May Crowning and Vatican 2

  • Thread starter Thread starter tnystrom
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

tnystrom

Guest
Our school principal said that we don’t make a big deal in school about the May crowning. Because of Vatican 2 and the reason protestants think we worship Mary is because of all the Mary liturgies. I question this. What thinkest thou?
 
We attend a regular Ordinary Form parish and we have 2 May crowning ceremonies–one for the school kids with the Mary inside the courtyard and one for the CCD kids with the Mary in front of the school. We also have a small statue of Mary in the santuary during the entire months of May and October. Right now, June, we have a Sacred Heart statue next to the tabernacle. I think it really depends on how traditional (small t) the priests at your parish are. If you’d like a bigger May Crowning, please offer to help organize it!
 
Print out the Vatican II documents and ask the principal to show you what they say about the May Crowning.
 
tnystrom said:
Our school principal said that we don’t make a big deal in school about the May crowning. Because of Vatican 2 and the reason protestants think we worship Mary is because of all the Mary liturgies. I question this. What thinkest thou?
Click to expand...
Having never been a protestant, I don’t really know if “Mary liturgies” are the reason why they think we adore Our Lady. However, how many protestants are likely to be present at a May crowning? If any are there, maybe that’s a good opportunity for instruction so that we can explain the nature of, and reasons for, the honor we give Our Lady.
 
tnystrom said:
Our school principal said that we don’t make a big deal in school about the May crowning. Because of Vatican 2 and the reason protestants think we worship Mary is because of all the Mary liturgies. I question this. What thinkest thou?
Click to expand...
Vatican II said nothing about May crownings. The school principal may not like them or want them in the school, but it’s his/her preference, not due to Church documents.
 
tnystrom said:
Our school principal said that we don’t make a big deal in school about the May crowning. Because of Vatican 2 and the reason protestants think we worship Mary is because of all the Mary liturgies. I question this. What thinkest thou?
Click to expand...
The Vatican II did nothing to Mary. It can’t, what is fact is fact.
 
A lot of devotional practices like Benediction, Rosary Groups, Adoration(40 Hours), Stations of the Cross, etc. took a hit after Vatican II. It had very little to do with anything official coming out of the Council but more to do with the scramble among the Clergy and Religious to put into effect what changes were called for. The devotional practices slipped into the background and now forty years later are starting a slow comeback because the laity are rediscovering them…

Most devotional practices were largely in the vernacular and in my opinion the N.O. filled a need among some of the laity that was once served by the devotionals, so between the scramblers in charge and the sated laity devotionals lost ground. Anyone who pulls that phony eliminated by Vatican II baloney needs to be brought up short by demanding show me where it says… Just my thoughts.
 
Is there any possibility that the school principal is hesitant to make a big deal out of Marian devotions because of a large population of Protestant students in the school?

I personally think that any Protestant who sends their children to a Catholic school must be prepared to be “Catholicized!”

But perhaps the principal is afraid that these families will leave the school and take with them income, and the result will be rise in tuition for Catholic children.

Or perhaps the principal is genuinely concerned about making non-Catholics uncomfortable with a tradition that isn’t required by the Church at all. Perhaps he feels that a May Crowning or other more visible forms of Marian devotion can (and should) be done in the Church setting rather than in a school setting.

As I say, I think that Catholic schools should be unashamedly Catholic, and Protestants should be prepared to put up with this if they want the benefits of a good education. But I’m not the principal and I don’t have to go to the priest and the school officials and tell them that several dozen people have withdrawn from the school, taking with them many dollars that need to be replaced for the school to continue functioning. Maybe if I were in his/her shoes, I would be a little less militant about an optional tradition.
 
rwoehmke said:
Most devotional practices were largely in the vernacular and in my opinion the N.O. filled a need among some of the laity that was once served by the devotionals, so between the scramblers in charge and the sated laity devotionals lost ground.
Click to expand...
Excellent point 👍
 
Cat said:
Is there any possibility that the school principal is hesitant to make a big deal out of Marian devotions because of a large population of Protestant students in the school?

I personally think that any Protestant who sends their children to a Catholic school must be prepared to be “Catholicized!”

But perhaps the principal is afraid that these families will leave the school and take with them income, and the result will be rise in tuition for Catholic children.

Or perhaps the principal is genuinely concerned about making non-Catholics uncomfortable with a tradition that isn’t required by the Church at all. Perhaps he feels that a May Crowning or other more visible forms of Marian devotion can (and should) be done in the Church setting rather than in a school setting.

As I say, I think that Catholic schools should be unashamedly Catholic, and Protestants should be prepared to put up with this if they want the benefits of a good education. But I’m not the principal and I don’t have to go to the priest and the school officials and tell them that several dozen people have withdrawn from the school, taking with them many dollars that need to be replaced for the school to continue functioning. Maybe if I were in his/her shoes, I would be a little less militant about an optional tradition.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, methinks you speak the truth. Catholic schools struggle so much financially and depend so much on Protestant children, that while they remain “Catholic”, it is a much tamer version.
 
ethelzguy said:
Unfortunately, methinks you speak the truth. Catholic schools struggle so much financially and depend so much on Protestant children, that while they remain “Catholic”, it is a much tamer version.
Click to expand...
Some might wonder why parents don’t just send their kids to the public schools. In our city, a deseg lawsuit decimated our public schools. For seven years, we were under the control of a court-appointed “Master,” who foisted upon us every form of theoretical social experiment from all the Ivy League eggheads who knew squat about educating real children, but were nonetheless determined to re-shape society.

The result was a plummeting of standardized test scores; at one point, only one school in our city of 150,000 was NOT on the state watch list of underachieving schools.

Any parent who could pulled their children out of the public schools and either homeschooled them or put them into parochial schools or private secular schools. We did. We tried public schools for three miserable years, and finally realized that the war was unwinnable as long as the courts and the teachers’ union had the city in a stranglehold. We knew that our kids would grow up much too quickly, and we weren’t willing to let them be “experimented upon” by social engineers.

So we put them in a private secular school at great personal expense. Of course we had to continue to pay our taxes for the continuation of the “Great Experiment” in our public schools.

Lots of very unreligious people put their kids in the various religious (Protestant and Catholic) private schools in our city. Some of these schools had languished for decades with small classes and only a few teachers. Suddenly there were long waiting lists!

So putting kids in public schools isn’t always an option.

I still think that non-religious people who put their kids in religious schools and setting must accept the religious practices and traditions of that school.

But in our city, there are many private schools, including secular private schools, as well as several large and thriving home school co-ops. So I can understand why the Catholic school principals feel obliged to try to hold onto these non-Catholic students, not only for the tuition dollars, but also because while the child is with them, they have the chance to evangelize. If the child and his/her family departs for another private (non-Catholic) school, well, there goes the chance to bring another lamb into the fold.
 
Cat said:
Is there any possibility that the school principal is hesitant to make a big deal out of Marian devotions because of a large population of Protestant students in the school?

I personally think that any Protestant who sends their children to a Catholic school must be prepared to be “Catholicized!”

But perhaps the principal is afraid that these families will leave the school and take with them income, and the result will be rise in tuition for Catholic children.

Or perhaps the principal is genuinely concerned about making non-Catholics uncomfortable with a tradition that isn’t required by the Church at all. Perhaps he feels that a May Crowning or other more visible forms of Marian devotion can (and should) be done in the Church setting rather than in a school setting.

As I say, I think that Catholic schools should be unashamedly Catholic, and Protestants should be prepared to put up with this if they want the benefits of a good education. But I’m not the principal and I don’t have to go to the priest and the school officials and tell them that several dozen people have withdrawn from the school, taking with them many dollars that need to be replaced for the school to continue functioning. Maybe if I were in his/her shoes, I would be a little less militant about an optional tradition.
Click to expand...
Very good point. I am a new Catholic, finally reconciling with the Church last March. I work closely with the pincipal on data analysis for accreditation. So I was wondering. Thanks.
 
The Second Vatican Council was the most Marian Council of all–it taught about her more than all the other Councils combined. It was also consecrated to her. Here is a section from Lumen Gentium on point:
  1. This most Holy Synod deliberately teaches this Catholic doctrine and at the same time admonishes all the sons of the Church that the cult, especially the liturgical cult, of the Blessed Virgin, be generously fostered, and the practices and exercises of piety, recommended by the magisterium of the Church toward her in the course of centuries be made of great moment, and those decrees, which have been given in the early days regarding the cult of images of Christ, the Blessed Virgin and the saints, be religiously observed.(22*)
Click to expand...
(22) Conc. Nicaenum II, anno 787: Mansi 13. 378-379; Denz. 302 (600-601) . Conc. Trident., sess. 2S: Mansi 33, 171-172.
Click to expand...
 
I have to agree. Until I discovered traditional Catholicism, I had absolutely no idea what a May crowning was. If someone had mentioned it, I would have thought they were talking about some monarchs somewhere.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top