As we begin the New Year of 2016, it seems a good idea to take a fresh look at the single most important event in the Catholic world, in the 20th century – the Second Vatican Council. The above short video clip provides a brief overview of the Council and its revolutionary spirit. Have you noticed this revolutionary spirit in your parish/diocese? Or, are you young enough not to have known anything different? Comments invited.
I regularly hear parental concerns about the dangerously intrusive and addictive... read more
Editor writes... Over the years, annoyed by the lengthy sermons of seemingly... read more
The following conversation took place recently, between our blogger Petrus and... read more
Update(s) - Tuesday, 16 March 2022 There has been additional reporting across... read more
Comment: The above overview of the Biden administration so far, requires no... read more
Editor writes... I found Neil Oliver's talk in the above video interesting... read more
From the Catholic Herald - 28 September 2022... In 2019 the controversial... read more
Editor writes... A reader emailed this news: The enemy of Fatima, and... read more
From the N & Q Report... Most of my readers didn’t trust... read more
As with all Feast Day threads, feel free to offer your... read more
Comments (32)
I am 53 and I have seen. Big change, not for the good
Sent from my iPad
Our Lord said “By their fruits ye shall know them”. Well, the fruits of the conciliar reform have been universally rotten and devastating. No objective Catholic can deny this fact.
If I may give my opinion, I would say that Vatican II was a real “brigandage, a spiritual embezzlement”. I have no doubt about this!
Lionel,
Well, there is sufficient evidence to suggest that the architects of the New Mass and post-conciliar changes were fraudsters who usurped the Council for their own ends. Fr. Ralph Wiltgen was the first to highlight the manouvres in his book “The Rhine Flows into the Tiber”.
Indeed you are right, Athanasius, I have read this most interesting book.
We want to remain exclusively catholic.
Lionel,
Yes, indeed we do, by the grace of God.
I have heard that a Fr Hesse is very good, from friends but don’t know him and haven’t heard him speak and I have not read anything about him except a bit of the article on Vatican II below. I would like bloggers’ opinion on the article. http://catholicapologetics.info/modernproblems/vatican2/documents.htm
Lily,
I copied this from a 2006 announcement by Catholic Family News:
“Catholic Family News has just received the sad news that Father Gregory Hesse died last night, January 25. All we know so far is that his death was brought on by complications due to diabetes, and he received the last rites from a priest of the Society of St. Pius X. We will update this page when we know more.
Father Greogry Hesse, S.T.D., J.C.D. was ordained in 1981 in St. Peter’s Basilica. He held doctorates in both Thomistic theology and Canon Law. From 1986-88 he served as Secretery to Cardinal Stickler at the Vatican. Since 1991, he worked in Austria, Germany and the United States giving lectures and producing theological articles that appeared in Catholic Family News, The Fatima Crusader and other journals.
He was a contributor to the book The Devil’s Final Battle and appeared in the 2004 Fatima documentary Heaven’s Key to Peace. An outspoken critic of Vatican II and the post-conciliar revolution, Father Hesse is remembered as a strong voice for the Latin Tridentine Mass and the Traditional Catholic Faith.
Please remember to pray for the soul of Father Hesse in your Masses, rosaries and prayers. Requiescant in pace.”
Athanasius,
I thank you sincerely for that statement which bears out what my friends have said. They might even have told me he was deceased but I had forgotten about him until I came across the article when I googled to see if I could find out anything to defend Vatican II because I thought of playing the Devil’s Advocate! Fr Hesse has put paid to that idea, LOL!
May he rest in peace.
Lily,
You are most welcome!
Sorry to have spoiled your Devil’s Advocate role!
I can’t even remember all of the atrocities that have occurred (and have been sanctioned/ignored by the Vatican) since VII, there have been so many. What still astonishes me, what still appals me, even after 50 years, is that so few fellow Catholics felt the same. I was a teenager in 1970, so when I hear of how the Faith was in “the old days” before the scandalous Council, I wonder, “really”? Was it so great amongst the laity?
I remember hearing a priest, talking about the indifference of most Catholics to abortion, say “Does anyone see what I see, does anyone care?”
Apparently most of us did not. The rot obviously set in before the 60’s, in so many “servants” of the Church. We are now reaping the rotten harvest of this indifference, and the world suffers as a result. None of this is news to the regulars on this blog, but there are those “lurkers” and “trolls” who perhaps are in ignorance. They see us as “intransigent, hate filled and judgemental”.
Thanks,VII..
Therese, to what atrocities are you alluding? And, how have they been sanctioned by the Vatican? Perhaps I am being dim but I don’t understand what you mean.
Oh Helen, I’ll have to go back in the records as there are too many examples, but off the cuff and from my poor memory, the “Liberation Theology” priests who not only sanctioned but joined murderous terrorists, Fr Andy Monaghan from Scotland who had his own radio programme to spout anti-Catholic teaching week in, week out, without the slightest check, and who was “in good standing” with his bishop, and with the Pope. If ever a priest deserved excommunication, that man was he; the countless nuns who have disgraced their order and the Church by OPENLY teaching heresy, for years;who have not been excommunicated, as they should have been.
And, Helen, are you kidding me? Have you not read of the egregious offences committed against Our Blessed Lord, day in, day out, for years by some of his His ministers? The blessing of homosexual union, the encouragement of “gay” Masses? None of the clergy involved have been sanctioned. Some have high office. Remember St Thomas More: in the law,silence betokens consent. Many of these people still hold high office; sadly many of them have died in it.
Helen
Reading over what I wrote, I’m annoyed with myself that it may seem to suggest that I was referring to only those clergy who stay silent in the face of such outrages; I was, in fact, referring to those who have taken a leading <public part, and who still hold office.
Therese, thank you for your thoughtful insight. The whole situation is / was a mystery to me but, posts like yours are very helpful.
What has happened over the last 60 or more years has been more like a creeping cancer or virus than a revolution. The French revolution was more immediate but the changes which have devastated the Church since vat 2 have been much more subtle and insidious.
Having lived through this era I have seen how the Mass and the sacraments have been watered down and reduced to meaningless (in most cases) rites depriving those who still attend the NO Masses of the rich heritage of graces previously bestowed on us from their reception.
The Mass didn’t change overnight but by degrees. It was still in Latin with small changes including some prayers said allowed by the congregation and then in the venacular; e.g. the Our Father. As time passed the Latin was replaced and Benediction, Perpetual Novenas and the different sodalities were replaced with YCW (young Christian Workers) with really no object at their heart except to unsettle us, and youth clubs etc. As a young teacher I had to get by without any textbooks because the Cathechism and all Holy texts had been thrown out. We began to flounder about and lost faith ourselves to some extent.
And so gradually the schools lost their catholic ethos. Our few faithful families are struggling to keep their kids on the right track by homeschooling and attending the SSPX Mass and sacraments.
I could go on but its all been said. Only Our Lady can counter this creeping evolutionary event that has destroyed our Church, the suffering bride of Christ, if and when the Pope obeys her command to Consecrate Russia to her Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart.
I’ve listened to several of Fr. Hesse’s talks on YouTube, he is quite impressive and pulls no punches regarding what he called the “counterfeit Church” established by VII. Recently I was surprised by his not-so-rosy assessment of Pope Pius XII, however, esp. regarding the Easter Week liturgical reforms, engineered by the infamous traitor Bugnini, which he approved in 1955. If I recall correctly, he (Pius) was also responsible for promoting Bugnini early in his career.
But to answer your question, Editor, or more precisely to fail to answer it, I ceased having anything to do with my diocese in 2009, and I did not grow up Catholic, so I have zero familiarity and memory of the pre-VII Church, and no knowledge of the creeping revolution as it affected my local diocese. I’ve read quite a bit about it and heard volumes about our former Archbishop, an “enemy of Tradition,” but no personal experience. Our current Archbishop appears to be very orthodox, is trying very hard to increase vocations, and is even friendly to traditionalists, but he is not one. I suppose one can be grateful for even that minimalist state of affairs in this age of apostasy?
RCA Victor,
There are some over-zealous Traditionalists out there who blame the start of the torubles in the Church on Pius XII. Fr. Hesse was one such mistaken soul.
The liturgical changes made by Pius were all perfectly in line with Sacred Tradition, especially regarding the restoration of the ancient Easter Week liturgical reforms. Furthermore, Bugnini showed himself to be an adept Tradtitional liturgist under Pius XII. His true colours didn’t show until much later, similar to Father, later Cardinal, Augustine Bea S.J., Pius’ confessor. Even saintly Popes can be taken in.
As it happens, the liturgical changes made under John XXIII were not dangerous changes either. In fact, they were perfectly good alterations made in line with Tradition. What happened under Paul VI, then, was neither prepared nor approved by his immediate two predecessors. The New Mass is a unique innovation all on its own.
Athanasius,
I don’t remember how I found this analysis, or why, but would be interested in your assessment of this analysis of the 1955 Easter Week reforms, which is not very favorable. I should add that I don’t know anything about this site, either, including all the names in the left column except for Peter Kwasniewski. http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2009/03/compendium-of-1955-holy-week-revisions.html#.VonWC1K0fMs
It’s in 10 parts, but this, Part 1, should give you the general idea. Each article starts with a synopsis of the pre-Pius XII ritual, followed by a synopsis of the reforms.
Athanasius,
Here’s a link to all the articles: http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2009/05/compendium-of-1955-holy-week-revisions_11.html#.VonXnlK0fMs I notice this interesting statement by the author at the beginning of Part 9: “The Holy Week reform of 1955 was the first substantial modification to the Missal of Saint Pius V since it was originally promulgated in 1570. However, many of its features remained in general use of for only fourteen years, and were abandoned when Pope Paul VI promulgated the Novus Ordo Missae in 1969. Furthermore, in some respects, the new rite returns to the practice of the Missal of Saint Pius V prior to the 1955 reforms.”
RCA Victor
Thank you for those links.
I had to laugh at the last sentence of that quote you posted: “…in some respects, the new rite returns to the practice of the Missal of Saint Pius V prior to the 1955 reforms…”
I would sure like to have the author of those words explain them in a little more detail, and perhaps add the following “However, in most respects the new rite mirrors precisely the work of the schismatic Reformation liturgist, Archbishop Cranmer.”
Athanasius,
I think you’ve answered my question! 🙂
Athanasius, as you say, even saintly Popes can be taken in, and I believe firmly that Pius XII was one such. However I disagree profoundly with your estimation of his reform of Holy Week, which, in effect gave the green light to all that followed. Returning to the ‘ancient Easter Week Liturgy’ was an ‘archaeologism’ condemned by Pius himself in ‘Mediator Dei’ and was the leitmotif of the horrors that followed. Bugnini et al knew well what they were doing from the outset. I’m not sure if you’re implying that under Pius he was actually more ‘traditional’, but he was a traitor from the beginning. This link to Rotate Caeli gives a reasonable account of those changes, which must be reversed when the Church returns to the Missal of Pius V.
Sorry not to have noticed this bit of the thread sooner – I usually look at the end and so miss insertions 😕.
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2010/07/reform-of-holy-week-in-years-1951-1956.html
As one who grew up before Vat.II, I can promise anyone with doubts about the matter that the Catholic laity, their local priests and bishops, the nuns, active and contemplative, the teachers, Catholic press, etc., etc., etc., enjoyed an absolute unity of faith and religious practice and customs. Wherever you went, you rejoiced in being a member of a Church that was visibly one, holy, Catholic and apostolic. The rottenness was hidden from us in the minds and plots of a clerical intelligentsia – see the link I have posted on the Jesuits in the new thread for a good account of this. Vat.II was the cauldron into which their poison was thrown, mixed and force-fed to a vast number of innocents. Catholics who had heard only the fullness of the Catholic faith all their lives were almost overnight hearing their unwilling priests and bishops (under obedience) throwing bewildering instructions at them about the Mass – the Sacred, Holy, Sacrifice of the Mass. It was almost impossible to believe, but obedience to the authority of Holy Mother Church, through her bishops and priests was reflexive. It wasn’t weakness of faith that was their undoing – it was obedience. The rot set in with amazing speed. Many of those with intellectual pretensions were excited by these novel ideas, and there was a haemmorhage of priests and religious and ‘reform’ of religious orders. The young, especially those born in the early 50s brought their new ‘pop culture’ through the open windows of the Council and right into the sanctuary, while the older generations of simple souls either walked or gradually gave in and began, after a while, to enjoy the greet-your-neighbour gossip sessions that their old Mass had been turned into.
It annoys me when people who were not there opine that in some way the Church as a whole, and especially in her simple children, must have been somehow ready and willing to accept what was done to them. Simply not so.
In a way I’m glad I was removed from the Church at age 5, and missed the entire revolution. My parents didn’t know their faith very well and I don’t believe they practiced it either, so I probably would have accepted the entire package of baloney right along with them.
(You might even say, Christina, that their false obedience was a weakness of their faith and the cause of their undoing…)
RCA Victor, you’re right of course, but you’re talking from hindsight and from an age that is knowledgeable and aware of the evil that earlier generations could never have imagined. It is always necessary to place oneself in the time before making judgements about those who lived in it. I have trouble with a close relative who, failing to do just that, opines that St. Thomas More was a very evil man. For generations, as I indicated, Catholics heard the same teaching and were rightly taught to be obedient to ecclesiastical authority, for it had never betrayed them. Disobedience to that authority WAS always wrong in those days, and one could hardly expect the average, not too highly educated Catholic to become aware that all had changed in a very short space of time. I didn’t really see the light myself until an NO priest gave me a copy of ‘Pope Paul’s New Mass’ by the late great Michael Davies, and of course I’m almost a genius. 😁😁😁
The rottenness was hidden from us in the minds and plots of a clerical intelligentsia..
Absolutely 100% true.
Christina,
LOL, as Editor is learning to say…I appreciate that reminder about using the correct perspective. The subject of obedience reminded me of this famous quote from Abp. Lefebvre: “Satan’s master stroke, by which he is bringing about the auto-destruction of the Church, is therefore to use obedience in order to destroy the Faith: authority against Truth.”
RCA Victor
I like that other quotation of Archbishop Lefebvre: “Catholics once sacrificed their lives for the Faith. Now they sacrifice the Faith.”
I was born in ’78 and so never knew the traditional mass in my youth, though I do have some vague memories from the parish I grew up in of a busy church, the people receiving communion while kneeling at altar rails and a cry chapel being used for babies/infants (this from the early 80s).
But just a few years later, when making my First Holy Communion, change was afoot as taking communion in the hand was drummed into us at primary school. And RE was largely an empty vessel which seemed without structure or substance; in retrospect I realise that this was because it was a free for all with novelties at the time and “anything went” hence why it was so chaotic.
I remember the School playing hideous recordings of ‘Christian pop-rock’ at assemblies. The lyrics I always remember (alas) went:
“Go-od with us, so close to us, Go-od with us, Emanueeeeeeeeeeeeel!”
It was atrocious, no wonder I lapsed asap. The other music inflicted upon us included childish hymns and weepy secular music such as “The Streets of London” by Ralph McTell (I have mentioned that before).
But, now firmly in the bosom of tradition, it concerns me to look back and recall that, when confronted with imagery (pictures or film) or sounds (chant) of “how Catholicism used to be”, it never occurred to me to ask “why did this all change and when?”.
This seems strange, especially when you consider how the traditional and authentic expression of the Catholic faith is starkly head and shoulders above the new in every way. I guess for me, it was because I was never particularly taken with the new mass, never that serious about the new faith. I think that such superficiality is a widespread issue in the new Church.
This is why its so important to tell people about the true faith and encourage them to seek out and investigate tradition. It is common for people to feel ambivalent or even negative after their first experience of the true mass, but if they make the effort and give it a chance then they reap much benefit back in return. Modern Catholics are not used to having to concentrate or expend effort in spiritual pursuits. They are not used to making t he faith the priority.
I think in the typical novus ordo Parish Church now, the revolutionary spirit has passed through like a tornado and left desolation in its wake. Everything has been swept away and everyone is standing looking at one another, blinking. All the novelties are in place – the altar girls, the lay ministers, the guitar music, communion in the hand, but there is often the sensation that no-one is really convinced by all this. No-one seems to know what they should be doing, or why. And yet they just keeping ploughing this furrow, as the congregation continues to get both smaller and older.
Gabriel Syme,
You have an excellent way of condensing years of experience into a fairly short space – when we have our June Conference, I hope you will communicate your experiences, as you have above and in many other posts, in the question and answers sessions.
You’ve no idea how much it will help the (we hope many) newcomers to hear someone of your age group speak of the shallowness of what they are themselves, still experiencing and thinking is normal, and, worse, “Catholic”.
For your diaries, once again, folks, ahead of the formal advertisement: Saturday, 18th June, Kerrydale Suite, Celtic Park, Glasgow, probably commencing 1pm – time to be confirmed.
The Catholic liberals have undoubtedly established a revolutionary situation. Here is what we read in the book written by one of them, Monsignor Prelot, a senator for the Doubs region of France. “We had struggled for a century and a half to bring our opinions to prevail within the Church and had not succeeded. Finally, there came Vatican Il and we triumphed. From then on the propositions and principles of liberal Catholicism have been definitively and officially accepted by Holy Church.”
http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/OpenLetterToConfusedCatholics/Chapter-14.htm
Editor: I believe you are our first ever blogger from Russia! Welcome!
Comments are closed.