Catholics Need to “get on Trend” - Part III - Vatican II
Vatican II: Reforms, Modernist Misapplications, and the Restoration of Sacred Practices
The Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) was convened by Pope John XXIII with the stated goal of aggiornamento (bringing up to date) while remaining faithful to resourcement (a return to the sources of Catholic tradition). The Council Fathers sought to renew the Church through a deeper engagement with Sacred Tradition, particularly in the liturgy, catechesis, and evangelization. The intent was never to introduce Modernism, which had already been condemned by Pope St. Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907). Rather, Vatican II aimed to deepen reverence, foster greater participation, and make the sacred mysteries more accessible while maintaining continuity with Catholic heritage.
However, in the United States, and in many other parts of the world, the post-conciliar implementation of Vatican II was marked by confusion, misinterpretation, and, in some cases, outright rejection of Church teaching. Modernist influences, which sought to redefine Catholic doctrine in subjective and relativistic terms, crept into the reforms, resulting in widespread liturgical abuses, doctrinal ambiguity, and a secularization of Catholic identity.
I. Sacrosanctum Concilium: Vatican II’s True Vision for the Liturgy
The most significant document concerning liturgical reform was Sacrosanctum Concilium, the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, promulgated on December 4, 1963. The document made clear that:
1. The Mass must remain centered on Christ’s Sacrifice. — The Eucharist is “the source and summit of the Christian life” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 10). The reform sought to deepen the faithful’s awareness of the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
2. Latin remains the normative language.— While the vernacular was permitted for pastoral reasons, Sacrosanctum Concilium (SC, 36) states that “the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.”
3. Gregorian Chant holds pride of place — “The Council emphasized that “Gregorian chant is specially suited to the Roman liturgy and that it should be given pride of place in liturgical services” (SC, 116).
4. Active participation is primarily spiritual — Vatican II called for “full, conscious, and active participation” (SC, 14) but did not imply external activism. Rather, participation was meant to be a deep internal engagement with the mysteries of the Mass.
5. Reverence must be maintained - The Council encouraged noble simplicity, but this did not mean a rejection of sacred art, vestments, or traditional practices that inspire devotion (SC, 124).
Even after the promulgation of the Novus Ordo Missae by Pope Paul VI in 1969, these principles were intended to guide its celebration. However, in the years following the Council, these clear directives were ignored or misapplied, often in ways that contradicted the intent of Vatican II.
II. Modernist Influence in the Novus Ordo Mass: How It Crept In and Its Effects on Catholic Worship
The Novus Ordo Missae (New Order of the Mass), promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1969, was intended to embody the true spirit of Sacrosanctum Concilium, the Second Vatican Council’s Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy. The Council Fathers sought a more accessible, yet still reverent, liturgy that would encourage full, conscious, and active participation by the faithful while maintaining continuity with Catholic tradition. However, in many places ”especially in the United States” the implementation of the Novus Ordo Mass was heavily influenced by Modernist ideas, leading to significant liturgical abuses and a loss of reverence.
Modernism, which Pope St. Pius X condemned in Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907) as “the synthesis of all heresies,” seeks to subjectivize faith, reinterpret dogma according to contemporary thought, and downplay the supernatural in favor of human experience. These tendencies have had a profound effect on the celebration of the Novus Ordo Mass, introducing distortions that were never part of Vatican II’s original intent.
1. The Loss of Latin and the Vernacularization of the Mass
What Vatican II Actually Said
Vatican II explicitly stated that Latin should remain the normative language of the Roman Rite. Sacrosanctum Concilium (SC, 36) affirms:
“Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.”
It also permitted the use of the vernacular in specific parts of the Mass, such as the readings and some prayers, for pastoral reasons. The Council Fathers never intended for Latin to be completely abandoned.
How Modernism Distorted This Reform
In the wake of Vatican II, many bishops and theologians argued that Latin was outdated and inaccessible to modern people, and they quickly moved to eliminate it entirely. This move reflected a Modernist tendency to conform the Church to contemporary culture rather than uphold its sacred tradition and intent.
By shifting entirely to the vernacular, the universal nature of the Mass was weakened, and the perception of liturgical continuity with past generations was lost. This also opened the door to endless improvisations in translation, some of which distorted theological meanings. For example, the English translation of the words of consecration, “for many” (pro multis), was changed to “for all” a significant theological deviation only corrected in 2011.
2. The Suppression of Gregorian Chant and the Rise of the “Contemporary Choir.”
What Vatican II Actually Said:
Vatican II was clear that Gregorian chant should hold “pride of place” in the liturgy:
“The Church acknowledges Gregorian chant as specially suited to the Roman liturgy: therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 116)
The Council also encouraged the preservation of sacred polyphony, such as that of Palestrina, and called for new sacred compositions to maintain a spirit of reverence.
How Modernism Distorted This Reform
Instead of preserving sacred music, many liturgical reformers, influenced by Modernist thought, replaced chant and polyphony with folk, pop, and even rock music. This was justified under the premise that the Mass should be “relevant” to modern sensibilities. Hymns with ambiguous or Protestantized theology replaced traditional Catholic hymns, often focusing more on human themes rather than on God’s majesty and transcendence.
This musical shift led to a desacralization of the Mass, where worship felt more like a social gathering rather than an encounter with the Divine. Additionally, many modern liturgical songs emphasized a horizontal, community-centered experience rather than a vertical, God-centered act of worship.
On critique of the performative nature of modern Catholic Music Ministries that involve guitars, drums, tambourines and vocal solos from the Ambo, more modern Catholic Choir leaders or participants will defend the practice suggesting they are “performing for Jesus” thereby justifying this shift in focus. But, this very attitude constitutes a fundamental misunderstanding of the role of music in the Mass.
1. The Mass Is Worship, Not a Performance
The sacred liturgy is the highest act of worship, in which everything must be directed toward the glorification of God and the sanctification of the faithful. Music in the liturgy is not entertainment but an integral part of worship.
—Sacrosanctum Concilium (1963),§112: “Sacred music is to be considered the more holy in proportion as it is more closely connected with the liturgical action, whether making prayer more pleasing, promoting unity of minds, or conferring greater solemnity upon the sacred rites.”
2. Sacred Music Is a Liturgical Act, Not a Personal Offering
-Music in the Mass is not an external addition or a personal artistic expression; it is part of the Church’s public worship. Calling it a “performance” distorts its nature.
-Tra le Sollecitudini (1903), §1: “Sacred music, being an integral part of the solemn liturgy, participates in the general scope of the liturgy, which is the glory of God and the sanctification and edification of the faithful.”
3. Avoiding a Subjective or Emotionalist Approach
-The purpose of liturgical music is to facilitate objective worship, not to create a concert-like atmosphere or appeal to personal emotions.
—Pius XII, Musicae Sacrae (1955), §43: “Music destined for sacred rites must have holiness and beauty of form: from which its special efficacy is derived to move souls to God in devotion and better dispose them for the fruits of grace belonging to the celebration of the Most Holy Mysteries.”
4. The Choir Leads Prayer, It Does Not Entertain
—The role of the choir is to assist the faithful in prayer, not to take center stage. Even beautiful polyphony and chant must remain a humble act of service, not a display of skill.
—Sacrosanctum Concilium (1963), §114: “The treasure of sacred music is to be preserved and fostered with great care. Choirs must be diligently promoted, especially in cathedral churches; but bishops and other pastors of souls must be at pains to ensure that whenever the sacred action is to be celebrated with song, the whole body of the faithful may be able to contribute that active participation which is rightly theirs.”
5. Liturgical Music Requires Reverence and Humility
—Those involved in sacred music must approach their role with humility, recognizing that they serve the liturgy, not their own artistic ambitions. Calling it a “performance” risks introducing vanity.
—Pius X, Tra le Sollecitudini (1903), §22: “The singers in church, even when they are laymen, are taking an active part in the sacred liturgy, and accordingly, they must fulfill their office worthily, with devotion and decorum, and they should be trained to be not only proficient in the art of singing but also devout and edifying in their conduct.”
3. The Reorientation of the Priest and the Loss of Ad Orientem
What Vatican II Actually Said
Vatican II never required priests to celebrate Mass facing the people (versus populum). The practice of celebrating ad orientem (facing east, or toward God) was the norm for centuries and was implicitly assumed by the Council.
How Modernism Distorted This Reform
Many reformers, particularly in the U.S. and Western Europe, insisted that priests must now face the people at all times. This change, while never mandated, was imposed as part of a broader Modernist effort to downplay the sacrificial nature of the Mass and emphasize it instead as a communal meal.
The result was a shift in theological perception:
—The priest was no longer seen as leading the people in worship toward God but rather as a “presider” over an assembly.
—The altar became a table rather than a place of sacrifice.
—The loss of ad orientem contributed to the desacralization of the Mass by removing an ancient visual connection to worship as a sacred offering.
4. The Introduction of Communion in the Hand and the Loss of Eucharistic Reverence
What Vatican II Actually Said
Vatican II did not authorize Communion in the hand. The Council documents make no mention of it, and the Church’s long-standing tradition was for the faithful to receive Communion on the tongue while kneeling.
How Modernism Distorted This Reform
Communion in the hand was introduced through disobedience rather than legitimate reform. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, certain dioceses in Europe, particularly in the Netherlands and Germany, began promoting Communion in the hand without Rome’s approval. Pope Paul VI, while reluctant, eventually allowed limited exceptions where the practice had already become entrenched. However, Modernist liturgists in the U.S. quickly spread the practice under the pretext of “restoring ancient tradition,” despite historical evidence showing that the early Church had abandoned Communion in the hand to protect the Eucharist from profanation.
This change led to:
—A decline in belief in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
—Increased instances of profanation and sacrilege, including the theft of consecrated Hosts.
—A loss of Eucharistic reverence, as people treated Communion more casually.
5. The Rise of Improvisation and Liturgical Abuses
What Vatican II Actually Said
The Council affirmed that the rubrics of the Mass must be followed faithfully:
“Regulation of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church Therefore, no other person, not even a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority.” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 22)
How Modernism Distorted This Reform
Instead of following the rubrics, many priests and liturgical directors began improvising Mass prayers, inserting spontaneous reflections, and altering words. This reflected a Modernist mindset that downplayed objective truth and embraced subjective experience. Some priests even added elements that were entirely foreign to Catholic worship, such as:
—The use of secular elements, like clowns or balloons in the liturgy.
—Non-Catholic ministers assisting in the sanctuary.
—Dramatized homilies or “liturgical dance,” which have no basis in Catholic tradition.
These innovations have led to a loss of uniformity in worship and have made the Mass feel different from parish to parish, creating confusion among the faithful.
III. How a Parish Can Live Out the Spirit of Vatican II
A parish seeking to end liturgical abuses and realign itself with the true spirit of Vatican II must take deliberate steps to restore reverence, catechesis, and sacred tradition.
Step 1: Restoration of a Sacred Liturgy
—Reintroduce Latin in the Ordinary of the Mass, as Vatican II intended.
—Restore Gregorian Chant and Sacred Polyphony, as SC 116 commands. Remove secular and contemporary music. The 50 year experiment of “relevant music” is a catastrophic failure. It is time to end the experiment and remove the drums and guitars.
—Reestablish Ad Orientem Worship for at least some Masses to direct worship toward God.
—Encourage Kneeling for Holy Communion and reintroduce the Communion rail when possible.
—Eliminate Improvised Liturgical Practices, including hand-holding, applause, and casual liturgical innovations.
—Train Altar Servers in the Traditional Role of reverent service at the altar.
Step 2: Deepen Eucharistic Reverence
—Promote Eucharistic Adoration weekly, with Benediction.
—Catechize on the Real Presence, emphasizing the sacrificial nature of the Mass.
—Encourage Confession by expanding hours and preaching about the necessity of the sacrament.
—Emphasize Fasting Before Communion, reviving the lost sense of preparation.
Step 3: Restore Catholic Identity
—Return to Traditional Vestments to visually reinforce the sacred.
—Bring Back Sacred Art and Statues to foster a sense of transcendence.
—Reinstitute Traditional Devotions, such as processions and Marian consecrations.
—Ban Non-Liturgical Activities in the Sanctuary, such as lay reflections or secular presentations.
Step 4: The Old Guard Problem — Addressing Resistance from Parishioners
—Explain the Reforms Clearly— Many resist change because they have been misinformed. Use parish bulletins, homilies, and study groups to explain why these reforms align with Vatican II.
—Offer Gradual Transitions—Implement changes slowly to help people adjust and provide explanations as to the need and reason for the changes.
—Engage Lay Leaders —Train catechists and parish volunteers in authentic liturgical theology.
—Provide Alternative Worship Options —Introduce a reverent Novus Ordo to give parishioners the opportunity to experience sacred liturgy.
—Be Patient but Firm — Pastors must expect resistance but remain committed to restoring authentic worship. The sheep require a shepherd who is compassionate but true compassion comes from clarity—not compromise on Truth.
IV. Here’s Where Catholics do need to “Get on Trend”
In recent years, the Catholic Church has seen a dramatic rise and expansion of Traditional Latin Mass communities. A survey reported by Crisis Magazine in 2021 examined attendance at TLM across various parishes from January 2019 to June 2021. The findings revealed a 27% increase in the number of parishes offering TLM and a 34% rise in average attendance per Mass. Overall, TLM attendance experienced a 71% surge during this period. While TLM attendees represent a small fraction of the Catholic population—only about 4% of U.S. parishes offer TLM—the growth within these communities is significant.
In contrast, studies indicate a decline in Mass attendance among Novus Ordo Mass communities. Gallup polling data shows that weekly Mass attendance among U.S. Catholics decreased from approximately 75% in 1958 to 25% by 2002. This decline suggests challenges in engagement and retention within NOM congregations.
Surveys focusing on younger Catholics reveal that TLM communities are attracting a youthful demographic. A study highlighted by the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter found that 98% of TLM attendees aged 18 to 39 attend Mass weekly, a stark contrast to the approximately 25% in the same age group attending NOM. This trend suggests that younger Catholics are increasingly drawn to the traditions and reverence associated with the TLM.
Does this mean that the Church needs to abandon the Novus Ordo Mass? Of course not. It means the Mass needs to reflect the tradition and reverence that is required in order to strengthen the faith AND the faithful.
The ancient principle Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi—"The law of prayer is the law of belief"—teaches that the way we worship shapes what we believe. This maxim underscores the profound connection between liturgy and doctrine, showing that a sacred and reverent liturgy is essential for preserving and strengthening the Catholic Faith.
In recent decades, the Church has witnessed a decline in faith and practice, particularly in regions where the liturgy has suffered from irreverence, casualness, and innovation detached from tradition. While the Novus Ordo Mass, as promulgated by Pope Paul VI, is a beautiful, valid and licit form of worship, its widespread abuse has weakened the faith of many Catholics. The solution is not to abolish the Novus Ordo but to restore it to the reverence it was always meant to have—celebrated ad orientem, with sacred music, proper silence, and a clear sense of the sacred.
A reverent Novus Ordo, in harmony with tradition, would form the faithful in true Catholic belief. When the Mass is treated as a sacred offering rather than a communal gathering, it reorients Catholics toward the transcendent reality of the Eucharist. This restoration is necessary for the Church’s renewal because belief in the Real Presence, moral teachings, and Catholic identity itself are all strengthened when the liturgy reflects divine worship rather than human-centered celebration.
A Church that prays reverently will believe and live rightly. The answer to today’s crisis of faith is not found in liturgical rupture but in fidelity to Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi. Restoring reverence to the Novus Ordo is not merely a preference; it is a necessity for the future of the Catholic Church.