www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Catholic church will continue to shrink if faith is not followed

http://blog.cleveland.com/pdopinion/2009/04/catholic_church_will_continue.html

Catholic church will continue to shrink if faith is not followed
By Martin Dybicz April 05, 2009

Dybicz is a theology teacher at St. Ignatius High School.

After reading the opinions expressed in The Plain Dealer these last few weeks, I am wondering what the reaction will be when consolidation takes place again in another 25 years, making this one look like small potatoes.

If present trends continue, consolidation will take place then for the same reason it is taking place now: Those who are leading Catholic institutions are not proclaiming, nearly enough, that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is only fully articulated in the "Catechism of the Catholic Church."

The dirty little secret is that many of these "leaders" do not believe that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is fully articulated in the Catechism. As a result, too many Catholic institutions are led by "cafeteria Catholics" (who pick and choose what they want from the faith) for, what is too often the case, other "cafeteria Catholics" (who like the morphing of the Catholic Church into the Unitarian Church).

The state of the diocese is reflected in the opinions expressed in The Plain Dealer. What was their general thrust? That the promotion of all the truths of the Catechism, including conversion of non-Catholics, would suffer from parish consolidation? Or that pet agendas will no longer be as easy to pursue?

Another mistake being made by the mostly lackluster leadership -- clerical and lay -- of Catholic institutions over the past 40 years (as pews and seminaries have emptied) is that "cafeteria Catholicism" is a generational phenomenon.

Unlike their "cafeteria Catholic" elders, who financially support the church while still needing a "caring" priest to tell them they don't have to be Catholic all the time, younger Catholics will not be as conflicted. Younger Catholics will either stay in the church for both the challenge and the comfort that the faith in its integrity provides, or they will leave for something else that calls for commitment to an unadulterated, unapologetic identity. Look at the average age of those at Mass on Sunday.

This is not to predict institutional growth if the faith in its integrity is preached and taught. Those who hear the Gospel will continue to have free will to accept or reject it. This is also not to predict the collapse of "Catholic" institutions that have sold their souls. Some have learned that they can survive if they can inspire loyalty for reasons other than Catholic identity. But it is harder for parishes and grade schools to play this game than it is for high schools and colleges. And those that do survive won't deserve to.

"Catechism Catholics" know that the war has been won -- the Kingdom of God is coming. What remains to be seen is how many battles the faithful (to the entire Catechism) must fight, and even lose, for their Lord along the way.

To the unfortunate expression "cafeteria Catholicism" we are now asked, God help us, to add the expression "Catechism Catholicism". A little sanity might be helpful.

"Cafeteria Catholicism" is itself a relatively new expression, but it refers to a phenomenon which has been around for a very long time - probably as long as the Church herself. I don't think that they had cafeterias in Western Europe in the seventeenth century, but they certainly had Catholics - often in high places - who managed to take what they liked and ignore what they did not like. That's just one example; there is no shortage of others.

"Cathechism Catholicism" is a more recent expression, and the phenomenon is at least somewhat more recent - I would date it to the aftermath of the Council of Trent, but that could be a bit late. But anyway, the notion that the Gospel is articulated only in a Catechism is downright grotesque - did Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John not articulate the Gospel? Did the Church not know what she believed until Denziger came along to tell us? Did the Holy Fathers of the Church not instruct and teach us? Is Catholicism-in-one-volume really a desirable or achievable goal?

Try again. Catholicism is a good deal richer - infinitely richer, in fact - than either a cafeteria or a catechism. Both of these have their uses, but the exclusive use of the cafeteria would not produce joyful eating, and the exclusive use of a catechism would screen us off from access to the profundity of Holy Tradition (or is that the real goal of those trying to foist "catechism Catholicism" on us?).

As for the pretended fear that the Church will shrink, wither away, or whatever if we don't all subscribe to Catholicism for Dummies, may I remind our participants that people have been writing obituaries for the Faith since the Church began - and, surprise, we're still here.

"Thou bulwark of those who hope on Thee, maintain the Church, which Thou has established by Thy most Precious Blood".

Fr. Serge

Father, bless !

Well said !

-- John

Bless you, Father Serge. The term "Cafeteria Catholicism" is all too frequently used as a stick with which some beat others who do not hold their particular interpretation of "Catholicism". All too frequently, it is used as a cover for "integrism", a fancy way of not being able to see the forest for the trees. As an Eastern Catholic, all too often, I am accused of "Cafeteria Catholicism" because, in living the Tradition, I follow practices, use theological expressions, and hold beliefs different from those in the Catechism, which is another way of saying Roman Catholicism = "Real" Catholicism, and we Eastern Catholics are merely allowed to follow our quaint rituals by sufferance.

Vatican II may have eliminated the Praestantia ritus latini, but the mindset lives on in many of the Latin faithful.

Blessings are always welcome - thank you!

While you are correct that "the mindset lives on in many of the Latin faithful", what's worse is that it also lives on in far too many of our faithful!

God bless you too.

Fr. Serge

Father, bless.

There is another point to be made, however.

Christ guaranteed that the Church would continue, but it is not guaranteed that the Catholic Church has to remain a world-wide institution of about a billion or so members.

For a long time (500s-1500s), Christianity was limited mostly to Europe and the Middle East and parts of Central Asia and a little bit of Africa.

During that time (500-1500s), the Roman Catholic part of the Church was gradually lessened in geographical scope to Western Europe (after various schisms and the rise of Islam).

That kind of shrinkage can happen again. Currently, much of Western Europe is no longer Christian. Many historically Christian countries around the world are becoming increasingly secular. And within Christianity, the Evangelicals seem to growing most of all.

Here in the U.S., the Roman Catholic portion of the Catholic Church saw (in the 2008 CARA study) has only 31% of adult Roman Catholics attend Mass on any given Sunday; and only 20% regularly attend Sunday Mass. The membership of the Eastern Catholics, meanwhile, is not exactly expanding.

So, there is a cause for real concern. The sky isn't falling. But, the Gospel --especially in its Catholic and Orthodox forms-- is not proving persuasive with a lot of people. Instead, we seem to be in period of contraction in some ways. People aren't going to Mass or Liturgy as much as before; people aren't joining the priesthood and religious life as much as they were; people are leaving to become Evangelicals or secularists. The questions are Why and What can be done to reverse this?

-- John

What I find interesting is that so many who accuse others of "cafeteria Catholicism" are themselves guilty of picking and choosing what they will believe. That is, they may hold to the truth regarding artificial contraception and abortion and the Real Presence, but they defend torture, preemptive war, vengeance, nationalism, etc.

We should all strive to live the Gospel to its fullest, as articulated by, yes, the Catechism of the Teaching Church. I suspect, though, that if we did so we would be so countercultural that the Church would actually shrink, not grow in numbers. Of course, those who remain would have larger families, eschewing artificial contraception.

I would like Iconophile to identify by name people guilty of the abuses he outlines above. I hear this argument frequently, but only through the use of tendentious definitions, special pleading and begging the question. When pressed for specifics, the "seamless garment" bunch always seem to bump up against the Church's teachings regarding the relative competence of the secular and spiritual authorities and the need for prudential judgment. In this regard, I suppose we could call him another "Cafeteria Catholic".

Being perfectly honest , I think we can all think of people who pick and choose - and sometimes they are people in Authority.

Not all are members of this Forum - naming names would not be wise

"What can be done to reverse this?"

The traditional approach has always involved cooperation between the Church and the secular government. The former would teach from the pulpit that failure to attend services was a grave sin that will send you straight to hell where you will be tormented by demons in fire and brimstone for all eternity. At the same time, the Church would enlist the secular government to impose civil and criminal penalties for failure to comply, including fines, imprisonment, and--in the most serious cases--death. The result was extremely high attendance, for as long as this system was in place. As soon as it was removed, attendance began to fall. Whether the concept was sound in the first place is open to debate. The ante-Nicene Fathers believed that true belief cannot be coerced, and the Church seems to have returned to that view.

In the immediate post-Constantinian period, the Church gained adherents rapidly, mainly because the state's support of the Church made conversion appear the way to social and political preferment. I suppose we could try to go that route, but I don't see it happening soon. In any case, the great majority of those new converts proved to be very shallow in their commitment, poorly catechized, and prone to backsliding and all sorts of superstitious beliefs. In fact, that could be said about the majority of the Christian faithful between, say, the 5th and the 18th centuries. It could very well be true today.

So look on the bright side--those who do attend Mass or Liturgy regularly are there because they sincerely want to be there, not because they are afraid of punishment (temporal or eternal) and not because they think it will win them any temporal benefits. Also, just to put things in perspective, 30% weekly attendance is phenomenally high as compared to the 5-10% that prevails throughout Western Europe. Even in Orthodox strongholds such as Greece and Russia, the number of self-affirmed faithful who attend services weekly is less than 10%--possibly lower than 5%.

"Being perfectly honest , I think we can all think of people who pick and choose - and sometimes they are people in Authority."

Picking and choosing is both necessary and inevitable, since the Church cannot and does not anticipate all contingencies. We do not live by the Law, but are guided by the indwelling Holy Spirit, which shall lead us into all truth. In many areas, the Church has spoken definitively, and its teachings have become integrated into the Tradition; but in many others, the Church has not yet made up its mind, or has not even considered them, because they have not come up or lie outside of its competence. In such areas, we are called upon to use our discretion, being guided by prayerful discernment and the voice of the Spirit. However, one must have an informed conscience, and one must be willing to stand by one's decision and take the consequences. The Church's authorities should be given the benefit of the doubt. However, when the Church teaches or declares something that appears contrary to Tradition or violates the tenets of one's conscience, then one has the obligation, after prayerful discernment, to take a stand, and to act.

Heck, it even says so in one of our catechist formation books, "Shown to Be Holt: An Introduction to Eastern Christian Moral Thought" (pp.67-68).

FATHER SERGE:

Father bless!!

To echo our brethren here--well said!!

The Church has shrunk in some places and grown in others and always seems to be like a candle that is about to be snuffed out only to flame up brightly in another place.

We have only to look at the UGCC to find that people will go underground if they need to in order to maintain their baptismal commitment. I remember well a story that my great grandmother told me of their village in Alsace being under Protestant rulers at one time. After about 70 years the Catholic Faith came out of the woodwork, so to speak. The Lord spoke of His "little flock" and I, for one, have no fear that He will find at least some faithful people when He returns.

Thank God for your faithful witness and thank you.

BOB

AMEN,... and I believe this is an excellent (aka: spiritually edifying) post with excellent thoughts to wrap up this thread without argument, but with positive faith in the power of God through the Church (whether Eastern or Western) and its faithful.

In Christ,
your fellow Moderator,
Alice

Shrink?
Now wait a minute! Where do you get those statistics?
From my last understanding the Church grew by 200 million members and now this year alone 150000 are to become Catholic in the United States alone, (That number being just the adults coming into the Church.)
Stephanos I

Yes - 150000 entering the Church - that's terrific .

BUT how many will leave it - oh not officially by telling someone - but just drift away quietly ?