I Hate Latin discussion
  • kevinfkevinf
    Posts: 1,188
    Greetings confreres,

    Many of us have been beaten to death over the question of Latin usage in Sunday Novus Ordo liturgies in the US. I am asking you to reflect with me the causes of this response, the "reasonings" people give for such a response and how have you replied, if at all. I am preparing a paper concerning this subject. I,too have been pummeled with this statement and the thoughts that go with it. If you wish to reflect openly, reply to this post. If not, you may message me privately.
    Thanked by 1Steve Q
  • MarkB
    Posts: 1,039
    What has been said to me or about me:

    "This isn't the 1950s."
    "We're going backwards."
    "No other parish is doing this."
    "I don't understand Latin."
    "It's too difficult to sing."
    "There's no joy in the music."
    "That's against Vatican II."

    And to the pastor:
    "You're not going to be here forever, you know."

    I respond with the standard references to Sacrosanctum Concilium, the GIRM, and other documents that state unequivocally that Latin and chant should be given pride of place at Mass and that people should know how to sing and say parts of the Mass in Latin. I have a collection of articles and videos that explain Church teaching about liturgical music in ways that are easy for nonspecialists to understand. I also make sure that when we sing Latin or vernacular chant at Mass that it's sung well. I think a lot of people who say they don't like Latin or chant have that opinion in part because they haven't heard chant sung well. Sometimes I point out that our Masses now have higher average attendance and more younger, ardent Catholics attending, and I credit the more reverent music and celebration of Mass with being a draw for the younger, more ardently Catholic demographic.

    To some people's credit, they have acknowledged that I'm right about what the Church instructs and that the music is good in quality. But it doesn't change some people's minds. They just don't like it. It's a matter of personal preference for them, and they have a personal aversion to Latin and chant that they can't or won't get over. These are people who have been familiar with Mass being celebrated a certain way, with certain familiar music, and they don't want that to be any different.

    I think some Boomers just want a Catholic-themed Sunday social club. They want an entertaining, emotionally satisfying religious service that doesn't make strong demands on them nor challenge them, then they want to enjoy their coffee and donut social hour after Mass.
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 2,730
    We are told the devil and other fallen angels hate Latin. So removal of Latin keeps them happy...
  • TCJ
    Posts: 977
    I told one person that we use something special, set aside for God for Mass. Latin is that special language. Would he want to use a McDonald's coffee cup in place of a chalice?

    It worked with that one person. for many people, they'd probably be fine with the coffee cup.
  • There's so much gorgeous music in Latin, covering a large chunk of music throughout Church history, that it'd be a shame to not do it.

    (I realize that's not much of a substantive answer, but I've noticed it can redirect people's thoughts away from the language aspect and toward the musical aspect.)
    Thanked by 1LauraKaz
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,001
    I would strongly discourage musicians from arguing the point with parishioners, even - especially - if baited. If parishioners don't share your assumptions, your arguments will boomerang, and getting them to share your assumptions is more work than you may realize. (This is a general caution about arguing with parishioners, not specific to the issue of Latin in liturgy. Musicians playing lawyers is a temptation to resist, not embrace. Appeals to authority are not the silver bullet they are expected to be.)

    All that said, the Church's treasury of Latin texts and the chants and polyphony to which they were long set are part of the birthright heritage of all Roman Catholics, and to keep Roman Catholics estranged from them is to effectively deprive them of that birthright heritage. This statement has the virtues of being true and also scrambles the customary bullet points typically hurled in argument about the subject.
  • MarkB
    Posts: 1,039
    With respect to the above post, a director of music can't simply respond with, "Well, that's just your opinion."

    Some rationale has to be given for the music choices or changes, or else you will seem to be acting arbitrarily. You don't have to be lawyerly. A reply along the lines of, "I'm trying to be faithful to the Church's official instructions for music at Mass," is a good start and is an invitation to further discussion about the details. You can tell pretty quickly whether you're arguing over what ice cream flavor is best -- in which case you politely deflect and end the discussion -- or whether someone is genuinely interested in learning and is open to having his mind changed.
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,001
    "With respect to the above post, a director of music can't simply respond with, "Well, that's just your opinion.""

    I fully agree with that and my comment was not intended to suggest it as a good response, because it's not.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,706
    Did you all ever realize how much of our discussion on this forum rotates around the poor choices of music that are allowed in the liturgy? Is anything sacred? (Pun intended). It is amazing to me that such a profound and central reason we are employed is wraught with so much division and confusion.
    Thanked by 2MarkB tomjaw
  • kevinfkevinf
    Posts: 1,188
    Perhaps this says it quite well: A rather well known bishop said to me once that Roman Catholicism is the only Church that you can be fired for doing what it asks for you to do. Continue your responses.
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,001
    " . . . Roman Catholicism is the only Church that you can be fired for doing what it asks for you to do."

    It's a fairly common experience across institutions - because humans. Perhaps only in Catholicism have saints advised that our necessary death to self often comes at the hand of injustice by superiors in the Church? (I am wary of the cultivation of the kind of docility to such injustice, in the erstwhile name of the virtue of humility, that it allows abuse of others and coverups of such abuse by people given authority in the Church.)
    Thanked by 2tomjaw ServiamScores
  • emac3183
    Posts: 35
    Today, I was informed that "The Pope banned the use of Latin in a letter to bishops." I'm assuming this is a misreading of his motu proprio, but I'm not sure where this came from.
    I just said: Vatican II told me that the "use of Latin is to be retained," and so I'll continue to use it until I know for sure I'm being directed by the Church in another direction (please God I hope to never see that day!).
    Thanked by 2tomjaw ServiamScores
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,409
    emac3183 - I would ask 'which Pope, when, can you show me the letter'
    And I might look for a recent papal liturgy and show them, for example Midnight Mass a month ago, the booklet is downloadable here :- https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/events/event.dir.html/content/vaticanevents/en/2023/12/24/messa-natale.html
    Not only is almost all the music Gregorian chant, but the assembly/congregation is expected to sing it in Latin.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw ServiamScores
  • jcr
    Posts: 132
    Discussions about what music we should play and sing at worship tend very strongly toward an argument about "what I like vs. what you like" and are doomed to a very desolate brand of fruitlessness. There is good, well conceived music and there is trash. There is also long-standing tradition that has its roots in antiquity and that is a worthy accompaniment for an ancient and long-standing liturgical faith. Thomas Day, in his "Why Catholics Can't Sing" made a point that seems to be frequently lost in the discussions of what are really minutia and that are off the issue. That was that much of the popularly conceived music written for the church is so incompatible with the ancient tradition as to make the contrast unbearable for those with any artistic bent at all. Can the average American educated in the government schools understand this? They might sense it. If they do, however, it often suggests "out with the old and in with the new". Should the music of the worship of God be different from the music of the rest of the world? Or, should the worship of God adopt the styles and the manner and the artistic intent of the ancient tradition? It's hard to get anyone to sit long enough to listen to this. This is especially true for the parishioner who just wants music that appeals more to his feet than to any other part of him. I'm glad that I have reached the stage of life where this issue doesn't arise very often. On the other hand, I get quite agitated over some of the stuff I hear. God bless you all as you carry the struggle ahead into this century. There are some people who will hear and understand and other who won't. There I go sounding like a Calvinist. Some will hear and understand. God bless them, too.
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,409
    There is good, well conceived music and there is trash.
    But not all good well conceived music is suitable for Mass. Even when it uses all the correct texts, Mozart, Beethoven for example, IMHO these are not in accord with ancient tradition
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,955
    It doesn't help that the church talks out of both sides of its mouth on the subject of music. Even when it does make a rule, there are usually so many exceptions the rule becomes meaningless. If the church would stop saying one thing while doing another it would help greatly in clearing up any confusion.
  • jcr
    Posts: 132
    Certainly not all good music is suitable for Mass. That was not anything like what I was driving at. However, the tradition is to bring the spotless lamb as our offering and I think that should be instructive to us. Unfortunately, the church does speak in contradictory terms about music. Even more unfortunately, she also speaks in the same way about too many other things. We still have the commandments and the law which Jesus told us would never pass away. Too many stop reading in those much loved passages of the "Sermon on the Mount" too soon! We still have the musical tradition of the church and it offers us much in music that is suitable. There is also more modern music that is also suitable. I've never been a proponent the "it must be old to be good" or any other such nonsense. The MD needs to have the capacity to make good musical judgments. Some do/some don't.
    Thanked by 3tomjaw MarkB LauraKaz
  • rich_enough
    Posts: 1,039
    I agree with Liam in that from what I've experienced, more often than not the opposition to Latin is not rational - it's a matter of personal and emotional investment.

    It doesn't matter that Vatican II called for it to be preserved, the pope celebrates Mass in Latin, etc.: Latin represents the "old way" which has been absolutely set aside. It's almost like a trauma response - what was seen as traditional was rejected, even though man of these things were held as sacrosanct - and the only reaction can be to hold desperately to what they have embraced no matter what.

    Of course, this really doesn't hold together in the final analysis - the setting aside of tradition was selective (Latin was despised but great attention was paid to clerical vestments; the pope's moral teaching was rejected but individual priests were seen as the final word on moral questions, etc.). But this is the only "rational" explanation I can come up with.

    So by the same token, no rational argument will move them on these issues. The question of Latin is particularly powerful in that it reaches into the symbolic and "pre-rational" space - it stands in for whatever was negative about what was left behind.
  • DavidOLGCDavidOLGC
    Posts: 80
    Our local parish may be small and not very financially well off, but use of Latin in our NO masses has never been a problem. As a matter of fact, the congregation has learned to sing a number of the pieces of the Ordinary in Latin.

    Thanked by 1ServiamScores
  • tandrews
    Posts: 163
    How to irritate a catholic: Begin any argument with "Well, Vatican documents say..."

    Related: It irks me when the local classical music station runs the tagline "What was old, was once new."
  • How to irritate a catholic: Begin any argument with "Well, Vatican documents say..."


    This is correct. I'm at a middle-of-the-road parish, so we still do a chunk of the '70s and '80s old favorites, but we've introduced chant antiphons (in English), as well as choir anthems in Latin, and they've mostly been well received.

    When it comes to Latin stuff, I can cite chapter and verse (and actually did in print on our Lenten worship aid with the Mass parts in Latin), but I almost never do with people coming up to complain, because they don't care.

    Honestly, I generally give the answer I gave above, and I'm always enthusiastic about what we're doing. (I also often make the point about how we should do more church music that is unmistakably church music.)

    It really does tend to disarm folks. They see I'm not trying to antagonize them, and that I really do love what I do.
  • jcr
    Posts: 132
    The deep seated objection is really not rational as has been ably pointed out by several above. It is an emotional thing. The same thing is true of the Gospel itself. Even though there re rational arguments, few are converted by them. A change of heart is required and that is the work of the Holy Spirit. Charity is an important Christian virtue and Prudence is the controlling virtue. In our dealings with people, love and prudential judgment are most important. I had a Baptist preacher friend who frequently said that everything happens in the arena of human relations. Building relationships may take us farther toward that change of heart that is our goal.
  • Latin is the universal language of the Church. As more and more parishes grow in diversity of languages, being able to sing in one common language unites us. There was a priest who was disappointed and felt like a failure at World Youth Day in Poland because there youth all started singing the traditional chant setting of Pater Noster, but his group couldn’t participate because they didn’t know it.
  • Sponsa, this reminds me of an anecdote. A friend of mine was in priestly formation, and Cardinal Müller visited the seminary and said Mass for the seminarians. He imparted the pontifical blessing in Latin at the end of Mass, which was met with silence from the seminarians who did now know the responses. Really quite embarrassing, especially in a place where clerics are being formed.
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 2,730
    @trentonjconn
    Roman Pontiffs do not commonly sign their Magisterial documents on the High Altar of S Peter's in the presence of the body of Cardinals. But S John XXIII thus promulgated his Apostolic Constitution Veterum sapientia, 1962, in which he insisted that the Latin language must remain central to the culture of Western Christianity. What on earth could the good old gentleman have done in order to make his point more emphatically?
    The rest is here, https://liturgicalnotes.blogspot.com/2020/05/variis-linguis-loquebantur-apostoli.html In an age where we are expected to obey every whim of the pope, is is good to have references of what other recent popes have demanded and they have been ignored.
    Thanked by 2trentonjconn WGS
  • MarkB
    Posts: 1,039
    I just received a critical email today. Gist of it: 69 year-old parishioner since 1997. Said he and his wife love Bob Hurd, Marty Haugen and Dan Schutte music because it inspired them and made them feel good when leaving church. They miss that music. Said that now the music seems like a dirge. And why the Latin? He was an altar boy before Vatican II and had to memorize the prayers at the foot of the altar in Latin, and he was happy to see Latin replaced with English after Vatican II. He said the Church is seeing declines in Mass attendance all over the country and maybe we should appeal to the young by not singing Latin and old music.

    In my email response, I thanked him for his thoughts about the music. I said the Church has principles for the music sung at Mass, which include that it be sacred and suitable, not sounding like songs on the radio or in Broadway theater. I said that Vatican II taught there was still a place for Latin at Mass and that Gregorian chant is the preferred music for Mass. I acknowledged that in the decades after VII parishes didn't implement the liturgical reforms well, but that's being corrected slowly, although not everywhere. I said our parish has seen growth in Mass attendance of 20% over the past year, with more younger people and young families, reversing a two-decade long steady decline for the first time, and I attributed that to the more reverent celebrations of Mass, which include the sacred character of the music now, because younger, ardent Catholics actually like Latin and chant at Mass since they evoke transcendence and prayerfulness.

    I offered links to videos and an article for more information.

    He replied, thanking me for my complete response and for the links. He said that he's disappointed to learn what he did, and that he will be parish shopping.

    I'm going to leave it at that.
  • : 69 year-old parishioner since 1997. Said he and his wife love Bob Hurd, Marty Haugen and Dan Schutte music because it inspired them and made them feel good when leaving church. They miss that music. Said that now the music seems like a dirge. And why the Latin? He was an altar boy before Vatican II and had to memorize the prayers at the foot of the altar in Latin, and he was happy to see Latin replaced with English after Vatican II. He said the Church is seeing declines in Mass attendance all over the country and maybe we should appeal to the young by not singing Latin and old music


    Man. This could be a boomer stock email. Ten points for any use of the term "dirge," bonus points if they remember Latin from their childhood and hate it.
  • ghmus7
    Posts: 1,473
    "My husband is a Methodist and does not understand Latin"
    Thanked by 2ServiamScores tomjaw
  • TCJ
    Posts: 977
    The idea that playing the favorite music of a 69-year-old is going to draw in young crowds is worthy of a good laugh.
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,001
    If he was born in 1954, he's among the last cohorts of the altar boys who learned to serve in Latin.
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 2,777
    I honestly think they just “don’t get it”. Perhaps it’s not their fault. But the end result is the same regardless.

    The young feel it in their bones.

    FWIW—I’ve been to mass in Portugal, Spain, France, and Austria. Any time they used common Gregorian ordinaries or the main Latin prayers, I could easily (and FULLY) participate. When they didn’t, I couldn’t.

    A former choir member of mine texted me from Rome two years ago when she went to mass and was happy that the ordinary was the same and that their whole family could sing it (from the square note notation) with ease.

    Turns out James isn’t such a nut case after all!
  • davido
    Posts: 895
    In fairness to the boomer generation, I think they lived through a difficult time to be a Catholic.
    In the midst of the changes, each of them had to find a reason to remain Catholic. Remember, the majority of their peers left the Church. Those faithful few that did stay had to embrace what they now thought was the face of the religion. And the pop style music was, for many of them, an integral aspect of the new Catholicism that they stayed faithful to, while all their peers left the Church.
    So now when young people are returning to the old ways and old music, they are faced with some uncomfortable realizations about what the Church hierarchy sold them in the 60s-90s.
  • I suppose it can very difficult to understand that there's a difference between the Church, and the Church. The Bishops, clergy, and faithful all over the world make up the Church in one sense of the word, but that doesn't mean they are always right. In the other sense of the word, we have the Church founded by Christ, which declares infallible dogmas through the Popes, and against which the gates of hell will never prevail. So when the Church (people) goes the against the Church (Peter), it seems like the Church is contradicting herself, and so many people are probably driven away by the apparent contradiction.
    Thanked by 1ServiamScores
  • francis
    Posts: 10,706
    @davido

    I can certainly relate to your point. In the sixties and seventies it was folk groups with three or more guitars and maybe a bass player. This morphed into CCM and worship and praise. As time went on, it was a constant assault and rejection of organ and choral based liturgy. Hymnals morphed into songbooks and missalettes. Children’s liturgies (I called them childish liturgies) erupted. The catechism was lost and children were not being taught the Faith. Ecumenism and dialogue with the world became the focus. This pushed one away from Faith or deeper into those clinging to the pre VII religion. A chasm developed between the two religions which has culminated in the apostasy of our present time. “Rigid Catholics” are now considered the danger to the new regime. TC and FS are blatant epitaphs of counterfeit doctrine masquerading as charity, mercy and inclusiveness.

    I have been thinking about this phenomenon as of late, which is a description of what the church was going to suffer in the future, from Our Lady of Lasalette. An eclipse is a very small, but very close manifestation of a planet that has no energy of its own, that completely obfuscates the sun. It takes on a corona which has the appearance of emmitting a ring of fire, but that fire is not from itself. The center of an eclipse is black. No light is given from its source. The true source of heat energy and light still remains but it’s completely blocked by the darkness.
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,001
    That, in terms of "driving away", was not so much the dynamic in the 1960s (in which, btw, the "Boomers" were not featured players, given that only the oldest Boomers had arrived into adulthood; prime actors of the 1960s in the Church were members of earlier generations, particularly the Lost and "Greatest" generations, and the Silent generation). Humanae Vitae was much more of that kind of factor; by comparison, people who left because of liturgical changes as such were a much smaller proportion of people. (Fr Gomar DePauw's group worshipped less than 10 miles from where I grew up, and was the subject of regular commentary I heard growing up; adults commenting were, at best, puzzled by the existence of the group.)
    Thanked by 1PaxMelodious
  • rich_enough
    Posts: 1,039
    But it was sold to the Boomers and they kept it going through the next couple of decades.

    While I agree that HV was a major (if not the major) factor in people leaving, disillusionment with the liturgical changes has been underreported and underemphasized, probably because the ones responsible for the narrative were on board with the changes. Like the adults you knew, they simply didn't understand why anyone would be unhappy with what had gone on. I just came across an instance of this in an article by Prof. John Cavadini of Notre Dame, co-author of a series of articles defending the new Mass.
  • davido
    Posts: 895
    It’s not just that the Sunday service changed. It’s that the whole Catholic culture changed. Latin, music, altar orientation, elimination of rubrics, de-ritualizatuon of the rituals.
    In the US it’s also tied in with suburbanization as Catholic immigrant communities grew in affluence and moved out of the city ghettos and lost the cultural pressure of Catholic society.
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,001
    Suburbanization (which also involved dispersal of Catholics of different flavors and mixing them thoroughly - my parents themselves came from parishes of different flavors (Irish vs German) - indeed was very important, and it preceded and continued through Vatican II.

    Before World War 2 (even more so before WW1), a Catholic child in the USA would more commonly be presented with the idea of priesthood or religious life as a prestigious one for gifted children: that was already collapsing before Vatican II, and I suspect you can see it in the intellectual caliber of men attracted to parish priesthood in the decades directly following the war. Catholic parents encouraged their most gifted children to consider the many more opportunities that had opened up for them in American life after the World Wars.
  • Don9of11Don9of11
    Posts: 693
    It's been my experience that most parishioners my age (65) have the mis-understanding that the Church got rid of Latin with Vatican II, which is a lie. Secondly, I think many parishioners don't like it, don't understand it, and more importantly, they don't want to understand it.

    I experienced a Novus Ordo Mass using Latin when I sang in St. Mary's Choir in Akron, Ohio begining in the late 1970s thru 2005. It was celebrated once amonth and only at one Mass. We had a 5:30 Vigil on Saturday and 8, 10, 12 on Sunday's. The choir always sang at 10 on Sundays. We sang Latin Mass settings and one that comes to mind is the Mass in G by Theodore Van Le Hache, it was our go-to Latin Mass.

    All the responces, that is people parts as well as the priest parts were accompanied with organ, sometimes in Latin and sometimes not, it all depended on the priest. The entrance hymn and closing hymn were in English and from the missalette (we used WLP) Offertory and Communion hymns were usually Latin hymns but now always.

    The responsorial psalm was recited (a pastoral decision) and the Gospel Alleluia was Mode VI and the verse was Tone 6. This was true regardless if the Mass was in Latin or English. Having these two aspects of the Mass always the same means that in relatively short order you will have more "participation" by the congregation then if the musical setting is changed every week.

    Only during Christmas and Easter did the choir sing the responsorial psalm. During Advent and Lent I think we did "Praise to you Lord Jesus Christ King of Endless Glory" since you don't use "Alleluia" during those seasons.

    The Eucharist Prayer was chanted by the priest in Latin but not always and the Lord's Prayer was chanted in Latin with organ. Using the organ helped to keep the choir and the congregation together. There was no Ad Orientum, the priest was always facing the people.

    A Novus Ordo Mass with Latin is very beautiful Mass. Today in my parish and I think in many other parishes we use the Chant Mass, I think its Jubilate Deo? Whatever one is in the missallet, during Advent and Lent.

    I have been introducing some Latin hymns to my organist and he is very receptive. In fact we are planing to sing "O Cor Amoris" (see attached) for a second communion hymn for Ash Wednesday.

    My opinion is that if you keep your Novus Ordo Latin Mass singable and not to "chanty" you will have more success.
    Thanked by 1ServiamScores
  • CatholicZ09
    Posts: 273
    Our former music director that left in 2015 was very much “Chant was pre-Vatican II. We don’t do that anymore.” The only thing we did Latin and in chant with him was the Agnus Dei that everyone knows from Mass XVIII. That was it, and it was typically done only during Lent because Lent = chant = penance = boring.

    I really dislike the association of chant with Lent, but that’s when we use it most in my parish nowadays. Our one priest even admonished us in the music ministry for doing the Chant Mass XVIII during Advent last year: “It’s a season of joyful expectation. Why are we doing chant?” Ugh.
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,001
    Ugh, indeed. For me, the My Little Pony Mass is penance.
  • kevinfkevinf
    Posts: 1,188
    Our one priest even admonished us in the music ministry for doing the Chant Mass XVIII during Advent last year: “It’s a season of joyful expectation. Why are we doing chant?” Ugh.


    Proof that clerics are asses sometimes.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw irishtenor
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,181

    Our one priest even admonished us in the music ministry for doing the Chant Mass XVIII during Advent last year: “It’s a season of joyful expectation. Why are we doing chant?” Ugh.


    Well, he's not misreading its soberness, since Mass XVIII is rather spartan and since it's prescribed for Masses for the Dead (as well as Advent/Lent weekdays).
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 2,777
    And interestingly, Missa XVII (seventeen) which is actually prescribed for Sundays during Advent and Lent is not nearly as sober sounding. Surprisingly upbeat for a "penitential" setting.
    Thanked by 2Andrew_Malton tomjaw
  • Andrew_Malton
    Posts: 1,167
    @ServiamScores I have the same feeling. The Kyrie with its “slow build” to a searing plea for mercy, high up past the octave and trustingly back down to the final. The Agnus with its even bigger range, and that almost-bluesey middle invocation, especially when sung call-and-response, is far far from joyless.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,955
    It seems to me the west could have done what the east did, translate the chant lyrics into the vernacular and keep the Latin, or in our case Slavonic, for special occasions. There is room for both.
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen hilluminar
  • francis
    Posts: 10,706
    Nah. We love the Latin, the GC, the mystery, the roots, the timelessness, the vestments, the Roman precision, the polyphony, and the reasons go on. (Besides! All the music I have been composing is mostly in Latin ;) )
  • Scott_WScott_W
    Posts: 468
    I don't argue the point any more, content to let the "seminaries and cemeteries" solution do most of the work.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,955
    Well, Francis, let's hope your pope namesake doesn't continue long enough to do in the Latin. Looks like he's working on it.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,706
    catacombs, soon vacant or Daniel 9… we will see
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,225
    Remember, the majority of their peers left the Church.


    And the majority of those who remained are often there only in body, not spirit.