6/8/08

Which Catholic "generation" is yours?


The world's Roman Catholic bishops gathered in St. Peter's Basilica for Vatican Council II

Reporting for the National Catholic Reporter on the annual conference of the Catholic Theological Society of America, John Allen writes of a presentation given by Purdue sociologist James Davidson in which he identified four distinct generations of American Catholics, grouped with respect to the Second Vatican Council (1962-65):

Pre-Vatican Catholics, meaning those born before 1941, representing 17 percent of American Catholics;
• Vatican II Catholics, born between 1941 and 1960, at 35 percent;
• Post-Vatican II Catholics, born between 1961 and 1982, at 40 percent;
• Millennial Catholics, born since 1983, at 8 percent.

Davidson proposed that generational differences should be taken seriously alongside other markers of diversity such as race, gender and class in both academic programming and pastoral ministry.

Davidson argued that the results of surveys from 1987, 1993, 1999 and 2005 show a clear trend, amplified in each succeeding generation, away from what Catholic writer Eugene Kennedy calls “Culture One Catholicism,” with a high emphasis on religious practice, clerical authority and doctrinal conformity, towards “Culture Two Catholicism,” emphasizing lay autonomy and the individual conscience.

Asserting that church leaders are today attempting to return the church to a “culture one” model, Davidson said that because the socio-economic status of American Catholics is not in decline and because “laity are not willing to grant control” to the hierarchy, “the percentage of Catholics who are culture one will continue to decline.”

If older liberal Catholics are over-represented in reform groups such as Call to Action and Voice of the Faithful, Davidson said, younger conservative Catholics are equally over-represented among new priests, seminarians, and even theologians.

Speaking specifically about theologians, Davidson said that a growing tendency for younger theologians to reflect a “culture one” mentality reflects “a larger pattern of separation between the laity and the leaders of the institutional church.”

I certainly identify in my own parochial experience the movement away from "Culture One Catholicism" to Culture Two Catholicism." Likewise, I read in the actions of Church administrators across the board efforts to return to "Culture One" rather than to grapple with the questions, demands and possibilities presented by "Culture Two."

Admittedly, you're reading the blog of a Vatican II Catholic (priest). Although written before I read Allen's article, my recent post on priesthood and the sketch of what has changed in my own lifetime resonates with the material at hand.

I'm putting up another poll on the sidebar as an effort to get a read on what "generations" of Catholics make up my readership. As is the case here all the time, your taking the poll in no way identifies you to other readers or to ConcordPastor.

Before or afer taking the poll you might be inclined to comment on this post and Davidson's theory.


-ConcordPastor

10 comments:

  1. I'm a Vatican II Catholic (born 1950)who believes that our present pope is ignoring the dictum Ecclesia semper reformanda...the Church must always be reformed. John XXIII opened wide the church windows for fresh air. Those who succeeded him began closing the windows (out of fear?). Our beloved church is still in need of reform. Do those of us who believe this swim against the tide, or go with the flow? It's a struggle for me as someone who has been very enthusiastic about change since the Council. Granted there were mistakes made. Fix the mistakes and move forward...not backwards. Most millenial Catholics are not afraid to question authority, practices and doctrines. They want clear answers and explanations, not quotes from church rules and documents. I think that those young adults who are attracted to "culture one' are in the minority. Hopefully it's true that this culture will decline in numbers. I believe that will happen with lay Catholics..but not as quickly with the hierarchy.
    Anne

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'd be interested in reading the presentation made by James Davidson to the Catholic Theological Society of America at their 2008 Convention that John Allen refers to in the NCR article.

    Wonder if his presentation at CTSA will be made available for "popular reading."

    James Davidson's is professor of medical sociology and health communications at Purdue; his research and teaching focus has been on the delivery of health services. Would like to see how he came to classify the generational groups of Catholics.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I am chronologically decidedly pre-Vatican II, but my understanding of the Faith moves me to Vatican II.

    I am very frightened by the apparent tendency of seminary training to encourage the "powerless laity" concept.

    What kind of Church should the Church be? A mindless mass molded by unhearing hierarchy or a vibrant participatory group?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hmmm, I don't like the box you've put me in just because I'm preVatican II. That's a point in time, not a state of mind. But assuming we old fogeys are mindless lemmings, at least give us credit for not putting the church out of business. We did leave something for the newbies to build on.
    I wandered into your blog last week. Very interesting, thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Welcome, Cookie! Glad you "wandered in" and I'm pleased to have you with us.

    Please look carefully at the question on the poll where I point out that the poll is chronological - NOT ideological!

    In giving talks on liturgy I often point out that it was the pre-Vatican II liturgy into which I was born and raised until I was in high school. I received the Eucharist for the first time and was confirmed in the Tridentine rite. That was the rite of my childhood and, more important, it was the rite of my parents and grandparents who were so formative of my faith.

    You did much more than just give us "something to build on!" You gave us the faith, the prayer, the heart of what it means to be Catholic!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Regarding the substance of your post. I found a different commentary online that may add diversity to the opinions already posted, by a convert to our faith. I don't know if you can fix this link, but I'd be interested in hearing your feedback on this article. God bless.

    http://www.splendoroftruth.com/curtjester/archives/2008/06/paranoia.php

    ReplyDelete
  7. Yes, I noted the chronological/ideological reference, but "cultural models" conjures up rampant mass thinking/understanding. Anyway, no offense taken!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous asks me to "fix" the link s/he provided and by that request I think s/he was asking for me to make it a hyperlink:
    http://www.splendoroftruth.com/curtjester/archives/2008/06/paranoia.php

    I have barely enough time to try to respond to some of the comments on my own blog. I'm not able to begin responding here to posts on other blogs.

    If Anonymous wishes to post his/her own thoughts here, I might respond as time allows.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Posting links is such a common practice in the blogsphere that it didn't seem a problem. Sorry for the confusion. The Curt Jester says it better than I could:

    "I don't think I buy this "culture one" and "culture two" distinction as something defining younger Catholics. For me a good theologian, priest, member of the laity, etc would think in terms of the body of Christ. Certainly throughout history there has been emphasis on one part of the body of Christ over the other and at times unhealthy emphasis. Whether it is clericalism or the unfortunate laity against the "institutional church" - they are both errors. The last 40 years has placed too much emphasis on the laity while at the same time wiping out distinctions between the ordained priesthood and the priesthood of the faithful. Ignoring ontological differences is not healthy and we should instead be seeing the glory in all parts of the mystical body of Christ and not playing off one part of the body against another. A sort of class warfare between the clergy and the laity. Of course St. Paul already saw this tendency in the early Church and preached against it in 1st Corinthians 12:14-20."

    ReplyDelete
  10. I am sorry the link didn't become a hyperlink. Here's another try:
    http://www.splendoroftruth.com
    (scroll down to Paranoia).

    Anonymous: I have NO problem with folks posting links here. What I'm saying is that I'm not at my readers' disposal to respond to whatever they place in front of me. By and large, I don't respond to comments readers make on my own posts.

    I will suspend that for the moment and make this comment. I don't find statements like the following helpful: "The last 40 years has placed too much emphasis on the laity while at the same time wiping out distinctions between the ordained priesthood and the priesthood of the faithful."

    Anyone who believes that "distinctions between the ordained priesthood and the priesthood of the faithful" have been "wiped out" in the last 40 years is not a keen or accurate observer of the scene. Sweeping generalizations add little of substance to any attempt at conversation or dialogue.

    ReplyDelete

Please THINK before you write
and PRAY before you think!