Your Top 3 Reasons for Drop in Mass Attendance?

[Birdpreacher]

1. Priests are from foreign countries
2. Preists are out of touch with Catholics
3. The Vatican was never ment to deal with so many literate people

 

[ElToro]

I see only one reason:

If the priest is a saint, his people will be holy.
If the priest is holy, his people will be good.
If the priest is good, his people will be fair.
If the priest is fair, his people will be mediocre.
If the priest is mediocre, his people will be bad.

There is a HUGE amount of truth to what you suggest. I would add two things. First, the priest needs support from his bishop. Lack of support can wreck even the most wonderful priest. Second, the priest must have some DRIVE. He must actually be a shepherd.

 

[ElToro]

1. Priests are from foreign countries
2. Preists are out of touch with Catholics
3. The Vatican was never ment to deal with so many literate people

FASCINATING (name removed by moderator)ut! I will extend that by saying the Holy See is slow to accomodate literate people with remarkable resources at their fingertips. From the Internet to EWTN.

When the retired priest told me the reason people no longer attend Mass is “because they want to read the paper and watch TV” while rejecting just about everything else we have discussed here I might have accepted that in 1971 – maybe. There is no way I would accept that today. Hearing his mindset sorta stunned me though. He was being earnest. He was a pastor from 1955ish to 1985ish. He was responsible for some big parishes. If he never really recognized why people stop attending the Mass (and there are obviously many reasons in toto), that tells me something in terms of why it has never been stemmed…

 

[ConstantineTG]

As do mathematicians and computer programmers, unless they want to create a lot of needless work for themselves. Trust me.

Subtitles in movies I can live with. Complete dubbing is dishonest to the integrity of the movie, an opera, a song, liturgy, you name it. If I want to attend a Ukrainian liturgy to better sense a different culture’s worshipping God, the last thing I’d want is to hear it in some translation. It’s just not authentic.

Then you’re just after the experience, not the spiritual worship of God in the Divine Mysteries.

When I go to a Liturgy, I’m there to give myself in prayer and worship. Inculturation helps. I worship God with who I am.

Oddly enough, traditionalists like yourself keep telling the Mass innovators that the Mass is not entertainment. Yet here you are comparing it to a movie.

 

[ConstantineTG]

1. The Vatican was never ment to deal with so many literate people

Are you saying that the faith is catered to the uneducated? You should know that at the height of the Roman Empire, most gentiles were well educated for the time.

 

[ElToro]

Are you saying that the faith is catered to the uneducated? You should know that at the height of the Roman Empire, most gentiles were well educated for the time.

Why would you try to put words in his mouth? In reality “at the height of the Roman Empire” most of the world’s population (including citizens of Rome) were illiterate. Even Constantine the Great who ruled the Roman Empire until 337 was illiterate.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

Excellent post Cat!!

I would like to add another possible reason why there has been a drop in Mass Attendance, and in church attendance in general.

“Spectator Culture.”

The U.S. has become a nation of spectators rather than participants.

We used to play sports. Men and women joined softball leagues or organized neighborhood games, bowled, shot hoops at the park, took walks, ice skated on a frozen pond, surfed down at the beach, swam in the creek, played pick-up hockey, etc.

Now we watch sports (and we pay a lot of money to watch).

We used to make music and dance. We invited people over for dinner and then sang and danced while someone played the piano, guitar, or fiddle. We joined lodges that had huge choirs and went with these choirs to conventions and competed against dozens of other choirs. We sang company and school songs. We sang riding in the car, and around the campfire.

Now we watch other people sing and dance (and we pay a lot of money to watch).

We don’t “do” much anymore. We are spectators. And heck, we don’t even watch sports, music, dance, etc. LIVE anymore–we just watch it on TV or in films or more than likely, on Youtube on our iPhones.

And…we used to be members of a church or parish and we had a place and a purpose there, and we knew people and considered them our friends, brothers, and sisters in the Lord. We belonged. People missed us if we weren’t there.

Now we aren’t members, we’re "spectators. We “watch” church. We have no idea how to “participate” in church. Even on this forum, Catholics argue about exactly what it means to “participate” in Mass. We’re so used to just watching that we don’t know how to do things ourselves anymore.

And church can’t begin to compete with all the other things that we spend time (and money) “spectating.”

So we stop going to church.

 

[Cat]

It’s a thought-provoking theory–that the Vatican has not figured out how to deal with so many literate people. I would be interested in hearing more about this theory.

 

[FatHead]

Cat - I completely agree with this comment. I talk like this to my religion classes. I tell them that they should approach Mass like they are going to the gym, not like they are going to a movie. Who would sit around a gym, doing nothing, and complain that “this doesn’t do anything for me?” To get anything out of Mass you must participate. To get anything out of your parish life you must participate.
I also like the fact that people need to be missed if they don’t show up. We need to be friends with the people in our parish.

but dont forget that unlike the gym, to participate in mass, you dont need to “do stuff.” sitting quietly and praying is actively participating

 

[FatHead]

I would like to add another possible reason why there has been a drop in Mass Attendance, and in church attendance in general.

“Spectator Culture.”

The U.S. has become a nation of spectators rather than participants.

We used to play sports. Men and women joined softball leagues or organized neighborhood games, bowled, shot hoops at the park, took walks, ice skated on a frozen pond, surfed down at the beach, swam in the creek, played pick-up hockey, etc.

Now we watch sports (and we pay a lot of money to watch).

We used to make music and dance. We invited people over for dinner and then sang and danced while someone played the piano, guitar, or fiddle. We joined lodges that had huge choirs and went with these choirs to conventions and competed against dozens of other choirs. We sang company and school songs. We sang riding in the car, and around the campfire.

Now we watch other people sing and dance (and we pay a lot of money to watch).

We don’t “do” much anymore. We are spectators. And heck, we don’t even watch sports, music, dance, etc. LIVE anymore–we just watch it on TV or in films or more than likely, on Youtube on our iPhones.

And…we used to be members of a church or parish and we had a place and a purpose there, and we knew people and considered them our friends, brothers, and sisters in the Lord. We belonged. People missed us if we weren’t there.

Now we aren’t members, we’re "spectators. We “watch” church. We have no idea how to “participate” in church. Even on this forum, Catholics argue about exactly what it means to “participate” in Mass. We’re so used to just watching that we don’t know how to do things ourselves anymore.

And church can’t begin to compete with all the other things that we spend time (and money) “spectating.”

So we stop going to church.

so why not sing the propers if they are just going to “spectate?”

 

[GJD]

**IMHO

1. Lack of belief in the Real Presence of Jesus in the Holy Eucharist.
2. Ditto
3. Ditto

If Catholics believed in the Real Presence - nothing would or could keep them away. This is the main issue - everything else is just icing on the cake (great homilies, good music, and welcoming community).**

This, absolutely! :harp:

 

[Birdpreacher]

FASCINATING (name removed by moderator)ut! I will extend that by saying the Holy See is slow to accomodate literate people with remarkable resources at their fingertips. From the Internet to EWTN.

The vatican, as in the decision making machine which reacts to the needs of the people was never designed to handle an educated community, let alone one with instantaneous communication at its fingertips.

The way we go about picking our leaders, for instance is one which the clergy, a very small percentage of the community make the rules, out of them only the men are eligble for leadership, out of them only men annoited by existing leadership get to be bishops, out of them only the ones well connected have a serious chance of being elected Pope.

This is a great way of picking leadership…in THE MIDDLE AGES, when heresies and pagan armies threatned the very existence of the Church and there was a need to keep the Word of God untouched by outside influences. The Church was made to Survive in light of the threats in the middle ages, however today the challenges faced by Holy Mother Church are unlike anything the conservative leadership has ever seen.(ex: No way the child molestation cases get made public in middle ages but with the advent of the internet)

THe Church, once the center of education, is seeing itself falling behind. In the Middle ages no one could read, so you went to church and listened to the Priest, this makes it easy for the church to garner legitimacy from the people. Today the Church is not in the forefront of anything, other then theology.

 

[TedDC]

So you believe the Word of God is just men talking about a man talking then interpreted to whatever they want? I know this questions wording may sound rude, but thats what came to mind when reading your response. I am sorry if I offend you, its not my intent.

I don’t believe that Church teaching is necessarily the Word of God. So yes, I think Church teaching is essentially just men interpreting words created by men.

And, can you site evidence that this is not true?

Actually, since the Church is making the affirmative claim of speaking for God, it’s up to the Church to prove the truth of its assertions.

 

[FatHead]

The vatican, as in the decision making machine which reacts to the needs of the people was never designed to handle an educated community, let alone one with instantaneous communication at its fingertips.

The way we go about picking our leaders, for instance is one which the clergy, a very small percentage of the community make the rules, out of them only the men are eligble for leadership, out of them only men annoited by existing leadership get to be bishops, out of them only the ones well connected have a serious chance of being elected Pope.

This is a great way of picking leadership…in THE MIDDLE AGES, when heresies and pagan armies threatned the very existence of the Church and there was a need to keep the Word of God untouched by outside influences. The Church was made to Survive in light of the threats in the middle ages, however today the challenges faced by Holy Mother Church are unlike anything the conservative leadership has ever seen.(ex: No way the child molestation cases get made public in middle ages but with the advent of the internet)

THe Church, once the center of education, is seeing itself falling behind. In the Middle ages no one could read, so you went to church and listened to the Priest, this makes it easy for the church to garner legitimacy from the people. Today the Church is not in the forefront of anything, other then theology.

I’ll take the church as christ has it set up, thank you very much.

feel free to leave at any time if youre not satisfied

 

[FatHead]

I don’t believe that Church teaching is necessarily the Word of God. So yes, I think Church teaching is essentially just men interpreting words created by men.

Actually, since the Church is making the affirmative claim of speaking for God, it’s up to the Church to prove the truth of its assertions.

youre not really helping this discussion. if you want to start a fight about the catholic church being the true church, the L&S forum is not the place for it.

 

[lisahiku]

my humble opinon

1. boredom
2. lack of fellowship
3. feeling isolated at mass (for me anyway)
4. mass times don’t meet my schedule
5. never hearing a homily that applies to my life or grabs my interest to make me WANT to come back.

For me personally, the lack of fellowship is a biggie. I get tired of feeling no one cares if I am there or not.

 

[ElToro]

It’s a thought-provoking theory–that the Vatican has not figured out how to deal with so many literate people. I would be interested in hearing more about this theory.

I’m not sure if it’s a matter of not yet figuring out how to deal with so many literate people. I think it might be more a matter of not recognizing or caring about an ever better educated faithful population who now have easy access to voluminous amounts of Church documents, replete with expert commentary.

Let’s take the issue of pouring the Precious Blood for the sake of an example.

Had the prohibition been made say 35 years ago (prior to EWTN and the Internet) almost NO lay Catholics would have even been aware of the change. The Holy See did not (and does not) have a mechanism in place to update the laity directly on such things – it relies on its pastors which is reasonable. In practical terms if the pastor ignored the prohibition, things just continued as before – very few were the wiser. If you actually happened to live next door to a seminry library or had a brother who was a diligent priest and you discussed such matters and you actually asked your priest about the liturgy you can only imagine what the response would have been! Thanks to the Internet, EWTN and other developed sources, not MANY know the priest is wrong when he continued to pour the Precious Blood and that causes tension.

I did not watch EWTN in the old days but I suspect they made it known to their viewers that (for example) prior to 1994 female altar servers were a huge no-no – yet they had been in common use for many years by that time. Liturgicae Instaurationes (1970) and Inaestimabile Donum (1980) and expert commentary would simply not have been available to the typical Catholic. Pastors pretty much did as they pleased – and very few were any of he wiser. I am sure that knowing the truth agitated many EWTN viewers and the Church has clearly not done well in even recognizing this change.

 

[formerlysure]

The main reasons many of my friends and family strayed, as did I for a long time, were:

• A common feeling that the Church is out of touch with American Catholics and disagreement with the Church’s positions on contemporary issues such as married and female clergy, birth control, and gay relationships;
• A lack of true understanding of Catholic tradition, doctrine and disciplines as many Catholics are not taught thoroughly growing up about their faith;
• A feeling that they are not welcome due to one behavior or decision or another, which is out of step with Catholicism, such as a divorce.

I think that things like bad music might push a family from one church to the church across town, and poor homilies might result in some grousing, but lasting absence from church is, in my view, a more serious decision for most people.

 

[Elizabeth502]

• A common feeling that the Church is out of touch with American Catholics and disagreement with the Church’s positions on contemporary issues such as married and female clergy, birth control, and gay relationships;

which means that they have:

• A lack of true understanding of Catholic tradition, doctrine and disciplines as many Catholics are not taught thoroughly growing up about their faith;

(because they are measuring Catholicism against a contemporary American culture which does not share essential premises with Catholicism. They want to use ‘Americanism’ to modify & critique Church teaching. It means that their real “church” is the contemporary mainline church of moral relativism, not the moral absolutes proclaimed by the Church, and this in turn speaks to poor catechesis and/or lack of personal commitment to the faith.)

I think that things like bad music might push a family from one church to the church across town, and poor homilies might result in some grousing, but lasting absence from church is, in my view, a more serious decision for most people.

Just to clarify: when I made my own comment about music, I was referring to those who are well catechized but looking for excuses not to attend, due to lack of fundamental commitment to key Catholic teachings & principles. Those who are committed continue to attend but, yes, are careful to select where they attend.

 

[ElToro]

The vatican, as in the decision making machine which reacts to the needs of the people was never designed to handle an educated community, let alone one with instantaneous communication at its fingertips.

The way we go about picking our leaders, for instance is one which the clergy, a very small percentage of the community make the rules, out of them only the men are eligble for leadership, out of them only men annoited by existing leadership get to be bishops, out of them only the ones well connected have a serious chance of being elected Pope.

This is a great way of picking leadership…in THE MIDDLE AGES, when heresies and pagan armies threatned the very existence of the Church and there was a need to keep the Word of God untouched by outside influences. The Church was made to Survive in light of the threats in the middle ages, however today the challenges faced by Holy Mother Church are unlike anything the conservative leadership has ever seen.(ex: No way the child molestation cases get made public in middle ages but with the advent of the internet)

THe Church, once the center of education, is seeing itself falling behind. In the Middle ages no one could read, so you went to church and listened to the Priest, this makes it easy for the church to garner legitimacy from the people. Today the Church is not in the forefront of anything, other then theology.

That’s not entirely true but you are correct in inferring that only men may be ordained. That has nothing to do with the Middle Ages.