Broadsword: I have been what my son refers to as a "rabid" practicing Catholic all my life (51 years). Fortunate enough to be taught by some very loving nuns and don't have the horror stories you often hear. I have been a supporter of Vatican II most of my life, still recognizing that some things might have been a bit much, but overall, thinking it was a good thing. I mean, do you really think its bad that women aren't relegated to the back of the church with their heads covered? I like that the alter faces the people and that I can understand what is being said. Having said that, I too am concerned with the drastic downward spiral that can clearly be traced back to Vat II. I cry when I think of the sin in our church.
Expect, at some point, to be crucified.
I don't recall women ever being asked to sit in the back of the Church. As for covering their heads, St. Paul said that a woman who doesn't cover her head in the presence of the Lord disgraces herself. Do you know more than St. Paul?
I'm a woman, and I never had to "stand at the back of the church with my head covered" prior to VatII. Women were active, nuns were active, married men were active. As for the head coverings, even in the late 50s, as women stopped wearing hats in the secular world (remember, prior to this, respectable women did not even go out on the street in a city or town without a hat), this was not a vital requirement. I even heard priests preach against silly things like women pinning dollar bills or Kleenex to their heads. In other words, a headcovering was a sign of respect if you could do it, but it was certainly not as important as going to Mass. Christians are not, after all, Muslims, to whom the external is vitally important.
There were problems with clericalism (that is, some of the clergy thought they were godlets - read J.F.Powers' stories for an accurate description), but I fail to see that this has changed in any way. Except perhaps now there are more people who believe they are clergy (most of the women, married men and nuns mentioned above).
"I too am concerned with the drastic downward spiral that can clearly be traced back to Vat II."
____________________
The scandals began in the 1950's if you look up the John Jay Report. Blame the rightists or the leftists, blame celibacy or the poetry of Pope John Paul II, or the Latin Mass or English Mass or whatever you like, but Vat. II is no more to blame for the immorality of Catholics than the Council of Carthage.
http://www.usccb.org/nrb/johnjaystudy/index.htm
Women were not relegated to the 'back' of the nave, but to one side or the other.
All in all, it worked very well that way.