Who’s Missing?


It is no secret that our parish is losing parishioners, not necessarily to other denominations, but to other parishes. Attendance is down substantially in the past couple of years with many families driving to neighboring towns where they apparently find Mass more to their liking. Reasons vary I am sure, but generally most have been upset to the point where they experience periodic anger instead of the peace of Christ in their liturgical celebration. Whether their anger is justified is a matter for discussion.

This past week, I came across an article by Father Robert Barron titled Why Catholics Leave the Church and What Can be done about it. Father Barron is writing about a survey by William Byron and Charles Zech which will appear in the April 30 edition of America magazine. While the article is primarily about people leaving the Church, the reasons cited may also apply to those vacating a parish. Many mention the Church’s teachings on divorce, same-sex marriage, contraception, and ordination of women. So why would this cause people to change parishes? After all, these Church teachings are universal. The fact is that these sins, sin as a whole actually, are not often mentioned from the pulpit. They are in our parish, however. One parishioner recently told me she was tired of being scolded at every Sunday homily.

Our priest rarely misses an opportunity to chastise the congregation for the lack of confessions or low attendance at Eucharistic Adoration. People complain that they want to be uplifted instead of being criticized when they come to Mass. Unfortunately, the truth is that few people are going to confession theses days and attendance at Eucharistic Adoration is sparse. The Sunday homily is the only opportunity to voice the pastor’s displeasure, but this weekly-reprimand approach is not working.

Father Barron wrote, “One respondent to the survey observed that whenever he asked a priest about a controversial issue, he “got rules and not an invitation to sit down and talk.” Unfair? Perhaps. But every priest, even when ultimately he has to say, “No,” can do so in the context of a relationship predicated upon love and respect.” Survey respondents also said many pastors were “arrogant, distant, aloof and insensitive.” Ideally, the splendor of the Mass would significantly overshadow any shortcomings in the personality of the priest, but in reality, the manner in which the priest interacts with his congregation greatly affects the spiritual temperature of the parish.

People can sense when a man counsels them out of Christian love and concern for their spiritual well-being. They are more likely to accept guidance when treated with soft-spoken kindness and respect rather than cold condescending criticism. One who lives in the light of Christ will radiate warmth in the way he interacts with others. He will be patient and peaceful even in times of conflict. People will be drawn to the light even when some gentle discipline is necessary.

At the same time, parishioners need to realize the priest has many duties. He cannot devote full attention to the well-being of his parishioners. The administrative requirements of the parish priests are many. Running a parish can be as daunting as running a business. There are personnel matters, budgets, reports, meetings, repairs, bills, in addition to all his liturgical duties, sick calls, funerals, weddings and catechesis for adults and children. The corporal responsibilities can limit the time available for spiritual care.

Father Barron also mentions the problem of bad preaching. The survey said many left because homilies were boring, irrelevant and poorly-prepared. While not every priest is going to be a skilled public speaker, Father Barron says, “Sermons become boring in the measure that they don’t propose something like answers to real questions.” People are always questioning, wondering, and harboring doubts. A perceptive homilist needs to provide answers. As Father Barron puts it, “When the homily both reminds people how thirsty they are and provides water to quench the thirst, people will listen.”

So what does one do when the parish priest is a bad homilist with poor interpersonal relationship skills? First, recognize that he is a Catholic priest acting in the person of Jesus Christ. He is also a human being with limitations like all the rest of us. He cannot be everything we would like him to be. Keeping it in perspective, the words spoken during the homily pale in importance in comparison to the words spoken during the Eucharistic prayer. As parishioners, we need to recognize the gift of Holy Orders that enables our priest to confect the Holy Eucharist for us each day. We should all be grateful that he said yes to his vocation.

Father Barron stresses the importance of reaching out to people who have left the Church and this may apply to parishes also. Survey respondents often said no one ever contacted them to see why they had left. In a small parish like ours, compiling a list of families or individuals no long attending would be a simple task. A personal contact or kind invitation might be all that is needed to get someone back onboard.

A caller to the Catholic Answers Live radio program last week said she wanted to join the Catholic Church and had called a parish three times to get information about their RCIA program, but her calls were never returned. Father Barron quotes his first pastor telling the parish secretary, “For many people, you are the first contact they have with the Catholic Church; you exercise, therefore, an indispensable ministry.” Consider also that we could be the last contact someone has with the Church or their parish. Let us make sure that never happens.

Jesus 24/7

Recently, I watched a video called the 24/7 Experience produced by the Evangelical Covenant Church. As stated on the DVD jacket, “In an episodic, reality-TV style, 24/7 brings your students on a journey to learn what it means to follow Christ in the 21st century.” In the video, a small group of teenagers makes a whirlwind tour of the United States, visiting a different city each day, learning what it means to follow Christ every day. They are introduced to people in various walks of life whose Christian faith strongly influences how they conduct themselves in their careers and charitable works.

The video was given to me by our pastor to screen for possible viewing by our CCD class made up of sixth through eighth graders. What struck me is the difference between how we Catholics view our relationship with the Lord, as compared to Evangelical Protestants. Now I have no doubt that many good Catholic teenagers are very Christ-centered and live their lives accordingly, but I sometimes get the feeling that our particular group is not really tuned in to what it means to follow Christ. That got me to thinking about how we raise our children in the Catholic faith verses the way Evangelicals are raised.

We Catholics tend to be very regimented in the way we practice our faith. The universality of the Church and the way we worship communally has resulted in the development of many standard prayers and practices in the two thousand years of our history. While our Protestant brothers and sisters may have few prayers memorized beyond the Lord’s Prayer or perhaps the sinner’s prayer, we have dozens. As good Catholics, we need to know the Our Father, Hail Mary, and Glory Be. We should also know the Act of Contrition, Guardian Angel prayer, Morning Offering, Angelus, and a few others. We should also know how to pray the Rosary, Divine Mercy Chaplet, and Stations of the Cross. We need to understand the Mass and the Sacraments, especially the Real Presence in the Holy Eucharist. All of these things are very important to our Faith, but also difficult for our children to grasp in weekly sessions. With instruction time very limited, is there a point where all the sacramentals, prayer memorization, the rites, and other unique Catholic practices actually become an impediment to reaching young people?

Our Evangelical brothers and sisters do not have any of this to learn. Lacking the sacraments and formal prayer, as well as an authoritative Church to guide them, they are left to teach the Bible, subject to their own interpretation of Scripture. Their primary focus can be to cultivate a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, albeit one minus the sacramental gifts He left for us. The Evangelical experience can be more social in nature, making it attractive to young people. Prayers can be spoken from the heart, requiring thought and meditation. Yes, we can do that as Catholics too, but how often do we? Is it any wonder that many non-Catholic teenagers may be more contemplative, knowledgeable, and active in their ecclesial communities?

While interacting with non-Catholic friends, young Catholics may get the feeling they know less about Jesus than their friends do. They hear stories of Protestant churches with youth ministers, rock bands and lively worship. Secular media bombards them with stories that paint the Catholic Church in a bad light. This idea that the grass is greener on the other side can carry over into adulthood. Often parents set a poor example by being lukewarm or questioning the authority of the Church. We should not be surprised that many of our young people end up leaving at some point.

I have been critical in the past of Catholics who stress the horizontal aspects of worship at the expense of the vertical. Yet I think our young people need more exposure to the social relationship, getting to know Jesus as a friend and confidant. At the same time, they need a good dose of good ol’ Catholic apologetics, understanding that Jesus loves them so much that He gave them a Church, the Catholic Church, and they are all very fortunate to be a part of it. I showed the video in class. I hope it helps them to understand the grace we as Catholics receive through the sacraments is the fuel we need to persevere in Him 24/7.

An Ill Wind Blows

Get used to being an outcast. Get used to being viewed as an extremist, even an enemy. Get used to being ridiculed, persecuted, targeted, and chastised. Get used to be isolated, lonely, forgotten, and ignored. No one will take you seriously. You will be a joke, a punch line, or a punching bag. That is where we Catholics and many Christians now find ourselves. Fasten your seatbelts because we are being driven recklessly down a dark road without lights.

So much has happened in the past few days to demonstrate this reality. The Obama mandate for religious institutions to provide contraceptives, some of which are abortifacients, is an obvious abuse of religious freedom. No longer can we be confident that such an abuse of the first amendment will not stand up in court. The immediate terse response from most Catholic Bishops has been encouraging. If a silver lining exists, perhaps it will serve to awaken people to what is happening.

About three weeks ago, I spoke to my CCD students about ethic responsibility when it comes to understanding where our money goes. While some charitable organizations may seem worthwhile, we have to be concerned with how they spend our donations. As the anniversary of Roe v. Wade was approaching, I used the example of the Susan G. Komen foundation. Many of the products we buy will display pink ribbons indicating that a portion of the profits go to the Komen foundation to fight breast cancer. Sounds wonderful, but we have to realize that Komen in turn supports Planned Parenthood, the largest provider of abortions in the country. They may argue that Komen money only goes for cancer screening, but by funding Planned Parenthood, they are potentially freeing other money to be used for killing unborn babies. Are there no alternative ways to perform breast cancer screenings in this country other than via an abortionist?

This past week, the Susan G. Komen foundation announced they would no longer fund Planned Parenthood. Alleluia! Our voices have been heard! Even though, Komen denied bowing to political pressure from Pro-life activists, this came as a welcome surprise. But wait! A public outcry followed. The media jumped all over Komen printing stories about poor women whose lives may have been saved by screenings performed at Planned Parenthood. How could Komen be so heartless? A few days later, this Komen foundation that had not bowed to pressure from Pro-life activists, appeared bow to pressure from Pro-choice activists, and resumed funding of Planned Parenthood. Again I ask, are there no alternative ways to perform breast cancer screenings?

I am going to digress for a moment. It is often said that we Pro-lifers should not use the term Pro-choice. Rather, those who would allow abortions are actually pro-abortion or pro-death. In our zeal to emphasize what abortion actually does, we want to use the strongest terms possible to make our point, but I am not sure this is totally honest or productive. I do not smoke cigarettes. I do not like cigarette smoke. I do not think anyone should smoke cigarettes. It is a filthy habit and bad for your health. Yet, I do not think cigarette smoking should be illegal for those who, despite the warnings, want to smoke. Just do it far away from me. When it comes to smoking, I am pro-choice. I am not pro-smoking or pro-cancer. Therefore, I do not object if people who favor the legalization of abortion want to call themselves Pro-choice, as long as they understand that one of the choices they are permitting is murder.

The religious right is portrayed in the media as the enemy, not caring about women’s health. Reports on the Komen situation were sometimes accompanied by information on what people can do to support Planned Parenthood. Donations to both organizations reportedly increased this week. Some Pro-lifers may have wished to support Komen after their courageous announcement, only to regret where that money may now end up. Susan G. Komen is under no obligation to fund Planned Parenthood, yet they find themselves in a situation where their mission to end breast cancer is placed in jeopardy by negative publicity spewed at them by the media and Planned Parenthood. They should have never attached themselves to Planned Parenthood in the first place.

Planned Parenthood is known for attacking anyone who would dare cut their funding. The State of Tennessee is now being sued by Planned Parenthood for denying funds based solely on an aversion to abortion. Like Susan G. Komen, they now find themselves being threatened.

Recently, a story on talk radio stated that 50-something percent of couples have sex on the first date. They attributed this to social media which allows people to become intimately acquainted before they actually meet. Stories like this are presented by the media as curiosities, but not necessarily detrimental to our society or personal well-being. Contraception of some sort is just assumed. A story on television this morning said that the average person in Japan does not have intercourse until past the age of 19, about 2 years later than in this country. The story was presented in such a way to indicate that Japanese teens are postponing sex, not that American teens start too young. Again, the story is treated as a curiosity, but the underlying message to teenagers is that starting young is the norm, so I might be an oddball if I do not. Secular society no longer even acknowledges that some people might find such behavior as immoral. Concern for the soul is not even on the radar.

While faithful Catholics hold true to unchanging beliefs, the secular world continues to stretch moral boundaries beyond their breaking point. Perhaps without realizing it, we have moved past a fork in the road where societal division will eventually lead to a cultural war. We are no longer all headed in the same direction. Yet, we cannot go our separate ways. Our paths are intertwined. Those of us navigating by a moral compass find ourselves viewed as obstacles in the roadway, obstacles that must be brushed aside and kept under control. A firm anchor in the faith is essential for us and our children if we are to persevere.

Time to Take a Stand

Abuse of our religious freedom continues to escalate under the Obama administration. The Department of Health and Human Services announced yesterday that Catholic schools, hospitals and charitable institutions have been given one year to comply with a government mandate to provide contraceptive coverage to all employees. That means, Catholics will soon be forced to provide abortive forms of birth control, sterilization, and other intrinsically evil procedures. Archbishop, and soon to be Cardinal, Timothy Dolan responded by saying, “In effect, the president is saying we have a year to figure out how to violate our consciences."

We have already seen Catholic adoption agencies close their doors when the government tried to force them to place children with same-sex couples. Now the assault on our Catholic faith sets up a confrontation that will have even greater repercussions. Those that comply with the order should be forced to sever ties with the Church. Those true to the faith may be forced to close or stand firm in civil disobedience. Violating our consciences is not an option.

Obama’s announcement came one day after Pope Benedict warned American Bishops about concerted efforts being made in the United States to deny the right of conscientious objection on the part of Catholic individuals and institutions with regard to cooperation in intrinsically evil practices. In his January 19 address to the Bishops of the United States, the Pope said, “it is imperative that the entire Catholic community in the United States come to realize the grave threats to the Church’s public moral witness presented by a radical secularism which finds increasing expression in the political and cultural spheres.”

At the forefront of this threat is the Obama presidency. The upcoming presidential election is one of the most important events we as Catholics will ever experience. It may serve as a uniting force for all Christians who value religious liberty. In Pope Benedict’s address, he said, “There can be no doubt that a more consistent witness on the part of America’s Catholics to their deepest convictions would make a major contribution to the renewal of society as a whole.” The time has come for Catholics, and indeed all Christians, to take a stand against the erosion of religious freedom being propagated by the present administration.

Are You Hurting?

Last night as a mild toothache kept me awake, I began to contemplate the relationship between pain and suffering. Pain, it seems to me, is a mere sensation and does not necessarily result in suffering. How we respond to pain may be affected by how self-absorbed we are at the time. Granted, the intensity of pain may bear directly on our degree of self-awareness.

For example, it is not unusual for me to be so engrossed in a woodworking project that I can cut myself without being aware of it. Not until I notice blood dripping do I realize I’ve had a mishap. I can guarantee that had somebody made me aware that I was about to cut my finger on a saw blade, my reaction would have been much different. The anticipation of an impending injury and the resultant redirection of focus to oneself can increase the amount of suffering incurred.

If it is possible to incur an injury without realizing it because we are focused elsewhere, is it possible to divert our attention willingly to endure pain that would otherwise cripple us? If we can feel someone else’s pain, is it possible not to feel our own? What is the relationship between pain and suffering? Does one necessarily result in the other? These are just rhetorical questions. Don’t expect to find all the answers here!

We are told pain is the result of original sin. If our first parents had not sinned, we would not experience pain in this life. That idea is difficult to comprehend. If Adam and Eve had not sinned, would it not seem inevitable that someone down the line would have eventually sinned? Is it then possible we could have had two lines of people in this world -- those who descended from sinners and those who did not. Would the sinners have experienced death and others not? I don’t know the answers to these questions. They are things that go through my mind during a sleepless night. I am sure they have all been asked before, and philosophers and theologians probably have answers.

I think about pain and suffering much during this time of year. While many of us are enjoying the Christmas season, others are experiencing suffering to varying degrees, be it physical, emotional or spiritual. We all know people who have been diagnosed with serious illnesses. The news is filled with stories of people who have experienced seemingly unbearable tragedies. Some families are separated from their loved ones by distance or division. Others are simply alone.

Often there is little we can do to lessen physical or emotional pain. The spiritual suffering has remedy, but many fail to take advantage, not realizing that spiritual healing can also help us deal with the physical and emotional side. The problem seems to be that most people do not know they suffer from a spiritual deficiency.

Our church was nearly filled Christmas Eve. We won’t see many of them again until Easter, if then. They are content to live their lives without God, not aware that it is impossible to do so. Spiritual health is determined by our relationship with Our Lord, and that relationship is eroded by our sins. Many people today seem to be oblivious to personal sin, so they fail to see the need for the Church and Sacraments. They have become so engrossed in their daily routine that they do not know they are bleeding.

People cannot see the ugliness of their sin except under the illumination of the light of Christ. A point of reference is needed. In order to call others to holiness, one must first be holy himself. One might look at an MRI of a cancerous tumor not knowing what he is looking at until he sees healthy tissue for comparison. A person who badgers another about his sin without first acknowledging his own sin is wasting his time. In other words, people need to see holiness before they can recognize their own deficiencies.

The Christmas season provides a great opportunity to call others home to the church. I read about one pastor who distributes books as gifts to all visitors attending Christmas Masses at his parish. Tom Peterson’s organization has expanded broadcasting of his Catholics Come Home promotion to major networks in addition to local television. The average TV viewer is estimated to see the video about eight times over the Christmas season. Father Robert Barron’s wonderful Catholicism series has been recently appearing on PBS stations. My daughter gave me the complete ten-hour DVD set for Christmas. The message is getting out there. Spread the Word.

Not as Simple as ABC

I frequently listen to the Open Forum for Non-Catholics on the Catholic Answers Live Radio program. Certain questions come up repeatedly. They involve papal infallibility, praying to saints, purgatory, Mary’s role, Sacred Tradition, confessing to a priest, development of doctrine, moral issues, and the list goes on. The regular apologists do a wonderful job charitably explaining the Catholic faith to inquiring callers, but I occasionally find myself thinking that the explanation falls short in convincing non-Catholics of the Catholic position.

One of the touchier areas is birth control. The Catholic stance is clear. Even though the number of children can be limited for legitimate reasons, the Church says, “Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify recourse to morally unacceptable means (for example, direct sterilization or contraception).” [CCC2399] In this world where vasectomy is routinely performed without any consideration of its moral implications, trying to explain Church teaching often bring incredulous stares.

The commonly used explanation is a reference to the Pope Paul VI encyclical, Humanae Vitae where the conjugal act between a man and wife is expressed as both unitive and procreative, an inseparable connection established by God, which may not be broken by human initiative. Therefore, each and every marriage act must remain open to the transmission of life.

Try explaining this to anyone having little or no fidelity to the Catholic faith. As Catholics, we must accept this teaching as a matter of obedience. Yet, I acknowledge that reasonable people may find this hard to understand and accept, especially when no abortifacient is involved. Their argument is often that the procreative aspect can be nullified by the normal cycle, biological abnormalities, or old age. Even the provisionally acceptable use of Natural Family Planning, abstaining from sexual relations during fertile periods, might seem to be interfering by human initiative. Does lacking the natural possibility of procreation negate the openness to the transmission of life? The Church says no, but the operative word is ‘natural’. If the possibility of procreation is negated by human initiative, we have a problem.

Is it wrong to have relations strictly for a unitive purpose? In the course of a long marriage, a couple may have conjugal relations thousands of times. Even if ten pregnancies resulted, the percentage of fruitful unions is small. So, the vast majority of conjugal relations are unitive and not necessarily procreative even if open to procreation. The problem arises when we take God out of the equation. Yet it is difficult to convince people to put complete trust in God in these matters. God even allows rape victims to occasionally get pregnant. The Catholic answer is that God allows bad things to happen to bring about a greater good, but that argument is a tough sell.

The unitive aspect is important to the marital relationship between husband and wife. Yet, many couples today would say sexual activity need not always be unitive. To them, it can be analogous to occasionally eating a hot fudge sundae strictly for enjoyment absent any nutritional benefit. Our culture bombards us with the idea that anything goes, even outside the bonds of marriage. In this Godless climate, how can we expect people to take Humanae Vitae seriously. To say every marriage act must be open to the transmission of life is a hard teaching. Many married couples would be unwilling to engage in marital relations if any possibility of pregnancy could result. This can put a strain on a marriage, especially if husband and wife are not in agreement.

Families are generally smaller now than they were many years ago. It is difficult to imagine that most couples, even Catholics, are not doing something beyond NFP to prevent conception. A co-worker’s wife recently gave birth to their third child. Talking among a group of guys in the shop, he said he thought they were done and was going to make an appointment to be clipped. As the stories circulated around the room, it turns out I was the only other man who had not had a vasectomy. It is just a part of the secular mainstream now to permanently end any possibility of pregnancy at some point of a marriage. The others in the room were not Catholic, but I wonder how many Catholics in the communion line have been sterilized.

Unless we willingly submit to Our Lord and the authoritative Church He established, the necessity to maintain openness to life is not a consideration for most couples. These decisions tend to be self-centered, based on what we perceive as personal matters between husband and wife. In many ways, we have become estranged from God in deciding these matters. As the scientific community’s invasion into the realm of God becomes more commonplace, the chasm between the secular and the spiritual will continue to widen.

As Catholics, we are bound by the teachings of the Church. In making the case for the Catholic teaching on sexuality, the Catholic Answers apologists often recommend Patrick Coffin’s book, Sex Au Naturel: What it is and why it’s good for your Marriage. Mr. Coffin was a former dissenter who wrote the book “to give orthodox Catholics intellectual ammo in how to understand and explain Humanae Vitae, as well as to challenge dissenters to see the beauty and truth of the teaching.” I have not read his book yet, but I should do so to aid in my own understanding. In the meantime, I defer to the Church, the pillar and foundation of truth, for what I believe.