Vatican II - 40 Years Later

Like Sister Maureen, I lived as a Catholic for twenty years before the council of the 60s. I am perplexed by her comments and, especially, by her description of the Church of those years. She said she didn't wish to denigrate pre-Vatican II Catholicism, but the picture she painted of it was hardly endearing. For instance, she said that in those times Catholics thought they needed to show up for Mass only after the readings, at the Offertory, I believe and that she remembered people actually entering when they heard the bells signaling that part. Not only do I not remember ever seeing such a thing -- not once in more than 20 years, mind you -- but I think she is wrong about the rule then current. I was always taught, long before the council, that Mass was invalid if one didn't arrive at least in time for the Gospel.

Her description of the wonders of post-Vatican II Catholicism is even more bizarre. I noticed that she did not mention the almost total collapse of the number of communicants after the council; the widespread ignorance today of even the most elementary teachings of the Church; the dreary music and the fact that most Catholics pass judgment on it every Sunday by politely listening without attempting to sing; the ad hoc nature of many celebrations, confusing rather than natural, as she would have it; and the excruciatingly boring sermons designed not to offend anyone. And I almost drove off the road when I heard her praise the ‘dialogue’ in the modern Mass. Today’s Mass is no more spontaneous than the Mass said in Latin, and anyone who has attended both knows that.

What was most striking, though, was Sister's gushing attitude toward Gene Robinson, the first caller. Instead of reminding this man that his behavior is a public scandal, she chose to make her words as palatable as possible to this admitted public sinner who has caused enormous pain in his own denomination by his deplorable antics. Worst of all, she passed over the opportunity to remind listeners that every homosexual act is intrinsically sinful according to Catholic teachings that go back to apostolic times. Nothing from the Second Vatican Council can be interpreted to change that, as I am sure Sister is well aware.

Sister Maureen's astonishing performance on the program says volumes about what has happened in the Church in last 40 years or so. By innuendo, silence, and other tactics familiar to those who regularly practice intellectual legerdemain, the opponents of orthodoxy have planted inside the Church itself the seeds of dissent, disunity, and the ultimate loss of faith. Of course, all the while they proclaim they are simply carrying out the mandates of Vatican II. In fact, theirs is the agenda of eighteenth century secularism simply dressed up in religious garb. This is surely the smoke of Hell in the Church that Paul VI once famously deplored.

I am sure Sister Maureen disapproves of sedevacantists and others who have chosen some recent pope, usually Pius XII, as the last 'true' successor to Peter. But I noticed that she and Gene Robinson have a similar if not as definitive notion concerning John XXIII. Personally, I think the good pope must look down each day and deplore that his memory has become captive of such tendentious ideologues.