Posted on 05/17/2012 5:40:57 PM PDT by Gamecock
Any other institution that lost one-third of its members would want to know why.....
The number of people who have left the Catholic church is huge.
We all have heard stories about why people leave. Parents share stories about their children. Academics talk about their students. Everyone has a friend who has left.
While personal experience can be helpful, social science research forces us to look beyond our circle of acquaintances to see what is going on in the whole church.
The U.S. Religious Landscape Survey by the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life has put hard numbers on the anecdotal evidence: One out of every 10 Americans is an ex-Catholic. If they were a separate denomination, they would be the third-largest denomination in the United States, after Catholics and Baptists. One of three people who were raised Catholic no longer identifies as Catholic.
Any other institution that lost one-third of its members would want to know why. But the U.S. bishops have never devoted any time at their national meetings to discussing the exodus. Nor have they spent a dime trying to find out why it is happening.
Thankfully, although the U.S. bishops have not supported research on people who have left the church, the Pew Center has.
Pew’s data shows that those leaving the church are not homogenous. They can be divided into two major groups: those who become unaffiliated and those who become Protestant. Almost half of those leaving the church become unaffiliated and almost half become Protestant. Only about 10 percent of ex-Catholics join non-Christian religions. This article will focus on Catholics who have become Protestant. I am not saying that those who become unaffiliated are not important; I am leaving that discussion to another time.
Why do people leave the Catholic church to become Protestant? Liberal Catholics will tell you that Catholics are leaving because they disagree with the church’s teaching on birth control, women priests, divorce, the bishops’ interference in American politics, etc. Conservatives blame Vatican II, liberal priests and nuns, a permissive culture and the church’s social justice agenda.
One of the reasons there is such disagreement is that we tend to think that everyone leaves for the same reason our friends, relatives and acquaintances have left. We fail to recognize that different people leave for different reasons. People who leave to join Protestant churches do so for different reasons than those who become unaffiliated. People who become evangelicals are different from Catholics who become members of mainline churches.
Spiritual needs
The principal reasons given by people who leave the church to become Protestant are that their “spiritual needs were not being met” in the Catholic church (71 percent) and they “found a religion they like more” (70 percent). Eighty-one percent of respondents say they joined their new church because they enjoy the religious service and style of worship of their new faith.
In other words, the Catholic church has failed to deliver what people consider fundamental products of religion: spiritual sustenance and a good worship service. And before conservatives blame the new liturgy, only 11 percent of those leaving complained that Catholicism had drifted too far from traditional practices such as the Latin Mass.
Dissatisfaction with how the church deals with spiritual needs and worship services dwarfs any disagreements over specific doctrines. While half of those who became Protestants say they left because they stopped believing in Catholic teaching, specific questions get much lower responses. Only 23 percent said they left because of the church’s teaching on abortion and homosexuality; only 23 percent because of the church’s teaching on divorce; only 21 percent because of the rule that priests cannot marry; only 16 percent because of the church’s teaching on birth control; only 16 percent because of the way the church treats women; only 11 percent because they were unhappy with the teachings on poverty, war and the death penalty.
The data shows that disagreement over specific doctrines is not the main reason Catholics become Protestants. We also have lots of survey data showing that many Catholics who stay disagree with specific church teachings. Despite what theologians and bishops think, doctrine is not that important either to those who become Protestant or to those who stay Catholic.
People are not becoming Protestants because they disagree with specific Catholic teachings; people are leaving because the church does not meet their spiritual needs and they find Protestant worship service better.
Nor are the people becoming Protestants lazy or lax Christians. In fact, they attend worship services at a higher rate than those who remain Catholic. While 42 percent of Catholics who stay attend services weekly, 63 percent of Catholics who become Protestants go to church every week. That is a 21 percentage-point difference.
Catholics who became Protestant also claim to have a stronger faith now than when they were children or teenagers. Seventy-one percent say their faith is “very strong,” while only 35 percent and 22 percent reported that their faith was very strong when they were children and teenagers, respectively. On the other hand, only 46 percent of those who are still Catholic report their faith as “very strong” today as an adult.
Thus, both as believers and as worshipers, Catholics who become Protestants are statistically better Christians than those who stay Catholic. We are losing the best, not the worst.
Some of the common explanations of why people leave do not pan out in the data. For example, only 21 percent of those becoming Protestant mention the sex abuse scandal as a reason for leaving. Only 3 percent say they left because they became separated or divorced.
Becoming Protestant
If you believed liberals, most Catholics who leave the church would be joining mainline churches, like the Episcopal church. In fact, almost two-thirds of former Catholics who join a Protestant church join an evangelical church. Catholics who become evangelicals and Catholics who join mainline churches are two very distinct groups. We need to take a closer look at why each leaves the church.
Fifty-four percent of both groups say that they just gradually drifted away from Catholicism. Both groups also had almost equal numbers (82 percent evangelicals, 80 percent mainline) saying they joined their new church because they enjoyed the worship service. But compared to those who became mainline Protestants, a higher percentage of those becoming evangelicals said they left because their spiritual needs were not being met (78 percent versus 57 percent) and that they had stopped believing in Catholic teaching (62 percent versus 20 percent). They also cited the church’s teaching on the Bible (55 percent versus 16 percent) more frequently as a reason for leaving. Forty-six percent of these new evangelicals felt the Catholic church did not view the Bible literally enough. Thus, for those leaving to become evangelicals, spiritual sustenance, worship services and the Bible were key. Only 11 percent were unhappy with the church’s teachings on poverty, war, and the death penalty Ñ the same percentage as said they were unhappy with the church’s treatment of women. Contrary to what conservatives say, ex-Catholics are not flocking to the evangelicals because they think the Catholic church is politically too liberal. They are leaving to get spiritual nourishment from worship services and the Bible.
Looking at the responses of those who join mainline churches also provides some surprising results. For example, few (20 percent) say they left because they stopped believing in Catholic teachings. However, when specific issues were mentioned in the questionnaire, more of those joining mainline churches agreed that these issues influenced their decision to leave the Catholic church. Thirty-one percent cited unhappiness with the church’s teaching on abortion and homosexuality, women, and divorce and remarriage, and 26 percent mentioned birth control as a reason for leaving. Although these numbers are higher than for Catholics who become evangelicals, they are still dwarfed by the number (57 percent) who said their spiritual needs were not met in the Catholic church.
Thus, those becoming evangelicals were more generically unhappy than specifically unhappy with church teaching, while those who became mainline Protestant tended to be more specifically unhappy than generically unhappy with church teaching. The unhappiness with the church’s teaching on poverty, war and the death penalty was equally low for both groups (11 percent for evangelicals; 10 percent for mainline).
What stands out in the data on Catholics who join mainline churches is that they tend to cite personal or familiar reasons for leaving more frequently than do those who become evangelicals. Forty-four percent of the Catholics who join mainline churches say that they married someone of the faith they joined, a number that trumps all doctrinal issues. Only 22 percent of those who join the evangelicals cite this reason.
Perhaps after marrying a mainline Christian and attending his or her church’s services, the Catholic found the mainline services more fulfilling than the Catholic service. And even if they were equally attractive, perhaps the exclusion of the Protestant spouse from Catholic Communion makes the more welcoming mainline church attractive to an ecumenical couple.
Those joining mainline communities also were more likely to cite dissatisfaction of the Catholic clergy (39 percent) than were those who became evangelical (23 percent). Those who join mainline churches are looking for a less clerically dominated church.
Lessons from the data
There are many lessons that we can learn from the Pew data, but I will focus on only three.
First, those who are leaving the church for Protestant churches are more interested in spiritual nourishment than doctrinal issues. Tinkering with the wording of the creed at Mass is not going to help. No one except the Vatican and the bishops cares whether Jesus is “one in being” with the Father or “consubstantial” with the Father. That the hierarchy thinks this is important shows how out of it they are.
While the hierarchy worries about literal translations of the Latin text, people are longing for liturgies that touch the heart and emotions. More creativity with the liturgy is needed, and that means more flexibility must be allowed. If you build it, they will come; if you do not, they will find it elsewhere. The changes that will go into effect this Advent will make matters worse, not better.
Second, thanks to Pope Pius XII, Catholic scripture scholars have had decades to produce the best thinking on scripture in the world. That Catholics are leaving to join evangelical churches because of the church teaching on the Bible is a disgrace. Too few homilists explain the scriptures to their people. Few Catholics read the Bible.
The church needs a massive Bible education program. The church needs to acknowledge that understanding the Bible is more important than memorizing the catechism. If we could get Catholics to read the Sunday scripture readings each week before they come to Mass, it would be revolutionary. If you do not read and pray the scriptures, you are not an adult Christian. Catholics who become evangelicals understand this.
Finally, the Pew data shows that two-thirds of Catholics who become Protestants do so before they reach the age of 24. The church must make a preferential option for teenagers and young adults or it will continue to bleed. Programs and liturgies that cater to their needs must take precedence over the complaints of fuddy-duddies and rubrical purists.
Current religious education programs and teen groups appear to have little effect on keeping these folks Catholic, according to the Pew data, although those who attend a Catholic high school do appear to stay at a higher rate. More research is needed to find out what works and what does not.
The Catholic church is hemorrhaging members. It needs to acknowledge this and do more to understand why. Only if we acknowledge the exodus and understand it will we be in a position to do something about it.
Did you notice it didn’t say Catholic Church or any church for that matter?
Do you always talk about people behind their back?
The apostles knew that Peter was not the leader of the group.
"Now there arose a dispute among them, which of them was reputed to be the greatest. But he said to them, 'The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them, and they who exercise authority over them are called Benefactors. But not so with you. On the contrary, let him who is greatest among you become as the youngest, and him who is chief as the servant.'" (Luke 22:24-26).
The very fact that the apostles had an argument among themselves shows they did not understand that Peter was to be prince. Also, the occasion of the argument was the night of the betrayal--the last night of the Lord's earthly ministry--and yet the apostles still did not understand that Christ had given Peter a position of primacy. The Lord settled the argument, not by stating that He had already made Peter head, but by declaring that the Gentiles have their heads, "But not so with you." Thus, Jesus very plainly taught that no one would occupy any such place as a Benefactor (or Pope) to exercise authority over the others.
The Catholic church has attempted to bolster it's authority by tradition, looking back and claiming roles for Peter and others like someone named Clement whereas there is no support in the Scriptures for these claims.
And when tradition and Scripture conflict it will always be tradition that is favored..
Dear CYC, I had post #1384 removed and apologize to you because it was inappropriate and mean
I will confess this sin at my next confession
I don't take offence easily nor do I suppose that anyone is bad because of their views so it's not personal to me at all. At the end of day we're sharing our opinions with whatever value that may have.
Great stuff, eh? So sharpen your blade and I'll see you on the green.
Or one of its synonyms that does not attribute motive (i.e. does not "make it personal") such as: capricious, conflicting, discordant, dissonant, incompatible, incongruent, irreconcilable.
That's because we don't need priests any more because the system of sacrifices is over and done with.
Jesus is our great high priest, making intercession for us before God and His sacrifice did away with sins.
Hebrews 10:10-18 10 And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
11 And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But when Christ[b] had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, 13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. 14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.
15 And the Holy Spirit also bears witness to us; for after saying, 16 “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws on their hearts, and write them on their minds,”
17 then he adds, “I will remember their sins and their lawless deeds no more.”
18 Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin.
Does that mean the Greek?
I already posted the Greek words in post 1,389. *Elder* is the correct translation. *Priest* is not.
“Inconsistent.
Or one of its synonyms that does not attribute motive (i.e. does not “make it personal”) such as: capricious, conflicting, discordant, dissonant, incompatible, incongruent, irreconcilable.”
~ ~ ~
It’s pretty obvious, by the thousands, Protestants are “inconsistent” in their beliefs about God’s Word, the result of professing heresy.
Thanks for replying RM. Interesting, those words you gave me show the fruit of private judgment. Will you comment on the heresy of private judgment?
The perfect example was given to show why private judgment which means personal interpretation of Scripture is heresy.
Taking the same two verses, Acts 15:8-9, stating they mean everyone has been given authority, “lay” people and God’s chosen leader of the Church, Peter who was speaking in those verses. Then a few posts later stating those two verses mean something totally different! Was it, the person realized he was going to be called on hist first interpretation.
If everyone decided the meaning of Scripture, there would
be so many opinions causing constant division. That’s why
God chose one authority.
A sentence in the latest message given non-Catholic Christian seer, Priscilla Van Sutphin.
The in parenthesis, the “still” means those who follow God after the Great Warning, Protestants hear the Great Warning called “the awakening” in prophecy. One end time people.
May 29, 2012
“Can you see how many are now speaking the same? My body is coming to more maturity and they will be speaking the same things, [those that are willing to still follow ME ].”
http://ft111.com/priscilla.htm
‘And when tradition and Scripture conflict it will always be tradition that is favored”...
~ ~ ~
Martin Luther’s “Bible Alone” is a heresy. Way to go~@! You are coming along admitting there is tradition.
Go further, realize you accept some tradition. Don’t take it so personal, you didn’t break away from the Church, you are following what you’ve been taught.
CynicalBear:
“Do you always talk about people behind their back?”
~ ~ ~
(i.e. does not “make it personal”)
You said don’t make it personal. The above is slam directed at me, that’s personal, not kind at all.
Admit you’re Catholic, it would show people reading this thread, you are fair.
Another huge surprise! A noob on the RF banging on a mod. That always turns out swell.
I've always acknowledged the existence and following of a number of traditions by Christians. Some good, some not.
“Martin Luther’s “Bible Alone” is a heresy”
Whether it is or not Marty will have to answer for not me since I don't follow him.
“Go further, realize you accept some tradition. Don’t take it so personal, you didn’t break away from the Church, you are following what you’ve been taught.”
No, I didn't “break away from the Church”, “the Church” broke away from the Christian church and became an apostate organ of the Roman state.
“you are following what you’ve been taught.”
That's one of the nicest things anyone has ever said to me!
I think I may be getting a case of the vapors here or am I just blushing?
Our discussion is proving “private judgment” is heresy. You stated in a past couple of posts two interpretations of Acts 15:8-9. Your FIRST, interpretation...”lay” people have the same authority as Peter and the Apostles. That’s not what those verses are about. Besides, there is no teaching from Christ that everyone has the authority to interpret Scripture. Multiple interpretations result in a house divided, PIOS does not come from God.
Today ~ CynicalBear:
“Don’t give me that error from the CC that Peter was the leader. If he was it would have been him who made the final decision.”
Look at all the verses, the ones preceeding Acts 15:8-9 and the ones to follow.
~ ~ ~
Acts 15:7
And when there had been much disputing, Peter, rising up, said to them: Men, brethren, you know, that in former days GOD made choice among us, that BY MY MOUTH the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
“Remember that Scripture must support Scripture, and since Scripture clearly demonstrates Peter’s primacy the Council of Jerusalem must be read in that context. So when you read Scripture you must ask yourself not only what is the author saying but also illustrating in the text.
First, what is the council deciding? Whether or not the gentiles should be circumcised. Okay, what next, after much debate, Peter stands up and addresses the assembly. Now think about that; if James was the authority why would Peter stand and speak first? Why you might ask? One, Peter has primacy over the apostles bestowed upon him by Christ. Two, Peter is always mentioned first among the apostles in Scripture indicating his primacy. Three, the writer wants to be congruent with the rest of Scripture and show that Peter is mentioned first.
Now here’s the key part. What is the first sentence that Peter says? Pay close attention now. He says from the earliest days God chose HIM, among the rest of the apostles, to covert the Gentiles. So the gentiles were entrusted to Peter by God. Since the gentiles were entrusted to Peter by God the gentiles are Peters domain. It is Peter’s prerogative then, to decide what is to be done with them, and that is what happens. Peter stands up and tells everyone what should be done. Then there was silence. Paul and Barnabas spoke about the signs and wonders that God worked through them. Then JAMES being the BISHOP OF JERUSELEM wholeheartedly agrees with Peter’s initial decision. When James says , “I judge therefore,” he is not invoking supreme authority over Peter. He’s actually saying “I am firmly of the opinion therefore”. Hope that helps”
“No, I didn’t “break away from the Church”, “the Church” broke away from the Christian church and became an apostate organ of the Roman state.”
~ ~ ~
I am sorry CYC, the above is false. HISTORY shows and the
famous major science tested MIRACLES are more proof the RCC is the Church Jesus established.
“The Christian Church”...kinda vague. The Roman Catholic
Church canonized Scripture. Without her God given authority you would not have a Bible to quote from...that’s a basic everyone must finally come to accept.
God wants us all to believe the same. What did He just
say in the message to Priscilla Van Sutphin, a Protestant
messenger?
Drives me crazy, ignoring their own prophets.
Admit you’re Catholic, it would show people reading this thread, you are fair.
“Another huge surprise! A noob on the RF banging on a mod. That always turns out swell.”
~ ~ ~
It seems unfair, personal insults are allowed by some people in this thread. I asked a question to figure out why.
“Banging” is a very uncouth term, why did you choose it?
So to you and you alone I say good nite.
Non-Catholics are posting quotes and comments about Augustine, Polycarp, Irenaeus, etc.
These men believed in the Real Presence, how come their
words to show their belief in the Eucharist are ignored?
I can share a couple of their quotes. Believe in the
Eucharist and all misunderstandings about the faith will
be straightened out. Go for the pinnacle.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.