In his book Breaking Faith: The Pope, the People, and the Fate of Catholicism, John Cornwell identifies core beliefs held by Catholic laity between Vatican I (1869-70) and Vatican II (1962-65): Devotion to Mary as the Mother of God; the indissolubility of marriage, and the inadvisability of mixed marriage; the real presence in the Eucharist; venial and (deserving Hell for all eternity) mortal sin; the necessity of confessing mortal sin; the immortal soul, the resurrection of the body; Purgatory and the scope for praying for the souls therein; infallibility and primacy of the Pope as successor of Saint Peter, the role of bishops as successors of the Apostles; the intercession of the saints; the reality of Satan, and of demons and angels; a hostile antagonism toward atheistic communism; the inadmissibility of contraception, abortion, premarital sex, adultery, homosexuality, and remarriage; the inadmissibility of worshiping with non-Catholics, weekly attendance at Mass; Holy Days of “obligation”; and the imperative to avoid meat on Fridays. Compare to Cornwell’s survey-supported post-Vatican II core convictions:
Belief that it is possible to have a personal and loving relationship with God; belief that God took human form as Jesus to redeem the world and bring us to God; commitment to a relationship with God through public and private prayer, worship, and reading of scripture, principally within the faith community and sacramentals of the Catholic church. Cornwell then observes that “unlike the pre-Vatican II list of priorities, these post-Vatican II Catholic convictions are shared with other Christian denominations.”
Certainly more and more members of whatever tradition are sitting more lightly in their pews than ever before. Movement between traditions has never been higher. But straying Catholics have earned a well-deserved reputation for finding their way back to Rome in the end. Cornwell and others expect the former magnetic effect of Roman Catholicism, largely due to the unique hold of the sacraments and cult of Mary upon the faithful, to wane. Are we poised for massive migration of Roman Catholics into the ranks of evangelical traditions? Or will we see perceptible evangelicalizing within Roman Catholicism or both?
13 responses so far ↓
Charles Churchill // Jan 22, 2007 at 11:23 am
I think part of what will be interesting if there is a migration of Roman Catholics is how well Christian churches screen people before letting them join the church. And to be clear, I don’t mean, now that this is happening, but instead, I mean, because we should always examine those who want to join the local assembly. My guess is that many Catholics will know more Scripture and more doctrine than many evangelicals, so it will be interesting if it happens.
Take care,
Charles
Greg Zenitsky // Jan 23, 2007 at 6:20 am
Charles,
Both my wife and I, both Reformed Baptists, have had the unique experience of witnessing to Catholic friends, some of whom have left “the Church”. In most cases, we would generally disagree with your statement that many Catholics will know more Scripture and doctrine than many evangelicals. Within the realm of our experience, we find that what Catholics know well are the traditions of the Church without any knowledge of whether those traditions have any basis in Holy Scripture. In fact, we find that most of our Catholic friends have very little knowledge of the Word. It’s when Catholics actually start reading the Bible that they start questioning the “teachings” of the Church and begin to challenge Church traditions. I would definitely agree with you on the need to examine those coming out of the Church into the Protestant fold, especially in light of such critical essentials as justification by faith alone. However, similar to what you stated, if we examined many professing evangelicals in the Protestant church regarding our own doctrinal stances, it’s here that we would find just as many who know very little of what Scripture teaches, let alone having the ability to communicate those teachings.
By His grace alone,
Greg Z
mdevine // Jan 23, 2007 at 7:22 am
Greg
Thanks for your comment.
Take note that I am not saying anything about Catholics in my post. I am sharing the thoughts of John Cornwell and speculating on what we might look for in the future.
Charles Churchill // Jan 23, 2007 at 7:32 am
However, similar to what you stated, if we examined many professing evangelicals in the Protestant church regarding our own doctrinal stances, it’s here that we would find just as many who know very little of what Scripture teaches, let alone having the ability to communicate those teachings.
That was actually along the lines of what I was thinking. Not so much that Catholics know tons of Scripture, but that most Christians know so little. A lot of the Catholics I have met, know a decent bit of Scripture by rote, from prayers and such, but they also knew a decent bit of doctrine as well. Having said that, I’m quite willing to believe that it varies from person to person and community to community, just like it does with Protestants.
Take care,
Charles
Greg Zenitsky // Jan 23, 2007 at 5:35 pm
Duly noted, Mark. My apologies for straying off-point. Cornwell speaks rightly regarding the magnetic appeal of the sacraments and Maryology in Catholic tradition and I hear this come through in the objections my Catholic friends raise regarding their fears in leaving the church. If there is to be a waning of Catholics from the Church as Cornwell suggests, it will be, in my opinion, the stronger magnetism of biblical truths they discover when they begin discovering the Word for themselves and quit relying on the traditions of the church.
Greg Zenitsky // Jan 23, 2007 at 5:39 pm
Charles,
Thanks for clarifying your point for me. I agree wholeheartedly that it varies by community and by person. I need to be more careful in making generalizations! Thanks for your graceful attitude.
Dennis Martin // Jan 24, 2007 at 12:38 pm
Please, Cornwell is an angry lapsed Catholic whose books on Pius XII have been exposed as mean-spirited frauds by neutral historians. This man should not be taken seriously if you wish to understand Catholicism today. There are so many better sources, starting with John Paul II and Benedict XVI (who had a long track record as a distinguished theologian incredibly learned in the writings of Luther and in philosophy and science). You are wasting your time with Cornwell, really, truly.
mdevine // Jan 24, 2007 at 7:09 pm
Dennis
I do not mean to commend Cornwell as an authoritative source by any means. I do believe he has an axe to grind. And my sense is that some of the tensions within RC just now are intense indeed. But recognition of the changes in core beliefs that Cornwell notes are shared by many. Much of what Cornwell states here could be said by Richard John Neuhaus, not a Cornwell fan to say the least. And Cornwell does provide a lot of traceable references. And he is a good writer. And he does provide a window into one perspective on RC that I want to understand. But should we sit at Cornwell’s feet to get the straight scoop on RC. I do not think so either.
Josh Champlain // Jan 25, 2007 at 10:39 am
Having lived on both sides of the fence on this issue, I’ve found (to the extent of my experience with each) that within the Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Church there exists two types of members: 1.) Believers in the Grace of Jesus Christ as revealed in Scripture 2.) Believers in the Authority of their Church.
Also, my personal salvation does suggest (to myselft at least) that Catholics can and do get saved; however, this is not through the administration of the sacraments. Though raised a RCC, I’ve since joined a Southern Baptist church where many members unconditionally rule out the likelihood of saved Catholics. I’ve spent a couple of years questioning my own salvation because of their doubts, but in reviewing the journal I kept when I accepted Christ I can come to no other conclusion than I was a saved Catholic (though I interestingly did find it necessary to seek a more Biblically dependent fellowship). I believe the assumption by some evangelicals mistakenly rules out the power of Holy Scripture (the word is still read publicly in Catholic Mass) and could lead a believer to doubt his own salvation.
In the end, I believe this issue is far too complex to make a generalization. If a person wants to know whether or not his/her Catholic friend is saved, they ought to ask that person who Jesus is? –Josh
Gary // Feb 13, 2007 at 3:46 pm
I too come from a Roman Catholic having been born in a R.C. family & grew up in a predominately R.C. town. Now as a Southern Baptist I wrestle with how Christian is the R.C.?My expereince is that most R.C people don’t understand what it means to have a personal relationship with God by trusting completely in Jesus Christ for righteousness. In general they tend to rely upon the “Church” for their righteousness that for them is imputed through the various sacreemnts. Many R.C. are attached to the pomp & ritual of the formal mass & find their peace with God that way. I never did!!! Only through Christ did I personally find peace with God & the assurance of forgiveness past as well as the availabilty of forgiveness in the future. American R.C. seem to have a different view of the church then say R.C. from Europe or Asia. Asians seem to me to be much more worshippful of Mary than Americans. American R.C. seem to be losing their trust in their doctrines. Thanks for this blog. The spirit in which it was written did not seem to attacking R.C. after all they too need Jesus!
Dr. Mark DeVine // Feb 14, 2007 at 10:13 am
Thanks Gary for this personal inside view. Your inability to find peace and assurance of forgiveness reminds me of Luther’s inability to achieve a clear conscience before God despite wearing out his confessor Johann von Staupitz in the pursuit. Perhaps at times, the worst thing that could happen would be the illegitimate achievement of peace in the wrong way because it keeps us from the pursuit of the true once-and-for-all sacrifice for sins.
Allan Edwards // Feb 20, 2007 at 6:01 pm
Just passing through, but I thought I’d throw my two cents in.
As a Roman Catholic I can admit only too readily that most Catholics don’t know why they believe what they believe and are thus easy targets for Evangelicals armed with an impressive knowledge of Scripture. Thus, statistics are heard of how large the numbers of former Catholics are in various Evangelical denominations.
This, however, should be seen along side another movement of conversion. This movement considers (often well educated) Protestant clergy converting to Catholicism in striking numbers. See http://www.chnetwork.org/ for more on that.
I do agree that Catholics, if they will remain such for long, will no longer be able to remain ignorant of Scripture (indeed they are told that to be such is to be ignorant of Christ Himself. See the document Dei Verbum and just about any other time the Church mentions Scripture). They will need to know just what all that ritual is all about and where it comes from. They will doubtlessly have to be more “evangelical” in order to survive. Interestingly though, all those uniquely Catholic things (ritual, church authority, etc.) are the strongest where the Church is the most vibrant and receiving the most converts.
Maria // May 29, 2008 at 10:22 am
I’ve been Catholic all my life,but I’ve noticed that I don’t know anything about the bible. I’ve gone to church but nothing is really explained to me. All that I’ve really learned is from Jehova Witnesses that go to my door, and they are right about all they say. They go by what the bible says. Maria 16 years old,GA
Leave a Comment