Ignorance, Pure Ignorance

Vatican II

 

Pastern: The knee of a horse. (This is wrong. When  Dr. Samuel Johnson was once asked how he came to make such a mistake, Boswell tells us he replied, “Ignorance, Madam, pure ignorance.”)

One of the major problems over the past half century in the Church is almost complete ignorance about what was actually written at Vatican II.  Father Z gives us a grand example:

Someone sent me a PDF of a flyer from the Diocese of St. Petersburg in Florida promoting a series of talks on Sacrosanctum Concilium.

Hopefully the talks will be great.

The flyer, however, isn’t so great.   There are a series of statements which perpetuate goofy notions that have been circulated for a long time.  Let’s have a look with my emphases and comments:

 

  • Did you know that before the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy we did not always have Old and New Testament readings at Mass? (Chapter 2, #51) [This is a false statement.  There are Old Testament readings in Extraordinary Form. Furthermore, every Mass includes texts from the Psalms.  The Antiphon are mostly Old Testament.]
  • Did you know that reception of the Eucharist under both kinds for the people came into practice after the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy? Before the document, people did not receive the Eucharist at every Mass and did not receive the blood of Christ at all. (Chapter 2, #55) [This is a misleading statement.  Frequent Communion was strongly promoted by St. Pope Pius X.  However, people still understood before the depredations that took place in the wake of and name of the Council that if you are not in the state of grace, you shouldn't go to Communion.  Furthermore, this statement makes it seem that if people are not receiving the Precious Blood, they are somehow being deprived of receiving the Eucharist.]
  • Did you know that before the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Mass was only offered in Latin – not in the multiple languages allowed today? (Chapter 1, #36) [This is a manipulative statement that also hides the truth of what the Council commanded.  First, it is not entirely desirable that multiple languages be used, because the multiplication of languages has fractured our unity, both across borders and across centuries.  The illicit elimination of Latin also slammed the doors of our treasury of Sacred Music.  Moreover, the Fathers of the Council commanded that Latin be retained!  They allowed for some limited use of the vernacular on occasions.]
  • Did you know that the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy reestablished the adult catechumenate? The RCIA process was developed to bring adults (and children age 7 and above) into the Church. (Chapter 3, #64) [This statement is much ado about nothing.  Adult converts and children above 7 were constantly being brought into the Church before the Council, and not in a one-sized mainstreams all method. Additionally, I can't tell you how many people I have spoken to who wished they had had the opportunity of private instruction rather than the silly RCIA stuff they had to endure.]
  • Did you know that prior to the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, people were not expected to actively participate in Mass by responding, praying, or singing – people were there just to “hear” the Mass? (Chapter 2, #48) [This is a falsehood.  Of course people were expected to participate actively at Mass, but actively in its most authentic sense of interiorly receptive activity. Furthermore, Popes throughout the 20th century urged people to make responses during Mass and clarified which parts they could participate in also with outward, vocal participation.]
  • Did you know that the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy calls for conscious and active participation in Mass and affairs of the Church by all the faithful by reason of our baptism? It set in motion the ability for lay people, including women, who were previously not even allowed in the sanctuary, to be lectors, Eucharistic Ministers, [No!] altar servers, [altar girls were promoted contrary to the law] and hold leadership positions. (Chapter 2, #14) [This is incorrect. Before the Council began, during the Pontificate of Pius XII there was an important document on Sacred Music which promoted congregational singing and gave a clear, strong definition of "active participation". Also, lay people cannot be "Eucharistic Ministers".  They can be ministers of "Holy Communion".  Only the ordained are truly Eucharistic Ministers.]

These statements are misleading. They reflect an attitude of, “Before the Council, bad. After the Council, good.” It is not uncommon among people of a certain age to find a view that the Church really began with Vatican II.  They want you simply to accept their premises (e.g., women being allowed into the sanctuary is a good thing).

Go here to read the rest.  If ignorance about Vatican II has been a problem in the Church since 1965, the profound and total ignorance that exists about the Church prior to 1965 is a complete and total disaster.  If Pope Francis wishes to take time from being concerned about youth unemployment, lonely geezers, and whether Catholics in adulterous marriages can receive Communion and still enjoy their adultery, he might attempt to address the problem that for too many Catholics the Church and her frequently glorious 2000 year history might as well be a text written in Akkadian.

6 Responses to Ignorance, Pure Ignorance

  • I am just old enough to remember the days before Christus Dominus in 1953, when communicants were required to fast from midnight. Christus Dominus introduced a three-hour fast from solids and a one hour fast from beverages (other than water).

    At that time, intending communicants usually attended an early mass, of which there was at least one and, often, several. Communion was not normally distributed at masses after 10 o’clock.. The missa cantata or high mass was normally at 11 o’clock. However, the change was introduced by Christus Dominus, not Sacrosanctum Concilium.

    I recall the great reverence that the good sisters inculcated for the Eucharist. They taught us that that there is no difference between Jesus Christ in the Eucharist and Jesus Christ in heaven, except that here He is veiled, and there He is not. Accordingly, they insisted that there must be no other difference between the purity of those who receive Jesus Christ in the Eucharist and that of the blessed, than what exists between faith and the open vision of God. Many daily mass-goers only received weekly, or even monthly, after a period of several days’ preparation, self-examination and sacramental confession.

  • Donald,

    I couldn’t agree with you more. The hermeneutic of continuity calls all that propaganda about “pre-Vatican II Church bad/ post-Vatican II Church good” as rubbish. Just as it calls all that propaganda about “pre-Vatican II Church good/ post-Vatican II Church bad” as equally being rubbish

  • MP-S. I didn’t receive Holy Communion for the first time until 1956 But I remember fasting overnight as a young person ?

  • This does not surprise me about the Diocese of St. Petersburg. This flyer sounds like it came from the parish where my mother attends Mass.

  • I didn’t know this!

    So in the old days, they had one form of communion, no awkward mass translations, no “contemporary” music, no “Catholic calisthenics” and half mumbled responses (half of which are the wrong translation out of habit), no “EM”s and no RCIA?

    Can we go back, please?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Follow TAC by Clicking on the Buttons Below
Bookmark and Share
Subscribe by eMail

Enter your email:

Recent Comments
Archives
Our Visitors. . .
Our Subscribers. . .