New poll confirms widespread dissent from Church moral teachings among US Catholics [CC]

[_Abyssinia]

There was an interesting study done that came out in 2012 that looked at WHY Catholic women used contraception ‘What Catholic Women Think about Faith, Conscience, and Contraception’

catholicexchange.com/160259

Even among the dissenting majority, however, not all are closed to the Church’s message on this subject. Hasson and Hill point out that about a third of these women mistakenly believe that the Church itself gives them the right to make up their own minds about which methods of family planning are morally acceptable. Many do not reject the Church’s authority out of hand.

Also, say the study authors, “When presented with an accurate description of the Church’s teachings on family planning many Catholic women show reluctance to completely reject the Church’s teaching.”

1/3rd of Catholics that use contraception think the Church “gives them the right to make up their own minds about which methods of family planning are morally acceptable.” That is just so uninformed, and that is quite a significant percentage of the dissenting Catholic women that use contraception. Would those 1/3rd continue to use contraception if they were informed and educated that that the view is completely wrong?

Mistakenly or not, 53 per cent of all women in the study who dissent in part or completely from church teaching cite a couple’s “moral right” to decide which method of family planning they will use. This makes it the top reason given for rejecting church teaching on the matter.

Two other reasons are cited frequently among this group: 46 percent say couples have “the right to enjoy sexual pleasure without worrying about pregnancy”, and 41 percent think that natural family planning is not an effective method to space or postpone pregnancy.

The authors perceive two main dynamics shaping these views: the influence of a cultural mindset that divorces sex from procreation and promises “sexual pleasure without consequences”, and a deficit on the church side in presenting Church teaching.

The latter can be deduced from the fact that 72 per cent of women surveyed said they rely mainly on the homily at Sunday Mass for learning about the faith, and yet just 15 per cent of that group fully accept the Church’s teaching on sex and reproduction. The weekly Mass homily, the authors say, “seems to represent a lost opportunity when it comes to conscience formation on the contraception issue.”

As for cultural influences, they seem likely (although the authors don’t say so) to account for at least some of the scepticism about natural family planning given the systematic bad press NFP is give by mainstream family planners and the media.

Priests need to speak more about issues like contraception in their homilies. If a lot of Catholic women who use contraception “rely mainly on the homily at Sunday Mass for learning about the faith,” that homily presents an opportunity to educate. If there is an increase in the number of homilies that talk about contraception, that could have the potential to in turn reduce the number of women using contraception because they will become more informed and educated.

Catholic media etc. should highlight more positive stories about Natural Family Planning. Maybe more Churches should invite couples who are using to NFP to come and give a talk to the parishioners.

About one in four of those who attend Mass regularly shows an interest in learning more about the method: hearing from other couples about the health and relationship benefits of NFP, what doctors say about it, and scientific evidence about its effectiveness. Such messages may be more persuasive than spiritual or authoritative ones, the authors suggest.

Excerpts not in article order.

 

[commenter]

So how would you classify those who were baptized Catholic and sometimes attend mass whole disagreeing with certain church beliefs?

They are welcome guests. It often is not a question of disagreeing with certain Church beliefs, but of not knowing or understanding them.

 

[commenter]

We live in a time when attitudes are considered as truth. Most polls are done not because people are seeking wisdom but to promote an agenda. The outcome of polls is sometimes slanted by the way the poll is conducted; furthermore, we only hear about the polls that are publicly released, we don’t hear about the polls conducted that did not provide the desired slant.

Earlier ages weren’t as gullible. It would not have occurred to researchers in the 1800s that
public opinion polls, even if they were objective, should guide them in pursuit of truth in Science, Morality, History, or Theology. Polls generally reflect the current slant of the secular media. So much of the Media is directed against the Catholic Church, because the Magisterium is not subservient to the media, as is the leadership of some Protestant churches. There are, increasingly fewer, Protestant Churches like the LCMS that are not media-subservient.

When the media promotes a certain agenda, it’s not at all surprising that most Catholics and Protestants will be heavily influenced, when that same Media does their polls. So what? If the Media persuades people that the daily affairs of the Kardashians are more important than disabled people struggling to overcome obstacles, does that make the Kardashians really more important? If the Media persuades people that the Earth is flat, would the resulting opinion polls change the shape of the Earth?

 

[JimG]

Even if this man was to church 41 yrs ago, he probably knows something more than nothing. In fact I’d say a lot of people know more than nothing at all.

That’s true. He remembers that he is Catholic. At some point, he may seek reconciliation with the Church. If he thinks about the items mentioned in the Pew poll, he probably takes his conclusions from the popular culture, rather than the Church. Such opinions, expressed in a poll or otherwise, would simply be erroneous. What value is it to do polling to determine how many Catholics hold to erroneous doctrine? What is needed is catechesis. It’s like doing a poll to determine how many chemists adhere to the principles of alchemy.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

We live in a time when attitudes are considered as truth. Most polls are done not because people are seeking wisdom but to promote an agenda. The outcome of polls is sometimes slanted by the way the poll is conducted; furthermore, we only hear about the polls that are publicly released, we don’t hear about the polls conducted that did not provide the desired slant.

Earlier ages weren’t as gullible. It would not have occurred to researchers in the 1800s that
public opinion polls, even if they were objective, should guide them in pursuit of truth in Science, Morality, History, or Theology. Polls generally reflect the current slant of the secular media. So much of the Media is directed against the Catholic Church, because the Magisterium is not subservient to the media, as is the leadership of some Protestant churches. There are, increasingly fewer, Protestant Churches like the LCMS that are not media-subservient.

When the media promotes a certain agenda, it’s not at all surprising that most Catholics and Protestants will be heavily influenced, when that same Media does their polls. So what? If the Media persuades people that the daily affairs of the Kardashians are more important than disabled people struggling to overcome obstacles, does that make the Kardashians really more important? If the Media persuades people that the Earth is flat, would the resulting opinion polls change the shape of the Earth?

very very true

 

[ComplineSanFran]

. What value is it to do polling to determine how many Catholics hold to erroneous doctrine?

I would imagine that the powers that be in the US Catholic Church find this information extremely valuable. I would imagine that religious scholars find the information extremely valuable. I would also imagine that other like-minded Roman Catholics would find great comfort in seeing that they are not alone in their beliefs and practices.

 

[Sy_Noe]

He is a Catholic, and he knows what he believes.

If they want to know what the ‘official teaching’ of the Church is, they wouldn’t be polling people, would they? The catechism is online, and sites like this one offer professional answers to specific questions.

Sites like this one? Do you mean when sites like this one start accepting that Baptized Catholics can identify as Catholics according to Catholic Church teaching?

 

[Sy_Noe]

That’s true. He remembers that he is Catholic. At some point, he may seek reconciliation with the Church. If he thinks about the items mentioned in the Pew poll, he probably takes his conclusions from the popular culture, rather than the Church. Such opinions, expressed in a poll or otherwise, would simply be erroneous. What value is it to do polling to determine how many Catholics hold to erroneous doctrine? What is needed is catechesis. It’s like doing a poll to determine how many chemists adhere to the principles of alchemy.

I realize people here think others who disagree about items don’t know what the Church teaches and they simply need catechesis. But in my experience in fact many know what the Church teaches about abc, abortion, SSM, and so on.

 

[ComplineSanFran]

Sites like this one? Do you mean when sites like this one start accepting that Baptized Catholics can identify as Catholics according to Catholic Church teaching?

Sy Noe, you are very good at reminding us of this fact. Thank you.

I wonder if people here would feel more comfortable with different labels for 76 million US Catholics. That way they can keep track of the rules for everyone according to the box they fit in. I’m thinking:

Observant and Conservative/Traditional Catholic
Traditionalist
Conservative and not so observant Catholic (misses Mass a couple times a month)
Divorced and Remarried Catholic
Gay married or in a relationship Catholic
Uses birth control Catholic
Goes to Mass but sins and doesn’t care Catholic
Baptized Catholic and who knows WHAT they believe Catholic

and the list goes on.

 

[Thomas_White]

I can’t speak for Thomas White but what I thought he meant was the person at the hospital who hadn’t been anywhere near a Catholic church for 40 yrs gave the true Catholic answer about being a Catholic. Assuming he was baptized or confirmed in a Catholic Church of course. And in that case, no until the Catholic Church changes its definition, he was not misrepresenting himself or being dishonest. He merely was going by what the Catholic Church told him and teaches on this.

Yes, this is what I meant.

 

[JimG]

I realize people here think others who disagree about items don’t know what the Church teaches and they simply need catechesis. But in my experience in fact many know what the Church teaches about abc, abortion, SSM, and so on.

Then they would find themselves in the same position as Protestants. Catholics are not sinless and are always in need of repentance. As long as they remain in the Church, there is hope. There is less hope if they remain in the Church while professing something other than Catholicism.

 

[DrTaffy]

Sites like this one? Do you mean when sites like this one start accepting that Baptized Catholics can identify as Catholics according to Catholic Church teaching?

Well, I meant only that sites like this one make it trivial to get an opinion from a trained Catholic priest. So while I agree with what you say, what I meant was only that a poll must intrinsically be looking at what people believe, not what the Church teaches.

 

[JimG]

Sy Noe, you are very good at reminding us of this fact. Thank you.

I wonder if people here would feel more comfortable with different labels for 76 million US Catholics. That way they can keep track of the rules for everyone according to the box they fit in. I’m thinking:

Observant and Conservative/Traditional Catholic
Traditionalist
Conservative and not so observant Catholic (misses Mass a couple times a month)
Divorced and Remarried Catholic
Gay married or in a relationship Catholic
Uses birth control Catholic
Goes to Mass but sins and doesn’t care Catholic
Baptized Catholic and who knows WHAT they believe Catholic

and the list goes on.

The rules are the same for everyone. Calling oneself a traditional observant Catholic doesn’t mean one never has need of repentance. The rebellious child is no less a child of the same parents as the obedient child, but the same “rules” apply to both. I only make the point that Church teachings are constant.

 

[Sy_Noe]

I would imagine that the powers that be in the US Catholic Church find this information extremely valuable. I would imagine that religious scholars find the information extremely valuable. I would also imagine that other like-minded Roman Catholics would find great comfort in seeing that they are not alone in their beliefs and practices.

I’m sure they do find it valuable. Cardinal Wuerl has stated it this way, “there are those who take part of what we say and there are others that take another part of what we say… there will always be some discussion among people what part they like best and for some, what part they’re going to accept.”

foxnews.com/transcript/2015/06/21/cardinal-donald-wuerl-on-pope-climate-change-message-can-rick-perry-escape/

I have to wonder what the poll results would be on the question of who is a Catholic.

 

[Thomas_White]

The rules are the same for everyone. Calling oneself a traditional observant Catholic doesn’t mean one never has need of repentance. The rebellious child is no less a child of the same parents as the obedient child, but the same “rules” apply to both. I only make the point that Church teachings are constant.

It is dogma that Church teachings are not constant.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Then they would find themselves in the same position as Protestants. Catholics are not sinless and are always in need of repentance. As long as they remain in the Church, there is hope. There is less hope if they remain in the Church while professing something other than Catholicism.

Or even less hope if they are pushed down so many times that they eventually get up and run away and not look back.

 

[JimG]

It is dogma that Church teachings are not constant.

Great, then we can merge with the Anglicans and everyone can pick and choose which doctrines they will accept.

 

[Tomdstone]

Great, then we can merge with the Anglicans and everyone can pick and choose which doctrines they will accept.

I am not sure that your proposal is feasible at least for now. Does your proposal mean that Catholics will accept SS marriage of bishops and women bishops?

 

[Sy_Noe]

Well, I meant only that sites like this one make it trivial to get an opinion from a trained Catholic priest. So while I agree with what you say, what I meant was only that a poll must intrinsically be looking at what people believe, not what the Church teaches.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8674827&postcount=2

 

[Thomas_White]

Great, then we can merge with the Anglicans and everyone can pick and choose which doctrines they will accept.

"8. And so the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved by an unending succession of preachers until the end of time…

“This tradition which comes from the apostles develops in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. For there is a growth in the understanding of the realities and the words which have been handed down. This happens through the contemplation and study made by believers, who treasure these things in their hearts (see Luke 2:19, 51) through a penetrating understanding of the spiritual realities which they experience and through the preaching of those who have received through Episcopal succession the sure gift of truth. For as the centuries succeed one another, the Church constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her.”

–Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, Die Verbum, Solemnly Promulgated by His Holiness Pope Paul VI on November 18, 1965

Die Verbum is one of the most important documents of Vatican II.