The Vatican Survey

I just finished filling out my diocese’s version of the Vatican Survey in preparation for the Synod on Marriage and the Family. All I can say is, “whew!” I am presuming that the basic set of questions are being used in diocese around the world, since some did not seem terribly relevant to my situation. It also seemed like some could only be answered by a diocesan official. More problematic, some of the questions were so technical or obscurely worded that I was left uncertain as to what was being asked. Also, the answers were almost all in narrative form, so I don’t know what kind of data will be able to be compiled from this.

I suppose it’s better than not being asked at all.

Fritz Bauerschmidt

I am a professor of Theology at Loyola University Maryland and a permanent deacon of the Archdiocese of Baltimore, assigned to the Cathedral of Mary Our Queen.

Posted

in

,

by

Fritz Bauerschmidt

Tags:

Comments

23 responses to “The Vatican Survey”

  1. Fr. Michael J. Kavanaugh

    I have had a similar experience. We were given the document at our Presbyteral Council meeting this week and asked for input. The questions that seek data on the number of persons or children or couples in this or that situation are easy enough. But when it comes to asking about how well natural law is understood by the general Catholic population, I wonder what sort of response was anticipated. I have been asked by a few people for copies of the document – they want to respond!

    Reply
  2. Paul Robertson

    Natural Law is the name given used to describe it when the Magisterium doesn’t like something but has no evidence base whatsoever to prohibit it. They wilfully ignore evidence gathered from the natural world and decide that what is good for a majority should jolly well be good for everybody.

    Natural Law suggests that “man” and “woman” are easy concepts to define (look at http://genetics.thetech.org/ask/ask327 to take the very first step towards scratching the surface of that one).

    Natural Law states that marriage between people of the same sex is bad because no children can come from that relationship. Natural Law should, therefore, also say that marriage between old people is objectively disordered, and between infertile couples. A friend of mine, for example, had her uterus removed, age 22, is she allowed to marry? Well, they say, nothing is impossible for God. If she can conceive and bear (miraculously), what’s stopping God from performing the same miracle for any other couple (or, indeed a virgin)?

    Natural Law is the argument deployed when bishops mean “just shut up and stop asking me difficult questions”, and is treated with as much contempt as it deserves.

    Reply
    1. Elaine Steffek

      No, it is much more theological than that. “Just shut up and stop asking me difficult questions” is what people rationalize when the bishops don’t agree with THEM and they have not the drive to find out why the Church teaches what it does.

      Reply
  3. Bill deHaas

    We are using the survey in our parish adult faith formation small group discussions. It is generating lots of thought and good discussion but, like Fr. Kavanaugh notes, you really do need to define or qualify some of the starting assumptions, etc. e.g. natural law, sacrament of marriage, family, divorced regulations, etc.
    We have used a timeline of all of the significant synodal and papal decisions on family life dating back to Vatican II to provide some baseline foundation to guide discussions.

    This was posted today – as a follow up to the comment above:

    http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/theologians-call-church-sexual-teachings-incomprehensible-ask-lay-input

    A couple of other interesing points: our diocesan bishop is not planning on posting this online or in the diocesan paper or via parishes. Given this, we suggested to our pastor who declined. What is mentioned is that the USCCB brought this up two weeks ago – yet, no movement in terms of a USCCB supported initiative on the survey?

    Reply
  4. Ed Stoops

    I just took the survey online. I was asked for my name, parish and other personal data including my race. I would have preferred an anonymous survey for the sake of greater honesty, though in my case it doesn’t matter since I am retired. While I am grateful for the opportunity to express my opinion, I can’t imagine anyone in Rome reading what I wrote.

    Reply
  5. Jack Rakosky

    Also, the answers were almost all in narrative form, so I don’t know what kind of data will be able to be compiled from this

    Narrative data are generally more valid (i.e. more likely to show relationships to other related variables, e.g. the persons behavior as observed or reported by others) and more reliable (provide consistent results across time and circumstance, e.g. not affected by how or when the question is asked) than quantitative data.

    This has been well known if many times forgotten even in the research community. So why so many multiple choice questions? Far cheaper to analyze and publish quickly.

    I have used narrative questions in small sample studies in parishes (e.g. 20 to 40 people) which is about the size in parishes where the data begins to show the shape of things.

    Generally I begin by clustering similar answers together, if necessary breaking a person’s comment into two or more sections. For example when asked an open ended question about what new adult faith formation the parish should undertake, bible study came out at the top of the list of suggestions. Not only was it first but people did not want it to be combined with other topics, while some other topics they actually encouraged combinations.

    When I studied their experience with Bible Study, I asked them about” conversation prayer” which took place in small groups. What resulted was data that could easily be used to construct a scale of interest in conversation prayer from “Not my cup of tea” “Find for others but not for me” “I am slowly getting use to it” “I like to hear others pray this way even though I would not do it in a group” “I like doing this with my wife, kids but not in a group” “I am very comfortable with joining in this prayer” “Isn’t it great that we Catholics are doing this now!” There was just a richness in the many responses that you would never tap into if you made a scale out of it.

    My preferred method of doing research in a parish is to snail mail the survey on parish stationery so that people know it is legitimate and have time to think about (and even discuss it with others) before I call them. I also send an e-mail copy to people for whom we have an email address and tell them they are perfectly welcome to respond by e-mail. The snail mall survey also has my e-mail address in case people want to do it by e-mail. Generally I have gotten about 60% of people to do it by e-mail.

    The e-mail helps greatly since I can simply cut and past and do not have to quickly write up my hand written scribbling from the phone conversations. Some times I have tried sitting down in front of my computer but that has its own problems. The attention I give the computer detracts from my attentive to the person on the phone; that attention is critical to quantity and quality of data. If people know you are interested in them, they will talk on and on.

    While I promise anonymity I publish the results. Since they are all rearranged it is very difficult to figure out who is who. People always look through the survey first to find all their responses. Most parish members are desperate to have their voice heard, especially if they do not have to worry about upsetting other people. People have told me many times that they just do not want to come to meetings or even voice their opinions directly to staff. People just do not want conflict in their parish lives.

    If twelve pastoral council members interviewed one person a week, and discussed those 50 interviews once a month, they could interview about 500 people a year.

    Reply
    1. George Hayhoe

      @Jack Rakosky – comment #5:
      Mr. Rakovsky’s wonderful description of his qualitative research methodology for the study of a parish reinforces my concern about how carefully this survey was crafted. Published so soon after the synod was announced, the instrument certainly doesn’t show the care a professional researcher would want to see in a survey of this importance.

      Carefully designed multiple-choice questions could yield a treasure trove of data that would provide lots of insight into these questions, especially if country, if not diocese, were requested. Imagine the hundreds of thousands of responses such a survey might elicit. Even that data would (I hope) open the eyes of bishops who refuse to accept reality.

      But therein lies the problem of the open-ended questions in this survey. A limited number (in the thousands, distributed throughout the world) of responses to carefully written, open-ended questions would yield even greater insights. But it is unlikely that the potentially enormous number of responses to this survey could even be read, much less interpreted by next October.

      This survey’s writers would get an F in my qualitative research methods seminar.

      Reply
      1. Jack Rakosky

        @George Hayhoe – comment #12:

        The problem really is the very short time frame for doing all of this combined with the expressed desire to take this issue down to the parish and deanery level.

        NCR has a very good article on previous attempts to do this and the difficulties encountered even with more time..

        http://ncronline.org/news/vatican/experts-wide-range-listening-synods-massive-undertaking

        If bishops around the world want to follow a Vatican directive to listen “as widely as possible” to Catholics’ views on issues like contraception, same-sex marriage and divorce before next year’s synod, they may have to get to work very quickly.

        Organizing such an effort, said several coordinators of bishops’ previous attempts to engage in wide-range listening, takes time, dedication and a sincere desire to listen to the everyday experiences of Catholics — regardless of whether their viewpoints fall outside the bounds of strict adherence to church teaching.

        It also depends on the ability of those doing the collection of the data to sort it and then find ways to interpret what it means.

        Unfortunately past synods have mainly been a time for speeches, usually unrelated to one another, and have largely enabled bishops to get in a lot of nap time. Bishops complained about four weeks of speeches, so B16 reduced it to three weeks, and gave them an hour of open discussion at the end of the day which was much appreciated . Francis is going to reduce it to two weeks, but he is going to have two related synods, the first to identify the issues in 2014, the second to adopt some pastoral guidelines in 2015.

        The reality is that the survey has generated a lot of interest in the topic and the synods beyond Church officialdom. That really has not happened much before.

        I gave my description of a way for parishes to get information because I think this, and many other issues are very sensitive, that a lot of people in the parish might be reluctant to discuss the issues, and those who are willing to discuss the issues may not be representative.

        I don’t think pastoral staff should wait for surveys or synods to see what is going to happen. The Vibrant Parish Life Study found that Parish leadership that listens to the concerns of parishioners ranked 7 in importance but 29 in being well done out of 39 items. This was the largest discrepancy in the sturdy.

        The reality is if we took the time to study this issue, and almost every issue for Catholicism, we would find a one size fits all model does not work for a global religion. A very flexible model that can be adapted to fit each nation by their own national or regional synods will likely be the way of the future.

        Anticipating that each nation is going to eventually have to fashion a program to deal with these issues, now is the best time to begin that discussion at the parish, deaneary, and diocesan level, knowing that it is going to be at least two years (until the second synod in 2015) til we get the big framework then probably another 2 years for the national framework.

  6. Jordan Zarembo

    There’s no way I, or any other layperson, in my diocese is going to see any survey. The bishop is young and this is his first seat. I doubt he wishes to risk survey results which strongly contradict orthodox positions. Almost certainly, any questions on Humanae Vitae will be met with the same level of hostility from the laity as in 1968. I’ll have to put my typewriter away for now, sadly.

    I would be curious to learn what Catholics who are officially permitted to complete a survey (such as English and Welsh Catholics) will answer with regard to sexual orientation questions. I suspect that many (most?) of the laity in the postchristian countries don’t see gender and sexuality solely according to the vir / mulier dichotomy. The issues Paul Robertson has brought up in #2 cannot simply be ignored. I sense that Pope Francis understands postchristianity and its more fluid view of human self-identity and relationships, but I suspect his princes would rather continue to ignore the coming tremors.

    Reply
  7. Alan Hommerding

    Is there any information about who, exactly, PREPARED the survey questions? Some of it seemed to me as if it had been crafted to get only the answer that the folks preparing the survey wanted to get.

    Reply
    1. Anne Moore

      @Alan Hommerding – comment #7:
      I SO agree!

      Reply
  8. Dale Rodrigue

    Will Francis and the synod of bishops next year be able to determine which dioceses participated in the survey and which didn’t?

    Jordan, don’t put your typewriter away yet!!!

    You can fill out the questionnaire at this site: http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?llr=lxs57lbab&v=001yFZRqoHoI_AVMKbsTRfBlJ-x29DEMZIRcAfDdknvkWssU_5jLkqdCXkmzx4nLDHQfntSfyBeSjLyBIL6DJbvPByUAwCYJS4LPM3gqIlwB27PHo4q3uzCoj6ICc-J15DBLwdCrVEeJTyKr4UMfxE-FVwq0eP2TQXNCXJhozk89-WEOWCkLOm1_G_SNtDOXpSopx7-NJ84wfnvpxN-IQJDSSsy-5RapWZlCCp4WyZYoEzI-jWw7LJO3yU4BLeqd0Gr

    Reply
  9. Gregg Smith

    Is this the survey that European Catholics are invited to complete but the U.S. Bishops have blocked the same opportunity here?

    Reply
    1. Michael Feit

      @Gregg Smith – comment #9:
      The US bishops’ responses vary. English and Spanish online versions and printable versions of the survey are on the Diocese of Oakland website. Yes, some of the questions are incomprehensible or presuppose the desired answer, but this is the first time in my life as a Catholic layperson being asked for any input so I take this as an encouraging sign.

      Reply
  10. John Swencki

    A dear friend teaches ethics at Harvard and says some of the popes’ encyclicals (esp concerning social justice and labor) are required reading in his classes. Trouble is, even alot of those bright Harvard students walk away from the encyclicals scratching their heads and wondering, “What did I just rread??” My prof friend (who says he’s “dangerously close” to asking to be received into the church, primarily inspired by church documents) says some of the church’s ‘best stuff’ goes undiscovered and unread because people just can’t understand them; they are not written for non-theologians.
    The current survey is a marvelous idea and gesture. But it is not structured or written in any way the best ‘survey people’ would suggest: terms are used that would be unfamiliar to most laypeople or whose definitions would be agreed upon, references to church documents that even many priests have not read, not all Catholics (clergy or lay) are competent to answer all the questions, phrasing of some questions is ‘leading’ or vague, the purpose of the survey is not defined well enough and more.
    If the Vatican (or any church office) truly wishes to communicate with the people, talk in a way/language people understand, strive to make yourself understood, put the theological jargon aside and use the people’s vernacular.

    Reply
  11. Bill deHaas

    Borrowed from the previous post from Yves Congar (thanks Fr. Ruff):

    “I note that throughout this session, and, according to what I have been told, yesterday, too, the remarks concerning the vernacular have all been on the pragmatic level. NO THEOLOGY UNDERLYING THE QUESTION. In general, the liturgical movements have not provided themselves with the ECCLESIOLOGICAL basis that they ought to have. In this case, the fundamental theological question, which has not been asked, is: who or what is the subject of the liturgical action?! It is the mystical, organic Body, to which the plebs sancta [holy people] belongs.”

    Wonder if the same observation can be made about this survey – thus, the worldwide comments will be on the pragmatic level (at first); then, some type of reformulation between Oct. 2014 and Oct. 2015 that provides or opens up discussions that touch on the theology underlining each question or section.

    Interesting – replace liturgy/vernacular with survey issues/natural law or sacrament of marriage or dignity of homosexuals or contraception, etc. and apply some of the VII speakers replies – be open to the future; don’t close any doors; know and understand the actual history; allow bishops decisions/discretion in their dioceses about approaches; arguments about unity as if it is uniformity, etc.

    Reply
  12. Joe O’Leary

    The grammatical error in question 6 is only one indication of how sloppy the Vatican questionnaire is. The Vatican’s use of “Natural Law” as a mantra is a joke

    Reply
  13. Jonathan Day

    The survey seems to assume a lot on the part of the respondent, e.g. knowing how parents in irregular marriages “approach the Church” (on behalf of their children, I am guessing). Or knowing whether “reliable statistics” are available regarding “unions which are not recognized either religiously or civilly”. Is this about polygamy?

    In addition to statistics and sex research, respondents are supposed to be familiar with canon law: “Could a simplification of canonical practice in recognizing a declaration of nullity of the marriage bond provide a positive contribution to solving the problems of the persons involved?”

    Then there is language in true Vox Clara style. “Cohabitation ad experimentum”, for instance. What kind of “experimentum” do they have in mind? Or does this simply mean “shacking up before the wedding”?

    And this: “What is the sacramental practice in these cases: preparation, administration of the sacrament and the accompaniment?” Is this about music during Communion?

    Finally, as a couple of commenters have noted, the document leans heavily on natural law. I responded that most people outside the Church see the prohibitions on things like contraception and “sexual practices not open to procreation” as idiosyncratic to Catholicism, the result of papal orders rather than a universally applicable consequence of the nature of things.

    Rhe Vatican prepared Lineamenta, preparatory reading for the Synod and for the survey. You can download a copy here. The document never mentions natural law until it gets to the survey questions, at the end. Rather, it cites Scripture, papal documents and the Catechism. We are to practice Catholic teaching on the family because we have been told to do so. Jews aren’t supposed to eat lobster; in the same way, (married) Catholics aren’t supposed to use contraceptives. Why? ‘Cos the pope said so.

    Then, almost out of the blue, comes a series of questions about natural law. Hermeneutic of rupture, anyone?

    Reply
    1. Jordan Zarembo

      @Jonathan Day – comment #15:

      Jonathan: What kind of “experimentum” do they have in mind? Or does this simply mean “shacking up before the wedding”?

      I’m sure they mean “shacking up before the wedding”. Look, when diocesan bishops and prelates are anxious about a certain topic, they try to divert attention by using Latin idioms and non-idiomatic English translations of already tortured Italian syntax and semantics. I suspect that one of the reasons why Pope Francis hasn’t clicked with the traditionalist/conservative wing of Catholicism yet is because he uses colloquial terms for “sensitive” subjects. The longer that a controversial phenomenon is reified or couched in extremely objectified (e.g. pseudopsychotherapeutic) terms, the longer one does not have to deal with its subjective realities.

      The stakes are high when it comes to de facto marriage. In Canada for example, two persons in a same-sex or opposite-sex relationship can file for the same benefits of married persons after a certain length of time. Jonathan is right to note that the Church’s perspective on sexuality is not the dominant paradigm, at least in Britain and North America. The challenge of the Church is to get its message across in a postmodern worldview and not shy away from the challenge through obscurantism.

      Reply
    2. Fritz Bauerschmidt Avatar
      Fritz Bauerschmidt

      @Jonathan Day – comment #15:
      On several of the question I simply put, “I’m not sure what the question is asking.”

      Reply
    3. Paul Robertson

      @Jonathan Day – comment #15:
      I assumed that unions not recognised are simple matters of cohabitation in the absence of sacramental or civil union.

      My guess about the experimentum was it’s a “let’s try to see if we can live together before putting ourselves in a situation in which we must”

      Paul.

      Reply
  14. Fr. Michael Erwin

    I simply noted the almost complete lack of the word love in the survey. We need married priests and bishops if we want a more intelligent discussion of this subject.

    Reply
    1. Paul Robertson

      @Fr. Michael Erwin – comment #20:
      It’s funny that the very people who exhort us to have more children are people who never have to live with them…

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *