Does size matter?

[Della]

Well obviously Catholics believe their Church was founded by Christ… that’s not the question I’m asking. I’m not twisting anyone’s words, I’m just confused. So again…

Is the size and influence of the Catholic Church, two thousands years ago or today or two thousand years in the future, a valid criterion for assessing her truth?

Size enters into only because, as the oldest Christian body, the Catholic/Orthodox Churches are going to be the largest. The Catholic Church has been sending out missionaries since 33 AD. while Protestant bodies have only existed for about 5 centuries. It’s why some here are pointing to the fact that the Church was founded by Christ–it was the first to act on his commission to “preach to all creatures” because it was the only Church at the time.

 

[DCNBILL]

Well obviously Catholics believe their Church was founded by Christ… that’s not the question I’m asking. I’m not twisting anyone’s words, I’m just confused. So again…

Is the size and influence of the Catholic Church, two thousands years ago or today or two thousand years in the future, a valid criterion for assessing her truth?

And again I would point to the truth, as many people who would accept the truth that is where I believe that that God will be with His faithfull, I do not see how God would chose otherwise for His plan for the salvation of the world.

 

[Crdl2Grv]

I have never in my life heard of any Catholic who has tried to defend the Catholic Church on the basis of its size. So I’m not really sure what argument you are trying make.

Confession time. My best friend (and best man at my wedding) is currently in an Orthodox seminary. He and I were giving each other some chin music about our respective churches the other day and I ended the “argument” with an e-mail that said, “Scoreboard, dude. Scoreboard” and contained a link to the worldwide populations of Catholics vs. Orthodox.

 

[Z_Ninja]

The simple answer is no, the size of the Religion does not matter. If, however, the size is what causes a non-Catholic to look at the Church, that’s fine. There are many things that may cause someone to explore the Catholic Church. If they join because of the size without believing in the doctrines and tenets of the faith, then they’ve joined for the wrong reason.

 

[Ahimsa]

Size enters into only because, as the oldest Christian body, the Catholic/Orthodox Churches are going to be the largest.

Actually, the Assyrian Church of the East, and the Oriential Orthodox, are just as old, but not nearly as large in numbers any more (due to Muslim expansion).

 

[Della]

The simple answer is no, the size of the Religion does not matter. If, however, the size is what causes a non-Catholic to look at the Church, that’s fine. There are many things that may cause someone to explore the Catholic Church. If they join because of the size without believing in the doctrines and tenets of the faith, then they’ve joined for the wrong reason.

I second this. There may come a time when the Church will be so persecuted that only a few will remain faithful–but the Church would still be the one Christ founded nonetheless. The size of the Church really didn’t hit me until I was well into RCIA. All I thought at the time was, “Oh sure, it makes sense it’s so large because it’s so ancient” and went on as before, learning, having my assumptions challenged and more and more certain I was doing the right thing by being reconciled to her.

 

[SteveVH]

Confession time. My best friend (and best man at my wedding) is currently in an Orthodox seminary. He and I were giving each other some chin music about our respective churches the other day and I ended the “argument” with an e-mail that said, “Scoreboard, dude. Scoreboard” and contained a link to the worldwide populations of Catholics vs. Orthodox.

Okay. I take it back. I know one person who has defended the Church based upon size.

 

[CompSciGuy]

When comparing the Catholic Church to other Christian denominations, it’s hard to ignore the fact that the Catholic Church is by far the largest and most widespread and most powerful, and had been so for many centuries. What are the implications of this? It don’t think it’s a very Biblical attitude to say that whatever group is ahead in worldy numbers is necessarily the one most approved by God. In her infancy the Church was obviously a quite small religious minority, very limited geographically. So is it just a coincidence today that the “One True Church” so happens to be the biggest?

I feel that part of the reason for many Protestants being so attracted to Catholicism may be simply awe in belonging to such an impressive worldwide organization, and not so much in liking the particular doctrines which she teaches.

I wouldn’t say necessarily that size is the issue. I have actually heard it argued in reverse from a Baptist minister: “Broad is the way that leads to destruction!”

Jesus said to “make disciples of all nations.” “A city on a hill cannot be hidden.” If Christianity is true, then the truth of the faith should be universal. Which of the denominations is universal? Which is really the face of Christianity in the world? Definitely the Catholic Church. A huge number of Protestant denominations don’t exist outside of America. Why would the Lord allow His universal Church to be constrained to a small community of believers in one of the wealthiest nations in the world?

 

[mark_a]

When comparing the Catholic Church to other Christian denominations, it’s hard to ignore the fact that the Catholic Church is by far the largest and most widespread and most powerful, and had been so for many centuries. What are the implications of this? It don’t think it’s a very Biblical attitude to say that whatever group is ahead in worldy numbers is necessarily the one most approved by God. In her infancy the Church was obviously a quite small religious minority, very limited geographically. So is it just a coincidence today that the “One True Church” so happens to be the biggest?

I feel that part of the reason for many Protestants being so attracted to Catholicism may be simply awe in belonging to such an impressive worldwide organization, and not so much in liking the particular doctrines which she teaches.

The ccc says that the Church will dwindle to a very small number sometime before the end of time. So I guess it depends on which time in history we’re talking about.

BTW, Islam (in all it’s forms and "denominations has surpassed Catholicism in mere numbers.

 

[Ahimsa]

Why would the Lord allow His universal Church to be constrained to a small community of believers in one of the wealthiest nations in the world?

So, size does matter?

 

[FabiusMaximus]

I think the size of the organization may make a difference only to someone who is already an established Catholic. Perhaps a Catholic might think, after already being convinced of Catholicism, that perhaps its massive size is an ulterior confirmation of what he already knew. Certainly though it’d be a poor reason to join the Catholic Church.

It’s very dicey, though. I don’t think it’s good to bring up. Personally when I began inquiring into Catholicism, size didn’t even register with me.

 

[SteveVH]

I think the size of the organization may make a difference only to someone who is already an established Catholic. Perhaps a Catholic might think, after already being convinced of Catholicism, that perhaps its massive size is an ulterior confirmation of what he already knew. Certainly though it’d be a poor reason to join the Catholic Church.

It’s very dicey, though. I don’t think it’s good to bring up. Personally when I began inquiring into Catholicism, size didn’t even register with me.

Nor should it.

 

[manualman]

Perhaps others already said it, but I DO think that ‘catholicity’ is a prerequisite for a religion that claims to be THE divinely revealed faith. As that bastion of wisdom, The Simpsons put it (paraphrase) “We are the one, true church: The eastern, reformed branch of Wesleyan Presbo-Lutheranism!” The rub, of course is that it is absurd for a religious community totally mired in a single, narrow cultural millieu to claim to be the universal church. That’s less about size and more about philosophy, doctrine and history though.

 

[Ahimsa]

Perhaps others already said it, but I DO think that ‘catholicity’ is a prerequisite for a religion that claims to be THE divinely revealed faith. As that bastion of wisdom, The Simpsons put it (paraphrase) “We are the one, true church: The eastern, reformed branch of Wesleyan Presbo-Lutheranism!” The rub, of course is that it is absurd for a religious community totally mired in a single, narrow cultural millieu to claim to be the universal church. That’s less about size and more about philosophy, doctrine and history though.

Was Judaism a divinely revealed faith?

 

[manualman]

Was Judaism a divinely revealed faith?

Judaism was a revelation specifically for the people God chose for the first covenant that would reveal our universal need for a savior and prepare the way for him. Were the practice of Judaism alone sufficient to meet the shortcomings of human sinfulness, we wouldn’t have needed Jesus to come, would we?

So in a way, yes, the specific focus of Judaism on being a religion largely inherited, not converted to IS a marker that it isn’t THE faith established by God to be his full revelation to mankind.

 

[rebecca123]

I think the large numbers also has something to do with the fact that the infants are baptized and then counted as Catholics right from the beginning. Not all denominations baptize infants, only those who can make a confession of faith and want to be baptized. I’ts more of a heritage thing, I don’t think converts from other Christian faiths make up the bulk of Catholics.

 

[Bezant]

When comparing the Catholic Church to other Christian denominations, it’s hard to ignore the fact that the Catholic Church is by far the largest and most widespread and most powerful, and had been so for many centuries. What are the implications of this? It don’t think it’s a very Biblical attitude to say that whatever group is ahead in worldy numbers is necessarily the one most approved by God. In her infancy the Church was obviously a quite small religious minority, very limited geographically. So is it just a coincidence today that the “One True Church” so happens to be the biggest?

I feel that part of the reason for many Protestants being so attracted to Catholicism may be simply awe in belonging to such an impressive worldwide organization, and not so much in liking the particular doctrines which she teaches.

Well, it’s not a bad thing to be big. It’s nice to be able to go in most countries and find a Mass. But I see your point. That’s a matter perhaps the Church isn’t addressing effectively, and that’s quality over quanity.

I sometimes come across Catholics who look at the Church, the largest Christian community at one billion strong, and argue that it’s a sign the Catholic Church is the One True Church.

And I say, Really? Because anyone who’s had a valid Trinitarian baptism – even if performed in an emergency by your Hindu neighbour – and who hasn’t made formal rites into another church is a Catholic by canon law. Surely, people who’ve had such baptisms make a very small number.

Nevertheless, how many of those one billion go to Mass every Sunday and Holy Day of Obligation? How many of those one billion adhere to Church teaching on birth control, homosexuality, or egg/sperm donation? How many experience Catholicism though blended religions, e.g., Santeria?

Some people believe Catholicism needs to go back to more traditional practices (e.g., meatless Fridays, Tridentine Mass, etc.) to make up for ‘cafeteria’ and ‘cultural Catholicism’. I don’t necessarily believe that this will bring Americans and Europeans running back to church. However, it could be helpful. IMO it seems the Church expects perhaps too little in the hope that members will do more than the bare minimum, but what it does expect, it demands too rigidly.

 

[Della]

Well, it’s not a bad thing to be big. It’s nice to be able to go in most countries and find a Mass. But I see your point. That’s a matter perhaps the Church isn’t addressing effectively, and that’s quality over quanity.

I sometimes come across Catholics who look at the Church, the largest Christian community at one billion strong, and argue that it’s a sign the Catholic Church is the One True Church.

And I say, Really? Because anyone who’s had a valid Trinitarian baptism – even if performed in an emergency by your Hindu neighbour – and who hasn’t made formal rites into another church is a Catholic by canon law. Surely, people who’ve had such baptisms make a very small number.

Nevertheless, how many of those one billion go to Mass every Sunday and Holy Day of Obligation? How many of those one billion adhere to Church teaching on birth control, homosexuality, or egg/sperm donation? How many experience Catholicism though blended religions, e.g., Santeria?

Within a Church with so many members it is only to be expected that a large part of the baptized aren’t going to be ultra faithful. No one has claimed such perfection for Catholics. It’s much easier for smaller groups in which everyone knows everyone’s business and everyone is expected to act, think, and do exactly alike in order to fit in to claim extraordinary faithfulness from their members. Besides, we cannot see anyone’s heart or know their struggles or how close they are to God. That is for God alone to judge, don’t you think?

Some people believe Catholicism needs to go back to more traditional practices (e.g., meatless Fridays, Tridentine Mass, etc.) to make up for ‘cafeteria’ and ‘cultural Catholicism’. I don’t necessarily believe that this will bring Americans and Europeans running back to church. However, it could be helpful. IMO it seems the Church expects perhaps too little in the hope that members will do more than the bare minimum, but what it does expect, it demands too rigidly.

I’m not so sure many of the ones who find ordinary Church teachings too strict would come back to full participation no matter how things were changed. Because there are so many Catholics who have been more influenced by the societies in which they live than the Church, it’s no surprise they don’t “get it”. The Church gets them for maybe one hour a week and Lady Gaga gets them all the rest of the time.

Also, instead of teaching authentic Catholic teaching after VII, a good many parishes became one with the culture and taught “love, peace, and joy” at the expense of solid theology. It’s no wonder people don’t believe the Church knows what it’s doing. But, as in every age since 33 AD, this is just a phase through which the Church is going–a bit of bumpy ocean to sail through. After Lady Gaga has gone, the Church will still be there, meeting the real needs of people with the truth and the Holy Eucharist, which trumps everything else the world can offer.

 

[Bezant]

Originally Posted by Bezant:
Well, it’s not a bad thing to be big. It’s nice to be able to go in most countries and find a Mass. But I see your point. That’s a matter perhaps the Church isn’t addressing effectively, and that’s quality over quanity.

I sometimes come across Catholics who look at the Church, the largest Christian community at one billion strong, and argue that it’s a sign the Catholic Church is the One True Church.

And I say, Really? Because anyone who’s had a valid Trinitarian baptism – even if performed in an emergency by your Hindu neighbour – and who hasn’t made formal rites into another church is a Catholic by canon law. Surely, people who’ve had such baptisms make a very small number.
*Nevertheless, how many of those one billion go to Mass every Sunday and Holy Day of Obligation? How many of those one billion adhere to Church teaching on birth control, homosexuality, or egg/sperm donation? How many experience Catholicism though blended religions, e.g., Santeria? *

Within a Church with so many members it is only to be expected that a large part of the baptized aren’t going to be ultra faithful. No one has claimed such perfection for Catholics. It’s much easier for smaller groups in which everyone knows everyone’s business and everyone is expected to act, think, and do exactly alike in order to fit in to claim extraordinary faithfulness from their members.

Yes, I do realise that upholding ‘quality’ in the Church is difficult when the ‘quantity’ is massive, and I certainly don’t expect the Church to be perfect in regards to ‘quality.’

Besides, we cannot see anyone’s heart or know their struggles or how close they are to God. That is for God alone to judge, don’t you think?

I don’t think so, though clearly numbers cannot reveal’where everyone is in their spirtitual lives.

The reality is that Catholicism has declined depressingly in some areas, especially in Europe and North America, but even in historically ‘Catholic’ places like parts of South America, Poland, and France.

My point is, while important that Church to be as accessible as possible to all people everywhere, it’s also important that the Church be able to keep people in the fold. The way I’m starting to see it, that could mean becoming more introverted and insulated than it’s been in the past.

Originally Posted by Bezant:
Quote:
Some people believe Catholicism needs to go back to more traditional practices (e.g., meatless Fridays, Tridentine Mass, etc.) to make up for ‘cafeteria’ and ‘cultural Catholicism’. I don’t necessarily believe that this will bring Americans and Europeans running back to church. However, it could be helpful. IMO it seems the Church expects perhaps too little in the hope that members will do more than the bare minimum, but what it does expect, it demands too rigidly.

I’m not so sure many of the ones who find ordinary Church teachings too strict would come back to full participation no matter how things were changed.

Yes, hence I doubt it will bring people running back, especially because people who leave the Church don’t do it over minor points like Lenten Fridays and altar girls. It could satisfy many, but not some.

Because there are so many Catholics who have been more influenced by the societies in which they live than the Church, it’s no surprise they don’t “get it”. The Church gets them for maybe one hour a week and Lady Gaga gets them all the rest of the time.

I don’t think it’s enough to say “That’s the way the world that the Church is in works,” even though that’s a valid point. There are times when the Church pays mind and energy to the world (for instance, the reaction to the DaVinci Code) when it would probably be better off ignoring it, or writing a statement and leaving the world at its rubbish.

Also, instead of teaching authentic Catholic teaching after VII, a good many parishes became one with the culture and taught “love, peace, and joy” at the expense of solid theology.It’s no wonder people don’t believe the Church knows what it’s doing.

That could be true, although I wonder if lay education was lacking with Catholics (compared to Protestants) before Vatican II.

But, as in every age since 33 AD, this is just a phase through which the Church is going–a bit of bumpy ocean to sail through. After Lady Gaga has gone, the Church will still be there, meeting the real needs of people with the truth and the Holy Eucharist, which trumps everything else the world can offer.

That’s definitely how God works. Whatever artificial creations we make will pass away, but his creations will remain long, long after.

 

[CompSciGuy]

So, size does matter?

Not size but universality. Catholicity.