« Church in Decline - or not? | Main | Calling Forth a Leader »
September 07, 2003
My answer...
My post immediately below this one wasn't exactly intended to be my opinion..it was more in the style of trying to summarize the zeitgeist. Do I think the Church is in decline? Actually, no more or no less than it always has been. Really. You may complain about the decline in faith among the masses, but I can't sign onto that. Superstition and paganism sprouted amidst the glories of medieval Christianity. To get closer to our own time, read Frank Sheed's accounts of his own frustration with the Church of the early to mid-20th century, as he tells stories of those who could spout the memorized catechisms but literally had no clue what they meant...even the nuns who were teaching it to others. But...but..but. Sure. But...there was the fear of Hell and there was the acceptance of authority which has all but been lost. The question worth asking is...is it really "worse" or is it a)just the same in different manifestation or b)has the current culture - more freedom of expression, less authority...made the shaky hold on faith that's going to be the lot of any large religious group more visible and more permissible to be open about?
Not that I think everything is great. My point is that I don't think it's ever been "great," in the sense of some ideal, lovely Church. If it had been, really - if it had been, would the radical transformation of 1965-c. 1972 have happened? Would it?
My suggestions for the frustrated.
1. Read history - real history of how the faith has been lived and grappled with since the beginning, and see how messy it is. Have hope in that - a sad, resigned kind of hope, but hope. And look to see who in those times brought the Church closer to Christ. Who were they? What did they do? For the most part they were those who decided to radically follow Christ and serve the poor, the sick and the orphaned. Go thou and do likewise.
2. Say the Jesus prayer a lot.
"Lord, Jesus Christ, Son of the Living God, have mercy on me a sinner."
3. Do what you have to. Homeschool. Switch parishes. Go to an early morning Mass. But in order to minimize the risk of ghettoizing yourself, do something positive, too. As Rod said, his wife's perspective is different because she's involved with a group of like-minded homeschooling moms.
4. If parish liturgy really drives you nuts, go to a local monastery or shrine, as Fr. Wilson mentioned. There is nothing wrong with this. People have done this for ages - it's why monasteries have been such an influence on the church...not because they've been enclosed, but because they draw in outsiders, teach them, serve them, etc, outsiders who then take what they've seen and spread the word.
There is a need for reform.
But we're fooling ourselves if we think there hasn't always been. It's true with us as individuals, it's true of the Church.
Posted by Amy Welborn | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451be0d69e200d8345589b569e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference My answer...:
» open book from kill as few patients as possible
This post over at open book was an answer to questions posed about the sort-of malaise that is apparent in some parts of the (especially American) Catholic Church. In some ways, especially with the sex abuse nonsense, it is a [Read More]
Tracked on Sep 7, 2003 1:42:59 PM
» Day of unrest from Camassia
This is not a relaxing weekend for me. As I write this, I am putting off going back to the... [Read More]
Tracked on Sep 7, 2003 4:22:59 PM
Comments
Good post, Amy.
Reading the history is indeed helpful in putting our troubles in perspective. I have been periodically reading a biography calle "Alphonsus de Liguori: Saint of Bourbon Naples" by Frederick M. Jones. The corruption, abuses, and ignorance in the Neopolitan Church is very similar to (and even worse in some ways) than the corruption, abuses, and ignorance of our own time. There were even problems with priests who blatently violating the rubrics of the mass to suit their own purposes!
Yet, at the same time, even with the historical perspective, the fact remains, as Father Wilson pointed out, that there has been a tremendous slide in the last 40-50 years of Catholic practice in this country. This can't be reasonably denied. At the same time, it can be argued that the abuses now have a greater impact than they did in earlier times because our culture does not have a shared Catholic Christian identity, but is instead aggressively secular. It used to be the case that one could muddle through the difficulties because one could rely on cultural Catholicsm as a kind of crutch to keep things moving along, but we don't quite have that luxury anymore.
Posted by: Patrick Rothwell at Sep 7, 2003 1:12:40 PM
Everydayness is the enemy.
Posted by: Walker Percy at Sep 7, 2003 1:45:45 PM
Another option is to fulfill your Sunday obligation at 8:30 am and then head over to your local favorite Protestant church at 11 am.
The Church may not be in decline but she sure is approaching critical times. I think--some think--clearly, something's amiss and the only answer is emphasis on Jesus and de-emphasis on the Church.
Posted by: Ono at Sep 7, 2003 1:57:57 PM
Patrick makes a good point about the aggressively secular culture. To that I would add the fact of the Information Age we're living in -- we just know far more about what is going on elsewhere -- and the rapid pace of societal change in the last sixty years. It's just a fact that in an age of rapid change, society's foundation gets troubled, and it is harder to form Christians.
But the Info Age is a blessing, too. Patrick is reading a bio of St Alphonsus. We are all heirs of the richest spiritual tradition the world has ever seen, and so much of it is right at our fingertips. One of the most useful helps to us in keeping our balance in this age is to focus on that. Pick up, for example, the excellent Carmelite Studies edition of the Story of a Soul, the Little Flower's life, and read it; if you have, get St Therese By Those Who Knew Her (Ignatius Press), the depositions given at her beatification, and see described the struggles Therese had which lie behind her autobiography.
Get "The Habit of Being," the wonderful collection of the letters of Flannery O'Connor,for not just a great read but a glimpse into how one brilliant Catholic lived her life in the Church in the 1940s-1960s in rural Georgia, and how she regarded the limitations of the Church. I couldn't recommend this more.
There are readily available classics of the interior life: several editions of Francis de Sales "Introduction to the Devout Life," the Carmelite Studies edition of "The Practice of the Presence of God" (Brother Lawrence of the Resurrection). Indeed, I'll bet we've all got books on our shelves or somewhere which once we found deeply useful, but which we've forgotten, and should really dust off and re-read.
If ever you come across a copy of "The Friendship of Christ" by Msgr Robert Hugh Benson -- what a book!! Just the first two chapters are worth the price of the whole thing.
ANYWAY - The richest spiritual tradition in the world is our legacy. No sensible person wishes to deny the reality of our problems as a Church, but we'll simply lose perspective if we're not plugged into the gifts the Church has for us. Remember what Chesterton said when a lady asked him after a lecture why it was that the Catholic Church in their day in England seemed to be the repository of all that was appalling junk in art and music.
"Oh," said Chesterton, "it all shows the wisdom of the Church. The whole thing is just so fantastic that if one didn't have these little letdowns, one would go mad."
Posted by: Father Wilson at Sep 7, 2003 2:10:45 PM
"In order to minimize the risk of ghettoizing yourself, do something POSITIVE, too." I certainly get your point, but must take umbrage (and hope all homeschoolers will, too) at the mistaken "positive-negative" dichotomy here, as you imply that suchlike as homeschooling, switching parishes, and, a fortiori, pointing out and condemning heresy among the clergy, are "negative" phenomena. Here's what the "20th century doctor of the Church," Dietrich von Hildebrand, had to say about the "intellectual fraud" of such "Positive and Negative Thinking" (chapter 6 in "The Charitable Anathema"):
"...the popular slogan uses of 'positive' and 'negative'is a distortion of the genuine meaning of the terms...When these terms are applied to attitudes of mind or to theses -- by way of suggesting an evaluation -- an intellectual fraud is committed; for they are then being used to evoke vague asociations that distract from the question that alone matters--namely: Is this attitude objectively called for? Or: Is this thesis true? To judge an attitude without consulting the object to which it refers is to ignore the question of relevance. And to praise an assertion or approval for being 'positive,' or to deride a denial or criticism for being 'negative,' tells us nothing about the truth of the affirmed thesis or the denied proposition. A true proposition should be asserted; a false proposition, denied or refuted. An attitude adequately responsive to the object in view should be recommended; one inappropriate to the object, rejected or criticized. The same principles apply to the sphere of action. We cannot characterize an action as 'good' and a decision not to act as 'bad' until we know whether the situation objectively calls for action or for refraining from action. In view of the cult of activism that is flourishing today, it is desirable to emphasize this point: not only is it just as necessary and just as morally good to abstain from evil as it is to perform a good action, but it is also as much a real response -- just as 'positive' -- as any other morally good action...Moreover, to abstain from sinning (which is motivated by love of God) is not only as 'positive' as any other good action, but is even our FIRST duty -- one that takes precedence over the accomplishment of an action that brings forth good. Likewise, to reject or refute an error is as valuable and desirable -- as 'positive' -- as to affirm or discover a truth. It is the nature of truth to exclude every contradiction of itself. Thus, the rejection of errors and falsehoods can never be separated from the affirmation of truth. The one implies the other. To give the impression that affirmations are 'positive' and denials 'negative' is to misrepresent completely the nature of judgments and propositions. This abuse of the language transforms the terms 'positive' and 'negative' into deceptive slogans and thus amounts to an intellectual swindle."
Posted by: Jon Merrill at Sep 7, 2003 3:13:52 PM
Jon,
I think what Amy's saying is that instead of wallowing in a stew, do something about it to take care of yourself spiritually - and that if you do that you are doing something positive. I don't think she meant to slam homeschooling, and in fact cited an example of someone homeschooling.
Posted by: WRY at Sep 7, 2003 4:00:38 PM
Amy, it's true that nostalgia sometimes paints a very rosy picture, which is misleading for some people. To wit, there never was a time when faith and Christian behavior was universal and of course, we must remember that.
However, it's not that this is just another chapter of the same sort thing that has gone on before. Oh, it's not that human nature has changed or the truth about Christianity has changed, but rather that communications have changed and cultural structures have changed because of technology, pressure politics, race-to-the-bottom legislation, divorce, violations of natural law, etc. We are in a post-Christian era, indeed a post-modern era, which is distinctly *different* in some ways from that which preceded it. This creates all kinds of problems. Our governmental structures, for one thing, don't operate on Christian principles any more for the first time in more than 1000 years, so for instance, we have the legality of gay marriage thing and all that surrounds it. This is just one example.
Yes, reading history is very important. Prayer is even more important. I can't talk to marginalization because I'm fighting with that myself, as many others are. As far as "going to a monastery" etc, you might have one in your area. A lot of people just don't. Here, we only have plain parishes, all with problems, punctuated by elementary schools with weird religion teachers. Period. That's it. No monastery, no relief. The only sisters we have around here are average age = prehistoric and they talk about eco-this or that, solstices and the like all the time, while they rent their grounds out to New Age groups and Sufi wannabees.
Yes, it's important to keep our perspective. BUT, we must not deny what is really happening. When 160 priests (out of about 500 in a diocese) sign a petition to try to remove the discipline of celibacy from the priesthood, it is serious. When aging nuns make their drumming circles under "sacred circles of trees," it is serious. It marks the emergence of a fault line for what may yet come. No one wants to say it, but it could happen, if we keep on going like we have been. And it may happen fast. We may need to think fast. Denial is not going to help that.
You asked whether the Church was presently in decline. I believe that the answer is NO, we are coming out of the decline we have been in through most of the 20th century. The decline already has occurred and with much pain and turmoil, we are starting to make the turn *out of* decline NOW.
Posted by: michigancatholic at Sep 7, 2003 4:30:33 PM
Thank you Jon Merril for the von Hildebrand quote.
Was he ever right on.
Posted by: Caroline at Sep 7, 2003 5:00:19 PM
Here's something that a number of the "ideologically" active types described in the Steinfels/Gibson synopsis can do: Quit telling folks to the right how things are better than you think, and you're really just nostalgic counterfeit catholics.
There's been people documenting this implosion for a while (The Wanderer, Fr. Fessio, and yes, the Remnant) and the stuff that people are lamenting here, is stuff they brought up 20 years ago, just to be Clucked and Pecked by the Conservative "types". The Wanderer. . . has been keeping the faith for a while--from Abortion & Contraception, to Liturgy, to Church Discipline--and they have a couple of lessons for those newly disheartened about how to persevere in an entirely hostile environment. Before everyone runs of to become eastern orthodox, perhaps there are a few steps short of this to learn from the "right." Starting with some humility.
Look to a Fr. Hardon, or a Fr. Fiore before giving up the (Holy) Ghost. . . .
Posted by: al at Sep 7, 2003 5:13:11 PM
Things may look bad from a "disciplinary" view of the Church: liturgies are not uniform, the pronouncements of the Magisterium are being widely ignored and the "discipline" of the clergy through celibacy has turned into a punishment for the faithful and the exploitation of their children.
But what about the Gospel message? Are not Catholics at the forefront of helping the poor and the marginalized? Do they not carry on the spiritual traditions of Jesus?
Liturgy and doctrinal pronouncements can be aids to salvation. But Jesus didn't seem to put much stock in the "discipline" of his own religious tradition. For many the Church has become an end in itself -- a competitive form of inside ecclesiastical politics -- not a means to bring souls to salvation. Jesus is the model. He is the way. To the extent that the Church points out the way, it is relevant. When it does not, it is irrelevant.
There are many good parishes out there, usually headed by a pastor who's trying to make the Gospel come alive in his parish and to keep the diocesan bureaucrats at arm's length. These good pastors have no desire and no chance to become bishops under the present system, leaving ecclesiastical governance to the ambitious and the obsequious. They know that the faith is not about governance and discipline, but about the Gospel message of Jesus.
Posted by: Jim at Sep 7, 2003 7:03:17 PM
When I was received into the Catholic Church at the Easter Vigil, the Bishop told us that he hoped and prayed that we would make frequent use of the sacraments, especially penance.I was deeply moved by his concern for my soul.I disagree with Jim's blanket condemnation of Bishops
Posted by: Timothy Young at Sep 7, 2003 8:21:52 PM
Timothy, you probably haven't been around long enough to see the picture yet. Hang in there. I hope you don't shock easily, eh?
Posted by: michigancatholic at Sep 7, 2003 8:39:21 PM
Rather a protestant sentiment there, Jim. The Church is never irrelevant, although some of her detractors are at times.
Posted by: michigancatholic at Sep 7, 2003 8:47:35 PM
I was reading about the pontificate of Gregory VII today. Talk about a turbulent period in the history of the Church! A synod voting to depose the Pope after accusing him, falsely, of adultery, heresy, etc. Imperial armies making war on the Pope. A majority of priests in northern Italy living openly with concubines and defying the Pope's attempt to enforce celibacy. Just a few of the headlines from a pontificate we now view as a major positive turning point for the Church. Each generation bemoans the challenges it faces, and some generations do face greater obstacles than others. However a close study of history does reveal that many generations of Catholics have faced, and conquered, adversities that dwarf our own. With prayer and actions in imitation of Christ there is no threat to the Church that cannot be overcome.
Posted by: Donald R. McClarey at Sep 7, 2003 9:14:51 PM
Oh, I think I have seen the picture,The BIG picture.After 49 years of wandering in the antinomian wilderness of protestantism, I'm ecstatic to be Catholic.I've already seen a few warts , but compared to what I left behind, this is Great! ( maybe adult converts are easy to please ).
Posted by: Timothy Young at Sep 7, 2003 9:31:16 PM
Timothy,
Congratulations on joining the church. May every year that goes by find your joy growing greater. I'm a convert too, Class of 1987, and I've never regretted it.
Posted by: WRY at Sep 7, 2003 9:55:10 PM
Donald: Each generation bemoans the challenges it faces, and some generations do face greater obstacles than others. However a close study of history does reveal that many generations of Catholics have faced, and conquered, adversities that dwarf our own.
That's true, Donald, and it's comforting, in a way, to learn how awful things have been throughout the Church's past. If we don't pray and fight, however, as if the survival of the Church depended on it, I fear we may peter out, as the faith has in Europe. Besides, even though the Church survived drastic crises in its history, think about all the souls lost because of the corruption in the clergy. Think of the people throughout the centuries, souls whose names are now known only to God, who gave up their Catholic faith, or even their Christian faith entirely, because of institutional corruption. It is important to retain the historical view, but also important not to let that lull us into complacency. There are souls at stake.
And besides, given the unprecedented dangers our world faces, from genetic engineering to Islamic fanatics armed with plagues and nuclear weapons, the world desperately needs the witness of the Church. As Amy said in the post that started this thread, the Scandal says to the world that rather than being about witnessing to the saving truth of faith in Jesus Christ, the bishops have been busy in what I will euphemistically call worldly pursuits.
Posted by: Rod Dreher at Sep 7, 2003 10:35:23 PM
Many good thoughts here, in many of the posts.
I thought Patrick's mention of the slide in Catholic practice over the past decades, accompanied with the increasingly secular culture which is often at odds with Christian values (e.g. right to life issues)is important.
To that I'd add the amazing and tremendous shift in emphasis from the family/community to a focus the individual which has also had its impact on Catholic practice in this country. If I do not have a healthy respect for the Church as my family in faith, or if I do not find the Church (parochially or universally) to BE my family in faith, there will be problems with my life as a Catholic.
This was illustrated, perhaps, by several remarks above that spoke of "too much emphasis on the Church and not enough on Christ." The Church IS the Body of Christ. There is always the need to re-emphasize the "of CHRIST" part, but if we see some sort of division between Christ and His Church then perhaps it would be good to think on that again.
God bless you all, and tomorrow's our Parish Feastday here, so I wish you God's blessings on the Feast of the Nativity of the Mother of God.
Posted by: fr richard at Sep 7, 2003 10:38:59 PM
Amy brings up a fascinating point when she asks whether a more open contemporary culture has made a shaky faith even shakier. I look at what happened after Vatican II as the Catholic version of what happened to the Soviet Union after Gorbachev's policies of "glasnost" and "perestroika". Those of us old enough to remember
Gorbachev know what happened: People who were forced to accept Communism now had the freedom to question it; in the end, Communism itself lost all credibility -- and a nation built on totalitarian intimidation imploded.
The same thing is happening w/in contemporary Catholicism. Many conservatives hold onto their Catholic doctrine because they had been intimidated into doing so in their youth; that's why many of them equate loyalty to the hierarchical structure with fidelity. Many liberals, now free to question, go off in all sorts of tangents that, ultimately, have more to do with intellectual fashion than Christ.
Much of this has to do with a Magisterium that for too long relied on intimidation to keep people in line, thereby preserving its own temporal power instead of relying on the salvific power of Christ to work through the Holy Spirit. When people found a freer atmosphere after Vatican II, many people found that their faith was based on nothing more than platitudes that had no basis in fact or revelation.
Contemporary Catholicism is reaping the "fruits" of a Magisterium that tried to teach through intimdation, even discouraging lay people from reading Scripture, rather than through actively mirroring Christ. As a result, the Church is in chaos. Conservatives use the Tridentine Mass as a way to turn back the clock. Liberals use intellectual fashion to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Rome tries to govern by dictat but forgets that this isn't the 12th century.
That doesn't necessarily mean the Church is "doomed". That does mean, however, that allaspects of the Church must dedicate itself to an understanding of the Gospel unfettered by man-made traditions or theological (or geopolitical) agendas. Otherwise, the Catholic Church will suffer in the 21st century what the USSR suffered in the 20th.
Posted by: Joseph D'Hippolito at Sep 7, 2003 11:53:37 PM
Fr. Richard: This was illustrated, perhaps, by several remarks above that spoke of "too much emphasis on the Church and not enough on Christ." The Church IS the Body of Christ. There is always the need to re-emphasize the "of CHRIST" part, but if we see some sort of division between Christ and His Church then perhaps it would be good to think on that again.
Father, I think what people are criticizing is not a theological truth, but the tendency to substitute, probably unconsciously, one's relationship with the living God with one's relationship with an organization or a set of rules. Of course the Church is the Body of Christ, but if one isn't careful, one will end up thinking that whatever the Church does is automatically "of Christ." If the bishop does X, Y or Z, well, it must be of Christ, because the Bishop represents the Body of Christ. You see? Ultimately we won't be judged by how many Church committees we served on, and what honors we accumulated in service to the institutional Church. We'll be judged on how well we knew, loved and served the living Christ. I imagine there are many souls who gave their lives in service to the Church in Hell now, because they never knew Christ, or they once knew him, but turned their back on him. May God preserve us all from confusing religiosity with religion!
Posted by: Rod Dreher at Sep 8, 2003 12:00:36 AM
Amy:
Just so. The Church has *always* been in crisis. It is the normal state of the Church since the whole purpose of the gospel is always to bring us to decide whether or not we shall serve God.
By the way, what does it take to get not only Frederica Matthews-Green and Terry Mattingly, but even Walker Percy to write on your blog? What's your secret?
Posted by: Mark Shea at Sep 8, 2003 12:46:04 AM
Walker Percy? She's a hoodoo sorceress, I tell ya! The Marie Laveau of Fort Wayne. You watch: she'll be channeling Cardinal Spellman here next (if he shows up, I want to ask him what he thinks of "Q--" ... oh, never mind.
Posted by: Rod Dreher at Sep 8, 2003 1:30:19 AM
To michigancatholic:
"Rather a protestant sentiment there, Jim. The Church is never irrelevant, although some of her detractors are at times."
Being dismissive, or for that matter, arrogant is not the same as being right. We Catholics have to learn the difference.
You may believe as an act of faith that the "Church is never irrelevant", but the facts sure seem to indicate otherwise.
Posted by: Jim at Sep 8, 2003 5:53:39 AM
Ono,
I surely hope you are joking. For all the problems that the Catholic Church is undergoing, I would never, never go back to my former life as a Protestant.
To pit Christ against the Church is about as unbiblical as you can get.
Posted by: Christine at Sep 8, 2003 8:13:33 AM
I have a really different perspective from most people on this thread. I work at a small Catholic college, which has an Abbey attached to it (well, actually the college is attached to the Abbey, not vice-versa). What I see is a real springtime of the Church. We have hundreds of students absolutely on fire for Jesus, the church and the sacraments. Our little school has less than 1,000 students, and about 200 of them go to daily Mass. (Although we embrace our Catholic identity, we remain a "mainstream" college--business is our biggest major, and we have intercollegiate athletics, etc.--we're not a special place like Franciscan University of Stuebenville, where you might think there was something particular about the place that drew a special kind of student). I also got to attend the national FOCUS (fellowship of Catholic University Students) conference last year, and saw literally thousands of young people, from colleges and universities--public and private--all across the country, who were also on fire. We've had about 40 vocations to the priesthood and religious life from our little college in the past few years. Also, the Abbey has a tremendous group of young priests and brothers--men who are themselves on fire in the service of Jesus Christ, and who are pouring out their lives in daily service to the Church and its people. After about a 20-year dearth of vocations, the tide seems to have turned for them.
To tell the truth, until I came here, when I was in a "regular" parish, I was completely unaware of this phenomenon. Now I just feel so hopeful about the Church and its future. I think you'll see the change first in your local youth ministry office.
I think the scandals may turn out to be the darkness before an amazing dawn.
Posted by: Kim at Sep 8, 2003 8:37:02 AM
