Recovering a Catholic Culture
Sherry mentioned in another post a story I tell in the Called & Gifted workshop about someone asking me if I "had accepted Jesus as my personal savior." Of course, as a cradle Catholic, it made me very uncomfortable. I instinctively knew that there were presuppositions behind that question that I did not share, so "yes" somehow wasn't appropriate. That is, I couldn't point to a specific date and time when I had been "saved." But "no" wasn't appropriate, either. After all, I prayed in my own words (silently, and particularly fervently before tests in school and in life). I can still recite my first extemporaneous prayer, which quickly became my bedtime prayer, "God bless mommy and daddy and David (my older brother) and Barbie (my older sister) and Penny (the dog) and myself." I learned rote prayers that I could pray aloud with other Catholics. My wonderful parents made sure they never missed Mass, so consequently I never missed Mass. I even played Mass as a kid with my older brother and sister (as the youngest I was relegated to communicant). There were reminders in my home about Jesus: a crucifix in my room, with last year's palms behind it; a book of prayers by my bed; a holy water font at the door. I went to Catholic gradeschool and CCD (how'd that happen?), gave up something during Lent, was an altar boy… the whole nine yards.
In some ways I grew up in a Catholic culture not unlike the one described by Paul McLachlan at a Catholic Pages website article linked above. You might say, as one participant proposed on this blog, that I picked up Catholicism by osmosis. In fact, my identity was Catholic enough that I have never really seriously being anything else. Sherry jokes that in my case, everything about this kind of Catholic culture "worked" and I'm not only still a practicing Catholic, but a priest, for heaven's sake (well, actually for my sake and yours, and completely by the grace of God).
But I know there are many children who grew up very much like me who are no longer Catholic. Some may even call themselves, "recovering Catholics," while others have joined Protestant denominations, or dabbled in New Age stuff, or started their own evangelical church in their basement twenty years ago which grew into the megachurch down the street. When I was involved in campus ministry, it sometimes felt like the Catholic students I was least likely to see were those who had gone to Catholic schools. They might have been at the local parish, but I met some who, when I asked why they weren't at Mass, responded, "Father, I spent X years in Catholic schools – I've done my time."
As someone who has entered the Church from evangelicalism, Sherry is more acutely aware of this kind of Catholic culture than I am. She mentioned the "don't ask, don't tell" atmosphere with regard to sharing our faith with each other that I never really thought about. It was the way we did things.
Over the last two years or so, I've begun to question if there aren't really two parallel Catholic cultures. One is the "cultural Catholicism" I experienced and benefited from, the other the Catholic culture envisioned by bishops and Popes and derived from the Scriptures. An example of what I mean follows. It's from the 1985 U.S. bishops document on Campus Ministry, "Empowered by the Spirit". In speaking about the importance of Christian community on college campuses, the bishops wrote
"The Church gains credibility when the dream of community produces genuine commitment and intelligent effort.
- In the ideal community of faith, the Mystery that rules over our lives is named and worshiped.
- Dedication to Christ is fostered, and openness to all truth, goodness, and beauty is maintained.
- The life of the Spirit is nourished and discussed.
- Positive images of God, Christ, Mary, and the afterlife warm the heart and structure the imagination.
- The common good is emphasized and personal development encouraged. Individuals experience true freedom and at the
same time accept responsibility for the well-being of the group.
- Traditional wisdom is available and the best contemporary insights are valued.
- Prayerful liturgies enable us to praise God with full hearts and create a sense of belonging, as well as nourish people for a
life of service.
- Members are known by name and newcomers are welcomed.
- Unity of faith is celebrated while legitimate pluralism is recognized.
- Individuals find both support and challenge and can share their joys and sorrows.
- The members hunger for justice and have the courage to fight the dehumanizing tendencies in the culture.
- The community knows the sorrows of life but remains a people of hope.
In this ideal community of faith, the members are of one heart and mind (Acts 4:32) and receive the spirit of wisdom which brings them to full knowledge of Jesus Christ who is the head of the Church (Eph 1:17-23)." Empowered by the Spirit, 37.
When I was involved in campus ministry, reading passages like this both thrilled me and exhausted me. "Who's going to make this ideal a reality?" I'd ask myself and my staff. Now I know the answer - intentional disciples! As is almost always the case, our wonderful Church documents presume or propose a culture of intentional discipleship, but if one does not exist in a parish, we have a bit of a catch-22. How do we foster intentional discipleship if the lived reality of the local parish is not actively promoting it?
The culture described above goes beyond surrounding our living environment with sacramentals. Not that sacramentals are bad. They are wonderful - able to sanctify almost every moment of our lives. However, their connection to the passion, death, and resurrection of Jesus, from which their power is drawn, "sanctifies the lives of those who are well-disposed," (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 61) i.e., for those whose faith is alive and well-formed. Once again, we come up against the importance of a conscious daily choice to follow Christ which is the presumed foundation for a full Catholic life. I have some thoughts on how we can promote intentional discipleship in our parishes which I'll post in a few days. I'm interested in reading your reflections and comments, however.
Labels: Catholic culture
posted by Fr. Mike, O.P. @ 9:22 AM
22 Comments
22 Comments:
Of course, Fr. Mike didn't mention that he grew up in Mayberry. Just call him Fr. Opie.
I think the label "cultural Catholicism" is misleading. It implies that "cultural Catholics" just go along with their faith without reflecting on it and that is untrue. Converts, by definition, have to approach a new faith somewhat didactically, i.e., not by osmosis and from the outside. So they will not have the ease of approach that cradle Catholics have toward the faith. But that does not mean that cradle or "cultural" Catholics are less reflective about their faith.
Imagine that someone who is a convert comes up to you and demands to know what you think about something that is intrinsically part of who you are. It's like a fish in the water. It's hard to describe because you've never been out of it. In contrast, it's much easier for a convert, because a new faith is a demarcation in their life. I think Sherry is making unfair comparisons between cradle Catholics and converts and to the latter's advantage, as "truer," more thoughtful, more apologetically-oriented Catholics, whereas we cradle Catholics are just sitting around letting things happen. And I think that may be because there is such a difference in the cultural ambience between a cradle Catholic and a convert.
Gina
"Accepting Jesus Christ as one's personal Lord and Savior" may be typically Protestant phrase, but it's what Catholics do when, in faith, they receive the sacrament of Penance, or when they receive the Eucharist. What could be more personal than receiving Christ, Body, Blood, soul, and divinity into your very body? Of course the grace of this reception is not effective without faith, but that just demonstrates the difference between Catholic and Protestant ideas of salvation. Protestants will ask you, "Are you saved?" In an essay I read many years ago, called "Are Catholics Saved?" one Catholic writer explained that the right way for a Catholic to answer that question (assuming a lively faith) is, "I have been saved (in baptism, by incorporation into the death and resurrection of Christ); I am being saved (by daily turning to God for forgiveness, and by reception of the sacraments that confer grace); and I hope to be saved (that is, that I will by the grace of God, persevere in following Christ and be received into heaven)." (He explained this at much greater length, so please excuse the theological generality here.)
I have noticed that some of the less sympathetic commenters here appear to think that to be an intentional disciple involves being "in people's faces." I have known a few people like that, mostly Protestant; for example, one fellow who would ask passing strangers as he walked by them, "Have you been born again?" and things like that without even bothering to stop. Approaches like this lose more converts than they gain. I don't think the sponsors of this blog favor doing that. Everyone will have his own way of presenting the Gospel, but boorishness should not characterize any of them.
Nor is discipleship limited to evangelization. But certainly within the Church, dealing with people in our own parishes, especially in our own families, we should be open about what is really most important--our relationship with God, our devotion to Jesus Christ, our participation in the Church as His Body. Those with teaching ministries, and especially those called to the ministerial priesthood, have a responsibility to do this in a more forthright and deliberate way by teaching and preaching the truth of the Gospel in and out of season. A parish of disciples is a parish of homes where prayer is a regular part of individual and family life, where the love of God and the standards of the Gospel inform every aspect of our lives from how we dress to how we conduct our business, where being brothers and sisters in Christ forms how we relate to one another the other 167 hours of the week when we are not at Mass. That's what discipleship looks like, and that's what these people are trying to do.
"I think Sherry is making unfair comparisons between cradle Catholics and converts and to the latter's advantage, as "truer," more thoughtful, more apologetically-oriented Catholics, whereas we cradle Catholics are just sitting around letting things happen."
Er, no. I am not saying that converts are "truer' more thoughtful" or whatever than born and bred Catholics. And here I need you to accept that I am telling the truth about what I mean to say.
I am saying that there is genuine spiritual and existential difference between those who are intentional disciples, whether raised Catholic or not, and those baptized persons who are not intentional disciples.
In the end, what we are talking about is *not* a "convert vs. cradle Catholic" issue. The issue is discipleship.
The tension is between "Catholic culture and practice regarding intentional discipleship at the beginning of the 21st century in the US" vs. "what the Holy Spirit is calling the Church to regarding intentional discipleship through her magisterial teaching".
Basically, as Fr. Mike pointed out, it's the Catholic faith vs. Catholic practice and the cultural-norms that are therefore absorbed unconsciously by normal human beings experiencing Catholic practice.
My evangelical background does make me especially aware of the gap between Catholic teaching and practice in this *particular area*. If I was from a different background, I'd probably cue more readily into gaps between Church teaching and practice in very different areas.
If I had been a Quaker, (which in fact I became while a college student)I'd be acutely aware of the gap between teaching on issues of peace and social justice and common Catholic practice on the ground,for instance.
My personal sensitivity would not invalidate the force of Catholic teaching in that area or represent the Quakerization of the Church or make it a "Quaker vs. Catholic" issue.
It would just mean that I was prepared by my background (perhaps even by God who, after all, was ultimately responsible for my birth into a non-Catholic family) to especially resonant with certain aspects of Church teaching and long to see them lived.
There's no escaping the fact that when a lot of people who are not raised within a certain culture enter that culture, they will change it, even without meaning to. Unless we mean to say that Catholicism is only for those born Catholic, we're going to have to accept that successful evangelization, the spread of the faith, has *always* changed the culture of the Church.
In the 21st century, the primary change in Catholic culture, awareness, and practice is not going to come from Anglo converts from evangelicalism like me or Aimee or Mark Shea, but from the global south, from hundreds of millions of African and Asian converts from non-Christian backgrounds.
What that change will look like, no one knows. Check in about 200 years. But its gonna swamp any little ripples that American evangelicals might make.
Nice reflections, Father. Maybe you should think about some sort of formation for priests, not just laity, so priests know how to form people in their parishes, or at least support the process.
I recently met a very dynamic priest who had done some wonderful work forming youth ministers for leadership in his parish. He was a fairly young priest, ordained around 2000, so I asked him how he himself had been formed to do this. Was it part of his seminary formation?
He laughed and said no, he'd had to find it on his own through a lot of reading and study after he'd been ordained. I asked him if he knew of any seminaries that provided this kind of formation for priests, and he looked sad and said no.
The saddest part of his story: he told me that after working so hard with the youth, the parish was assigned a new pastor who didn't understand what he was doing and canceled the whole project, deeming it unnecessary. Things went back to the usual status quo, with no real leadership for the young people in the parish.
I don't know what seminary formation looks like, though I do know it takes years. But I often wonder how well priests really are prepared to actually lead and form people. Seems like an important piece, as the priests are the real leaders of the parishes. But today, many priests seem leery of lay formation, maybe because of fear we'll turn into Voice of the Faithful types.
Henry wrote:
I have noticed that some of the less sympathetic commenters here appear to think that to be an intentional disciple involves being "in people's faces." I have known a few people like that, mostly Protestant; for example, one fellow who would ask passing strangers as he walked by them, "Have you been born again?" and things like that without even bothering to stop. Approaches like this lose more converts than they gain. I don't think the sponsors of this blog favor doing that.
I respond:
Exactly, Henry. Evangelization, whether lifestyle or more explicitly proclaimed, must always respect the dignity of the other person. It must be appropriate to the type of relationship you have. On a typical Chicago summer day, I don't walk around proclaiming, "Wow, it's hot out here . . .and boy is it hot in hell. Do you know where you are going when you die?"
Thanks for highlighting that point.
On a typical Chicago summer day, I don't walk around proclaiming, "Wow, it's hot out here . . .and boy is it hot in hell. Do you know where you are going when you die?"
You don't? I'm so bummed!
I don't--but don't think I haven't thought about it! :)
Sometimes the charism of evangelization can be a little . . inconvenient! :)
Sherry,
I noticed your remarks about the changes to Catholicism that will come from the "global South." However, I do think you should notice that many Catholics in the global South are very conservative, very traditional, and very orthodox. Many recruits to the SSPX and other ultra-traditionalist movements have large followings there. The Episcopal bishop Peter Akinola also has a large following in Nigeria.
In addition, it looks like Pope Benedict will issue a universal indult for the old Latin Mass, reinforcing the old Catholic "culture."
Why are you making the assumption that the global South will further disintegrate traditional Catholicism? Why are you also making the assumption that Europe and the West (including Australia) will not resurge, given a decent change to recover its traditional Catholic heritage, which Pope Benedict wants to return to it?
Gina
Hi, Gina;
Thanks for your posts. One of the points I'm trying to make is that we can't rely on a "Catholic culture" or environment to ensure that Catholics will remain Catholic by default. (And I don't believe you're saying this, either). BUT we have to recognize that we are immersed in a larger, very powerful non-Catholic and essentially non-Christian secular culture that is filled with many messages contrary to the Gospel, and those messages are packaged to SELL! That's why it is so important that all Catholics, cradle and convert, have to consciously choose to follow Christ each day. It has always been so.
Gina wrote:
In addition, it looks like Pope Benedict will issue a universal indult for the old Latin Mass, reinforcing the old Catholic "culture."
Why are you making the assumption that the global South will further disintegrate traditional Catholicism? Why are you also making the assumption that Europe and the West (including Australia) will not resurge, given a decent change to recover its traditional Catholic heritage, which Pope Benedict wants to return to it?
I respond
Intentional discipleship and formation for mission have little to do with the "style" of liturgical worship. You won't find a single person from the Catherine of Siena Institute that believes we need to fundamentally change the nature of the liturgy to accomplish what the Church intends in terms of living out more fully the mission of the laity.
As I recall, Sherry was a parishioner at a very "old school" parish, Blessed Sacrament in Seattle. I don't believe she sees traditional Catholic liturgy as inimicable to discipleship as the Church proclaims it.
Indeed, my parish in Seattle was the only one in the entire diocese to have a traditional Latin Mass (in this case, the old Dominican rite)and the pastor who was responsible for that initiative was the priest with whom I founded the Institute.
Keith,
Liturgy isn't a matter of "style." That's been the problem with many so-called liturgical "experts" since Vatican II. As Pope Benedict has written many times, the rubrics and content of the old Mass are one with traditional Catholic theology. The Novus ordo (and I am excepting those which are done quite well) can wreck a conherent Catholic theology (or evangelization, whichever you prefer). I think you will find, if Pope Benedict re-introduces the Latin Mass of Pius V, that, by necessity, the way the Church is evangelized will change because the way people pray will change.
Gina
Aimee Milburn wrote:
I don't know what seminary formation looks like, though I do know it takes years. But I often wonder how well priests really are prepared to actually lead and form people. Seems like an important piece, as the priests are the real leaders of the parishes.
I respond:
Seminary formation is heavy on the academics: scripture study, moral theology, dogmatics, systematics, but weak in pastoral theology, i.e., the understanding of the role of the priest in helping the lay Christian in their formation as an active member of the body of Christ.
I had an excellent academic training heavily influenced by Thomism at the Dominican School of Philosophy and Theology, but was not explicitly prepared to govern a parish community, even though we staff 19 parishes and Newman Centers around the west. By governance I mean not only how to be involved in the administration of a parish, but also how to help parishioners discern their individual charisms and thus their unique vocations, how to support them in their secular lives, or how to help the parish discern what its vocation was in terms of serving the needs of the community in which it is inserted. Governance is something I have begun to learn about through my association with the Catherine of Siena Institute, and someday we hope to put together materials to help parish leaders in this aspect of ministry. It is an integral part of the three-fold office of Christ the priest, prophet and King, but sadly ignored.
In his September, 2004 ad limina visit with the bishops of New Jersey and Pennsylvania, Pope John Paul II emphasized the importance of the power of governance [munus regendi],
"The exercise of the "munus regendi" is directed both to gathering the flock in the visible unity of a single profession of faith lived in the sacramental communion of the Church and to guiding that flock, in the diversity of its gifts and callings, towards a common goal: the proclamation of the Gospel to the ends of the earth. Every act of ecclesiastical governance, consequently, must be aimed at fostering communion and mission. In view, then, of their common purpose and aim, the three munera of teaching, sanctifying and ruling are clearly inseparable and interpenetrating: "when the Bishop teaches, he also sanctifies and governs the People of God; when he sanctifies, he also teaches and governs; when he governs, he teaches and sanctifies" ("Pastores Gregis," 9; cf. "Lumen Gentium," 20, 27).
Parish pastors share in this three-fold munera in union with the bishop, and so governance on the parochial level must also be directed to calling forth the gifts of the laity, helping them discern those gifts, celebrating them, and then coordinating them for the common good not only of the parish, but also of all the souls living within the boundaries of the parish. Obviously (to me, at least as a former pastor), this task requires a lot of collaboration and delegation within the parish staff and the intentional disciples of the parish. But it is incredibly exciting work in my book - much more interesting than putting together a parish budget for the next fiscal year...
Thank you so much for that wonderful response, Father. I am hoping that this kind of thinking will eventually make its way into seminary formation. Some of my professors in my graduate program also teach in the seminary here, so I am hoping they will have a beneficial influence on the seminarians, if not on the actual curriculum. The pastor, in my experience, sets the tone for the parish, even though he can't do it all himself.
Trained lay people can help by doing good formation of boys and young men in parishes who may be called to be priests, and then have good influence of their own. But I do hope and pray for leadership from "called and gifted" priests like yourself on this, and hope that you and your institute can make a real contribution. I'm sure it is, and will!
Great Article! Thank You!
Thanks to author! I like articles like this, very interesting.
nice blog!
nice blog!Nice information
:-) ochen\' zaebatyj blog!
soglasen s vami ochen\' zaebatyj blog!
Keep up the great work. It very impressive. Enjoyed the visit!
Post a Comment
<< Home