Index of Leading Catholic Indicators

Una Voce America ^ | June 2003 | Una Voce America

[Maximilian]

Here is the article again, having deleted the last line which had provided a link to a website selling the book. The moderators pulled the first posting for being a "solicitation," but this interview is the top "Headline News" story on Seattle Catholic this morning.

[Maximilian]

Let's try this again. Excellent article provides the statistical documentation regarding the true situation in the Church. In a short interview, he refutes the "post hoc" canard as well as the other justifications for the collapse since Vatican II.

[Loyalist]

PING.

To underscore the point more clearly: the United States probably has suffered least drastically under the post-conciliar decline in the West.

[Notwithstanding]

Or is this?

[Notwithstanding]

[OpusatFR]

"Here’s another objection. Some people might say that you’re making a post hoc, ergo propter hoc argument - just because something happened after the Council doesn’t mean it was caused by the Council..."

I'm not that smart by any means, but the fruit of a thing is what we judge. That my kids had lots of problems finding Catholic wives, not CINO's but acutal practicing Catholic wives tells a lot. And I'm sorry, but it is absolutely vital to our family that the girls they marry are ~Catholic~.

[ex-snook]

Thanks for the repost.

"just because something happened after the Council doesn’t mean it was caused by the Council. "

I think he might have dismissed this too readily. Was Vat II itself the 'spirit' of some zeitgeist? (Zeitgeist is German for "the spirit of the age,").

I have noticed the absence of younger people in Church membership groups (Knights of Columbus, at retreats, Holy Name and Altar Societies are done gone with the wind). Political party choices becomming 'independent'. However, soccer fields, movies and dance recitals are booming. It's parent choice - but what drives the choice? Is it really for the children or for the parents?

Find what has destroyed 'commitment' and I think the answer will be closer to explaining the statistics.

[ninenot]

Was Vat II itself the 'spirit' of some zeitgeist?

Interesting question.

[Aquinasfan]

And I'm sorry, but it is absolutely vital to our family that the girls they marry are ~Catholic~.

Can they wait ten years for my daughters? ;-)

At age 8, my oldest knows that she's supposed to look for a Catholic husband so that they can raise Catholic children.

[Gerish]

Have not read the book yet, but will look into it.

My take on this - the year the Church starting falling apart? 1968

Reason: HUMANAE VITAE!

[OpusatFR]

LOL! Too young, alas, but I do have some very nice eight and nine year old nephews that are coming along nicely!

[sitetest]

Dear Aquinasfan,

"Can they wait ten years for my daughters? ;-)"

LOL. I may have a solution for you. They are nearly 9 and 6, respectively. The older wants a smaller family. Under 10: the younger doesn't understand why the older is so limited in his imagination.


sitetest

[ultima ratio]

Some of those who use the "post hoc ergo propter hoc" argument try to have it both ways. They claim Vatican II is the most important event in modern Church history while at the same time they deny it had any influence at all on all the bad statistics. It won't fly.

[Maximilian]

They claim Vatican II is the most important event in modern Church history while at the same time they deny it had any influence at all on all the bad statistics.

As a recent article here said, "Will we maybe discover another cataclymic event that happened in the Church between 1962 and 1966?"

[dsc]

"Using pretentious arcane words to buttress your argument"

Isn't it funny that the word for that is "sesquipedalianism?"

[OpusatFR]

LOL! I had to check that one out. That's a William Buckley $10 one.

[attagirl]

I have noticed the absence of younger people in Church membership groups (Knights of Columbus, at retreats, Holy Name and Altar Societies are done gone with the wind

Sad, but true. In our parish, the Rosary Society is the hospitality committee. It does NOT pray the Rosary! I refused to join.

[Robert Drobot]

Yours is a great opportunity.

Begin distributing handouts on the Rosary - copy them from the web. Do it weekly. Watch for incremental changes. The Rosary and a Latin/English Sunday Missal ( in the anticipation of a return to oldest of Roman Catholic traditions ) are two wonderful gifts the hospitality committee can buy, and distribute freely to interested parishioners of your parish.

Create the interest.

Shake off the stagnation of a passive-social parish in favor of an active faith-based parish. You have been blessed with a task. Go with it!

[Diva]

I can only agree with what Cardinal Ratzinger said: “We find ourselves faced with a progressive process of decadence. ... It is incontrovertible that this period has definitely been unfavorable for the Catholic Church.”

First, thanks for posting this article. I "Poped" in 1978 and spent several decades trying to find the Catholic Church I had seen in all those movies from the 40s and 50s. I didn't know much about Vatican II but since I became a Catholic I have heard many explainations as to why the Church in America is in the condition it is in...not healthy to say the least. But, recently, I'd say in the past three years I've heard one from a very traditional (still inside the Church) friend and I find it interesting to say the least. He claims that Vatican II was the "fall-back" position. In other words there was a lot of up-heaval within the Church heirarchy that most of the faithful were completely unaware existed. This coincides with another argument I've read concerning what happened at the Council. This one suggests that two of the three Cardinals who set the agenda and controlled the flow of discussion were radical in their desire for change. They were also quite intelligent in the manner and use of words in the Counciliar documents leaving lots of "wiggle room" so to speak. What do ya think?