you less. Otherwise, quit. Something doesn't have to be sinful in order for it to be "not right" for you.

Do you really need a priest to tell you that participating in the worship services of heretics is wrong? I'm actually amazed right now.

Sometimes people on the internet actually have more knowledge than a priest.

Sometimes a priest may be in error because of ignorance, but most priests who would approve of indifferentist behavior would just be following the lead of their hierarchy and ostensible Pope in ignoring the traditions of moral theology.

Um...ok, Daegus, master of the interior life. Am I supposed to humble myself before the opinion of a self-admitted hormonal teenager that found tradition just a few months ago (and admittedly, has had but limited conversation with traditional Catholics in real life; also admittedly goes to a FSSP parish and therefore cannot criticise me for doing the same) and go back to my priest and tell him that I respect the judgements of an obscure forum-poster above those of his?

Obviously you cannot handle the truth and so you retaliate rather childishly. How embarrassing and unbecoming of you to attack me in such a pathetic way. Do you think what you've presented against me constitutes a valid argument in any way? I have presented you with facts and in return you bring your histrionics to the table. At the same time, you have the temerity to bring up that I am a "hormonal teenager" when you are just the same. Will you consider what I have told you or will you embrace utter apostasy and persist in serving a Protestant worship service? Even if you attack me, you cannot attack God. That is who you must take up the issue with, not I. It is not me that you are vexed with. It is God.

 Furthermore I never criticized you for going to an FSSP parish, so I'm not sure what that even has to do with anything.

Do you really need a priest to tell you that participating in the worship services of heretics is wrong? I'm actually amazed right now.

Do you really need someone to tell you that the whole thread is about how playing the organ doesn't constitute participation? I've never said that active participation is OK. Neither has my priest.

Of course you haven't said it. You don't think that your participation in a Protestant worship service is actually a sin.

"A sin for thee but not me" ~ Is this the mark of a Pharisee?

Did SouthernBelle's advice - a perfectly Catholic piece of advice and one that shows great spiritual maturity at that - really get 3 "thumbs down" by this crowd of rabid self-proclaimed traditionalists?

So someone who says it's ok to attend a heretical service gave a "perfectly Catholic piece of advice" yet the 4 people who tell you you're wrong are "rabid self-proclaimed Traditionalists"? You obviouly don't know what the meaning of Traditional is.

Um...ok, Daegus, master of the interior life. Am I supposed to humble myself before the opinion of a self-admitted hormonal teenager that found tradition just a few months ago (and admittedly, has had but limited conversation with traditional Catholics in real life; also admittedly goes to a FSSP parish and therefore cannot criticise me for doing the same) and go back to my priest and tell him that I respect the judgements of an obscure forum-poster above those of his?

This is one of the lowest, most pathetic statements I have ever read on this forum. Your attack against Daegus is both un-charitable and un-Christian. You can get banned for cutting down people like that, so I'd be careful if I were you. Just because Daegus is fairly new to Tradition does not mean his views cannot be taken seriously. What about people who are only Catholic for minutes following a deathbed conversion? Daegus is 17, he's doing great for his age. You owe him an apology.

Do you really need someone to tell you that the whole thread is about how playing the organ doesn't constitute participation? I've never said that active participation is OK. Neither has my priest.

It IS participation. 4 people have tried to tell you that. You can either listen to the people here who are only trying to help you because we care about your soul, or you can keep your head in the sand. The choice is yours.

Who told you that the FSSP is pro-Vatican II? Whatever that means anyhow. And haven't I already said that this priest is neither pro-novus ordo (duh - why would be enter the FSSP if he was) or pro-Protestant?

The FSSP doesn't speak out against the NO or anything going on in the Vatican because they're afraid they'll "get in trouble". They fear the wrath of man more than the wrath of God. You should ask an SSPX priest.

Did you really just say that? You are willing to trust an anonymous source on the Internet rather than the council of a priest that has spent 7 years in the seminary? Your post reeks of the hellish arrogance that some people get after sitting behind their monitors reading about "the Crisis in the church" and fancy themselves learned in subjects that were formerely pursued only by holy priests and religious. It would harldy be surprising if you were among those new to tradition that has almost no communication with real (not online) traditional Catholics and lacks the social ability to even associate with them apart from behind the veil of the Internet- where you are free to shoot off your mouth without consequence.

I've been a Traditional Catholic since Januray 2010. That's great considering the spiritually lazy Novus Ordite I was before. I think it's no secret that you're not a Trad, more of a neo-Trad. Half of my family is Protestant (including my father) and I can't express to you enough how dangerous it can be to hang out with them and play the organ for them of Sundays. But you don't seem to care. I think you only started this thread to see how many people agreed with you and really didn't give a flip who thought you should change jobs.

Okay this thread is getting a little too heated... lets everyone cool down! Here, some pious pick up lines from a previous thread. If you can guess who wrote this, you've been here too long lol:

Quote

Some time ago, someone came to me with the question of how to ask his betrothed for a modest kiss in such a manner as to impress her, to which I responded,

Quote:
Say to her, "Your lips are as sweet rubrics to which I am bound sub gravi to adhere!"

Ahhh.. all better.


Vladimir, our brother, please pray on this issue. You are no neo-Trad, I think you're good willed, and thats why you've come here and asked the question you did. But sometimes, we ask people the things we want them to tell us. And when our friends tell us those things which are burdensome, we flaw them and what is said, instead of neutrally taking into account what is presented to us. This is a very sound forum, with some very honest, and good-willed people. I will say a prayer for you.

Hobble?

Another forum member wrote:

While many people have good intentions, their "experience" in moral theology often consists of nothing more than a good search engine, or a Catholic book or two.

This is quite true, and I must candidly admit that I fit this description to a great extent. This is good to remember because it is a humbling reminder of our limited capacities as layfolk. But I shall go further beyond what this poster wrote and state that the chief reason why a learned and holy Priest of good repute is to be sought for counsel in preference to any layman, personal sanctity and erudition notwithstanding, is because the former is endowed with the graces of state that have his Sacred Orders as their origin and whereby he may direct efficaciously and effectively the individual Catholic who has recourse to his judgment with the appropriate dispositions (humility, sincerity, docility, etc.); the salvation of souls being the chief end of the sacred Priesthood together with the glory of God, and this ultimately constitutes the only reason why epikea would be invoked in the seeking and attaining to Holy Orders on the part of traditionalist clerics without the consent of the Roman Pontiff.

My views on the matter in question were sought, and by charity I am obliged to assent to the request. The following are merely my personal perspectives and opinions, which do not of themselves oblige consciences in any way, since I have no competence or authority to do so, as stated above.

Having carefully pondered upon the matter, and having consulted various texts, I believe the disputation upon the initial inquiry that began this thread may be reduced to the following questions: the first being, "May Catholics co-operate in non-Catholic functions?" and the second, subordinate to and elucidating upon the first question, being, "What exactly constitutes co-operation?"

The principles pertaining to the second question are explained by Rev. Fr. Davis in his Moral and Pastoral Theology (vol. I., treatise V., ch. viii., secs. 1 and 2 pp. 341-343; London and New York: Sheed and Ward, 1958). Instead of summarizing these principles, I have scanned and attached these pages.

Rev. Fr. Davis also explains the principles pertaining to the first and chief question, regarding co-operation in non-Catholic functions (op. cit., vol. I., treatise V., ch. ix., p. 282-290). These pages are also attached.

Directly pertaining to the predicament in question, Rev. Father Davis wrote:

It is wrong to play the organ in a non-Catholic church as a help to the religious service (S.O., July 8, 1889), or to be a member of the choir during services, but it is not wrong, scandal apart, to take part in musical festivals in such places. A Catholic organist might continue in his post so long as he was in grave necessity, apart from serious scandal.

I am incline to agree with Rev. Father Davis in his assessment of organ playing in a non-Catholic service. The only excusing factors, which would have to exist simultaneously, are:

1) A very grave necessity (in the particular predicament in question, it is of a financial nature I suppose), and

2) The absence of proximate occasion of sins against the faith, either (a) by exposing oneself foolhardily to the heretical teachings when one is not well-established in the profession and practice of the Catholic faith; or (b) by scandalizing fellow Catholics and the non-Catholics that partake in that service (e.g., giving the impression that it is alright for a traditional Catholic to co-operate actively in a non-Catholic religious function, in light of the propagation of the false ecuмenism of "Vatican II," or giving the impression that the public cult of non-Catholics is to be tolerated and, consequently, their errors are also to be tolerated).

It is the second factor that merits exceedingly careful consideration, in light of the pertinent disciplinary norms of the Code of Canon Law, promulgated by Pope Benedict XV in the Apostolic Constitution Providentissima Mater (27 May 1917; A.A.S., vol. IX, pars II [1917]).

Rev. Frs. John A. Abbo and Jerome D. Hannan, in expounding upon Canon 1258 in their monumental work The Sacred Canons: A Concise Presentation of the Current Disciplinary Norms of the Church  (vol. II, pp. 512-514; St. Louis, MO: B. Herder Book Co., 1957), explicitly state that the

Particular acts of active participation that are forbidden are indicated herewith.

[...]

e) It is not allowed a Catholic to play the organ or sing in connection with the religious services of non-Catholics.

Regarding the passive or merely material presence of a Catholic in a non-Catholic religious function, Rev. Frs. Abbo and Hannan state that this may be tolerated for a serious reason, "provided there is involved no danger of perversion or scandal." Whensoever there is doubt, the local ordinary would be the one to assess the seriousness of the reason in order to either permit or prohibit this passive or material presence. However, it is clearly stated:

It is clear that only a serious reason justifies even passive presence. This kind of presence excludes any participation in the  services and forbids praying, singing, the carrying of candles, in company with the non-Catholic participants.

To conclude, dear Vladimir, it is my private opinion, based on the principles taught by the authors above-mentioned, that you ought to seek another sort of employment as soon as possible, since the reactions that have been expressed in response to your query clearly show that there is danger of scandal by playing the organ in a Protestant service, especially because of the present day errors concomitant with the false ecuмenism of "Vatican II." Whatever contractual obligations you have incurred that entail your participation as an organist in these functions are null and void because you cannot agree and you cannot be bound to something that would involve the violation of natural and divine positive law, such as the prohibition of active participation in non-Catholic religious functions. If there is a question of restitution for a contractual obligation or debt, you must seek to satisfy this obligation in another manner.

Again, this is merely my perspective, and you must again seek the counsel of your Father Confessor in light of the above-mentioned principles. The pages cited above are attached, so that you and the other forum members may see for yourselves what these authors say, and not rely on my faulty judgment and limited effability.

Please be assured of my prayers.