Faithful Catholics Returning to Humane Vitae?

The Annual Catholic Directory Years 1944-2003 | 7/10/03 | Me

[Hermann the Cherusker]

Year	Infant Baptisms	Marriages	Cuumlative Baptisms	Cummulative Baptism	Cummulative Baptisms/Marriage	Annual Baptism/Marriage	Ratio of Catholics Married In Church
1943	722434	289548		4699880	3.14	2.45	1.12
1944	710648	249140	14770410	4725321	3.26	2.83	1.17
1945	705557	245261	15404338	4796173	3.34	2.88	1.21
1946	705557	245261	16012434	4870393	3.42	3.01	1.18
1947	738314	345772	16659248	4937943	3.49	2.62	1.13
1948	907294	394593	17243217	4903826	3.60	2.38	0.90
1949	937208	373191	17658238	4838683	3.73	2.53	0.82
1950	943443	338512	18031443	4817950	3.81	2.88	0.78
1951	973544	328317	18362938	4836438	3.84	3.10	0.72
1952	1018303	319846	18580236	4869050	3.84	3.37	0.67
1953	1077184	303444	18701181	4920359	3.80	3.61	0.63
1954	1094872	303187	18719169	5022707	3.73	3.83	0.63
1955	1161304	313652	18711155	5136791	3.63	3.84	0.60
1956	1204982	324907	18638314	5249448	3.52	3.95	0.59
1957	1284534	325249	18488265	5341465	3.40	4.02	0.54
1958	1307666	314989	18178802	5431703	3.27	4.27	0.53
1959	1344576	319992	17787700	5523622	3.14	4.11	0.51
1960	1313653	319481	17319430	5588659	3.02	4.23	0.53
1961	1352371	312811	16900769	5638311	2.91	4.23	0.51
1962	1322283	311655	16433323	5677977	2.82	4.24	0.52
1963	1322315	329450	16001717	5707651	2.73	3.98	0.51
1964	1310413	352458	15575553	5718690	2.65	3.62	0.52
1965	1274938	357000	15175646	5711753	2.60	3.34	0.53
1966	1190842	360929	14844340	5705498	2.57	3.16	0.56
1967	1139248	371155	14636084	5697944	2.54	2.95	0.57
1968	1095172	405792	14461885	5674234	2.53	2.68	0.58
1969	1086858	417271	14341730	5616415	2.53	2.61	0.56
1970	1088463	426309	14202540	5545117	2.54	2.47	0.56
1971	1054933	416924	14067400	5467108	2.55	2.34	0.57
1972	975071	415487	13954365	5392624	2.58	2.21	0.59
1973	916564	406908	13917241	5318759	2.62	2.15	0.60
1974	876306	385029	13946980	5248766	2.69	2.32	0.61
1975	894992	369133	14115008	5205093	2.76	2.40	0.60
1976	884925	352477	14367992	5172605	2.83	2.53	0.58
1977	890677	341329	14663774	5152596	2.90	2.63	0.54
1978	896151	340489	14966219	5137056	2.94	2.67
1979	910506	345521	15106117	5111954	2.98	2.73
1980	943632	350745	15225305	5071818	3.02	2.80
1981	982586	353375	15310954	5023992	3.06	2.73
1982	965049	347445	15372672	4971199	3.11	2.81
1983	975017	347973	15448460	4912347	3.15	2.72
1984	947668	345973	15486880	4838074	3.22	2.76
1985	953323	348300	15561226	4759618	3.29	2.70
1986	941898	342440	15639146	4680352	3.36	2.74
1987	937947	341622	15704964	4594475	3.43	2.77
1988	946303	336915	15772507			3.10
1989	1044334	341356				3.36
1990	1147976	336645				3.51
1991	1180707	332468				3.59
1992	1193122	325789				3.18
1993	1036049	315387				3.26
1994	1029694	305385				3.37
1995	1029281	302919				3.45
1996	1044304	300582				3.46
1997	1040837	288593				3.51
1998	1013437	273700				3.73
1999	1022014	267517				3.85
2000	1031243	269034				3.75
2001	1007716	256563				3.92
2002	1005490	241727

The data above are from the Annual Catholic Directory of the United States and Canada. The data is for all American Catholic dioceses, including the eastern rite jurisdictions.

Column 1 is the year of the data (the data for the previous year appears in the Catholic Directory of any given year).
Column 2 is the number of Baptisms for that year.
Column 3 is the number of Marriages for that year.
Column 4 is a 15 year moving total of Baptisms.
Column 5 is a 15 year moving total of Marriages.
Column 6 is the ratio of Column 4 to the previous years Column 5.
Column 7 is the ratio of Column 2 to the previous years Column 3.
Column 8 is the ratio of twice Column 2 25 years later to Column 1 of that year.

[sinkspur]

However, in general, mixed Marriages do not work out, and Catholic Tradition discourages and forbids them.

Catholic practice is much different, however. As you know, dispensations are now frequently granted for Catholics to marry non-Catholics in non-Catholic churches, with the Protestant minister as the sacramental witness.

[narses]

"That's for the better."

That's debateable.

[Maximilian]

However, that is another valid explanation, which I would accept as possible accounting for some, but not all, of the increase.

Let's remember that they're aren't any fewer Catholic today than there ever were. There's just fewer Catholics at Mass on Sunday, in the convents, in the seminaries, in Catholic schools, etc. But the population of Catholics is larger than ever. And nearly all of them go through the ritual (which they probably consider no more religious than putting up a Christmas tree) of having their children baptized.

the number of marriages has plummeted since 1990 by around 30%

Actually it's a lot worse than that. Compare the peak year of 1970 with 426,309 marriages compared to 2002 with 241,727. That's a drop of 43% or nearly half. So with statistically more self-identified Catholics in the US, we have just more than half as many marriages.

Meanwhile look at the number of baptisms which peaked in 1961 at 1,352,371 and then dropped to 876,306 in 1974 before rebounding to 1,005,490 in 2002. Compared to 1974 it's true that this does represent an outright increase in baptisms. But it does not mean that Catholics are having more kids. There are a lot more "Catholics" in the United States today than there were in 1961, even if many of them are co-habitating instead of getting married. (Does your source book for this data have a number for total Catholics?) So the birth rate is still much, much lower.

Turning the drop in marriages into a good thing by using it as the denominator in the equation does not make sense anymore. It was a valid comparison for as long as the percentage of illegitimacy was so low as to be negligible. That would apply until 1964 or so. But today you're comparing apples and oranges.

[Loyalist]

Indeed. If my father hadn't converted in order to marry my mother, I doubt I would have had any faith at all growing up in a mixed marriage.

[sinkspur]

That's debateable.

The Church doesn't stop people who want to marry from marrying; they just marry outside the Church, without the graces of the sacrament.

Mixed marriages present challenges, to be sure, but, as long as the couple is aware of them, what's the problem? Should the Church stop marriages between Catholics if one of the Catholics never goes to Mass?

How totally free from sin does the couple have to be?

[Hermann the Cherusker]

Your personal observations jibe with many that I have made as well. My mother-in-law tells me similar story's from her work in the Church in Butler County, PA.

They also go along with anecdotal societal trends on more young women wishing to be stay-at-home mom's of larger broods. Recall that the US Census found the number of stay-at-home mom's is on the rise.

My feeling is that there are not a lot more very large families (6 children and up), but that there are a lot more with three, four, and five than people quite realize now. Since many of these are young (like me), they may well have more. The parishes around me have relatively few very large families, but I do notice a large number with 3-5 children (i.e. a mini-van full). I wonder if the size of the mini-van is playing a part in this?

You can put my wife and I in the never contracepted category.

I've also noticed that as there are more people now marrying in their 30's, some of these have chosen to complete eschew birth control and let God take His course, since their years of fertility are relatively short, and it would be unlikely they have over four children. One man married at 31 that I know at work who is now in his 40's has three kids, and would have had four but for an ectopic pregnancy. Another similarly married at 30 has three kids with a fourth having miscarried between numbers 2 and 3.

I actually only know of two contracepting couples who married in the Church of my currently "having babies" friends, and both of them are in mixed-marriages with a Protestant woman. The contraceptors I do know seem to more frequently be the fallen away types.

[Maximilian]

Pius XI's condemnation (that is what it is) caused good people like my parents to be married in the rectory of Annunciation Church in Houston in 1944.

There's nothing wrong with being married in the rectory. It would be much better if there were more quiet ceremonies of that type today instead of the disgusting extravaganzas where obscene amounts of money are spent while everyone knows that the bride and groom have been sleeping together for the past few years. Starting your marriage with simplicity and humility and with a word of warning sounds like a reasonably good program. Looks like it worked in the case of your parents. The contrast between the blatant hypocrisy of most modern marriages with the humility and sincerity of your parents' marriage is very striking and edifying.

Max, you know very well that the Church's attitude toward mixed marriages has changed, significantly. That's for the better.

The new catechism still discourages mixed marriages. And while it's true that the leniency of dispensations has increased, I do not believe that it is a good thing by any means. I have observed far too often, including in my own family, the truth of Pope Pius' statement that mixed marriages lead to indifferentism which leads quickly to a loss of faith for the children.

Ironically, mixed marriages were less of a danger back in the days when they were discouraged so strongly. Catholics clung to their faith with a bulldog grip and were likely to convert their spouses. Today the danger of indifferentism is many orders of magnitude greater.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

As you know, dispensations are now frequently granted for Catholics to marry non-Catholics in non-Catholic churches, with the Protestant minister as the sacramental witness.

I am aware of this, I've been to two such weddings. This seems to me a grave mistake though. The mixed marriages I know that are working best were married in the Catholic Church. The worst ones are the ones married in Protestant Churches under the dispensation; which I attribute to the problems with marrying Protestant Women as Catholic Men. Catholic men are not notorious for strength of faith.

[Maximilian]

Should the Church stop marriages between Catholics if one of the Catholics never goes to Mass? How totally free from sin does the couple have to be?

You're probably aware that this is a growing trend -- pastors refusing to allow couples to be married in Church if they are clearly not practicing the faith and only want the church as a suitable backdrop for their ceremony.

In the sentence that just immediately preceding the excerpt from Casti Connubii above, Pope Pius XI said:

This religious character of marriage, its sublime signification of grace and the union between Christ and the Church, evidently requires that those about to marry should show a holy reverence towards it, and zealously endeavor to make their marriage approach as nearly as possible to the archetype of Christ and the Church.

[ACAC]

It seems I have received many answers. For the record, as long as both parties are Christian, I don't even consider it a mixed marriage.

[ACAC]

My wife and I chose a church we both liked after we were married for a few months. We decided we could not function in different churches. It has worked out very well.

[ACAC]

I do not think we had 2 "different faiths." We just went to 2 different churches. However, we compromised and solved that "problem."

[sitetest]

Dear Hermann,

"My feeling is that there are not a lot more very large families (6 children and up), but that there are a lot more with three, four, and five than people quite realize now."

I don't know about the first assertion. It may just be that we're homeschoolers, and Catholic homeschoolers seem to often have rather large families. Six and more aren't unusual. We have some homeschooling friends who are our age, with five children, the youngest is under two. The wife seriously intends for more. She's just trying to keep up with the rest of the bunch.

But you're probably right among folks sending their children to Catholic school, or public school (though our K of C family of the year this year has seven children, all in, or destined for Catholic school).

Folks my age (I'm 43) usually have smaller families, and I know several who have gone as far as sterilization. But the folks about ten years younger seem to be "going for the gusto."

"I've also noticed that as there are more people now marrying in their 30's, some of these have chosen to complete eschew birth control and let God take His course, since their years of fertility are relatively short, and it would be unlikely they have over four children."

As well, when we were young, we were told that fertility would hold up well at least until about age 35. There are a lot of baby boomers who found out the hard way that fertility declines rapidly past one's late 20s.

Perhaps the younger ones are learning from the hard-learned lessons of others.


sitetest

[ACAC]

Speaking of home schooling reminds me of something. I believe the Catholic position in birth control is finding its way into some evangelical families. This is happening without the encouragement of any evangelical churches. Many evangelical and fundamentalist families that homeschool have 6-9 children. This is almost the norm among this group now. They may not come right out and say birth control is wrong, but they feel uneasy about it and don't use it.

[Desdemona]

As well, when we were young, we were told that fertility would hold up well at least until about age 35.

That somewhat depends on the genes. One of my great-grandmothers had six after 35, in six years, and the great-great grandmothers on the other side had four and five after 35. It's never a guarantee, but when one is dealing with God, anything is possible.

[sinkspur]

The contrast between the blatant hypocrisy of most modern marriages with the humility and sincerity of your parents' marriage is very striking and edifying.

It was forced on them. They wanted a Church marriage, but the old pastor said no.

My dad converted, but not until he got away from that parish. He resented the hell out of what he always saw as a humiliation.."The Church treated me like a second-class citizen."

Ironically, six years after he converted, an assistant pastor at another Church in 1959 did, indeed, call him a second-class Catholic because he was a convert.

Dad never darkened the door of a Church again, until he made his final confession and went to Mass a couple of times before he died.

Lots of people were hurt by an Arrogant Church.

The Church should be humble; it has every reason to be.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

And nearly all of them go through the ritual (which they probably consider no more religious than putting up a Christmas tree) of having their children baptized.

Do you have evidence for this? The suggestion makes me curious enough that I'm going to ask some Priest friends about it. Maybe Deacon Sinky or TM can tell us from their ministerial experience if they get many single mom's for Baptisms.

the number of marriages has plummeted since 1990 by around 30%

Actually it's a lot worse than that. Compare the peak year of 1970 with 426,309 marriages compared to 2002 with 241,727. That's a drop of 43% or nearly half. So with statistically more self-identified Catholics in the US, we have just more than half as many marriages.

The marriages come out of the baptisms/births of 25 years previous, in general, so the tracking is pretty good of the trends. The present dearth of marriages is due to the so-called "Birth Dearth" of 1968-1988. That the number of baptisms is holding steady as Marriages plummet is a good thing family-size wise. It was precisely those people married in the peak wedding years of 1968 through 1973 who had the fewest children.

What is remarkable is that the upwards bubble of Baptisms from 1952 to 1964 did not produce the slightest blip in Marriages from 1977 to 1989 - they held steady at 350,000 per year, even as the number of Catholic theoretically eligible increased by 30%. It is clear a large portion of that cohort has left the Church.

Meanwhile look at the number of baptisms which peaked in 1961 at 1,352,371 and then dropped to 876,306 in 1974 before rebounding to 1,005,490 in 2002. Compared to 1974 it's true that this does represent an outright increase in baptisms. But it does not mean that Catholics are having more kids. There are a lot more "Catholics" in the United States today than there were in 1961, even if many of them are co-habitating instead of getting married.

I disagree here, because I do not see major changes in illegitimacy behavior between 1983, 1993, and 2003. The 1990's were noted for a slowing in illegitimacy, not a speed up. Yes, the number of Catholics is up, but that is because births plus immigration plus conversion have outnumbered deaths plus apostacies. It is like society though, in that Baptisms are holding steady even as the number of Catholics of child-bearing age is clearly dwindling, since it is now the "Birth-Dearth's" turn.

(Does your source book for this data have a number for total Catholics?) So the birth rate is still much, much lower.

It has the total registered, which now stands at around 62 million or so. I did a calculation of apostasies in the Church before from 1965 to 1993, and came up with the number of 8.5 million, including some funny jumps in the total number of Catholics in a few years. The calculation was annual change in Total Catholics - Baptisms - Converts + Deaths. This has significantly slowed the growth of the Church in the US since Vatican II.

On the other hand, the number of converts is up markedy in the past ten years, to an annual level of 160-180,000 in the US for at least the past five years, the highest ever, and a doubling of the numeric rate of 20-30 years ago.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

You can also thank the influence of Dr. Charles Provan. His excellent booklet helped me convince at least three Protestant Couples who had no interest in listening to the "Scarlet Whore of Babylon."

[sitetest]

Dear Desdemona,

Certainly, many folks have children well into their 30s, and even well into their 40s. I was born when my father was 35, and my mother was 33.

But statistically, the drop-off in fertility after age 28 is large. Partly as a result of the more common delay of childbearing into one's 30s, about one out of seven married couples who wish to have children wind up unable to conceive. Factor that into Hermann's statistics, and see what it does to the per couple ratios.


sitetest

[Desdemona]

Well, as my mother had five, all after the age of 28, I'm thinking that there are other factors in the infertility we don't know about.