Back in the day (the 400s) it was estimated that 75% of the laity and 90% of the clergy had succumbed to the Arian heresy.
But. . .even the Pope who himself had ‘leanings’ never promulgated any teachings that were this heresy. And within 2 or 3 generations, thanks to the vigorous preaching of men like Athanasius. . .the heresy disappeared and the Church was once again fully orthodox --not only that, this occurred at the time that Rome was falling to the barbarians and it was due to the Catholic Church–restored to full vigor and faith–that civilization was saved, as it was the Church who rescued many books, kept up through monasteries things like agriculture, routines and ways of life which preserved the faith such that even if 99 out of 100 monks would be killed, the remaining one was able to ‘recreate’ all that had gone into the monastery, start again, and keep things going.
In the first century of the faith, while many were converting, many also were falling into error, listening to ‘another gospel’, having to be admonished, reinstructed, etc. --and many were being killed. Yet through all the difficulties, the faith itself prospered.
So even if there has been an infiltration into the hierarchy (by masons, communists, active homosexuals, you name it), even if the faith of the average U.S. Catholic seems to be weakened or dying, even if the ‘majority’ of Catholics deny some or all teachings, etc. . .that doesn’t mean the Church is dying, or has been overthrown.
It means we are in a ‘turning point’. The Church has been through many such; it’s just that most of today’s Catholics are not aware of their history, and these cycles, and think that because they were told that from say 1930 to 1960 the Catholic Church was great, powerful, that everybody went to Church, dressed properly, knew the faith perfectly, and nobody was discriminated against and everybody was good–that all the ‘uproar’ in the last 40 years is something AMAZING, unheard of in Catholicism, etc. It isn’t.
A lot of things were exaggerated or twisted about the ‘halcyon days’ of the 1930s to 1960s. For one thing, it wasn’t just Catholics who were more ‘together’. There was a lot less ‘diversity’ in those years. TV only really started in the 1950s. Before that, radio had only just become popular in the 1920s. Also the 1930s were the Depression era, the 1940s had World War 2, the 1950s the Korean War and the rise of communism.
There were many fewer THINGS and a lot more WORK in those times (leading to less ‘leisure’ time and IDLENESS, and to people appreciating what they HAD.) And people were drawn together by common bonds. . .bonds of poverty in the 30s, bonds of patriotism in the 40s, bonds of ‘trying to build a better future’ in the 50s. There was a great deal of mutal respect.
Yet there was still discrimination. While the Irish had been unwanted here in the U.S. in the last 19th century, most of them had worked their way into the middle class by the 30s. It was the Eastern European Catholics who became ‘low man on the totem pole’ in mid 20th century. Italians had their own troubles in the early years of the war; Bavarian German heritage Catholics as well. So there began to be ‘little class wars’ even among Catholics. Of course there was discrimination against Catholics, Jews, and blacks in that period as well. Many claim sexual discrimination (the glass ceiling) although one also needs to be aware that with the poverty of the 30s calling for both men and women to work to live, the 40s needing women to work on the home front while the men fought, and then the need to ‘build the economy’ and to provide jobs not just for the returning soldier but the beginnings of the ‘baby boom’ generation, but also the huge influx of people coming (legally and not) into the U.S., there was a reason that corporate America was ‘encouraging’ women to ‘stay home’ briefly. They may not have been correct in their reasons but they weren’t being malicious or anti-woman.
) a day. . .if there is questionable material on the links, I’d be wary.