No Difference In Church Attendence Based on Worship Style - LCMS Data
  • jclangfo
    Posts: 148
    The American Enterprise Institute published an important sutdy on religiosity in America. One key finding may be of interest to this group:

    "Attendance at highly liturgical churches has declined by precisely the same amount as among other LCMS churches. There is no difference whatsoever in the pace of congregational decline based on liturgical style. This strongly suggests that other studies finding a positive effect of worship style were in fact accidentally measuring something else. Stetzer and Dodson’s book actually noted that comeback churches often had a change in leadership and an intensive period of discernment and reflection. It is possible that this process itself drove growth. Academic research has found that churches with greater member commitments in terms of financial giving, volunteering, and attendance at extra activities during the week tend to grow much faster. Put plainly, churches grow when their members are deeply committed to them, not simply because they have a contemporary musical style."


    https://www.aei.org/research-products/report/promise-and-peril-the-history-of-american-religiosity-and-its-recent-decline/
    Thanked by 1NihilNominis
  • I'm surprised that you included the last line.

    I don't know the American Enterprise Institute, but you've piqued my interest, so that when I get a chance I shall try to read the entire report.

  • NihilNominisNihilNominis
    Posts: 632
    I wish the Lutherans didn't divide it between "liturgical" and "contemporary".

    One nice thing about Catholic worship is that musical style doesn't tend to affect the centrality of the Eucharistic liturgy to the Sunday assembly. In LCMS circles, the cues taken from contemporvant low church evangelicals are not onlyvmusical, but pertain to the order of worship.
    Thanked by 1CCooze
  • jclangfo
    Posts: 148
    So, I think that worship style has an impact on church attendance, but not in the ham-handed Field-of-Dreams "People will flock to the Traditional Latin Mass once we offer it" or "The youth will come back once we have a praise band" way. This never works, outside of the case where you're the only parish in a geographic area offering a niche product and you corner a niche market.

    I've seen this play out a number of times now, and parish improvement strategies that change worship style as a single variable while keeping everything else the same see no or negative change in attendance. Hence the line from the study stating "This strongly suggests that other studies finding a positive effect of worship style were in fact accidentally measuring something else" stood out to me.

    I think that worship style plays a more subtle role in parish revitalization. I think that the worship style is an important part of the culture of a parish, and that parishes that successfully revitalize build a culture around their worship style. I've seen parishes with thriving cultures centered around multiple worship styles, so I don't beleive that the particular style of worship is the driving factor. On the other hand, there do exists styles of worship that it would be nearly impossible to be successful with (What Bishop Barron calls "beige Catholicism"), I just think that there is a much broader spectrum of functional worship styles than is commonly recognized on this message board.
    Thanked by 2MarkB GregoryWeber
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 2,713
    Unfortunately, I think, in Catholic churches, at least, the BIG driver with church attendance is the personality of the celebrant. I live in a rural-ish area populated by obsolete and crumbling mills. We have too many churches for the number of people (which has dropped off remarkably everywhere since COViD--people are NOT coming back--anywhere), and there have been retirements and new appointments, so even though technically people are supposed to go to their territorial parish, everyone church shops to find the priest they like.

    The "worship styles" (a phrase I detest with every fibre of my being) of the parishes here range from the (and I'm not making this up) contemporary parish with its 'Youth Band' made up of 90-year-old women with walkers, to the average Gather Comprehensive 'Beige' things, to the Choral and Floral where I am : by-in-large people couldn't care less whether the choir sings Palestrina or Peter, Paul, & Mary; if it looks like a traditional church or a warehouse--if they like the personality of the priest they will stay, if he leaves, so will they.

    I could say that I blame the versus populum Novus Ordo and its focus on the priest and his ego, but I won't.
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 2,503
    I find most of this research paper interesting, but for anyone wanting to focus on worship style note that is just pp 48-51.
    Thanked by 1Chrism
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,003
    since COViD--people are NOT coming back--anywhere)


    Based on what I saw Sunday at my parish, that is not true. Of course, that was at one Mass, mid-morning; but I've been at that Mass a few times during The Panic and there were definitely more people there this time.

    This Sunday was the first on which our Archdiocese (apparently) dropped all its panic protocols. We even had holy water in the fonts!!
    Thanked by 2tomjaw GregoryWeber
  • Dad29,

    There are places where the damage is already too serious because the situation was too dire before the obligation was lifted. There are others (my parish, for example) which is growing and (contrary to what this particular study claims) people are drawn by tradition: worship of God, faith expressed concretely outside of Mass, and other factors, too.
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,269
    " . . . so even though technically people are supposed to go to their territorial parish,"

    Well, the 1983 Code of Canon Law eliminated that as an obligation; people are free to go where they will to worship, though their territorial parish remains their canonical domicile, which is relevant in certain situations.
    Thanked by 1GregoryWeber
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 2,713
    This weekend's Masses were the first without some of the protocols, it was announced the previous week that it would be happening. There were markedly fewer people, and many of those who did come were upset because there wasn't duct tape blocking off every other pew and that some people weren't wearing masks. And this is a fairly "conservative" parish. This is Western MA, by the way: the church-going population (of any denomination) is primarily 65 and over.
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,003
    Salieri, it is the considered opinion of all Flyover Country people that there are NO 'conservatives' in Massachusetts, period. You might want to re-assess your assessment.
    Thanked by 1NihilNominis
  • MarkB
    Posts: 506
    That study is probably obsolete because COVID upended and disrupted everything.

    Did a year-long dispensation from Mass attendance kill the habit of going to Mass that marginal Catholics who still bothered to attend Mass weekly still had? Probably.

    Will it be hard to get those marginal Catholics to return to weekly attendance or even monthly attendance? Probably.

    Will COVID end up having accelerated the trending decline in Mass attendance that Catholic parishes were already experiencing? Probably.

    It's going to be lean for years at parishes for social-demographic reasons and for COVID-related reasons.

    The parishes that thrive and survive in this climate may be able to offer lessons to other parishes about how to succeed in retaining and attracting parishioners. I believe the quality of the pastor and the quality of the music play important roles because people who are serious about Catholic faith will be drawn to parishes where the liturgy is celebrated worthily and beautifully.
    Thanked by 1irishtenor
  • rich_enough
    Posts: 837
    I've seen parishes with thriving cultures centered around multiple worship styles, so I don't believe that the particular style of worship is the driving factor.

    It's probably safe to say that most everyone on the Forum has seen the same thing, which begs the question which culture you want to build. If the music is mostly about the religious experience of the individuals in the worshipping community (for example), then that is the kind of culture you will be building.
    I just think that there is a much broader spectrum of functional worship styles than is commonly recognized on this message board.

    You'll notice that in her documents the Church never speaks of music "styles," let alone their functionality. It does, however, speak of music that is integral and proper to the liturgy.

    If there is a "function" at all, it's best summed up in the well-known phrase from Sacrosanctum Concilium, to "add delight to prayer, foster unity of minds, or confer greater solemnity upon the sacred rites." And it has also laid out which music best serves these ends (insofar as music can be "instrumentalized" in this way).
  • Rich,

    I don't think of it as instrumentalization. The Church tells us which is organically connected (and therefore naturally disposed to be fitting accompaniment) to the prayers and actions of the Sacred Liturgy.

    Thanked by 2rich_enough eft94530
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,269
    " it is the considered opinion of all Flyover Country people that there are NO 'conservatives' in Massachusetts, period."

    Which shows that Flyover Country People can be just as ignorant as Coastal Elites Country People.

    Because humans.
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 746
    I find myself rather skeptical of applying the insights of this study to Catholicism. The Lutheran churches are splintering apart and while they definitely have their liturgy wars too, I don't necessarily believe that you can compare it 1:1 with the liturgy wars within Catholicism.

    I've seen with my own eyes the traditional parishes (and individual TLM's) that are bursting at the seams—sometimes in stark contrast to the same church's normal N.O. attendance. Where TLM's are, young people abound.

    And while there is a general correlation between traditional liturgy and traditional theology in other denominations, it is not a hard and fast rule. There are many anglicans who love traditional liturgies but have all sorts of other weirdness behind the scenes, whereas with Catholicism this is rarely the case. You know exactly what to expect when you attend a TLM.

    What is perhaps most prescient is the phrase that jclangfo touched on:
    Put plainly, churches grow when their members are deeply committed to them, not simply because they have a contemporary musical style."


    This is indeed—apart from Tradition—part of the reason for the success of traditional parishes. People take it seriously, and they act like it, and like attracts like.
  • pfreese
    Posts: 84
    “I've seen with my own eyes the traditional parishes (and individual TLM's) that are bursting at the seams—sometimes in stark contrast to the same church's normal N.O. attendance. Where TLM's are, young people abound. “

    Not just the EF, there’s plenty of draw to an OF parish that do their masses with the due reverence and solemn beauty that the Council exhorts. One such nearby OF parish is “bursting at the seems” to the point that until last week (when all remaining Covid capacity restrictions in our archdiocese were relaxed) they still required signups for confessions and Sunday masses due to so much demand, when most parishes abandoned that regimen last summer. There are several other legacy OF parishes around with similar stories. This, in a metro area with a half dozen parishes that offer at least one EF mass every Sunday.

    “People take it seriously, and they act like it, and like attracts like”

    Ditto
    Thanked by 2MarkB marymezzo
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,000
    Taking liturgy seriously is always a good thing. However, attendance figures are not always as accurate as some would wish. You may have a once per week TLM that has, for example, 200 people in attendance. That may be the largest individual mass at that church. What doesn't seem to be mentioned is that the 4 or 5 NO masses held each week have a few hundred more in attendance when added together. It is possible to have a TLM mass with large attendance that is dwarfed by the total attending other masses. Reporting figures is fairly easy. I would like to see some of those figures mentioned above when kept in perspective.
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,003
    Which shows that Flyover Country People can be just as ignorant as Coastal Elites Country People.


    No. It demonstrates beyond doubt that pixels do not relay flippant humor at all.
  • bhcordovabhcordova
    Posts: 941
    We have 6 or 7 people who go to our EF Saturday morning Mass, which is similar to the numbers that go to daily Mass. We have gotten back to our pre-covid numbers who come to Mass on Sunday and the Sunday Vigil (about 300 people at one Mass and about 500 at the other).
  • KARU27
    Posts: 139
    Jclangfo mentioned cornering a "niche product in a market".
    Well that's exactly what most EF (or reverent OF ) parishes do.
    Thanked by 1bhcordova
  • Karu,

    The Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite is hardly a "niche market" product. Only those who live at the tip of a spear call the shaft of the spear a "niche".
  • KARU27
    Posts: 139
    Well, I think most Catholics in the post-Vatican II world would see the EF Mass as a niche market product, considering that not all dioceses have even one EF Mass available.
    I realize that discussing the liturgy in these business marketing terms is disrespectful and lacks dignity.
    Thanked by 3CharlesW MarkB SarahJ
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,000
    I don't find questioning the manipulation of numbers disrespectful. It happens every day in every field and endeavor. If you have 15 NO parishes in a city and one TLM in one parish on any given Sunday, then it does clearly appear to be a niche market. That's the way the numbers pan out.
    Thanked by 1KARU27
  • Karu,

    That most Catholics in the Post-Vatican II world would see the EF Mass as a niche market product, marketing vocabulary and all, tells us a great deal about the state of the Church at this point in time.

    Charles,

    I object to the manipulation of numbers, [parenthetical comment] so I understand and agree with your point that manipulation is bad. I've never been a fan of the argument "numbers don't lie".

    On the other hand, if we put actual context on those numbers, authentic and true, the following picture emerges:

    "Inspite of the dreadful, unCatholic behavior of many bishops and execrable catechesis for at least two generations, to say nothing of the example of Catholics in public life who claim to be Catholic but aren't, and a toxic culture in the country as a whole, slightly less than a quarter of all Catholics attend Mass regularly in the United States of America, or did before they were prevented, and then encouraged not to attend, and told other things were more important than the destination of their own immortal soul and growing in the life of virtue."

    "An orchestrated campaign of stigmatization notwithstanding, more and more Catholics of all ages are turning to a form of worship which doesn't focus on them."
    Thanked by 1dad29
  • MarkB
    Posts: 506
    It's not manipulation of numbers. The TLM attracts about 2% of Catholics who attend Mass on any given Sunday.
    Thanked by 1CharlesW
  • Mark,

    If those two percent of Catholics are driving every week an hour each way, and are in other ways going out of their way to be faithful Catholics, this tells us more than merely the 2% number.

    Considering how hard various bishops for multiple decades have worked to blot out the Traditional form, and stigmatize it, and (flat out) lie about it, the 2% number is impressive. Speaking only from personal experience, when I began attending the traditional form family openly worried that I was leaving the Church. This didn't happen out of malice, merely ignorance.
    Thanked by 1sdtalley3
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,000
    Some of the TLM folks are downright paranoid and think everyone is out to get them. My experience is that most Sunday morning Catholics don't care about them one way or another. The Traditional folks are still a very small minority in comparison to the larger group of NO Catholics. They need more Zen. If you look for enemies hard enough, you will always find them.
  • Some of the TLM folks ...


    This comment can be made of nearly any group, surely?
    Thanked by 1CCooze
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,000
    Some seem more suspicious and fearful than others. You can also create enemies where none existed.
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 7,917
    When I was growing up everyone just knew what was meant by 'good music' - even if they didn't listen to it or understand it they respected it and those who performed it and respected the cultural role it played in society and civilisation. Ditto 'church music' - everyone just knew what was and wasn't church music, what belonged in church and what didn't. Likewise, a church musician (at least in Catholic or Episcopal churches - and maybe Lutheran churches) would not be approached about music which stylistically referenced patently secular genres.

    Now, in this Age of Relativism 'good music' isn't an objective category but is whatever any one likes, and church music, likewise, is not an objective category but is whatever appeals to the given tastes of this or that favoured group. There are no, absolutely no, genres of music that are thought to be 'sacred' at the expense of others which a given speaker may prefer for purely personal tastes - without so much as a nod towards historically rooted 'church music'.

    When I was growing up some people were even slightly embarrassed to admit that they didn't listen to Beethoven and would never have admitted out loud that he or she didn't like Beethoven at all. Not so these days - those who don't like 'good music' are quite defiant about their lack of appreciation of the same, yea, even boastfully proud of it. We have had a French Revolution and a French Reign of Terror in the Church, and it's ugly marks will likely be with us for generations of unrepentant iconoclasts.

    Polls may indeed show that in this place or that place target group A or Z prefers this or that music, loved whatever it was that they learnt at summer camp, at university chapel, or such, but these polls will ever reflect the preferences only of those who took the poll - of the 'target' group. Anyone who takes a poll or is excited about what he or she taught group A or Z and drew the conclusion that their preferences were the ones which appealed to 'youth', 'children', 'people', and so on are suffering from a bad case of hubris and are standing on egg shells. Polls reveal only the likes and dislikes of those who participated in them - even if those who take them are thought to be a representative 'cross section' of a given stratum of society or church people.

    Indeed, we live in an age in which scads of priests and bishops presume, in defiance of the recent council, to forbid Latin and other musics of our heritage in their parishes and their entire dioceses. On the other hand, has anyone heard of priests and bishops who, in obedience to the recent council, required of their parishes and diocese that Latin and our musical heritage find a place in the liturgical life of said parishes and dioceses? And what does 'Rome' or 'the Vatican' say??? Nothing! Silence!

    This is not a pretty picture. It is a very sad picture. It is one that I wish were rosier and referenced a more sane or altruistic and less subjective state of affairs, but, sadly, it is the relativistic world we live in.

    Thanked by 2CharlesW CHGiffen
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 746
    It's not manipulation of numbers. The TLM attracts about 2% of Catholics who attend Mass on any given Sunday.


    And 2% of one billion is...

    a very consequential number, in the grand scheme of things.

    Perhaps "niche" relatively speaking, but ultimately not in broader context. It's also rather sad that something that was once the universal norm has been relegated to the fringes. That said, (and this is partly what I was getting at earlier) there is undeniable growth in the TLM. The last decade has seen an absolute explosion. Considering the rate of growth of TLM crowds and the (increasingly) rapid rate of decline of N.O. parishes, it is entirely possible that the statistical disparity between the two will become minimal to nonexistent in the next 20 years. This is of course assuming PF doesn't go through with making TLM's indult masses as some media have started to leak this past week.
  • bhcordovabhcordova
    Posts: 941
    Considering that EF went from being not allowed without permission to being allowed without needing permission only 14 years ago, basically any growth is an 'explosion'. Once the novelty wears off, I think we will see an ebb in the number of EF parishes and services.
    Thanked by 3Liam CharlesW MarkB
  • redsox1
    Posts: 201
    We should rejoice in the growth of the EF. We should also rejoice in the growth of quality choral programs at parishes that celebrate only the NO, as well as the amazing growth in the use of propers. Yes, there is truly wretched music and liturgy out there, and there always will be. Things are so much better than they were 25 years ago. The seeds that have been planted are bearing fruit. More and more people, particularly younger people, want what is authentic, and not some cheaply personalized substitute for the Mass.
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 746
    Once the novelty wears off, I think we will see an ebb in the number of EF parishes and services.


    14 years is a long honeymoon period. I don't think TLMs are going away anytime soon, even if PF tries to clamp down on them. The cat is out of the bag, especially for people under 30.

    I think that people will still continue to flock to them, and if they are administratively hampered, I suspect the SSPX will see even more attendees than they did during the pandemic when all the other churches shut down.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw dad29
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,000
    Who knows? The proponents of the TLM are often not above exaggerating its influence and reach. Yet, there is a market for it and I suspect you are correct that it will not go away. As to what Rome will or wont do regarding the TLM, who knows there as well. There are individuals with media careers based on fanning conspiracy theories to enhance their own fame and status. And fan them they do. You certainly can't believe all you hear from these folks.
  • To BHCordova's point:

    When our second child was born, we saw a 100% increase in the number of children we had, and when his little brother (next in line) was born, the increase was only 50% ... from three boys to two boys, but 50% growth is still substantial, even if the figure is misleading.

    To the point he glosses over: this form of the Mass had held pride of place in the Roman Church for centuries, so even though the Dominicans and Franciscans (and the Sarum rite) had their own privileges, the Roman Rite suffered a catastrophic loss in 1969, from which (if some persons had had their way) it would never have recovered. It did, however, recover, not because it changed its essence but because unjust prohibitions were removed and the media campaign began to collapse.

    "Novelty" is a funny word to use. People go to a TLM once out of curiosity.

    Bad music, and badly sung/played good music both have the capacity to repulse us, and there are (or were) parishes where the best music is still sung/played badly.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 746
    You certainly can't believe all you hear from these folks.

    There are well-regarded media outlets reporting that bishops who attended the meeting have relayed the information. Seems less a "conspiracy" than just hearing it from various talking heads on youtube. We shall see, indeed, but I won't be the faintest bit surprised if it does indeed come to pass. After all: the devil hates what is of God and nothing is more 'of God' than the Traditional Roman Rite (a.k.a. "the Mass of all ages")
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,000
    The "Mass of all Ages" is more hype than reality. The so called "Roman Rite" changed after Rome fell and the culture collapsed. It was again altered during the time of Charlemagne. Even the mass after Trent incorporated changes and practices in use for the last 300 or so years. We have had some changes in the eastern rites, too, but less dramatic and more minor. All things change over time.

    Current changes? Again, who knows? Persons with something to gain often interpret what they thought "bishops" said and then the bishops deny having said it. I would be interested in revisiting all this a year from now and looking at what, if anything, actually happened. If things actually do change, I wonder how some will cope with those changes and what adjustments they might make.
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 2,713
    The changes in the Roman Rite from the Carolingian period until 1570 were organic. And any additions between 1570 and 1954 were minor. 1955's re-writing of Holy Week was the first "expert" intervention, removing rites and ceremonies which existed since at least the 9th century.

    The Novus Ordo is the most drastic re-writing and reorganization of a liturgy in the Latin Church since Luther's service or the first Book of Common Prayer, and even they were less drastic. A new calendar, obliterating entire seasons; re-orientation of the sanctuary versus populum; a monstrous lectionary, defying the physical reality of the year; etc. And all of this because a bunch of pointy-headed "experts" wanted to re-create the first-century liturgical Utopia in their image.

    I am fairly certain that in ten years time the number of parishes in my diocese will shrink by half: We have no seminarians, and many of the active priests are nearing retirement; most parishioners are in the 65+ age-bracket. Meanwhile, the places in neighboring dioceses with the TLM are growing. To be honest, the only reason that I still attend the Novus Ordo is because I'm paid to.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,000
    I worked in the Novus Ordo for 20 years. I handled that by attempting to do the best music I could and follow the rubrics as closely as possible. If the NO was a bad situation, I made the most of it. I suspect a number of musicians would do the same if the EF were curtailed.

    The pastor of that parish for 38 years once said to me, "we are strong when we are persecuted. In good times, we become weak." He had a good point.

    As to whether of not the
    bunch of pointy-headed "experts" wanted to re-create the first-century liturgical Utopia in their image
    actually succeeded, I think they did not. I don't believe those experts had any real understanding of the liturgical state during the first century any more than they had at any other time. Their focus was, as we are seeing in other areas in our current time, more akin to social engineering than to liturgical practice. The liturgy was a tool to accomplish a social and political agenda.

    Whether organic or not, change is change whether good or bad.

    As for myself, I have retired and have left the liturgy wars behind. At my age, I would not likely go back to dealing with any of it. The head of the government agency where I worked for 25 years or so had a cartoon in his office. It depicted a little man crouched in a fetal position with the caption, "people are no damn good." I could go along with that sentiment at times, especially in terms of working with them, especially in a church setting.
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 2,713
    I don't care about the liturgy wars either: I do what I do, and make the best of the situation. But I do know what my preference is.

    On the other hand, if we could remove microphones from the clergy, that alone would be an improvement of epic proportion.
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,003
    There are people who drive 1 hour each way to an EF Mass, and there are people who drive 30 minutes each way to a well-celebrated OF Mass (my spouse and I among them.) Either Rite is fine.

    But then, this morning we drove 1 hour for a graduation Mass. We were subjected to a variety of musical noises: Nashville lite, Disney, and (failed) middle-school garage-band. Time off from Purgatory!
    Thanked by 2CharlesW tomjaw
  • CCoozeCCooze
    Posts: 1,063
    "The Traditional folks are still a very small minority in comparison to the larger group of NO Catholics."

    It will be very interesting, though, to see what sort of numbers there are of regular (as it is supposed to be, and probably shouldn't be part of the stats, otherwise) Sunday goers, as people are supposed to be returning to their pews, and letting go of their TV/computer screens.
    From most of the reports I have heard (you may still say "trads like to exaggerate"), EF parishes were the ones with regular, capacity attendance throughout the last year... so I doubt (though could be mistaken) the OF gets to boast the same consecutive attendance rates for the 2020-2021 liturgical year
    Thanked by 1eft94530
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,000
    Who knows since figures can be hard to come by. But again, a full TLM mass in one church in a region is small in comparison to multiple parishes in the region that don't do the TLM.
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,003
    One should look at all the numbers in context. Seems to me that a recent reliable annual survey showed that US Catholic 'regular attendees' is a rapidly-diminishing number overall. Thus, if "trads" merely tread water, they will not be a tiny share of the market in 5-10 years.
  • TCJ
    Posts: 741
    The fact that in many areas, people have to travel long distances to get to a TLM means that were there more ready access, numbers would go up considerably.

    Common things with TLMs:

    1. Worst part of town
    2. Building in disrepair (thank you diocese)
    3. Mass at 3:00 PM or 5:30 AM.
    4. In the most remote location in the diocese.

    And yet, it keeps growing.
  • MarkB
    Posts: 506
    It doesn't necessarily mean that. It means TLM attendance would be spread out more thinly over more locations and Mass times, and the legacy TLM parishes would see a drop in numbers.
    Thanked by 2CharlesW MarkS
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,000
    I think there may be a limit to the number of folks who find the TLM appealing. Even if all those attend the local TLM, what happens when the kids grow up? My experience with kids is they often do the opposite of what the parents would have desired.

    My objection to some of the broad claims about attendance and future projections is that nothing is really certain and anything can happen.
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,269
    "Common things with TLMs ..."

    How pervasively true is that now and where so?
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,000
    Common things with TLMs:

    1. Worst part of town
    2. Building in disrepair (thank you diocese)
    3. Mass at 3:00 PM or 5:30 AM.
    4. In the most remote location in the diocese.


    None of that is true in my area.
This discussion has been closed.
All Discussions