What really changed with Vatican II?

While looking back on 7 years since the issuing of Summorum Pontificum, I found a blog post by a novus ordo Diocesan Hermit sister on the very day of the motu proprio's release. What she says - from a quasi-liberal or moderate point of view - concerns me very much. I wonder if it was just propaganda to hate on traditionalism, or if it she was right: that something truly, deeply changed in theology about liturgy and sacraments.

Note her emphasis on the "assembly" and "the people", and how things have changed drastically. What really did change? Is her mindset reflective of a real theology of the Vatican since the 1970s, or is she just one of a dying breed?


Quote:What seems clear to me at the same times these folks bemoan the poor level of catechesis in the post Vatican II Church, they have not understood the significant theological reforms and underpinnings of the current Ordo Missae. Christ's presence in the Proclaimed and preached Word is underscored in today's normative (ordinary) Mass. So is his presence in the Assembly. These are both downplayed (if recognized at all) in the Tridentine rite. It is not hard to find parodies of the current Ordo Missae in the descriptions traditionalists provide, but it is almost impossible to find accurate descriptions of the Masses most of us Catholics attend day in and day out in most every parish and diocese in the world. These ARE liturgies of aesthetic quality, of reverence, power, and profundity. They are also liturgies where being a mere spectator to the priest's special and individual communication with God is not acceptable, where clericalism at the expense of the mission and dignity of the laity and their vocation in the world is unacceptable, where God's immanence is as important as his transcendence, and where the incarnation is not a cause for scandal as it seems to be for many traditionalists who want a Mass which is not sullied by the requirements of meeting and greeting one's neighbor or embodying Christ for one another right there in the assembly.

I sincerely hope Pope Benedict XVI is correct that this Motu Proprio will not be an occasion for division, much less of outright schism, but with a Church using different Offices (Breviary vs Liturgy of the Hours), different rites of baptism and confirmation, different Masses with different liturgical calendars and lectionaries as well as different underlying theologies of Eucharist, Church, lay vocation, views of ordained priesthood, and the presence of Christ in the Mass, I can't help but be concerned that Benedict has been naive in his analysis of the negative potential of this Motu Proprio which rejects (from what I have heard), both the wisdom, wishes, and concerns of the majority of Bishops of the Church in the world, and the not-so hidden agenda of many Tridentine enthusiasts to turn back the clock to pre-Vatican II liturgical theology.

Messages In This Thread
What really changed with Vatican II? - by Heorot - 07-07-2014, 11:31 AM

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)