 The Testimony of Tradition and The Least Important Council Fidelity to Tradition has been the most evident characteristic
of the Catholic Church throughout her history. In his Summa Theologica, St. Thomas
Aquinas warned us: "It is absurd and a detestable shame, that we should
suffer those traditions to be changed which we have received from the
Fathers of old." The practice of
celebrating the Eucharistic facing the people as a deliberate pastoral
policy originated with Martin Luther and was taken up by leaders of the
Protestant heresy in other countries. But where the Catholic
Church is concerned, the claim that there was ever a time when Mass was
celebrated facing the people, as an
act of conscious pastoral policy is total fantasy. The truth was
expressed with admirable clarity by Msgr. Klaus Gamber, Director of the
Liturgical Institute of Regensberg when he stated: "There never was a
celebration versus populum in
either the Eastern or Western Church. Instead there was a turning
towards the East." There is clearly no support from Tradition for a law mandating
that Mass must be celebrated facing the people, and that hence there
must be no tabernacle upon the altar to impede visibility. If such a
law had been promulgated since Vatican II it would be a condemnation of
the entire liturgical tradition of the Church, and would be highly
suspect. Any priest would have ample justification for refusing to
implement such an unprecedented violation of a tradition received from
the Fathers of old. However, no law
mandating a celebration facing the people has ever been promulgated
since the Council. The Least Important Council Before discussing what Vatican II and the post-conciliar
legislation has to say on the subject of Mass facing the people, it
will be helpful to examine the Council itself. There had been twenty
councils prior to Vatican II, but anyone reading the Catholic press
today, or listening to the typical bishop or theologian, would imagine
that no other general council had ever been held, or even that the
Church had begun with Vatican II. From
a dogmatic standpoint, Vatican II is the least important of all the
councils. It settled no disputed question, it promulgated no dogmatic
definition binding upon the faithful, it deliberately refrained from
investing any of its teaching with the note of infallibility. It
is legitimate to wonder why precisely the Council was called, and what
exactly its purpose was. Pope John XXIII claimed that he convoked it as
a result of an inspiration from the Holy Ghost, but no Catholic is
obligated to believe that this was the case. Cardinal Heenan, Primate
of the Catholic Church in England and Wales, explained in the second
volume of his autobiography that Pope John could not possibly have
foreseen the results of his decision to call a council. He was, the
Cardinal testifies, under the impression that the bishops had come
together in Rome for a short convivial meeting, but its sessions
continued for five years. God was indeed merciful in allowing the old
Pope to die before he saw the extent to which his Council, as Cardinal
Heenan put it, "provided an excuse for rejecting so much of the
Catholic doctrine which he so wholeheartedly accepted." Note that Cardinal Heenan did not accuse the Council of
rejecting the teaching of the Church, but claimed that it provided an
excuse for this to be done. How did it happen?
|
