I lived through those years, though I was young. (I received my first communion in 1968, and remember the introduction of the new Mass in 1970.)
You have to understand that Catholics before 1960 were taught the faith -- formally and informally -- in a very clear (that's good) manner, but also in a very rigid (hmmm) manner, with a lack of distinction between dogma, doctrine, common theological opinion, discipline, "best practice," pious custom, etc. (and that's bad).
Also, for many of them, their religious training stopped abruptly with confirmation in 8th grade.
(Catholics between about 1960 and 1985 were often taught garbage or nothing, so they are even worse off. That's my generation.)
So when one tiny part of this edifice was suddenly thrown away, it seemed like the whole thing was up for grabs.
For example, my father was an altar boy back in the early 1930's. He was highly scandalized by the idea of receiving the Eucharist from a lay person, because (as he quite correctly noted) he was not even allowed to touch the chalice as an altar boy, but could only handle it through the veil.
At one point, I remember him saying flatly that receiving Communion from a layperson was no different than eating a cracker; IOW, he was embracing the (completely heretical) idea that the efficacy of the Host depended on the minister who gave it to you!
In the 1960's and 70's, a "tiny part of this edifice" was not thrown away, huge chunks of it were tossed out overnight. (Go to an indult Tridentine Mass at an FSSP parish sometime, and imagine going from that to a tacky, irreverent Novus Ordo in barely 10 years, and you'll see what I mean.)
Because of the lack of distinction that had been made during their catechesis between different levels of teaching and practice, people erroneously assumed that, if lots of liturgical custom and practice could be thrown out, lots of moral theology could also be thrown out (and shortly would be).
Good explanation. Thanks for taking the time. (I didn’t realize you were that much older ... ;-)
My parents were (Protestant) children in the 1930’s and 40’s, and both knew plenty of Catholics. Dad was even engaged to one, around 1955! Neither of them remembers any of their peers’ being able to explain why they did or believed any of the things non-Catholics noticed as being different. That seems to me to reflect a significant failure in what is now presented as a Golden Age.
As a first-generation Catholic product of the John Paul II years, I’ve missed a lot of historical turmoil and baggage! I’m sure I’ve also missed plenty that was beneficial, but I don’t, subjectively, miss it because it was never a part of my or my family’s experience.