Hi Martha - welcome! I don’t claim to be very well versed in the documents of Vatican II. Of course it brought about changes in different areas such as the sacred liturgy and the Church’s relationship with the laity. However, it seems to me that many of these changes which we are told came out of Vatican II are actually the result of un-thorough reading of the documents and blatant disobedience on the part of a number of people in the Church. One of the main things we hear - and it is often a topic of discussion here - is the “reorganisation of the sanctuary”. Even some of our great cathedrals have been destroyed by authorities who have ripped out the beautiful, ornate high altars and have taken Christ (in the tabernacle) out of focus and moved Him to the sideline. One church I know reordered its interior a few years ago - amidst much protest. The traditional seating was reorganised so as the people were no longer facing the tabernacle and the altar - the seats were put facing into the nave, with the altar half way down the nave. The reason “we have to bring the people to the centre of the Mass” - this reasoning makes me angry and sad: CHRIST is the centre of the Mass, and while Vatican II may have wanted more lay participation in the Mass, the intention was not that Christ would fade into the background.
Other treasures of the Church we thrown out by priests misreading the texts. There were many traditional polyphonic choirs (specialising in the music of Palestrina etc) which were done away with because such choirs were seen by some as disencouraging lay participation in the Mass. This sort of thing was never permitted by Vatican II. Ancient music from chant to the works of Renaissance masters are regarded by the Church as the music to which all Church music should aspire. And what do we have today - too few polyphonic choirs, the average parish church hasn’t had a piece of Gregorian Chant sung in over half a century, if ever. Not only that, but there are so many people - many here on CAF - who lament the dire quality of music in their churches.
Then we get the Second Vatican Council being used by some priests as an excuse for their abuses during the liturgy. I read a story - I think it was on this forum - where the priest (if I remember correctly) did not make the sign of the Cross at the beginning of Mass. When the person asked the priest about it, they were told that Vatican II got rid of the requirement to make the sign of the Cross at the start of Mass! An absurd statement, but there are so few people who know or understand in detail what Vatican II actually did want, that they can be fooled by people who put everything strange or new down to Vatican II when in fact, it is their own disobedience to the Church which is often at fault.
