Nature and purpose of Vatican II

by Letters Editor · September 13, 2011

From Frank Bompas, Johannesburg

I would like to make some comments in relation to the letter from Franko Sokolic (August 17). Without any justification he seems to be saying that John Lee attacks the Mass. This is far from the truth: in his earlier letter Mr Lee is defending the very necessary ongoing process of the Church of liturgical renewal and reform, which was very badly needed at the time of Vatican II.

Contrary to what Mr Sokolic states, it is not true that the Mass remained substantially the same since the 7th Century till the time of Vatican II. Both minor and major liturgical changes do occur periodically when the Church feels the need.

As one who attended many Masses in the old rite I can say that this liturgy was far from being ideal, and in common with many other Catholics I was very happy when it was replaced with prayers and liturgical actions that better reflect pastoral needs and the biblical and apostolic theology of the Eucharist.

If Mr Sokolic thinks that the Church is going to roll back the liturgical reforms after Vatican II, which were instituted after intensive consultations with liturgists, bishops and theologians, I am sure he is going to be sadly disappointed. However, I have no doubt that as time goes on the Church will make further attempts to correct abuses and renew and improve the liturgy.

The new Mass reflects the theology and pastoral concerns of Vatican II. While �traditional Catholics� would like to see Vatican II repealed, this is never going to happen.

Vatican II was part of the much-needed attempt by the Church to define its role in the modern world. The fact that problems involving faulty teaching and pastoral and liturgical practice have appeared in the Church after Vatican II is not the fault of the council fathers.

If there are errors of doctrine or spirituality in the documents of Vatican II and in the new order of the Mass instituted after Vatican II as constantly alleged by traditionalist Catholics, I challenge them to substantiate these claims properly.

A major problem in the liturgy has not been the structure of the liturgy but the irreverent and uninspiring way in which it is sometimes celebrated today. However, many of the Masses I attended in the old rite were conducted in a hurried and disrespectful fashion and what the priest said was inaudible. It is up to the bishops to ensure that priests conduct services in a worthy manner and lead edifying lives.

It is also a responsibility in canon law for the bishops to ensure that Catholics receive the pastoral care they are entitled to. In addition, Catholics should be properly evangelised and doctrine and morals taught. The fact that much of this often does not occur or is done in a very perfunctory manner explains partly why many Catholics are being lured away into the schismatic traditionalist groups� that have arisen after Vatican II.

The deficiencies of the Church are not to be blamed on Vatican II but at least partly on some Church leaders who appear to be unable or unwilling to exercise the responsibilities entrusted to them.