Posted on 05/10/2006 5:48:08 PM PDT by sionnsar
A great deal of attention has been given to Ron Dreher’s announcement he is considering a move to Eastern Orthodoxy. Dreher, a convert from Protestantism to Catholicism, gives as reasons for his possible change of ecclesial allegiances the fallout from the sex scandal, the lack of any real sense of Catholic belief and practice at the parish level and concern for his children’s spiritual wellbeing. Al Kimmel gives a fairly strong critique of Dreher’s possible move at Pontiications and it is fine as it goes but I believe there are a few things that may be a factor in Dreher’s case that Kimmel has not considered.
In the last few years there has been quite a move of prominent Protestants to both Rome and Orthodoxy with Anglicanism often as a transitional phase. The reasons for this often stems from the Evangelical Protestantism’s confusion over authority, its lack of theological depth, the absence of any rootedness in history, and the banality of its worship. Once one has decided to move, the question becomes where? Anglicanism might seem like a good place but the current state of the ECUSA almost rules it out entirely for an orthodox Christian. This leaves it between Rome and Orthodoxy.
For a number of reasons, Orthodoxy is more often than not the loser. The identification with various ethnic groups and the distinctly Eastern atmosphere can intimidate those considering a move in that direction. Many at least have an idea what to expect in a Catholic mass before they get in the door. Furthermore, many Catholic parishes have toned down the distinctly Catholic elements so much that the boundaries between Catholic and Protestant styles are not as great as they once were. Then of course is the Pope John Paul II factor. The late pontiff was such an admirable figure on the world stage that his very presence at the helm could convince potential converts that Rome was the right choice.
I believe a number of Protestants did not (and, in fairness, probably could not) work through every single issue in their minds before making a choice for Rome. Thus, many decided that the Catholic Church was right on so many issues that they would trust her for the remainder. Perhaps they didn’t quite get “papal infalibility” or the “Immaculate Conception” but one look at the history of the Roman Church vs. Protestantism’s confusion and it was a no-brainer.
Catholicism is much more attractive when the focus is on Pope John Paul II, Mother Theresa, and St. Thomas Aquinas than on Cardianal Law and the actions of the USCCB. Dreams of woshipping God in a stately liturgy can be dashed by one experience with the banal ICEL translation of the Novus Ordo. This is not to single out Rome. As an Anglican, I would much rather identify myself with the Caroline Divines and the Tractarians than the current apostate ECUSA. Similarly, Orthodoxy looks better when the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom is celebrated than when the infighting occurs that gave rise to the expression “Byzantine Intrigue”.
In Dreher’s case, I suspect he had a romatic view of what life in the Catholic Church would be like. Perhaps he trusted the Church to overcome his lingering questions. Now the trust has, in his eyes, been violated and perhaps his doubts about the Roman distinctives are becoming more solidified. I think there are a lot of Catholics like him - conservative, desiring an expression of Christianity rooted in history, subscribing to some variant “branch theory” (with both Rome and Orthodoxy both “Catholic”), and for various reasons having decided to trust Rome’s claims. If the scandals continue this could be a prelude to a larger shakeout but I don’t think Rome is so foolish as to let it get that far. What it does indicate is that the patience of even the most faithful Catholics in America has its limits.
That's very true. We enjoy going to different parishes when we are travelling.
However, we do more at our parish than just attend Mass. We have Religious Education, Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts, youth group, and other activities. One need not do any of these things at a Catholic parish, of course, but we like to be involved. Changing parishes because this or that element wasn't to our taste would be disruptive to our whole family.
If you think something in a parish is dangerous, as opposed to just "not ideal," then you have an obligation in conscience to go somewhere else.
The task of rearing one's children in the faith falls first and principally to oneself. The more help one has from one's parish community, the better, but a mom and a dad who do their best to practice and teach the faith are the crucial element.
Very true...but there has to be a minimum level of support from the Church in this endeavor. The average parish (save one which has now also soured) in the Archdiocese of Baltimore does not meet that minimum level, IMHO. During our whole time there, we were never registered at a parish, and I was quite reluctant to ever want to convert anyone to only have them exposed to the nonsense in these churches. I feel that we have to fix our own house first (by fix, I mean only the necessary things for salvation) before we bring anyone else in. Terrible to say, I know.
Renewal of the Church will start from the home. I feel that I fixed my own house (myself and my family) now with our recent move, but in no way will I let my guard down in rearing my children in the faith.
I think by "fine line" I was specifically referring to liturgical practices.
Examples of what would be dangerous IMO:
Priests changing the words (ad-libbing)at Mass, whether essential or not because this makes a mockery in either case.
Homilies bordering on and/or overtly heretical
For children, seeing bad example in the worship accorded to Our Lord in the Eucharist
Examples of what is not dangerous, but not ideal:
Bad music
Bland homilies
Lack of parish community
The fine line lies in what one considers to be dangerous or not. Not all will necessarily agree with my categorization above.
Persecution, therefore, will never be lacking. For, when our enemies from without leave off raging and there ensues a span of tranquility—even of genuine tranquility and great consolation at least to the weak—we are not without enemies within, the many whose scandalous lives wound the hearts of the devout... So it is that those who want to live piously in Christ must suffer the spiritual persecution of these and other aberrations in thought and morals, even when they are free from physical violence and vexation.
St. Augustine
As a Catholic, my faith tells me that the Church has a divine origin, but my own experience tells me that it must be divine because no human institution run with an equal mixture of ineptitude and wickedness would have lasted a fortnight.
--Hilaire Belloc
I'm Jewish and always will be but if I were to convert it would Eastern Orthodox. They seem more real and traditional. Much less concessions to modern life and frivolity. Their married priests make sense to me - I know not all are allowed to be married
No, we all put our lines in different places, or even have a different graph.
However, if non-Catholic churches are inside the lines, then there's a much more substantial issue. Although I respect the Eastern Orthodox (as a generality - they have lemons just like every other church), there are serious theological differences between Orthodoxy and Catholicism. They are not interchangeable. (Here I'm addressing the thread subject, rather than you personally :-).
excellent quotes, brother. Ol' Rod has gone off the deep end. Good thing for him he wasn't alive early in the 11th century when the public pederasty and homosexuality of clerics was so scandalous that St. Peter Damien had to write Gomorrah.
You're joking, right?
Nope. Something to do with what started out as a good topic(family dinnertimes), flooded into a discussion on how we look at home. Personally, I don't worship food, I eat food...
I look like a slob at home. Salespeople at the door regularly take me for the nanny, and I don't correct them :-).
We eat food here, too. I don't think Rod Dreher has enough children to really understand this point.
I'm not sure whom you're addressing as "you all," and I can't be offended at "the tendency to follow the man not the institution," because I don't know what you're talking about.
That said, my family's practice has always been to attend the closest Catholic church. The only time we would not do this would be if there were serious problems with doctrine; sometimes one just gets a moonbat priest.
I also found Rod Dreher's "CrunchyCon" stuff to be an aesthetic pose, rather than real ideas. However, that might just be farm-kid reverse-snobbery on my part :-).
I only have this to say to Mr. Dreher: the only person who can protect your children from abuse by priests (or anyone else) is YOU! The only thing you have to do to make sure that no priest ever gets his hands on one of your sons is to make sure that one of your sons is never alone with a priest. It is that simple. Every case of abuse I’ve ever read about occurred b/c the parents
trusted the priest and the child was therefore allowed to be in the company of the priest for extended periods of time with no one else present. And if he is so foolish as to assume that he can avoid having to deal with this problem by transferring his allegiance to the Orthodox (or any other Christian group for that matter),then he’s not nearly so bright as I had thought.
It also sounds to be like Dreher is angling for some increased attention from the Church. Perhaps the local priests are not “sucking up” enough.
I'll take your word for this, because I've never noticed this particular line of criticism. But I wasn't looking for it, either :-).
I have posited this idea and never get what I consider to be an honest acknowledgment of this trend.
I have known Catholics who chose a parish other than their local church, for various reasons, including the pastor. I don't know if the percentage of "non-local" attendees is significant enough to be a "trend", but it's possible.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.