The other major problem being the growing number of “Charismatic Catholics” within the Hispanic Catholic community, now representing about 50% of that total.
The Charismatics embrace Pentecostalism which the Vatican feels is at odds with its teachings, particular as respects ordained priests being the conduits to the sacraments. In other words, a disagreement on “holiness access”.
Pentecostalists believe in “direct” holiness, i.e. no middle man – priests. Charismatics however, unlike the Vatican, do not believe Pentecostalism is necessarily incompatible with Catholicism. Thus, Benedict’s potential convert access point opening. They’re willing to listen (and maybe wooed). However, they pose as much a threat as they do opportunity, so cannot be dismissed for a variety of self interest reasons.
The current trend of the Charismatics is away from Roman Catholicism. Benedict needs to reverse that inertia and turn the exit threat into a member recruiting opportunity. Not an easy task. However, given the Charismatics being more fundamentally conservative than progressive minded in their approach to religious teachings and doctrine and existing in far greater numbers than the progressives, makes them (much) more appealing to the Vatican and its traditional conservative product offering. Unfortunately for the progressives, it further reduces the incentive and chances to see the Church embrace their many change demands, furthering, not closing the growing divide between the two.
Therefore, Benedict’s (pre-visit) goal on this first U.S. visit is clear and really two-fold.
1) To buttress the ranks in order to stem or mitigate the outflow of the progressive “Cafeteria Catholics”, while
2) Most importantly, learning and developing a “Charismatic Catholic recruiting strategy” to better engage and enlist this crucial subset or sweet spot of the Hispanic Catholic community.
The Charismatics and Hispanic Catholics, particularly the exploding immigrant base, being the real target and key to long term sustainable growth to not only the U.S. Catholic Church, but also in the aggregate for the global Catholic Church, as the rest of the article will elaborate.
With that, it’s important to look at why the Vatican is simply trying to slow the outflow of the Cafeteria Catholics rather than completely stop the bleeding and actually try to rejuvenate that member demographic inflow.
In fact, the Catholic Church shrewdly plots with regard to its rapidly changing membership mix. Evidence suggests it is seemingly interested in growing member ranks rather than building member diversity, not in ethnic terms but rather as respects the various diverse member economic segments. In fact, deciding to abandon progressives while embracing and growing the low income member ranks, albeit in ethnic neutral fashion. Why then this seemingly radical change from embracing “all” (ethic and economic) segments to only “some” (ethnic only) in an organization notorious for being change averse?
While the global Catholic Church increasingly recruits in third world nations, and those numbers swell, it abandons many in its progressive thinking middle and upper income class segments. Specifically in Europe and the United States. In fact, European membership, in quite counter-intuitive fashion, has been in serious decline for several decades. Interestingly, the growing religion is Islam, exploding with the influx of Middle Eastern immigrants over the last two decades. Consider France for example, a perceived bastion of Catholicism, has 5 to 6 million Muslims. It is estimated that within 25 years at current birth rates, that France will have a Muslim majority.
Unlike France, the equivalent U.S. decline in the traditional progressive demographic group is being offset with an even greater bulge of new members, as noted earlier, from massive Latin American immigration.
The resultant aggregate Catholic Church global member expansion therefore masks the accelerating erosion of that traditional middle/upper income progressive base, caused by the Church’s reactive abandonment from its very own fate accompli conclusion - that the progressives are already lost. Why? Because the church refuses to change.
John Paul II, viewed “aesthetically” as a model, almost mannequin like Pope, will never be known as the “Pope of Diversity”, but instead better remembered as the “Pope of Growth”. One need only look to his unflinching (church) conservatism and global travels to see why. His travels earning him the title of “Pilgrim Pope”. In the face of radical social change, he sought to maintain the conservative status quo, causing an ever widening gap between the church and the progressives. Too, he was the most traveled pope in history, yet with a disproportionate emphasis on third world nations. In retrospect, an agenda beyond being seen and adored. One with specific and key member growth purpose and intentions. Akin to a politician campaigning in a state before a primary. The purpose – woo voters. In his case, woo members. Certainly he traveled to developed nations but in retrospect one can argue those were (progressives) “erosion control” visits; not to stem it but rather to slow it. Not unlike one of the 2 purposes behind Benedict’s current visit to the U.S.
Why this apparent “abandon and grow elsewhere” strategy?
The answer is easy if looking upon the Catholic Church as a business and viewing it’s behaviors in corporate terms. The sea change in societal culture and value systems post World War II, led by the renaissance change in thinking baby boom generation progressives, did not go unnoticed by the Vatican hierarchy “Board”. Constituents began to do the unthinkable and necessary - challenge church doctrine and tolerance in such areas as abortion, priest marriage/homosexuality/pedophilia, women priests, and even papal infallibility to name but a “very few”.
