[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?

[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.

[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!

[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.

[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?

[Hermann the Cherusker]

Again, in all areas there has been a dramatic decline. In 1965 there were 1.3 million infant baptisms, in 2002 there were 1 million. (In the same period the number of Catholics in the United States rose from 45 million to 65 million.) In 1965 there were 126,000 adult baptisms - converts - in 2002 there were 80,000. In 1965 there were 352,000 Catholic marriages, in 2002 there were 256,000. In 1968 there were 338 annulments, in 2002 there were 50,000.

The numbers of Infant Baptism divided by the number of Marriages imply a long term trend of ~4 children per Catholic family. I find the steadiness of that figure interesting with respect to the use of Birth Control by Catholics. Traditionally moralists used to set 4 children as a minimum number to strive towards in marriage.