Catholics Trail Protestants in Church Attendance

Gallup News Service ^ | December 16, 2003 | George H. Gallup Jr.

[RWR8189]

 

 

 

George Gallup Jr. is the Chairman of the George H. Gallup International Institute and is recognized internationally for his research and study on youth, health, religion, and urban problems.

After dipping to an all-time low in the wake of the recent sex abuse scandals afflicting the Catholic Church, weekly church attendance among Catholics appears to be on the rebound. However, historical Gallup Poll data show that Protestants have now clearly overtaken Catholics in church attendance, for the first time in Gallup polling history.

Between March 2002, when the news of the scandals broke, and February 2003, weekly church attendance among Catholics fell nine percentage points to 35%, the lowest measurement since Gallup began asking the question in 1955. By November 2003*, however, the figure had climbed 10 percentage points to 45%. Protestants' levels of church attendance, meanwhile, remained fairly stable during this same period.

While it is up from earlier this year, that 45% figure among Catholics is 29 percentage points lower than the 74% recorded when this question was first asked in 1955. Comparatively, Protestants' church attendance is actually slightly higher in November 2003 (48%) than it was in 1955 (42%).

Although religious convictions and beliefs tend to change little over the years, religious behavior reflects the tenor of the times to some degree, as a brief review of the last half-century reveals.

The 1950s

Expanding business and industry, accompanied by tremendous growth in the cities and suburbs, defined the 1950s. The post-World War II decade was also full of religious vitality, with rapid growth in church membership, especially in the booming new suburbs. Weekly church attendance was at 74% among Catholics and 42% among Protestants.

The 1960s

In the 1960s, Americans experienced major change and upheaval: rapid technological advances, the full emergence of the civil rights movement, urban riots, the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, and Robert Kennedy, war protests, the beginnings of the women's liberation movement, and strong anti-establishment feelings.

That anti-establishment sentiment may have carried over to organized religion, as weekly church attendance started to slide among both Protestants and Catholics. By 1969, church attendance was down 11 points from 1955 among Catholics, and 5 points among Protestants.

The Second Vatican Council, which began in 1962, ushered in an age of reform in the Roman Catholic Church. But despite the reforms offered in Vatican II, Pope Paul VI's 1968 encyclical on birth control reaffirmed the church's strict stance on the issue. Many Catholics, particularly young adults, may have felt that they could not oppose the pope's encyclical and remain good Catholics, and therefore began to attend mass less frequently.

The 1970s

The activism of the 1960s gave way to disillusionment and cynicism in the 1970s. Americans were growing more pessimistic about the economy, the prospects for peace in the world, social institutions, and their own futures. Catholic attendance at Mass continued to slip during this decade -- from 60% in 1970 to 52% in 1979 -- but Protestants' weekly attendance showed little statistical change.

The 1980s

The public mood of discouragement, apparent during most of the 1970s, gave way to a far more upbeat frame of mind in the 1980s. Economic optimism increased during this period, and while concern over many problems confronting society -- such as crime, unemployment, and the nuclear threat -- remained, Americans were far less apprehensive about the immediate future than they had been in the previous decade. Catholic church attendance seemed to change very little during this decade, hovering between 51% and 53%.

The 1990s

Catholic church attendance has experienced some rises and dips during the 1990s and the first few years of the 21^st century, but nowhere near the decline that occurred between the 1950s and the 1980s. In March 2002, Protestants reported attending church more frequently on average than Catholics for the first time in nearly a half-century of Gallup Poll data collection. Protestants' levels of church attendance have remained higher than that of Catholics since then.

Bottom Line

Protestants pulled into a clear lead over Catholics in weekly church attendance after the sex scandals that rocked the Catholic Church in early 2002 -- but the decline in Catholic church attendance began long before the scandals. The latest November figure shows a decided rebound in attendance at Mass, but Catholics still trail Protestants by a small margin.

*Results are based on telephone interviews with 1,004 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted Nov. 10-12, 2003. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points.

[wimpycat]

More pathetic than hilarious, really.

I'm Southern Baptist and I don't think that those who cling to the Whore of Babylon...er, I mean Catholics, are going to hell...necessarily.

DISCLAIMER: THIS HAS BEEN A JOKE. THIS WAS ONLY A JOKE. IF IT HAD BEEN A REAL STATEMENT, YOU WOULD HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED OF, ETC. ETC.

(I really am Southern Baptist, though.)

[Rome2000]

Protestants were justifiably pissed over indulgences 500 years ago, but seem silly and supportive of horrid leftist personages like Howard Dean and Ho Chi MIn.

The split will be reversed in our lifetimes.

[potlatch]

I checked back through, and saw only one earlier comment #5 by tbird5, which stated a simple fact, no arguing at all??

[Rome2000]

So do you deny the historical figure Jesus ever exhisted then?

Jesus had to have existed, but I draw the line at Joseph Smith.

[wimpycat]

It's not a simple fact. It's a gross exaggeration. The term "Protestants" encompasses a very wide variety of beliefs. There are lots of Protestants who think they'll go to hell for not attending church, or even worse, for not attending the "right" church.

[potlatch]

This was tbirds only comment #5, until a simple one to me;

"Catholics have to go to mass every Sunday. Protestants don't have to attend services weekly. This is sad for all those that call themselves Catholic."

I just can not find that to be a gross exaggeration of anything!! I have never known that Protestants HAVE to attend weekly services.

[WackyKat]

Protestants were justifiably pissed over indulgences 500 years ago, but seem silly and supportive of horrid leftist personages like Howard Dean and Ho Chi MIn.

If you think that Protestants are "leftist" you must not know many of them, and you certainly don't live in the South

Many Protestants I know denounce Catholics as being "leftist"

See what I said about the feud being funny?

[Salvation]

Indeed a wonderful addition to every day. God bless you!

Merry Christmas!

[liberty or death]

We all have a direct lineage to Jesus. He died on the cross to forgive all sins. Each individual has a direct line to him just by bowing and confessing to him. War and death are all that religions can claim throughout history because their leaders foolishly claim to be the heir to a mystical lineage or some other such nonsense.

[Guelph4ever]

Quick question from the worst kind of "Papist" there is: a convert (yes, I *willingly* left a Protestant church for the *fun* of confession and penance):

a) Do you really believe that the herald of Christ was named John the Southern Baptist?

and

b) Do you really think Jesus & the apostles drank grape juice at the Last Supper?

Q: What do you call that little window in the back of a liquor store?
A: The Baptist window!

-> There are 3 fundamental truths about religion: Jews don't recognize Jesus as the Son of God, Protestants don't recognize the Pope as the Vicar of Christ, and Baptists don't recognize each other at the bar on Saturday nights.

THESE HAVE BEEN JOKES, ONLY JOKES, AND NOTHING BUT JOKES, SO HELP ME GOD.

(made in honor of a great Baptist preacher [4-u Bro. Bill] who always had a Baptist joke on hand)

P.S. -Were you aware that the Baptist University of Baylor in Waco, Texas (oldest one in the state) has been trying to get rid of their president, a former Baptist preacher, FOR: (get this,) BEING TOO BAPTIST. Too repeat, it is a BAPTIST university, founded by the BAPTIST church. I was outraged.

Anyway, sorry, let the serious stuff continue...

[familyop]

It's obvious by the recent news that I don't like to mention, even to this extent, about American Catholic and Episcopal (Am. Anglican) clergy, that there is no solo cause for the downturn in attendance. The same is true of the many "little churches." There are many causes, and all churches (including the various Protestant) have been hurt by those causes. The small churches only have some advantage in attendance, because their heirarchies work slightly more backward, that is, partially from the bottom, up, in administration, even of doctrine (flexible Reformist catechisms of sorts), sometimes. And yes, it is true that such flexibility toward adaptation is often not for the better, but this difference is not the focus of what I seek to present for your consideration.

Our high divorce rates have much to do with church attendence going downward. A society of whole families will more likely attend church regularly. I will leave this as a premise and common knowledge, although the following contains a bit more information for the premise.

Romanticists of the late 1700s and early 1800s sang their seductive songs in efforts to elevate adultery and make it seem good. Ministers like Moses Hull and Henry Beecher seduced the wives of all away from their husbands in their poetic, charismatic sermons in favor of "soul communion" (romantic love, rationalizing adultery), etc. Western society began to put their propaganda into policy. Engels, Mao and other socialists knew and wrote that women must be liberated from their husbands and put into the labor market to strengthen socialism and to break faith in our Lord. Both men and women participated in this earlier part as leaders of the "revolution" against family structure. The men helped with hopes of satisfying their lusts.

The policies of all of the early pioneers of propaganda to destroy the family were implemented in a sledge hammer blow against the family with the more recent hippie revolt. Both lustful men and women participated in this part, also.

Laymen and leaders need to be honest regardless of various feelings or lights within (i.e., regardless of mysticist and spiritualist tendencies away from scripture and early catechisms). With all agreement that yes, our men have much to learn also, I leave you with the following. Yes, it is focused on only one issue of many issues affecting our families and faith, but it is focused on a view of something that is much neglected. I pray that our Father in heaven blesses you all in your good efforts.

Do you want men and the women who love men to return to the churches?

Driving the Divorce Rate: Who’s Teaching the Women?

August 3, 2003

by Art Lemasters

We know that with other things being equal, more children have healthier lives if they have both mothers and fathers in intact families. We have learned that with the high divorce rate, something needs to be done to train fathers to stay with their families and that far too many fathers abandon their wives and children, unwilling to abide by their responsibilities… We’ve been on the wrong track.

Wives have been filing for divorce at about twice the rate (more, in some places) of husbands. See the study report, “These Boots are Made for Walking: Why Wives File for Divorce” (Margaret F. Brinig and Douglas W. Allen, 2000, The American Law and Economics Association) in which an enormous number of divorce certificates from four U.S. states were analyzed.

Why have so many supposedly conservative ministers and socio-political writers sermonized exclusively on the problem of husbands abandoning or being “absent” from their wives and children? Are we really doing women any good service by refusing to truthfully define the problems instigating the high rate of divorce in order to make it lower? Are we doing the potential children of divorce any good by the same?

So how can we assure that fewer children will suffer from the ill effects of divorce? According to the Brinig and Allen report, no-fault divorce and “who gets the children” are the predominant motivations—not “cruelty” (“6%,” with all forms of cruelty, including adultery). We have allowed the saturation of our media and government with subjective feminist propaganda, full of exaggerations, to divert our attention from the prevalent causes of divorce. We need to know more about those prevalent causes before we can take effective action to lower the divorce rate.

Who’s teaching the women? We know that many socially conservative organizations are now teaching men to be good fathers. Think about it. Women are learning about issues of marriage and dealing with husbands through Women’s Studies courses (feminist and humanist propaganda), local “battered women’s shelters” (which disseminate more of the same in each community) and many other kinds of organizations that teach women to be independent—independent from husbands. Women are also taught by such organizations to know the incentives to divorce (propaganda and tactics that make divorce an easy lifestyle option for them). Most conservative organizations have been recipients of some of the same liberal, anti-family propaganda—many without knowing it.

The Brinig and Allen report should be sufficient to dispell the common myth that fathers, more often than mothers, abandon their families, but there are other sources of fact on the same issue. Two more references are “Who Divorced Whom: Methodological and Theoretical Issues” [Sanford L. Braver, Marnie Whitley and Christine Ng. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage Vol 20(1/2) 1993, p.1.] and the May 21, 1991 National Center for Health Statistics, Monthly Vital Statistics Report [Vol. 38, No. 12 (S) 2].

Many conservative organizations and organizations of faith are teaching men to be good fathers and husbands. That may solve part of the problem, and it is a good effort. Who will teach women to be good wives and mothers?

[Adapted from first publication to the Family Operations forum on February the 1st, 2001.]

[Guelph4ever]

An ironic accusation coming from one named "liberty or death". People have been killed by religion, but others have also been uplifted by it, saved by it, freed by it and given back their human dignity by it.

Are you aware of how many millions throughout history have been killed in the name of liberty? Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot etc all used the name of liberty in their massacres. Does that make true liberty bad, the fact that its name has been misused? I don't think so.

[familyop]

Mark 10:17-21 (Biblia Sacra Vulgata)

    et cum egressus esset in viam procurrens quidam genu flexo ante eum     rogabat eum magister bone quid faciam ut vitam aeternam percipiam

    Iesus autem dixit ei quid me dicis bonum nemo bonus nisi unus Deus

    praecepta nosti ne adulteres ne occidas ne fureris ne falsum     testimonium dixeris ne fraudem feceris honora patrem tuum et     matrem

    et ille respondens ait illi magister omnia haec conservavi a iuventute     mea

    Iesus autem intuitus eum dilexit eum et dixit illi unum tibi deest vade     quaecumque habes vende et da pauperibus et habebis thesaurum in     caelo et veni sequere me

(King James)

    And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running,     and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that     I may inherit eternal life?

    And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none     good but one, that is, God.     Thou knowest the commandments, Do     not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false     witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother.

    And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed     from my youth.

    Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing     thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the     poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the     cross, and follow me.

[familyop]

...sorry about the formatting the first time. ...home this one works. Mark 10:17-21 (Biblia Sacra Vulgata)

    et cum egressus esset in viam procurrens quidam genu flexo ante eum     rogabat eum magister bone quid faciam ut vitam aeternam percipiam

    Iesus autem dixit ei quid me dicis bonum nemo bonus nisi unus Deus

    praecepta nosti ne adulteres ne occidas ne fureris ne falsum     testimonium dixeris ne fraudem feceris honora patrem tuum et     matrem

    et ille respondens ait illi magister omnia haec conservavi a iuventute     mea

    Iesus autem intuitus eum dilexit eum et dixit illi unum tibi deest vade     quaecumque habes vende et da pauperibus et habebis thesaurum in     caelo et veni sequere me

(King James)

    And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running,     and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that     I may inherit eternal life?

    And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none     good but one, that is, God.     Thou knowest the commandments, Do     not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false     witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother.

    And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed     from my youth.

    Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing     thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the     poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the     cross, and follow me.

[k2blader]

This is kinda interesting, but I'm not sure it really means anything.

Taken on its own, attending church is a "religious" tradition which has little to do with Christianity.

Now if Gallup were able, through some miraculous means, to get some statistics on *worship*, that'd be a different story.

[familyop]

Oops. Oh, well, it's there. ...apparently, my brain loses HTML tags when it needs sleep.

[enuu]

Protestants don't make the distinction between mortal and venial sins. With the emphasis on a personal relationship to God, they emphasize the importance of attending church for educational and worship reasons, and for fellowship, but that's a diffenent concept entirely than the Catholic one of the Eucharist as a Sacrament that instills grace.

[enuu]

Very good point. What strikes me is that less than half of people who are identifying themselves as belonging to a religion attend the church services of that religion. So apparently people consider something internal or individual to define them as Protestant or Catholic, not whether they follow the guidelines or dictates of their faith. Is one a Baptist, for example, if one does not go to a Baptist church regularly?

[familyop]

"Protestants don't make the distinction between mortal and venial sins."

Extremely liberal Protestants (misnomer, as they are more illuminist than Protestant and have been an opposition against the Church long before Protestantism) don't believe that scripture is any more inspired than poetry.

Somewhat liberal Protestants believe that no sin is punishable for one who has repented only once in one's life.

More orthodox Protestants (few, indeed) distinguish between sins according to what scripture says about various sins (worst sins being mentioned with words like "abomination," "death," "shall not enter," etc.). The more orthodox, conservative Protestants also distinguish between ceremonial and moral Law. These believe most people in all churches to be infidels.

So rather than loving or hating sins to various extents under one catechism or convention, Protestants in general do so under several. And illuminists (those who believe in spiritual power but do not believe the scriptures at all) are equal opportunity emissaries.

[Dr. Scarpetta]

In other words, it is the evangelicals that are attending church, not the "mainline" (theologically liberal) ones.

You're right. The beautiful, historic, Protestant mainline churches are empty, except for the elderly. The Presbyterians, United Church of Christ, the Methodists, the Lutherans, etc. have been taken over at the highest level by DEMOCRATS.

IMO, one of the reasons they've gone downhill is because they're PRO-CHOICE. They even give medical abortion coverage to their pastors and send money to the NCC, which is used for liberal causes.

The evangelical Protestant churches are PRO-LIFE and do not send money to the NCC.