Logo

The great awakening: How lay people have shaken up the church

Thursday, July 15, 2010
The great awakening: How lay people have shaken up the church
Photo by Karen Callaway/Catholic New World
ShareThis
The Second Vatican Council unleashed a wave of lay participation in the church—and there’s no turning back.

Joan Higgins remembers when things began to change at her San Francisco parish. "It was 1968," she says. "We had a new young pastor who was very forward-looking. He turned around the altar, moved the tabernacle to one side, and instituted a moment of collective silence for reflection after communion." The young priest also introduced another innovation: a parish council.

"Then he left to get married," says Higgins with a laugh. "We got a new pastor who was very conservative. He moved the tabernacle back behind the altar, got rid of the moment of silence, and abolished the parish council."

A few decades earlier, the changes instituted by either of the new pastors might have been met by a collective shrug of the parish's shoulders. In those days, Catholics--mostly second- and third-generation immigrants--were more concerned with putting bread on the table for their families than debating the placement of the tabernacle. In the heady years after the Second Vatican Council, however, Catholic laypeople were more inclined to give voice to their desires for and disappointments with the church.

"My husband, Bob, who served on the parish council, was very upset about it being abolished," says Higgins. "He held a meeting at our house with a lot of men from the parish, and they had a long conversation about what to do." Higgins, for her part, was at least as concerned about the elimination of the moment of silence after communion. "I thought it was very important for us to reflect on what had just happened at the Mass," she says. "So I wrote the pastor a letter to complain. He actually called me up to talk about it, and we had a good conversation."

A growing ferment

It is an exaggeration--but not much of one--to say that the role of the laity in the Catholic Church has changed more in the last 75 years than the last 750. Seventy-five years ago, when this magazine was first published, the Mass was in Latin, and laypeople did not read from scripture or distribute communion. "Religious education" consisted of classes in Catholic schools taught primarily by sisters wearing habits.

Nevertheless, to suggest that laypeople had no role in the life of the church of that time would be mistaken. Catholic parishes had a rich network of lay associations--confraternities, sodalities, service organizations--that played an important role for a church of immigrants seeking a foothold in American society.

"These associations served a useful purpose," says Jay Dolan, author of The American Catholic Experience (University of Notre Dame Press) and professor emeritus of history at Notre Dame. "Catholics weren't necessarily well regarded by the broader culture. They were able to develop a sense of confidence by joining and participating in these organizations," says Dolan.

By the mid-20th century, however, it became clear that many lay Catholics were seeking a broader role in the life of the church. After the Great Depression and World War II, church leaders encouraged laypeople to help rebuild their societies. Catholics were obtaining college degrees and entering the ranks of the professions. They were reading and talking about their faith.

"The theology of the mystical body was enormously important," says Dolan. It stressed that every Catholic was a member of the Body of Christ and was called to make Christ present in the world. In 1943 Pope Pius XII embraced this theology in an encyclical, Mystici Corporis (The Mystical Body), where he wrote that laypeople "ought to have an ever-clearer consciousness not only of belonging to the church, but of being the church."

The most significant lay movement of this period was the Christian Family Movement (CFM), founded in 1949 by Patricia and Patrick Crowley. While the name might suggest a support group for married couples, the CFM's actual focus was on Christian social action in the world. CFM encouraged the formation of small groups of married couples who would use a three-part method: observe, judge, act.

"The people involved in CFM believed that they had to make it easier for people to have good family lives," says historian Jeff Burns, the author of Disturbing the Peace: A History of the Christian Family Movement (University of Notre Dame Press). "They understood that economic and social conditions in the broader society had a large impact on family life."

By the early 1960s, notes Burns, more than 50,000 couples were involved in the Christian Family Movement. Because couples tended to cycle in and out of the group, the actual impact was much larger. CFM eventually went international, becoming particularly strong in Latin America.

More than three lines

Shortly after his election in 1958, Pope John XXIII announced his intention to call an ecumenical council, a gathering of the world's bishops that quickly became known as Vatican II. In a 1962 letter to the pope, Cardinal Léon-Josef Suenens of Belgium called "for a major statement on the position of laypeople in the church. The Code of Canon Law devotes a mere three lines to them!"

As it turned out, the laity received far more than three lines at Vatican II. "Almost every document deals with the laity in some way," says Dolores Leckey, author of The Laity and Christian Education (Paulist Press). Sancrosanctum Concilium (Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy), for instance, called for reform of the liturgy in order to promote the "full and active participation" by the entire assembly. The council also adopted Apostolicam Actuositatem (Decree on the Apostolate of the Laity), which called the laity to discern the gifts given to them in baptism and to use them in service of the church's mission.

J. Peter Nixon is a regular contributor to U.S. Catholic. This article appeared in the August 2010 issue of U.S. Catholic (Vol. 75, No. 8, pages 12-17).

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The First Sentence Says It All

The First Sentence of this article says it all

"We had a new young pastor who was very forward-looking. He turned around the altar, moved the tabernacle to one side"

If looking forward to a conversion to Protestantism is what you had in mind they I might understand this.

What surprises me about the regular lay people that want to be involved in the Liturgy - and Church movements but refuse to study in depth The history of the liturgy, the scriptural apologetics of the core of our Faith and doctrines, and in general the center of Catholic theology

Look what was said in the first sentence ?!
You as a Catholic believe in the real presence of Jesus Christ in the Blessed Sacrament which is constantly present in the Tabernacle
And you advocate moving "Him" to the side for what ? a plant ?....a chair...? a person?

Worship not the creation over the creator my friends for the enemy is not outside the Mother Church for it has arrived within the Mother

AMEN MARK !

Amen Mark!

Unfortunately, the Novus Ordo introduced by Paul VI already tended toward Protestantism. So I suppose it should be no surprise that in dioceses and local parishes the bad "reforms" went even further.

It seems to me - and may God forgive me if I'm wrong - that the desired (evil) outcomes were accomplished in several steps by enemies of the Church:

1) Minor and not-so-minor changes made in the Liturgy by Rome prior to Vatican II, even under Pius XII... John XXIII changing the Canon which basically remained untouched and unchanged for 1500 years, and certainly for 1000 years. The Canon, which goes back even prior to the 500's, perhaps even to the Apostles, was called a "Canon" in that no one in the Roman Rite would ever dream of getting rid of it or tampering with it.
(Although, I suppose if anyone was worthy of a one-word addition, it was the great St Joseph)...Anyway, back to the pre-Council changes in "Step 1": There was also the 1962 Missal which made us think what we once thought was untouchable could be radically altered with no problem
2) The Second Vatican Council
3) The post-Council changes to the Liturgy by Rome
4) The Novus Ordo
5) The translations of the Novus Ordo into other languages...and other post-conciliar documents & changes
6) The bishops' conferences pushing the "reforms" further in each country
7) Local bishops pushing the "reforms" further in local dioceses (mandating moving tabernacles, etc)
8) Many priests taking it even further to the next level in the parishes

The result of these 8 steps = almost univeral madness and insanity.

And there are a number of folks reading this who want even more moves (steps 9, 10, 11, and 12, etc if you will) to push things farther and farther away from the traditional Catholic Faith and practice.

Perhaps Step # 1 started the slippery slope... perhaps all steps in this process need to be considered and reversed, not just 6,7, and 8

It should be added, on a side-note discussion about the Roman Canon as discussed above, that the Liturgical Reformers of the 1960s did plan to completely dump it from the Novus Ordo Missae. Only by direct command of Paul VI was a modified form of it retained as "Eucharistic Prayer I". In practice, this Eucharistic Prayer I is never used in parishes anyway. (In being a member of a local parish from the 1980s, # 1 was only used one time in decades in that parish, by a visiting priest from Malta!)

Catholics are funny old

Catholics are funny old folk... Hehehe.

an exaggeration "laypeople did not read scripture"

1) I started Catholic elementary school in 1949. At that time we were using a format of the Baltimore Catechism, at least in the upper grades, which had scripture with the Q&A.

2) I started Catholic high school in 1955. One of the required texts was a New Testament. We had periodic "days of reflection". We were expected to read the NT during that day, especially when we were assembled in study hall. We also had 4 intense yrs of Latin and 4 less intense yrs of Greek. In college I bought a Greek NT so I could keep up with my Greek - not very successfully.

3) I started Catholic college in 1959. We were required to take 8 theology and 6 philosophy courses as part of the core. 3 of those courses were scripture.

This was not a raving liberal place. Several decades later I was at a party in Houstom talking to my former pastor John McCarthy, then the Aux Bp of Houston and later Bp of Austin, now retired. I told him I was from Covington Ky. At first he couldn't place it. After I pointed out that it was just across the river from Cincinnati, his eyes lite up. Oh yes he said. That is where the Cincinnati airport is. He then brought up a piece of trivia I will always remember. During Vatican II, the Covington bishop, Bp Ackerman was considered one of the most conservative bishops at the council.

I find it hard to beliee that a backwater like CVG would be ahead of the rest of the world.

Regarding the Teaching Role of the Laity.

[The historical role of the bishop in the Catholic Church has been to "teach, sanctify, and govern." With laypeople moving into teaching the faith and playing a more active role in the celebration of the sacraments, it wasn't long before laypeople were wondering about their role in church governance.]
I have observed 2 churches, one in the Dallas Diocese and another in the Baker, OR Diocese, each with far right, ultra-orthodox priest, who have completely dismantled successful lay led CCD programs and taken over the teaching duties themselves. It appears to me that Mother Angelica or some of her priestly confederates are inculcating into the minds of ultra-orthodox priests that they can not trust the laity to properly educate the young. The end result I have observed is a decrease in actual class time as the priest does not have adequate time to attend to all ages of students and absolutely little if any discussion with high school students the mature subjects that are often discussed in these pages. I'm not just talking about sex. They get the priests spiel on abortion, birth control, and pre-marital sex. They don't get any other education on Vatican II, major encyclicals such as Rerum Novarum and Humanae Vitae, or any discussion of the role of lay adults in helping to shape the world into a more Catholic place.

Is there anyone else in the room?

Do the priests teach by themselves? I've been a scout leader for over 10 years. With all its faults the BSA has had for the past 25 years or more a "two deep", "rule of three", "no one-on-one" policy that mandates that a leader can never be alone with a child who is not his or her own. This resulted from BSA's own abuse scandals and caused a lot of problems when it began. Scoutmasters used to take scouts into the woods by themselves. Now you need at least two adults, three if one has to leave for any reason. A single leader can't even lead a meeting. It's a logistical nightmare. Trips are canceled because of lack of adults. But it works better than leaving one adult alone with a bunch of kids. My wife and I are scout leaders and were volunteers in our parish. We've taken BSA Youth Protection Training and my wife has taken Girl Scout training. Because our son was in a parish troop we needed to take additional parish-troop training and parish volunteer training. All mandated the "no one-on-one" rule. I asked the parish trainer what training the priests got. He said, "I don't know, they won't tell us". Obviously it's not "no one-on-one" because of Confession. The idea of a kid sitting in the Reconciliation Room today with a priest is as incredible as expecting them to confess masturbation. Someone will say, "teachers are alone with kids, do you suspect priests more?" I'll say yes. Should teachers be monitored? Probably. Digital cameras are cheap.

As For Being Alone..

I personally think it is a sad commentary of our society. No wonder we have a hard time generating new priests if a teen considering a vocation can not even accompany a priest on hospital rounds or visiting the shut ins.

As for the 2 parishes I descibed, the priest in the Dallas Diocese takes grades 1-3, 4-6, and 7-above each for a 3 month interval on Saturday morning for 3 hours at a time sitting in the pews in church while he instructs. He is not alone because he REQUIRES at least one parent to be present for the 3 hours or he will not enroll the child.

As for the priest in the Baker Diocese, as far as I know he's alone with them. And his pupils are dwindling as about 90% of the parents have transfered to the Jesuit mission on the nearby Indian Reservation where the laity still instruct the children with the priest popping in on occasions.

Sad Commentary

It's hard to get scout leaders for the same reason. It is a sad commentary. My father was a scoutmaster and took kids on campouts in the 40's by himself. When I was a scout there were never more than two adults and none of them were parents. On hikes it was just our scoutmaster and us. Scout leaders were ex-scouts in their 20's and 30's we knew only as Mister X. We didn't know their first names. We never questioned why they were there but it was to repay what scouting gave them. When the rules changed a lot of the old timers quit. They resented their trust being questioned. But the change had to happen. Too many bad men had gotten through, too many kid's lives had been ruined and too many lawsuits had been filed. Now everyone just accepts it but it's harder than ever to get adults to volunteer. There is a dearth of outdoormen and women in general and even fewer who were or want to be associated with scouts. The BSA's discriminatory policies don't help. Neither does it's dumbing down of the outdoor program. But the added personnel requirements definitely have something to do with it. The priest you mention is right to insist on one parent being present with him but one parent for each kid is crazy and not even good for the kids. A big difference in scouts and everywhere since I was a kid is the parents. In the old days we never saw them except at home. Now they're everywhere kids go. What kid wants that? What parent does?

Priests do more than lay people

But lay people are important too.

and there are a lot more lay people that clergy

That's why they accomplish so much!

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
U.S. Catholic insists on a civil and respectful dialogue on our website, following our Comment policy. Comments should be charitable, on topic, and brief. U.S. Catholic reserves the right to delete comments deemed inappropriate. We encourage you to choose your words wisely.