What were the post-Vatican II changes like to live through?

[PetraG]

You’re taking a torturous route when you don’t need to. Priests were accessible. If my mother wanted to see a priest, she made an appointment. And she saw him. You make it sound like nobody was there. Not true.

Actually, the priests were probably more accessible, because there were proportionately more clergy. I’m only referring to the ease, the low cost, the range of media and the sheer volume of what can be made available in terms of teaching materials. The availability of personal time with the priests themselves is another matter.

 

[phil19034]

St Katharine Drexel was in a stone sarcophagus beneath an altar at the motherhouse outside of Philadelphia(until last year)

Just as an FYI, St. Katharine Drexel wasn’t beneath an altar. She was (and still is) simply in a stone sarcophagus which sat(sits) on the floor. The faithful were able to kneel in front of her sarcophagus. But she wasn’t under an Altar.

NOTE: I have no idea if any priests ever performed an ad orientem mass using her sarcophagus as an altar. However, she wasn’t under an altar in any practical sense.

NOTE 2: for those interested, she was moved with her sarcophagus to the Cathedral Basilica of St. Peter and Paul in Philadelphia. The sarcophagus is now next to the side Altar that her parents paid for and where a statue was placed on top of when she became a Saint.

NOTE 3: The pic on the below website is what the sarcophagus looked before and after the move.

https://www.saintkatharinedrexelshrine.com/

God Bless.

 

[edwest211]

Referring to the time period, we had access to everything we needed. Convenience was secondary. I know people who can’t navigate the internet. There are people who don’t know what a PDF is. And the added convenience is not that convenient for some.

 

[PetraG]

Referring to the time period, we had access to everything we needed. Convenience was secondary. I know people who can’t navigate the internet. There are people who don’t know what a PDF is. And the added convenience is not that convenient for some.

I agree that in the individual case the internet is an opportunity to do things that can still be accomplished in other ways by those who prefer that. I don’t have an issue with that. I’m saying that in the broad case of lots of people there is more communication now than in the past. You might rightly object that there is also much more misinformation available, which is sadly very true, but I still think that on the whole a group of people who practice the same amount of diligence will find more available now than ever before. This presents an opportunity our heirarchy and organizations such as Catholic Answers have not neglected to make good use of.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

This presents an opportunity our heirarchy and organizations such as Catholic Answers have not neglected to make good use of.

Well put. The mere existence of the Internet, and its widespread adoption, has allowed the Church to reach many people, and to teach them the truth, than would have existed without it. And it has allowed errors to be called out and shown for what they are.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Thought I would post this just for fun. Some of the latest Church architecture and décor maintains some traditional themes but in a modern way and using modern (and much less expensive) materials. To me, it’s much more attractive and inspiring than either the “1970s style” or the heavy 19th Century styles.

http://www.stroik.com/portfolio

 

[MagdalenaRita]

Living through the wreckovations of today is just like it was living through those of 50 years ago. People try to force their styles on others.

What is happening today is very slow and an a very big uphill climb and not at all like it was 50 years ago. Pope Paul VI’s Mass is still the ordinary form of the Mass and most parishes are still singing “comtemporary 1970’s songs”, though yes people are trying to change and bring back reverence and hopefully more of the Tridetine Mass and more Catholic traditions but it is slow and not the same.

Those people then had their traditions, parishes, beauty and Mass completely ripped out from underneath them.

Around 1989 I spoke with an elderly woman who was in a hospital dying and I noticed on her chart it said she was Catholic. I asked her if I could call a priest. She said, and I remember it clearly, “no, the Catholic church I was raised in and grew up in is gone. There are no priests to call.” At the time I didn’t know what she meant, but I understand now what must have been the pain and loss she felt.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Thought I would post this just for fun. Some of the latest Church architecture and décor maintains some traditional themes but in a modern way and using modern (and much less expensive) materials. To me, it’s much more attractive and inspiring than either the “1970s style” or the heavy 19th Century styles.

http://www.stroik.com/portfolio

Very nice. I enjoyed seeing these.

For simple, post-Vatican II architecture, the church below is about as good as it gets:

https://www.stanncharlotte.org/home/about-us/theological-tour-of-the-church/

 

[Ridgerunner]

Very nice.

 

[Dovekin]

As the Council put it, there are parts of the mass that cannot change, and parts that can. The Tridentine liturgy “developed organically” which means that it developed, that it is different from what it was 1000 year earlier. And the post-Tridentine liturgy did not develop much at all because of the printing press. The text was artificially frozen, leaving change to the non-textual elements.

The charge from the Council was to examine the changes and restore the Roman rite to its essentials. I doubt that the rites that resulted from that process are an accurate recreation of the rite of 1500 years ago, but they are probably closer than the unreformed ritual with its history of “development.”

 

[Dovekin]

I have no idea if any priests ever performed an ad orientem mass using her sarcophagus as an altar. However, she wasn’t under an altar in any practical sense.

That seems like an odd lapse.

Thanks for the correction and connection to current info on her shrine.

 

[TheMortenBay]

I doubt that the rites that resulted from that process are an accurate recreation of the rite of 1500 years ago, but they are probably closer than the unreformed ritual with its history of “development.”

I very much doubt that too. And I’ve yet to see one piece of evidence pointing towards that the Mass of Paul VI is not a novelty inspired by different trends (among protestant influences). The idea that it somehow is more ancient than a ritual with a mileage of 500 years plus seems impossible to me.

 

[OraLabora]

The idea that it somehow is more ancient than a ritual with a mileage of 500 years plus seems impossible to me.

That claim (that it is more ancient) is false, I agree. What is true though, is that “tradition” is not simply taking something lock, stock and barrel and preserving it identically forever. It allows one to adapt to the times and include elements of tradition that leave an indelible imprint of, in this case, Catholicism. Thus some ancient traditions that had been lost at Trent, were allowed back in, such as the troped Kyrie. (I’m still waiting for appropriate plainchant settings to appear for that; though our abbey has one it uses infrequently). The Liturgy of the Hours is another example of this; the basic structure is recognizable; psalms (such as 62 at Lauds or 109 at Vespers) are in their appropriate places; it can be done in Gregorian chant (I do so every day although this week I have a head cold and can’t chant). But it has been made more flexible and adaptable for people with busy lives (diocesan clergy, laity) but can be made longer for contemplatives (two-nocturne Office of Readings/Vigils, three minor hours) so that it can respect psalm 118 v. 164’s claims of praising God 7 times per day.

novelty inspired by different trends

That too is a false claim. As one who has attended many Anglican services (my wife is Anglican), the High Church Anglican liturgy is much closer to the EF than it is to the OF, save for the language. The Low Church liturgy as done at my wife’s church resembles nothing like a Catholic Mass. As for the Evangelical Protestant services, they are nothing at all like a Catholic Mass.

When I am at an OF Mass, I know I’m at a Catholic Mass. When I attend a Low Church service at my wife’s church, I am totally lost in their praise-band style “liturgy”.

The OF Mass isn’t Protestant, it was made simpler to make it more relevant to the people. IMHO for that purpose it has been a huge success. The questionable music that sometimes accompany it, or the desire of certain clergy to innovate beyond the (very reasonable) choices allowed by the Missal, have nothing to do with the structure of the liturgy. And, its simplicity still does not preclude beautiful, reverent solemn celebrations with full Gregorian chant. If you saw how our abbey celebrates Mass, you would see the OF in its highest possible expression. It is beautiful, and its “noble simplicity” allows it to flow gracefully from one element to the next; the sacred silence inserted in appropriate places, certainly allows the Mass to retain a contemplative element (that I would like to seem more at parish Masses).

 

[TheMortenBay]

The OF Mass isn’t Protestant

I’m not one of those claiming that it is. I might say the some ideas are in line with protestant thinking in the 1500s, but that’s not what’s important.

If you saw how our abbey celebrates Mass, you would see the OF in its highest possible expression.

I went to a High Mass in Westminster Cathedral earlier this year. It was very reverent and beautiful. A bit of Latin, a lot of reverence. I’m happy my friend (who’s not Catholic) decided he’d rather go there than a TLM I could have visited at home. Still, it’s got nothing on a full EF Pontifical Mass. But that’s opinion and preference, not right or wrong.

 

[edwest211]

The Church establishes the form of the Mass, not Catholics in the pews.

 

[Dovekin]

The idea that it somehow is more ancient than a ritual with a mileage of 500 years plus seems impossible to me.

That sounds impossible to me as well. I am suggesting that both forms are modern. They each have similarities to the worship of 1500 years ago. The one has gone through 1500 years of development while the other was, in part, an attempt to undo some of that development. But neither recreates the ancient liturgy exactly, neither even tries to do that.

The point I was making here, I think, was that the effort in the 60s and 70s was to a create a liturgy from the original sources that would nourish the faith as it did in the early years of the Church. The EF adherents make a similar claim about the ritual they think is ancient.

 

[Dovekin]

RC Spirituality gives a description of Eucharistic Prayer II that captures the dynamic better than I can express:

In contemporary celebration of the Eucharist this Eucharistic Prayer is probably the most frequently used, due to its brevity and simplicity. It is modeled after and adapted from a Eucharistic Prayer presented by St. Hippolytus of Rome in the Apostolic Tradition as an example, a prayer dating back to 225 A.D.

Due to its brevity and simplicity Eucharistic Prayer II presents an opportunity and a potential pitfall. It’s an opportunity to meditate on the essential prayer at the heart of the liturgy of the Eucharist. We’ve seen that Eucharistic Prayer I (the Roman Canon) is beautiful prose, but it is also a more developed prayer. Eucharist Prayer II is core Eucharistic devotion and intercession.

 

[TheMortenBay]

That claim (that it is more ancient) is false

TheMortenBay:

novelty inspired by different trends

I love how on top of this you are, @OraLabora
It’s good to know where the outer boarders of the EF vs OF discussion are.

 

[stpurl]

You mean the St Hippolytus who made himself an antipope, was in schism with the Church, and only was reconciled shortly before his death? Whose works are pretty much disputed, fragmented, 'attributed to him, etc? You mean that Louis Bouyet who actually admits to writing (actually rewriting) a prayer given by Annibale Bugnani for use at Mass and who specifically claims to have written this prayer wasn’t the author?