Are the Church Leaders "Out of Touch" with the congregation?

[GraceDK]

The Catholic Church is comprised of millions and millions of people, many of whom are not well catechized, and most either do not agree with the entirety of the catechism or do not think it is really important to follow it.

Granted, there are a lot more “rules” in the Catholic Church than in other Christian denominations, and it’s harder to live by. Having said that, if The Church is really concerned about helping people live in a way that gets them to Heaven, She first needs to teach them how to do so - and why they should. Coloring pictures of Jesus at Sunday school or at CCD does not a well-formed Catholic make.

I do not think it’s an exaggeration that upwards of 90% of those who call themselves Catholic use birth control. And miss Mass regularly. And never go to confession. And receive communion while not in a state of grace. And support the death penalty. And take the Lord’s name in vain. And have sex out of wedlock. And vote for pro-choice politicians. And, and, and…

I think it is indicative of a huge problem when we have this number of Catholics flouting the rules that are supposed to help them live a more holy life and achieve eternal life with our Lord. They simply do not believe the catechism is correct or important to their salvation. Some people will say, “Oh well, that’s their problem if they don’t follow the rules.” But I don’t think you see this percentage of, say, Mormons, out doing things that are explicitly against their religion. I do not think 90% of Mormons are drinking alcohol every night. I don’t have an answer to the problem, but it’s something The Church needs to really, really think about. Never once have I heard a homily about adherence to the catechism. And honestly, it’s something I’m struggling with personally right now. I can’t even get a priest to give me guidance on how to accept the catechism in my own life, much less look to my fellow parishioners for support and encouragement.

I very much agree, and Im so happy you bring this up.

For a few years I went to messianic Churches and Pentecostal Churches. In those churches the people came every sunday and severel times a week not because they had a “Sunday obligation” but because they loved to come there. The fellowship was based upon the faith. People were passionate about Christ.

The most disturbing difference I see between the free churches-services and most of the Catholic churches I’ve visited is that in the free churches the Gospel is preached. You actually walk home with the sense of trembling, awe and gratitude because you just heard the whole salvation story in a sermon which made you repent and wanna weep for joy at the same time, it made you wanna seek Jesus… Mix that with actual healings in the name of Jesus taking place in front of you, and you must be moved. You must choose…

When people are not evangelised we can talk all we want about rules and not see any results. Its a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit in us, and the arms of the Father around us, that make it sensible and even possible to live according to the rules of the Church.
I’d say the same about catechism… don’t ever start preaching on the Catechism if you haven’t laid the basis of faith, which is the Gospel preached.

Jesus didn’t command us to go and teach everyone the catechism. He said: Go and tell what I have done, to the ends of the world.

For me and most people I know who had a conversion experience as grown-ups we have experienced its the Holy Spirit through faith in Jesus Christ, that opened our eyes to the hidden structure of this world and gave us a new heart, sensitive to injustice and sin… when you know Jesus personally, you simply cannot live like you used to live.

So first things first.

 

[sedonaman]

Exactly. Not many. And that’s why I think that the mode of transmission is outdated. People want to feel close to others and connect to the rules of their faith on a personal level. That’s why I like the Mormon model of making it a personal and loving message that the Bishop and church elders discuss frequently. And because of their focus on family it trickles down from the adults to the children easily.

So a message based on reason is passé?

 

[Owlpride]

I sort of think they are. I’m involved in my church and have nothing but respect for many priests, but often times I don’t think I can approach them for advice/counsel. I sort of think that they don’t know what it’s like to struggle with money, marriage, kids, doubts about faith, etc.

 

[mellowcalico]

So a message based on reason is passé?

I don’t think the poster is saying the message is outdated… but the way the message is delivered is outdated (ie reading encyclicals). I think the poster is saying bring a message to someone personally, such as Catholics talking to other Catholics and discussing and explain how God’s rules are important in their life and why… makes the message clearer than reading about it.

As an analogy/example… what makes a better, clearer and lasting impression? Reading text about a lion, how it hunts and lives or actually going out on Safari and watching a lion hunt and live?

 

[sedonaman]

I sort of think they are. I’m involved in my church and have nothing but respect for many priests, but often times I don’t think I can approach them for advice/counsel. I sort of think that they don’t know what it’s like to struggle with

money

A couple of years ago, the roof on the church began leaking badly and the parking lot needed repairs. They cost over $200,000 to fix. Where was the money going to come from?

marriage

Do you think keeping their vows is easy?

kids

There are over 1,000 “children” in my parish, if you get my drift.

doubts about faith

You must think they are superhuman.

etc.

The fact is, they struggle with life like everyone else.

 

[sedonaman]

I don’t think the poster is saying the message is outdated… but the way the message is delivered is outdated (ie reading encyclicals).

I think this shifting of the burden is a cop-out for laziness.

I think the poster is saying bring a message to someone personally, such as Catholics talking to other Catholics and discussing and explain how God’s rules are important in their life and why… makes the message clearer than reading about it.

This might work on some people, but what about those for whom it doesn’t work? Many prefer reading because they can ponder it and go back and re-read it. Discussions about religion have a habit of degrading to a debate ending in a shouting match, and few are any good at debating [including yours truly]. Jesus was an expert, and even he didn’t get through to very many.

As an analogy/example… what makes a better, clearer and lasting impression? Reading text about a lion, how it hunts and lives or actually going out on Safari and watching a lion hunt and live?

In this example, the lion does not explain why he lives the way he does; the non-lion observes it. Perhaps we should witness more by example.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

So a message based on reason is passé?

Not what I’m saying at all. But if the message based on reason is never heard by the church members because it doesn’t feel relevant or important then it doesn’t matter how reasonable, logical, or even correct that message is.

 

[EasterJoy]

I think there has been a shift of the ground on which the discussion was placed.

Let’s look at the OP (boldface mine):

…several people, including 2 priests have made statements to that effect to me recently.

I assume they were referring to the complaints that people have that the Church is **unreasonable in it’s expectations about chaste living, birth control, gay marriage and other social issues **being discussed on the popular media and the fact that Mass attendance is so low in the USA.

Do you think it’s true? Can you see why people would think that way?

And another question…if they ARE out-of-touch…should they be? Should they be trying to understand the feelings of the people, or worrying more about the way things SHOULD be and not entertaining the objections of the Everyman Catholic?

The question was not

1. If you went to your pastor with your problems, do you believe you would find him compassionate and that he has a grasp of the trials you face?
2. Could the heirarchy improve with regards to how they use modern modes of communication?
3. Could the heirarchy do a better job of catechizing regarding what the Church teaches and articulating why the Church teaches these things?

These are all good questions, but they are not quite the question the OP posed.

No. The statement was whether the Church is “unreasonable in its expectations” concerning what is right and what is wrong.

Do I believe that many Catholics have lowered their estimation of their faith and its practice as a consequence of a rise of their estimation of the value of the prevailing social standards? Oh, yeah. There’s little question about that. The truth of whether or not what the Church teaches is true is constantly being measured against the standards laypeople set for themselves based on what secular society tells them decent people need to do in order to be decent. Since the voices of secular society is made up largely of people who are outside the Church–many of whom do not let that stop them when it comes to having opinions about what the Church should and should not believe, teach, and do–this is a change from times when the secular influences would merely be the private opinions of other laypeople within the Church.

There is no inherent conflict in teaching the truth and being cognizant of the feelings and trials of those you teach. I would hope it is obvious that compassion and a real love for those one teaches is a necessity for a moral teacher. Certainly, as the means of communication in the world at large move to electronic media, the Church needs to spread her message in ways that will be heard.

What cannot be allowed to take place is a neglect to teach the truth in an effort to maintain the pretense that the health of the Church can be gauged by the numbers of warm bodies in the pews and large bills in the collection plate. That wouldn’t work. Even if it did, that pretense would ultimately be an act of self-serving pandering, and would still amount to dereliction of a sacred duty, and a dereliction of the highest degree.

 

[sedonaman]

Not what I’m saying at all. But if the message based on reason is never heard by the church members because it doesn’t feel relevant or important then it doesn’t matter how reasonable, logical, or even correct that message is.

I think these types are just looking for an excuse. They are the rocky ground the seeds fell on. You [the rhetorical “you”] can do only so much given your [the rhetorical “your”] knowledge, skills, and abilities.

 

[EasterJoy]

Not what I’m saying at all. But if the message based on reason is never heard by the church members because it doesn’t feel relevant or important then it doesn’t matter how reasonable, logical, or even correct that message is.

The OP didn’t say that people weren’t hearing the message. That is a different issue. The OP was referring to people who didn’t “feel” the message communicated a “realistic expectation.” In other words, the yardstick by which they were judging “relevance” and “importance” was not truth, but how inclined they were to alter their lives so as to live according to the teaching.

Should “I don’t feel as if I can do that without failing” or “I don’t see the good of such strict boundaries” translate to “that must therefore be false and you have no excuse to teach it”? That is the crux of the matter.

 

[StJudePray4Me]

The OP didn’t say that people weren’t hearing the message. That is a different issue. The OP was referring to people who didn’t “feel” the message communicated a “realistic expectation.” In other words, the yardstick by which they were judging “relevance” and “importance” was not truth, but how inclined they were to alter their lives so as to live according to the teaching.

Should “I don’t feel as if I can do that without failing” or “I don’t see the good of such strict boundaries” translate to “that must therefore be false and you have no excuse to teach it”? That is the crux of the matter.

I would say that many people who identify as Catholic but who find the teachings in question unimportant, would say that the Church leaders don’t understand what it is to live in the world. All you have to do is look around these forums to find endless questions on the teachings about ABC… One after another, people say, “well, I know, but WHAT IF…” and they go on to explain their personal set of circumstances. Many would say that the realities of their life make the teachings seems somehow less important than the crisis they are facing. They then go on to think about how a priest, bishop, cardinal, pope could not really understand what they are facing.

 

[sedonaman]

… They then go on to think about how a priest, bishop, cardinal, pope could not really understand what they are facing.

They need to consider what those leaders are facing. I once attended a lecture by a bishop who had just come back from a meeting in Rome. One of the women asked him if they talked about altar girls [they hadn’t as yet approved them]. He replied that it was on the list, but there wasn’t time left because they had to address other problems like one African bishop had: government soldiers that morning came in and arrested his whole staff.

 

[Roy5]

Interesting question. I have tried to find teachings of Jesus that condemn artificial birth control, for example, and believe I have been unsuccessful. Maybe we should also condemn artificial hearts, artificial limbs etc.

 It seems to me personally that the celibate male clergy is out of touch with most married couples. To many of my friends, some of them intensely devout Catholics, this can seem like an invasion of their bedrooms. They are the ones responsible for rearing children and artificial birth control, while imperfect, allows couples to relax and enjoy the romance, bonding, and intimacy that married relations allow without fearing another pregnancy.

 Sorry, but the Church-approved method of birth control, also designed to avoid pregnancy (the same goal), isn't very reliable, which explains why most married Catholics rely on artificial birth control.

 

[GraceDK]

Interesting question. I have tried to find teachings of Jesus that condemn artificial birth control, for example, and believe I have been unsuccessful. Maybe we should also condemn artificial hearts, artificial limbs etc.

There are alot of things which are not stated directly in the Bible… Things you take for granted. Anyway, why do you believe in the Bible if you don’t believe the Holy Spirit guided the Church back then in 380 when the canon was recognized in its current form? The Church wrote, gathered and preserved the Biblical Scripture until today and has also been given sole authority to interpret it in the right way. Just like Jesus promised his apostles.

 It seems to me personally that the celibate male clergy is out of touch with most married couples.

Really? So what about Jesus… he was celibate too… and the apostle Paul who made some of the most important statements ever to be followed by believers about marriage. I am not married, but I have received much help in the relationship area both from married and celibate priests. What matters is that the priests have a listening ear to God…

To many of my friends, some of them intensely devout Catholics, this can seem like an invasion of their bedrooms.

Do you also think its an invasion of the bedroom when God tells us not to fornicate or commit adultery?? I don’t think you (sorry, your friends) are very logical…

They are the ones responsible for rearing children and artificial birth control, while imperfect, allows couples to relax and enjoy the romance, bonding, and intimacy that married relations allow without fearing another pregnancy.

Artificial birthcontrol was called “a perversion” by Martin Luther and it was held to be perversion until recently by all Christian churches.
And, sorry but as a Catholic I don’t find condoms romantic at all. I am happy I am no longer a Protestant because I believe that artificial birthcontrol tempts people to use each other as sexual objects and that artificial birthcontrol has indeed had a devastating effect on society and health…

 Sorry, but the Church-approved method of birth control, also designed to avoid pregnancy (the same goal),

You don’t know what you are talking about good brother… I guess you don’t have an oppinion formed by reading and praying over the matter …

isn’t very reliable, which explains why most married Catholics rely on artificial birth control.

They rely on artificial birthcontrol because the church is in a crisis - like many churches - and most people haven’t been instructed well about this and many other things. Many Catholics even don’t know they are acting against the rules when they have a contraceptive mentality and contraceptive sex. I know severel people who use NFP and they get the amount of children they plan for and want, but often they are more open to life than most people in modern society… Keep studying and praying, and you will see that the Catholic church has been the same church for 2000 years, the promises of Christ to the Church are true, The church was built on Peter and the kingdom of death has not prevailed against it so that it started to teach that sin was not sin, like the other recently made churches have done…

 

[EasterJoy]

Interesting question. I have tried to find teachings of Jesus that condemn artificial birth control, for example, and believe I have been unsuccessful. Maybe we should also condemn artificial hearts, artificial limbs etc.

 It seems to me personally that the celibate male clergy is out of touch with most married couples. To many of my friends, some of them intensely devout Catholics, this can seem like an invasion of their bedrooms. They are the ones responsible for rearing children and artificial birth control, while imperfect, allows couples to relax and enjoy the romance, bonding, and intimacy that married relations allow without fearing another pregnancy.

 Sorry, but the Church-approved method of birth control, also designed to avoid pregnancy (the same goal), isn't very reliable, which explains why most married Catholics rely on artificial birth control.

Hmmm. I don’t think Our Lord ever talked about how one must run a business–well, provided you are not planning on abusing the owner’s emissaries and murdering his son–how to decide whether or not a war was just or how to conduct a war justly, whether or not it was OK to commit suicide…well, this could be a long list.

If we limit what the Church can teach to those topics on which Our Lord spoke directly and of which the clergy have direct working knowledge, that is a great deal of our moral lives that we deem closed to “invasion”, isn’t it?

As someone else noted, Our Lord was a celibate who grew up in a sexless household with history’s only perfect woman for a mother and a saint of the first degree as the master of the household. Who knows if he even had half-brothers and -sisters to deal with? What did he know about the trials of human life?

The leaders of the Church do not have teaching authority from first knowledge, nor are they free to adjust the teachings of the Church to compensate for their personal trials and weaknesses. If they did, the laity would be outraged, wouldn’t they? Why the double-standard?

 

[sedonaman]

Interesting question. I have tried to find teachings of Jesus that condemn artificial birth control, for example, and believe I have been unsuccessful. Maybe we should also condemn artificial hearts, artificial limbs etc.
…

Sounds like sola scriptura to me. Like I said, Jesus never made a phone call either.

 

[Roy5]

Just for the record, I am not sola scriptura, The Bible is full of inspirational and important material, but parts of it i can’t believe. For example, Ex. 22:18 and 20. Or, much of Ex. 21, Lev. 20, Deut. 22-23. Do I believe that God told Joshua to murder everybody as he conquered cities like Jericho and Ai? Did God command Saul to kill every remaining Amalekite? What about that story of how youth teased Elisha about his bald head, he called down the curse of God and two she-bears came and mauled 42 youth? And was Joshua able to keep the sun in the sky longer so that he could overcome the enemy?

 We could go on and on. I even have trouble with Jesus cast demons into pigs which then raced down a cliff to drown in the water. And when it comes to Paul, who never once mentions Mary in all his letter (by the way), what about his statement that women should keep silence in the churches? When I go to Mass the readings often are read by women,

 I predict that the Catholic Church will find some way to change its policy condemning all artificial birth control. It certainly changed it attitude re the theories of Copernicus and Galileo, and even apologized to Galileo. Abortion is a totally different issue, of course. Birth control kills no one, Besides, the approved Catholic method of birth control - by the calendar - has the very same goal - preventing a pregnancy.

 I come from a mixed Catholic-Protestant heritage and one of my main interests is reconciliation among Christians. That is difficult when one side adamantly claims that it alone has the full splendor of truth and all other Christians are mistaken. I favor a more open attitude - the sort you find among most mainline Protestants who permit communicants to have a wide variety of views on doctrines and such.

 

[jwinch2]

It is the people that are out of touch with the true teachings of Christ. Bunch of whiners if you ask me.

Exactly right. It is not the job of the successors to the Apostles to conform to us. It is our job to conform to their teachings.

I was thinking about this the other day. Many Catholics are mad about the HHS mandate situation. I have come to the conclusion that we are nearly as mad as we should be. If what Cardinal Dolan has stated is true, they were promised by President Obama that there would be conscience exemptions in the legislation. This means that they were lied to.

Now for the average person, being lied to is annoying and for faithful Catholics, the idea that our Bishops were lied to should make us angry. But, are we angry enough? Has anyone really thought about the fact that the people who were lied to are the direct successors to the Apostles chosen by Christ Himself to head His Church. To us, it should be no different than if Obama had lied to St’s. Paul, Peter, John, etc. or even to Christ. If we really believe in these men and their vocation. We probably ought to be angrier than we are.

 

[sedonaman]

Exactly right. It is not the job of the successors to the Apostles to conform to us. It is our job to conform to their teachings.

I was thinking about this the other day. Many Catholics are mad about the HHS mandate situation. I have come to the conclusion that we are nearly as mad as we should be. If what Cardinal Dolan has stated is true, they were promised by President Obama that there would be conscience exemptions in the legislation. This means that they were lied to.

Now for the average person, being lied to is annoying and for faithful Catholics, the idea that our Bishops were lied to should make us angry. But, are we angry enough? Has anyone really thought about the fact that the people who were lied to are the direct successors to the Apostles chosen by Christ Himself to head His Church. To us, it should be no different than if Obama had lied to St’s. Paul, Peter, John, etc. or even to Christ. If we really believe in these men and their vocation. We probably ought to be angrier than we are.

You got that right!

 

[Owlpride]

A couple of years ago, the roof on the church began leaking badly and the parking lot needed repairs. They cost over $200,000 to fix. Where was the money going to come from?

Do you think keeping their vows is easy?

There are over 1,000 “children” in my parish, if you get my drift.

You must think they are superhuman.

The fact is, they struggle with life like everyone else.

Look, I have great respect for 99.9 percent of priests. I wasn’t trying to insult them. I stand by what I said though. When a car breaks down for someone on my income, when my wife is in a terrible mood and my kids are acting like idiots, no a priest can’t relate. That doesn’t mean I don’t like priests or don’t have respect for them, but often times they don’t know what it’s like to live a lifestyle like many of us live. Again, that DOESN’T mean they can’t offer advice or help (another topic altogether) it just means they might not be able to fully grasp the issues.