A
AlNg
Guest
I went to a church service where women were required to wear headcovering and there were a lot of men and boys in attendance.
- Status
L
Limoncello4021
Guest
Any men reading this who complain about the “feminization” of the Church. Be a role model. Go to Mass and get involved. Good Catholic women long for good Catholic men. They do exist–I’m on a college campus with a seminary that bursting at its seams. There are NO excuses for any of us, male or female, not to serve God.
The last thing our society needs right now is men who don’t step up. Be part of the solution, not the problem.
The last thing our society needs right now is men who don’t step up. Be part of the solution, not the problem.
B
BartholomewB
Guest
Thank you for that link to the Lectionary statistics. There are a lot of questions there that have aroused my curiosity. Why the disparities, I wonder? The Sunday and weekday readings cover 96 percent of Mark but only 85 percent of Matthew … 81 percent of Jonah but not a single verse from Obadiah …
A
ahs
Guest
They “should” recognize Christ in the Eucharist because He is truly present there. Whether they feel or see something happen, or get influenced or get disappointed isn’t relevant, is it? Why should they base their recognition of a thing upon their personal subjective experience of it? I don’t always experience Christ in a way that I can see or feel when I go to Mass. But that doesn’t stop me from going to Mass, because He really is there and I wouldn’t want to miss out on being in His presence, regardless of whether I get anything out of it. I don’t just go to Mass for me; I go for God.
Tis_Bearself
Patron
I think this varies by parish. I have noticed in the upper-middle-class areas I visit, more men are at church, usually with wives and, if they are the age to have kids, with the kids.
It is the poorer areas where one sees many households with moms only, that you see fewer men. I wonder if it’s because they do not have the strong father role models encouraging church attendance.
It is the poorer areas where one sees many households with moms only, that you see fewer men. I wonder if it’s because they do not have the strong father role models encouraging church attendance.
A
adgloriam
Guest
Poorer areas generally don’t work 9 to 5. They sanctify themselves though work, little need for culture.
A
adgloriam
Guest
You’ve never seen anybody from a “Pontifical University” standing up against the wicked.
A
ATraveller
Guest
Hardness of their hearts is their problem. I’m sure in the US many choose the NFL over worship on Sundays. If their minds are renewed, they will see what’s more important.
I would agree with a full view of Scripture needs to presented but don’t get your hopes up on attracting young men with that.
That’s very likely due to the fact today, as a society, we don’t have high expectations of men, assuming there were high expectations in the past. ‘Boys being boys’ is a problematic attitude.
It’s always about sex isn’t it? I know some pastors who have noticed this too. Many young men’s minds are ensnared by premarital sex and promiscuity. Mix instilled arrogance with that, they leave.
I think another problem is services have become routine events and social events. From time to time, it would be good to remind ourselves why we do what we do as TINYAD points out.
That’s appears to be a problem and crosses gender lines. Many feel like spectators than active parts of the Body of Christ. And that extends outside of Sundays.
I’ve heard a few non-denominational churches in the US tried heavy metal-like services but the only thing it did was just draw men from other service times to that one. It didn’t do much to get men outside the church to join, maybe a handful through friends but if they’re truly converted to being followers of Jesus is unknown.
This might be interesting to some:
Church attendance by gender and denomination
(Part 6 in an 8 post series on Christian church attendance) The previous post examined gender differences in attendance rates for all Christ...
brewright.blogspot.com
Tis_Bearself
Patron
I am sure that the women who are at church, sometimes with the children whom they support alone, also work very hard.
G
goout
Guest
I am part of a parish where women do most of the parish staff functions and have a huge influence in liturgy/music.
We can debate feminine/masculine all day fruitlessly.
A couple of our guys formed a guys only Scripture study group and that has taken off. It is distinctly masculine. The guys help with retreats etc that are planned mostly by the female staff.
Get in there and get involved. Change doesn’t happen on it’s own. And sometimes you find that you are the plug in the pipe, not someone else.
We can debate feminine/masculine all day fruitlessly.
A couple of our guys formed a guys only Scripture study group and that has taken off. It is distinctly masculine. The guys help with retreats etc that are planned mostly by the female staff.
Get in there and get involved. Change doesn’t happen on it’s own. And sometimes you find that you are the plug in the pipe, not someone else.
Last edited:
R
redbetta
Guest
Political correctness? I thought is was common knowledge that Catholicism is a VERY politically incorrect religion.
I have been friends with 3 people who have converted to Catholicism in their teens. All of them have been male. The two I have kept in touch with are still practicing. If people took the time to actually read and learn about Catholicism, they will easily see that it is no religion for softies or the politically correct. Maybe your observations could be because women are more bookish. Or the guys just too plain lazy.
I have been friends with 3 people who have converted to Catholicism in their teens. All of them have been male. The two I have kept in touch with are still practicing. If people took the time to actually read and learn about Catholicism, they will easily see that it is no religion for softies or the politically correct. Maybe your observations could be because women are more bookish. Or the guys just too plain lazy.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
I believe men and boys need to perceive the Church as something greater than themselves.
The Church has received some serious hammer blows in the last few decades. Misinterpretation and manipulation of Vatican II led to defection of a lot of priests and religious. It also led to things like “woman church”, de-gendering scripture and prayers, de-commissioning altar boys and reducing liturgical language to modern idiom and “plain language”.
Then the abuse scandals made a lot of priests and bishops afraid of their shadows. A certain “social reform” view of Catholic morals became very prominent; a northeastern movement that replaced the emphasis on individual conversion with a “social” view. That’s thin soup for most men. And too, threats to bishops and priest about “being political” in sermons has caused them to opt for the (political) social reform view. As long as they preach a weak version of social change, they’re safe.
I’m not sure my complaint is so much a “feminization” of the Church as it is the demotion of men and boys. Boys, in my opinion, are natural Huns. Without real discipline, they never grow out of it. Nowadays, men are not sternly expected to support families even if they drop dead of heart attacks in the attempt. No heroism is required, and no male of any age responds well to a weakening or elimination of that expectation. Who ever hears of St. Joseph anymore? Who hears of the real heroes among the male saints or, as you say, biblical characters?
If a male does not require of himself that he be a hero, then he’ll be the flip side of it; a marauder, a passing wanderer and sometime raider. And no amount of messaging “social reform” or “collective redemption” will change that because it requires no challenge to individual heroism.
I recall some historian commenting on mores during the high Middle AGes and Renaissance. He said (and I’m paraphrasing) “Compared to the people of those times, moderns neither sin well nor repent well.”
When we sin, we do it half-heartedly and deny that it’s sinful anyway. And if we don’t admit it to ourselves, we don’t repent at all. If we don’t admit to our sometime villainy, we will never require a heroic redemption of ourselves.
Is that the “black and white” that everybody now says shouldn’t be how we see things? Yes. And some things are exactly black and some exactly white. Men, I think, need that way of seeing things.
The Church has received some serious hammer blows in the last few decades. Misinterpretation and manipulation of Vatican II led to defection of a lot of priests and religious. It also led to things like “woman church”, de-gendering scripture and prayers, de-commissioning altar boys and reducing liturgical language to modern idiom and “plain language”.
Then the abuse scandals made a lot of priests and bishops afraid of their shadows. A certain “social reform” view of Catholic morals became very prominent; a northeastern movement that replaced the emphasis on individual conversion with a “social” view. That’s thin soup for most men. And too, threats to bishops and priest about “being political” in sermons has caused them to opt for the (political) social reform view. As long as they preach a weak version of social change, they’re safe.
I’m not sure my complaint is so much a “feminization” of the Church as it is the demotion of men and boys. Boys, in my opinion, are natural Huns. Without real discipline, they never grow out of it. Nowadays, men are not sternly expected to support families even if they drop dead of heart attacks in the attempt. No heroism is required, and no male of any age responds well to a weakening or elimination of that expectation. Who ever hears of St. Joseph anymore? Who hears of the real heroes among the male saints or, as you say, biblical characters?
If a male does not require of himself that he be a hero, then he’ll be the flip side of it; a marauder, a passing wanderer and sometime raider. And no amount of messaging “social reform” or “collective redemption” will change that because it requires no challenge to individual heroism.
I recall some historian commenting on mores during the high Middle AGes and Renaissance. He said (and I’m paraphrasing) “Compared to the people of those times, moderns neither sin well nor repent well.”
When we sin, we do it half-heartedly and deny that it’s sinful anyway. And if we don’t admit it to ourselves, we don’t repent at all. If we don’t admit to our sometime villainy, we will never require a heroic redemption of ourselves.
Is that the “black and white” that everybody now says shouldn’t be how we see things? Yes. And some things are exactly black and some exactly white. Men, I think, need that way of seeing things.
E
ethereality
Guest
No, I am not suggesting anyone do that. I am merely saying it is a just course of action that bishops could call for, just as in prior centuries Crusades were called to stop the innocent from being murdered. I will add that obedience to bishops here is important; apparently God values it immensely, to the degree that it’s sinful to disobey your bishop unless he’s commanding sin.
Destruction of property is not intrinsically immoral, so ‘end justifying the means’ is not an applicable assertion to make. God Himself commands it multiple times in the Old Testament (e.g. tearing down the Asherah poles, razing cities, destroying livestock); likewise Jesus destroyed others’ livestock (pigs, permitting the demons to enter them and drown themselves): If Jesus, God Himself, consented to the destruction of animal property (Jesus did not try to stop the pigs from drowning), how much more – given the Old Testament history – is destruction of inanimate property not intrinsically immoral. (By the way, to add a lesser example, Jesus also destroyed a fig tree in Mark 11. It was outside the city of Bethany, but it could have been someone’s property. Perhaps the Roman Empire considered it their property.)
It seems to me you are simply alarmed by how “drastic” such action is relative to daily lives today, proving my point about how passive the Christian faith has become for so many. Perhaps you misunderstand the word ‘violence’ to mean ‘destruction of any kind’ rather than ‘unjust harm’.
Last edited:
M
Mattapoisett64
Guest
Back in my day, the “curate,” young Fr. Newly Ordained, would hang around the schoolyard, often starting a pick-up basketball game. Priests don’t hang around schoolyards anymore, for obvious reasons. Also, very few Catholic schoolyards. Priests that I know - and we’re in Massachusetts, so that says something too - don’t want to be seen talking to one boy / teenager or as being interested in the youth group, lest anyone get the wrong idea. The paranoia - understandably so - is amazing. Parishes around here used to have functions for the altar servers; now, they ask the (married) Knights of Columbus to handle that. Hard to be a role model from 50 feet away. Just one factor.
B
BartholomewB
Guest
No, nothing like the entire Bible. See Mr Freeze’s comments on this thread.
A
Arkansan
Guest
Letting women take traditionally male roles (such as altar serving) results in young men and boys not being inclined to participate.
O
on_the_hill
Guest
“In Islam, man dies for God. In Christianity, God dies for man.”martinez7251:
More correct to say willing to kill for their religion.
O
on_the_hill
Guest
See? All I had to do was read the first couple posts and then skip to the end. The answer is always the same, whether or not it’s correct. 
O
on_the_hill
Guest
I asked my son about the HUGE PROBLEM of girl altar servers. He’s 12 years old. He’s been an altar server for about a year and a half.
He looked at me funny and asked, “Huh?”
I said, “Girl altar servers. Does it bother you that there are girl altar servers?”
He answers, “Why would that bother me? Why are you even asking?”
“Because people say that girl altar servers make boys not want to do it.”
He said, “It wouldn’t matter if it did bother me because you’d make me do it anyway.”
Last edited:
J
jfz178
Guest
Yeah, that’s one thing I notice on this site. A lot of people here read any story or any question and they imprint their personal biases on it. Whatever the issue is, it supposedly proves their pet theories right. It’s like one evangelical TV preacher I will not name. Every time there is a natural disaster, he declares it’s God’s retribution for gay marriage or whatever he is railing on that week. Really? Gays caused an earthquake in Peru?
- Status