Posted on 08/12/2003 7:52:00 PM PDT by Land of the Irish
Kenneth Jones’ statistic research work first appeared in Latin Mass magazine in the Nineties. As a CPA working in the investments industry at that time, I was already immersed in charts, graphs and financial reports comparing projections and actual results. I knew the decline in the Church had been precipitous since the Sixties, but in page after page of simple bar charts awful truth sank in. A picture says a thousand words, good or bad. It occurred to me then that the quantitative approach to the charting the decline since Vatican II would make a good book someday, and that day has come.
Mr. Jones addressed the Catholic Citizens of Illinois monthly lunch forum on August 8th (held on the second Friday of every month at the Chicago Athletic Association) discussing his new book, The Index of Leading Catholic Indicators, (Oriens Publishing, St. Louis, MO.) He could have easily subtitled this work with any number of clever by-lines, but showing a lawyer’s restraint, he delivers the numbers straight up with simple charts and tables covering the period 1920 to 2000, and with projections through 2020 in most cases, based on the trends since the Sixties. His sources of data are independent and credible. The approach to evaluating data (specifically in the area of survey bias in determining Mass attendance numbers) is scientific and accurate. The results are bleak and depressing.
Mr. Jones is a very personable speaker, which was an asset as he recounted the grim statistics in Catholic vocations, beliefs and education to a scandal wearied crowd of traditional Catholics. From 1920 to 2000, the Catholic population in America grew from around 18 million to over 60 million, a 360% increase. During this same time, the number of priest steady rose, to a peak in 1970 of 59,000. In that same year, there were 161,000 nuns and sisters. But in the years that followed, vocations to the priesthood, sisterhood, and holy orders collapsed. There are one tenth as many seminarians today as in the Sixties. The nuns as most of us remember them - teaching and loving - have been cut by more than half. Everywhere there is a lack of, or loss of faith in Catholic teachings.
What could have gone so terribly wrong to produce such declines?
Jones believes, as do many Catholics, that the Second Vatican Council and the implementation of various reforms immediately following that Council are directly responsible. “No reasonable person looking at the evidence could come to any other conclusion. The beginning of the declines in all categories commences after the Council, and it’s been all down hill since. Yes, I believe there is a positive correlation.” Yet in spite of the post-Council wreckage, church leaders continue to insist that the Second Council was a smashing success, and the reforms should continue, in spite of the results. The disconnect between the causes and effects of the decline was the motivation for writing the book, which Jones hopes will help Catholics distinguish between the myths and realities of Vatican II.
The statistics related to Catholic attitudes on core Catholic values have changed dramatically in the last forty years. They reveal that since Vatican II, there are tens of millions of self-proclaimed Catholics in this country who aren’t Catholic at all.
Though the results in several polls vary, Jones believes that Mass attendance in the US is currently at 25%. In the 1920’s it was a time of huge urban Cathedrals, and tightly woven very ethnic and very Catholic parishes. Not surprising, Mass attendance was high, as high as 80% in some areas, but always a major of the parish members. Attendance began to crash in the Sixties, falling by double digits annually in the early Seventies to one in four Catholics today.
There are no lines at the confessionals either, because no one is going. In one survey, Jones noted, one in three Catholics today claim to go to Confession once a month. “All you have to do is look around on Sunday to know that something’s not right. It’s called survey bias. We suspect many Catholics surveyed knew they had to make an annual confession to remain Catholic, and they gave information that was not true.”
A 1994 New York Times/CBS poll showed that 70% of Catholics between the ages of 18 and 44 have lost faith in the Eucharist, believing instead that it was a “symbolic reminder” of Jesus. The same survey revealed that 51% of Mass going Catholics believed that the Eucharist was symbolic! If the majority of modern Catholics had their way, noted Jones, we would have woman priests and married priests, and all prohibitions on birth control would be lifted, including abortion. Jones traces the increasing gulf between Catholic actions and beliefs to the Second Council.
Faced with dwindling religious order teachers, and poor catechism and education quality, the numbers of Catholic schools and students declined dramatically from 1960 to today. There is good news: private Catholic schools (non-diocesan) have been increasing as orthodox home-school families have banded together, hired teachers and converted buildings.
Jones concludes that the Second Vatican Council wasn’t so much a spark that lit a dry forest, but a force that broke a dam which held back oceans of dissent and heresy. The application of the reform of Vatican II says Jones, combined with the social and technological changes going on in the world, has been a complete disaster. It is difficult for Jones and many Catholics to reconcile the optimism of the pope, who lavishes praise on the many fruits of Vatican II that are spreading their branches in the New Pentecost. “If this is renewal,” said Jones wryly, “I don’t want to be around when the decline sets in.”
To avoid that decline, Jones suggested that Catholics resort to the most powerful and plentiful weapon in their grasp - prayer. Prayer for our families, our country, and most importantly for our priests and bishops, that they make the right decisions and provide faithful leadership. The second thing to do is evangelize, joining groups such as Credo, which Jones helped found in St. Louis in 1996, or like Catholic Citizens of Illinois (also founded in 1996.) “Through forums, newsletters, websites, phone calls, conferences, videos, tapes and TV the voice of authentic Catholicism is being heard.” Jones encouraged restoration oriented Catholics to keep the truth alive and in front of the Catholic laity and clergy, and not to be afraid to defend the Catholic faith, and the truth, when it is challenged.
It’s hard to argue with Jones’ numbers, but it is possible to look at them in different ways. We all know that there are many millions of inactive, self-described Catholics who ask nothing of their parish and give nothing. If we were to exclude non-Mass attending Catholics from the pool of people relying on vocations, catechism, and education to sustain their families, the numbers across the board look different. In the 1920’s two out of three Catholics went to Mass weekly, a number that was sustained though the early Sixties, then crashed to one out of four Catholics today.
Assuming we are concerned with a body of believers and a Church known as Catholics, I don’t believe it is reasonable to include Catholics-in-name-only, who show up at Church to be “hatched, matched, or dispatched” and never to be seen of again. The priest problem doesn’t look as bad when compared to the number of Catholics who come to Mass, in fact it shows improvement. From 1920 to 2000, the number of Mass attending parishioners per priest declined from 500 to 350. Conversely, during that period, the number of total Catholics per priest nearly doubled, from 843 to 1,429, demonstrating a “shortage” of priests. I would argue that a priest is primarily going to minister to the needs of Catholics who go to Mass, not the 75% who don’t show up for Mass. These projections get worse going forward, but by 2020, we can assume that there will be around one priest for every 500 mass going Catholics, or at the level experienced in the 1920’s.
The good news is that in spite of the collapse in vocations in the old-line religious orders like the Jesuits and Franciscans, there are new orders of priests that are booming with seminarians. The Legionaires of Christ, the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, the Society of St. John Cantius, for example, are highly orthodox and thriving communities. Even the bleak landscape of diocesan vocations is dotted with hope in unexpected cities like Denver and Lincoln, Nebraska, where orthodox men are being attracted by orthodox bishops.
In spite of the decline in Catholic education at the elementary and high school level, vocations are being created in great numbers as the number of orthodox universities increases. The greatest number of vocations recruitment up to the 1960’s was done in Catholic Universities. The collapse in the number of seminarians is mostly due to the collapse of faithfulness to traditional Catholic values in places like Georgetown, DePaul, and other universities that today are entirely secularized. With the rise of private colleges like Thomas Aquinas in California, Franciscan in Steubenville, and now Ave Maria in Florida, there are increasing numbers of authentically Catholic universities, and the consequence, as before, will be increasing vocations coming from them.
The decline in the number of Catholic schools and students is not entirely driven by Vatican II, though the collapse of authentic Catholic curriculum and catechism in these schools can find little other cause.
Affordability of Catholic education has been adversely impacted by taxes on working families, which rose from 15% of gross income to 45% of gross income today, all taxes (federal, state, and local) included. Under these circumstances, most Catholic families can’t afford to send their children to a private or parochial school, and without any other choice, are forced into public education and the propaganda that comes with it, reinforcing the secular and skeptic beliefs that plague us today.
The numbers of sisters, many of them teachers, declined from 138,000 in 1945 to 75,000 today, forcing Catholic schools to hire lay teachers and pay them competitive salaries. Not only was this more expensive, but many Catholic parents reacted by sending their kids to the public schools if brothers or nuns weren’t teaching anymore at their parish school. During his talk, Jones correctly pointed out that the tragic demise of the sisterhood worldwide needed to be better appreciated by Catholics. In spite of heroic popular saints like the Therese the Little Flower, and Mother Teresa of Calcutta, the orders of sisters have been co-opted by feminists and dissenters to an astounding degree.
Fortunately, just like in the priesthood, the orders of sisters that are growing and thriving are those which have clung most tenaciously to tradition and orthodoxy. The great orders of tomorrow are being founded before our eyes by the courage and faith of women like Mother Assumpta Long, TV evangelist Mother Angelica, and Mother Teresa. Just as the priesthood of the future will be populated by men of orthodoxy and faith, the liberal sisters of the 80’s and 90’s will soon have run their course, and the restoration will be aided by orthodox nuns.
Kenneth Jones has provided a wealth of information on the decline in the Catholic Church. What remains to be seen is whether the bishops will act on it, or continue to perpetuate the myth that everything is fine, and the fruits of the Second Council are continuing to unfold, when in fact, the exact opposite is true.
This is what the supporters of Vatican II fear the most: facts. They are only able to exist in a fantasy world; in the real world everything is the opposite of what they claim. A simple dose of reality is the most powerful antidote to bromides about the "new springtime of the Faith."
Just an excuse to bash the Novus Ordo and Vatican II. Same old, same old.
Good luck at getting much interest. In case you trads hadn't noticed, there's a BOYCOTT of you guys going on.
These threads are boring, boring, boring.
Don't ping me anymore. Most of this is regurgitated cr*p. If I wanted to rehash the excuses of schismatics for the nth time, I'd join in on these junk threads.
sitetest
Again! Maybe this one will last longer than 48 hours.
P.S. Are you now a trad, sinkspur? If not, why aren't you joining the boycott?
But, your point is well taken about why he remained in the party and why he would run as a Republican.
He's gonna win that race, you know.
Good luck at getting much interest. In case you trads hadn't noticed, there's a BOYCOTT of you guys going on.
Who organized this "boycott"? Why? What is heretical about this piece? How do you ever so pius members of the Catholic Caucus determine who is a "trad" to be boycotted?
For those I've pinged, if you judge me a "trad" to be boycotted, please let me know and I'll be happy to ping you no more. I am aghast at the "head in sand" denial of fact and the lack of charity inherent in this odd, childish game. I'll be fascinated to see if the self described Deacon Sinkspur answers my questions and even more, how he answers them.
It is more complicated than that. The archdiocese of Los Angeles, for example, ordains a large number of men every year, despite Cardinal Mahoney.
It must be frustrating for you when you have to announce the boycott, and in ALL CAPS, since no one had noticed. All the intelligent people are still posting :- ) Is this the electronic equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and saying, "Nah, nah, I can't hear you"?
I suppose you are able to offer even the tiniest shred of data to support your accusations? Michael Rose has hard facts, interviews and arrest reports to go on. What evidence do you have to support your thesis?
Good comparison.
Time will tell...
Yes indeed.
My children are the same way. After 3 years of the Latin Mass and traditional Catholic catechesis, the thought of attending a New Mass makes them ill. It's a shame that you have no traditional alternatives in Japan.
Bro. Alexis Bugnolo is a moderate traditionalist who is usually very well grounded in solid traditional sources and not some radical who believes his own opinion is infallible. He stated recently on the Latin Mass email list that it is permissible to stay home and pray if the Mass you would be able to attend is a source of spiritual danger. It is NOT a question of validity. You do not have to attend Mass just because it is valid, if it presents dangers to your soul.
To cite specific cases: a very sick or a sick & young family member that needs care is a sufficient reason for one parent staying home, so as not to leave the sickone alone; working so as not to starve, engaging in necessary travel of a great distance to visit the dying, attend a burial, marriage of importance, etc. these can justify missing mass, if the time to attend mass and/or find a mass prevented these things.Also, the Church does not require you to risk life or limb or undertake notable inconvenience; thus traditional books of moral theology have always excused those who would have to travel more than 60 minutes each way to a mass by means of the modes of transportation available; or those who to travel would have to risk killing or injuring themselves or others upon dangerous roads or terrain and/ or in bad weather, or undertake notable financial costs or risks in travel, by driving uninsured vehichles, or flying. All these would be excused from attending Mass.
Likewise you are not bound, even if you have no such excuse, to attend Mass, if the only Mass being offered is offered by an Orthodox priest or any formal schismatic priest (defined as one who does not pray for the current pope or the current Bishop/Archbishop of the locale); or even any Catholic priest, (in name) who mixes heresies or gross immorality (indecency, impurity, superstition, witchcraft, etc.) into the mass.
Likewise you are not obbliged to attend mass if the place of mass is a source of scandal or spiritual or moral or physical danger: thus you do not have to attend mass if the only place you could otherwise be obliged to attend is decorated with pornography, heretical images, stores of ammunition that could explode, individuals who are suffering from highly contagious and communicable diseases such as the bubonic plague, sars, a priest who is known to harbor genocidal anitmosity against your ethnic group (as happend in Riwanda) etc..etc..
Likewise you are not obliged to attend Mass if those thing expressive of Catholic significance are removed for the purpose of denying Catholic Truths: so that you do not have to attend Mass if the priest forces the congregation to use a creed, prayer or rite which denies any catholic or divinely revealed truth, such as God being the Father, the existence of original sin, the redemption wrought by the Cross etcc..
Ha ha. I can honestly say that I hadn't noticed in the least. In fact, I hardly posted at all for a month or so, and then it seems that just recently there's been a new crop of interesting threads. And there's been a new bunch of intelligent people just arrived with good points (even if I don't always agree). I was thinking that the discussion level has been noticeably improved, but I didn't attribute it to the absence of anyone.
BTW, where are these great threads going on from which we are excluded? Maybe there on another server instead of FR, because I certainly haven't seen any here.
I went to their website and found it difficult to find but did find the Cardinal's speech at the ordination in January of 2002. At that time they ordained 3 priests. The cardinal said then that there would be no more ordinations until June,2003 when they would be ordaining five.
I believe one or two of the anticipated ordinands dropped out but I am not positive.Even if all of them were ordained that would be a grand total of eight over 1 and a half years,pitiful from a diocese of 4,000,000.
I also know that they closed their diocesan seminary due to lack of candidates. This again demonstrates that the liberal dioceses are bleeding.I think Rockford ordained 8 or 10 this June.Even Phoenix with one tenth of the Catholic population of L.A. ordained 6 or 7 over a one year period.
Obvious and pathetic attempt to hijack a thread. I suggest you just stick to your boycott, before you make yourself look anymore childish.
It is as equally well-known the Prelates rejected the carefully prepared schema for the Council and adopted a "let's wing it" approach,(at best), and the results were we have an Ecumenical Council that both liberals and conservatives appeal to to justify their desires.
Me?
Everyone who reads this thread?
A valid Mass, even poorly offered, is infinitely more pleasing to God than prayers offered at home.
It could be accurate that one's local Parish is an occasion for a perpetual Lent, but, if it is, so be it.
Attend. Pray. Speak with the Pastor. Organise. Protest. Oppose. Petition. Speak with the local Bishop. Go to the Press. But, don't let the enemy keep the keys to the gate of the city.
I am currently reading about this exact truth (no accusations, just the facts, ma'am!) in "The Desolate City" - Revolution in the Catholic Church. It was written by Anne Roche Muggeridge who is not exactly a liberal!
I think if you do a bit of searching around on google, see who recommends the book and see the reviews on it, it will be a must read for you. Unfortunately it is out of print but I did a search on Amazon and was able to get a used copy for about $6.00. It is footnoted and has every bit of information backed up and is not written in an alarmist tone at all, in fact, it is really a history book. And a good one, imo. The most coherent and researched book on this subject that I've read.
I'd posit that the first sentence in the above quote is partly true, in a way. Pius XII was autocratic, especially towards the end of his pontificate when he saw the rampant liberalism simmering beneath the surface of the clergy. He was resented by a lot of cardinals and bishops who felt that Pius kept them from being equals with him as in: "Pius was first among equals." From what I have read, resentment of Pius was particularly true in the Rhine countries.
So here comes John, congenial and simple, wanting to bring the Church up to date - a modernization and simplification of procedures and disciplines in order to sort of "spring clean" the Church's treasures in case anyone stopped by, so to speak. That was his version of ecumenism. He saw, during the first council, how the whole thing was being hijacked by the radicals and liberals and tried to stop the council then and there. But he died.
Paul was orthodox but indecisive it seems to me. But he also was distressed at the abuses but apparently was powerless to stop them.
A disaster? I think the disaster is in us. The documents of the council are not radical at all, imo. But what was loosed during that time were theologians who openly flaunted and published their dissent on matters of dogma, doctrine and Tradition - the full page ad taken out in the NYTimes (sometime in '69), by prominent Catholic theologians, is breathtaking in its dissent and disobedience. And Paul found himself powerless to act immediately. So now we had, in effect, two magisteriums - one in Rome and one in the dissenting theologians. Taking up the cross is much easier when you follow the theologians, and that is what most of us did. And nothing much happened!
With the new open society of free love and self gratification beckoning us with its promise of happiness and freedom, we ran with open arms!
It really is a time of trial and tribulation for orthodox Catholics... the world is really against what we are praying to become. And history repeats itself!
Good suggestion. I've wanted to read that book but have never stumbled across a copy. I'll keep my eyes open.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.