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.

>>there is more to God's word than what is contained in the Bible.<<

So the RCC can just make stuff up? The RCC is blasphemous in it’s adoration of Mary. Scripture should give even the casual reader evidence of that.

Luke 11:27-28 27 And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked. 28 But he said, Nay rather, (Greek Menounge: nay surely, nay rather) blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.

Jesus disagreed with the words spoken about Mary and said those who believed were the ones who were blessed.

The words spoken to Mary were no different then were spoken to Jael in Judges. In fact, Jael was called blessed above women. Mary was called blessed among women.

Luke 1:28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.

Judges 5:24 Blessed above women shall Jael the wife of Heber the Kenite be,

Those words were also spoken of Noah, Moses, and David.

It’s so difficult to get through.

Believing Martin Luther’s “faith alone” and not seeing it’s God’s action, His rules, the rituals He has decided saves us plus our “actions”, our cooperation to receive God’s grace. 3 things, this is what saves us.

It was posted, the term, a rejection calling something required “extreme legalism.”

Denial that we must follow God’s set down holy “rituals” which are the greatest means to receive His grace. God uses physical things to impart His grace.

Where is the physical used in the new Protestant teaching
of “born again?” Where is the water as Jesus states is required in John chapter 3, in His explaining the meaning of “born again” to Nicodemus?

Acts Of Apostles 2:38
But Peter said to them: DO penance, and BE BAPTIZED every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins: and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Actually, they will claim they do, but while such does at least somewhat attest to the supernatural (which atheists refuse to even allow), it hardly compares with the purity, passion, probity and power which the apostles could attest they were “approving ourselves as the ministers of God, (2Cor. 6:4ff) with constant supernatural “signs of an apostle” wrought “in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds,” (2Cor. 12:12), neither where the supposed successors even chosen by the method used for the one and only apostolic replacement (in order to maintain the original number of apostles. (Acts 1:15-26; cf. Rv. 21:14)

Yet even these manifestly God-ordained men did not claim assured infallibility for whatever they would ever universally speak on faith and morals, but validated their message by Scriptural means, in word and in power, explaining, “by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God”, (2 Corinthians 4:2) to the glory of God.

Let’s look at what Jesus thought of physically ingesting his flesh and blood.

Matthew 15:17 Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught? Eat the word John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Deuteronomy 8:3 And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.

Ezek 3:1 Moreover he said unto me, Son of man, eat that thou findest; eat this scroll, and go speak unto the house of Israel. 2 So I opened my mouth, and he caused me to eat that scroll. 3 And he said unto me, Son of man, cause thy belly to eat, and fill thy bowels with this roll that I give thee. Then did I eat it; and it was in my mouth as honey for sweetness.

Jer 15:16 Thy words were found, and I did eat them; and thy word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of mine heart: for I am called by thy name, O LORD God of hosts.

Revelation 19:13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.

John 6:35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.

1 Corinthians 10:3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat; 4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

Eat and drink the word of God.

Other verses about the word.

Psalm 1:1-3 Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers; 2 but his delight is in the law of the Lord, and on his law he meditates day and night.

3 He is like a tree planted by streams of water that yields its fruit in its season, and its leaf does not wither. In all that he does, he prospers.

Psalm 12:6 T he words of the LORD are pure words, like silver refined in a furnace on the ground, purified seven times.

Psalm 119:9-16 How can a young man keep his way pure? By guarding it according to your word. 10 With my whole heart I seek you; let me not wander from your commandments! 11 I have stored up your word in my heart, that I might not sin against you.

12 Blessed are you, O Lord; teach me your statutes! 13 With my lips I declare all the rules of your mouth. 14 In the way of your testimonies I delight as much as in all riches.

15 I will meditate on your precepts and fix my eyes on your ways. 16 I will delight in your statutes; I will not forget your word.

Psalm 119:89 Forever, O Lord, your word is firmly fixed in the heavens.

Psalm 119:105 105 Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path.

Proverbs 30:4-5 5 Every word of God proves true; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him. 6 Do not add to his words, lest he rebuke you and you be found a liar.

"Then they are against Scripture."

"They" are NEVER against Scripture. It deceitful to continue to present the Catholic view of Tradition and Scripture as an either/or proposition as much of Protestantism sees them.

The acceptance of Scripture does not automatically disqualify Tradition and the acceptance of Tradition does not automatically disqualify Scripture. Catholics believe that both together form the sacred deposit of faith (depositum fidei), and both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence:

CCC80 - "Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together, and communicate one with the other. For both of them, flowing out from the same divine well-spring, come together in some fashion to form one thing, and move towards the same goal." Each of them makes present and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised to remain with his own "always, to the close of the age"."

I don't mind explaining and defending the doctrines and dogma's of the Church, but the unrecognizable mischaracterizations posted here only further cloud the issue and insult the truth. I don't expect to convert to anyone to Catholicism, but at least reject the Church for what it really is, not what it is assumed to be.

Peace be with you.

No quite, as the “gotta be in the Bible” is not dependent upon the premise that all that Jesus ever spoke or that is otherwise the Word of God is written, but that Scripture alone is the class of revelation that is the assured, supernaturally established word of God, upon substantiation by in word and in power the itinerant church began, and by which all is tested by.

And thus “gotta be in the Bible” requires it to be subject to verification by Scripture.

Many might hope brother John ‘heard” God tell him to give 25,000 to the church (or more weighty things), and maybe God did in His chosen way, but that does not have the authority of Scripture, though giving does.

Rome however, as with certain other religious groups, requires full assent of faith to even specific acts not in Scripture, not does assurance of the veracity of such depend upon the weight of Scriptural substantiation, and which source again, some claim only has authority by her, hers being directly from God, while an interpretation is only authoritative if by her, thus she is effectively autocratic.

>> I have wondered, about the “altar call”, “born again” meaning of accepting Jesus into your heart one time as your personal Lord and Savior and you are saved.

Who came up with this belief? Who first wrote about it? I think it’s Evangelical, doesn’t come from traditional Protestantism.<<

Faith saves

"Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life." (John 5:24)

Hebrews 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. 11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: 12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; 13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. 14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. 1 Corinthians 6:11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

Hebrews 10:14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

The means by which we are saved is an unwavering faith in Jesus.

John 6:38-40 Jesus said, “I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day”

Rom. 3:28-30, "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. 29 Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, 30 since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one."

Rom. 4:5, "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness,"

Rom. 5:1, "therefore having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,"

Romans 9:30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. 31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;

Rom. 11:6, "But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace."

Paul rebukes Peter for applying rules for salvation.

Gal. 2:16, "nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified."

Gal. 2:21, I do not nullify the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly.

Phil. 3:9, "and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith."

Acts 13:39 and through Him everyone who believes is freed from all things, from which you could not be freed through the Law of Moses.

1 JOHN 2:12 I write to you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you for His name's sake.

Hebrew 10:14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

Relying on some legal earthly act is law not grace and faith.

And how do we know?

Romans 8:16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

Paul told the jailor “believe on the Lord Jesus and you will be saved – and your house”.

>>Catholics follow the Church, her teaching on Scripture not private judgment as Protestants do. If you follow the Church, not one verse in Scripture (OT and NT) contradicts the other.<<

Oh really?

John 3:13 No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man.

Pope Pius XII solemnly defined in Munificentissimus Deus on Nov. 1, 1950, that the "Immaculate Mother of God, the ever-virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory."

That looks like a direct contradiction to me.

Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

And Catholics think that God commanded the brazen serpent which was a “graven image” but let’s see what happened to that.

2Kings 18:4 He removed the high places, and brake the images, and cut down the groves, and brake in pieces the brasen serpent that Moses had made: for unto those days the children of Israel did burn incense to it: and he called it Nehushtan.

Would Catholics crush the statues of Mary or any of the Saints into dust or have they become idols?

I can find many cases of contradiction with Catholic belief and scripture.

“The Popes/Magesterium have no such authentication from God for their extra biblical tradition.”

Natural Law:
Are you contending that the Church has been completely without miracles since the death of St. John?

~ ~ ~

From the heart, No one will touch the prophetic even though
it is listed second in Scripture or, notice the current
Protestant prophetic is saying a divine event, from
God is going happen soon and the messages to Protesant prophets keep stating, there is a fullness of Truth. And Jesus desires and He is constant in Protestant current prophecy about unity of belief.

Oh well, just remember when the “event” takes place, the
wonderful, glorious, merciful 2nd Pentecost, the Great Warning.

How about the major “miracles”, all Roman Catholic.
Science has tested and tested...they’re not from this earth.

Shroud of Turin

Tilma of Guadalupe

50 years, Pio bore the wounds of Christ on his person

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.