Post Vatican II numbers show continued decline

[GratefulDad]

Post Vatican II numbers show continued decline. See below. Does anyone know if their has been an update since?

WallStreet Journal:

online.wsj.com/article/SB123086281850448271.html?

Kenneth C. Jones compiled an “Index of Leading Catholic Indicators: The Church Since Vatican II,” published in 2003. Among his findings: While the number of priests in the U.S. more than doubled to 58,000 between 1930 and 1965, that number has fallen to 45,000, and by 2020 there will be only 31,000. In 1965, there were 180,000 Catholic nuns, but by 2002 that number had fallen to 75,000; Catholic marriages have fallen in number by one third since 1965, while the annual number of annulments rose from 338 in 1968 to 50,000 in 2002. (Regarding the annulment process, it is said that, for better or worse, psychological factors have been taken into consideration much more so post-Vatican II.) And, of course, we have the clergy sex abuse scandal that culminated in 2002 and continues to this day.

Pat Buchanan said this:

“And their legacy? Four decades of devastation wrought upon the church, and the final disgrace of a hierarchy that lacked the moral courage of the Boy Scouts to keep the perverts out of the seminaries, and throw them out of the rectories and schools of Holy Mother Church. Through the papacy of Pius XII, the church resisted the clamor to accommodate itself to the world and remained a moral beacon to mankind. Since Vatican II, the church has sought to meet the world halfway. Jones’ statistics tell us the price of appeasement.”

More of the Report:

mostholyfamilymonastery.com/29_Figures.pdf

townhall.com/columnists/PatBuchanan/2002/12/11/an_index_of_catholicisms_decline

 

[Mark77]

More useless Vatican II bashing???

Why do we shoot ourselves in the foot everyday?

Yes the people implementing the changes and dealing with the scandals have made serious mistakes, but the same mistakes were made before Vatican II.

No 2 people agree on everything, much less 1 billion Catholics worldwide!

That is exactly why Jesus gave us St peter and all of the Popes to guide us in unity through all time. He never said it would be perfect or easy, He just promised that if we “repent and believe in the Gospel” we will have eternal Salvation with Jesus in Heaven!

Could the moral decline of our society have had anything to do with the decline in numbers? Do you really think that keeping the Latin Mass would have prevented these losses?

We must stop blaming others and start with ourselves. Pray, attend Holy Mass as often as possible, read Sacred Scripture, live and preach the Gospel daily, read the Catechism and learn the Faith and continue to try to implement positive changes where needed within the Church.

St Francis didn’t leave the Church and start a new church, he worked hard to reform it from within. The same with St Catherine of Sienna and St Athanasius and many others throughout history.

These Schismatic breakaway groups like ‘most holy family’ don’t solve anything, they are just compounding the problems and giving our critics more fodder for their relentless attacks.

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

mark

 

[Gaurdian]

More useless Vatican II bashing???

Why do we shoot ourselves in the foot everyday?

Yes the people implementing the changes and dealing with the scandals have made serious mistakes, but the same mistakes were made before Vatican II.

No 2 people agree on everything, much less 1 billion Catholics worldwide!

That is exactly why Jesus gave us St peter and all of the Popes to guide us in unity through all time. He never said it would be perfect or easy, He just promised that if we “repent and believe in the Gospel” we will have eternal Salvation with Jesus in Heaven!

Could the moral decline of our society have had anything to do with the decline in numbers? Do you really think that keeping the Latin Mass would have prevented these losses?

We must stop blaming others and start with ourselves. Pray, attend Holy Mass as often as possible, read Sacred Scripture, live and preach the Gospel daily, read the Catechism and learn the Faith and continue to try to implement positive changes where needed within the Church.

St Francis didn’t leave the Church and start a new church, he worked hard to reform it from within. The same with St Catherine of Sienna and St Athanasius and many others throughout history.

These Schismatic breakaway groups like ‘most holy family’ don’t solve anything, they are just compounding the problems and giving our critics more fodder for their relentless attacks.

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

mark

What Vatican II bashing are you talking about these are just the numbers. Why are you so defensive. This info is from Kenneth Jones and Pat Buchanan no one else for this info. By the way did you read the what Buchanan wrote about the Church meeting the World Halfway?

 

[otjm]

What Vatican II bashing are you talking about these are just the numbers. Why are you so defensive. This info is from Kenneth Jones and Pat Buchanan no one else for this info. By the way did you read the what Buchanan wrote about the Church meeting the World Halfway?

The Vatican 2 bashing is the post hoc, ergo propter hoc argument that keeps going round and round - numbers have gone down since Vatican 2; therefore it is because of Vatican 2.

Numbers have also gone down drastically for the mainline Protestant denominations, but Catholics who blame Vatican 2 for the changes in the Catholic Church ignore the fact that there were and are other issues at work which have had and continue to have impact on people, whether they are mainline Protestants or Catholics. Vatican 2 did not cause the Protestant decline.

They also ignore the impact that the Pill, and the resultant reaction to Humanae Vitae had to Catholics in the pew, and that was post Vatican 2. They ignore Suituational Ethics, which came from an Anglican/Episcopalian priest and spread like wildfire (and coupled with the Pill, made absolute havoc in moral theology). They ignore the vast material powerhouse that both the US and Europe (and Japan, as it was re-built) became, and the impact of materialism on people in the pew. They also ignore the impact that the revision (I am being polite) to catechesis had on people for two generations - a change in catechesis that had no direct connection to Vatican 2, but rather to the people - some of good will and some not - who decided to throw the baby out with the bath water when they introduced new catechetical materials that were devoid of doctirinal content. To them you can add the bishops who didn’t have a clue as to what was going on, and let the changes occur.

As to Buchanan, he is a very bright and very opinionated individual, but that does not lend automatic credence to his comments. Prior to Vatican 2 rome (including Pope John 23rd, but msot certainly not limited to him) looked at the state of the Catholic Church and saw a church that had come through 500 years of history, including but not limited to the Protestant Revolution, the Churhc’s reaction to it, massive changes in Church/State relations, and saw a Church that seemd to be “fighting the previous war” to put it in military terms - meaning that we had a current war on our hands, but our reactions were not to the current one b ut the previous one. It is a metaphor often used in discussing how generals fight battles, with a prime example of the generals during Viet Nam relying on their World War 2 experience and trying to fight in Viet Nam as if they were in France or the Pacific.

At least some of the objectives of Vatican 2 were to find a way of addressing current issues head on, and not in a fashion as if they were a hundred years ago. A good example is the direction Vatican 2 wanted the Church (i.e. the peoplein the parishes) to go with Scripture. We now have far greater expsoure to Scripture through the Mass and through the multitude of Scripture study programs. Vatican 2 also wanted to move beyond a mentality that the Pope was the CEO and the bishops were the middle managers waiting to carry out his orders, and to reconize that the bishops were decendants of the Apostles, and as such had greater responsiblities in the Church than some mid-level manager. They were to be shephards of their flocks. If you want an example, look at Chaput.

Buchanan is good with a quip, and certainly has had more than his 15 minutes of fame. But quips are ill-suited to answering complex questions.

 

[pnewton]

What Vatican II bashing are you talking about these are just the numbers. Why are you so defensive. This info is from Kenneth Jones and Pat Buchanan no one else for this info. By the way did you read the what Buchanan wrote about the Church meeting the World Halfway?

No, they are not “just numbers”. They are statistics, which can lie as well as the smoothest politician. When I saw the link to that nutty monastery site I dismissed any credibility. If one wants stats, go somewhere one does not have an axe to grind and there is at least a chance of honest research. BTW, not all numbers are in decline. The last time I played who has the best stats, I found that the Vatican website shows there are more Cahtolics today. Americans are so narrow-minded and provencial.

 

[Timothysis]

Of course, no one ever gives an ounce of credence to the societal changes that occurred in the late 50’s and, especially, the 1960’s. How much of an effect do you think the introduction of the pill in the mid 1960’s had to do with anything or the rise of the Playboy magazine culture? Who do you think changed the world more, the Vatican II council or the Beatles on the Ed Sullivan show? Do you think that Church attendance and enrollments in the seminaries would have remained unchanged if Vatican II never happened? Woodstock didn’t happen as a response to Vatican II; which do you think is more indicative of the state of younger people then, Vatican II or Woodstock?

And Pat Buchanan is a loon.

 

[GratefulDad]

TJ, some of what you say above I would agree with and much of your third paragraph. It was the change of the entire environment. Piety and reverence were traded for shorts, flip flops and almost full blown conversation and jokes in the pews. A well defined and biblical based Catechist’s was swapped out for “flexibility and not being so harsh and rigid” CCC. I am not even close, to being old enough to have had the Baltimore Catechists in school, but after being exposed to it. I can see it’s beauty and brilliance from the Holy Spirit.

Bashing Vatican II that is not my point, I was first trying to see if these numbers have been updated. Second, even the most happy and feeeel good Vatican II, 1960’s left over, cannot deny the stats. The 60’s are over and we’re seeing the real effects of it now in our world. Would you maintain this has been a positive 40 years?

Buchanan is a straight up, Orthodox Catholic that practices what he preaches and stands up for the Church at the slightest secular onslaught.

I am praying this quote from the new Archbishop of New York will be one of those beacons to mankind.

Archbishop Timothy Dolan, newly named Archbishop of New York:
“Maybe the greatest threat to the church is not heresy, not dissent, not secularism, not even moral relativism, but this sanitized, feel-good, boutique, therapeutic spirituality that makes no demands, calls for no sacrifice, asks for no conversion, entails no battle against sin, but only soothes and affirms.”

 

[GratefulDad]

No, they are not “just numbers”. They are statistics, which can lie as well as the smoothest politician. When I saw the link to that nutty monastery site I dismissed any credibility. If one wants stats, go somewhere one does not have an axe to grind and there is at least a chance of honest research. BTW, not all numbers are in decline. The last time I played who has the best stats, I found that the Vatican website shows there are more Cahtolics today. Americans are so narrow-minded and provencial.

Are you saying Jones is lying about all these fictitious numbers?

 

[GratefulDad]

Of course, no one ever gives an ounce of credence to the societal changes that occurred in the late 50’s and, especially, the 1960’s. How much of an effect do you think the introduction of the pill in the mid 1960’s had to do with anything or the rise of the Playboy magazine culture? Who do you think changed the world more, the Vatican II council or the Beatles on the Ed Sullivan show? Do you think that Church attendance and enrollments in the seminaries would have remained unchanged if Vatican II never happened? Woodstock didn’t happen as a response to Vatican II; which do you think is more indicative of the state of younger people then, Vatican II or Woodstock?

And Pat Buchanan is a loon.

Are you saying that a reverent and well catechized family could not stand up to the “Idiot Box” and the “flapping in the breeze secularist”? hmmm? Do all of our Catholic families today just bow down to the MTV godd and submit to the consumption will of the almighty TV?

 

[pnewton]

Are you saying Jones is lying about all these fictitious numbers?

No.

 

[roanoker]

Face up to the facts. The decline happened because of Vatican II. I remember at the time people predicting it, and they were right. You can’t just dump 2000 years of tradition and beloved saints and expect nothing to happen!!

 

[pnewton]

Face up to the facts. The decline happened because of Vatican II. I remember at the time people predicting it, and they were right.

Most of us know the difference between opinion and fact.

 

[roanoker]

I think the results show the difference between idle opinion and facts. What happened was completely predictable and occured as predicted. What more do you need? You can’t deny that the rapid declined began immediately after Vatican II was implemented.

 

[pnewton]

I think the results show the difference between idle opinion and facts. What happened was completely predictable and occured as predicted. What more do you need? You can’t deny that the rapid declined began immediately after Vatican II was implemented.

In addition to knowing the difference between opinion and fact, we also know how to read here. We are also familiar with logical fallacies and bait and switch.

If anyone will read up a couple post, you will note that what roanoker said was a fact that the decline happened** because** of Vatican II. Now the switch has been made to just a decline happening after Vatican II.

To answer the original post, this is how statistics can be perverted. One starts with an opinion and works backwards to the data. All data that does not support the desired conclusion is disregarded and the rest is shown as “proof.”

 

[Auntie_M]

What Vatican II bashing are you talking about these are just the numbers. Why are you so defensive. This info is from Kenneth Jones and Pat Buchanan no one else for this info. By the way did you read the what Buchanan wrote about the Church meeting the World Halfway?

Don’t know about Kenneth Jones but Pat Buchanan is a “Protestant” NEWS FLASH "PROTESTANTS have been bashing the Church since Protestants were born.

You all would be doing yourself a favor by listening to Mark (above) It is all this Catholics Bashing Catholics that’s sickening.

 

[Auntie_M]

What about the “falling away” at the Protestant reformation. Was that because of Vat 11 also? (oh, excuse me, it couldn’t have been, it happened long before Vat11)

It seems alot of people tend to believe what others say too quickly.

Catholic history can be found in any parish library. It would be a better idea to read up on the Catholic faith before you bash it or quote someone who is against her.

As a Catholic, I believe it would be better to “DEFEND” her.

 

[GratefulDad]

Don’t know about Kenneth Jones but Pat Buchanan is a “Protestant” NEWS FLASH "PROTESTANTS have been bashing the Church since Protestants were born.

You all would be doing yourself a favor by listening to Mark (above) It is all this Catholics Bashing Catholics that’s sickening.

He is Catholic. Check Wikipedia too.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Buchanan

 

[jlhargus]

Face up to the facts. The decline happened because of Vatican II. I remember at the time people predicting it, and they were right. You can’t just dump 2000 years of tradition and beloved saints and expect nothing to happen!!

JL: Well it depends if those traditions or disceplines are relevant. I see you are Protestant. So have you dumped the Church Christ established. I was not Catholic until 1973, I have attended the Tridetine Mass and have nothing against it or those who like it. I much prefer the new mass. I do like a mass with some latin responses. Especially for international gatherings.

 

[pnewton]

What about the “falling away” at the Protestant reformation. Was that because of Vat 11 also? (oh, excuse me, it couldn’t have been, it happened long before Vat11)

Or the decline of Protestants after Vatican II. Or the increase of Catholics after Vatican II, or (we can let holyfamilymonastery insert what ever stat they ignored here). Statistics do no lie, but people distort truth and the do it using statistics.

For Example, if this group, Holy Family Monastery, wants to point our failing numbers of Catholics, still a billion, what does that say about their reeeaallly small number of members. No doubt they would then say something about how numbers aren’t everything. I have seen that little jewel once today.

 

[GratefulDad]

Or the decline of Protestants after Vatican II. Or the increase of Catholics after Vatican II, or (we can let holyfamilymonastery insert what ever stat they ignored here). Statistics do no lie, but people distort truth and the do it using statistics.

For Example, if this group, Holy Family Monastery, wants to point our failing numbers of Catholics, still a billion, what does that say about their reeeaallly small number of members. No doubt they would then say something about how numbers aren’t everything. I have seen that little jewel once today.

Newton, I don’t think I am following you here? These numbers are from Kenneth Jones.