Big Picture at World Youth Day: 'It’s the Evangelicals, stupid!' [John Allen]

[Catholic_Press]

Yesterday, Pope Benedict XVI arrived in Madrid for what is officially the 26th edition of World Youth Day, a total which includes off-year events organized, at least in theory, at the diocesan level. Counting just the massive international gatherings headlined by the pope, Madrid is the 12th World Youth Day since John Paul II launched the tradition in Rome in 1985.

Collectively, those gatherings have generated crowds in excess of 15 million people, making World Youth Day the Olympic Games of world religion: The largest regularly held international religious event on the planet.

read more

More…

 

[st_julie]

He is so correct. These young Evangelical Catholics are surging right up the center and bringing the thousands of children from their faithful catholic families with them.
Linda

 

[JReducation]

Had I written the article, I would have clarified a little more the term “Evenagelical”. This can leave a bad taste in some people’s mouth, especially converts from Protestantism. What is really coming up is a generation of Catholic Evangelists. They are well educated in the secualr sciences and now they want to know more about the Catholic faith. They are going to be a force to contend with.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[manualman]

Allen’s been trying hard for some time now to establish the term “evangelical catholic” as used in this article as common parlance. I’m not quite sold on the term either, but other than that the article is not bad at all.

 

[irishpatrick]

Allen’s been trying hard for some time now to establish the term “evangelical catholic” as used in this article as common parlance. I’m not quite sold on the term either, but other than that the article is not bad at all.

I am with you. Using that term seems to be a negative, as if they are somehow extremist Catholics, when in fact they are simply Catholics.

I think “faithful Catholics” would be much more accurate, if one needs to modify the word Catholic.

 

[manualman]

Labels DO have to be fair when you are a reporter. If Allen call US “faithful” catholics, then he’s joined us explicitly and implicitly labeled the other guys ‘unfaithful catholics.’ I personally think that’s not an inaccurate label, but it doesn’t send the message of objectivity that Allen is trying to find.

Perhaps ‘orthodox catholics’ would work. I’m not sure innovators as a whole would find the implicit label ‘unorthodox’ terribly damning.

 

[irishpatrick]

Labels DO have to be fair when you are a reporter. If Allen call US “faithful” catholics, then he’s joined us explicitly and implicitly labeled the other guys ‘unfaithful catholics.’ I personally think that’s not an inaccurate label, but it doesn’t send the message of objectivity that Allen is trying to find.

Perhaps ‘orthodox catholics’ would work. I’m not sure innovators as a whole would find the implicit label ‘unorthodox’ terribly damning.

How about “Catholics?”

Forget other modifiers. The term “orthodox” will confuse many with Eastern Orthodox. I do think he is trying to make a difference in how he refers to Catholics, but Evangelical sends a message that we have somehow joined hands with Protestant Evangelicals, while the word faithful simply means Catholics who are faithful. When you choose a modifier, some people will be left out.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

I really liked this article. I think the term ‘evangelical catholic’ is the best I’ve ever heard to describe it. These are people who’ve made a personal decision to follow Christ (and His Church and the pope). It’s very much in contrast to an older generation who reluctantly followed rules issued by a top-down hierarchy. This personal choice for Christ is exactly what evangelicals are always preaching to Catholics about. So I like the name and think it works well.

 

[irishpatrick]

I really liked this article. I think the term ‘evangelical catholic’ is the best I’ve ever heard to describe it. These are people who’ve made a personal decision to follow Christ (and His Church and the pope). It’s very much in contrast to an older generation who reluctantly followed rules issued by a top-down hierarchy. This personal choice for Christ is exactly what evangelicals are always preaching to Catholics about. So I like the name and think it works well.

Catholics already make a personal choice for Christ–they do not need to borrow monikers from a non-Catholic faith.

Using the word “evangelical” makes Catholics seem similar to Protestant Evangelicals, and that is NOT a good thing.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Catholics already make a personal choice for Christ–they do not need to borrow monikers from a non-Catholic faith.

Using the word “evangelical” makes Catholics seem similar to Protestant Evangelicals, and that is NOT a good thing.

I guess I think protestant evangelicals are more “on fire” which seems like a good thing to me. My impression of the older generation of Catholics is many of them ended up in the church due to “going with the flow” back in the day when most people went to church, and they may have never experienced a personal conversion. I don’t mean to generalize about them all, but I think there is a trend there.

How would you describe the difference between this younger generation of catholics and the older generation?

 

[irishpatrick]

I guess I think protestant evangelicals are more “on fire” which seems like a good thing to me. My impression of the older generation of Catholics is many of them ended up in the church due to “going with the flow” back in the day when most people went to church, and they may have never experienced a personal conversion. I don’t mean to generalize about them all, but I think there is a trend there.

How would you describe the difference between this younger generation of catholics and the older generation?

This notion of a personal conversion is very Protestant in nature. Everyone who has a real faith in Christ, has a real faith in Christ, whether they can mark the day they started to believe, or not. Catholics have no reason at all to follow the Protesant model–it should be the other way around.

This generation of younger Catholics are strong in their faith, yet understand that it is still just a small percentage of the total—there is still massive work to do for all age groups. There are a great many older Catholics who love the Lord with all their heart, and you’d be shocked to know how much knowledge and wisdom they hold. People who go to Mass every single day, who say rosaries every day, who pray for others, etc…those are very strong Catholics and they come in all ages. Being in fancy, booming, Bible studies was not required, it was a loyal and obedient love of the Lord that saw many older people through great turmoil. They went to Mass, they went to Confession, they raised large families, they made sure their kids were raised in the faith and received the sacraments–they were in very large measure strong Catholics, but not in the Evangelical Protestant model, rather in the Catholic model.

The reason this group of young Catholics is noteworthy is simply because leading up to present days, the young did not care much about the faith. John Paul II helped that a lot, yet more than anything the young–imo–are seeing that their parents generation (the baby boomers and a bit younger) dropped the ball, and the young want the very things that some of the boomer generation through away. They want ties to a 2,000 year history and faith–they want stability in a world that has very little.

 

[Digitonomy]

How about “Catholics?” Forget other modifiers.

Because Allen is not talking about all Catholics, just a subset. Let’s try it your way:

As the late Cardinal Jean-Marie Lustiger of Paris, the dictionary definition of a Catholic, once put it, “We’re really at the dawn of Christianity.”

Makes no sense, and obscures the point Allen was making.

 

[irishpatrick]

Because Allen is not talking about all Catholics, just a subset. Let’s try it your way:Makes no sense, and obscures the point Allen was making.

Yes, but they are Catholics, that is my point. If Allen wants to use a modifier, than something like ‘faithful’ would be far more accurate because Catholics come in many shapes and sizes.

 

[Digitonomy]

If Allen wants to use a modifier, than something like ‘faithful’ would be far more accurate

No, it really wouldn’t be more accurate, because the Archbishop of Paris is unlikely to be more faithful than most other bishops. What distinguishes that archbishop and this group from other Catholics is a focus on evangelizing in the way Allen describes.

 

[JReducation]

Yes, but they are Catholics, that is my point. If Allen wants to use a modifier, than something like ‘faithful’ would be far more accurate because Catholics come in many shapes and sizes.

Actually, the term is not as new as we think. Allen has simply tweaked it a bit. The original term was coined by St. Francis who called his brothers to be Gospel Catholics. By that, he meant that they were to go beyond the canons, the rubrics and the catechisms. They were to live the Gospel very literally. They were to preach only the Gospel, not from catechisms, encylicals or books other than the scriptures. The term implied a focus. It did not demean or reject what was out there: catechism, encyclicals, other rules, etc. Here, we have Francis telling his brothers where to put their focus.

Fastfoward to today. The popes, through WYD have been focussing on sending the young out to evenlize. This is a constant theme at every WYD. That’s why I disagree with Allen’s use of the terms. I would have said Catholic Evangelists. The focus has been to help the young become evangelists.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Dale_M]

e popes, through WYD have been focussing on sending the young out to evenlize. This is a constant theme at every WYD. That’s why I disagree with Allen’s use of the terms. I would have said Catholic Evangelists. The focus has been to help the young become evangelists.

As always, Br. JR, you remind us of important points. But I wonder if John Allen’s phrase has a slightly different meaning.

As with others here, I am uncomfortable with the phrase “Evangelical Catholic.” Evangelicalism has a strong identity and tradition in Protestantism, and it doesn’t seem to share much with the definition of Evangelical Catholic which Allen spelled out. Moreover, Lutherans (I have read) often refer to themselves as “evangelical catholics.” So that specific phrase already has usage which might add to confusion.

I think those are good reasons to avoid the phrase “Evangelical Catholic” as Allen does. However, I think he is intending a meaning which is different from “Catholic evangelist.” Is the matter of being Catholic more important than the evangelizing? In other words, is being Catholic the adjective or is “evangelizing” actually the adjective? I think Allen’s point is that Catholic identity and teachings are being evangelized, rather than Catholics spreading a more generic gospel of Christ.

If that is his intent, it might explain why he chose the word Evangelical. That word is known and is comfortable to use. Alternatives, despite being more accurate, are more cumbersome, e.g. “evangelistic Catholic” or “evangelizing Catholic”

On the other hand, I may be totally wrong.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

This notion of a personal conversion is very Protestant in nature. Everyone who has a real faith in Christ, has a real faith in Christ, whether they can mark the day they started to believe, or not. Catholics have no reason at all to follow the Protesant model–it should be the other way around.

This generation of younger Catholics are strong in their faith, yet understand that it is still just a small percentage of the total—there is still massive work to do for all age groups. There are a great many older Catholics who love the Lord with all their heart, and you’d be shocked to know how much knowledge and wisdom they hold. People who go to Mass every single day, who say rosaries every day, who pray for others, etc…those are very strong Catholics and they come in all ages. Being in fancy, booming, Bible studies was not required, it was a loyal and obedient love of the Lord that saw many older people through great turmoil. They went to Mass, they went to Confession, they raised large families, they made sure their kids were raised in the faith and received the sacraments–they were in very large measure strong Catholics, but not in the Evangelical Protestant model, rather in the Catholic model.

The reason this group of young Catholics is noteworthy is simply because leading up to present days, the young did not care much about the faith. John Paul II helped that a lot, yet more than anything the young–imo–are seeing that their parents generation (the baby boomers and a bit younger) dropped the ball, and the young want the very things that some of the boomer generation through away. They want ties to a 2,000 year history and faith–they want stability in a world that has very little.

Well I’m sorry if I appeared to put down the faith of older Catholics in general. What I really wanted to do was figure out the distinction between the faith of the new generation and the faith of, say, their grandparents. I see good things in the younger generation but I shouldn’t have said it in a way that made the other generation look bad. Sorry!

 

[irishpatrick]

Well I’m sorry if I appeared to put down the faith of older Catholics in general. What I really wanted to do was figure out the distinction between the faith of the new generation and the faith of, say, their grandparents. I see good things in the younger generation but I shouldn’t have said it in a way that made the other generation look bad. Sorry!

No problem at all.

 

[JReducation]

As always, Br. JR, you remind us of important points. But I wonder if John Allen’s phrase has a slightly different meaning.

As with others here, I am uncomfortable with the phrase “Evangelical Catholic.” Evangelicalism has a strong identity and tradition in Protestantism, and it doesn’t seem to share much with the definition of Evangelical Catholic which Allen spelled out. Moreover, Lutherans (I have read) often refer to themselves as “evangelical catholics.” So that specific phrase already has usage which might add to confusion.

I think those are good reasons to avoid the phrase “Evangelical Catholic” as Allen does. However, I think he is intending a meaning which is different from “Catholic evangelist.” Is the matter of being Catholic more important than the evangelizing? In other words, is being Catholic the adjective or is “evangelizing” actually the adjective? I think Allen’s point is that Catholic identity and teachings are being evangelized, rather than Catholics spreading a more generic gospel of Christ.

If that is his intent, it might explain why he chose the word Evangelical. That word is known and is comfortable to use. Alternatives, despite being more accurate, are more cumbersome, e.g. “evangelistic Catholic” or “evangelizing Catholic”

On the other hand, I may be totally wrong.

We would have to get inside his head to figure this one out. I can barely deal with what’s in my own head, nevermind Allen’s.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF