Speaking as a priest and proud member of the Episcopal Church, the church I love, I can offer at least one critique. We are too cerebral. The article speaks a lot about justice, finance, formation and more, but where is spirituality? It would help the mainline churches to be more spiritual, more experiential in their engagement with the Divine. For instance, justice issues are critically important to Christians and churches, but if it isn’t grounded in the people having firsthand encounters with God, soul work, transcendence, then we’re just another social service agency.
One thing I shout to my denomination’s seminaries in fantasy conversations is, “Are you kidding me? The world is at this point entirely ignorant about Christianity, and you, a building full of experts on it, can’t figure out what to do with yourselves?”
It seems that this data pairs well in an inverse relationship to steeply inclining cultural acceptance of LGBTQ+ and same sex marriage. The other grand shift in the US since 1987 is the huge increase of religious diversity in the US. The West is throwing off Biblical authority in exchange for Hollywood authority.
Christians who left the church haven’t necessarily joined other religions, but they were unprepared to defend the exclusivity of Jesus Christ in relationship to other faiths. They left the narrow path due to embarrassment of the resurrected Christ. They rejected Jesus as truth, in exchange for a philosophy of “my truth” and “your truth”, ultimately even accepting a “truth” in which a man might be a woman in spite of the truth of biological facts.
Protestants could always abandon heresy and return to the Holy Roman Catholic Church founded on St. Peter by Jesus Christ (Mt. 16:18). Just sayin’ …
The Catholic Church is the first, the largest, and longest-lived Christian organization. It predates Protestantism by +1,500 years, and any truth one may find in Protestantism was inherited directly from the Catholic Church.
Maybe it’s time, like the Prodigal Son, to come home. Come home to Rome.
A church that looks the other way when its priests sexually abuse children and thinks it’s moral to allow a woman to die from a miscarriage? No thank you.
Your concerns are serious and deserve to be addressed with both honesty and clarity.
First, regarding the grievous sins of certain clergy: the Catholic Church does not “look the other way.” In fact, in recent decades, the Church has taken the lead among all major institutions in confronting, addressing, and preventing abuse. While past failures to act appropriately did occur — as they have tragically occurred in every major institution, secular and religious — it is false to suggest that the Catholic Church, as such, condones or ignores abuse. Rather, it teaches, unequivocally, that such sins cry out to Heaven for justice, and demands both repentance and accountability for the perpetrators. Justice must be done because the Church, being divine in her founding but human in her members, must continually purify herself in fidelity to Christ.
Second, regarding the accusation about allowing women to die from miscarriages: the Catholic Church upholds the dignity and sanctity of both the mother and the child. Catholic moral theology permits medical interventions necessary to save the life of the mother, even when, tragically, such interventions may indirectly result in the loss of the unborn child. What the Church forbids is the direct, intentional killing of the innocent. To frame Catholic teaching as if it demands the death of women is a misunderstanding, or a misrepresentation, of her actual doctrine.
The Catholic Church, in her unwavering defense of all human life — mother and child — acts not from cruelty, but from a profound reverence for the image of God in every human being. Her moral consistency is not an obstacle to love; it is the very expression of it.
I would gently invite you to seek out authentic sources for understanding Catholic teaching, rather than relying on distortions. Truth and charity are always united.
May God, who is Truth and Love, guide us all ever more deeply into the fullness of both.
Thank you for a serious answer to a somewhat snarky comment. I’m glad the Catholic church has been taking sexual abuse more seriously than it did for many decades. I still hear stories about women with, for example, premature rupture of membranes prior to fetal viability, when Catholic hospitals refuse to intervene if a heartbeat can be detected despite the danger to the woman of developing sepsis. Catholics and evangelicals have pushed these extreme types of risks into law in many states, endangering women to prolong the life of fetuses who will not survive. It’s cruel and dangerous for women and their families.
Rebecca, thank you for sharing the genuine anguish behind your words.
I grieve alongside you at the thought of any woman endangered by fear of inadequate care.
The Catholic Health System remains unwavering in its commitment to both mother and child.
When membranes rupture before fetal viability, clinicians administer antibiotics, steroids, and all morally permissible interventions to halt infection and preserve life.
If delivery becomes the only means to save the mother, they allow the natural course rather than intend any direct termination.
This approach rests on the principle of double effect — never willing the death of the innocent, even as we treat a grave threat (see Ethical and Religious Directives §§50–52).
No hospital under Catholic oversight withholds necessary care; it seeks always to heal without contravening moral truth.
I invite you to review these directives yourself, trusting that the same compassion and clarity guiding clinicians in crisis informs every action of the Church.
May the mercy and fullness of truth entrusted to the Church founded by Christ on Peter draw you into firmer trust. In charity, I conclude our dialogue here. God bless you.
You’re right to note that our Eastern Orthodox brethren make a similar claim — and indeed, they do so with great seriousness, rooted in ancient apostolic tradition. As Catholics, we honor and respect the Eastern Churches for preserving valid sacraments, apostolic succession, and much of the liturgical and theological patrimony of the undivided Church.
However, from the perspective of the Catholic Church — as defined by the First and Second Vatican Councils, and reaffirmed in documents such as Lumen Gentium — full ecclesial communion subsists in the Catholic Church alone, due to the divinely instituted office of the papacy. Christ said to Peter, “You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church… I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven” (Mt. 16:18–19). This Petrine primacy is not merely honorary, but juridical and doctrinal — intended by Christ Himself to be a visible and perpetual principle of unity (Lumen Gentium, §18).
The Eastern Orthodox Churches, while apostolic and venerable, have been in schism since the 11th century, chiefly over the authority of the Bishop of Rome. Thus, the essential question is not one of antiquity or beauty of tradition — both the Catholic and Orthodox Churches possess those in abundance — but of the divinely willed structure of unity. Christ established one Church, not a loose federation. That Church is visible, hierarchical, and united through communion with Peter’s successor.
So, to answer your question directly: The Holy Roman Catholic Church is right, not because we claim superiority, but because she alone retains the fullness of the faith, the universal magisterium, and the visible headship entrusted by Christ to Peter. In that sense, returning to the Church in communion with the successor of Peter is not merely coming “home” in a sentimental sense — it is a return to the visible center of unity willed by Christ Himself.
Brandon, you’ll first need to coherently and faithfully present the rebuttal to which you are referring if you wish me to address it. Simply stating that there is one and expecting me to know precisely the rebuttal to which you are referring is unreasonable.
I suspect my prior comment will suffice as an answer to this further inquiry, but please provide the argument you’d like me to address, and, in charity and truth, I will oblige.
“… church-related organizations must grapple with how to remain relevant and effective in the face of declining membership.” Church-related organizations have NOT been relevant and effective. That is the reason they are declining precipitously.
Absolutely. It's like having a buggy-whip factory with tons of cash. You could search for new markets for buggy whips or try to convert it to a semiconductor plant. Or you could shut it down, take the resources and create something new. Someone close to me is on the board of a well-endowed theological institution. From what I hear, these are difficult conversations.
Speaking as a priest and proud member of the Episcopal Church, the church I love, I can offer at least one critique. We are too cerebral. The article speaks a lot about justice, finance, formation and more, but where is spirituality? It would help the mainline churches to be more spiritual, more experiential in their engagement with the Divine. For instance, justice issues are critically important to Christians and churches, but if it isn’t grounded in the people having firsthand encounters with God, soul work, transcendence, then we’re just another social service agency.
Thank you for your thoughts. I’d largely agree. You might look at some of my other posts.
One thing I shout to my denomination’s seminaries in fantasy conversations is, “Are you kidding me? The world is at this point entirely ignorant about Christianity, and you, a building full of experts on it, can’t figure out what to do with yourselves?”
The purpose of the church is to make disciples of Jesus Christ. When it gets away from that, God gives it up (Romans 1).
It seems that this data pairs well in an inverse relationship to steeply inclining cultural acceptance of LGBTQ+ and same sex marriage. The other grand shift in the US since 1987 is the huge increase of religious diversity in the US. The West is throwing off Biblical authority in exchange for Hollywood authority.
Christians who left the church haven’t necessarily joined other religions, but they were unprepared to defend the exclusivity of Jesus Christ in relationship to other faiths. They left the narrow path due to embarrassment of the resurrected Christ. They rejected Jesus as truth, in exchange for a philosophy of “my truth” and “your truth”, ultimately even accepting a “truth” in which a man might be a woman in spite of the truth of biological facts.
I suspect that what we think the church is and what God thinks the church is are not the same.
Protestants could always abandon heresy and return to the Holy Roman Catholic Church founded on St. Peter by Jesus Christ (Mt. 16:18). Just sayin’ …
The Catholic Church is the first, the largest, and longest-lived Christian organization. It predates Protestantism by +1,500 years, and any truth one may find in Protestantism was inherited directly from the Catholic Church.
Maybe it’s time, like the Prodigal Son, to come home. Come home to Rome.
A church that looks the other way when its priests sexually abuse children and thinks it’s moral to allow a woman to die from a miscarriage? No thank you.
Your concerns are serious and deserve to be addressed with both honesty and clarity.
First, regarding the grievous sins of certain clergy: the Catholic Church does not “look the other way.” In fact, in recent decades, the Church has taken the lead among all major institutions in confronting, addressing, and preventing abuse. While past failures to act appropriately did occur — as they have tragically occurred in every major institution, secular and religious — it is false to suggest that the Catholic Church, as such, condones or ignores abuse. Rather, it teaches, unequivocally, that such sins cry out to Heaven for justice, and demands both repentance and accountability for the perpetrators. Justice must be done because the Church, being divine in her founding but human in her members, must continually purify herself in fidelity to Christ.
Second, regarding the accusation about allowing women to die from miscarriages: the Catholic Church upholds the dignity and sanctity of both the mother and the child. Catholic moral theology permits medical interventions necessary to save the life of the mother, even when, tragically, such interventions may indirectly result in the loss of the unborn child. What the Church forbids is the direct, intentional killing of the innocent. To frame Catholic teaching as if it demands the death of women is a misunderstanding, or a misrepresentation, of her actual doctrine.
The Catholic Church, in her unwavering defense of all human life — mother and child — acts not from cruelty, but from a profound reverence for the image of God in every human being. Her moral consistency is not an obstacle to love; it is the very expression of it.
I would gently invite you to seek out authentic sources for understanding Catholic teaching, rather than relying on distortions. Truth and charity are always united.
May God, who is Truth and Love, guide us all ever more deeply into the fullness of both.
Thank you for a serious answer to a somewhat snarky comment. I’m glad the Catholic church has been taking sexual abuse more seriously than it did for many decades. I still hear stories about women with, for example, premature rupture of membranes prior to fetal viability, when Catholic hospitals refuse to intervene if a heartbeat can be detected despite the danger to the woman of developing sepsis. Catholics and evangelicals have pushed these extreme types of risks into law in many states, endangering women to prolong the life of fetuses who will not survive. It’s cruel and dangerous for women and their families.
Rebecca, thank you for sharing the genuine anguish behind your words.
I grieve alongside you at the thought of any woman endangered by fear of inadequate care.
The Catholic Health System remains unwavering in its commitment to both mother and child.
When membranes rupture before fetal viability, clinicians administer antibiotics, steroids, and all morally permissible interventions to halt infection and preserve life.
If delivery becomes the only means to save the mother, they allow the natural course rather than intend any direct termination.
This approach rests on the principle of double effect — never willing the death of the innocent, even as we treat a grave threat (see Ethical and Religious Directives §§50–52).
No hospital under Catholic oversight withholds necessary care; it seeks always to heal without contravening moral truth.
I invite you to review these directives yourself, trusting that the same compassion and clarity guiding clinicians in crisis informs every action of the Church.
May the mercy and fullness of truth entrusted to the Church founded by Christ on Peter draw you into firmer trust. In charity, I conclude our dialogue here. God bless you.
Eastern Orthodox say the same thing about themselves. So who’s right?
You’re right to note that our Eastern Orthodox brethren make a similar claim — and indeed, they do so with great seriousness, rooted in ancient apostolic tradition. As Catholics, we honor and respect the Eastern Churches for preserving valid sacraments, apostolic succession, and much of the liturgical and theological patrimony of the undivided Church.
However, from the perspective of the Catholic Church — as defined by the First and Second Vatican Councils, and reaffirmed in documents such as Lumen Gentium — full ecclesial communion subsists in the Catholic Church alone, due to the divinely instituted office of the papacy. Christ said to Peter, “You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church… I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven” (Mt. 16:18–19). This Petrine primacy is not merely honorary, but juridical and doctrinal — intended by Christ Himself to be a visible and perpetual principle of unity (Lumen Gentium, §18).
The Eastern Orthodox Churches, while apostolic and venerable, have been in schism since the 11th century, chiefly over the authority of the Bishop of Rome. Thus, the essential question is not one of antiquity or beauty of tradition — both the Catholic and Orthodox Churches possess those in abundance — but of the divinely willed structure of unity. Christ established one Church, not a loose federation. That Church is visible, hierarchical, and united through communion with Peter’s successor.
So, to answer your question directly: The Holy Roman Catholic Church is right, not because we claim superiority, but because she alone retains the fullness of the faith, the universal magisterium, and the visible headship entrusted by Christ to Peter. In that sense, returning to the Church in communion with the successor of Peter is not merely coming “home” in a sentimental sense — it is a return to the visible center of unity willed by Christ Himself.
EO’s have a similar-length rebuttal to why they are the true church. So who’s right?
Brandon, you’ll first need to coherently and faithfully present the rebuttal to which you are referring if you wish me to address it. Simply stating that there is one and expecting me to know precisely the rebuttal to which you are referring is unreasonable.
I suspect my prior comment will suffice as an answer to this further inquiry, but please provide the argument you’d like me to address, and, in charity and truth, I will oblige.
“… church-related organizations must grapple with how to remain relevant and effective in the face of declining membership.” Church-related organizations have NOT been relevant and effective. That is the reason they are declining precipitously.
I'm surprised no one has stated the obvious. Some of them should close.
Some may, but my point is that many have financial endowments that will allow them to stay open long into the future.
Absolutely. It's like having a buggy-whip factory with tons of cash. You could search for new markets for buggy whips or try to convert it to a semiconductor plant. Or you could shut it down, take the resources and create something new. Someone close to me is on the board of a well-endowed theological institution. From what I hear, these are difficult conversations.
All because these denominations have departed from God’s word and embraced the world.