Posted on 07/18/2002 3:10:53 PM PDT by narses
"How do you explain a lack of belief in the Real Presence by a majority of Catholics today?"
That is a somewhat controversial thing to say.
However, even if one were to grant it for the sake of argument, one would find that those who attend Mass on a weekly basis are far more likely to believe in the Real Presence than those who don't (and the absolutely stunningly overwhelming majority of Catholics who go to Mass on Sunday do so at a new Mass).
If the assertion is true, that participating in the new Mass causes people to lose belief in the Real Presence, then we would expect that those who are most exposed to the new Mass, i.e., those who attend at least every Sunday, would have lower levels of belief than those who are much less exposed to it, i.e., those who don't attend at least every Sunday.
One must be careful how one interprets causality when all that is really known is correlation.
sitetest
AB
How do you explain a lack of belief in the Real Presence by a majority of Catholics today?How do you define a lack of belief today? Based on a secular NYTimes poll taken years ago of anyone who called himself a regular Catholic?
What were the questions asked, who was asked, etc.?
And how did the result compare to the result of a similar poll in 1960?
Unless the results of the same questions were better in 1960, there isn’t much to explain.
patent +AMDG
Yes, by all means, let's have "liturgical flexibility" Bring on the guitars and the dancing s. Liturgical FlexibilityAre you aware that Corpus Christi in Rochester is not affiliated with the Catholic Church? They schismed.
patent +AMDG
Indeed!
There is no heresy in the new rite. Rome cannot authorise heresy. But the new rite, it would seem, does not give us enough Catholic doctrine to prevent Catholics from unwittingly becoming Protestant in their thinking. As Fulton Sheen put it, "If you don't behave as you believe, you will end by believing as you behave." The new rite of Mass is capable of being carried out in a Protestant manner. Given the chronic tendency of our fallen human nature to go for what is easier, our liturgy, in the hands of the ill-instructed, will always tend to a Protestant interpretation. And Catholic liturgy carried out in a Protestant manner will lead the worshippers to Protestantism.
In fact, I've noticed that those who believe in the Real Presence most ardently in my own (Mass of Pope Paul VI) parish are those who attend most often.
Please reconcile this fact with your theory that the new Mass causes lack of belief in the Real Presence. ;-)
sitetest
No, I wasn't. Thanks.
Do you know when it happened?
However, I've heard/read about "dancing girls (and boys)" occuring in other places also. I don't have those pictures.
There was a subtle attack being made on the Tridentine Mass and those of us who attend it. I was not attacking the Novus Ordo nor did I mean to suggest that those pictures were "representitive" of anything. I was attacking the mentality that would make snide comments about the Tridentine while refusing to acknowledge the very serious abuses (not just dancing) that occur in some Novus Ordo parishes around our country.
Pax
Have you read Goodbye, Good Men? There are descriptions of the mockeries of the Mass that go on in some seminaries. In one instance, the celebrant of the Mass had some small pieces of the Eucharist on the paten and he proceeded to blow on the paten and send the pieces flying. I guess he didn't believe in the Real Presence. And he was training future priests!
Yes, patent. There really are Catholics who don't believe in the Real Presence. You are certainly free to remain in denial. I'm not debating the exact numbers, just facing the facts. How one prays affects how one believes. How do you explain the large drop in the number of practicing Catholics, the mass exodus of priests and nuns from religious life, and the huge drop in the numbers of seminarians following the change to the New Mass? Coincidence?
My emphasis added. Thanks for clearing that up. To hear some of the hard core traditionalists, you'd think every Novus Ordo Mass, in every parish, everywhere is a cesspool of sacrilege, blasphemy, ad-libbed prayers, bad music, heretical preaching, with a chorus line of dancing girls kicking it up in front of the "table".
AB
Please don't presume that your parish is representative of every parish in the United States. :-)
ELS
Yes, patent. There really are Catholics who don't believe in the Real Presence.I am aware there are, and that is a gross perversion of what I said.
You are certainly free to remain in denial.You set up a strawman position, one I didn’t take, and then accuse me of being in denial. I don’t see how this advances your claims.
Can you compare the statistics or not? That is my point, and one you duck by spitting sarcastic insults about how I think there aren’t any Catholics who don’t believe in the Real Presence and that I’m in denial.
Can you compare pre Novus Ordo statistics with post Novus Ordo statistics on the belief in the real presence?
I'm not debating the exact numbers, just facing the facts. How one prays affects how one believes. How do you explain the large drop in the number of practicing Catholics, the mass exodus of priests and nuns from religious life, and the huge drop in the numbers of seminarians following the change to the New Mass? Coincidence?Once you prove the same, I will try to address it. But you have only alleged one number (haven’t provided any proof of it). Even had you proven that number, you cannot claim that things have gotten worse over time by only providing a number at one point in time. That is logically false.
The very minimum is to provide two numbers, from similarly worded and taken surveys, at two different times. Most statisticians would suggest that without three such points in time, your contention is entirely unproven, and that even with three the possibility of statistical error is unreasonably high. But hey, go ahead and respond to my request for a valid comparison by another personal attack.
patent +AMDG
Do you know when it happened?A few years back, it wasn’t real recent but recently enough I still recognize the name.
Dominus Vobiscum
patent +AMDG
And the will is lead by the intellect. If the intellect leading the will is defective, the will chooses evil. If a Catholic has been taught (or not taught) by essentially Protestant Priests and Bishops, that Catholic will fall into disbelief because of the gravity of his fallen nature.
Those who follow Christ's Light will see everything right.
Bull Chips! You sound just like a Fundamentalist believing that the Holy Spirit is sitting on top of his shoulder guiding him into the misinterpretation of scripture.
Stop blaming anyone but those who refuse to believe.
Aside from the perversion scandal (which you still refuse to acknowledge), the lack of Catholic Instruction in Catholic Schools, Universities and Churches is even a more outrageous tragedy which has and will lead to the destruction of millions of souls. Put the blame where it should be. The half-a$$ed bishops who dominate the American Catholic Church.
"Please don't presume that your parish is representative of every parish in the United States. :-)"
It is you who are presuming, my friend. I'm not primarily relying on my personal experiences. I'm relying on research that I've seen over the years.
"If you are truly interested, I'm sure you can find the info on the Web."
You addressed this to patent, I believe, but it is you who may wish to go look up the data. Catholics who attend Mass every week are far more likely to believe in the Real Presence than Catholics who are occasional church-goers, or who don't go at all. And yet, it is the Catholics who attend each week who are most exposed to the Mass of Pope Paul VI. Go figure.
Furthermore, studies that indicate a low level of belief in the Real Presence are simplistic, and thus misleading. Often, the methodology of these studies is constructed to reduce the percentage of respondents who appear to believe in the Real Presence. It isn't hard to construct a survey in this way. I personally learned a few of those tricks in my grad school days.
Especially with a subject like the doctrine of the Real Presence, an easy way to depress the apparent number of believers is to ask the question in a theologically technical way. It is true that many, perhaps most Catholics, cannot give a theologically-complete answer as to what is the Real Presence. Heck, there are aspects of the doctrine of the Real Presence over which even orthodox theologians argue.
But if you ask, "Do you believe in the Real Presence of the Eucharist, in other words, is Jesus truly present, Body and Blood, in the elements of the Eucharist?" some of the studies I've seen indicate belief for all Catholics in the US of about 65%.
Since only about 40% (or maybe fewer) of Catholics actually attend Mass every single week (and almost all at the new Mass), knowing that the rate of belief in the Real Presence is higher for this subpopulation, it is likely that belief in the Real Presence among at least nominally practicing Catholics is very, very high.
And even among non-practicing Catholics, the rate is likely close to a majority.
Now, if you ask people about the details of the doctrine of transubstantiation, you will see a dramatic fall-off. Throw in the metaphysical terms "accidents" and "substance", and you'll drive your positive response rates right through the floor. These are philosophical terms which once had more currency than they do today. Most folks, today, are not educated in Aristotelian metaphysics.
I took undergraduate courses at the Catholic University of America from pontifically-licensed Catholic theologians, and once upon a time, I actually knew all that stuff reasonably well. But you know, I don't use Aristotelian metaphysics that much anymore, and my undergrad days are 20+ years behind, and I forgot a lot of it, and a lot that I remember, I'm kinda fuzzy on it.
So, if someone asked me a technical question about the doctrine of transubstantiation, I might unwittingly answer it incorrectly. Senior moment, I guess. And in such a survey, I'd be marked down as, "Doesn't believe in Real Presence."
But that doesn't make it so.
You presume far too much to think that most devout, practicing Catholics don't believe in the Real Presence. And since your presumption is, in fact, a fallacy, your conclusion, that the new Mass decreases in belief in the Real Presence, is left in tatters.
Charity first.
sitetest
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.