“Catholics Come Home!” videos – then and now

In the past I have been impressed favorably by the short, inviting videos made by Catholics Come Home!

REMEMBER: If you are a fallen away Catholic, or you have strayed a bit, all 99.9% of you have to do to “come home” is to examine your conscience and make a good confession.  That’s it.   You will be able to receive Communion again (in the state of grace) and start working (with the help of grace) on those bad habits or problems you make have picked up.

Today I received this email:

Catholics Come Home….newer versions??

Fr. Z, you need to see this:

Here is the original video of Catholics Come Home from a few years ago. Very well done:

B) Now…..this was released the other day:

C)….And this:

Anyone can see there is a radical difference between the original, and the latter two newer versions:

(latter two)
-Eschatological sense is missing, eternal life with God? Salvation?
Repentance of sins?
-No mention of Jesus
-Greater focus on earthly/temporal happiness
-Environment, tolerance….??
-Promoting “human rights”, “We want a better life”, care for the
environment, dream of a better world…..??
*Shocking this was on the EWTN page.

Yes, the spirit, if we can call it that, of the first and then more two more recent videos is different.

Discuss: Do we dumb things down or deemphasize important and central characteristics of the Faith in order to get people into the door? Is that how we proceed with the New Evangelization?

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in New Evangelization, Our Catholic Identity, The Drill and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. un-ionized says:

    CCH has had numerous videos running at any one time, not just these few. My favorite from the earliest series is called Movie of Your Life.

  2. Rellis says:

    I actually thought the same thing when I saw this on Saturday. Interesting others felt the same way. These now remind me of the Church of Latter Day Saints commercials you used to see on Saturday afternoons.

  3. Andrew D says:

    I’m glad I forgot to donate to them this year. These two new videos are awful: social justice, inclusiveness, and mother earth propaganda. Seriously, it might as well be an ad for the episcopal, lutheran or some non-denominational congregation. All that’s missing is a gay couple and a transgender walking down to receive Communion.

  4. Gabriel Syme says:

    Alarming to see the word “inclusive” as a title in the newer videos (which I haven’t watched through yet).

    I have found that, in the context of Christianity, the word “inclusive” is invariably used by dissenters as code to mean “pro-gay”.

    This is very clearly the case, when you think about it, as its appearance is otherwise erroneous. I mean, what kind of organisation (of any kind) would advertise for members and then not include them?

  5. New Sister says:

    The new ads are man-centric and insipid ~ they remind me of the “Youcat”.

    I think central points of the Faith are deemphasized and watered down because the militant faithful who were inspired and encouraged during the reign of Benedict XVI have lost heart/become discouraged under Pope Francis. They have allowed liberals to take the reigns back.

  6. Polycarpio says:

    Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis. I don’t mean that the message we send today is a different message than the one we sent yesterday or last year, just that the packaging of the message needs to be adjusted to resonate in today’s culture. Asking whether we dumb it down or stand by the essentials presents a false dichotomy, in my humble opinion. You don’t have to pick one over the other–you can send multiple messages, some emphasizing soft themes and others spelling things out. In fact, we need to layer the messaging a little bit, not make it flat. Indeed, it may be that the newer messages are intended to develop and build on the earlier messaging in this campaign.

  7. acardnal says:

    EWTN has become more liberal in my opinion since Mother Angelica’s illness and after her death. There continuing broadcast of the Los Angeles NCEA convention Mass is problematic and I have stopped my donations to EWTN.

  8. acardnal says:

    “There” = their

  9. nine man morris says:

    Before everyone makes too much of the differences, they should note that the first video is 2 minutes long, and the two new videos are 30 seconds long. So the old video is four times longer – maybe they just think (justifiably) that people are dumb now, with short attention spans…

    In fact, I had to reference again and again to see which video was when, as the old video had at least 30 seconds of rambling about universities, hospitals, science, diversity, etc. They had another minute and a half to mention Jesus or the sacraments barely.

    Sometimes I wonder if the idea that was are in some faith hole isn’t imagined. Maybe the majority of the church and hierarchy has always disappointing. Maybe Pope Leo XIII, Pius XII, and many, many others would have looked far scarier than Pope Francis if we had live streaming, the 24-hour news cycle, the internet, social media, and so on.

    Maybe the real cause of these effects is the information age/the internet. Many students of eschatology have noted that Daniel’s kingdom of the anti-Christ, which has feet of “iron and clay” suggests a government that is somehow unified and not at the same time. Many have suggested a confederacy, a European Union, the cell-like structure of terrorist organizations, communism and so on. But none of these seems likely to dominate the world and it’s future completely. Did you ever notice the internet is like a transnational country, changing governments around the globe like a revolving door, has turned all property and money into a numeric code, pumps filth, porn and anti-Christian messages out 24/7? Makes you wonder if the tentacles of the beast are not fiber-optic cables….

    Maybe this sequence just shows how information technology has dumbed down people, dragged down the church, and made us all significantly more shallow.

  10. No, this is not the way…

    The way to bring people to the church is by telling the honest truth about the timeless teaching.


  11. jaybird says:

    These new ads are aimed at Millenials, many of whom don’t believe in God, or Jesus Christ, or His Holy Catholic Church. As a former Atheist, but now a Catholic, I can attest this mentality is pervasive among my generation.

    There are three general classes of people the New Evangelization is meant to reach:

    (1) the un-evangelized
    (2) the un-catechized
    (3) the un-sacramentalized

    These classes can be memorized by the evangelical statement: “We evangelize in order to then catechize. And we catechize in order to then sacramentalize.” All evangelization must happen in this order or else the Church will falter.

    The first ad is fantastic. Simple and gets straight to the point. This is a great “come and see” approach to our Faith. The second ad, needs some work. I know CCH is trying to show how ‘inclusive’ the Church is, likely because when polled, one of the first words the detractors use against the RCC is ‘judgmental’ or ‘intolerant’. I’ve always been a fan of Matthew Kelly’s line that goes something like “No organization feeds more people, clothes more people, houses more people, educates more people, or helps more people than the Catholic Church.” I think showing what we do, rather than discussing vague principles, will soften atheist/agnostic hearts more effectively than quoting Jesus (since many of these young people either were not taught about Him, or were taught He’s just one of many religious founders).

    The least effective parts of these ads is the large ‘Catholics Come Home’ signs at the conclusion. It is my impression these ads are meant to reach the (1) un-evangelized (rather than the (2) un-catechized or the (3) un-sacramentalized). If the first set of CCH ads that ran from 2011-2013 were meant to reach the fallen-aways, who are largely evangelized as well as some-what catechized, but are currently (3) un-sacramentalized, these ads are meant for a broader audience. Unfortunately, if I was totally unsacramentalized and looking for purpose in my life, seeing a ‘Catholics Come Home’ sign might stop me from acting upon the ad’s action point of visiting their website.

    That being said – a great attempt by CCH. I expect this will have a good yield. I see these most effectively reaching young adults on new media channels such as YouTube and Hulu. The first set of ads that I mostly saw while my Baby Boomer father was watching Fox or CNN. For those not in the know, according to Nielsen statistics, the median age of a FOX News viewer is 68 years old, and the average age for CNN is 59 years old.

  12. lmgilbert says:

    Honestly, I think the criticism of these last two clips is a bit unfair. Their entire point is to—in 30 seconds—entice the viewer to go to catholicscomehome.com.

    These clips are not intended as brief summations of the Catholic faith, but presumably are based on research into what will actually draw someone to go to catholicscomehome.com. I took a brief look at that site and it looks pretty good to me, at least.

  13. Benedict Joseph says:

    “Maybe the real cause of these effects is the information age/the internet.”
    No, the cause of this is shame and self-loathing among vast swath of professional Catholics who want plant their feet in two worlds. They want to be Roman Catholics because of some cultural/emotional attachment but they also want to be movers and shakers. They are not knowledgeable of the faith because catechesis was abandoned fifty-five years ago with the approbation of a hierarchy who put their trust in fraudulence, replaced by ecumenical Catholic-Lite. Roman Catholicism has developed a self-consciousness regarding its supernatural character. It rather be lumped with left-wing protestantism or the Elks Club than be known as the Bride of Christ.
    All this began long before cyber world. It was effectively well established by 1975.

  14. un-ionized says:

    The two minute video was made to be edited into the thirty seconds required for airing on commercial TV.

  15. un-ionized says:

    Acardnal, a look at those round table discussions with the profs. from Steubenville opened my eyes to that.

  16. Gail F says:

    I think they are excellent commercials. They are just different from the first one (which I also love) — which is four times as long, aimed at a wide audience, and VERY expensive to air. These are cheaper (30 seconds of air time), targeted to a specific audience (millennials) and meant to do just one thing: pique their interest. They hit all the concepts and words that are known (ask ANYONE in marketing) to especially appeal to this demographic, and to make them intrigued about hearing them from an unexpected source. That’s ALL they are meant to do — to tell young people that the Church is interested in those things too, and invite them to find out for themselves. After that, it’s up to the diocese that airs them to do the work. I was dubious about the first commercial, because it PROMISED that people would be welcome if they look into returning to the Church… and not all parishes are interested in having people return or convert. To put it mildly. But they seem to have helped a lot of people come home and I hope these do as well. If you’re not a millennial, they will not appeal to you. They aren’t meant to.

  17. Gail F says:

    Also, CCH is run by very faithful, super devout Catholics… who know a lot about advertising. I trust them to know what will work, and I think you should, too.

  18. BenFischer says:

    nine man morris is right. the first 30 seconds of the 2 minute video is essentially no different than either of the other 30 second videos. I wonder the 1st video was similarly edited for popular media when it came out, and if there’s a longer version of the latter videos that would more doctrinal and less generic.

  19. Sonshine135 says:

    “Do we dumb things down or deemphasize important and central characteristics of the Faith in order to get people into the door? Is that how we proceed with the New Evangelization?”

    Well, the entirety of the last commercial were the words of Pope Francis himself, so apparently he thinks this is the way. I find a strong powerfully lived faith that is in action is much greater than words.

  20. visigrad says:

    I have come to detest the words ‘tolerant’ and ‘inclusive’…..

  21. Kerry says:

    Neither hot, nor cold.

  22. majuscule says:

    The top one, “Epic” comes in 30, 60 and 120 second versions here (scroll down a bit):


    They also had/have an audio version for radio but I haven’t heard it for a while.

  23. greenlight says:

    Whether you’re a fallen away Catholic or a practicing Catholic who’s struggling to find your way, the message from the top down is pretty clear: If you’re traditionally-minded please go away, everyone else, come on in. Those who accept hard teachings aren’t welcome. Those who want easy teachings are welcome, but why would they come here when there’s so many other denominations that are easier still?

  24. Geoffrey says:

    EWTN is just fine, though I don’t watch it much. Every time I turn it on, it’s usually Mass or the Rosary. I try to never miss Raymond Arroyo’s The World Over.

    The first Catholics Come Home video was truly epic. To this day it gives me chills. They should have brought it up to date by adding a clip of Pope Francis and left it alone. If it’s not broke, don’t fix it. Why are we intent on never doing this?!

  25. Kerry says:

    The two greatest institutions in the world are the Marine Corps and the Catholic Church. Why not a Catholic ad like this?

  26. Kerry says:

    With the Te Duem playing in the background: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqwV9l-U8ds
    (I’ll stop now.)

  27. rdschreiner says:

    Boooo! The first segment is extremely touching and shows our Faith in all its glory. The rest of it is a bunch of politically correct crap and will do nothing to bring others to come back.

  28. PTK_70 says:

    No, we ratchet it up, we double down…more ‘versus cum populo’ ordinary form ROMAN RITE Masses!

  29. anilwang says:

    Discuss: Do we dumb things down or deemphasize important and central characteristics of the Faith in order to get people into the door? Is that how we proceed with the New Evangelization?

    This is precisely the reason I left the faith as a child. Because the faith appeared to be just a man made institution, it was no different from any other, including one I could make up myself that was more suited to my temperament. Granted, my understanding of the faith would not have even been raised to the level of the ancient Arians, but I don’t my near total lack of knowledge of the faith was that exceptional. After all, why do so many Catholics defect when “they aren’t fed” or when they read a Dan Brown novel or here someone like Eckhart Tolle spin his new age garbage as Christianity?

    The new ads do nothing except affirm that Catholicism is just another man made institution, so it could be taken or left. And since taking it carries more baggage than leaving it, there’s little point in doing anything other than leaving it.

  30. Elizium23 says:

    They are effectively disseminating all the key points emphasized by the Francis pontificate.

  31. un-ionized says:

    Visigrad, if it were not for inclusiveness I would be on welfare. Watch what you mean.

  32. johnnys says:

    Don’t understand it…..the Catholic Church needn’t become more protestant to attract protestants. The Truth should suffice.

  33. Ages says:

    Sadly, these new videos could have been made by any generic NGO. And the Enemy, having seen he cannot destroy the church outright, has seen fit to reduce it to being just another secular agency. And what this promotes IS secularism—the idea that man can save the world.

    We exist to save souls. What is the adage? “Christ didn’t come to make bad men good, but to make dead men live.” Christ didn’t die for the spotted owls or the polar ice caps. Those are important but they are not “selling points” for the church.

    Using sentimentality and happy images is a terrible way to lure people into the Church. Our reverend host is right, eschatological reality is the only honest way, and if people don’t care about that, let the Holy Spirit do more of His work first.

    The Lord warned us that life in this world will be suffering, but to fear not. There is much suffering to come, and we do a great disservice telling people the Church will make them happy. Joyful, yes, but not happy in the usual vapid sense.

  34. jflare says:

    Oh dear! I had thought Catholics Come Home had some sense of the dignity and passion of the Church. Sadly, those last two videos…mostly emphasize the reasons why people have been leaving in droves for some time.

    “Visigrad, if it were not for inclusiveness I would be on welfare. Watch what you mean.”
    Sadly, un-ionized, I suspect you are one of an extreme few. I suspect visigrad, myself, and many others have seen “inclusiveness” and “tolerant” used as buzzwords mostly to badger people into “accepting” behavior and attitudes that the Church teaches (rightly) to be moral abominations.

    Ordinarily, I would think it a good thing to emphasize the Pope’s intentions. Sadly, Pope Francis attitudes tend to be all too easily construed as cause to exercise carte blanche to do or believe precisely as one pleases, not as the Church teaches.

  35. Father G says:


    There are two versions of the original video of “Catholics Come Home” that include Pope Francis:



  36. Pingback: On Catechesis for Young People – Oxford Catholic

  37. tealady24 says:

    Wait a minute, is it just young people who would want to “come home”? No mention of Jesus Christ, the Faith as we know it, just touchy-feely good stuff.
    This is not Catholic. You know I live in NJ and there is not ONE Latin mass to be found in a 1-hour drive in any direction. Only the feel-good version of what this looks like.
    Ever take a look at who is on the Board of Directors for Catholics Come Home? These people all live and move and have their being in EACH OTHER. I watched Tom Peterson on EWTN last month with Fr. Mitch, and something was not right; both my husband and I could just sense it.
    When you go to their website, one of the BIG things is to have Tom come out to your parish and speak. What’s wrong with this picture? This is NOT the CATHOLIC CHURCH I grew up in.
    I don’t know if you remember that church; but it was the one where people flocked to mass on Sundays, and dressed the part, parochial schools were bursting at the seams, and FAITH was taken very seriously on a daily basis.
    That church. Where did it go?!

  38. WVC says:

    I have begun to doubt if TV (in the EWTN sense) is even capable of being an evangelization tool. They can provide good things to recent converts, neophytes, or folks who are Catholic but want to know more, but the talk shows are not going to reach many in the Gen-X or Millennial brackets who aren’t already practicing Catholics. Commercials like these simply aren’t effective.

    If anyone wants to use these tools for evangelization, I think story telling is a much better way to go about it. Not moralizing, sentimental, or brow-beating type of “Catholic” stories that don’t deserve to air on the Lifetime channel, and not 100% saints stories or *shudder* VeggieTales. Watch some of Hitchcock’s masterpieces. Look at “The Rope” if you haven’t seen it. It’s a perfect morality play. Or some of John Ford’s better Westerns.

    Catholics have the advantage of knowing that the truth, wherever it is found and embraced, will eventually lead to the Faith. We artificially hamstring ourselves when we think we have to have a Catholic talk show about doctrine or have people tell their specific conversion stories in order to evangelize.

    Or, to think of it another way (and I’m stealing this from Literature Professor David White): Grace builds upon nature, and we live in an age where nature itself is being lost. We must first teach men what it means to be men and women what it means to be women and everyone what it means to be human. Only after you “break up that dry, hard packed soil” can you then think about planting seeds of Faith.

    Folks, especially young folks, today in America and most of the Western World don’t need warm, cozy, feel good advertisings. They need to see, encounter, and come face-to-face with suffering. Not the social justice type of suffering, but the anguish of the soul type of suffering. The suffering that has lead to such rampant drug addiction, materialism, false Internet communities, and staggering suicide rates. We think we’re the best that’s ever lived. In reality we’re by far and away among the worst. You’ll get more mileage trying to evangelize with a copy of 1984 or “A Brave New World” than a hundred episodes of “Catholics Come Home.”

    Folks don’t understand how badly they need to get in the lifeboat if they don’t perceive the flood that is destroying everything around them. We need to talk about the flood and stop trying to oversell the lifeboat.

  39. EeJay says:

    I don’t like any of them. First, second or third.

    Can’t stand the use of modern advertising techniques in religion. Yes the first video covers much deeper the faith of our fathers but at the same time it feels like it also drags it through the puerile, over sentimentalised drudge of the modern media commercial world.

    The second and third videos are just like watery soup, tasteless – yuck!!!!

  40. cl00bie says:

    It seemed to me that the first video was “preaching to the choir”. It was aimed at those who were attracted to the timelessness and holiness of the Catholic Church. Most of those are already here. It may result in an impulse to deepen their faith, but for the most part, it’s like preaching about coming to church to those who are already there.

    The others seem to reach out to those on the margins. Those who believe the Catholic Church is hostile to them. It has a softening message that might resonate with those folks. This, in my opinion, is a good thing.

  41. The Masked Chicken says:

    Really? Does CCH really think that any aetheists are going to be swayed by these commercials? They insult the history of Catholic television. Do they really think that Ven. Fulton Sheen would be impressed? He argued with the leading philosophers of his day and, yet, had the common touch that drew millions to watch his television broadcasts.

    The long commercial and the first short commercial mention the concept of the Church as family, but here’s the problem – to many Millenials, the concept of family means something different than it has, in the past. Theirs is a generation marred by no-fault divorce, homosexual unions, missing fathers, living together, and an over-sexualied culture. Their moral guidance has come, not from a father who knew both how to hug and also how to spank, but, more often than not, from a psychologized, political correctness which is reluctance to apply responsibility to any guilty party. This is a hurting generation that wants to be supported no matter what they do. They do not see that the causes of many of their generations problems are, at root, moral. The emotion has replaced the will as the faculty of love and they cannot see that following the path of love can lead to a cross – even dishonor and shame – feeling bad – which to many is worse than death.

    I know I paint with a broad brush and not all Millenials fall into this generalization, just as not all Baby Boomers are flaming liberal Woodstockers, but I have taught thousands of students in this generation and that is enough of a sample to draw some general conclusions. Students, young people, are different these days, not by quantity of experience, but by the quality. I hate to say that the second two commercials are like pop music theology – they have no depth. Oh, sure, draw the un-Churched in with a promise of, “inclusion,” and , “tolerance,” and watch how fast they leave once they find out what those words really mean in correct Catholic theology.

    Psychology and advertising have become de facto secular religions and using the techniques common to them will drown out the message CCH wants to make because it is no different than any other that the young see, day in and day out.

    Most of all, what the second two commercials are missing, very badly, is any mention of the transcendent. The Church is not of this world. The Church is proof that there is something beyond. Neither of these two commercials even hint at this. Dietrich von Hildebrand pointed out, many years ago, that it was the loss of the sense of the sense of transcendent that has marked the modern Church. These two commercials play right into this.

    These commercials imply that the Catholic Church is the Church of Easy Sainthood. What good does it do to save the world, but lose ones soul? Smiling faces and campfires will not hold one in a world that has studied the ways of temptation. I suppose that summarizes the difference between the commercials. The first commercial calls you to consider the Catholic Church. The last two tempt you with easy promises. No, they are not worthy of the saints who gave their lives for a Faith that is true, a Faith that requires strength, a Faith that requires fighting.

    The Chicken

  42. JPK says:

    We should keep in mind that one of the greatest evangelists of all time, Saint John the Baptist, had a simple, yet direct message. And he had hundreds if not thousands lining up to be baptized. Saint John the Baptist directness was such that he called the Sadducees “You brood of vipers!” To Saint John the Baptist, there was no worry about “inclusiveness”. We are all part of a fellowship of Sinners in desperate need of Redemption. Cannot get more inclusive than that.

  43. anns says:

    How about a video that includes the words “Remember thou art dust, and to dust thou shalt return.” …Ash Wednesday seems to be the non-holy day of obligation that even Catholics who only attend Mass occasionally still show up for. Our culture does everything it can to avoid the reality of our mortality and eternity, would not it be better to have this simple wake up call more than once a year? Starting with the universal human condition encourages the questions which our secular society can not answer; questions which Christ answers, through His Church, with the Truth which is more beautiful than man can conceive.

  44. tzabiega says:

    I think these latest videos are just fine, even though the first video is my favorite (and gives me goosebumps thinking how it truly summarizes our most wonderful and only True Faith). The great Catholic philosophy professor Dr. Peter Kreeft once said that Protestants try to convert people by preaching to them, while Catholics convert people by inviting them to Church. If you think you will convert someone by telling him or her all the wonderful truths of the One and Only Church, then you will fail miserably, because YOU are trying to convert them. By bringing the person to the Church where the Tabernacle with Our Lord Jesus Christ is kept, then GOD will be the one converting, and you will be his helper–and that is the goal of these new videos. Conversion is not usually a sudden thing, but a slow process which needs a beginning, the beginning being entering the Church. There is a seminarian in our diocese who entered the Catholic Church in college after seeing the Catholic Mass on EWTN and then attending Mass because he wanted to see live what he saw on TV. The unfortunate thing is that, unlike the Church shown in the videos, most Catholic churches in the U.S. are not beautiful and the music is horrendous, while beauty is one of the most persuasive parts of the Church. The external beauty represents the internal beauty of the Catholic Church.

  45. lairdangusmcangus says:

    I know that Our Lady of Fatima foretold all of this.

    I know that it is our fate as true Catholics to suffer all kinds of abuse and calumny.

    I know that we are meant to suffer with Jesus on the Cross even as the Church hierarchy makes its deals with the Prince of this World.

    But this still makes me incredibly sad. I feel increasingly that I am being pushed toward a sedevacantist position. We have already the boasting of Cardinal Daneels that his St. Gallen “mafia” forced the resignation of Pope Benedict and set up the election of Pope Francis. This stands in direct violation of canon law, calling the entire conclave into doubt.

    I don’t WANT to leave the Church. I don’t want to have to turn to the SSPX or other traditionalist societies of dubious status. But I will NOT abandon Jesus to side with these wicked Churchmen. Never!

  46. hwriggles4 says:

    One common misconception from our secular world (even on news programs including Fox News) is that anyone is welcome to attend Mass. The ushers at the door do not have a checklist that says: sorry Charlie, you haven’t been to Mass in six months, and you used ABC in your marriage, so you are no longer welcome here.

    Now before someone pulls their Colts 45 on me, my point is that Catholics and non Catholics and “Christmas and Easter Catholics”, as well as fallen away Catholics (I was a one hour Catholic for many years) are welcome to sit in the pew, sing hymns, listen to the homily, and pray. Now, NOT EVERYONE is welcome to receive the Holy Eucharist, and non Catholics and Catholics who are not properly disposed for Mass need to abstain from receiving Eucharist.

  47. Dan says:

    “Do we dumb things down or deemphasize important and central characteristics of the Faith in order to get people into the door?” Yes and it clearly doesn’t work.

    Satan has managed to completely destroy the intellect of most people. The Church is burning and to save it they decided to pour a little gas on the fire because from a distance the heat felt nice and it would bring people in. Of course when people actually got there there was nothing to make them stay. So you know what might work? Lets pour even more gas on the fire because if the flames are higher then surely people will see that and come.

    Over the course of 2 thousand years the Church has created a treasure map, Saints and Popes through the ages through the true intercession of the Holy Ghost, have revealed that map to us to guide us down that narrow path and through that narrow door. The map is called the magisterium, but has been left aside to widen the path and fit more people on it. The greatest harm of Vatican II is not the documents, oh if only we would at least follow what is in them. It is the idea that all of those documents can be set aside in favor of a human centered approach, to widen the path. However now the path is far to wide, and the door is narrow and many will not enter.

    How can people not see this? Because our intellect is destroyed, we are told we can ignore reality now and even the most basic ideas of truth are cast aside. I can decide if I am a man or woman. Parents can look at their three year old boy playing with a doll and decide that clearly he is meant to be a girl and mutilate him to make it appear true. That is child abuse but sanctioned abuse because what is a little thing like gender when we can so blatantly ignore even human life. We live in a world now centered on belief, but only on self centered belief, you can believe anything you like about yourself and decide your own truth, so long as you don’t believe in God

    The Devil fears Latin, the turning of the altar, sacred music, the Traditional Latin Mass because those things engage the intellect and he can’t have that. Satan deals in feelings and as long as the only reason we go to mass is to hear the guitar can drums and have a feel good atmosphere then he can distract our atrophied minds away from what is really there.

  48. AnthonyJ says:

    It is the Francis effect. If Benedict were still Pope we wouldn’t be seeing this kumbaya commericials from them.

  49. Lepidus says:

    The trouble with the social justice type ads is that the people attracted by them do not simply follow Fr. Z’s recommendation about simply making a good confession, start receiving the sacraments, and working on the bad habits. They end up making an announcement that they are back (or joining) then become Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, and join up with the like-minded priest from the 60’s and 70’s to push that agenda.

  50. comedyeye says:

    “Do we dumb things down or deemphasize important and central characteristics of the Faith in order to get people into the door? Is that how we proceed with the New Evangelization?”

    Yes. It’s called ALPHA.

  51. Geoffrey says:

    I could be wrong, but I believe the primary purpose of Catholics Come Home is just that: getting those who have left the Church to come back. Talk of reaching out to atheists with this or that language does not really apply (in this case).

  52. Dave N. says:

    Might as well join the Kiwanis Club.

    WHO ARE the people behind Catholics Come Home? It’s impossible to tell from their website, which is disconcerting.

  53. un-ionized says:

    I think people are missing that CCH is about Catholics who have left the faith to come back. i do lots of one on one evangelization and about a third of the people that I know who are ex-Catholics are so because someone used their faith as a weapon against them, in the I’m better than you mode and they feel that they are not good enough to go to church. About a third left for theological reasons and about a third because of the abuse scandal. I think CCH is most targeting the first group. The most difficult ones to deal with are the last group because with them as with the first group, it is very personal and evangelization should not be a grudge match.

  54. PTK_70 says:

    @tealady24…Ma’am, if I may so bold, that church you describe, or some semblance of it, has gone South, to Dixieland. That church is finding a home amongst people who believe/profess that God walked the earth and left them His written word. Who aren’t embarrassed to be followers of the Lord Jesus, who are alarmingly open about church membership. This is meant as a general description of a regional attitude and not an indictment of any given individual outside that region. Nor am I gloating – I live north of 60 degrees latitude.

    As for my earlier suggestion regarding Mass celebrated ‘versus cum populo’, I want to make clear that I was speaking of Mass celebrated ‘ad orientem’, priest and people facing the same direction, regardless of the form of the Mass or the language employed. Surely this will be a vital component of a truly effective New Evangelization. I also suspect that Millennials will be open to and embrace this posture as much as, or more than, anyone.

  55. Thom says:

    More noise for a world drowning in noise. Even worse, appeals to pride and narcissism. We’re a generation that is caring! We’re diverse! We kiss stinky feet! We smirk incessantly! We’re awesome! We, we, we! Me, me, me! You like to feel good. So do we! We don’t like to feel bad — no, no, no! The Church makes you feel good, see? We used soft lighting, warm colors, and saccharine music just to make sure you get the point! We can even make commercials that are indistinguishable from all the other crap on TV! We’re awesome! You’re awesome! Everything’s awesome! God too! Yeah, he’s awesome, just like you!

  56. Sliwka says:

    In defense of the 2nd video, the first 30second spot; it bears a strong resemblance to the 30 second EPIC spot on the CCH website: highlight some outwardly goods of the historic Church, Triune God/ Jesus is the reason, come check us out.

    Is it effective? Doubtful but perhaps CCH has good stats that suggest otherwise. As a socalled Millennial would this sway me, probably not but I was converted from a generic Christianity by the fisheaters apologetics and history, but my friends in high school were kind of anti-Catholic so it may have started me looking into things

  57. Maineman1 says:

    Well, the videos properly represent where most modern Catholics are at in this modern day and age. And they are definitely not safely ensconced in spiritual communities of sublime worship, supernatural faith, ethereal frames of mind, and stark Catholic identity.

    These videos represent most modern Catholics accurately and adequately. So, I am not shocked or saddened.

  58. JuliB says:

    I came back formally into the Church through CCH. I found a program online at the Diocese of Joliet for Catholics who wanted to learn more. This was before the commercials though.

    The sessions that met in the homes of the members were very helpful.

    Gail F said: ” I was dubious about the first commercial, because it PROMISED that people would be welcome if they look into returning to the Church… and not all parishes are interested in having people return or convert.”

    In my case, it was that the parish in question wasn’t interested in a person like me coming to it. You know, a trad-friendly person. In fact, when I gave my confession (F2F) to the priest, he told me as much. Well – that I wouldn’t be happy there.

    Not that big of a deal since it was way too far for me to attend regularly, but I learned an important lesson in keeping my mouth shut.

    Someone online who was assisting me in coming back said that the problem was that the parishes were not the ones that many of us would like to come home to!

    She managed to locate a basic, non-goofy parish. Even with a change in pastors, it has remained non-happy clappy. I am blessed.

  59. Elizabeth M says:

    Of course we do not dumb it down! Can you imagine how someone would react if they came into full communion with the Church under the pretext that all is fluffy and mercy and happy, only to be tempted by a dark night of the soul, or fall into some mortal sin, and then be told the Truth about how Divine Justice requires penance. I suppose a person would feel betrayed much like the betrayal of a spouse who was hiding their true personality before the wedding. Don’t make things happy sappy to get backsides in the pews. That’s not the way Jesus taught.

  60. Mightnotbeachristiantou says:

    The first was 2 minutes the others were less than 30 seconds. I think it might have been better to make a 2 minute that can be edited down as needed. Give soft and hard information in segments so that you. Have a choice of how you wish to deliver information.

  61. vandalia says:


    Donald Trump told Mark Halperin yesterday that his sister, a federal judge, would be a “phenomenal” Supreme Court justice. He also said that “we will have to rule that out now, at least.”
    Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/423196/trump-praises-his-sister-pro-abortion-extremist-judge-ramesh-ponnuru

    Now, I will concede that “rule her out, for now” is open to interpretation. My interpretation is “I will rule her out until I get elected.” [Well, that’s certainly an “open” interpretation. Meanwhile, he released a list of names that doesn’t not include his sister.]

    I will also add, http://www.redstate.com/leon_h_wolf/2016/02/15/trump-sure-said-sister-supreme-court-idea-believes/

    In any other election, his views and track record on abortion would be to the left of the Democratic nominee. As I have already said several times, “to choose the lesser of two evils is to choose evil.”

    I can never vote for a ny candidate, particularly for President, who has a track record that even suggests that he supports radical abortion. The idea that if I vote for Candidate Y (or do not vote) that is really support for Candidate X may be good modern politics, but it finds no support in Catholic moral theology (well, orthodox theology at least.)

    I will go “lefty” for a moment and say that everyone must examine their conscience. While many voters may escape on invincible or culpable ignorance, if you are reading this, it is not an excuse. Can you justify your vote on judgement day? (Also, keep in mind that if you vote for a pro-abortion candidate like Trump, every politician from here on out will conclude that there is simply no need to be strongly pro-life since they will get the votes anyway. However, if votes are left “on the table” it is a strong message than any future Republican candidate (at least) had better toe the line.)

    [You have by now reconciled yourself to 4 years of Hillary. Thanks.]

  62. AVL says:

    I’m sorry, but the new videos are nothing but pandering to societal trends, aka, “the world”!! How disappointing. The first video was awesome. Why did they give away their substance?? Sad, sad, sad.

  63. vandalia says:


    [You have by now reconciled yourself to 4 years of Hillary. Thanks.]

    The argument that failure to support Trump is a vote for Clinton comes from modern party politics, and is not based in Catholic Tradition. At its core, it is no different from those who supported Stalin because of Hitler, or those who supported Hitler because of Stalin. Rather, those who were later Canonized focused instead on what the Church demanded. If you are able to point me to a single Saint who was a member of either the Nazi or Communist party during WW 2, please do so.

    Hillary and Trump both support abortion and other policies that are intrinsically evil. People conveniently forget that Trump and the Clinton’s have been best friends for decades. I don’t have any doubt that if there was an established Republican candidate and the Democratic field was wide open, he would be running as a Democrat in this election. The Church teaches that one may NEVER choose evil. Now we have been through this before with gay marriage, ordination of women, and other such topics. NEVER means NEVER. The Church did not say “never, unless you don’t have any other good options; or never, unless there are other things you like.”

    The commandment that I must follow is to never support evil under any circumstance. Do you have so little faith that you believe that the God who converted Saul could not convert Hillary (or Trump for that matter)? I do my part, HE does HIS part. Pretty simple.

    As to your statement, if you want to focus on that angle, I would rather have 4 years of Hillary than 100 years of Arlen Specter.

    “Specter stated that he was “personally opposed to abortion,” but was “a supporter of a woman’s right to choose.” He also had a 100% rating from NARAL. (I would post the link to their document, found courtesy of Wikipedia, but I can’t bring myself to giving their website a hit. If you want to check for yourselves, you can check the references on his page.) I would also point out that Rick Santorum actively supported Specter over Pat Toomey in the 2004 Pa primary. That is Senator Pat Toomey who today has a 0% rating from NARAL and other such organization on the left. That is what we get when people start putting politics over Truth.

    Since I am in prophet mode, I will keep going. Do you believe in pro life issues…. or do you believe in the Republican party? If you can only choose one, which do you choose? Because as this primary has finally demonstrated, the two are not identical. Rick Santorum made his choice roughly ten years ago in the PA Republican primary. The answer to that question doesn’t matter to me, but believe me, it will matter in eternity.

  64. vandalia says:

    Oh, I should have added this to the end of my last post, but just to eliminate any confusion, this little reflection was initially created to address those who said they had to vote for Hillary to prevent a Trump Presidency. It works in both directions.

    As I told them, one may never vote for Clinton, despite how crazy/insane/bizarre Trump may appear. You may never vote for Clinton even if it leads to 4 years of Trump.

    For Catholics, perhaps alone in this world, doing nothing – or perhaps it is more correct to say that one need not do anything – is a perfectly legitimate option. I would point out that much of the criticism of Saint Teresa in the last week has come about due to the fact that they claim she ignored the political aspects of poverty and focused on her Vocation.

    I do my job, God does His.

  65. boxerpaws63 says:

    i’m sorry,but it was the do nothings who stayed home the last time that gave us Obama. I don’t grasp the argument that you can sit out the vote and have even a smidgen of a chance Hillary is elected. He put out the list of people he would nominate and I’m going to take him at his word. I KNOW the kind of justices Hillary would nominate. She doesn’t have to give anyone her word. We know.
    Hillary is corrupt. The FBI is corrupt. The DOJ is corrupt. The DHS is corrupt. I dread the thought that we wake up the morning of Nov 9 and find out the country that so many fought and died for has fallen to such corruption. i also dread the thought of the loss of all our fundamental rights from religion to free speech. If you think Obama had it in for Christianity; Hillary will make him look like a boy scout. THOUSANDS of ‘refugees’ will come pouring into the country. She will definitely grant amnesty to illegals and open the borders to anyone and everyone. Behind Hillary will be the shadow government of George Soros. So i will take Trump at his word and hold his feet to the fire on the nominations. I believe Mike Pence is a good man who would not sacrifice principle for any position. I’m voting Trump,encouraging others to vote Trump and because there seems to be some spark in him to do the right thing and make the right choices that i can trust he will keep his word. I simply can’t see not voting at all-i refer back to Father Z again.I would vote for the corpse of Filmore before i would let Clinton anywhere near the White House.

  66. boxerpaws63 says:

    A Clinton-Soros Administration:. Gives billions to left-wing causes: Soros started the Open Society Institute in 1993 as a way to spread his wealth to progressive causes. Using Open Society as a conduit, Soros has given more than $7 billion to a who’s who of left-wing groups. This partial list of recipients of Soros’ money says it all: ACORN, Apollo Alliance, National Council of La Raza, Tides Foundation, Huffington Post, Southern Poverty Law Center, Soujourners, People for the American Way, Planned Parenthood, and the National Organization for Women.
    And that is just the tip of the iceberg.

  67. boxerpaws63 says:

    I want Trump to be elected so we have the FREEDOM to do our job.

  68. Ann Malley says:


    “.. The idea that if I vote for Candidate Y (or do not vote) that is really support for Candidate X may be good modern politics, but it finds no support in Catholic moral theology (well, orthodox theology at least.)”

    And you won’t find that 1+1=2 in the context of Catholic moral theology. You won’t find that choosing to send your kids (and those of others) out into the snow without a coat because one was shredded and covered in toxic spew (inside and out) while the other has stains and some dirt that is has been wiped off (and will be further wiped off by melting snow) can lead to a rank case of pneumonia either.

    The reason is because we are to use our intellect, that and prudential discernment. Not just send out kids out into the snow without the best covering we can provide and with a mindset to argue against the basics of mathematics because it isn’t precisely found in the texts of Catholic moral theology.

  69. Semper Gumby says:

    Kerry: Combining videos of the Te Deum with the Marine Corps Silent Drill Platoon? Priceless.

    That reminds me of something a buddy told me. In Spain there’s a Reconquista-era monastery (Carthusian?) Our Lady of Defense, that he said is now occupied by Sisters. US Navy Seabees from the naval base at Rota help the Sisters on occasion with renovations, firewood, etc. Sometimes when a US troopship docks in Rota a dozen or so Marines and sailors spend a day of shore leave helping the Sisters. If I recall, there was a Reconquista battle and Marian intercession near the monastery.

    Interesting post and comments on the Catholics Come Home videos.

Comments are closed.