<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Thursday, May 12, 2005

Is it the Men, the Music, or the Madness?
The shortest distance between two points is a straight line, or so Euclidean geometry would tell us. Take a population sample from the inside of a Catholic Church circa 1962 and another from the same church this past weekend. Traditionalists will tell you that's all you need to know, and don't you think it's time to turn back the clock?
Human geometry is not a one-dimensional exercise. It is more complex than Einstein's curved space, and no one is anywhere close to describing an equation that will predict it, especially in the melting pot of faith, psychology, art, sociology, and politics we call the Church. Men are turned off in Catholic churches. The Mass is not manly enough. Too many feminazi musicians in pantsuits or wimpy homilies according to commentary at one of last week's popular open book threads. Frequent contributor Neil Dhingra sinks the salvo that men have been marginalized by modern ecclesiastical society about mid-thread, relating historical items of women nudging men out of the pews a century ago. And it has probably happened every year before and since. A University of Washington study (somewhere in the archives here it's linked, but I can't find it tonight) suggested it's a Mars/Venus thing: that men are just wired differently and care less for the spiritual and the last things than women. An older historical study I saw suggested that in colonial times, when men outnumbered women among this continent's settlers, churchgoing and church membership were considerably less than they are today. The Catholic Church doesn't keep statistics for what would be helpful to know: a year-by-year tracking of men's attendance habits and a comparison with women's. Then we might know for sure if men are bleeding off more heavily than women. This would be a more helpful gauge than taking two points and attempting to draw a line between them. Even more helpful would be to discern what events affected church attendance: wars, natural disasters, cultural upheaval, an ecumenical council, an encyclical on contraception, a liturgical change. Andrew Greeley suggested many years ago that in the US, Humanae Vitae would have caused more of a hemorrhaging in Mass attendance if not for liturgical reform. I hear conservatives blame liturgy for chasing off churchgoers, but would they feel the same if these chased off were practicing forbidden stuff in the bedroom instead of Tridentine fussbudgets? To hear some people talk this past month, they're ready to nail the planks to the edge of the ship and give "heretics" their disembarkation passes. I have a hard time buying into the notion that men are particularly chased away by the Vatican II Church. Or that tough talk by a cigar-smoking, whiskey-slugging cleric in a cassock and biretta will lasso the males back into the fold. I think it's as silly to focus only on the men who aren't there as it is to focus just on gay sex predators. We all know that lots of women are alienated from the Church, just as we know a significant portion (if not a decided majority) of sex offenders are heterosexual. The music angle is less convincing. I put pre-conciliar treacle like "On This Day" next to the best (or worst) of what David Haas puts out. The Church has always had horrid music. It chased away the men (and women) in 1962 and it probably still does today. But most people don't base their church attendance on getting finally fed up with the musical scene. Even if feminist sisters in pantsuits are directing the choir. I've watched the efforts to form a Men's Club in my parish with interest. We had an initial event about two years ago: a good breakfast speaker that drew maybe a hundred guys. This past winter was a shrimp dinner and poker night. That outdrew the Saturday breakfast on parenting and being a good husband. I think the golf outing is set to better either. Would the world be wonderful if a weekend retreat or a prayer night drew the most of all? Of course it would. But you can't deny the allure of playing. Targetting men is setting up for failure. Genetics are against you. If the numbers of single women of all ages don't draw men to the doors, do you think homilies against contraception and abortion will? If you want more people in the pews, why not instead target the fence-sitters? You know: the people who might just come back to church if they were asked. I know that's a radical concept for the post-JP Church that's ready for a leaner, more streamlined look under our new pope, but what is this all about? Making the Body of Christ into the image of an idealized unconciliar conservative Catholicism? Or actually going out after the lost sheep, regardless of their gender? WWJD?

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

The Alliance for Moderate, Liberal and Progressive Blogs

Join | List | Previous | Next