An evangelical is studying the ancient Church Fathers. She is impressed with the deep theological insight of the Fathers. She begins studying ancient Christian art, and takes a special interest in church architecture. Over time, she begins to personally observe the Church Year, and studies the hallowed prayers and liturgy of the Church. She finally tires of the white walls and “contemporary” music of her mega-church, and decides to attend a Catholic mass. She steps inside, and kneels to pray, but can’t find any kneelers. Soon the procession starts, and rather than being solemn and reverent, dancers parade up the aisle. The architecture is no noticeably different than the evangelical church, and the priest add libs a lot to the liturgy, making it rather chatty. The evangelical leaves, and decides to visit an Orthodox Church.
A progressive Protestant is starting to see increased crime in his neighborhood, which he starts to connect with a general moral breakdown in society. He ponders the root cause of his neighborhood’s decline, and now questions his former assumptions about certain family issues, particularly his belief that divorce is “no problem.” This leads him to explore the Catholic Church, because it, unlike his current mainline church, still considers divorce a sin. Soon, after much independent reading, he begins to see the wisdom of Catholic Teaching on a variety of issues. He decides to meet with a priest to discuss becoming Catholic, and the priest gives him a strange look, and asks him why he wants to become Catholic when he already has a church. The priest counsels the man that since the ecumenical era, the Catholic Church doesn’t steal sheep, but if the man really wants to be Catholic, then the priest won’t stop him. So he is thrown into RCIA, where he is taught things that pretty much line up with the mainline church he came out of. The man leaves RCIA, and starts looking for a new church.
Now, I know these examples are simplistic. Most committed seekers would not abandon joining the Catholic Church simply because they entered one or two distressing situations. Nonetheless, I have often wondered:
How many faithful potential converts have been turned away from the Church, even scandalized, by the watered-down Catholicism they sometimes encounter?
I know that some catechists, priests, and liturgists justify “dumbing down” the faith, or “watering down” the liturgy in order to make Church teaching and worship more attractive. Nonetheless, this seems to me to be a losing situation, in that by dumbing down the faith, they are attracting those who aren’t likely to be committed to the Church. I mean, to whom are they making the Church more attractive? Committed or uncommitted converts? First, in today’s society, with few social and family pressures to be Catholic, I am guessing that few uncommitted people are going to bother joining the Church, watered-down or otherwise, to begin with. Second, it seems to me that those uncommitted to joining the Church on the Church’s terms are not going to suddenly become committed, active Catholics once they do join. So, basically, by being flaky, is the faith being watered down so much that committed seekers are being turned away, leaving only a small handful of semi-committed converts? I think the answer is probably “yes,” and this could explain the decline of many mainlines: nobody is going to join a church or organization whose beliefs are so watered-down or nebulous that they are meaningless.
Now, I have to say that standing up for, and teaching the Truth of Catholic Teaching, does not mean being overbearing. As a teacher (and sponsor for RCIA), I am always reminded that amidst our permissive society, Catholic Teaching is generally going to be difficult to digest, and offensive on its own, so it is important that it be taught in both Truth and charity. I think it is important that we not fall into the opposite extreme of being flaky, which is being hard, impatient, and mean to those struggling to believe. I have honestly seen quite a few nominal Catholics and candidates accept Church Teaching after actually having the teachings explained by a faithful, but patient, person. You wouldn’t think a Catholic in her 40s would not know that the Church is against artificial contraception, or that a Catholic in his 30s would think that we are supposed to give up meat on the Sundays of Lent, but I have known of these cases. In both of these examples, patient and loving teaching worked.
So I am curious, how many of you have been scandalized by flakiness? Has it ever influenced your decisions relating to religion, or choice of parish? I know that many on the Christian blogosphere are pretty devoted and committed, so we notice things like this!
David Bennett
Jennifer
asimplesinner
Fr. J.
Chad Toney
Jorge Flores
Jonathan B
carmelbennett
nicenehobbit
Jason S
jaybird68
papaz
April 6, 2008 at 12:56 pm
“Now, I know these examples are simplistic.”
I think they go beyond simplistic to the point of being unreal. Might one find a single instance? Sure. A person who steps foot in a Catholic Chuch for the first time and is put off because it does not match her academic study of the liturgy? Unlikely. Of course, Cardinal Avery Dulles said that his first visit to a Catholic Mass exposed him to all of the ills of the Tridentine Liturgy and he found absolutely no appeal to the faith by the experience.
I know my own inner city parish suffers neither from indifferentism nor a misunderstanding of the seriousness of broken marriages. It would be simplistic and unfair to take this too far, but a more common experience than what was described above would be to note that our conservative, well-fed suburban Catholics friends (clerical and lay) too often have little interest in inner city ministry with us.
April 6, 2008 at 1:26 pm
Katherine,
As I said, most potential converts continue exploring Catholicism in spite of finding parishes that look and act more like Episcopal churches. Nonetheless, I know individuals who were considering Catholicism who most certainly did feel put off by attending a Catholic parish that was no different than the experience they were trying to leave behind.
Since I am regularly in contact with a variety of converts both online and offline, I can tell you that sometimes many converts become Catholic in spite of what they encounter locally. The examples I provided were meant to be overly simplistic to make a point, but as I said, from my experience, they are definitely not unreal. One gentleman I know was almost ready to back out of RCIA when his RCIA leaders defended the use of artificial contraception. Just offhand, I can think of another lady and her husband who almost did the same thing. I can think of many others who just shrugged their way through their RCIA programs, putting up with teaching they knew was purposely vague or even heretical so that they could reach the Easter Vigil. I am not saying this is the right approach. When I joined the Church I did so knowing that no parish is perfect, and that many parishes function more like Episcopal parishes. However, this is why I speak of watering down the faith as being a possible scandal, because some believers, wanting genuine Catholicism, are indeed scandalized by it.
I am not sure what you mean in your second paragraph. My opinion is that most well-off folks (”conservative” AND “liberal”) tend to downplay divorce because they can afford the consequences a little better. Now that you mention it, the folks I know who have said divorce is no big deal are often rich whites who can easily speak of what’s best for the poor, because they are pontificating from the suburbs or condos downtown near a campus; they don’t know anybody who is poor, or have to live with poor people. Rich white “intellectuals” spearheaded the sexual revolution, and left the poor to deal with its disastrous effects. I say this as someone who grew up in Appalachia around poor people, coming from a family where our grandparents had to buy shoes for my brother and me, because my parents couldn’t afford it on my dad’s meager salary. So I admit, well-off elites trying to say what’s good for the poor gets me a little miffed, so I think I am agreeing with you here.
April 6, 2008 at 2:31 pm
I have to agree with Katherine, though. If one were to go only on the basis of the Catholic blogosphere (not to mention the snottier elements of the Anglican and Orthodox blogosphere), one would get the impression that Catholicism “on the ground” is just one flaky liturgical abuse after another.
Yet most of us do not experience it that way. Our local parishes may not be perfect, but they are a far cry from the blogoshpere caricature (clown Masses and priests in Barney costumes..ring a bell?). One Catholic poster somewhere once said, in response to some really grumpy, crabby, virulently anti-Catholic converts from Protestantism to Orthodoxy: “If there is a Clown Mass being celebrated anywhere in the world, no matter how unusual or remote the event, you guys will find it and present it as representative of Catholicism as a whole.” OK, words to that effect…but that was the gist.
To which I respond: Amen! That has been my online experience as well. Never mind the countless beautiful, reverent Masses, the numerous faithful priests, the many beautiful churches (including newly built ones–there is a trend back toward tradition and beauty, big-time). Never mind the fact that the number of faithful, reverent Catholic parishes exceeds the total number of of members of some of these eensy communions which look down their snobby noses on us feckless benighted papists.
Nope. These folks will ferret out the most extreme examples of Catholic liturgical aberrations, even if they have to scour the entire liturgical landscape to find them. The very smoke of Satan fuels such a search, IMHO. (Believe me, Simple Sinner, I do not have you in mind at all when I say this…I am simplyb using your post as a springboard and pretext for my soap-box rant WRT certain Catholic-bashers who shall be nameless, LOL.)
In [i]Polyanna,[/i] Hayley Mills said, quoting Abe Lincoln, “If you look for the bad in people, you are surely goping to find it.” I believe that, if you look for the bad in any church, you will find it as well. That goes for every single church and ecclesial community under the sun. If you look hard enough, you will find something really rotten–because we are all sinners. Nothing is perfect this side of the grave. For every Catholic Mass horror story, I bet there are Orthodox horror stories, Anglican Continuum horror stories, Lutheran horror stories, and on and on. In fact, I know there are; I even know some of the horror stories.
But are we called, in Christ, to fixate on the horror stories of other people’s communions? Or to give people the benefit of the doubt by assuming that the horror stories are not necessarily representative? Christian charity enjoins us to do the latter.
I’m sorry that I’ve babbled on, rather off-topic, too. I know your point, Simple Sinner, was not that RC liturgical abuses are representative, or that the other communions attracting potential converts are problem free. But that certainly is the impression one could get in the blogosphere — both from cranky Catholics and from rabidly anti-Catholic polemicists from other traditions.
That’s why it’s important to set the record straight. For every hippy-dippy parish (a dying breed, BTW), there are ten or 20 feaithful parishes striving to recover the best of their rich liturgical heritage.
And the picture just keeps getting better and better. The liturgical renewal (reform of the reform) is much more advanced today than it was even five years ago. The glass is half full, not half empty, and getting fuller.
Anyone who doesn’t believe me is invited to experience Catholicism here in the South, the new Catholic Bible Belt. :-) Forget the moribund Northeast (the region of my birth and upbringing, BTW). The South will rise again–leading the way in the New Evangelization. :D
April 6, 2008 at 3:07 pm
Diane,
As the author of this post (not Simple Sinner), let me say that I agree with you. In fact, I am contemplating a future post about some of the griping and negativity that often appears on the Catholic blogosphere, especially with regard to liturgy. I did not write this post to imply that the Catholic world is filled with liturgical abuses. If it came across that way, I need to revise this post, because the kind of nitpicking and sarcasm I sometimes encounter online is pretty scandalous too, I am afraid. I agree with you that not every Catholic parish is full of liturgical abuses. I put my little blurb at the end of this post about not falling into the opposite extreme, because I know people who have decided Catholicism is not for them because they encountered an overbearing and impatient orthodox Catholic who gave them the wrong impression of what it means to be Catholic. Based on stories I have heard from the 1970s, things have improved tremendously, and in my diocese things are very positive.
The point of my post is that some parishes still hold onto the notion that by watering things down people will be be more likely to become Catholic, and I wondered if this really had that effect. I also wanted to look at watering down the faith as having the opposite effect as intended, as possible scandal. It is a thought I had one day after I heard the story of a man who was about ready to drop out of RCIA because of the things the teachers were saying that contradicted Catholic Teaching. On the surface, I think glossing over difficult Catholic Teaching, or even denying it, would seem to make Catholicism more palatable, but what if watering down the faith actually has the effect of driving folks away?
April 6, 2008 at 4:18 pm
Well, Mr. Bennett, I agree with you. I have a Jewish friend who wanted me to bring her to a Catholic mass but, after hearing her stories of the chanting of Hebrew and other traditions, I would just be embarrassed to bring her anywhere in this town. I am happy, though, that other cities have it better.
Maybe I’ll take her to the local Orthodox church; they do liturgy really well, and I think she’d get a lot out of fit.
April 6, 2008 at 6:24 pm
In general our Diocese waters down the RCIA program to the point of absurdity. BUT - in our parish we have a year long RCIA (starting up again tomorrow) and we go through the entire Catechism. Ou pastor put the program together himself and it is wonderful.
April 6, 2008 at 6:28 pm
Adrienne,
That is excellent. I have always wondered why RCIA programs simply don’t use the Catechism, or perhaps the Compendium or new USCCB Catechism as their textbooks. I have found that mature seekers *want* good information, and are disappointed (or maybe even offended) when they get dumbed-down presentations.
April 6, 2008 at 7:52 pm
David,
You pose some very interesting questions. As someone who is actively and intellectually converting to the Catholic Church allow me to speak of my own experience.
My journey started with the acceptance of God, then Christianity, then Protestantism and now, finally, toward Catholicism. I have read voraciously, both pro and con Catholic writings, but in the end, the teachings and the truth of the Church could not be denied.
Alas, trying to find a Priest who shares this point of view has been and continues to be the biggest impediment to my actually joining the Church. Three times I have made appointments with Priests to discuss converting. Unless I really pushed, not one spoke of sin, salvation or my soul. All three treated the teachings of the church and the Catechism more as “voluntary guidelines on how live an ideal life” as one Priest put. All three avoided direct conversation about Church teachings and instead wanted to talk about “social justice” issues and politics.
Imagine how frustrating and dispiriting this is for someone who has already made the intellectual jump to the Church and who now seeks to find a home within the Church.
By no means is this post meant to be disparaging to all Priests. I know that somewhere out there I will find the right Parish and the right Priest and I will find my home with the Church. Sadly, it’s just been a lot more difficult than I ever imagined.
April 6, 2008 at 8:31 pm
David,
Excellent post. Don’t be to put off by the negative reactions to your post in your blog. They’re probably liberals who are angry at any defamation of the many innovations made in the Spirit of Vatican II.
And they probably vote for baby killers to.
April 6, 2008 at 9:02 pm
My wife and I grew up free-church, but for the past five years we’ve been moving closer and closer to the Catholic Church. When we finally started RCIA we knew a fair amount of Catholic theology and, in fact, it was the beauty of Catholic teaching that was drawing us to convert. So, we went to the first RCIA class at the local parish. The leaders seemed like great people, earnest and well-intentioned, but they were continually apologizing for Catholic beliefs. We were assured that Catholicism was no different than Epispopalianism, women would be ordained in the Catholic Church in a few years, there is no such thing as indulgences, etc. When they opened the floor for questions I asked why we should alienate our Protestant family and friends by becoming Catholic if Catholicism is no different from Episcopalianism.
We did not go back. Had we not been 100% certain that we wanted to become Catholic I doubt we would have ever set foot in a Catholic parish again.
We found a parish 30 minutes away that taught RCIA out of the Catechism. It also didn’t hurt that the pastor is wonderful. We were received at the Easter vigil two weeks ago!
I found David’s post (while intentionally stereotypical) spot-on. It may be difficult for some cradle Catholics to understand how difficult it can be for a Protestant to become Catholic. I was describing my experiences to a gay friend and he said it sounded a lot like coming out of the closet: family and friends are frequently very confused, hurt, and even angry. Why would we go to the trouble? Because we were drawn to the fullness of the Catholic Church, its history, theology, liturgy, hierarchy (!), the works. Needless to say, folks in our position do not want to sacrifice so much only to re-discover watered-down mainline Protestantism in a Catholic wrapper.
April 6, 2008 at 9:15 pm
Tito, that’s fairly uncharitable.
As one considering leaving Protestantism for Catholicism, I really worry about this. I’ve seen it come up a lot in discussions and convert books and blogs and etc etc. i think the problem is real.
I would also affirm that it is a problem: when we water things down, we make them unattractive because we make them superfluous. In market terms, the product isn’t distinctive, isn’t differentiated from other products. What’s attractive is what’s unique, and Christianity is unique, when it isn’t watered down so that it looks a lot like what the culture is saying in the first place.
April 6, 2008 at 10:00 pm
I wonder if that’s my friend nathan whom I know and love…sounds like it to a T.
April 6, 2008 at 10:20 pm
The same, Irenaeus!
April 7, 2008 at 8:26 am
Irenaeus,
That was uncharitable and probably left better off for another discussion (the promotion of infanticide). Though I find it difficult to even have debate with the negative posters (not you) when they have other motives in their dissent, ie, an axe to grind.
Tito
April 7, 2008 at 1:35 pm
Katherine I know that you are a contrarian par excellance, but if you are really of the thinking that it is simplistic or unrealistic that folks have visited Catholic parishes and been sorely disappointed, keep talking to converts and would be converts…
Then again, you did have the requisite and anticipatory remarks to be made about the TLM… And from there - rather inexplicably -you needed to throw in 2¢ about your inner city parish experience and its implicity superiority to those suburban types.
I think you thrive on contradistinction.
April 7, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Our new RCIA starts up this evening. We teach a full year and use the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the new USCCB Catechism. We stress that conversion must be intellectual as well as spiritual (heart).
I hear often about RCIA’s that do not teach this way. A “feel good” approach will not work and many of those people leave the church quite rapidly. The city where our Bishop is located (no names) teaches this way and their drop-out rate is almost 100%. As Dr. Phil likes to say, “how’s that working for you?”
April 7, 2008 at 8:29 pm
First of all, I apologize fior confusing David Bennett with Simple Sinner. I am very new to this blog, needless to say. Mea culpa!
Secondly: Tito…I took pains to say that I was not accusing the post’s author of fixating on liturgical abuses as if they represented Catholicism “on the ground” in toto. But there are definitely folks in the blogosphere who do this, and it really gets old. Especially as it does not even remotely square with my own (fairly extensive) experience.
Do liturgical abuses exist? Undeniably. Are they the norm everywhere? Absolutely not. And the trend is overwhelmingly in the right direction.
For the record, I am a conservative Catholic, 100% faithful to the Magisterium. I have even been known to attend Mass in the Extraordinary Form.
Satisfied? ;-)
Diane
April 7, 2008 at 8:34 pm
Adrienne–our parish adult-ed class has used the new USCCB Catechism. I love it (despite the political correctness of some of its “saint” stories, LOL).
April 7, 2008 at 8:41 pm
Diane,
I think I have come across you on Anglican blogs, and I always enjoy what you have to say!
April 8, 2008 at 12:31 am
Hi, David! You sound familiar, too, and I distinctly remember enjoying what you have to say as well.
Do you post at Christopher Johnson’s blog? Is he not the funniest guy in cyberspace? Sometimes I laugh so hard I have tears running down my face.
Diane
April 8, 2008 at 1:19 am
Diane,
Yes, thanks! ;~)
April 8, 2008 at 9:52 am
This is spot-on.
Dr Hahn recounts a similar story in his book “Rome Sweet Home” that it took him several tries to find a priest who would receive him into the Church, instead of sending him away to be the “best Presbyterian he could be.”
What David writes certainly varies from place to place, but my experience is that there are some palces where the Wayback Machine is continually set to 1975. Just look at the ruckus going on in the Belleville Illinois diocese right now, where a bunch of 70’s left-overs don’t understand that the revolution is over and they lost.
Two personal stories to illustrate my point and I’ll get of the soap box. These are the unembellished truth, may lightning strike if it’s not:
Story 1: A friend asked me to help a person he’d been corresponding with in my area to connect with a church and start RCIA. He told me this person was a non-denominational Protestant and had been reading the Church Fathers, and had decided he wanted to become Catholic. I was involved in the religious ed program at my parish so I knew that while the DRE was mildly flaky, the program was reasonably solid. I knew nothing about RCIA, though…As I was speaking with my friend’s sponsor and asking how my friend was doing in the program, she smiled and said, “fine…he watches EWTN, but we think he’ll grow out of that.” Same parish where the ordination of women was advocated for in thinly veiled homilies and one of the three priests told the kids at an assembly they didn’t have to confess their sins to a priest, directly to God was fine.
Story 2: Arriving at our new parish, I wanted to resume my work in education. I presented my credentials and experience to the DRE…2 years Catholic Scripture Study leader, 3 years junior high teacher, 2 years RCIA sponsor, RCIA teacher (Church history & sacraments), and published weekly for 2 years on Catholic websites. Most DREs are thrilled to get a man involved in the Relgious Ed program, let alone one with experience, if only as an example to the many men who sit on their hands rather than lead as we’re called to do. I was told (very politely, she was nice about it), that there wasn’t room for me in the program and that their program was “more spiritually based” rather than catechetical.
I keep hearing that the JPII generation of priests are more orthodox and that they’re coming…dear Lord, please speed them on their way!
April 11, 2008 at 2:13 pm
SS –
I’m not suggesting anyone report of particular, individual experience are inaccurate. I am suggesting they are not the universal experience.
I am sympathetic to those as referenced here have been disappointed to the parish religious instruction they have been offered after they have been drawn to the Church by their reading of the Church Fathers, their vocacious review of Catholic writings or their study of a fair amount of Catholic theology.
Somehow you suggest that when I raise my experiences, it is out of bounds, however. It is actually you whom I think has an issue with an air of superiority. Whenever the conversation moves away from the pastoral care of people referenced above, you suggest it is inappropriate. I think you need to pray and reflect on this.
The vast majority of the people in my parish do not have a high school degree and 3/4ths of U.S. Catholics do not have a college degree. Those who read the writing of the Fathers or theological books need to have their pastoral and catecethial needs adressed. But to belittle someone for even raising a pastoral concern for the rest of the Church is not what we are called to be as Catholics.
If matter contrary to the faith are being taught, that issue should be addressed. But the snarky criticism of “dumbed-down” teaching is overdone.
April 12, 2008 at 2:57 am
We will have to go our seperate ways when it comes to whether there has been a dumbing down… Perhaps you are fortunate enough (praise God if you are) to be treated to homilies that entreat the faithful to greater understanding of the truth of The Faith… It wasn’t what I grew up with - not even close.
Then again, don’t retreat to the false dichotomy of saying that we are saying this is the universal experience - we aren’t. I actually am not sure where you got that.
Air of superiority I just can’t see on my end. I can’t say the same when it comes to your paternalism (or would that be maternalism?) in regards to your people at your parish… No one mentioned college degrees, Sister Katherine. No one.
April 14, 2008 at 2:04 pm
Maternalism? If you mean motherly care, sure. With a sense of superiority? Not at all. If you prefer, I’ll speak only for myself and not for my friends. I’ve tried to read some of the works of the Fathers of the Church and find it way over my head. I’m not an intellectual. I’m not a scholar. I’m not a vocacious reader of theology. I can handle some church history, Lives of the Saints, popular devotional works, as well as magazine articles.
I think it is snotty and elitist to demand that parish homeletics and catechesis should be at a level over the head of someone like myself. And I think it is snotty and elitiest to suggest that when someone makes the observation that we are not all at the same of skill on this matter they are being ‘maternalistic.’ Looking down on less educated people is not a virtue. It is even less a virtue to pretend that those of us with less education don’t have an existance worth recognizing.
April 14, 2008 at 3:06 pm
My Dearest contrarian sister, Katherine:
I think it is snotty and elitist to demand that parish homeletics and catechesis should be at a level over the head of someone like myself.
I do as well. Which is a good thing that no one here is suggesting that. You were the one to couch it in such terms - not us. You were the one to bring up the statistics of college level education in your inner city parish - not us. Both seem rather red herrings to the point of the post. Namely we don’t think the truth of the Catholic faith is a heady and difficult to grasp concept. The Baltimore Catechism that grade schoolers used tell us as much.
So I am left to wonder if you think that folks in inner city parishes or without college degrees could not handle stronger more catechetical sermons and homilies. I certainly don’t believe that to be the case.
And I think it is snotty and elitiest to suggest that when someone makes the observation that we are not all at the same of skill on this matter they are being ‘maternalistic.’
I would too - if I saw someone doing that.
Looking down on less educated people is not a virtue.
I agree. That is why sermons that are lightweight powderpuff pieces from men who can do far better - they have the knowledge and training - is especially annoying. People can handle dynamic, orthodox sermons that are strongly catechetical.
It is even less a virtue to pretend that those of us with less education don’t have an existance worth recognizing.
Show me someone doing that to you Sister Katherine, and I will stick up for you!
Now as to something I think is snotty? Serving as an incessant contrarian only ever speaking up to cast aspersians or doubt. Creating red herrings in refuting things that are not said, creating false dichotomies, and intimating arguments against things that were simply not called for.
David’s parish is semi-rural. Mine is a tiny Greek Catholic mix including a good number of folks who are working class & ESL. We didn’t call for a return to the Tridentine Mass (neither of us attend it regularly, I have attended once in the past decade) so why Avery Dulles is mentioned, or how the location and demographics of your parish is relevent, I really cannot see. We don’t call for college level homiletics, so what college degrees have to do with it, I am not certain. We didn’t say people with less education don’t have an existance worth recognizing. Where that came from or what it is in response to, I have NO idea.
April 14, 2008 at 8:24 pm
David what happened to my comment?
April 18, 2008 at 6:56 am
[...] as a Catholic? Is it traditions in your home that define being Catholic to you? Or maybe it is flakiness that keeps you away from your [...]