Whoa! I’m not wanting to derail the thread, but I’d like to set the record straight, please! There may have been a stray priest here and there with mental problems or with authoritarian hangups who might have espoused such stuff, but that was definitely NOT the norm!!
NO! Venial sins weren’t categorized by the Church, nor her priests, nor her literature, as mortal sins! Venial sins were always the same venial sins they are today, and mortal sins were always the same mortal sins they are today. Check the lists found in examinations of conscience prior to VII. That doesn’t mean that there weren’t controlling parents, extended family members, nuns, nor priests who didn’t latch onto an occasion for a guilt trip to get kids to shape up when kids were errant.
We had a priest who was a very controlling person and in his later years was a very controlling senile person! He should have been relieved of pastoral duties years before the diocese moved him to “assist” at the Cathedral in a distant city (where he offered daily Masses); instead, one poor young priest after another was saddled with being his assistant. When he’d get WAY out of hand, the ramrod parishioners would trek to the Bishop, and he’d go off for a “vacation” (treatment) of several weeks to a few months, but even he didn’t call venial sins mortal ones.
Yes, prior to Vatican II, people in our neck of the woods (we attended Mass in four counties) did normally go to confession once a week, if possible, and, if not, once a month. Although one could receive communion with venial sin upon the soul, it was still a smudge, at least, upon the purity of the soul, and, back then–as opposed to recent years–receiving communion with the cleanest soul possible was highly prized. Children in church schools normally attended mass and received communion every school day, and many, many townspeople–both those who worked downtown and those who were busy at home–did the same. Recall, too, that many of the saints advocated daily confession.
If you have a 2nd or 3rd grader, do you tell them that it’s fine for them to receive communion with only the venial sins of stealing their classmates’ pencils, candy, lunch, trinkets, or money? And then expect them to follow the straight and narrow as they grow older? If it’s no big deal to take a dollar at age 7 or 8, why is it a big deal to take money for any reason at all from Mom’s purse or Dad’s wallet while they’re sleeping? Or do you give them the frequent opportunity to go to confession so that their soul is spotless upon receiving communion? Back then, we opted for the latter. Stealing and lying were strict taboos, so probably weren’t considered venial. (I’m old enough not to remember, with certainty!) They were definitely a big deal!
The Catholic Church used to be the gold standard for attempting to live right in the sight of God. Throughout the world, Cathollics had set the standards for higher and higher levels of education for the masses. Even those who decried everything Catholic looked to us as a beacon in education, law, theology, logic, morals, and, yes, science. I’m not sure that we’re still held in such high esteem. Judging by what I see in our churches and read on CAF, I don’t think that, as a whole–at least, in the U.S.–we hold ourselves to those same high ideals. People used to be more concerned with what was appropriate for a given situation (for example, reverence during Mass) and more oriented to what they thought would be pleasing to God, compared to today (for example, wanting to talk during Mass, so, ignoring that silence is appropriate, going ahead and talking–or laughing).
You didn’t see the gawking, talking, and even laughter that intrude during the Masses of these last many years. The parishioners tried to be quiet to hear the priest. The Missal was split, with Latin on one side and English (or whatever vernacular was being used) on the other. We were intent upon hearing the Latin intonation of the priest’s words so that we could keep up with the English. We constantly had to be on our toes in order to follow along with the prayers. We avidly listened for the bells and certain familiar actions of the priest or altar boys. If someone became ill, he was helped by those nearby, but the rest of the church body would have no inkling, because their eyes and minds were fastened upon the sacrifice of the Mass. We had a sense of expectation and anticipation for the Eucharist which I’ve not seen nor sensed on the part of most others, in years.
maryjk, I’m terribly sorry that people in your community experienced such extremes. People should have gone to the bishop, repeatedly, if necessary, because the incidents your friends report were not the norm. They’re so far from anything that I experienced or heard about, that, were it not coming from a Catholic, I’d say it’s another anti-Catholic fable. Our family was very active in diocesan and state activities within the church, so I don’t think that my impression of those years is a narrow one, at least for our state.
Also, if I’m remembering correctly, it took a formal act of the Bishop to excommunicate someone, and, even if that occurred, the person was simply unable to receive any sacrament except that of Confession, until the indiviual ironed out his problem with the priest, and then the Bishop’s office. You did say that the priest was old, so he had to have been mentally deteriorating, or, perhaps, as a mere mortal, one of his failings was a dictatorial personality. Whatever the reason for his poor priestly actions, I’m appalled that your family had such a bad–and definitely not a genuine Catholic–experience. I’m so sorry that your family and those in your community were exposed to such distortion of the way things should have been.
OP, maybe this background will help you in deciding the traditions you wish to establish in your own family.
