Vatican II
Thoughts on the effects of the Council
Sometimes, it is difficult to see the benefits derived from the Second Vatican Council. In fact, I’d be hard pressed to cite many. I don’t know why I’ve been thinking about the Council so much, maybe because the Motu Proprio, extending the freedom of the ancient Latin Ordo is expected ’soon’.
At Mass this morning, we were joined by the 6th, 7th, and 8th grade students. Each week a section of the student body assembles for school Mass. They are so noisy, entering and leaving the Church (not to mention at the sign of peace) that I couldn’t help notice them. Very few genuflect, much less pay attention or participate in the liturgy.
What a difference a generation or two makes
I went to Catholic grade schools, with fully habited nuns as teachers. We entered the Church in rigid single file and in silence, with a to-the-ground genuflection towards the Blessed Sacrament on the altar - not a table. The boys shirts were tucked in, and our ties straight. We knelt straight, with hands folded. We used leaflet missals to follow the Mass, and we sang Gregorian chant. We approached communion in strict formation, returning to our place, with our heads bowed. After Mass we remained a few minutes for our thanksgiving. We rose at the knock of Sister’s knuckles against the back of the pew and returned to our classroom in silence.
What a difference in training today. These Catholic school kids had to be told by the Celebrant when to stand, sit, and kneel.
Aggiornamento
How many years has it been since the closing of V-II? Forty two years now? The Church still seems more like a free for all than anything else. If the Church opened itself to the world at the Council, it seems the world rushed right in. Many Novus Ordo Masses are so people-oriented, the sacred is obliterated - of course we all know that, it has been repeated ad nauseum for decades now. My apologies for bringing it up.
Casual corner
A couple of bloggers have posted on proper attire for Mass, which is a good reminder for folks. Although, it seems to me that a more casual, people-oriented Mass invites casual dress. The club atmosphere in some “Faith Communities” before and after Mass, makes this clear to me. I’m not saying it is right, I’m just pointing out that casual is as casual does.
When Extraordinary Ministers come forth from the congregation en-masse, joining the priest in the Sanctuary, after a raucous sign of peace right before the Agnus Dei, and when people approach Communion without reverence, and suddenly - Mass concludes a few minutes later to a din of conversation and greetings, I have to question if people even know what just happened. Do they really believe they just received the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ? In such a casual atmosphere, do they even think about what they are wearing? And is one’s clothing the prime importance in this scenario?
I’m convinced that if people understood where they were, and what they were doing there, and Who they were communicating with, they might just be more open to dressing appropriately. I don’t believe many of them even know what they are doing, except maybe fulfilling an obligation to their personal concept of God - who happens to be Catholic.
Back then
When I was younger, a woman wouldn’t be allowed in Church in a sleeveless blouse or dress - the Pastor, usher, or some nun, made sure of that. Women’s heads were supposed to be covered as well, which got kind of ridiculous when you’d see a girl at Mass with a piece of kleenix bobby-pinned to her hair, or wearing what looked to be a doilie. Yet that was in a time when there were disciplines in place, both in society as well as the Church. Mass wasn’t in the round, nor was Church a community center.
The priests were Father or Monsignor, not our golfing buddy named Jim. Nuns were nuns, and they looked the part. The Church was a place of silence, and decorum, leading to prayer and worship. There were no words to describe the Church as a “worship space” nor was there a place called a ”gathering room” - neither would we have described the interior statuary and embellishments in terms of ”worship environment” - or whatever term liturgists use today. The Church was not an abstract place, it wasn’t a multi-functional events center - it was the House of God.
But this is now
In many people’s minds, the Council ended more or less as a wide open deal - nothing in particular was declared infallible by the event - although the Council itself is infallible. Critics, and there are lots of them, have even stated that most of the documents were ambiguous, and obviously some took advantage of that fact. Strides have been made to restore a sense of discipline and order in the Church, yet we have this freedom of conscience legacy that persists. (Which is great, providing it has been properly informed.) I am, to be sure, no expert on the subject, I’ve merely lived through the aftermath.
When you read the documents, you cannot help but be impressed by their splendor, and yet amazed at how deformed the interpretation has been. I know John Paul II and Benedict XVI have and are doing all they can, along with those Bishops in communion with them, to implement the reform of the reform, but sometimes I wish the Council never happened.
It is difficult to see how opening up to the world and modernizing Herself has helped the Church be any more relevant.
May 24th, 2007 at 1:42 pm
Terry: Excellent post. I was hoping you had killed a rabbit because then I could count upon you to be my hunting partner this Fall. I’ll just have to keep encroaching upon your fashion turf so you’ll be irked enough to do it!
Really, the woman from New Guinea on Abbey-Roads 1 made me reflect upon what I think is appropriate dress in my (Western) culture may not be in another. She may be wearing formal dress for her culture! I could be perceived as the poorly dressed one if I went to Mass in New Guinea.
Or, maybe I should just shut up about it all.
You are really a sneaky, profound man, you know that, right?
May 24th, 2007 at 1:52 pm
Cathy - You were right on in your post - the Abbey1 post was just to be funny - the picture was meant to crack you up. Incidently, that picture infuriates traditionalists.
It’s the 20th century and I think indigineous people now dress appropriately - so native costume or not, the woman was innapropriately dressed - but that’s another issue centered around inculturation, altho the Capuchins had the people put on clothes in New Guinea decades ago.
This current post emanated from my wondering how we got this way - dressing in beachwear for Mass. Protestants put us to shame as far as dressing for Church. Rich and poor alike. No matter how poor black folks have been, they dressed to kill for Church - even in the hot smoldering summers in the South - or anywhere.
May 24th, 2007 at 2:44 pm
must have been a rough day for you at Assumption
May 24th, 2007 at 3:06 pm
Vattican II was to bring the Church into the world not the world into the Church. We need to live as St. Francis said preach the Gospell where ever you go if need be use words. We need to live the best example each one of us can.
May 24th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
What bothers me in Church is less what people are wearing (if it’s clean, serviceable, and modest then alright) and more of what they’re SAYING and how they’re ACTING! I can’t even go to my parish’s 7am mass (the “quiet” one) without being annoyed by people talking LOUDLY from the VESTIBULE and right on into the Nave about all kinds of stuff. But what do you expect when you have an Associate Pastor who comes up to you before Mass while you’re sitting in the pew (head down, meditating, mind you) to ask you how you’re doing blah blah blah in a normal tone? Not even hushed! And our pastor (God love him) is no better. Monastery hopping on discernment retreats has spoiled me. Monasteries are true places of sacred worship w/signs usually posted for visitors to not wear shorts & tanks for Mass (although I’m less concerned about dress shorts, etc). But the lack of reverence really is shocking to me anymore. Now I’ll rarely attend the youth mass (my parish’s 12 o’clock mass), but sometimes I’ll take my parents now & then. They like being around young people. And I’m told there’s a place for amped guitars & drums for worship (it’s *just a style preference* right?). But invariably at those Masses people arrive like they’re attending a rock concert. They sit back and let themselvs be *entertained* by the “choir” vs. trying to sing WITH the choir, and they (cringe) APPLAUD at the end of Mass. WTH?! Maybe I should dress up more for Mass. Maybe once I lose 65+ pounds & can fit back into my old clothes, I will. But how one behaves is much more important to me. Or is it just my weak will & pathetic ability to not meditate & concentrate strongly enough through the chattering masses & bass reverb??? “Bitter … party of 1.”
May 24th, 2007 at 3:58 pm
Protestants do indeed put us to shame: I was at Old Country Buffett a couple of Sundays ago. Everywhere I looked, there were little girls in white dresses and little boys in suits and ties, surrounded by their families in attractive but not as “dressed up” attire. Except for two families seated together with two boys and four girls of various ages, completely decked out in suits and white dresses, including the adults. Since it was the height of the First Communion season, I could guess that most of the families were at the restaurant to celebrate a child’s special day. But these other two families? My curiousity got the better of me, so finally I asked if there was a special occasion. One of the women smiled up at me from their table and answered, “Yes, every Sunday we dress for church and go to praise the Lord!” Amen, sister! What better reason?!!
May 24th, 2007 at 4:57 pm
Well being from the deep South myself, I have a comment to make in response. I have been to a largely black Catholic Church (with wonderful people who mean well, mind you) who always dress to kill and everything of that Southern Baptist nature–which many of them were brought up in or exposed to. Yet I have seen more liturgical innovations in that Church–walking to the back of the Church to let best friend Mary know that I offered her my peace, using inappropriate vessels, liturgical dance, a choir that has a leader that I literally saw dance (modestly) over to the center in front of the altar when singing the Meditation hymn after Communion.
So I don’t think that whole “dressing up” thing necessarily equates with being more serious and reflective on where you are.
That said, at least other people weren’t scandalized by the length of anyone’s skirt or how low her blouse was cut.
May 24th, 2007 at 5:25 pm
Actually the Church I attend is not Assumption, it is Annuncition, and the priest there is very good.
May 24th, 2007 at 6:25 pm
I’m afraid I just can’t get worked up over “appropriate dress” unless it’s seriously immodest. I’ve seen too many people in shorts and tee shirts genuflect and behave in a respectful manner while people in suits were disrespectful and disruptive. The whole thing’s just too Protestant for me. Unfortunately, a lot of traditionalists are Protestants without realizing it.
May 24th, 2007 at 6:34 pm
I think it’s REALLY IMPORTANT to mention that Vatican II has been so distorted that people have not looked to the documents or the hermaneutic of continuity for the theological definitions of “reform” and “RENEWAL”
The Renewal of Vatican II was a call to holiness, and we need to remember that after this council, the laity was reminded that the Liturgy of the Hours was for them, too, not just cosecrated and vowed religious and clergy.
John Paul II did a great job of defining this, and constantly draws our attention to the theological definitions of the council.
The problem is that most people still haven’t bothered to read what he wrote, they haven’t bothered to find the beauty in his own words, pointing us all to the actions of the Holy Spirit in the documents.
Compare it to the Bible; that was inspired by the Holy Spirit, too, and look what’s happened there. How many denominations are there?
Why, then, with historical reference as to how humanity likes to distort the truth according to their own relative agenda, are we surprised that Vatican II has been so distorted?
It is the job of those of us with the capacity and interest in perpetuating the truth to READ the documents, UNDERSTAND THEM IN CONTEXT, and, TEACH THE TRUTH TO OTHERS!
The documents cannot be interpreted or understood without reference to the past 2,000 years of church history and theology, but unfortunately, people threw of that away and read the documents through marijuana-fogged sunglasses.
Another point for consideration…Vatican I hasn’t even been fully implemented yet.
May 24th, 2007 at 6:44 pm
The council just seems to be just a bunch of “busy-body-ism”. Perhaps celibate men which too much time on their hands to think? (not meant to sound anti-clerical, but..).Every other council was convened for a reason, not just to “update” the Church. Every generation could say they need a council to “update”, and it would be chaos every 50 or years. They were called as the wolf of heresy was howling at the door. As far as bringing the Church to the world, and not vice-versa.. that is exactly what has happened, we have converted to wordliness. Catholics cannot be told apart from anyone. The world has converted us.
May 24th, 2007 at 6:47 pm
Good post, and I agree on the excesses of the past forty years. By coincidence, I also had school children attend my mass today. I could hear them marching into church. They were a bit noisy as children usually are, but I hardly noticed them after they arrived. They were extremely well behaved. All wore uniforms, which included modest shorts. I did notice when they left that each child genuflected and made the sign of the cross. I agree with those who note that behavior is probably more important than dress.
May 24th, 2007 at 6:51 pm
Good comments Julie. You stated,
“It is the job of those of us with the capacity…etc..”
Yeah, that’s pretty much what the hierarchy, and priests were supposed to be doing the last 40 years, along with educated laity who found a new voice in Church administration and Catholic academia.
The resultant chaos of V-II has done more damage in a shorter period of time than the Protestant revolt - which resulted in such numerous sects and denominations.
Now, thank God, we have hope that Pope Benedict can bring about the renewal and unity of faith we all so desperately need and desire.
May 24th, 2007 at 7:48 pm
Terry: I did laugh at that photo on Abbey-Roads1 at first but then it made me think. I hate it when you do that! I just want to be silly and you make me reflect.
May 24th, 2007 at 8:03 pm
Terry, yeah, that’s what they were SUPPOSED to be doing…but clearly, they DIDN’T.
So now it’s up to you and I to pick up the pieces. I do believe that Vatican II is a gift to the Church, but like all true gifts from God, discernment is needed and it’s hard work to know what to do with this information.
I do see hope in that things will be straightned out, but I will say this; the misiinterpretation of these documents exposed a festering poison in the Church. If everything was so perfect before this Pastoral Council, then why did things go so bad so suddenly? Clearly, something was wrong already, and this exposed the wound.
I think this was in God’s plan, as hard as it is to face up to that.
Now the Church is in a healing process, but unfortunately it’s worse than the burn unit at the local trauma center.
May 24th, 2007 at 8:47 pm
“If everything was so perfect before this Pastoral Council, then why did things go so bad so suddenly?”
Julie - Now that is an excellent insight! It is as if the aftermath of Vatican II was an accident just waiting to happen.
May 25th, 2007 at 6:55 am
Julie, I concur w/you. There was likely something much amiss in the Church that was exposed (and exacerbated) by Vatican II. Liturgical abuses were not unheard of in the TLM, but I don’t hear folks discussing that too much.
May 25th, 2007 at 12:53 pm
Sorry Dad, I knew it was Annunciation, I recalled that right after I posted!
May 25th, 2007 at 1:00 pm
Jeron, Try bringing it up to the trads….they call it a red herring or a straw man and completely dismiss it. But clearly, something was amiss, as you say, because if the catechesis was so solid, we would not now be picking up the pieces of the last 40 years or so.