Why do Catholics become Evangelicals?
When I first arrived in Colorado Springs, Sherry told me it is sometimes referred to as "the Evangelical Vatican." Driving around town, I couldn't help notice all the churches on streetcorners and malls. They range in size from megachurches like "New Life" with 15,000 members to tiny ma and pa housechurches that might become megachurches in 20 years.
I even went on a fieldtrip to New Life one Sunday after Mass with Sherry to see what it was like (that might be another blog post someday!) Apparently, many of the members of these churches are former Catholics and Catholics who "double-dip," going to Mass sometimes and to the Evangelical church on other weekends.
In the December 2006 issue of Homiletic and Pastoral Review, Fr. Gerald Mendoza, OP, of the Southern U.S. Dominican Province has an article entitled, "Why do Catholics become Evangelicals?" that I'd like to comment upon. But first, a brief synopsis of his points.
Fr. Mendoza comments on the millions of Hispanic Catholics who are leaving Catholicism for Evangelical Protestantism in Latin America. According to Cardinal Miguel Obando y Bravo of Managua, Nicaragua, the number of Protestants in Latin America has grown from 4 million in 1967 to 30 million in 1985. Only 15% of Latin American Catholics actively practice their faith, and if the trend present between 1960 – 1985 hold, fully one third of Latin America will be Protestant (mostly Evangelical) by 2010. In our own country, anecdotal evidence indicates that 30% of the 35 million Evangelicals are former Catholics. Sherry has told me of "seeker-friendly" megachurches like Bill Hybel's Willow Creek in Chicago that have special classes aimed at fallen away Catholics, who make up the vast majority of former Catholics who become Evangelicals.
The mission of the early Church, Mendoze writes was "unapologetically missionary and evangelical. It would seem that the almost exclusive purpose and mission of the twelve apostles, as well as the many other disciples that accompanied Jesus…was, ostensibly, an on-the-job-training program meant to disseminate the Good News or evangelion, so that God, in his indefatigable love and desire for a personal relationship with his creation, might reconcile it to himself." Mendoza moves through a quick overview of the medieval and post-reformation attitudes towards evangelization, Paul VI's Apostolic Exhortation on Evangelization in the Modern World, and concludes with a quote from a homily of Raniero Cantalamessa, preacher to the Vatican household, on the tendency in our contemporary situation to preach a "new gospel" focusing on "self-knowledge, self-expression, self-acceptance, self-justification, self-realization, in other words, self-fulfillment instead of the self-denial and self-forgetfulness that lies at the heart of Christianity."
But why do Catholics leave? Mendoza outlines four reasons
1) lack of active participation in Mass.
2) lack of scriptural and theological understanding (in part, because of 1).
3) lack of appropriate and effective Catholic catechesis, due to the emphasis on sacramental preparation of children, leading to theological sophistication at the elementary or junior high school level.
4) anemic parishes that are often large and impersonal, and poor preaching.
These may, in fact, be reasons why Catholics leave the Church, but I find these to be no more than symptoms of an underlying problem, which Cantalamessa addresses in a December 2 Advent Homily to the Papal household (http://www.zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid=81035) that Sherry quoted in her January 4 post. I'll requote a portion of it, but the final sentence is the one that touches upon an answer to the question of this post.
"The Churches with a strong dogmatic and theological tradition (as the Catholic Church is par excellence), run the risk of finding themselves at a disadvantage if underneath the immense patrimony of doctrine, laws and institutions, they do not find that primordial nucleus capable of awakening faith by itself…This is one of the reasons why in some parts of the world many Catholics leave the Catholic Church for other Christian realities; they are attracted by a simple and effective announcement that puts them in direct contact with Christ and makes them experience the power of his Spirit."
In the preaching, catechesis, sacramental preparation, service projects, and community-building events that take place in our parishes, perhaps we've forgotten or obscured the "primordial nucleus" of the Gospel message that awakens faith. It is the transforming power of a personal relationship with Jesus, made possible by his grace and the hearing of the basic message of the Gospel, that sets hearts on fire with faith and love. It is intentional discipleship that compels people to desire to encounter Christ in the Mass and other sacraments and to rely on that encounter to continue as his disciples. It is intentional discipleship kept alive by a daily reliance on grace that fuels the Catholic Christian's desire to learn more about Christ in the Scriptures, and to seek the teaching of the Church as a guide for daily life. Dare I say it - it is intentional discipleship in our clergy that leads to inspiring, challenging, creative, passionate, orthodox homilies.
Fr. Mendoza suggests that we can learn something from how evangelicals evangelize, but when it comes to his solutions for how we can stem the tide of Catholics becoming Evangelicals, he offers the "same old, same old."
1) Prioritize the evangelical mission of the Church, including "a new, special consistory…to strategize and establish a new office in the curia to assist with Catholic evangelistic efforts or to reform the existing Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples." Offer moral and financial support for lay evangelistic movements and organizations (the Institute could use some of that support!). And where our expertise is deficient because we've ignored evangelization, he suggests drawing upon successful Evangelical programs.
2) Establish an international movement to bring home lapsed Catholics with a national plan for each country established by each national conference of bishops with the support of the Vatican and mandated participation by each diocese.
3) Establish diocesan and parish offices of adult education and catechesis to foster mid-week adult religious and scriptural educational programs.
None of these solutions seem very promising to me. The typical Catholic response to problems is to create a program. That worked in this country when many Catholics were poor immigrants who lived in Catholic cultural ghettos. Unless we heed Fr. Cantalmessa's observation of the need for preaching the heart of the Gospel and inviting people into a lived relationship with Christ, these programs won't be as successful as they could be. Unless we identify our intentional disciples in our midst, support them, hold them up as the norm for Christian living, and give them tools with which to evangelize others, we will continue to see the seed of faith planted in the hearts of baptized Catholics bloom in Evangelical churches.
Intentional disciples who live and speak about their faith have a much greater potential for successful evangelization than a program. For one thing, they encounter people who are fallen away. By definition, fallen away Catholics aren't present in our parish churches when we advertise our programs in the bulletin! Furthermore, successful evangelization begins with a trusting relationship – either with an individual Christian, or with the Scriptures, or with an institution like the Church. This is perhaps one reason why our frequent commenter, Gina, is soured on the idea of talking about her faith. She's been accosted with questions about her relationship with Jesus by strangers whom she does not trust.
For the same reason, catechetical programs won't be successful until we begin to develop a culture of intentional discipleship. Every campus ministry I was involved with had over 1500 registered parishioners made up of students, university faculty, staff, administrators, plus local folks. Every year because of the tremendous turnover due to graduations, drop outs, transfers, incoming freshmen and graduate students and the general mobility of well-educated Americans, we re-registered every parishioner. Every year we invited people to express what offerings they'd be interested in. Usually a good percentage of people would say they were interested in Bible study, but when we offered bible studies, only a handful – often less than fifteen people - showed up. I don't think my experience is unusual. People who remain uncatechized in spite of the offerings that already exist may well do so because faith is not the highest or even a high priority for them. That's not the case for intentional disciples.
Relying upon the bishops to come up with a plan of evangelization may not be a great idea unless they collaborate with those who are involved already in direct evangelization. The bishops have a lot to teach about the principles of evangelization, but few have experience in the field. With how many unbelievers and fallen away Catholics does the average bishop get to meet and establish a relationship? I certainly didn't meet many as a pastor.
I am grateful Fr. Mendoza is asking the question, "Why do Catholics become Evangelicals?" Too often we ignore that it is happening at all. And while their faith and their relationship with Jesus might be awakened in the megachurches that are popping up everywhere, Catholics who leave the Church are missing the supernatural supports of that faith and relationship: the Sacraments, the wisdom of 2,000 years of Christian experience and teaching, and the communion of saints - that cloud of witnesses living and deceased who support us with their prayers, example, and love. Their ongoing journey of faith may be more rocky than it need be.
Labels: conversion, Evangelicals
posted by Fr. Mike, O.P. @ 9:38 AM
37 Comments
Links to this post
37 Comments:
A small correction:
Although Rick Warren says that a huge percentage of his 20,000 member Saddleback Church are former Catholics (he tells of baptizing former nuns!) the mega-church that has a whole track for former Catholics is Willowcreek, Bill Hybels' immense "seeker-sensitive" church outside Chicago.
They call it the "Catholic Connection" and say that it is designed for spiritual seekers from "Catholic cultural backgrounds".
Rick Warren has pointed out the obvious: a church focused upon evangelizing the unchurched in the US is probably going to be evangelizing people with some kind of religious background. In southern California or Chicago or Boston, it would likely be a Catholic background, in the upper mid-west a Lutheran background, in the south, a Baptist background, etc.
But, across the board, mega-churches in the US that focus on evangelizing the unchurched are disproportionately filled with former Catholics. Colorado Spring isn't a particularly Catholic area but about 1/3 of the 15,000 attendees at New Life church on a Sunday morning are former or still practicing Catholics. Many evangelical mega-churches are estimated to be 1/2 or more former Catholics.
And as anyone who travels in evangelical circles can tell you, it is routine for evangelical pastors, leaders, and missionaries to start their spiritual biography by mentioning that they were raised Catholic. For instance, the 30-something founding pastor of Mars Hill Church in Seattle, which is internationally known, is a former Catholic.
I just left a long comment on Jacks' post "How Do You Communicate an Experience," and then found this new post. The last two paragraphs of my other comment are relevant to this, so I'll reproduce them here:
In my Evangelical church, many of my friends were former Catholics. When I was on my way into the Catholic Church I asked each of them in turn why they had left the Catholic Church. They all gave me the same answer: although they loved the Church, had a sense of God there, and miss many things about it, they did not encounter Christ there. It wasn’t until they met an Evangelical, who witnessed to them about Christ, that they finally encountered Christ.
I have heard this story repeated many times; one of my teachers in the Augustine Institute has a son, now serving in Iraq, who left the Church for the same reason and has been a devout Evangelical every since. This may be an uncomfortable issue, but is an issue that many in the Church are aware of, including recent Popes, and are trying to deal with. Thankfully, so is the Catherine of Siena Institute.
That said, I’ll share something else: I am in the evangelization and catechesis (E&C) track in my graduate program, and we have been doing an intensive study of both how E&C was done in the early Church, and of the E&C documents of the Church today. We have learned that E&C has stages, the first of which is the “primary proclamation of the gospel” which is the preaching of the person of Jesus Christ and his work in salvation history, also called the kerygma.
We have also learned that the Church has identified “primary proclamation” as being weak to the point of being almost non-existent, and the preaching of the faith reduced almost to a series of propositions and mechanical-sounding doctrines.
The US Bishops did a study just a few years ago in which they found that nearly a third of the adults who enter the Church each year have vanished by the end of the year, and the problem is that they never received the primary proclamation of the gospel – they were never introduced into a relationship with Christ. They were taught doctrines – catechesis – but they were never evangelized.
The problem is endemic, and though identified is not really being addressed. How many bishops or priests, for example, go door-to-door in their own parishes, or invite people from the pulpit to come talk to them afterwards about Jesus and the Church? In my Evangelical church, pastors and lay people went door-to-door, and every single Sunday at the end of the service people were invited to place their faith in Christ, and come forward and meet with someone about it. I was one of the counselors who met with people who did, and it was a wonderful experience.
Yes, some people thought we were rude and intrusive. But the gospel is intrusive. They crucified Christ for it, and Christ promised us that we would suffer, too. I’ve had my share of doors slammed in my face. But I’ve also had my share of seeing people commit to Christ, and seeing their lives change, because of our witness, and I can tell you that there is no better or more joyous experience than that. It makes up for all the rest.
But not once in any Catholic mass or setting have I ever heard someone witnessed to and invited to believe in Jesus, and never have I heard a priest during a homily invite people to come talk to him or other counselors afterwards about it. And when I try to suggest to anyone that this be done, I’m told “that’s too Protestant. We don’t do that here.”
Well, we don’t, and we see the fruits of it in the millions of Catholics who fall away altogether, or go to evangelical churches who reach out to them and invite them to have a relationship with Jesus. Which makes me all the more glad for this blog, and the opportunity to make these suggestions to people who also really want to do something about it. Thank you so much for this!
One last thought: the New Evangelization annunciated by John Paul II is directed first not at the world, but at the people in the pews, who have been poorly evangelized and poorly catechized. Maybe we should start by inviting the people in the pews to have a relationship with Christ, in case they don’t already, and to make sure they really do.
Fr. Mike, I just had another thought, and want to ask a question which is daring and may offend some, but it's a question that needs to be asked.
In my time in the Catholic Church, I have met priests to seem to have a very close relationship with the Lord, which I can see in the manner in which they say the mass: very reverent, attentive, devout, and prayerful.
I have also met priests whom I've wondered have a relationship with the Lord at all, they seem so worldly, and say the mass in such a hurried, worldly, rote manner. (I can also see this sometimes in the way priests hear confessions).
Fr. Mike, in your opinion, do most priests have a close relationship with the Lord, or do they need to be evangelized also? How well does seminary formation really bring young men into a close relationship with Christ, and prepare him to share that relationship with others?
I realize formation probably differs among seminaries and whether one is in a religious or diocesan seminary, but I do wonder about it sometimes.
Aimee and Fr. Mike,
I think you have hit on something that I have long been trying to put my finger on. I think, in Catholic circles today, we see a lot of good people (even those who describe themselves as "faithful/orthodox/favorite-label-of-the-day" Catholics) make the mistake of doctrine for the lived faith. (Your comment, Fr., about the subject of the presentations you have been invited to give is what brought that to mind for me.) We've got a generation or two of Catholics who haven't been catechized. But often, we emphasize only one element of that catechesis failure: the lack of an education in the dogmas of the Church. The second, and the two are not really separable when it comes to true catechesis, is an education in the life of the faith. I'll give an example from my own life. I was taught only the most rudimentary basics of the faith in CCD. I don't recall, besides learning some basic prayers and one walk-through of the Liturgy of the Eucharist before First Communion, I don't recall being taught much of anything through all years about the teachings of the Church. I also grew up in a Catholic household whose only sign of the faith was the fact that we had a few crucifixes in the house, a bible (that was never opened) under the coffee table, and went to mass on Sundays. Now I don't want to belittle what I was given, because God used it to move my soul, but I cannot help but conclude that it was just going through the motions. The best sign I can give for that is that my parents no longer go to mass (unless I am coming to visit). It was a heart-breaking thing to realize that your parents insisted on mass every Sunday because they thought it was the "right thing to do" in raising children, not because they believed.
(BTW, I try hard not to judge my parents, because there are signs of real faith at times. Or at least I would like to think so. And I pray desparately that whatever is there grows.)
So we were starved of two forms of catechesis. Now, we happen to live in a time where information about the dogmas of the Church are now readily available. We can go online and in a few instances have a copy of all of the encyclicals and the catechism at our disposal. When you are starved, you gorge yourself on the first thing you find. And so many have done, teaching themselves the dogmas of the faith from books, magazines, internet sites, etc. But that's only one part of what we lacked. And the mistake, I think, is that some have come to elevate a "system" -- a theological structure -- to the place of Christ Himself. Possibly not knowing the difference. And while dogma can be learned (to a degree) from a book, a life can only be by engaging it. That's part of our struggle, too, I think.
Gina,
I wish you would be a bit more generous in your reading of my post. I didn't say that it's best or wise to engage and learn dogma through the internet or reading a few books. I merely described something that is happening. I also never suggested a devaluing of dogma, but precisely was emphasizing that it is something that flows from Christ and shouldn't be mistaken, on its own, for the relationship with Christ itself.
As for RCIA, I cannot speak to its content as I have never been exposed to it. However, to suggest I have it "backwards" misses my point. The CCD I was exposed to (and many of my contemporaries) was exposed to was precisely not about a relationship with Jesus. It, at best, was about a relationship with an image of Jesus that man determines and controls (the "Barney" Jesus, for example)and not a Person that is outside of my control, that is real, that pushes back. My point was, frankly, to emphasize the failure to catechize in both of these dimensions.
“I think you have it backwards. From what I can see, CCD and RCIA have been all about a relationship with Jesus (whether it's well done or not, is not the issue right now), with no discussion about what follows from that. “
Gina:
But what we are talking explicitly is the actual practice of CCD and RCIA and evangelization, not the theology. Everyone here loves the Church’s theology of evangelization, but, in large measure, it isn’t being lived. That it is being *done badly* is exactly the point.
Church teaching does explicitly distinguish between different stages of the ministry of the word: 1) pre-evangelism which develops trust in the unchurched; 2) initial proclamation of the kergyma, which awakens person faith; 3) “initiatory catechesis” which follows initial proclamation, and 4) post-baptismal catechesis.
No one here is advocating the jettisoning of dogma or initiatory catechesis. We are saying that in the majority of instances, we leap over #1 and 2 in practice and go directly to #3 and 4.
When we do that, we are building a second floor of doctrine before the first floor of personal faith in the Christ of the kergyma, of intentional discipleship, is in place. And that results in a huge number of entirely in-name-only Catholics for whom dogmas is just a set of meaningless or oppressive rules because the central relationship with Christ which gives them meaning is missing.
An adult cannot substitute the faith and intention of others or the Church for his/her own response to God which is the necessary pre-requisite (“positive disposition”) to receive baptism.
“The disposition that suffices for receiving the baptismal grace is the faith and intention, either of the one baptized, if it be an adult, or of the Church, if it be a child.” (Summa Theologiae, III, Question 71. The preparations that accompany Baptism)
The really startling thing is, as the 1917 Catholic Encyclopedia points out:
“. . . it may even happen, in the reception of these sacraments, that the character is imparted and the grace withheld; the lack of proper dispositions which is sufficient to prevent the reception of the grace may not prevent the reception of the character.
Thus, an adult who receives baptism without right faith and repentance but with a real intention of receiving the sacrament, obtains the character without the grace. “
How many adults do we receive in the Church every year who receive the sacramental character but not the sacramental grace because we did not preach the kergyma clearly to them and awaken them to the need for “right faith and repentance?”
As I told Cardinal George last summer, I am the “survivor of three RCIAs and graduate of none” (To my surprise, he roared with laughter. He was already very ill but had not yet announced his cancer surgery but he certainly hadn’t lost his sense of humor).
All my RCIA’s were purely and simply terrible (two were on the liberal end, one was very conservative) and all in completely different ways. Not once did I hear the kergyma preached.
If you are a non-Catholic trying to determine whether or not you can, in conscious, be Catholic, how the process is actually run is everything! You don’t know (or care) what the documents say RCIA is supposed to be about, what matter is what you actually see, hear, and experience in the one you are going through. It is there that you will receive your first and abiding impression of what the Catholic faith and Catholic Church is about: Will it be this?
The Christian Faith is, above all, conversion to Jesus Christ, (141) full and sincere adherence to his person and the decision to walk in his footsteps. (142) Faith is a personal encounter with Jesus Christ making of oneself a disciple of him.
General Directory of Catechesis, 53
Gina,
I really must invite you to revisit what Keith and others have written and reconsider it. Because one cannot help but be left with the impression that your m.o. is to find fault with anything posted here, even at the cost of a fair characterization of what is being presented.
Let me assure you that no one on this blog is seeking to make the Church into Protestantism. Accept that at face value for the moment, and then ask, "if that is true, then what is the point that they are trying to make?"
I think we will have a far greater chance of genuine dialogue if you do that. Because your last responses to Keith, I find striking, from the fact that I don't think Keith (a) disagrees with you on the nature of the Mass nor (b) in his suggestion for a setting for evangelization of outsiders, is proposing the creation of a Protestant liturgy. What he desires is that everyone come to know Christ. That's not a desire that any Catholic should object to.
Aimee,
I definitely agree with your statement about the Liturgy of the Word. From my perspective, however, there is not much there geared explicitly to help someone who does not have a Christian worldview move from where they are to where God calls them.
The Word is proclaimed and that in itself can be a powerful moment--please don't get me wrong. What I was trying to point out is that there is a difference in intent between a megachurch service and the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
Thanks for your clarification!
Aimee,
Yeah, I got that after I reread the comments in order. :)
I think that there are, indeed, things that can be done to make the Liturgy of the Word more "evangelistic" (and I agree with the things that you and Fr. Mike have talked about).
That being said, I'm still not sure that the Sacrifice of the Mass is the best vehicle for nurturing and supporting 'seekers.' The danger in doing so, I believe, is that we risk stretching the Liturgy until it loses some of its integrity.
Of course, that presupposes the 'fact' that communities are, indeed, filled with intentional disciples rather than 'functional seekers' (as I believe they are now). :)
I believe the most effective things we can do is surround the Liturgy with opportunities for seeker-targeted proclamation and further formation for baptized Catholics.
Keith:
This is exactly what Fr. Mike and I are currently working on - an RCIA inquiry process that is truly inquiry and proclamation, not initiatory catechesis. An inquiry process that is primarily Socratic in style (question and answer in small groups) and gently invites inquirers to talk about their real questions and lived experiences of God to this point - and during which leaders gradually introduce the kergyma and its challenges.
It's challenging but very exciting!
Sherry,
As usual, my response is: Yay! How can I help. Please let me know!
I also think that a fully rounded RCIA Inquiry Process should contain an experience of prayer and communal worship that might be particular to that community--nothing touches people who are on the threshold of faith so much as the realization and experience that He is indeed real!
Aimee -
It sounds like you've been reading, "Our Hearts Were Burning Within Us"! I took the bishops' proposal that RCIA be a model for all adult faith formation seriously, and wrote a 4 part series of articles for the Siena e-Scribe. It was interesting to note that the description of the pre-catechumenate, where the basic kerygma was to be proclaimed and initial faith and conversion stimulated, was limited to a few pages in the RCIA study text that the bishops published.
So I agree, the essential task of establishing the foundational relationship with Christ, which is to lead the individual into full communion with his body, the Church (and where that relationship will be celebrated, nurtured and deepened through the sacraments) is missing.
BTW, if you want to read these, you can find them in the March through September e-Scribes at http://www.siena.org/Library.htm.
Hi, Gina;
Thanks for reading my long post on this topic.
You wrote, "This is an interesting question, but you have left out, or underplayed two important aspects about the relationship with Jesus Christ: the liturgy and personal prayer."
Fr. Mendoza's article, as I mentioned, gives "lack of active participation in the Mass" as one reason why people leave the Church. Perhaps I should have given more of an idea of what he meant. He wasn't commenting on the quality of the liturgy and active participation in the sense that Sacrosanctum Concilium speaks of it. He simply meant they aren't there at all!
Here's the entirety of his text on this section:
"Out of 60 million Catholics in 1997 in the U.S., only 25% minimally practiced their faith.[13] In 1999, the National Catholic Reporter conducted a study that showed a general decline in Mass attendance, while at the same time a trend toward more personal autonomy regarding all morals.[14] Without question, the person that does not know his or her faith is unable to defend it or to intelligibly critique it against challenges posed by fundamentalists, and a person who does not actively participate in his or her faith, at a minimum, with regular church attendance, cannot know his or her faith."
In addition thanks for pointing out the fact that I didn't mention prayer explicitly, except in the penultimate sentence. I presumed that people would recognize that prayer is the very heart of our response to the relationship that Christ desires to have with us. There can be no "personal relationship" with Christ without a well-developed life of prayer in all its manifestations.
Aimee wrote:
It’s another thing I’d like to write about and promote, in time. Already have a little bit on my blog.
I reply:
Aimee, I loved your little sacramental reflection. In fact, it inspired me to write a bit on the Sacraments on my own blog www.takeyourplace.squarespace.com
I even quoted you in my post. :)
Keith
I posted a comment this morning, but it seems to have disappeared . . .oh well.
Anyway, thanks for your kind words about my post, Aimee. We do have to help others remain vulnerable to the transforming grace of Christ and try and remain so ourselves, allowing others to help us.
I do believe that part of the answer to Sherry's question about lack of transformation and effectiveness among Catholics lies in the lack of sacramental preparedness among many Catholics. Case in point, there aren't exceptionally long lines to celebrate the Sacrament of Reconciliation in most parishes, but there certainly seems to be long lines for reception of the Eucharist.
Heck, I've done it, too--and I know better.
I believe that there is a direct correlation between unleashing the sacramental graces and effectiveness in mission (among many other things).
Why do so many lapsed Catholics get sucked in, and I mean sucked in, the "megachurch" style of worship these days? Let me count the ways!
Packaging -- those slick media-conscious preachers are very adept in this respect.
Baby boomers and post-baby boomers were victims of the giddy (down)side of post Vatican II
"reforms," and they received a watered-down formation.
Lack of Biblical understanding and appreciation of its historic origin. CATHOLICS GAVE THE WORLD THE BIBLE. Only the Protestants edited much out only to suit their purposes, much alike what the Bolsheviks got away with in Russia for 70 yrs.
THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS THE BIBLE CHURCH!. Don't let them fool you!
Lack of understanding of the Eucharist. -- Once a person has a solid understanding about the Eucharist, the "born again" aspect of evangelical Protestantism will have less appeal. One can, and should be, born again, and again, and again ... and remain a solid Catholic. That way when somebody asks "Why don't Catholics believe in or have 'personal relationships' with Jesus?" they can tell their inquring evangelical friends that Catholics indeed have a personal relationship with Jesus in a far superior way than the average evangelical could understand.
I could go on and on -- but the biggest danger to Catholicism in the US isn't the sexual scandals of past decades, but the slick and very deviousness of the oh-so-simple message of the evangelicals.
Because we live in a media-saturated society today, fewer people are giving these siren-churches a real mental "going over," thus making themselves vulnerable to getting sucked into the glitzy, power-point conducted and packaged "services" and all the new "Praise and Worship" songs (that ironically are a result of Kumbaya Katholicism) that are as interesting to sing as watching paint dry is to visual stimulation.
These megachurches operate without any real sense of the historical claims of Catholicism, Anglicanism, and Orthodoxy. As a result, one often hears the old line that we should all do what we can to return the church to its supposedly more pristine state as it was described in Acts, and certainly before Constantine turned Christianity into state-established Catholicism and all went to hell before Luther banged his complaints on the church door.
Sometimes I'm tempted to ask these people if they'd be willing to sell off their mega-sized SUVs and start driving old Beetles again. Misplaced and misunderstood sense of nostalgia. Those good old days of Acts also included the pre-conversion Saul. Oh, well, that was a minor detail.
Only in America could this slick hucksterism thrive!
I don't know whether to laugh or cry whenever I see a megachurch website where the head pastor's wife is referred to as "First Lady." Oh, and some of these pastors have somehow managed to get away with being called "bishop," minus the Apostolic lineage.
Catholics wake up! If you're that upset to leave, at least join the Episcopalians, (or the more conservative Anglicans), Lutherans or the Orthodox--but not this K.I.S.S. nonsense masquerading as a legitimate form of
Christianity. Maintain your standards!
Keith,
The Mass is the period when we join the perpetual adoration continually offered to God by the saints. No, it is not designed explicitly for catechumens or those thinking about entering the Church. And there is no reason why it should be; it never has been before. Read about the early liturgy (3-4th centuries; catechumens were not even allowed after the readings).
If you want a service that is more deeply "protestant," perhaps you should join an evangelical denomination. This is precisely why I am always wary of those who are SO enthusiastic about evangelical churches. They always go overboard. The Catholic Church is what it is. If that isn't good enough for you, then perhaps you should seek elsewhere.
By the way, your suggestion for an informal, "small l" liturgy is more properly classified as a Bible discussion group. Devaluing Catholic liturgy this way is irreverencing the liturgy. Again, if the Catholic liturgy is not good enough for you, perhaps you should seek elsewhere. It' offensive to those of us who see the Mass as intrinsic to our lives.
Gina
The other difficulty, I think, that the Catholic Church faces is that the Sacrifice of the Mass is not explicitly evangelistic--what I mean by that is that the movement of the liturgy is a movement primarily of those who are joined to the Church already. Even the homily is intended to "break open the Word" so that we might enter more deeply into the Eucharist.
In contrast, most Protestant services--in particular those of megachurches--seem to be designed around two thing--explicit evangelization of seekers and exploration into living the Christian life more fully. Then, they "surround" this experience with support ministries, formation, and small-faith group encounters.
The primary activity of a Catholic parish is, therefore, a Liturgy which does not have as its goal the explicit conversion of non-members (or even the recommittment of current members). These things may occur at a Liturgy, but that is not the primary "goal" of the mass.
From a conversion of seekers paradigm, then, the Church already seems to be a "step behind." On top of that, most parishes don't have supporting ministries that teach and form lay catholics on how to bring "Christ to the marketplace" or how to share their faith with others.
Given that the Liturgy is, thank God, what it is (and shouldn't/couldn't change), how can the Church respond? I think it would be interesting if the Church offered liturgies (with a small 'l') that offered an experience of communal worship of God and gave participants an opportunity to hear the gospel preached and shared in its fullness.
There is no sense offering those things, however, without making "invitation" a priority in the community. Formation and support for catholics on how to share their faith in a respectful way, as well as discernment and support for those with a charism of evangelization.
The first response most catholics might have is that Fr. So and So doesn't have the time to include that in his schedule. And they are probably right. Set aside the issue that most pastors spend an inordinate amount of time on administration and not governance, these types of liturgies can be entirely lay-led if they need to be. Because of the importance of the ministerial priesthood, it doesn't make sense to introduce the gospel in a continually "ordained-free" environment, but there are enough charisms and talents within the parish to plan and execute this initiative.
Currently, most 'seekers' who find their way into RCIA or into a Returning Catholics program find themselves facing a 'presentation.'
And frankly, that just isn't enough.
Wow, Aimee, that's a great idea - to invite people to come to me after Mass to talk about their relationship with Christ. Of course, it means I'd better be prepared to talk about mine (which means, of course, I'd better have one!)
I can't tell you how many conversations I've been invited to have or talks I've been asked to give about abortion, stem-cell research, papal infallibility, the Inquisition, just war theory, artificial contraception, etc. I can't remember the last time a parishioner asked me to talk about my relationship with Christ, or to talk about theirs. Reconciliation, a sacrament I love to celebrate, is so powerful for me because it is most often in that context that people talk about their relationship with Christ and their desire to respond more fully to him.
This is an interesting question, but you have left out, or underplayed two important aspects about the relationship with Jesus Christ: the liturgy and personal prayer. Cardinal Ratzinger wrote a good piece about the New Evangelization and he says:
"God cannot be made known with words alone. One does not really know a person if one knows about this person secondhandedly. To proclaim God is to introduce to the relation with God: to teach how to pray. Prayer is faith in action. And only by experiencing life with God does the evidence of his existence appear. This is why schools of prayer, communities of prayer, are so important. There is a complementarity between personal prayer ("in one's room," alone in front of God's eyes), "para-liturgical" prayer in common ("popular religiosity") and liturgical prayer. Yes, the liturgy is, first of all, prayer; its specificity consists in the fact that its primary project is not ourselves (as in private prayer and in popular religiosity), but God himself—the liturgy is actio divina, God acts and we respond to this divine action."
As to Jesus Christ, Cardinal Ratzinger writes: "Only in Christ and through Christ does the theme God become truly concrete: Christ is Emmanuel, the God-with-us—the concretization of the "I am," the response to Deism."
I think the point that Cardinal Ratzinger makes about prayer is very important and it include the liturgy. Prayer is essential and it includes private prayer. The reforms that Pope Benedict is expected to make to the Novus ordo may include restricting the actions of the laity in the liturgy and it is important to understand that "active participation" in the liturgy (SC) does not necessarily entail "busyness," but does inherently entail contemplation, meditation, and prayer. I think Protestants, especially Evangelicals, do not understand this. Perhaps post-Vatican II Catholics (of which I am a member by age, if not by disposition) do not understand it, either. But it is a feature of traditional Roman Catholic worship that differentiates it from Protestant worship and links it to Eastern Orthodox worship.
Gina
Well that's because of liberation theology and it's continuing pernicious effect on Hispanic Catholicism.
Gina
In other words, Keith, if nothing the Catholic Church does, with respect to evangelization, is right, why do you stay? Let the evangelicals have their own methodology. Why does the Church have to change everything she does?
Gina
Jack,
I think you have it backwards. From what I can see, CCD and RCIA have been all about a relationship with Jesus (whether it's well done or not, is not the issue right now), with no discussion about what follows from that. A lot of biblical scholarship, as well as what passes for "scholarhip" in religious education posits a Jesus that loves us and whom we love, but who makes no demands on us and permits everything (contraception, abortion, homosexuality, same-sex civil unions, etc.). It's all about Jesus; there is no dogma.
As Pope Benedict's Deus caritas est showed, God IS love, but that love has specific demands and parameters and ways in which humans must behave in order that that love be played out. That's why doctrine is spelled out. And that's why is should be taught.
It's all well and good to say that the Jesus proffered by the above is a false Jesus, but that's almost beside the point. The relationship with Jesus that one has differs from faith to faith; all Christian denominations privilege different parts of the Scriptures and emphasize different aspects of Jesus. We don't just embrace Jesus Christ without predispositions or assumptions. I think it is naive to assume that dogma can be engaged and learned just by going to the internet or reading a few books. And it devalues its importance, as well. Dogma is not just a series of arid propositions. It's the combined wisdom and tradition of the Church. And that's part of Catholicism, too. It's not just Scripture and the unmediated encounter with Jesus.
Gina
I read a piece on Godspy from the New York Times about Hispanic Catholics, and about the rivalry between Catholicism and Pentecostalism. Hispanic Catholics were characterized as believing that Catholicism is about 'solidarity' whereas Pentecostalism is merely about individualism. I couldn't help thinking that, if it was put to me like that, Pentecostalism sounds a lot more Christian than Catholicism, and a lot more likely to tie up with people's experience. It's because they've slipped into *identifying* Catholicism with collective solidarity (rather than seeing that solidarity as a result of Christ's presence to each of us as individuals) that they are bleeding Hispanic Christians to the Pentecostals, in my opinion.
Fr. Mike said:
Wow, Aimee, that's a great idea - to invite people to come to me after Mass to talk about their relationship with Christ. Of course, it means I'd better be prepared to talk about mine (which means, of course, I'd better have one!)
Bless you, Father, you’re the first priest who has actually reacted with enthusiasm to me when I suggest this! To me there is nothing more exciting, and if I were a priest I’d be doing it all the time. I’d never miss an opportunity.
In addition, it is a great charism that lay people can also exercise, to be available to witness to people and pray with them about their relationship with Jesus (and the Church, in the Catholic context). In my evangelical church, I went through a three-month training in order to become a counselor after the services, as it was great help for our very busy pastors. And it was such a wonderful blessing to meet with the people who came down.
Along with evangelism training (another thing I’d love to do in a Catholic context, as I’m a trained door-to-door evangelist), after-mass counseling is another thing I’d love to do, if I had priests who would do the inviting!
Keith: actually, I was responding to Gina's comment, not yours. Yours I agreed with very much.
But it would be very easy for motivated priests to make the Liturgy of the Word more evangelical, as Fr. Mike and I are discussing in this thread, and for the laity to help.
I second that, Jack. Constant nit-picking, Gina, makes it difficult to carry on a real dialogue here.
And to set the facts straight: the Liturgy of the Word is explicitly for catechumens, and in the early Church was even called the "mass of the catechumens." This part of the mass has never been considered exclusively for Catholics only, or exclusively for adoration only.
The Liturgy of the Word is explicitly for the proclamation of the gospel and has always been open to everyone. In the early church, after the Liturgy of the Word, catechumens left to their own meeting to discuss the readings and preaching, as part of the preparation for reception of the sacraments. Baptized believers remained for the Eucharist, but today even that is open for anyone to attend (though not receive).
That's wonderful, Sherry. I'd love to hear more about what you're doing also.
Here are two other key things I learned from recent Church documents this year:
1) The baptismal catechumenate, which is RCIA, is the model for ALL catechesis. But the beginning of the process, the primary proclamation, needs to be developed.
2) Adult Faith Formation is to take PRIMARY place in the Church, ahead of all other forms of catechesis. This second is especially surprising, as most parishes focus on kids and teenagers - and confirmation of teenagers sometimes turns into the "graduation" sacrament - i.e. graduation from the Church, not confirmation into a deeper life of holiness and witness.
Fr. Mike: if you do start inviting people to come up after mass and talk with you about Christ, I would so LOVE to hear how it goes!
Gosh, Keith. Thanks! I looked, and was struck by this line of yours, about the manner in which some Catholics may unthinkingly receive the sacraments:
We are like thirst wanderers in the desert who, after receiving an overflowing cup of water, pour it on to the sun-seared sand instead of into our bodies.
Wow. What an image.
So, our job is to teach people to open their mouths, and drink. And that means being open, and vulnerable, to the transforming power and grace of Christ.
Fr. Mike:
Yes, I studied "Our Hearts Were Burning Within Us" last year, and referred to it in one of the papers I wrote for school.
I appreciate the link to your articles - I'll definitely take a look. No sense re-inventing the wheel if someone else is already doing some good thinking!
Also, just by the way: I met with one of my professors today to go over the paper I wrote for him this past term, and afterwards got into a conversation about his upcoming course, which is on moral and mystical theology. We both were enthusiastically gushing about how well-formed the Dominicans are in the mystical theology (among other things) of the Church. My professor studied in Rome, and attended lectures in the same hall where Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange (my favorite) used to teach, the one they built just for him.
Thought you'd get a kick out of that.
Speaking of prayer, which you mention, the prayer tradition of the Church, the mystical theology, to me is one of the most precious treasures of the Church, and part and parcel of understanding and deepening in the sacraments. It’s another thing I’d like to write about and promote, in time. Already have a little bit on my blog.
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
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home