Posted on 12/28/2013 3:59:04 PM PST by NYer
According to recent demographic surveys, it seems there are presently 30 million people in the U.S. who identify themselves as “former Catholics.” That figure is both surprising, and, for Catholics, disheartening.
Over the past 50 years or so, a profound change, other than that effected by Vatican II, has taken place in the Catholic Church. It might be described as the phenomenon of “vanishing Catholics.” The Canadian philosopher, Charles Taylor, has identified four major challenges facing the Church today. First on his list is the exodus of young adults from the Church. According to recent demographic surveys, it seems there are presently 30 million people in the U.S. who identify themselves as “former Catholics.” That figure is both surprising, and, for Catholics, disheartening. It represents a little less than 10 percent of the total population of this country. It also means that had those persons remained Catholic, approximately one in three Americans would be identified as Catholic. Only two religious groups represent a larger percentage of the U.S. population: Protestants (cumulatively) and current Catholics.
This phenomenon is disheartening not only for bishops and priests, but also for faithful Catholics generally. Many older Catholics are saddened at the sight of their children and grandchildren abandoning the Church.
Questions naturally arise. What has caused such a massive defection? How might one account for this phenomenon? It hardly seems possible that any single factor could explain a phenomenon of such magnitude. Various reasons for people leaving the Church are well-known. Many of them have been operative from the earliest times of Christianity. In his first letter to Timothy, St. Paul reminds him that “The Spirit has explicitly said that during the last times some will desert the faith and pay attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines …” (1 Tm 4:1-7). In his first letter to the Corinthians, Paul speaks of dissensions and divisions among the faithful (1 Cor 1:10-16).
From the first centuries up to modern times, there have been doctrinal differences (heresies) which led to great numbers separating themselves from the Roman Catholic Church. Many others have left the Church for what can be described as practical reasons, rather than doctrinal differences.
Among the latter, there are many who separated themselves from the Church because of marriage problems. There are those who left because they became greatly dissatisfied with inadequate preaching, uninviting liturgy, and minimal hospitality in their parishes. It seems worth noting that expecting church attendance and public worship to be therapeutically satisfying often leads to disappointment and eventual alienation.
Not a few have left the Church because of real or perceived mistreatment by bishops or pastors. Reactions have a way of becoming overreactions. An overreaction to clericalism and paternalism in the Church resulted in autonomy becoming absolute. Evelyn Underhill offered a helpful analogy in this regard. She likened the Church to the Post Office. Both provide an essential service, but it is always possible to find an incompetent and annoying clerk behind the counter. Persons who expect all representatives of the Church to live up to the ideals proposed by the Church will typically become disillusioned and leave. Persons with such expectations would have left the Church of the Holy Apostles.
Most recently, a cause for many leaving the Church is the scandal of clergy sexual abuse. This has been a stumbling block not only for those directly affected, but for Catholics generally. Because of the questionable role played by a number of bishops, their moral authority is diminished. The time when bishops could command is past. Now, they can only hope to persuade and invite. Loyalty to bishops had been widely identified with loyalty to the Church. As the former loyalty diminished, so did the latter.
Clearly there are times when the Church is more of an obstacle than a help to faith. At Vatican II, the Council Fathers pointed out that the Church is always in danger of concealing, rather than revealing, the authentic features of Christ. Often enough, members of the Church’s leadership have been guilty of a sin typical of many religious teachers—namely, being more concerned about preservation of their authority than about the truth.
While specific reasons can be cited, it is helpful to recognize several underlying attitudes that are operative. (1) There is an anti-dogmatic spirit which is suspicious of the Church’s emphasis on fidelity to traditional teachings. (2) There is the widespread belief that one can be free to ignore, deny, or minimize one or more received doctrines without feeling compelled to break with the Church. (3) There is also the belief that, guided by their own conscience, regardless of how that matches—or fails to match—generally accepted Catholic teaching, persons can develop their own understanding of what it means to be Catholic. Someone has coined a phrase that describes persons with those attitudes, calling them “cafeteria Catholics,” i.e., those who pick and choose what to accept of official Catholic teaching and ignore the rest.
Two questions arise in the face of the phenomenon of “vanishing Catholics.” One question is of a more theological and ecclesial level: are those departed to be considered heretics or schismatics? A second question arises at the practical level: how can those who have left be reunited with the Church? Regarding the first question, it is worth noting that, while speaking of dissension and division among the faithful, and of separation from the community of believers, the New Testament does not make a distinction between heresy and schism. Since the definition of the Pope’s primacy of jurisdiction, it is difficult to see how there can be a schism that is not a heresy.
According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (§2089), heresy “is the obstinate, post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and Catholic faith, or it is, likewise, an obstinate doubt concerning the same.” Schism is “the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff, or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.” The Theological Dictionary, compiled by Karl Rahner and Herbert Vorgrimler, defines heresy as “primarily an error in matters of faith. The heretic takes a truth out of the organic whole, which is the faith, and because he looks at it in isolation, misunderstands it, or else denies a dogma.” “Schism occurs when a baptized person refuses to be subject to the Pope, or to live in communion with the members of the Church, who are subject to the Pope.”
In any case, given the variety of reasons for people leaving the Church, the degree of separation, and especially assuming good will on the part of those leaving, it is difficult to classify them as heretics or schismatics. Church authorities have the right and the duty to take measures against heresy and schism when those become evident. Clear denial of a dogma cannot be tolerated. But between this and a purely private, material heresy, there are many shades. Not every challenge to accepted theology is heretical. There are many partial non-identifications that endanger faith and unity but do not rise to the level of schism. Nor does every act of disobedience to human laws in the Church imply schism.
While speculative questions about heresy and schism are significant and need to be addressed, they pale in comparison to the practical question of how those departed can be reunited with the Church. That question is as complex as are the reasons for people leaving the Church. That question is further complicated when one addresses the question of the underlying attitudes that are operative.
Obviously, the Church must work at removing any obstacles to reunion. With Vatican II, that work was begun. The Council recognized the Church is semper reformanda, always needing to be reformed. The actual return of individuals requires something more than an adjustment in Church practices or new programs. It is a matter of God touching the individual with his grace.
A final question that can prove troubling is how the massive defection from the Church is to be reconciled with God’s providence. This is simply one of many instances in which we are challenged to believe in an omnipotent God, who is also a loving, provident Father. Providence is not an occasional, intrusive, manipulative presence, but one that is with us both in tragedy and in joy, in the joy that consists not so much in the absence of suffering, as in the awareness of God’s presence. To find the strength to experience calmly the difficulties and trials that come into our lives is a tremendous challenge. If, however, we are able to do that, every event can be “providential.” In a sermon on the feast of the Ascension, Pope Leo the Great said: “For those who abandon themselves to God’s providential love, faith does not fail, hope is not shaken, and charity does not grow cold.”
There can be a very subtle, almost imperceptible temptation to think we know better than God how things should be. We can be like the naive little girl, who, in her prayers, told God that if she were in God’s place, she would make the world better. And God replied: “That is exactly what you should be doing.”
A very long post to tell me we need extra- biblical writings and traditions to come to a priest hearing confessions. It is your tradition that is fine. However, to tell others who look to the Gospels and epistles on confession that they are in error and retaining sin as some do here, is man passing judgment on another man for looking to the Holy Spirit inspired Words of God for guidance, doctrine, reproof..
You can quote fallible men all day including popes and what matters is what is Holy Spirit inspired scriptures.
“Until the church starts kicking out some politicians I find no reason to be in the pew.”
How about to receive the Body of Christ?
I never had a church to leave. What I left was a emptiness of not knowing who my savior was. I still listen to
Hank Williams, but now I don’t have to cry into my beer over the emptiness of not knowing the Lord.
I wandered so aimless, life filled with sin
I wouldn’t let my dear Saviour in
Then Jesus came like a stranger in the night
Praise The Lord, I saw the light
I saw the light, I saw the light
No more darkness, no more night
Now I’m so happy, no sorrow in sight
Praise the Lord, I saw the light
Just like the blind man, I wandered along
Worries and fears, I claimed for my own
Then like the blind man, that God gave back his sight
Praise the Lord, I saw the light
I saw the light, I saw the light
No more darkness, no more night
Now I’m so happy, no sorrow in sight
Praise the Lord, I saw the light
I was a fool to wander and stray
For straight is the gate and narrow the way
Now I have traded, the wrong for the right
Praise the Lord, I saw the light
I saw the light, I saw the light
No more darkness, no more night
Now I’m so happy, no sorrow in sight
Praise the Lord, I saw the light
Words and Music by Hank Williams
Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound,
That saved a wretch like me.
I once was lost but now am found,
Was blind, but now I see.
T’was Grace that taught my heart to fear.
And Grace, my fears relieved.
How precious did that Grace appear
The hour I first believed.
Through many dangers, toils and snares
I have already come;
‘Tis Grace that brought me safe thus far
and Grace will lead me home.
The Lord has promised good to me.
His word my hope secures.
He will my shield and portion be,
As long as life endures.
Yea, when this flesh and heart shall fail,
And mortal life shall cease,
I shall possess within the veil,
A life of joy and peace.
Yes, when this flesh and heart shall fail,
And mortal life shall cease;
I shall profess, within the vail,
A life of joy and peace.
When we’ve been there ten thousand years
Bright shining as the sun.
We’ve no less days to sing God’s praise
Than when we’ve first begun.
“mass is scripture filled is bogus?”
What???
There is not one thing in the masss that is not scripture filled
Today’s mass:Intoit is Wisdom 16 14:15 and Ps 82:1
Starts (Extraordinary form)
The mass IS scripture
Why does the mass anger you?
Hoc est enim Corpus Meum
This is my body??
It is in scripture !!!!
For the bible idolators among us
Wis. 18:14-16
look them up and they are right for the time
“mass is scripture filled is bogus?”
What???
There is not one thing in the masss that is not scripture filled
Today’s mass:Intoit is Wisdom 16 14:15 and Ps 82:1
Starts (Extraordinary form)
The mass IS scripture
Why does the mass anger you?
Hoc est enim Corpus Meum
This is my body??
It is in scripture !!!!
For the bible idolators among us
Wis. 18:14-16
look them up and they are right for the time
ye believe means to DO ACT the commandments and the beautitudes!!
Work them !!! Do them!!!
Beautiful song and I have always loved it. Sang it in church not long ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYMLMj-SibU
That is more the Easter Orthodox model, but in reality rather than minimizing the role of the pope and magisterium, both are exalted by Catholics due to their need for interpretation.
No, that is not true. The Orthodox do also follow the historic Catholic model, but that is because they are historically Catholic. That shouldn't surprise anyone. But it is the Catholic approach to doctrine and dogma, and is why the Church was such a stalwart of dogmatic reliability for almost 2000 years. The abandonment of that truly Catholic understanding of the faith has created all the chaotic dissonance of recent past.
And looking for what has been accepted as true for all that time is quite restricted with much of a full universal sense, and esp. at the time of the Reformation there was a lot of variance.
Yes, but it was not variance arising out of a historic understanding of the Church, but from one of innovation. It was a reinterpretation of the faith from humanistic ideals, fueled by the Enlightenment, and as such was an artificial twisting of doctrinal reliability. Fortunately the Church survived that trauma, but only to unimaginably capitulate on most of the same issues four hundred or so years later. Talk about inexplicable.
The claimed "unanimous consent " hardly ever actually true, if at all in much of a full sense. And there was and is later disagreement and need for interpretation as to what the Spirit speaking through the Church throughout history and all time.
Here you buy into a very common error with your statement of unanimous consent. Go back and look at my post and you will see I rejected that notion out of hand. It has never been Catholic. It is a straw man. The Church has held and taught the apostolic faith handed down through the Spirit, and at times it was largely a minority one. Consider the period of the Arian heresy for example. However, it was never doubted what the orthodox faith was because it could be found attested to by the Church as a whole throughout even the early period. Yes, many individuals dissented, but that didn't change the witness of the Church through which the wheat could be sifted from the chaff. Your unanimous consent is not, and has never been relevant.
Thus if you hang around here much, you will see RCs basically invoking the argument you thought was a bit of a loaded statement, and that i then refuted.
This is a very strange assertion which causes me to wonder if you actually read my above post, or the previous one to which you replied.
Are you SSPX or something?
No, I am a layman. I have never been to any traditionalist services because I have spent my 40 years in the desert. But, I do believe that the Church didn't fall out of the sky in 1964, or 1864 for that matter. Anyone hoping to understand the faith must look beyond their own culture and their own contemporary time and seek the truth which is always held. No, again, not unanimous consent, but consistent 2000 year witness, which is not the same thing at all, but much more meaningful. In a revealed religion, such as Christianity, tradition is not an option, but requisite. If you sever yourself from the faith of history you cannot know the historic Christ. That is true for people who call themselves Catholic as much as it is for all believers.
Amen to the Didache- it also contains elements of the mass and CONFESSION
sorry for the double post
Sorry for the misspells - bedtime!
Our Lord Jesus Christ opened the Gate on the cross. WE GET THROUGH the gate if we MERIT it as his sheep,
Sheep who screwed up — not let in - Lord Lord? we believe but messed up our WORKA??? SORRY!! Too easy keep baaaaaaing!!!
Oh well - do considee Rev, 21-27 and our Lord giving the power to his apostles.
The psalmsts were pre ressurection
Tamanby hall - Kennedy;s etc. CORRUPTION
But protestants are corrupt as well we live in a fallen world
Brothers are cousins - Yo bro”
If Jesus had a sibling line we wou;ld know about it for sure
“...Mary sinless...”
Understand the meaning of Grace for a moment. LUke tells us in the BIBLE that Mary is full of Grace. Anyone in a state of Grace does not have sin. Period. IT IS IN THE BIBLE!!!!
The Lord Jesus Christ was not a divine doorman! By His shed blood, our sins are paid in full. He is our redeemer, our atonement is through Him, we access His grace through faith not by works, because by works shall NO ONE be justified. Sheep who "screw up" don't morph into goats. They remain sheep and Jesus is the good shepherd who gives his life for the sheep. He gives to us eternal life and we shall NEVER perish nor will anyone pluck us out of His hand.
"A prince, while he is a little child, is presumably as willful and as ignorant as other little children. Sometimes he may be very obedient and teachable and affectionate, and then he is happy and approved. At other times he may be unruly, self-willed, and disobedient, and then he is unhappy, and perhaps is chastised—but he is just as much a prince on the one day as on the other. It may be hoped that, as time goes on, he will learn to bring himself into willing and affectionate subjection to every right way, and then he will be more princely, but not more really a prince. He was born a prince" (C.I.Scofield, Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth).
So you would read Romans 10:9 thusly?
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus,and believe DO ACT the commandments and the beautitudes!! Work them !!! Do them!!! in thine heart that God raised Him from the dead,thou shalt be saved?
Do you believe the bible?
Colossians: 124
OUR sins are not paid in full. He is our Redeemer our Atonement is through Him, we access his Grace thlough Faith AND Works.
See James 2:10, 22 and 26
Read them!!
Sorrow for sin MUST show itself throgh works.
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.