Skip to main contentAccessibility feedback

Fixing the Church’s Failure

Tom Ridenour posted this on the Internet recently, and we asked if we could reproduce it here:

“In a previous response Fr. X mentioned that the poor behavior of many who attend Mass was not the cause of a falling away in faith and obedience but symptomatic of larger cultural problems. He cited the general breakdown regarding legitimate authority in society in general — the eroding of the interdependent infrastructure that supported order and obedience — and extreme selfishness, among other reasons. I would like to add one more cause to the list: the failure of the Church to truly teach the faith, not just in the post-Vatican II era, but before that. 

“Priests who bridge the gap, so to speak, tell me that while there was outward compliance in many ways before Vatican II, that compliance was often without understanding. People did things but did not fully understand why they did them. There was a lot of blind obedience, which is not a bad thing in itself, but it certainly puts the one who obeys in a shaky place. 

“The whole spirit of the country and of the world has changed since the 1950s, when everything looked good in so many ways. Vatican II was not the cause of the change, but it opened the way for that new spirit to enter the Church and secularize it. That spirit has misrepresented the Gospel and the teachings of Vatican II. 

“Clearly, the time has come when people will no longer blindly obey. If they are to obey they have to be told why, and the reasons have to be good. With children, one child obeys without question, and another asks, “Why should I do that?” The first may be the easiest to deal with, but the latter may be more solid in the end, because he will have a complete formation (intellect and will) and will be able to help others more effectively. 

“The past few years I have had intense friendships with two women who were both lapsed Catholics. Both are very intelligent, top students and creative. Both left the Church, one for Presbyterianism (and the choir), and the other for Fundamentalism. Both went through Catholic schools all the way up to college (one won awards for knowing  her catechism) Neither  had ever heard the term Real Presence until they heard of it from me. One is my age (49); the other is 33.

“What were they taught in Catholic school? They knew nothing of the realities of the Gospel. One knew some theology, but had no idea of how it related in any practical way to her own life. The other had had a born-again experience and was deeply involved with the local Assemblies of God church. 

“I began a three-year campaign to bring her back to the Catholic faith. This involved digging deep. She pulled out all the ammunition: documents from CRI, ‘Bible Answer Man’ material, Scripture upon Scripture (thank God, I was an Evangelical and had studied lots of Scripture). 

“She considered everything, she weighed everything. She compared everything to Scripture, which had become her sole rule of faith. Though she works at the same place I do, we talked very little. We wrote to each other. And now that I look back on it, I think that was the better thing to do. Personal confrontation can be sticky when people are passionate about what they believe. The writing helped diffuse some (but not all) of that. 

“Sometimes there would be months of hiatus, and then it would begin again. I lost a lot of sleep sitting at my computer late into the night, answering her letters and responding to the material she sent me. 

“It took me three years to undo what the Fundamentalists had done. It also took me three years to do  what the Church ought to have done: properly teach the essential realities of the faith, not excluding the anthropological realities. 

“She is now back in the Catholic Church, due to the grace of God. She has a stack of written material from me (in chronological order, she tells me) which must be over 400 typed pages, answering virtually every sort of question in every area of the faith. 

“Years ago people were taught certain habits; now they are taught nothing, or they are simply taught the wrong thing-what my friend calls ‘Catholic lite.’ 

“The bottom line: the Church cries out for teachers. The Church cries out for priests who will preach the faith. I seldom hear about purgatory, sacrifice, expiatory suffering in union with Christ, the seven deadly sins, the works of mercy (most Catholics who leave the Church can name none of these), becoming a new creature in Christ, self-denial, hell and eternal punishment, angels, devils, confession, chastity, not being conformed to the world, or any clear explanation of why the Church takes certain stands on controversial subjects. The lives of the saints are seldom if ever mentioned, nor are the countless miracles in the Church throughout the ages, which point to its supernatural source and end. In thirteen years as a Catholic, I have never heard some of these mentioned. And none, in my opinion, is ancillary to the faith. 

“No wonder my friends knew nothing of the Real Presence. 

“Lifelong Catholics are running into Fundamentalists who do give them reasons and who are saying something definite, something challenging, something a person can base his life on. They look at what the Fundamentalist seems  to be saying with authority (Fundies always have lots of Scripture to back their ideas up, which the average Catholic knows nothing of). 

“Furthermore, to his horrors he is led to understand that the habit he was taught seems to contradict the Scriptures the Fundamentalist has shown him. He concludes (with a little assistance) that the Catholic Church teaches things contrary to the Word of God. The results: He is angry-very angry in some cases. He is overwhelmed with the sense of having been betrayed (and he has been, but not in the way he thinks). 

“And voilà! Virtually overnight he develops a deep anti-Catholic sentiment and shows up in Fundamentalist pulpits as ‘Exhibit A.’ 

“Everybody loses: the person, the Church, and the person’s family — all this because someone did not truly communicate the faith. 

“The fervent leave because some truth is better than what they perceive as nothing at all except rote behavior. The tepid stay, continue to put their dollar and/or pocket change into the collection plate, and chuckle (if they are awake) at the appropriate times during the Hallmark-greeting-card sermon. 

“Is this the universal situation? Thank God, it is not. But it exists to a greater degree than any of us would like to think.

Where are those who will teach the Catholic faith? And teach it from the perspective of the transforming love of God, rather than from a legalistic, authoritarian viewpoint? For, let’s be honest: without love the Catholic faith is just flat-out too hard.”

Tom makes a number of excellent points — and perhaps the best one is by example. How many of us would take the time to write 400 pages of explanation of the faith, just to win back one person to the Church? Will we at least volunteer to teach C.C.D.? Sponsor a catechumen? Provide a subscription or books or tracts to a library? What is a soul worth, anyway? 


The Internet forum where Tom’s original message appeared is a new one, the Catholic Faith List. The description says it is “an informal, moderated mailing list which exists to promote authentic Catholic doctrine and practice in the light of all  the Church’s tradition, including  the teachings of and since the Second Vatican Council.”

The list’s founder and moderator, Mike Harrison, is so far doing a good job of discouraging the extremes (from Goddess-worship to sedevacantism) often found in so-called “Catholic” online forums. You can e-mail him at jhm@io.org for sign-up information 


We don’t want to appear immodest, but our own Worldwide Web site is coming along, too. The text of most Catholic Answers tracts (more than 100!) is now online, as is our catalogue, complete with an order form you can print out and mail or fax to us. Expanded as it is, the web site is only in the embryonic stages of development-watch for sensational changes there over the next few months. Meanwhile, stop by and read a tract at http://www.catholic.com/~answers. 


One drawback to many twelve-step groups is that they’ve been so infected by New Age assumptions that Christians feel uncomfortable in them. That is sad because the original group, Alcoholics Anonymous, was founded on solid Christian principles-indeed, the Twelve Steps themselves are ordinary Catholic practice-and some of A.A.’s earliest supporters were priests and sisters. Jesuit Father John C. Ford edited Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions, the practical handbook of all twelve-step programs.

W. Robert Aufill sent us several articles recommending the Calix Society, an organization for recovering Catholic alcoholics. Although it was founded in 1947, Calix has remained relatively small, despite its success in helping members maintain sobriety. Perhaps more Catholics will turn to it as the Christian roots of A.A. become obscured (some groups no longer pray the Our Father, for example). 

A.A.’s co-founder, Bill Wilson, saw “no opposition between A.A. and Calix. . . .” And, in fact, members of Calix are expected to participate in A.A. The goal of Calix, says Aufill, is “to assist Catholic alcoholics in integrating twelve-step recovery with its Christian and Catholic roots.” 

For more information, write to the Calix Society, 7601 Wayzata Boulevard, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55426. 


From Canada, Georges Allaire says:

“I had an amusing visit in between courses. A charming, effeminate, young man appeared in my doorway, carrying a rosy paper pad, and enquired whether he could interview me for the student school paper. He tried to ingratiate himself by insisting how much great esteem he had for me and regretting that I suffered from a terrible reputation amongst the students. (Methinks this meant the students of his inner circle.) He wanted to right the wrong. I thought in English “Flattery will get you nowhere,” but chose not to echo the thought in French words. 

“I volunteered to answer his questions. It took little time for him to profess what was already blatant in his appearance and demeanour: his homosexuality. And he had noticed my short letter to the editor that appeared two years ago in Le Soleil, a Quebec City daily, where I had written: ‘Heterosexuality seeds a garden of life. Homosexuality moisturises a refuse zone.’

“So he got down to discussing my views on sex and homosex. I told him what I tell anybody: that sex is the union of man and wife in a common selfless outpouring of selves onto another self, the child; and no sex is true to sex that goes against the grain of life. In this sense, homosexuality cannot truly love because it goes against the grain of life. It moisturises refuse rather than seed life. 

“‘When you say this, I can’t help but feel that you demean me,’ he said.

“‘On the contrary. You demean yourself. It is because I respect you that I am frank with you. You are the one who is hurting yourself.’ 

“‘For you as for me, what is important is to know oneself and to be content with oneself.’

“‘Sorry, but the important thing in life is not to know oneself: it is to be generous of oneself.’

“‘But how can one be generous if one does not know oneself?’ 

“‘It is precisely by the giving of oneself that one learns about oneself. It is the challenge of life that allows one to learn what one can be. That, for instance, is exactly what the child does to the parent and what homosexuality rips from a person’s life.’ 

“‘Homosexuals can be generous.’

“‘As human beings, they can, but as acting homosexuals, they are not. They are destroying the fabric of life. As human beings, they can have many qualities, they can show courage. But that is beside the point. I was once asked whether I believed that committing suicide is an act of courage. I answered that for some it is, and for some it is a act of cowardliness. But that is beside the point. A suicide hurts everyone who is counting on him. It is an act of selfishness. If you have known a person who has committed suicide, you certainly understand this.’

“‘I did and I do.’ He paused. “I’m content to be what I am,’ he said.

“‘And I am not,’ I answered. ‘I am a sinner and I go to confession.’

“‘What! You are not content with yourself? You have done so much, and you are not satisfied with yourself?’

“‘Let me explain it this way. When one is measured by excellence, one’s failings are evident. One has to dwell in mediocrity to be satisfied with oneself.’

“‘You say you go to confession. Do you confess to God or to a man?’

“‘I confess to God through a man. When we do something wrong, we readily construct excuses for what we do. Talking directly to God would be full of that. But when we have to talk to a man, the lameness of these excuses is made evident. And also, talking to a man is humbling where humility is needed.’ 

“‘Personally,’ he said, ‘I like the Bible.’

“‘Sorry, you can’t like the Bible. Not with what you profess to believe. The Bible goes squarely against your view of God, the world, love, and man. It is simply not true that you like the Bible, if you know what it says and if you believe what you say. You must detest the Bible.’

“‘But I find there are many good things in the Bible.’ 

“‘Look, I can always find an intelligent sentence in a book that I find inherently wrong. I could quote it, but I would be cheating if I said this meant that the book is good and that I like it.’

“‘I think Christ is a nice guy. It’s the Church that I do not like.’

“‘When Christ came, people killed him. It’s normal that his Church should also be disliked.’ 

“After some time, he asked: ‘Do you believe we are living the time of the Apocalypse?’

“‘No, I do not. At all times, some people think they are living the time of the Apocalypse because they are suffering. But at all times people suffer. However, if your question is whether I believe our times are bad, I emphatically say yes. Quebec has presently the world record for suicides amongst the young. Each month, at least one child between ten and fourteen commits suicide. Yes, our times stink.’ 

The discussion lasted over an hour and a half. At the end, the young effeminate said he was getting hungry. It was 4:30. He left. The article never went into print. Methinks the fellow didn’t get down to writing it.”

Did you like this content? Please help keep us ad-free
Enjoying this content?  Please support our mission!Donatewww.catholic.com/support-us