Don't Pine for 'the Good Old Days'

[gpmj12]

Catholic historian Hilaire Belloc (1870-1953) criticized his contemporaries for “reading backwards into history,” by which he meant the “present continually judging the past from a position of supposed superiority.” Belloc might be surprised by the current trend among some Catholics: today, it is fashionable to “read forwards into history,” meaning the present judging the past with a yearning for the “good old days.”

It is not uncommon to find Catholic commentators highlighting certain centuries or time periods in Church history when the Faith was lived (seemingly) more authentically—when Catholics believed and practiced faithfully, and the hierarchy was replete with holy and orthodox prelates. Frequently, this erroneous view of Church history is used to bemoan the current state of the papacy, the liturgy, sacramental devotion, and theological writing.

There are certainly areas and topics in the Church today that warrant concern and legitimate criticism, where a careful and considerate review of Church history can help us, provided we proceed with great prudence. But the “good old days” mentality is the opposite of all that: specious at best and disingenuous at worst. This mentality fails to acknowledge that every time period has unique political and ecclesial circumstances which cannot be easily replicated.

Read on here…

Don't Pine for 'the Good Old Days' | Catholic Answers Magazine

How can the modern-day Catholic avoid falling into the “good old days” trap of historical interpretation? Here are four strategies/suggestions:

1. Study Church (and secular) history: Read, read, and read books from a multitude of authors to gain insight and different perspectives of historical events. Those who are concerned about knowing which historian to trust can concentrate on identifiable Catholic writers first and then, with a firm foundation in Catholic history, engage other authors.
2. Remember the historical context: Understanding historical events from the perspective of those who lived them is crucial. The political, military, economic, and religious context of the past must remain prominent in any attempt to learn from history and apply those lessons to modern circumstances and situations.
3. Avoid static caricatures: History involves the complex story of men and women of the past and their choices and actions. Avoid the temptation to view certain periods of the Catholic past as “the good old days,” and recognize that every age of Church history involves virtue, vice, conflict, and crisis. A desire to return to the supposed “glorious” past—almost certainly not as glorious as you think!—is foolhardy.
4. Learn from history; do not use history: Studying the past provides meaning to the present so that the present can help determine the future. Using history to further an agenda or to merely criticize is a misuse of history and a disservice to the men and women of the past. Learning from our brothers and sisters in the Faith provides an opportunity to grow in our faith in Christ’s Church and maintain an even keel in the midst of trying times. Moreover, studying the actions of past Catholics can serve as a model of behavior for appropriate responses to modern-day problems as well as provide a cautionary tale for inappropriate reactions.

Instead of wishing for the “good old days,” Catholics today are better served by a holistic understanding and interpretation of Catholic history so that the Church’s mission of spreading the gospel can be more effective in a world that is in desperate need of Christ.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

It’s a case of “take the meat and leave the bones”.

People will, of course, disagree on what part is the “meat” and what part is the “bones”.

And that’s okay.

 

[gpmj12]

Sounds like a good old Protestant approach to the history of the Church. It is actually quite important to recognise good from evil in the service of the Church and Christ. No room for duplicity.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

It is no such thing.

I am actually agreeing with the article on the one hand, and with Belloc on the other. They’re both correct. My point here, is that some people will look at Phenomenon X, or Practice Y, or Situation Z, and will look at it one way, and other people will look at the same thing or things, and see it another way.

We don’t all have to be in lockstep on matters of Church history, and agree that all the same things were good, bad, or indifferent. Historians disagree among themselves on things all the time. And I have two degrees in history (BA and MA), so I feel confident that I know what I am talking about.

 

[BlueKumul]

We should long for Heaven, not for other places and times in the fallen material world.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

True enough, but there is nothing wrong with looking back to a past era, and seeing good things there, things that we’ve lost. The low crime rates in American cities and towns, and the stability of black families (contrasted with the present situation of pregnancy out of wedlock and absentee fathers) comes immediately to mind. Nobody wants to go back to segregation and Jim Crow, but as I said, take the meat and leave the bones.

By the same token, things such as advances in medical technology — which allow people to live who would have died in earlier times — and a more inclusive society are definitely an improvement over past times. And instantaneous mass communication, and access to vast stores of knowledge, is far more of a good thing than a bad thing. Being able to assemble together huge lists of sexual abusers within the Church, to tell what they did and when, and to keep tabs on them, wouldn’t be possible without that kind of instantaneous, accessible mass communication. No doubt there are many who had secrets to keep, and who wish that kind of information access weren’t possible. That is just one example of the Internet being far more good than bad, and being able to look back to a day before it existed. By the same token, if this technology were ever to cease to be, I for one would look back and reflect on how good it was.