Pew Survey: Only half of Catholics know teaching on Eucharist

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tolle_Lege
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ir’s a lovely thought, but people who are already ignorant shouldn’t be doing the instructing; that would be the blind leading the blind.

A priest can only do and say so much during a ten-minute homily, but it is an important time.

Our faith has some profound theology. Weekly Mass isn’t enough to learn it all.

Assuming its theology is rigorous, Catholic school is great for children and teens but has become all but unaffordable for middle class families.

I took RCIA and was honestly appalled by how fluffy the material was; the meetings resembled more of a high school retreat than an actual course with actual content. There was a LOT that I had to go learn on my own.

I’d honestly rather not play a blame game, though. Priests and deacons need to reach out outside of the Mass, and parishioners need to respond. Adult ed lectures offered to accommodate different schedules - and ideally providing childcare - is a wonderful start.
 
CilladeRoma said:
VII just turned up he heat.
Click to expand...
Did it, though? Neither my father (a cradle Catholic confirmed in the early 40’s), nor my Mother (a convert in the late 40s) had any clear understanding of the Catechism. They knew most of the “rules,” when to fast, when to go to Mass, that sort of stuff. Not much beyond that. My mother became more knowledgeable, but only later in life (in her retired years).

In sum, I remain unconvinced that things were so different in the “good old days.”
 
TMC said:
In sum, I remain unconvinced that things were so different in the “good old days.”
Click to expand...
Yep.

And then there is the old “we didn’t learn that” trope.

One of my husband’s confirmation groups a few years ago swore up and down they had never heard of X when he started talking about it in class. However, I was their teacher for two years before and we covered X very thoroughly. And trust me, neither my husband nor I are slouches on doctrine and I teach and design learning for a living so it’s not an inability on my part to communicate.

Religious education programs have kids for 1 hour a week. The parents have them all the other hours. What they learn there has far more impact than anything I do.
 
Last edited:
I like how whenever someone criticizes clergy, it’s a terrible thing, but whenever the next survey comes out, we’re all on a witch hunt for the clergy responsible.
 
I agree and that was kind of my point.

I think that VII and the social upheaval of the 1960’s in the US did make this a little crazier for a while, especially the early 1970’s to mid 80’s when I was catechised.
 
Thom18 said:
40.png
CilladeRoma:
And just who is supposed to teach them?
Click to expand...
Their parents.
Click to expand...
My parents might have told me that Jesus was present but explaining it was beyond their understanding. I know I’ve said the same thing to my kids but they were long grown before I went into more research on the topic than what my question and answer catechism from the early 60s taught me.
 
One must realize we are into our third generation of lack of proper catechesis. Its hard to blame the parents, when they were never taught the truth as children, and its hard to blame their parents, when they were never taught the truth as children.
Do parents share some of the blame, indeed, assuming they are still attending mass on a regular basis, why don’t they learn the truth as adults. Many do, but many do not, despite years of faithful mass attendance. I know Catholics who are in their 50s and early 60s, who never stopped attending mass every Sunday, but who would likely not answer the questions of the survey correctly.
The whole Church, laity and clergy, must take the blame.
 
I am not for sure how it takes a deep understanding to explain and teach this properly. I can say that I certainly learned it correctly as a child and teenage (thank you parents and nuns), and I never had an in depth understanding of the metaphysics behind the word transubstantiation taught to me. Is it not sufficiently good to be taught: the bread and wine become the actual body and blood of Jesus, it still looks and tastes like bread and wine, but it is no longer bread and wine. Hence we worship the Eucharist because it actually is God. When we receive the Eucharist, we are actually receiving God.
That’s a paraphrase, but I think it sums up what we were taught as kids, and it was stressed over and over again. I actually do not recall any discussion of the term transubstantiation beyond being told that’s what it was called. I do not recall any real discussion of John chapter 6 (although this may be my bad memory). But we were certainly taught the correct teaching. Why would that have been beyond your parent’s understanding or beyond your’s?
 
Edgar Allan Poe wrote in The Purloined Letter:

“If you want to hide something, put it in plain view.”

IOW, we’ve taken the Presence of Our Lord for granted for so long that in a certain sense He is still hidden, even though He is really, truly and substantially present on the Altar, in the Tabernacle and/or the monstrance.
 
Last edited:
1ke said:
Religious education programs have kids for 1 hour a week. The parents have them all the other hours. What they learn there has far more impact than anything I do.
Click to expand...
BRAVO!!! Every teacher - Catholic, public and public - will tell you that children will not make progress unless the subject(s) taught are reinforced at home.

I don’t remember much about my childhood but one of the few things I do remember is my mother teaching my sister and I how to make the Sign of the Cross and pray our morning & evening prayers (Our Father, Hail Mary [the RC version], and Guardian Angel prayer).

And I still have all my stuff from catechism class when I was little too. ☺️
 
TMC said:
Doesn’t really trouble me, to be honest. I would much prefer that Catholics know and follow moral teachings, than that they understand theology. Religion should be about helping people live proper lives, not about educating them on theology. Just one man’s (likely unpopular) opinion.
Click to expand...
This is my sense as well. It’s more important to be of right disposition to receive and it is enough to desire to do what the Church does, than to have a fully developed understanding of what the Sacramental mysteries entail.
 
LifeSite. Good article

www.lifesitenews.com

Pew report: Only half of America’s Catholics know what the Church teaches about Communion - LifeSite

WASHINGTON, D.C., July 26, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) ― Do only half of America’s Catholics know what their Church teaches about Holy Communion?
www.lifesitenews.com www.lifesitenews.com

.
.
I can appreciate Fr. Paul Sullins’ reasons for thinking the results were skewed, and I agree, but in the other direction.

I think the percentage of Catholics knowing their faith is less.

Only 4% labelled themselves as “Unsure.” This tells me that a high percentage were guessing. 40 - 60% ???.

Since the “Not sure” option was obviously not the correct answer those participating had a 50 - 50% chance of guessing correctly.

So, I am guessing those who Know that Transubstantiation is true and what it means is more likely about 25 %.

John
 
Last edited:
Some of our Communion songs refer to Or imply that the precious Blood of Jesus Christ is wine. it is no longer wine it only has the appearance and outward characteristics of wine. I think this is part of the problem
 
I grew up Pentecostal and even I knew what Catholics believed regarding the Eucharist- because we were quite aware that they didn’t believe it was symbolic like we did. It’s inexcusable for Catholics to not know. Not only is a lack of catechism likely- they’d almost have to have been actively taught the wrong thing by someone.
 
The problem as I see it is that we are taught that sacraments are a “visible sign” and some of the catechists or catechetical materials will use words like “symbol” in discussing associated sacramental matters.

If the Eucharist is discussed in these terms without the teaching really being hammered home and repeated and repeated and repeated that it is the REAL Body and Blood of Jesus Christ after the Consecration, then Catholics, including those who might have been baptized but not really catechized, are not going to fully understand.

I think there has also been some reticence during the 70s, 80s and 90s to talk about mystical matters like transubstantiation, as part of the general push to de-mystify the church and make it look less “superstitious” and more “ecumenical” etc. I can tell you right now that if it wasn’t for my mother and maybe a couple of nuns and priests who really kept emphasizing the Real Presence and that is why we go to Mass, not for a social gathering and not to listen to the priest talk, and that is why we go to Adoration (I would note that when I was growing up, our parish only had regular Adoration for a few years and it only made a “comeback” in about the last 10 years) , I would probably have not gotten the message about the Real Presence.

We can thank the traditionalists for bringing this very important point back to everyone’s attention in the last 20 years or so. Otherwise I’m pretty sure a lot of Catholics would think we go to Mass to have “community time” with our brethren and be filled with the Holy Spirit in some virtual form.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top