Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Reaching young 'nones' will take an authentic evangelizing voice
This is a great read if you want to laugh at someone who TOTALLY DOES NOT GET IT.
https://www.ncronline.org/news/opinion/distinctly-catholic/reaching-young-nones-will-take-authentic-evangelizing-voice
Last week, my colleague Heidi Schlumpf reported on a conference at the University of Notre Dame, aimed at creating "cultures of formation" that will help stem the exodus of young Catholics into the ranks of the "nones." I was especially interested in the keynote address by Bishop Robert Barron, auxiliary bishop of Los Angeles.
...The second finding Barron considers is that young, former Catholics are "uncomfortable with statements about who or what God is," and that they resist "strong statements made regarding theology."
He suggests this is part of the "relativism that holds sway practically everywhere today." Young people invoke "my truth" but are suspicious of talk about "the truth." He terms this the "culture of 'whatever,' " in which people conclude that what works for me might not work for you, and general statements about religion are viewed with suspicion.
...The second finding Barron considers is that young, former Catholics are "uncomfortable with statements about who or what God is," and that they resist "strong statements made regarding theology."
He suggests this is part of the "relativism that holds sway practically everywhere today." Young people invoke "my truth" but are suspicious of talk about "the truth." He terms this the "culture of 'whatever,' " in which people conclude that what works for me might not work for you, and general statements about religion are viewed with suspicion.
In other words, he's upset about tolerance for other viewpoints - which is exactly why people are leaving his religion.
The author of this piece at least displays some understanding though:
...Barron may be more skilled, and more eloquent, than others, but the approach to young people must take account of the way judgmentalism in general turns them off. So while we can provide some obscure philosophic or theological reason to explain why the church considers homosexual acts "intrinsically disordered," where is the humility to admit that such language is pastorally a disaster, and not just when reaching out to gay people?
The world has changed. People have changed. And a lot that change has been very good. But the RCC is an institution that prides itself specifically on NOT changing. Young people leaving it are a direct result of this. Something's gotta give if they want to survive, but when they have anchored the church itself to this notion of not changing, it CAN'T give, even an inch.
Better to let the dinosaur die, and with it the intolerance it promoted and supported.
8 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
Barron qualifies this dark picture by adding that those who, like himself, have tilled this field of evangelization know that "behind the very questions that even the most aggressively antireligious young people pose is indeed a spiritual longing and fascination."
Many non-religious people are still interested in the spiritual (only a quarter or so of them are actual atheists). It's just that they are no longer interested in organized religion's version of the spiritual.
It's the same as with the late Middle-Ages. People were frustrated because the Catholic Church couldn't give them the answers they needed. That's why they started digging in more obscure spiritual teachings and arrived at the esoteric and the occult. That's why we had a Renaissance: People were disappointed with mainstream-Christianity and went to pre-christian ideas. ("Renaissance" = "Rebirth"
He suggests this is part of the "relativism that holds sway practically everywhere today." Young people invoke "my truth" but are suspicious of talk about "the truth."
That's not relativism. That's being aware that multiple religions exist, each of which claims to be "the truth".
Barron riffs on Lonergan's four stages of consciousness and intentionality. By getting stuck at the second stage, that on inquiring and understanding, these young people do not enter into the third stage of judging and do not have to risk getting to the final, fourth stage of taking responsibility for their conclusions and acting in a manner that is consistent with what they have come to know and choose.
Instead of lamenting that young people don't want to commit to a single religion, how about your failure that your religion is not convincing enough to make them commit?
The fourth item is that young former Catholics "describe religious faith as illogical or unscientific," which, Barron says, "breaks my heart" and that it is this bias that results in much of the ridicule hurled at religion.
Religion is logical but unscientific. Science contains the possibility that any explanation could be wrong. Religion specifically excludes some explanations from the possibility of being wrong. Science and religion are thus philosophically incompatible.
Young people will never get to the arguments Barron makes so eloquently if they think the church's leaders are morally fraudulent.
Amen.
The approach to young people must start with the recognition that after growing up in a culture drowning with consumer messaging, young people crave authenticity above all. It seems to me such authenticity, for the church, must begin with poverty.
AKA what Jesus preached.
Many non-religious people are still interested in the spiritual (only a quarter or so of them are actual atheists). It's just that they are no longer interested in organized religion's version of the spiritual.
It's the same as with the late Middle-Ages. People were frustrated because the Catholic Church couldn't give them the answers they needed. That's why they started digging in more obscure spiritual teachings and arrived at the esoteric and the occult. That's why we had a Renaissance: People were disappointed with mainstream-Christianity and went to pre-christian ideas. ("Renaissance" = "Rebirth"
He suggests this is part of the "relativism that holds sway practically everywhere today." Young people invoke "my truth" but are suspicious of talk about "the truth."
That's not relativism. That's being aware that multiple religions exist, each of which claims to be "the truth".
Barron riffs on Lonergan's four stages of consciousness and intentionality. By getting stuck at the second stage, that on inquiring and understanding, these young people do not enter into the third stage of judging and do not have to risk getting to the final, fourth stage of taking responsibility for their conclusions and acting in a manner that is consistent with what they have come to know and choose.
Instead of lamenting that young people don't want to commit to a single religion, how about your failure that your religion is not convincing enough to make them commit?
The fourth item is that young former Catholics "describe religious faith as illogical or unscientific," which, Barron says, "breaks my heart" and that it is this bias that results in much of the ridicule hurled at religion.
Religion is logical but unscientific. Science contains the possibility that any explanation could be wrong. Religion specifically excludes some explanations from the possibility of being wrong. Science and religion are thus philosophically incompatible.
Young people will never get to the arguments Barron makes so eloquently if they think the church's leaders are morally fraudulent.
Amen.
The approach to young people must start with the recognition that after growing up in a culture drowning with consumer messaging, young people crave authenticity above all. It seems to me such authenticity, for the church, must begin with poverty.
AKA what Jesus preached.
“rationally compelling biblical alternative”
