The hidden exodus: Catholics becoming Protestants

Any other institution that lost one-third of its members would want to know why.....

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.

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.

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.

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.

God’s plan that the faithful receive God, Our Lord in the most Holy Eucharist, you protest and reject this Truth so you deny His IS the New Covenant Passover Lamb.

The FAITHFUL are only those who abide by GOD'S WORD ALONE - HIS WORDS REIGN with them and they will never listen to another and NO ONE can snatch them from HIS HAND.

So watch who you say who is rejecting TRUTH as there is ONLY ONE TRUTH/JESUS THE WORD. JESUS IS THE SAVIOR!! HE is the bread of life, The WAY, THE TRUTH, THE LIFE. HE is the cornerstone of HIS CHURCH, only those who hear and obey HIS WORD ALONE He calls HIS OWN. That's faithful!!

IT IS ALL ABOUT JESUS!!

"They did NOT serve communion to the congregation as Christ instructed it be done."

Since by your own admission you do not believe that the Real Presence of Christ is present in the Eucharist you really look a little foolish pursuing this argument. It smacks of baiting. If you really believe it is the clear and direct command of Jesus Himself you would be partaking of both species weekly.

Christ’s one time “BLOODY” Sacrifice. The same sacrifice in an UNBLOODY manner is offered to the Father in Heaven AND on earth in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sins.

A bloodless sacrifice is USELESS.

Jesus is currently sitting at the right hand of the Father waiting for His enemies to be made His footstool.

He is NOT in heaven being sacrificed.

Holy Spirit inspired Scripture tells us that.

So I either believe the Catholic church which tells us that Jesus is being continually offered as a sacrifice in heaven, or I believe the Holy Spirit inspired Scripture that Jesus died once for all and is now seated in heaven at God's right hand waiting for His enemies to be made His footstool .

It's kind of a no brainer there. I KNOW God can't lie.

I have always been curious why they withheld the cup from parishioners and why only the priests could partake. Anyone know?

I took communion once in RC church back in the 70’s where the parish only received the bread. I will have to ask my DH’s experience growing up in the RC church and parochial school.

You will not provoke me to anger to hate. What ever your transgressions or trespasses I will forgive you and love you for your weaknesses.

“But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you".

“If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners love those who love them. And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you. Even sinners do that. And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, expecting to be repaid in full. But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful."

Luke 6:27-36

You will not provoke me to anger to hate

Why should I? Something has to be within you that provokes you.

love you for your weaknesses.

Satan might think I'm weak but I am STRONG 'in Christ'. It's all about JESUS, not me.

It is ALL about JESUS and what HE already DID as IT IS FINISHED

God's WORD Reigns as IT is the FINAL Authority. Thank YOU, JESUS!

Actually I didn’t know any better being born into Catholicism. I went to catholic grammar and HS and mass every day before school - the church being attached to the school so it was a requirement. We only knew what we were taught and all my relatives and friends were catholic. So there was no one around with Truth to bring it up. But why the priest were only allowed I don’t have a clue.

The Mass is prefigured from the Old Testament, The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the “continual sacrifice” spoken of in the Book of Daniel. It is the “clean oblation” the Eucharistic Sacrifice prophesied in Malachi 1:11. In the New Covenant, Judaism and Protestantism have no “continual sacrifice”, no priesthood, seee...only found in the true faith.

The ONLY sacrifice that we Christians offer to Almighty God is our sacrifice of PRAISE and we don't need a priest to do that:

Hebrews 13:15
Through Jesus, therefore, let us continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise — the fruit of lips that openly profess his name.

The BLOODY sacrifice of Christ FOR our sins is DONE. There is NO MORE A NEED for a blood sacrifice. When you believed in Christ and received Him as your savior, your sins were blotted out and God says he will remember them NO MORE. He does not judge us according to our sins ANYMORE. We stand holy and blameless before Him because of Christ. We praise him because of what HIS grace did for us. The sacrifice of praise is what God wants from us - NOT a replay of Christ's sacrifice. Believing on Him is receiving him is eating and drinking him is being born again is being saved for eternity. THIS is the TRUE faith!

“The sacrifice of praise is what God wants from us - NOT a replay of Christ’s sacrifice. Believing on Him is receiving him is eating and drinking him is being born again is being saved for eternity. THIS is the TRUE faith!”

~ ~ ~

Trying to find the simplest explanation of the Holy Mass.
If someone else has one, please share. When former Protestant minister Scott Hahn attended his first Mass, He was astounded, Scott said...this is the Book of Revelation.

from: http://www.catholicthinker.net

+ + + + +

Protestants have many arguments against the Eucharist and the Mass. They understand, correctly, that these things are the very heart of Catholicism (“Destroy the Mass, destroy the Church” – Luther). To touch upon perhaps the greatest error (or most twisted teaching): Christ IS NOT “re-crucified” at the Mass (a ridiculous and purposefully ignorant teaching): rather, Christ’s single, timeless Sacrifice on Calvary is “made present” and presented to the Father. (Such a concept was readily to familiar to the early Christians, most of them Jews who considered their Passover sacrifice to be the “re-living” of the Exodus, not just its remembrance.) God, of course, lies outside the bounds of time; all time is stretched out before Him to see. Because HUMANS OFFEND HIM CONTINUOUSLY, AND IN THE PRESENT, it is fitting that His just anger be appeased continually by Christ’s propitiatory Sacrifice.

And this is exactly what we see in Hebrews and REVELATION, understood by the first Christians as describing the Heavenly liturgy: the Lamb of God is presented continually to the Father, a propitiatory and eternal Sacrifice....

“He overlooks what is described. Jesus broke the bread before ottering it to the disciples, saying “This”.
“This” was not the unbroken loaf (masculine) but a piece or a fragment of the loaf (neuter).
Hence a fragment or piece of a loaf was literally “a break”.

~ ~ ~

What are you saying brother, translation? I am serious.

The fact, most Christians believe in the Real Presence
and everyone in Heaven does...this fact, doesn’t it inspire
a change in non-Catholic Christians, maybe...

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.