Vatican II Reforms - Impact on Converts

  • Thread starter Thread starter dts
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m a convert from Southern Baptist. I’ve heard cradle Catholics say that a lot of folks would do other things while the old-style (pre-Vatican II) Mass was being performed, because they didn’t feel like they were participants.

I read Ratzinger’s “Spirit of the Liturgy” about 3 or 4 years ago – excellent! I have never attended a Traditional Latin Mass, and don’t even know the difference between a Tridentine Mass, and a pre-Vatican II Mass (or even if they’re the same thing). However, through reading Ratzinger’s book, and also “The Lamb’s Supper” by Scott Hahn, I have gained a greater appreciation for the idea of the priest facing away from the congregation. As stated by someone earlier, it becomes more evident that the priest is offering Mass on our behalf, and offering our prayers to God.

As for the Latin language, I can certainly understand how the vernacular is better for the understanding of the faithful (that kind of goes without saying). However, I like the idea of universality that comes from having all Catholic churches around the world using the same language. And it certainly is more beautiful!

While as a Catholic I must follow the teachings of the Magesterium, and therefore I must accept that they knew what they were doing at Vatican II, I must admit that I am disappointed that Catholic churches seem to be moving toward more “Protestant-style” services (music, etc.)

It would seem to me that a Traditional Mass would be a spiritually uplifting respite from a cookie-cutter world, and would draw more people to the Church.

As for the cradle-Catholics, I keep wondering if they don’t know what beauty resides in the Catholic church. It’s kind of like someone who’s eaten steak all they’re lives. They don’t appreciate it as much as someone who’s eaten only hamburgers. They were taught everything as a child, but I’ll bet many of them have forgotten most of what they were taught. Sure, they can go to classes, etc. to study the faith, but how many actually do? And sadly it doesn’t appear that priests are using homilies to re-educate the faithful.

So…Is the Tridentine Mass and the pre-Vatican II Mass the same thing? How do I find a church in my area offering one or both of these?
 
Larry1700 said:
I’m a convert from Southern Baptist. I’ve heard cradle Catholics say that a lot of folks would do other things while the old-style (pre-Vatican II) Mass was being performed, because they didn’t feel like they were participants.

I read Ratzinger’s “Spirit of the Liturgy” about 3 or 4 years ago – excellent! I have never attended a Traditional Latin Mass, and don’t even know the difference between a Tridentine Mass, and a pre-Vatican II Mass (or even if they’re the same thing). However, through reading Ratzinger’s book, and also “The Lamb’s Supper” by Scott Hahn, I have gained a greater appreciation for the idea of the priest facing away from the congregation. As stated by someone earlier, it becomes more evident that the priest is offering Mass on our behalf, and offering our prayers to God.

As for the Latin language, I can certainly understand how the vernacular is better for the understanding of the faithful (that kind of goes without saying). However, I like the idea of universality that comes from having all Catholic churches around the world using the same language. And it certainly is more beautiful!

While as a Catholic I must follow the teachings of the Magesterium, and therefore I must accept that they knew what they were doing at Vatican II, I must admit that I am disappointed that Catholic churches seem to be moving toward more “Protestant-style” services (music, etc.)

It would seem to me that a Traditional Mass would be a spiritually uplifting respite from a cookie-cutter world, and would draw more people to the Church.

As for the cradle-Catholics, I keep wondering if they don’t know what beauty resides in the Catholic church. It’s kind of like someone who’s eaten steak all they’re lives. They don’t appreciate it as much as someone who’s eaten only hamburgers. They were taught everything as a child, but I’ll bet many of them have forgotten most of what they were taught. Sure, they can go to classes, etc. to study the faith, but how many actually do? And sadly it doesn’t appear that priests are using homilies to re-educate the faithful.

So…Is the Tridentine Mass and the pre-Vatican II Mass the same thing? How do I find a church in my area offering one or both of these?
Click to expand...
May I suggest you read all of the material that’s linked to, at the bottom of this web page titled ’Articles introducing the Latin Mass’

latin-mass-society.org/

But to answer your question; yes, the ‘Tridentine’ Mass is the same as the pre-VII Mass, although ‘Tridentine’ is an inaccurate name to assign to the Classical Mass as it implies it was fabricated at Trent, much in the same way the Novus Ordo Missae was fabricated in the late 60’s.
 
I’m a convert from a lifelong agnostic background (I was only baptized two years ago). Though I would describe myself today as a Novus Ordo conservative Catholic with great love and appreciation for the TLM (Traditional Latin Mass), the TLM has actually played quite a great role in my conversion.

One of the first interior steps I made towards the Church was when I stepped by chance into a SSPX Mass in Paris. It was exciting and I was also greatly impressed by the canonical silence during the Consecration.

Later, I fell in love with a guy who had converted to Catholicism due to a group of Traditionalist friends (even though he attended almost exclusively NO Masses by the time I met him). We stayed together for 1.5 years and he was one of the major factors in bringing me to the Catholic faith.

And thirdly, the person who would become my godfather, a colleague of mine I had known for years before I asked him, is a full-blown Traditionalist, who almost exclusively attends Masses either in the TLM or in Eastern rites (Byzantine, Armenian).

So, yes, the TLM has “brought” me in some way to the Church, but only incidentally - I mostly attend the Novus Ordo today. Fortunately, liturgical standards here in Vienna, Austria - at least in the major inner-city churches - are quite good; incense is common, church hymns are beautiful (they have a great tradition in German), organ music is very widespread, and you often have music by Mozart, Schubert et. al. to accompany the liturgy. We also have the Novus Ordo in Latin here in some places, and also some churches (though rare) without a “people’s altar”.

At the same time, what mostly keeps me away from Traditionalists (as opposed to the TLM as such), is the lack of joy and hope in many of them. Every time I meet Traditionalists (whether on the internet or in person), they always seem to be complaining, but not expressing much of the joy of being Catholic and the eagerness to convert souls.

I have found this zeal in many orthodox Novus Ordo Catholics (I belong to the Legion of Mary now, where the spirit is really very uplifting and impressive), but in almost no full-blown Traditionalist Catholics (though there are of course exceptions). Many will say of course that this is not typical, but that’s my experience (also my own interior experience from the time I was flirting with Traditionalism - you really tend to get depressed and hopeless).
 
X-Lutheran Here

Yes the Eucharist is one of the reason I converted . At one time, I believed in Luther’s view of the Eucharist ( Con-substantiation – Christ is present with the bread and wine). It seemed more reasonable – I could trust my senses. We received on the tongue with high reverence at the alter rail. I remember in Lutheran Sunday school my pastor said about the Host “ This is HOLY you do not touch this only a ordained minister of Christ can touch this".

However for the Lutheran consubstantiaton to be true Christ would have had o say “** This contains my Body”** rather than** This IS my body.** Thus I am Catholic.

But to an average Joe in the pew entering in to a NO Mass you would not know the different between Lutheran service and a NO Mass. Only after to “dig in to the faith” do you realize that they are different.

If that same average Joe attended a TLM – he would have no doubt that this is not a Lutheran service but a Catholic Mass
 
Some statistics

In 1965 there was 45M Catholics in the US
In 2002 there was 65M Catholic in the US

In 1965 there were 126,000 adult baptisms - converts
2002 there were 80,000.

Index of Leading Catholic Indicators - Ken Jones
 
devotus said:
Some statistics

In 1965 there was 45M Catholics in the US
In 2002 there was 65M Catholic in the US

In 1965 there were 126,000 adult baptisms - converts
2002 there were 80,000.

Index of Leading Catholic Indicators - Ken Jones
Click to expand...
But the question I have is how many were converts from other Christian denominations in each of these years (as opposed to individuals who were never baptized)? Did that go down, stay the same, or go up?
 
Here are some interesting stats that shoow non-Catholic Christians have been coming into the Church:

From the Catholic Encyclopedia(1909) “Statistics of Religions”, Table VIII:newadvent.org/cathen/14275a.htm

In 1909, Catholics comprised 18.7% of the world population. Non-Catholic Christians comprised 20.8% of the world population.

Ratio of Catholic/Non-Catholic Christians: 0.900

From Encyclopedia Britannica’s “Adherents of All Religions by Six Continents - Mid- 1995”: zpub.com/un/pope/relig.html

In 1995, Catholics comprised 16.9% of the world population.Non-Catholic Christians comprised 16.8% of the world population.

Ratio of Catholic/Non-Catholic Christians: 1.008
 
This report covers the Catholic church in the UK that has been released by the English Catholic bishops … I do not think the results for the US are any better

The report by Anthony Spencer of the Pastoral Research Centre covers the period from 1963 to 1991 and also shows the** number of adult converts fell by 55 per cent and first Communions by nearly 40 per cent**. More recent statistics from 2001 show little improvement.
 
It’s tough to isolate the Council as a cause of these numbers. The general culture of the West experienced massive moral and ideological turmoil that we are still recovering from. Likewise, the Council called for renewed efforts for evangelization and spreading the truth (this is the primary theme of every document), but instead of obeying the Council, people went the ways of the culture and fell into religious indifferentism and a malaise of agnosticism and practical atheism.

These kind of struggles were prophecied:

2 Tim. 3:1 Know also this, that, in the last days, shall come dangerous times. 2 Men shall be lovers of themselves, covetous, haughty, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, wicked, 3 Without affection, without peace, slanderers, incontinent, unmerciful, without kindness, 4 Traitors, stubborn, puffed up, and lovers of pleasures more than of God: 5 Having an appearance indeed of godliness, but denying the power thereof. Now these avoid. 6 For of these sort are they who creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, who are led away with divers desires: 7 Ever learning, and never attaining to the knowledge of the truth.

Likewise, from the Catechism:

**672 **…According to the Lord, the present time is the time of the Spirit and of witness, but also a time still marked by “distress” and the trial of evil which does not spare the Church563 and ushers in the struggles of the last days…

**675 **Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers.573 The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth574 will unveil the “mystery of iniquity” in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh.575

**677 **The Church will enter the glory of the kingdom only through this final Passover, when she will follow her Lord in his death and Resurrection.578 The kingdom will be fulfilled, then, not by a historic triumph of the Church through a progressive ascendancy, but only by God’s victory over the final unleashing of evil, which will cause his Bride to come down from heaven.579 God’s triumph over the revolt of evil will take the form of the Last Judgment after the final cosmic upheaval of this passing world.580

563 Cf. Acts 1:8; I Cor 7:26; Eph 5:16; I Pt 4:17
573 Cf. Lk 18:8; Mt 24:12.
574 Cf. Lk 21:12; Jn 15:19-20.
575 Cf. 2 Th 2:4-12; I Th 5:2-3; 2 Jn 7; I Jn 2:1 8, 22
578 Cf. Rev 19:1-9.
579 Cf Rev 13:8; 20:7-10; 21:2-4.
580 Cf. Rev 20:12 2 Pt 3:12-13.
 
I do think that the council itself it not the sole cause but what has done more harm is the so called “Spirit of VII” and the out right neglect of our Bishops to discipline dissenters and to teach Catholics catholic doctrine.

But the council does have issues in unclear teaching that paved the way to disaster

However , I think if the council was followed , from the very beginning, **and understood in the light of our 2000 year old tradition **we would not be in the condition that we are in.

Mt 7 18-12
A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a rotten tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. So by their fruits you will know them
 
devotus said:
I do think that the council itself it not the sole cause but what has done more harm is the so called “Spirit of VII” and the out right neglect of our Bishops to discipline dissenters and to teach Catholics catholic doctrine.

But the council does have issues in unclear teaching that paved the way to disaster

However , I think if the council was followed , from the very beginning, **and understood in the light of our 2000 year old tradition **we would not be in the condition that we are in.

Mt 7 18-12
A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a rotten tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. So by their fruits you will know them
Click to expand...
Anita Moore did a good post on her blog about the Spirit of Vatican II. Here is part of what she found when she researched the actual documents Sacrosanctum Concilium. It shows that the “Spirit” and the letter of Vatican II are two very different things.
  1. In virtue of power conceded by the law, the regulation of the liturgy within certain defined limits belongs also to various kinds of competent territorial bodies of bishops legitimately established…3. Therefore, no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority.
36.1. Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.

54…steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them.

115…Composers and singers, especially boys, must also be given a genuine liturgical training.
  1. The Church acknowledges Gregorian chant as specially suited to the Roman liturgy: therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services.
  2. In the Latin Church the pipe organ is to be held in high esteem, for it is the traditional musical instrument which adds a wonderful splendor to the Church’s ceremonies and powerfully lifts up man’s mind to God and to higher things.
  3. The texts intended to be sung must always be in conformity with Catholic doctrine; indeed they should be drawn chiefly from Holy Scripture and from liturgical sources.
124…Let bishops carefully remove from the house of God and from other sacred places those works of artists which are repugnant to faith, morals, and Christian piety, and which offend true religious sense either by depraved forms or by lack of artistic worth, mediocrity and pretense.
 
But I wonder how many more Protestants have erroneously thought: Hmm, they’re coming around to our way of thinking.**

I found this quote while reading through the thread…It struck a cord with me, because when I converted, more than twenty years ago now, I remember thinking… “Thank goodness the Catholic Church has become more Protestant”…Having come from a Lutheran church (I was born a Methodist, and have experience with Baptist, Church of Christ, Presbyterian and other Protestant churches) I instantly recognized the similarities…The only real outward difference is that the Lutheran “service” has no Eucharistic Prayer.

While it may be easier for Protestants to “get” what is going on at Mass now, I think we have lost a great deal of our identity, and I am appalled that I even thought it was great that the Catholic Church was becoming more Protestant…What is wrong with simply being Catholic?

Many have been converted through experiencing the mysteries of the TLM, and the beauty of older churches…They recognized that here lies the Other…The Holy… In other words, there was an innate sense of mystery and the Holy… The silence said it all…

Today’s TLM attendees participate in a very real way…Just as VII intended…They pray the Mass, and enter into the mystery…They join with the priest…who faces the altar with them…in offering the sublime sacrifice.

Even as a Methodist…and all those years ago in college (60’s of course) I knew that when a priest had his back to the congregation he was not excluding them, but was including them in a special way.

Once our Methodist chaplain knelt at the altar…back to us…and we prayed together for the flood victims in our region…What an eye opening experience that was…I have never forgotten it…

CH

**
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top