HOW WAS IT THAT THE PRE-VATICAN II CHURCH OF THE 1950'S IN THIS COUNTRY COLLASPED, LITERALLY, OVERNIGHT?

Henry said...

The key:

I am convinced that what happened was no accident. Destruction like that had to have been carefully planned years in advance. Using reason dictates that the decline that what we have seen happen so rapidly in the Church, literally from 1 year to another was diabolical and planned.

Planned to exploit the complete obedience to and trust in the institutional Church, of both lay and clerics.

"MOST OF THIS WAS WELL MEANING AND NOT MEAN SPIRITED."

I doubt it. True, the mass of Catholics who fell for it, and carried out the destruction at ground level, were trusting, well-intentioned dupes. But not those pulling the strings.

January 18, 2018 at 9:10 AM

Rood Screen said...

The commentator seems lacking in the daily experience of living a Christian life. Even the holiest among us are capable of spiritual falls. Just as physical falls are sudden by their nature, so are moral falls. Adam and Eve were fine one day and outcasts the next.

The generation of Catholics that so quickly abandoned Catholic tradition was strongly influenced by the post-WWII spirit of defiance brought on by the long absence of their warring fathers. But that influence was contained by Catholic tradition until VCII effectively abandoned tradition in favor of modern fancy. And at this point in history, there's no point arguing that VCII intended some other outcome, since it is the outcome, not the intention, we must now try to outlive.

January 18, 2018 at 9:22 AM

...

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Henry, I think the desire to deconstruct the Church, although evil, was from a triumphalism and arrogance to make Catholicism like Protestantism. The hierarchy and lowerarchy wanted Christian Unity and were willing to sacrifice Catholic identity on a number of fronts to achieve it. I don't think they had malicious intentions but were drunk on the authoritarian model of the Church that could pull it off, whereas Protestantism for the most part would never become more Catholic, use Latin buy into our devotions, resort to indulgences or appreciate celibacy and our top down way of doing things.

January 18, 2018 at 9:44 AM

Anonymous said...

Bee here:

I have often thought that the 1960's were an age of mass adolescent rebellion, writ large, because of the Baby Boomers. If the first Baby Boomers were born around 1945 at the end of WWII, (I know the dates are very fluid; lots of people extend the Baby Boomer years on either side), then around 1962 the first Baby Boomers were 17 years old. In 1965 the first ones were 20. And the numbers were huge entering adolescence and young adulthood each successive year for at least 10 years.

My feeling is (and this is only my own hypothesis; not anything I can PROVE (:-) )that this huge population of adolescents and young adults was very influential because of their numbers. As young people, every new fad, every new idea, every throwing off of authority seemed right and good, and there were people out there ready and willing to exploit it for their own political ends. And they did, inside and outside the Church.
It was like a social WWII.

Just my idea.

God bless.
Bee

January 18, 2018 at 10:08 AM

...

Henry said...

"The hierarchy and lowerarchy wanted Christian Unity and were willing to sacrifice Catholic identity on a number of fronts to achieve it. I don't think they had malicious intentions"

Nor do I. Without, doubt the vast majority of the hierarchy and lowerarchy were well-intentioned. The questionable intentions were on the part of those--typically academic theologians lacking pastoral experience--who put it all over on them. Resulting in the pastoral disaster of the past half-century.

January 18, 2018 at 11:47 AM

...

ByzRC said...

I'm sure back then, reformers were patiently waiting in the wings ready for the genie to come out of the bottle starting the process of deconstruction followed in short order by reconstruction in their ideal. They likely existed in sufficient numbers and across all ranks such that organizing wasn't difficult. Large organizations always have those who seek destruction or, the advancement of their individual or, collective agendas. I'm sure today there are plenty that if given the chance, would band together and take the reforms even further. For evidence of this, all we have to do is watch the proceedings for the synods, read Amoris Laetitia and see how various dioceses are or, are not going to implement. The cycle will continue and its strength and weakness will correlate directly with the era in which it occurs and the tone set from the throne.

Years back, I read Pius XII's Mediator Dei and without rereading, I seem to remember him warning about this very thing and the need to safeguard, among other things, the liturgy as a result. My recollection could be very flawed, however.

January 18, 2018 at 5:08 PM

Adam Michael said...

I do not think that pre-Vatican II Catholics were any more devout or weak than other generations of young Catholics. They had their weaknesses and virtues, as did other generations of Catholics. However, unlike other generations, their lives were upturned through a rapid harnessing of their Church's energies toward a reformist agenda. The rest is history.

I once valued centralization as a great benefit to the Church. However, the results of Vatican II have taught me to value decentralization (with its occasional organizational messiness/pettiness). Human nature is weak and secularism is strong. It is good to not be able to change things easily. The lack of quick action breeds reflection until more mature sentiments prevail. For example, there were some liturgical reformers in the Orthodox Church of the 1960s. However, there was no mechanism for liturgical reform and today their sound contributions to piety survive, while their innovative ideas are largely forgotten for lack of implementation.

January 18, 2018 at 6:25 PM

TJM said...

Adam Michael,

EPIC fail. When 80% of American Catholics went to Sunday Mass prior to Vatican Disaster II compared to a little over 20% now, I think that's pretty good evidence that the former group was more devout than those that don't even bother to show up.

January 19, 2018 at 9:52 AM

Adam Michael said...

TJM,

I was referring to the generation of Catholics who experienced Vatican II. My point was that we cannot argue that this generation lost their Faith because they lacked piety or had a defect in formation. Your comment regarding their Mass attendance hints at this. Regarding what happened to their piety once Vatican II hit - history records the fall.

January 19, 2018 at 6:32 PM

TJM said...

Adam Michael,

Your clarification makes sense. As part of the generation who experienced Vatican Disaster II, I can say I thought most of the "updating" was a huge mistake. And this emphasis on "love, love, love" was never a major selling feature because atheists love, protestants love, jews love. Teaching of the Faith essentially ceased around 1965. And remember this was a top down revolution which makes it all the more perplexing

January 19, 2018 at 7:51 PM

Cletus Ordo said...

The Vatican II era from the 60's to the present is an embarrassment. Future Catholics will look upon this time with the same horror as we look upon the Arian period when people who believed wrongly had all the power and the faithful (like Athanasius) were punished. It will not last forever, but it's gone on for far too long. Note how those most devoted to the silliness are the oldest perpetrators of the mess.

The legacy of this "liberated" Church is a pathetic, destructive joke.

It will end. It cannot sustain itself. Parishes will close--some near you. But IT WILL END.

January 20, 2018 at 2:11 AM

TJM said...

Cletus Ordo,

Yes parishes will close even while Archbishops like Cupich lie about the reasons. In Chicago there is a parish closing which is located within a vibrant Hispanic community. Think about that. Hispanics have historically been Catholic in overwhelming numbers. But the Novus Ordo Church has worked its magic, and viola, even the Hispanics aren't showing up in sufficient numbers to keep the parish going! Cupich lies and says the neighborhood has changed!! No, Cupich, the glories of Vatican Disaster II is the reason for the closing.

January 20, 2018 at 9:37 AM