• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

Pope Saint Paul VI (3 April 1969): “Although the text of the Roman Gradual—at least that which concerns the singing—has not been changed, the Entrance antiphons and Communions antiphons have been revised for Masses without singing.”

  • Donate
  • Our Team
    • Our Editorial Policy
    • Who We Are
    • How To Contact Us
    • Sainte Marie Bulletin Articles
    • Jeff’s Mom Joins Fundraiser
  • Pew Resources
    • Brébeuf Catholic Hymnal
    • Jogues Illuminated Missal
    • KYRIALE • Saint Antoine Daniel
    • Campion Missal, 3rd Edition
    • Repository • “Spanish Music”
    • Ordinary Form Feasts (Sainte-Marie)
  • MUSICAL WEBSITES
    • René Goupil Gregorian Chant
    • Noël Chabanel Psalms
    • Nova Organi Harmonia (2,279 pages)
    • Roman Missal, 3rd Edition
    • Catechism of Gregorian Rhythm
    • Father Enemond Massé Manuscripts
    • Lalemant Polyphonic
  • Miscellaneous
    • Site Map
    • Secrets of the Conscientious Choirmaster
    • “Wedding March” for lazy organists
    • Emporium Kevin Allen
    • Saint Jean de Lalande Library
    • Sacred Music Symposium 2023
    • The Eight Gregorian Modes
    • Gradual by Pothier’s Protégé
    • Seven (7) Considerations
Views from the Choir Loft

Pastoral Difficulties with Recently Ordained Priests

Fr. David Friel · February 8, 2015

HERE WAS AN IMPORTANT post made almost two weeks ago over at Pray Tell. The post is from Fr. Anthony Ruff, OSB, and it is entitled “Pastoral Difficulties with Recently Ordained Priests.” That term, “recently ordained priests,” usually refers to men who have been ordained for up to five, maybe even ten years. As one who fits that category, myself, the title caught my undivided attention. I read the column with great interest.

N.B. Instead of rehearsing all the points made in the original post, I encourage you to read it for yourself. Doing so will allow you to make more sense of my response, and it will also allow me to make my response more briefly.

First, I appreciate the tenor of the remarks given by the three diocesan officials. Their concerns appear quite genuine, and I am challenged in a positive way by some of their critique. It is with the same spirit of charity and respect that I wish to respond.

IOCESAN OFFICIAL #1 begins his reflections with a treatment of liturgical matters. The specific issues he raises, to be honest, seem like issues about which most of the lay faithful are not troubled. The People of God are not, in large part, very concerned by issues like liturgical vesture, rubrical accuracy, or the purification of vessels. Allowing such things to dominate a debate about “Pastoral Difficulties,” in my opinion, says more about those having the debate than it does about the recently ordained.

Official #1 transitions from the liturgical issues to matters of leadership, asking what role the community has in helping the recently ordained to develop leadership skills. Hopefully, that development began even before the seminary. Still, it is absolutely essential that a priest’s first assignment or two helps him to exercise true servant leadership. Foremost in this work is the pastor to whom he is assigned, and the faithful with whom he works also share a role. Like most professionals, men in the priesthood grow with experience. So we agree strongly on this point.

IOCESAN OFFICIAL #2 offers several encouragements, or pieces of advice. The first encouragement is for recently ordained priests to seek out a wide variety of pastoral experiences. This is good advice, but it is also something that happens almost on its own in today’s Church. The days of starting out as the 3rd or 4th assistant with few responsibilities and becoming a pastor 30 years later are gone. Newly ordained priests are almost universally required to have a hand in many things and to learn pastoral & administrative skills quickly—often much sooner than in previous generations.

His fourth encouragement is to “seek out the lost sheep.” I agree wholeheartedly with this encouragement, but it seems like preaching to the choir. Seeking out those who have drifted or disaffected, from my observations, is one of the great passions among recently ordained priests today. The desire to reach out to those on the margins is precisely what fuels our desire to preach hard truths, to reject relativism in all its forms, and to reestablish a sense of corporate Catholic identity. Again, I agree with this encouragement, but I would rank this among the strengths of most young priests, rather than their weaknesses.

IOCESAN OFFICIAL #3 starts by referencing the perceived liturgical “rigidity” of young priests. I appreciate his perspective, which acknowledges that this perception is quickened by the “laxity” of preceding generations. Following rubrics is not “rigidity”; it is doing what the Church asks of us. Ignoring rubrics is not “creativity”; it is disregard for what the Church asks of us. (Yes, I appreciate the irony that such a black-and-white appraisal appears “rigid,” but I stick to what I’ve written.)

Official #3 wisely addresses maturity, which can certainly be an issue among young priests, especially those, like me, who were ordained as young as 25-years-old. In the last half-century, society has nearly doubled the period of adolescence. Decades ago, a young person was expected to act like an adult by the time they were 18, at least. At this age, many young men & women were out of the house, getting married, and off to work. On account of many different factors, this is no longer the case, and society no longer expects people to mature until closer to 30. This is a problem, and it is a problem that affects not only society at large, but also the young priests who have been raised in this society. Formation programs need to be aware of this, and they need to be robust in their efforts to help candidates for the priesthood achieve the affective maturity described in Pastores Dabo Vobis.

The third official also references clericalism in the context of various liturgical issues. I have addressed this matter thoroughly in a previous post, explaining why I don’t believe obedience to liturgical law is in any fashion a symptom of clericalism. As for pastoral formation, there is probably not a seminary to be found that doesn’t offer a better pastoral formation program now than they did decades ago, so this cannot be the culprit of whatever issues might be observed among the recently ordained.

My most significant criticism of the post over at Pray Tell concerns none of the points that are made therein. It actually concerns a few points that are not raised. The two major issues that go unaddressed in the article are these: the impact of the sexual abuse crisis on the recently ordained and the era of Summorum Pontificum.

First, let me speak about the impact of the sexual abuse crisis on us. I entered the seminary in 2003, one year after the Church in America was forever changed by unrelenting reports in The Boston Globe of deviant crimes by priests & shameful cover-up by bishops. I had classmates who were studying for the Archdiocese of Boston, so the crushing news never seemed distant. Then, in 2005, the first of two scathing grand jury reports was published, detailing the horrors of priestly abuse in my own Archdiocese of Philadelphia. The second was published in February 2011, three months before I was ordained a priest. On top of that, a massive number of my priest role models were among those accused or removed for having gone astray.

My story is not unique. Initiating a discussion about “Pastoral Difficulties with Recently Ordained Priests” without so much as mentioning these issues is a clear demonstration of how much remains to be learned & understood about my generation of priests. The abuse crisis is as much a part of our DNA as the 9/11 attacks are upon the consciousness of New Yorkers.

Second, I think it is difficult for earlier generations of priests to appreciate what it was like to be in the seminary at the time Summorum Pontificum was released. The most senior priests alive today remember celebrating Mass before the reforms of the Second Vatican Council. The vast majority of our priests, however, have no lived experience of celebrating that Order of Mass. Many don’t even have memories of attending it. For most priests in ministry today, what we now called the “Extraordinary Form” is still basically regarded as the “indult Mass,” the weird penchant of an isolated few conservative wackjobs. But the recently ordained and those in formation now were mostly raised without the same hang-ups that former generations have about the “Tridentine Mass.” Thus, there is often a greater openness to the gift Pope Benedict has given us through Summorum Pontificum.

When I entered the seminary in 2003, seminarians would have been fearful to mention the word “fiddleback,” and to attend an “indult Mass” would have been to take a perilous risk. These things would have been considered major “formation issues.” By the time I was ordained, however, we had celebrated Mass in the Extraordinary Form at the high altar in the seminary chapel. These were strange times.

Going through seminary formation at a time when there are two legitimate forms of the Roman Rite is a very new thing. Why wouldn’t a seminarian today want to be able to celebrate both forms, if not out of personal interest, at least out of professional competency? In today’s Church, a seminarian who doesn’t have an interest in learning both forms of the Mass is a bit like a fellow who dreams of becoming a parking valet but who refuses to learn to drive a standard transmission.

As Diocesan Official #1 rightly points out, every generation of priests has its issues. No formation program is ever perfect, nor is any priest. To some extent, the history of the Church can be charted along the path of a pendulum. It would seem to me grossly premature to suggest that my generation of priests (those presently considered “recently ordained”) are the ones farthest from the center of that swing.

Young priests are a gift to the Church. So are old priests and middle-aged priests. So are the lay faithful. But it is our fidelity to the Church—totally aside from the details of our age or ideas or station in life—that is the greatest gift.

Editor’s Note: Fr. David Friel has given us an amazing reflection and we are in his debt once again. It is regrettable that the Liturgical Press Blog he mentions (PrayTell) uses statements from anonymous sources. Those offering unsolicited criticism should have the courage to use their own names. —JMO

Opinions by blog authors do not necessarily represent the views of Corpus Christi Watershed.

Filed Under: Articles, Featured Tagged With: Authentic Liturgical Renewal Reform, Liturgical Abuse, PrayTell Blog, Reform of the Reform, Servant Leader Last Updated: November 30, 2020

Subscribe

It greatly helps us if you subscribe to our mailing list!

* indicates required

About Fr. David Friel

Ordained in 2011, Father Friel is a priest of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia and serves as Director of Liturgy at Saint Charles Borromeo Seminary. —(Read full biography).

Primary Sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

President’s Corner

    PDF Comparison Chart • “Serious Problems with the Lectionary Translation”
    EARS BEFORE truly revolutionary changes were introduced by the post-conciliar reformers, Evelyn Waugh wrote (on 16 August 1964) to John Cardinal Heenan: “I think that a vociferous minority has imposed itself on the hierarchy and made them believe that a popular demand existed where there was in fact not even a preference.” We ask the kind reader— indeed, we beg you—to realize that those of us born in the 1940s and 1950s had no cognizance of Roman activities during the 1960s and 1970s. We were concerned with making sure we had the day’s bus fare, graduating from high school, taking care of our siblings, learning a trade, getting a job, courting a spouse. We questioned neither the nuns nor the Church.1 Do not believe for one instant any of us were following the liturgical machinations of Cardinal Lercaro or Father Bugnini in real time. Setting The Stage • To never question or resist Church authorities is praiseworthy. On the other hand, when a scandalous situation persists for decades, it must be brought into focus. Our series will do precisely that as we discuss the Lectionary Scandal from a variety of angles. We don’t do this to attack the Catholic Church. Our goal is bringing to light what’s been going on, so it can be fixed once and for all. Our subject is extremely knotty and difficult to navigate. Its complexity helps explain why the situation has persisted for such a long time.2 But if we immediately get “into the weeds” we’ll lose our audience. Therefore, it seems better to jump right in. So today, we’ll explore the legality of selling these texts. A Word On Copyright • Suppose Susie modifies a paragraph by Edgar Allan Poe. That doesn’t mean ipso facto she can assert copyright on it. If Susie takes a picture of a Corvette and uses Photoshop to color the tires blue, that doesn’t mean she henceforth “owns” all Corvettes in America. But when it comes to Responsorial Psalm translations, certain parties have been asserting copyright over them, selling them for a profit, and bullying publishers vis-à-vis hymnals and missals. Increasingly, Catholics are asking whether these translations are truly under copyright—because they are identical (or substantially identical) to other translations.3 Example After Example • Our series will provide copious examples supporting our claims. Sometimes we’ll rely on the readership for assistance, because—as we’ve stressed—our subject’s history couldn’t be more convoluted. There are countless manuscripts (in Greek, Hebrew, and Latin) we don’t have access to, so it would be foolish for us to claim that our observations are somehow the ‘final word’ on anything. Nevertheless, we demand accountability. Catholics in the pews are the ones who paid for all this. We demand to know who specifically made these decisions (which impact every English-speaking Catholic) and why specifically certain decisions were made. The Responsorial Psalms used in America are—broadly speaking—stolen from the hard work of others. In particular, they borrowed heavily from Father Cuthbert Lattey’s 1939 PSALTER TRANSLATION:
    *  PDF Download • COMPARISON CHART —We thank the CCW staff for technical assistance with this graph.
    Analysis • Although certain parties have been selling (!!!) that translation for decades, the chart demonstrates it’s not a candidate for copyright since it “borrows” or “steals” or “rearranges” so much material from other translations, especially the 1939 translation by Father Cuthbert Lattey. What this means in layman’s terms is that individuals have been selling a translation under false pretenses, a translation they don’t own (although they claim to). To make RESTITUTION, all that money will have to be returned. A few years ago, the head of ICEL gave a public speech in which he said they give some of “their” profits to the poor. While almsgiving is a good thing, it cannot justify theft. Our Constant Theme • Our series will be held together by one thread, which will be repeated constantly: “Who was responsible?” Since 1970, the conduct of those who made a profit by selling these sacred texts has been repugnant. Favoritism was shown toward certain entities—and we will document that with written proof. It is absolutely essential going forward that the faithful be told who is making these decisions. Moreover, vague justifications can no longer be accepted. If we’re told they are “making the translations better,” we must demand to know what specifically they’re doing and what specific criteria they’re following. Stay Tuned • If you’re wondering whether we’ll address the forthcoming (allegedly) Lectionary and the so-called ABBEY PSALMS AND CANTICLES, have no fear. We’ll have much to say about both. Please stay tuned. We believe this will end up being the longest series of articles ever submitted to Corpus Christi Watershed. To be continued. ROBERT O’NEILL Former associate of Monsignor Francis “Frank” P. Schmitt at Boys Town in Nebraska JAMES ARNOLD Formerly associated w/ King’s College, Cambridge A convert to the Catholic Church, and distant relative of J. H. Arnold MARIA B. Currently serves as a musician in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Charlotte. Those aware of the situation in her diocese won’t be surprised she chose to withhold her last name.
    1 Even if we’d been able to obtain Roman journals such as NOTITIAE, none of them contained English translations. But such an idea would never have occurred to a high school student or a college student growing up in the 1960s. 2 A number of shell corporations claim to own the various biblical translations mandated for Roman Catholics. They’ve made millions of dollars selling (!) these indulgenced texts. If time permits, we hope to enumerate these various shell corporations and explain: which texts they claim to own; how much they bring in each year; who runs them; and so forth. It would also be good to explore the morality of selling these indulgenced texts for a profit. Furthermore, for the last fifty years these organizations have employed several tactics to manipulate and bully others. If time permits, we will expose those tactics (including written examples). Some of us—who have been working on this problem for three decades—have amassed written documentation we’ll be sharing that demonstrates behavior at best “shady” and at worst criminal. 3 Again, we are not yet examining the morality of selling (!) indulgenced texts to Catholics mandated to use those same translations.
    —Guest Author
    “Music List” • 17th in Ordinary Time (Year C)
    Some have expressed interest in perusing the ORDER OF MUSIC I prepared for the 17th Sunday in Ordinary Time (27 July 2025). If such a thing interests you, feel free to download it as a PDF file. As always, the Responsorial Psalm, Gospel Acclamation, and Mass Propers for this Sunday are conveniently stored at the the feasts website.
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    Communion • “Ask & You Shall Receive”
    All of the chants for 27 July 2025 have been added to the feasts website, as usual under a convenient “drop down” menu. The COMMUNION ANTIPHON (both text and melody) are exceedingly beautiful and ancient.
    —Jeff Ostrowski

Quick Thoughts

    Pope Pius XII Hymnal?
    Have you ever heard of the Pope Pius XII Hymnal? It’s a real book, published in the United States in 1959. Here’s a sample page so you can verify with your own eyes it existed.
    —Corpus Christi Watershed
    “Hybrid” Chant Notation?
    Over the years, many have tried to ‘simplify’ plainsong notation. The O’Fallon Propers attempted to simplify the notation—but ended up making matters worse. Dr. Karl Weinmann tried to do the same in the time of Pope Saint Pius X by replacing each porrectus. You can examine a specimen from his edition and see whether you agree he complicated matters. In particular, look at what he did with éxsules fílii Hévae.
    —Corpus Christi Watershed
    Antiphons Don’t Match?
    A reader wants to know why the Entrance and Communion antiphons in certain publications deviate from what’s prescribed by the GRADUALE ROMANUM published after Vatican II. Click here to read our answer. The short answer is: the Adalbert Propers were never intended to be sung. They were intended for private Masses only (or Masses without music). The “Graduale Parvum,” published by the John Henry Newman Institute of Liturgical Music in 2023, mostly uses the Adalbert Propers—but sometimes uses the GRADUALE text: e.g. Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul (29 June).
    —Corpus Christi Watershed

Random Quote

“Whether celebrated with priest and people facing each other or with priest and people together facing the same direction, every Eucharist is Christ coming to meet us, gracing us with a share in his own divine life.”

— Most Rev’d Arthur J. Serratelli (1 December 2016)

Recent Posts

  • PDF Comparison Chart • “Serious Problems with the Lectionary Translation”
  • “Music List” • 17th in Ordinary Time (Year C)
  • Flor Peeters In A Weird Mood?
  • Communion • “Ask & You Shall Receive”
  • Jeff’s Mother Joins Our Fundraiser

Subscribe

Subscribe

* indicates required

Copyright © 2025 Corpus Christi Watershed · Isaac Jogues on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Corpus Christi Watershed is a 501(c)3 public charity dedicated to exploring and embodying as our calling the relationship of religion, culture, and the arts. This non-profit organization employs the creative media in service of theology, the Church, and Christian culture for the enrichment and enjoyment of the public.

The election of Pope Leo XIV has been exciting, and we’re filled with hope for our apostolate’s future!

But we’re under pressure to transfer our website to a “subscription model.”

We don’t want to do that. We believe our website should remain free to all.

Our president has written the following letter:

President’s Message (dated 30 May 2025)

Are you able to support us?

clock.png

Time's up