FAMILY MATTERS
Building on Sacred Tradition James Preece looks at Vatican II “Inventions”
A
h, Vatican II. The elephant in the room. What is its status exactly? Do we reject it in private but begrudgingly accept it in public when the Bishop is listening? Probably best not to talk about it at all if we want to stay friends… Well, I’m going to stick my neck out and say that I do accept it. Not only do I accept it, I think it was part of Tradition and a Good Thing. But. You knew there was a “but” coming. I only accept it in the context of the rest of Sacred Tradition. In other words, I do not believe that the Second Vatican Council came along and “got rid” of all the bad old stuff and replaced it with a whole load of “new stuff” in a kind of ecclesiastical revolution. We are all familiar with the things Vatican II didn’t say - it didn’t say get rid of altar rails, or that the Priest should face the people, or that Holy Communion should be received on the hand. Those things were all sneaked in afterwards. Maybe we’re also familiar with the things Vatican II very definitely kept, but that never happen – that Gregorian Chant be “given pride of place” or that “steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them”. What people seem less aware of are the things that Vatican II did say but – crucially – didn’t invent. For example, I recently heard somebody say that Vatican II “for the first time” encouraged ordinary Catholics to read the scriptures. Tell that to Pope Leo XIII who, in Providentissimus Deus (1893), said that his office compels him “to desire that this grand source of Catholic revelation should be made safely and abundantly accessible to the flock of Jesus Christ” and who later offered an indulgence “to all the Faithful who read these Holy Scriptures for at least a quarter of an hour”. Vatican II didn’t invent lay Bible reading. Does it matter? If somebody starts reading the bible because Dei Verbum
28
told them to – isn’t that a good thing? Yes, obviously. What concerns me is the impression often given that Vatican II introduced lay scripture study, which in turn gives the impression that Traditional Catholics ought to be against it. Leo XIII says we ought to be all for it. Somebody will counter that the preconciliar Catholics in the pews didn’t hear what Leo XIII said in his
‘…how can we authentically interpret Vatican II and other recent Church documents in line with the whole of Catholic tradition through the ages?’ encyclicals, they heard some grumpy Nun telling them that only protestants read the Bible. That may be true, but I’m not Doctor Who, I can’t go and check. Traditional Catholics are often accused of wanting to “take us back” to the 1950s (or 1590s) and I dare say some traditional Catholics might feel that way, but for people like myself who have no idea what the 1950s were like, the question is quite different. It becomes
– how can we authentically interpret Vatican II and other recent Church documents in line with the whole of Catholic tradition through the ages? In order to move forwards, not backwards. A specific example worth looking at is the role of the laity in the Church. You could be forgiven for thinking that the Second Vatican Council invented “active participation” in the liturgy and the “universal call to holiness”, yet the Catechism of the Council of Trent instructs Priests to “exhort the faithful to lead holy lives and practice every virtue”. The General Instruction for the 1962 Missale Romanum clearly states “Missa natura sua postulat, ut omnes adstantes, secundum modum sibi proprium, eidem participent” or in English: “The Mass, of its very nature, requires that all present should participate in it, in the manner proper to each one.” People will tell you that the laity do not participate in the old Mass, but the rubrics require it. In each case we see that the Second Vatican Council does not invent, but rather builds upon Sacred Tradition. It must be understood only in continuity with Sacred Tradition. When this is not the case, funny things happen. Instead of understanding the authentic role of the laity, we give them little jobs in the sanctuary and call it “participation”. Something is lost. So, if you are a JP2 or B16 Catholic and curious about tradition – do not be afraid! You don’t have to stop reading the Bible. We are not schismatics, we cling to Rome and the See of Peter – but we also cling to the truths handed down by Sacred Tradition. It can be done. It must be done. One without the other is madness. Of course, this also works in the opposite direction. If you view Vatican II with suspicion and meet the “stuck in the past” stereotype then you are missing out as well. Remember that Our Lord guaranteed His Church. If a paragraph could possibly be read to mean something contrary to Sacred Tradition – then it can’t be read in that way. Sacred Tradition said so.
SPRING 2022
