Nick Donnelly recently on twitter questioned the state of the Church and referenced Vat II as the potiential cause of the chaos. The whole Vatican II situation has troubled me for as long as I can remember. I’d never leave Rome. Never. Ever. But I deeply long for the old rite Mass, the old Churches, the old Liturgy, the old prayers, the veils, the indulgences of 10, 50 or 100 days for certain prayers. I may as well be honest, and say I feel, in a small way, angry, that I feel the Faith, that for 100s of years was practiced a certain way, was not handed to me properly. I used to feel guilty but the older I get, the more my guilt turns to questioning. ‘Hang on just a second - so ridding the churches of devotions, and regular public processions, and straightforward teaching, fearless teaching and replacing it with a silent Church, that makes excuses for its beliefs, precipitating a calamitous decline in, not just attendance, but belief in gerneral; is a good thing?’ Pre Vat II wasn’t utopia. But just reading the remarks of popes who were around at the turn of the century, and of course the whole ‘make known at 1960’ controversy of the 3rd secret really has me bewildered for decades now on what exactly we’ve done to our Church? I just don’t believe I’m alone in these feelings. What’s done is done and we are where we are..we’ve just got to make the most of things I’m just afraid of it getting worse. The recent removal of kneelers (Kneelers!) at a local church near me isn’t a good sign of things steadying.
Hi regolith, I am 60 years old this year and I can remember the old Mass! I am greatful that I have in my memory banks this wonderful homage that we as Catholics gave to God in the original Latin Mass! The changes in the Mass that we experienced here in Australia after Vatican 2 did not overly concern me, because I realised, even though I was very young that Jesus was still there! Jesus was still in the tabernacle! Jesus still came at the consecration! Over many years I became aware of many abuses, however this made me more fervent in my Love for Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament! I realised that there were now fewer people to adore him, to visit Him, to recieve Him devoutly, and yet He was still there! I became aware at this time that His once Glorious robes were now exchanged for rags in the new liturgy! But Jesus remained in the tabernacle! now in these rags as a begger for even a crumb of acknowledgement for dying for me and for humanity! In some new order Masses Jesus remains in rags as a poor begger, reduced to the sidelines, But He is still there in these rags, He remains there for me and for you. What must we do? We must love Him whether He is dressed in rags or in regal attire! We must adore Him, while we can, like those that have him only in closed underground venues for only a few short minutes, like those in China. We must fall down in adoration at this, His acceptance of rags which is a great sign of His Love for us! In this way we can make up for the great lacking of faith in our day. One day soon, I believe, Jesus will be gone from our churches. Make each day count! Visit Him! Love Him! Adore Him!
There is Traditional Catholic narrative that rubbishes Vatican 2. I have never bought into this, for if you say that the Holy Spirit was absent from a Church Council , well where is He to be found then? But I do love the old Tridentine Mass and Liturgy. There were abuses of the Council ; it's true the Liturgy was raped since then. But I think this has more to do with the Spirit of the times than the Council itself. But I am not going to get into an endless row over this. Just my two cents worth. I particularly liked Lumen Gentium.
Good thread, regolith, thank you Josephite and padraig. I really caught your point about Jesus still being there, J, and padraig, the comment abvout the spirit of the times struck home with me. YES! That was a huge factor for sure.
I agree Padraig. It’s dangerous ground to walk on when people start saying the council was a sham or void of divine authority of the presence of the Holy Spirit. Notwithstanding that, the council was never, I believe, meant to end up with the change we see. I wonder, if the council atendees saw how things would be in 2018, how they’d feel? @josephite made an excellent point about the abuses of the Eucharist and how they’ve skyrocketed. A priest on twitter, who I follow, Fr Kevin M. Cusick, recently spoke of the irreverent reception of the Eucharist; we went from kneeling, to using both hands, to now, in the last few weeks, a man walking up and presenting one hand, like he was getting candy. Awful. The dreaded phrase ‘spirit of Vatican II’ was wheeled out on national radio last week in terms of allowing women ordination and God knows what. The spirit of Vatican II (can anyone here point me to the Church document that coined that phrase?) is the card played when one wants to introduce nonsense theology. When I hear the phrase ‘spirit of Vatican II’, used in a conversation, I brace myself for the inevitable. And the inevitable logic runs something like this: ‘what I’m saying doesn’t make any sense in terms of theology. But it’s an incredibly useful phrase to throw into a conversation to angle in the most ludicrous theological and church reforms imaginable, and its so infinitely open ended and devoid of clarity or substance, it can support absolutely any arguement, and if you don’t support it, your wayyyy behind the times and backwardly-rigid’. Again, this is my experience. Just to clarify, I’m not bashing the second council, far from it, but something terrible happened with the ‘spirit of Vatican II’ liberals, who so twisted the outcome to result in what we see today. Michael Voris, who is a little OTT in negativity, consistently has painted this reality very well.
Powerful and true!!! When I was sorting out all these same things and discussing it with an FSSP priest I realized that as much as I love the old Mass it is me who benefits. I am lifted up and taste beauty and truth. Exultation. But at NO where so many are indifferent and careless or outright unbelieving I am keeping Our Lord company in those beggars’ rags. I am watching one hour with Him and loving Him for those who don’t. I endure the bad music the horrible “decor” the horror of manipulating gender pronouns in sacred scripture—all of those outrages and it grates on every nerve. But I am with Jesus and I figure we endure it together. So it becomes an ongoing offering in Union with His Sacred Heart. (I hasten to add that in the last few years the NO where I am has become much more reverent and the music much improved and our priests are wonderful!) Our Lord told St Margaret Mary that when she felt consolations then He was comforting her. When she felt dryness and coldness but continued in her devotions regardless then she was comforting Him. Just my thoughts. I wish the Council had gone differently and I fervently wish JXXIII had revealed the 3rd secret. But he didn’t. Water under the bridge. It is what we do now where we are to console Our Lord and plead for the coming of His Kingdom that counts. The present moment. That is what we have.
Wonderful post AED. Sums up how I feel entirely. I took great solace in the words Fr Ripperger (what a POWERHOUSE of truth wisdom and teaching he is to me by the way) said in his lecture on the ‘6th generation’ - he mentioned how some the young of the present generation are displaying incredible graces and fervor. Wonderful to hear. He mentions it in this excellent video:
I know Fr Kevin I am not too far from his parish Are you local? Small world You can’t go wrong following Fr Kevin and his adorable and photogenic cat
A bit of reflection here- As a Post Vatican II Catholic, I suspect 2 changes I particularly appreciate include listening and participating in the Mass within my own language and having found myself in the ministry of a member of 2 Choirs. Without Vatican II, these would not be possible. I'm sure the former was addressed by use of Mass books (I know there's another term for them) written in one's own language. Yet, I do love the inclusion of Latin during the Easter Triduum. I did last week have a very interesting brief conversation with 2 cousins of my Mom's generation. They truly regret and long for how the Church was and the much greater level of reverence which was evident throughout (our Diocese) the American Church. They are 1st generation as their parents were immigrants. I must say I was pleased to hear this. I think 30 years ago I may not have felt that way. Interesting how we mature. I know this is clear evidence of my own spiritual maturity and growth. I had a similar conversation yesterday with 2 friends - a fellow choir member and our Director. The friend is a bit older than the director and I and she commented on missing the more traditional Mass and ecclesiology (eschatology - right word?). We were discussing the reassignment of a local priest who is very traditional to a parish which had become quite progressive. As a result many members have chosen to leave that parish. MANY GROWING PAINS. The former priest may or may not have retired. I have truly disliked attending/visiting there since he started there. Apparently the new Priest received his calling to the Priesthood in Medjugorje and visited there numerous times. Isn't THAT interesting! For a diocese in which the Priests are told they are not allowed to go there, nor give any credence to Garabandal...; that was the comment I received from my young priest when I initially presented the idea of this pilgrimage. He said 'you are more than free to go. But while I have been intrigued, I cannot go.' The man helping me plan a pilgrimage knows him and we may be visiting with him in preparation. So much more to this background. Granted one thought which is very prevalent is 'if it keeps the young people in the Catholic Church, we need a little of that as well. different ways of reaching the full congregation. If it brings wayward Catholics back into the fold, Halleluiah our prodigal brother or sister has returned, for renewed education!!' Pre-Vatican proponents could suggest this how we all justify it or...honestly listen to some who are returning for their reasons. For one friend, hearing Latin in church for some reason scares her. She is a couple years older than I. Apparently the only reason it scares her is because she doesn't understand it. I've helped calm those fears, yet you won't find her going to a more traditional church. I think another older friend might prefer the traditional. That was the Church she left when she got married 40 years ago. ON THE OTHER HAND, I do hear of many young Catholics in this diocese who are now seeking the beauty of the Church of their grandparents for its RICH tradition, time honored teachings and reverence. I often see young (teens/20s/30s) Catholics in Adoration of our Lord in Exposition. This gives me GREAT HOPE!! Two more weeks of Lent also give me hope.
Mass today was so strange, on the Feast of St Joseph. The priest forgot to say the Gospel and the Sexton had to remind him. Then he said the opening prayer twice, he said it again after the Gospel. Then he washed his hands in the glass of water given him to drink and dried his hands on the altar cloth. He also seemed to get lost in the missal and read the wrong prayers. He was a visiting priest from England. I was wondering if he was really a priest? He was in his sixties so he should have known how to say mass. You do hear stories. Poor man; maybe he has Alzeimers
I have mixed feelings about Vatican 11. I have nothing against (in fact I rather like) Mass in the vernacular although I do think it should be possible for each large parish to have one TLM per week at a reasonable time of the day. I'm at a loss to see the advantage of paring down the Mass as soon as the liturgy was changed into a language everyone could understand. If the purpose was to help people better understand, what was the point of trimming what they heard and supposedly better understood? Protestants tend to call their Sunday services "worship". In our hierarchy's attempts to make the Mass more "welcoming" they reduced Catholic worship to the bare bones to the stage now where even the bones are wasting away. My main reservation about the actual language change is that it gives man-worshipping bishops and priests too much opportunity to ad lib the Mass, with the growing danger of Mass without a valid Eucharist. Some changes were required to reorganise and refresh the Church. Protestantising the literature and the Mass was a step too far, as was ripping from our churches anything which appeared too "Catholic" like statues and shrines which the supposedly better educated and self-styled more spiritually enlightened modernists belittled as pandering to ignorance and superstition. Josephite's description of Jesus being in rags is apt. What once was revered as sacred (the Blessed Eucharist) is now treated as a free supermarket sample. That Jesus came as a beggar doesn't give us the right to demean Him or to raise ourselves to the level of His omnipotence. I'm sure that (most of) the Fathers at Vatican 11 didn't intend the gutting of almost all that's sacred from our Sunday worship, but that's what happened. Pope Benedict tried to fix it but I'm afraid we're back again on the road, this time with pedal to the metal, of worshipping man over God. I go to Mass to worship Jesus our Saviour, not to admire the performance of a choir, the cuteness of the altar servers or the wit of the priest.
Indeed well said. As I’m not old enough to remember the old rite- was the Gospel ever presented as it is now, what I mean is ‘for shorter version omit italics’? This irritates me for two reasons: 1 I came to Mass to hear the Gospel. Please read all of it. 2 if I had €2 for every time the gospel was reduced to three lines, and then the priest give an ultra long sermon on social justice or a rambling series of non related short stories - I’d be a rich man. Did this happen pre vat 2? (Genuine question)
I am unsure of the historical Genesis of the passage from the Tridentine to the Novus Ordo Rite but my own understanding is that it was not, in fact, the intention of the Council Fathers that this should happen? In other words the New Mass was not the stated aim of Vatican 2. Like many, many, many other innovations, ; the Council Fathers wished to preserve the old mass, this, I think ,was Pope Benedict's understanding of the matter and one he tried to enforce during his own Pontificate..
There is controversy regarding this. Bugnini (I think he was a Cardinal) was involved in the Liturgical Committee in 1972 Michael Davies uncovered some hints that Bugnini was a Freemason Supposedly someone let Paul VI know about this I need to do more research on this before I post more Yes I smell a rat
My memory is hit and miss after so many years but from what I remember the trouble with the pre-Vatican 11 Mass was that for the most part the readings were in Latin. The laity had missals with the readings in English but not everyone had a missal and if the priest was fluent in Latin he could have moved on to the next part of the Mass while the person in the pew was half way through reading the missal. Mass could be over in 20 minutes if there weren't many receiving Communion and no homily. Then again, only the priest and altar boys were in the sanctuary so there were no delays switching from one reader to another and waiting for the offerings to be brought up by people from the congregation. I don't think that shorter versions of the readings were the norm and as far as I can remember there were two Gospel readings at each Mass. I have to 'fess up here and admit that I wasn't exactly the most devout Catholic in those days. The best outcome would have been to simply translate the Mass as it was into English but the modernists took their opportunity to innovate and ran with it.
Reg As far as I remember, the Gospel was read in Latin by the priest on the Gospel side of the altar Which looking at the altar is the left side The right side was the Epistle side Both the Epistle and the Gospel were read from the pulpit then to the congregation in the vernacular I recall this from Sunday Mass Not sure if it was the same during s quiet Low Mass which as Dolours said could be as short as 20 minutes People read their missals Priests went fast But the Mass then was HOLY No circus clowns or clapping I truly miss it
The hymns were better too - both the English and Latin hymns. We learned the Latin hymns in school and what the nuns called Plain Chant (not sure whether that was better or worse for me because I hadn't a note in my head). I miss Benediction which we had after Mass maybe once a month with all the bells and smells. I suppose the microphones are an improvement on the pulpit but the message today is banal and as often as not has the most tenuous link possible to the readings of the day. I remember when the folk Masses were introduced. A novelty for a few weeks, after that just plain boring. They were still doing the folk Masses about 20 years later when all the young people had moved on to rock and heavy metal. I'll spare you the comment of one of my then young nephews because I would have to delete the expletives.
No it didn’t. At least not in my memory. And the sermon always dealt with serious things like morality and sin and the consequences of being unfaithful. But I will say this. In pre V2 Catholicism it seemed to run like a well oiled machine but it was cold. By this I mean we learned all about Jesus and we knew we were receiving Him in Holy Communion but we didn’t have that personal powerful sense of His Presence in every moment of our lives. “Personal savior” kind of thing. The Holy Spirit had I think been stifled. We had a lot of head knowledge but at least for me the actual vibrant relationship with Jesus was missing. That came later as an adult when I returned to the Church but then I found it utterly changed. Then I grieved for what we had lost. The reverence and beauty and holiness. I felt like an orphan—a stranger in a strange land. I am so grateful the Latin Mass is now available. I can’t often get there but it comforts me to know it is there.
