Index of Leading Catholic Indicators: The Church Since Vatican II

[marymonde]

worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=29948

An index of Catholicism’s decline

Patrick J. Buchanan

As the Watergate scandal of 1973-1974 diverted attention from the far greater tragedy unfolding in Southeast Asia, so, too, the scandal of predator-priests now afflicting the Catholic Church may be covering up a far greater calamity.

Thirty-seven years after the end of the only church council of the 20th century, the jury has come in with its verdict: Vatican II appears to have been an unrelieved disaster for Roman Catholicism.

Liars may figure, but figures do not lie. Kenneth C. Jones of St. Louis has pulled together a slim volume of statistics he has titled Index of Leading Catholic Indicators: The Church Since Vatican II.

see the linked article for more…

 

[Unfinished]

Interesting article. Nice to see some statistics backing up what we already knew.

 

[marymonde]

Yes it is nice to see the facts.

The man that compiled them is a member of my parish. I believe he did a very comprehensive job getting all the statistics together.

 

[Windmill]

Much of problems are due to the handling of the Council. Some of it, too, was the anti-authoritarianism that was rife in the 60’s.

I don’t like where the Church has gone, and I long for the fairy-tale days of whole communities being steeped in their Catholic Faith.

I love traditional Catholicism, I pray for a TLM to come to our area, but I always have to ask myself a question:

If the faith of the average Catholic way back then was THAT solid, then why wasn’t it enough to deal with the societal, cultural, political, and ecclesial changes that took place in the 60’s? IOW, was the state of the Church bad before, and we were a “house of cards” waiting to fall?

I’ve read stories about legalisms back in the day that made a joke out of piety. People went thorugh the rituals without it affecting their lives in any real way. That type of faith cannot handle real challenges.

I don’t know. My take tends to be that V2 was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Too many things were setup for there to be problems, and this was the perfect excuse.

The answer is not going to be to deny V2. The answer is not going to be to simply reinstate the TLM. The answer is going to be to catechize, catechize, catechize. If this occurs, then people will love and cherish their faith. It will change who they are, not just what they do. After that, I believe people will be more open to things like a TLM.

I think that traditional publications are going ot be a key factor in a genuine renewal of faith. So many modern works seem like they are trying to re-invent the wheel. Pop-psychology is blended with Catholiclingo to make wierd ideas seem palatable. The end result is a hodgepodge of worthless psychobabble that is incapable of sanctifying. When people discover the older works that answered all the same questions and problems that men of all ages have faced, then people will start to appreciate the treasure of holy books and good, traditional practices.

I think we should support publishers like: TAN, Baronius Press, Roman Catholic Books, etc… They are the keepers of the Flame, IMHO.

 

[marymonde]

Here are Jones’ grim statistics of Catholicism’s decline:

Priests. While the number of priests in the United States more than doubled to 58,000, between 1930 and 1965, since then that number has fallen to 45,000. By 2020, there will be only 31,000 priests left, and more than half of these priests will be over 70.

Ordinations. In 1965, 1,575 new priests were ordained in the United States. In 2002, the number was 450. In 1965, only 1 percent of U.S. parishes were without a priest. Today, there are 3,000 priestless parishes, 15 percent of all U.S. parishes.

Seminarians. Between 1965 and 2002, the number of seminarians dropped from 49,000 to 4,700, a decline of over 90 percent. Two-thirds of the 600 seminaries that were operating in 1965 have now closed.

Sisters. In 1965, there were 180,000 Catholic nuns. By 2002, that had fallen to 75,000 and the average age of a Catholic nun is today 68. In 1965, there were 104,000 teaching nuns. Today, there are 8,200, a decline of 94 percent since the end of Vatican II.

Religious Orders. For religious orders in America, the end is in sight. In 1965, 3,559 young men were studying to become Jesuit priests. In 2000, the figure was 389. With the Christian Brothers, the situation is even more dire. Their number has shrunk by two-thirds, with the number of seminarians falling 99 percent. In 1965, there were 912 seminarians in the Christian Brothers. In 2000, there were only seven. The number of young men studying to become Franciscan and Redemptorist priests fell from 3,379 in 1965 to 84 in 2000.

Catholic schools. Almost half of all Catholic high schools in the United States have closed since 1965. The student population has fallen from 700,000 to 386,000. Parochial schools suffered an even greater decline. Some 4,000 have disappeared, and the number of pupils attending has fallen below 2 million – from 4.5 million.

 

[homewardbound]

I’m glad to have found CAF, its a nice reminder that not all Catholics have fallen prey to secular thinking.

 

[Unfinished]

The answer is not going to be to deny V2. The answer is not going to be to simply reinstate the TLM. The answer is going to be to catechize, catechize, catechize. If this occurs, then people will love and cherish their faith. It will change who they are, not just what they do. After that, I believe people will be more open to things like a TLM.

I think this is an excellent point. Even people who like the Novus Ordo more than the TLM, they are usually still very open to the idea of it being celebrated more regularly. That is, if they have studied their faith and are faithful Catholics.

The Catholics who often call the TLM “stupid” or “silly” are often the ones who disagree with the Church on this or that. Not to lump them ALL in here, but I am speaking generally from experience.

So, lets make everyone a faithful Catholic. Then the Novus Ordo will be celebrated properly, and the TLM will be offered at every parish.

 

[SnorterLuster]

If the faith of the average Catholic way back then was THAT solid, then why wasn’t it enough to deal with the societal, cultural, political, and ecclesial changes that took place in the 60’s? IOW, was the state of the Church bad before, and we were a “house of cards” waiting to fall?

Speaking from my experience as a teenager in the 60s, the Church was always our Rock. It didn’t matter what society or politics was doing, we could count on the Church being unchanging in the ocean of chaos. Then Vatican II changed the very things that the Catholics of the day most recognized as being Catholic. The Mass, Latin, priests being something special due to their consecration. Our rock was turning to sand beneath our feet. No longer was Sunday morning to be our sanctuary from the madness outside. Instead, we were to bring the madness right up to the altar. I will never forget my best friend came home on leave from operations in the Viet Nam theater. He went to Mass and got an earful of how men in the service were killers and not fit to call themselves Catholic. I think that was the last time he went to Church except when he got married.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Here are Jones’ grim statistics of Catholicism’s decline:

Priests. While the number of priests in the United States more than doubled to 58,000, between 1930 and 1965, since then that number has fallen to 45,000. By 2020, there will be only 31,000 priests left, and more than half of these priests will be over 70.

Ordinations. In 1965, 1,575 new priests were ordained in the United States. In 2002, the number was 450. In 1965, only 1 percent of U.S. parishes were without a priest. Today, there are 3,000 priestless parishes, 15 percent of all U.S. parishes.

Seminarians. Between 1965 and 2002, the number of seminarians dropped from 49,000 to 4,700, a decline of over 90 percent. Two-thirds of the 600 seminaries that were operating in 1965 have now closed.

Sisters. In 1965, there were 180,000 Catholic nuns. By 2002, that had fallen to 75,000 and the average age of a Catholic nun is today 68. In 1965, there were 104,000 teaching nuns. Today, there are 8,200, a decline of 94 percent since the end of Vatican II.

Religious Orders. For religious orders in America, the end is in sight. In 1965, 3,559 young men were studying to become Jesuit priests. In 2000, the figure was 389. With the Christian Brothers, the situation is even more dire. Their number has shrunk by two-thirds, with the number of seminarians falling 99 percent. In 1965, there were 912 seminarians in the Christian Brothers. In 2000, there were only seven. The number of young men studying to become Franciscan and Redemptorist priests fell from 3,379 in 1965 to 84 in 2000.

Catholic schools. Almost half of all Catholic high schools in the United States have closed since 1965. The student population has fallen from 700,000 to 386,000. Parochial schools suffered an even greater decline. Some 4,000 have disappeared, and the number of pupils attending has fallen below 2 million – from 4.5 million.

A few comments​

1. That something occurs after something else, does not mean that one causes is the other. That there was a decline in stats after V2, does not in any way mean that the Church had not been saving up for such a decline.
2. The figures in the post are very deceptive if the figures for intervening years are left out. An ice-cream seller who sells 100 ice creams in one month, & then only 50 in that following, is not doing as well as in the first month: but, if he sells 80 in month three, his business has undergone a marked revival - even though he is still selling fewer than in month one.

So with those stats - it’s impossible to make sense of them, unless one knows what the trends in the intervening years were; they may very well mask a real revival. But because only the first and last figures in the series are given, it’s impossible to know.

1. The stats also ignore such things as the birth of new religious communities - this failure to mention such things gives a false picture of unrelieved decline which is as misleading as suggesting that the Church in the USA has no problems at all
2. One of the changes made by V2 - & one contemplated by Pius XII - was the restoration of the permanent diaconate. This is very likely one of the reasons for the fall in the number of aspiring priests.
3. The Church had been losing the workers for two generations before V2 - sooner or later, this was going to have effects on the ability of the Church to renew itself. And just possibly the two WWs had had an effect - dead Catholics can’t reproduce.
4. The CC in the USA is not the only part of the Church - if the stats had included some of those for Africa, they might well give a different impression
5. What accounts for each set of stats ? For instance: are the reasons that account for the decline in the number of schools, related to, or the same as, the reasons there are fewer women religious ?
6. How have other Churches & religions been doing over the same period ? Are the reason for the various declines in stats caused by things peculiar to Catholicism, or do they reflect sociological & demographic changes in society which have affected other bodies too ?
7. Nicea 1 in 325 was followed by centuries of trouble for the Church - Councils often are.

It’s not enough to note stats, & stop there. One has also to ask “Why are they as they are ?” IOW - one has to ask what the stats signify, & one has to try to account for them; simply to record them is not enough. And they need to be put into some kind of social context - otherwise, they mean little

Unless such qquestions are amswered, Jones’ stats prove nothing at all about Vatican II.

Besides, it is illegitimate & illogical to reason from judgements about quantities, to judgements about values - “V2 was a good/bad thing” is a value judgement, which cannot be derived from quantities of stats - that would be like estimating holiness by bodily height. The legitimacy or goodness or badness of V2 cannot be based on stats.

 

[devotus]

“We feel we must disagree with those prophets of gloom, who are always forecasting disaster, as though the end of the world were at hand”

Pope John XIII Opening Speech to the Council

kinda ironic huh?

 

[BobP123]

worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=29948

An index of Catholicism’s decline

Patrick J. Buchanan

As the Watergate scandal of 1973-1974 diverted attention from the far greater tragedy unfolding in Southeast Asia, so, too, the scandal of predator-priests now afflicting the Catholic Church may be covering up a far greater calamity.

Thirty-seven years after the end of the only church council of the 20th century, the jury has come in with its verdict: Vatican II appears to have been an unrelieved disaster for Roman Catholicism.

Liars may figure, but figures do not lie. Kenneth C. Jones of St. Louis has pulled together a slim volume of statistics he has titled Index of Leading Catholic Indicators: The Church Since Vatican II.

see the linked article for more…

Actually the Novus Ordo is relatively well attended in the U.S. In France, for example, they’re happy if they get 10 people to attend in a large cathedral.

 

[SnorterLuster]

1. How have other Churches & religions been doing over the same period ? Are the reason for the various declines in stats caused by things peculiar to Catholicism, or do they reflect sociological & demographic changes in society which have affected other bodies too ?

No numbers to back it up, but if I remember correctly the Catholic Church’s attendance didn’t drop a much as the so called mainstream Protestant churches, but the conservative, rigid evangelical chuches, such as the Southern Baptists, grew very fast over the same period.

 

[Ace86]

A few comments​

1. That something occurs after something else, does not mean that one causes is the other. That there was a decline in stats after V2, does not in any way mean that the Church had not been saving up for such a decline.
2. The figures in the post are very deceptive if the figures for intervening years are left out. An ice-cream seller who sells 100 ice creams in one month, & then only 50 in that following, is not doing as well as in the first month: but, if he sells 80 in month three, his business has undergone a marked revival - even though he is still selling fewer than in month one.

That’s a good point, but I think that in general, most of the figures that shouldn’t be declining, were and are declining.

So with those stats - it’s impossible to make sense of them, unless one knows what the trends in the intervening years were; they may very well mask a real revival. But because only the first and last figures in the series are given, it’s impossible to know.

1. The stats also ignore such things as the birth of new religious communities - this failure to mention such things gives a false picture of unrelieved decline which is as misleading as suggesting that the Church in the USA has no problems at all
2. One of the changes made by V2 - & one contemplated by Pius XII - was the restoration of the permanent diaconate. This is very likely one of the reasons for the fall in the number of aspiring priests.

True. They really should mention orders like Mother Angelica’s, and the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal.

1. The CC in the USA is not the only part of the Church - if the stats had included some of those for Africa, they might well give a different impression

The report was only done on the Catholic Church in the US. The reason to isolate the Church in the US is simply because it has different statistics than the Church in Africa, etc.

1. What accounts for each set of stats ? For instance: are the reasons that account for the decline in the number of schools, related to, or the same as, the reasons there are fewer women religious ?

It’s probably related to the decline of women religious, but the reason women religious declined was because of too much heterodoxy in those particular religious orders.

1. How have other Churches & religions been doing over the same period ? Are the reason for the various declines in stats caused by things peculiar to Catholicism, or do they reflect sociological & demographic changes in society which have affected other bodies too ?

Well the pop in the US has been growing, as has the number of Catholics. BUT Catholic families in general are smaller because of the universal acceptance of birth control. Secularism also plays an important role, but I think the loss of the sense of the Sacred, and the loss of the sense of sin also factors into Church growth and shrinkage.

1. Nicea 1 in 325 was followed by centuries of trouble for the Church - Councils often are.

It’s not enough to note stats, & stop there. One has also to ask “Why are they as they are ?” IOW - one has to ask what the stats signify, & one has to try to account for them; simply to record them is not enough. And they need to be put into some kind of social context - otherwise, they mean little

Unless such qquestions are amswered, Jones’ stats prove nothing at all about Vatican II.

Besides, it is illegitimate & illogical to reason from judgements about quantities, to judgements about values - “V2 was a good/bad thing” is a value judgement, which cannot be derived from quantities of stats - that would be like estimating holiness by bodily height. The legitimacy or goodness or badness of V2 cannot be based on stats.

Vatican II itself cannot be blamed, but the way and means in which it was implemented can be blamed.

By their fruits you shall know them…

 

[RobedWithLight]

We should be very careful when interpreting statistics, as Gottle has clearly pointed out. Too often, declines in the number of vocations are casually blamed on VII, that is, since these declines happened “after” VII, then VII is the “cause” of these declines, which is exactly what might be derived from a superficial and amateur reading of such figures. In logic this is called the fallacy of Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc. And I don’t see how VII is to blame for the closure of many Catholic High Schools, as though economics and other related factors had nothing at all to do with it.

 

[RobedWithLight]

Actually the Novus Ordo is relatively well attended in the U.S. In France, for example, they’re happy if they get 10 people to attend in a large cathedral.

Sarcastic remarks against a valid liturgy of the Church is highly inappropriate and un-catholic. Here in the Philippines, churches are often full during Mass on Sundays. And masses are in the local dialect.

 

[marymonde]

Vatican II itself cannot be blamed, but the way and means in which it was implemented can be blamed.

By their fruits you shall know them…

What do you mean, how it was implemented? If it was poorly implemented, why weren’t the necessary corrections made? What does that say about the ruling ability of the hierarchy and Rome? It implies they are totally inept at producing documents and carrying them out in a proper manner. It’s sounds more like an excuse. That is like me telling my children, I have rules and here they are, but then I let them do whatever they please and not correct them because they implemented them diffferently than what I meant them to be. It’s called chaos and not looking out for the best interest of my children’s souls. I recall a story about a woman asking St. Pio where her deceased children were, for they had died and she wanted to know the state of their souls. He told them they were in hell, because of her permissiveness. Not carrying out your duty to the souls you are entrusted with is a very serious matter, whether you are a parent or a prelate.

Like I said before, if you all do not see the fruits of what is going on in the Church over the past 40 years, I don’t know what to say. I am more inclined to think that when the Church became lax, so did society. The Church is the Pillar of Truth, and when the Truth is hidden, chaos ensues.

 

[Unfinished]

Sarcastic remarks against a valid liturgy of the Church is highly inappropriate and un-catholic. Here in the Philippines, churches are often full during Mass on Sundays. And masses are in the local dialect.

He actually wasn’t being sarcastic. Exaggerating a bit, perhaps. But in France the SSPX has better attendance than the rest of the Church.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Like I said before, if you all do not see the fruits of what is going on in the Church over the past 40 years, I don’t know what to say. I am more inclined to think that when the Church became lax, so did society. The Church is the Pillar of Truth, and when the Truth is hidden, chaos ensues.

Honestly, how could we manage without the prophets and seers amongst us, pointing out the bad fruit and apportioning blame.

The problems that the article is prepared to blame on VII or the Council or the Popes what could just as easily be blamed on the times in which the council was held (which is handily described as the "Spirit of Vatican II) and the times since then: “free love,” anti-establishment, “flower children,” the “me” generation, excessive materialism, etc. It hardly ever occurs to anyone that these things might lead to a reduction in mass attendance or priestly vocations. Certainly, the Church is to combat these things, to react against these things, but many in the Church bought into those very mindsets, aiding and abetting them. This isn’t new in the history of the Church, but no one blamed the Church for it, no one blamed a legitimate council for those problems. My response to the article is the old saw that “correlation does not prove causation.”

On the way to mass at my own parish (which is right now quite troubled, but which still managed to pull such a crowd to Ash Wednesday that there was only room to stand), I passed another parish, where the church and the vestibule were so crowded that a crowed of about 200 were gathered on the plaza in FRONT of the church. And pedestrians were still converging from all directions (I had thought, “I’ll just go to Saint Christopher’s, it’s closer”)! I guess we need to tell that priest and congregation that attendance is way down.

 

[Ham1]

And here is some more shocking news:

Attendance at the Tridentine Mass is dwindling! Look at these numbers:

In the US, before Vatican II: approximately 50,000,000 attended the Tridentine Mass on Sundays.

Today: only 30,000 or so attend the Tridentine Mass on Sundays.

What a devastating statistic!!!

…or could there be another reason behind the decline???

 

[JKirkLVNV]

And here is some more shocking news:

Attendance at the Tridentine Mass is dwindling! Look at these numbers:

In the US, before Vatican II: approximately 50,000,000 attended the Tridentine Mass on Sundays.

Today: only 30,000 or so attend the Tridentine Mass on Sundays.

What a devastating statistic!!!

…or could there be another reason behind the decline???

I blame Pope St. Pius V and the Tridentine Mass.

And the Masons.

And those irritating little pop corn skins that get caught in your teeth, and you can’t get them out, unless you peel the cellophane off your pack of cigarettes and sort of floss, but that doesn’t always work, 'cause you can’t get your whole hand in your mouth and it’s caught at the back and…

Look it up, if you don’t believe me. You can find the information in the same place we found the Iraqui weapons of mass destruction.