The decline of the Catholic Church in the United States and in Europe is apparent to anyone who looks at the statistics. The American statistics would be comparable to the far worse European ones if it were not for the influx of Hispanic, Vietnamese, and Filipino Catholics. Catholics of European descent are a vanishing race.
The 2009 Catholic directory reported:
—There were 191,265 church-recognized marriages in the year ending Jan. 1, 2009, more than 5,000 fewer than the year before.
— Confirmations numbered more than 622,000, down about 8,500 from the previous year.
— First Communions numbered nearly 822,000, a drop of about 1,300.
— Infant baptisms totaled more than 887,000, down by almost 16,000.
— Adult baptisms and receptions into full communion totaled more than 124,000, a decline of more than 12,000 from the previous year.
This decline in sacramental practice occurred when the number of Catholics was, according to the Church directory, increasing.
The decline in some places (such as Quebec) began before Vatican II, but the years after Vatican II have seen an accelerating decline. Some blame the Council itself, saying that the Church was doing fine and should not have changed. Others say that the failure to make enough changes is the cause of the decline.
The proponents of more changes want the Catholic Church to follow the example of the Episcopal Church in accepting married priests, women priests, homosexual marriages, contraception, abortion, lay governance etc. But the Episcopal Church is in even steeper decline. Why should the Catholic Church not follow the same path if it adopts the same policies?
Those who want the Church to return to 1950 point to the relative stability or success of conservative Protestant churches. But the worship of these churches is often either charismatic or media-saturated, about as far from the 1950 Tridentine mass as one can get.
From my limited point of view, I think that the sudden and autocratic changes in Catholic life which were imposed autocratically by the Vatican on the advice of a handful of theological experts, was one source of the decline. Catholics had developed habits: the Latin mass, Marian devotions, fish on Fridays, the Baltimore Catechism. Suddenly, overnight everything was gone. It is always harder to start a new good habit, and many people just drifted away. Whatever the value of the reforms, the way they were imposed was bound to cause damage.
In an attempt to overcome the hostile, fortress mentality that characterized Catholicism, Vatican II opened new doors to ecumenism and to a less hostile attitude to other religious and philosophies. But this was rapidly interpreted to mean indifferentism: one religion is as good as another, the differences mean little or nothing.
The legalism that characterized 1950 Catholicism has been succeeded by antinomianism especially in sexual matters: anything that is socially acceptable goes. The Catholic Theological Society has defended about any sexual perversion that one can imagine, and lay Catholics have assimilated the message.
Larry R. Petersen, Gregory V. Donnerwerth in “Secularization and the Influence of Religion on Beliefs about Premarital Sex” (Social Forces, Vol. 75, 1997) analyze changes in attitudes to pre-marital sex among Catholics and Protestants and conclude:
The findings indicate that among conservative Protestants who attended church often there was no decline in support for traditional beliefs about premarital sex between 1972 and 1993. On the other hand, support for such beliefs declined significantly among mainline Protestants and Catholics at all levels of church attendance and among conservatives who were infrequent attenders.
Secularity, or worldliness as it used to be called, is not the inevitable winner in the contest with Christianity. The Catholic Church adopted policies that allowed secularism to erode Catholic belief and practice. Some of the policies were changes that upset established routines. In addition, while continuing to maintain traditional doctrine, the hierarchy allowed corrosive ideas to circulate, and sometimes even discouraged the laity who tried to defend traditional teachings – such conservatives were seen as disruptive. Episcopal toleration extended to the advocacy and practice of pedophilia (Paul Shanley).
Apart from the bishops, the Catholic establishment in the United States (chanceries, colleges, universities, religious orders) would like to see Catholic sexual morality become a dead letter: an interesting intellectual curiosity, like the strictures against usury, that might contain a gleam of wisdom but would not usually affect the way Catholics behaved in either their public or private lives.
Bishops are careerists and balance their need to impress the Vatican with their orthodoxy against the reality that most of the members of the Catholic Church in the United States, including the members who supposedly transmit traditional teaching, do not accept that teaching. These are the people who pay the bills and give the Catholic Church the illusion that it has an influence in the public sphere.
Such a compromise with worldliness does not even maintain Catholic numbers. If the Catholic Church is so meaningless, why bother with it? Why get up on Sunday morning to hear third-rate music and intellectual pablum? If you take the Gospel seriously, you are more to end up in a conservative Protestant church which, for all its limitations, has not surrendered, on some key issues that affect daily life, to the world.
As a Hispanic man i would like to add that there has been descrimination from white bishops, priest, nuns, laity about the way we live our Catholic life.
We latinos tent to be more conservative traditional in our ways, just yesterday the priest of my parish did no take one minute to bless and talk to the lady who brough a baby Jesus to the mass to be bless, y felt so sad cause things like that means a lot for us latinos.
Yes, and the community life of a conservative Protestant Church is often quite attractive. Conservative Catholics–in my experience–often mock conservative Prots by calling their religion crass emotionalism or personality driven entertainment, but when I was a Protestant minister I would prepare my sermon for about 6 hours and practice delivering it too. I’m always amazed at the flippant indifference of Catholic priests toward preaching. I wish there were no sermons at all. Many times I’ve heard rank heresy preached at Mass–from assertions that Christians are to be pacifists, to Nestorianism to denials of the resurrection. Where the theology is sound, there is often a lack of a serious effort to preach. I don’t buy the “but we have the Eucharist” excuse. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God. Will we ever have deliverance from the nonsense?
Excellent analysis, Lee. I’d like to add the following:
I believe that Vatican II did to the Church what Gorbachev’s policies of glasnost and perestrokia did to the USSR. It’s like putting new wine into old wineskins; the old structures could not be maintained under the new attitudes, so chaos ensued.
The Church has been so legalistic that when Vatican II swept away much of the legalism, no faith or mature understanding of the Gospel was there to replace it. To many Catholics, the legalistic structures and attitudes *were* the Church; once they were gone, Catholics lost their identity — and they didn’t have the Gospel to fall back on.
The legalism itself arose from the Church’s fundamental stucture: a centralized, isolated hierarchy immune from accountability and interested in maintaining and extending its own power. For far too many centuries, the Church tolerated corruption (what do you think led to the Reformation?) for the sake of avoiding “scandal” (which was just an excuse for protecting the malfeasant, as we saw with the sex-abuse crisis).
Catholics are fed up. I know; I am one who is. Catholicism, as currently constituted, will become as spiritually vapid and irrelevant as mainline Protestantism unless Rome make radical changes. Benedict is trying to do his best but his best might not be good enough. Reinforcing the old wineskins, which Benedict is trying to do with such things as the Tridentine Mass, will not create the spiritual revival the Church needs.
To “a discouraged sheep”: Where and how have you heard Nestorianism preached from the pulpits? Just curious.
(Revised) All one has to do in order to experience the decline of American Catholicism is observe the typical white suburban middle aged parish priest. They are remnants of all that was wrong with Vatican II. Too many American Catholics and amongst them those who were supposed to be our shepherds thought the spirit of the new church post Vatican II was to deny our Catholic heritage and tradition, which thankfully the Latino and immigrant communities continue to keep alive in America. White Catholic Americans seem to have been acting out their subliminal self-loathing of a traditionally anti-Catholic society in so earnestly shedding their Catholic identity. In the end so many of our churches and parishes seem to resemble some protestant-heretical church. What we need it orthodoxy. What we need is heterodoxy. The errors of Vatican II have destroyed long enough the Western Church. What will in the end I believe save the Western Catholic Church will be greater communion and eventual unity with our Eastern brethren who have both preserved their faith and traditions. Even our dismayed Anglican brethren with whom our Holy Father has sought unity will help to save the Western Church by incorporating into the detestable post Vatican II churches in their sphere a return to more ornate, pious and devotional form of worship. In the end Catholicism will only be saved when it returns to its original identity. Let the Church live and prosper spiritually with 100 TRUE members than with a billion pretenders!
To D’Hippolito, what more should the Church do?
They tried making the Mass a feel good, low brow, holding hands event, with ridiculous garments and even more ridiculous churches and the masses ran away.
They let laymen and women distribute Eucharist but there were only less people to “slop” the Sacred Host in their hands.
They let girls be altar servers but young girls weren’t rushing to the task.
They made our priests face the crowds when consecrating the Eucharist only to see less people there.
They made the Mass about what they thought the people wanted and tossed aside the sacred mass that Holy Mother Church fought to preserve for centuries and less and less people came.
Laymen and women now instruct the faith in schools, CCD, and in parishes, not so much for lack of vocations, but at times just to let them do it. I have been in parishes with ample priests who still are mandated to “involve” lay ministry more.
But still none of this has caused a resurgence of the faith.
Perhaps the more they deconsctructed traditional Catholicism, the less Catholics thought they needed to be Catholic? Who can honestly say that Martin Luther might not look up at the Catholic Church today and say ‘hey that’s basically what I was asking for?’
All thanks to the supposed wisdom those more concerned with modernity than preservation of faith.
Good analysis, any of the decline due to flakey theology like that given us by Schillebeeckx.
Correction. The Nestorianism wasn’t from the pulpit, it was the priest’s changing of the Eucharistic prayer to “May we come to share eternal life, with Mary the mother of Jesus, with the apostles….” I thought it might be a mistake; the next week he repeated the change. I think he was influenced by some well-meaning but ignorant evangelicals who fear that calling Mary “Mother of God” somehow means that Mary is greater than God or above God.
Anthony, your last post merely reinforced what I’ve said. The changes you point to are, for all intents and purposes, cosmetic changes. If the Church falls on the basis of cosmetic changes, perhaps the Church has lost its hold on the Gospel.
What Church leaders need to do is to repent — not just in words but in deeds. They must make a greater effort to preach Christ crucified, resurrected and ascended — and *mean* it. They must reject intellectual fashion. They must reject the lust for power and secular influence. They must enforce canon law rather than ignore it (as they have in the case of malfeasant bishops). They must reject a sentimental ecumenism that borders on indifferentism (such as Bernard Law praying to Allah in a Suburban Boston mosque late in 2002). They must be accountable for their mistakes and sins, and not rely on “avoiding scandal” to cover them up.
Moreover, the Church needs a revival of the Holy Spirit to guide it out of this morass.
I agree with you Joseph, well said! Anthony, it was Bishops (and Popes) who spent much, or most of their priesthood celebrating Mass and the other sacraments in the traditional manner who got us into this mess. Latin, and timeless liturgies, beautiful chuirches, etc. while important, by themselves cannot get us where we need to be. Unless members of the hierarchy end their isolation, careerism and arogance, and until they are held accountable for their leadership, we will be subject to the kinds of nonsense we’re complaining about here, over and over again. After all, as Dr. Poodles said, the changes of the 1960’s were arrogantly forced on the people. The spirit of clericalism must be exorcised, until it is, all the junk is going to happen again in some other way.
May the Holy Spirit fall upon the Church like fire. Fire to cleanse and purify, and fire to set hearts and lives ablaze.
If it’s any comfort, none of this sounds like the Catholicism at my parish: http://www.stmarysgvl.org/
Based on my experience, the Church is slowly correcting herself, and losing membership may be part of the correction.
Christian, you and the other parishiners at St. Mary’s are very fortunate. However, I don’t know that your experience would be widely shared in North America. No doubt the Holy Spirit is slowly correcting the Church and I do see hopeful signs. Nonetheless, He waits for our co-operation and that of our leaders. We ought not be too easily reconciled to losing lots of people. God wants them in the Church and certain changes may keep them in, and as well, draw others who are presently outside her visible boundaries.
“…draw others who are presently outside her visible boundaries.”
At least at the parish level here, that’s what’s happening. I have the impression that Bible Belt Catholicism is a bit different from the rest of the country, maybe because of the robust Protestantism around us.
On a related topic, do you get the sense that the bishops have become more energized in the last few years as a result of the Scandal?
“The Catholic Church adopted policies that allowed secularism to erode Catholic belief and practice.”
And why didn’t they see it coming?
Certain Catholic bloggers like to say how wise the church is. How we should respect her as out mother. How the Church looks at things from the perspective of centuries, not years. Etc. Etc.
But in reality, the Church continues to do some pretty dumb things, and it’s hard not to conclude that they really shoulda known better.
After twenty years away from the Church, I am happy to say that I have returned to it with much rigor. However, since my return, I have seen liberalism creep into the fabric of Catholicism with decaying effect. Part of the problem, as I see it, is in the mind-set that has developed as a result of living in this increasingly secularized world. This secularization has infected everyone, from Catholic congregants and, unfortunately, even its ordained ministers. For instance, many of today’s Catholics support abortion, homosexual marriage and the ordination of female priests, and this includes some priests. These criss-crossed messages only lead to confusion, and eventually to a moving-away from the Church. A return to the tenets of traditional Catholicism, coupled with a pushing-back of the crippling effects of liberalism and secularism, would at least point the Church back to the road where it enjoyed much growth and success over the centuries.
Yesterday, I attended mass at St. Jerome’s parish in Glendale, Arizona. The church was half full. Almost the entire congregation held hands during the our father, but I did not. A woman to my side glared at me. Then, during the sign of peace, the entire congregation got out of their seats and spent 10 minutes walking around shaking hands with people, but I did not. At the end of the service, instead of saying “the mass is over, go in peace,” the priest cheered “Alleluia!” And, almost the entire congregation cheered back “alleluia,” but I did not. Next Sunday, I imagine those same people will return to mass, but I will not.
In recent years there have been some new movements in the Catholic Church which, I think, have been invigorating for growth in Christian Perfeciton on the part of Catholics.
One movement that I have been a member of since the mid 1980’s is as follows:
Opus Sanctorum Angelorum
138 Gratiot Avenue
Detroit, MI 48205
313-527-1739
info@opusangelorum.org
http://www.opusangelorum. org
I also recently published a pamphlet about the Opus Sanctorum Angelorum. A description of the pamphlet can be read at http://www.meljosartifacts.com
Thanks!
Joe
The modernists at the Vatican II Council’s desire was to destroy the principles and precepts of Catholicism to form a one-world order religion. Paul VI promulgated what Vatican II’s endless changes that contradicted Magisterial Teachings. The marauders at the Vatican have successfully confiscated all formerly Catholic churches and schools and are using them to teach what our loving Pontiffs have warned us to avoid. It has emptied the pews as desired.
“Animus Delendi-I Desire to Destroy” is a book written by Atila Sinke Guimarâes.
novusordowatchwire.org