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.

I have a LOT of friends who are former Catholics, and they did not leave because of marriage. Almost all of them say that they started reading their Bibles and realized that the Catholic church did not adhere to its teachings.

Largely agree with that statement, I'd have to add that in my experience, my wife of nearly 26 years and I left the Catholic church also because of the "cafeteria Catholics" who keep trying to change the Church. I'm sure you've met them, they're the ones who try and politicize and change the Church's stance on everything from Birth Control, family, marriage, illegal immigration and more.

Honestly, my wife and I genuinely loved the Priest in our Church. We both knew him for several years before he married us. A finer example of a man with a full heart for God who exemplified grace and mercy you'd be hard pressed to find.

It was really all the other b.s. going on in and around the Church caused in large part by the cafeteria Catholics who wanted to pick and choose what they believed in while still calling themselves Catholics that literally pushed us over the edge to leaving the Church.

We've been members of an Evangelical Christian church for the past 13 years now and while I really like the fact that we belong to a fully Christ and Gospel centered church, it truly does break my heart to see what's happening to the Catholic church as that's where my relationship with Jesus started.

I'm really tired of people focusing on the minutia that divides us. Our relationship with Christ independent of whether one calls themselves a Catholic, Protestant, Baptist, Evangelical or whatever should be what unites us, rather than the Religious labels dividing us.

Respectfully,
USC

I agree, and understand why. Regardless of what the “study” says, 100% of the ex-Catholics I know left the Church

100% of the Catholics that I know who left the church...and I know at least 6 (including a nun)...left because they sought spiritual growth and a personal walk with Christ...and the Catholic Church wasn't giving that too them.

Do you really have to ask why people are leaving the church when only 12% of Catholics believe the Bible is literally true...when only 7% read their Bibles with any regularity...when only 17% think Satan is real...or only 9% believe that their most important relationship is between them and God?

Now...the numbers for Evangelicals and mainline protestants are not near what they should be...but you get some disgruntled Catholic with a hole in their heart who wasn't discipled very well (and believe me...with numbers like this...it AIN'T the people...you have a SYSTEMIC problem) and they will leave the church in a heartbeat for something they perceive as real.

Sounds interesting, but what does that mean? Are all of the members and clergy excommunicated from the PCA? If so, what does that mean?

What do you think it means? It means what it says. It means that that congregation is no longer considered part of the PCA.

Thanks for the confirmation. Does that mean that every member of the particular church will be unwelcome at every current PCA institution? How is that enforced or communicated?

Does that mean that they are unable to participate in any PCA or affiliated services?

What do you think it means? It means what it says - "they are not allowed to particpate in communion and then asked to leave the church if the sin continues with no repentance". I should have added the part about the repentance.

I don't know what it means. That's why I asked. Does this apply to every Reformed denomination or just every PCA institution?

It sounds more encouraging than I thought, but can you explain exactly what this process means?

The process is exactly as described in scripture. Please refer to Matthew 18:15-20: 15 “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. 17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. 18 Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 19 Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. 20 For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.”

If they go to another PCA church, or even another Reformed church, are they able to participate in communion there?

What does your particular group do about child molesters? And what does that mean to their practice of worship - assuming that they have any.

I am not Metmom, but I know of a solid local Baptist congregation who had an elder who was found to be a child molester.

I didn't know that metmom was Baptist.

They Matthew 18 and confronted him. They prayed with him. He did repent, but he is no longer an elder and they immediately reported him to the authorities and obviously is never again allowed to be alone with children. This is standard proceedure in biblical churches, and has always been.

I thought that you were PCA. However, were there any other repercussions to this elder? Was he excommunicated?

What is the history of your church on child molesters?

In my diocese, there are a half dozen priests and other clergy over the last 30 years that have been jailed. All have been removed from the ministry of the Church and been excommunicated. The bishop who oversaw some of this has has his name over the local Catholic university's library removed in shame (as well as our KofC Council's founding name) and been convicted of abetting (or some such). I don't believe that he has been excommunicated, but as he is still alive, the possibility still exists, since the investigation is still going on.

Sounds interesting, but what does that mean? Are all of the members and clergy excommunicated from the PCA? If so, what does that mean?

Ex-communication means nothing when you recognize the fact that salvation is through by grace alone, through faith alone in Christ alone.

Ah. Nothing. Gotcha.

If you believe that ex-communication affects your salvation, then you are placing your trust in the church to save you and not Jesus.

Once again, I see the reason that people leave the Faith. Their faith is in themselves and their religion is what they construct. Everything is justified 'in the name of Jesus'. I hear that argument from everyone from Osteen to Swaggart to Oral Roberts to Bakker to Haggard to...

You keep telling me that nobody leaves the Faith for personal reasons and you keep showing me in your posts that that is exactly what you have done.

Churches don't save and churches can't save. Peter speaking here..... Acts 4:12 And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

But as was ably demonstrated by the good Dr. E., it is the definitions and the doctrines as taught by the Church that teach orthodoxy, else anything goes and whatever springs from the whims of men may be construed as Christianity.

Your failboat has just arrived. Mormons believe in Christ as Lord, King, God and Saviour.

Mormons believe in a non-virgin born Jesus who is the half-brother of Lucifer who was born of another one of Elohim's wives.

In other words, without the definition of the Church's teachings, anything goes. Thanks for the confirmation.

But how does that qualify as a response to Dr. E's statement?

See my last statement.

For all the grilling of lupie about the Reformed church, of which you are not even a member, how about answering some questions about your own church?

Like why it allows child molesting priests to continue to serve as priests and represent Christ to the parishioners?

Why hasn’t the Catholic church defrocked those priests? Why the mentality of *Once a priest, always a priest?*. when Catholics scorn OSAS?

Why serve communion to pro-abortion politicians? Why doesn’t the RCC enforce it’s OWN rules on its OWN congregants before throwing stones at others?

Why doesn’t the Catholic church ex-communicate those who are in sin by supporting abortion and homosexual marriage instead of granting them Catholic funerals?

Why the double standard of expecting absolute perfection out of others and giving themselves a pass in their own corrupt and immoral behavior?

Or is it just too much a matter of *Do as I say, not as I do?*

Catholics who hold to double standards, giving themselves and their church a pass while condemning others for the same behavior are the epitome of hypocrisy.

Physician, heal thyself.

Nobody owes you any answers as we answer to God for what we do, not men.

I do not know if Metmom is Baptist. I didn’t say that she is. I have no clue which church she attends, but from her testimony I know that she belongs to the church of Christ and is a member of His body. You might want to go back and read things more thoroughly. I sense a lot of confusion on your part because you seem to keep asking the same questions multiple times and distort what I posted.

Different Protestant and Reformed denominations have their own methods of knowing whether someone has been denied fellowship or is somehow under church discipline if the person is honest. Just like the Roman church. It all depends on the person. Someone who is excomunicated from the Roman church can go to any church and eat the wafer. Nobody will stop them at the door - even if there are an excommunicated somodomizing ex-priest who is out of prison.

In the end, God knows the heart. The LORD knows who is bringing judgement on themselves by partaking in the Lord’s supper while in rebellion to Him. Man can’t. A big man-made, man-run institution like the Roman church can’t. Nor can a small bible believing country church of 30 people.

Once again, I see the reason that people leave the Faith.

Nobody leaves *the Faith* (capital *F*) because there is no such thing as the *Faith* (capital *F*).

People leave the Catholic church, just as they leave other churches, but leaving a church is not abandoning faith, it is not leaving Christ.

Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

Faith is a very simple thing. It's just taking God at His word and what He says is really is in spite of the fact that we can't see it.

Nothing mysterious about it.

I suppose in one sense, you are correct. I left faith in the Catholic church for faith in Jesus and got saved in the process because it's faith in HIM that saves, not faith in the Catholic church.

Romans 10:8-13 8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim); 9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. 11 For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. 13 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

In other words, without the definition of the Church's teachings, anything goes. Thanks for the confirmation.

Another valiant try and another crash and burn fail.

Without the authority of and adherence to Scripture, anything goes. That explains why so many of the Catholic church doctrines are so off base.

The Church's definition of something is meaningless. It's what the word of God says that matters.

"It’s strictly a man-made concept to avoid the stigma of a divorce."

There is no Biblical basis for marriages against ones consent. There is no Biblical basis for marriages involving children. There is no Biblical basis for marriages involving the retarded. There is no Biblical basis for marriages between siblings and otherwise incestuous relationships. There is no Biblical basis for marriages that involve polygamy or bigamy. There is no Biblical basis for marriages involving fraud or deception. Yet all of these are causes for a declaration by the Church that the marriages were never valid.

May your everyday be like Easter Morning and your every night like Christmas Eve.

Without the authority of and adherence to Scripture, anything goes.

That's a good description of Protestantism and its offspring. For them, it isn't really about the authority of Scripture or the adherence to Scripture. It's about the authority of their interpretations of Scripture.

It's what the word of God says, according to MY interpretation, that matters.

That's really what it comes down to.

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.