Vatican II was a huge self inflicted wound on Mother Church. In order to satisfy a dissatisfied minority of the clergy, the Church was turned upside down to the bewilderment of the laity. The loss of trust in the clergy, from the Pope down, is rarely talked about, but I think that trust, taken for granted as a fact of Catholic life prior to Vatican II, among the Catholic laity, has never been reestablished. The utter fecklessness with which the Church took a leap into the dark is breathtaking, along with the fact that today the official line, against all evidence, is that Vatican II was a great success which has borne marvelous fruits. That type of bald faced dishonesty adds blatant insult to unrepentant injury.
1964 Lament
- Donald R. McClarey
Donald R. McClarey
Cradle Catholic. Active in the pro-life movement since 1973. Father of three, one in Heaven, and happily married for 43 years. Small town lawyer and amateur historian. Former president of the board of directors of the local crisis pregnancy center for a decade.
Used to think the rejection of Humanae Vitae was the cause, now I know better.
This “bald face dishonest” mindset of celibates preaching that periodic continence is impossible for married husband and wife -is the chicken, not the egg.
“Used to think the rejection of Humanae Vitae was the cause, now I know better.”
The difference between the reaction to Vatican II and Humanae Vitae was the liberal media loved the former and hated the latter. In those days though we weren’t as aware of the duplicity of the liberal media. And a lot of clerics in the church egged them on as they do today.
The church went from the Gospel of Matthew Mark Luke and John to the gospel of me, myself and I. Once you elevate personal conscience above the teachings of Christ and you combine that with what was a sin on Tuesday is not on Friday (e.g. 3 hour fast before Eucharist) and what wasn’t a sin on Tuesday is on Friday (e.g. the Church teaching on just war or the death penalty), the faithful can be forgiven for going the easy path. Except they won’t be. Jesus said that we would be his friend if we did what he commanded. He didn’t say we would be his friend based upon what a synodal focus group thinks is or isn’t a sin. Jesus called us to Greatness not to mediocrity.
From the final stanza of another poem by the same author in that article, perhaps unintentionally prescient about the mass exodus to come:
Submerge that layman
Lower the boom
We’ll have this Church again
As quiet as a TOMB.
I have been following this series for some time, and what has struck me as remarkable is how the (in retrospect) seemingly modest changes prior to the NO prompted such widespread ambivalent or negative reactions. I suppose in some respects it would come down to how exactly it was implemented in a particular place. When I was at Clear Creek Abbey a few months ago I attended a few of their masses, which weaves in some of the 1965 modifications. To be honest I wasn’t a fan, but it was also something that wouldn’t be a deal-breaker. Of course, they also weren’t celebrating Mass in crazy ways either and so it was to me more curiosities than anything else. I’m also a relatively new Catholic, so I cannot exactly place myself in the situation of someone who grew up prior to the mid-60’s and then found their Mass being endlessly tinkered with through the late 50’s and 60’s.
It’s a tragic history that I’m glad is being brought to light by projects like these. I think Donald is correct in pointing out the loss of trust that is widespread, and is something that will not be easily or quickly healed.
Always wishing to find a glass of lemonade in a barrel of lemons, one positive aspect is the widening of scripture use. The TLM repeats its readings each and every year.
The Ordo has the three cycles of readings.
If my understanding of this is in need of enlightenment please correct me.
I like the expanded lectionary as well, Philip … Except when you notice what passages are left out.
V2 embraced ambiguity for the sake of unity. It’s easy to get everyone to agree on something when it can mean anything. Then, when it was over, the god-fearing went back to worshiping God in peace while the godless sought out positions of authority to “implement change”. Just like in the secular world, the good people just try to live their lives in peace while the depraved run for school board.
“For God’s sake, why do you damnable sodomites pursue the heights of ecclesiastical dignity with such fiery ambition?”
~St. Peter Damian
***I like the expanded lectionary as well, Philip … Except when you notice what passages are left out.***
Good point CAG.
Philip-
I would say that the expanded lectionary is a mixed bag, and not only for the passages left out (e.g., St. Paul’s admonition against receiving the Eucharist unworthily). I originally typed up a much longer comment, but here’s some bullet points:
A. Bigger is not always better, more readings means more to forget. Effective pedagogy is often more in repetition and reminding than in the amount of content.
B. 3 year cycle has no precedent in church history, removes pedagogical memory that occurs in annual cycle (e.g., things like Good Shepherd Sunday, etc.) Also creates disjunction between one year liturgical cycle and 3/2 year lectionary cycle.
C. Sanctoral cycle is largely denuded of particular readings because of the lectio continua.
D. Touted features of the 3 year cycle like thematic cycles are only evident to persons heavily immersed in it.
E. One good thing is expanded readings on ferias of Lent and Advent, other seasons.
F. Adding additional readings to Mass as happened in the NO could have been a means of expanding the one-year lectionary, akin to how some Ember days have more than the standard readings. Prior to Trent there were also examples of more variety and expanded readings throughout the Roman rite, and this could have been folded in to the one-year lectionary IMO.
Thank you Jason.
Well. One can’t say the Church flourished and adult formation blossomed due to the extra texts.
I’ve said it here many a year, that we should step back in order to go forward, and I still feel that way. I witnessed vocations springing up in our little church. Sure there are many factors however the following can not be disputed as being the catalyst;
TLM, Perpetual Eucharistic Adoration and a Father who knows his sheep and wants nothing less than their personal sanctification to take root with corporal and spiritual works of mercy flowing through each of them.
Looking at Our Church Militant today and yesterday, it’s always struggled. It’s always been saturated with the spirit of Judas Iscariot from one century to the next.
Growing more St. Paul’s than Judas’ is a given since *wherever sin abounds grace abounds are the more.*
Thank you so much for your bullet points, Jason.
I’m always learning….slowly, but heading in the right direction. I heard this once;
” Your heading in the right direction but your cart is half on the road and half in ditch. ”
Peace be yours.
“For God’s sake, why do you damnable sodomites pursue the heights of ecclesiastical dignity with such fiery ambition?”
~St. Peter Damian
Heard it said that:
“these have/had a strong desire to appear on Broadway in snazzy outfits and live in Palaces..”
-but didn’t have what it took-
I think those who both blame the Council and those who think the Council was the greatest thing to ever happen overestimate the Council’s impact, which is pretty much nil.
I can’t agree, Greg. Those who flick to the TLM weren’t around in 1962 looking to return to something. It is amazing to us what was tossed on the scrap heap. We will not give it up.
Very well said, Don!