Posted on 12/28/2013 3:59:04 PM PST by NYer
According to recent demographic surveys, it seems there are presently 30 million people in the U.S. who identify themselves as former Catholics. That figure is both surprising, and, for Catholics, disheartening.
Over the past 50 years or so, a profound change, other than that effected by Vatican II, has taken place in the Catholic Church. It might be described as the phenomenon of vanishing Catholics. The Canadian philosopher, Charles Taylor, has identified four major challenges facing the Church today. First on his list is the exodus of young adults from the Church. According to recent demographic surveys, it seems there are presently 30 million people in the U.S. who identify themselves as former Catholics. That figure is both surprising, and, for Catholics, disheartening. It represents a little less than 10 percent of the total population of this country. It also means that had those persons remained Catholic, approximately one in three Americans would be identified as Catholic. Only two religious groups represent a larger percentage of the U.S. population: Protestants (cumulatively) and current Catholics.
This phenomenon is disheartening not only for bishops and priests, but also for faithful Catholics generally. Many older Catholics are saddened at the sight of their children and grandchildren abandoning the Church.
Questions naturally arise. What has caused such a massive defection? How might one account for this phenomenon? It hardly seems possible that any single factor could explain a phenomenon of such magnitude. Various reasons for people leaving the Church are well-known. Many of them have been operative from the earliest times of Christianity. In his first letter to Timothy, St. Paul reminds him that The Spirit has explicitly said that during the last times some will desert the faith and pay attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines (1 Tm 4:1-7). In his first letter to the Corinthians, Paul speaks of dissensions and divisions among the faithful (1 Cor 1:10-16).
From the first centuries up to modern times, there have been doctrinal differences (heresies) which led to great numbers separating themselves from the Roman Catholic Church. Many others have left the Church for what can be described as practical reasons, rather than doctrinal differences.
Among the latter, there are many who separated themselves from the Church because of marriage problems. There are those who left because they became greatly dissatisfied with inadequate preaching, uninviting liturgy, and minimal hospitality in their parishes. It seems worth noting that expecting church attendance and public worship to be therapeutically satisfying often leads to disappointment and eventual alienation.
Not a few have left the Church because of real or perceived mistreatment by bishops or pastors. Reactions have a way of becoming overreactions. An overreaction to clericalism and paternalism in the Church resulted in autonomy becoming absolute. Evelyn Underhill offered a helpful analogy in this regard. She likened the Church to the Post Office. Both provide an essential service, but it is always possible to find an incompetent and annoying clerk behind the counter. Persons who expect all representatives of the Church to live up to the ideals proposed by the Church will typically become disillusioned and leave. Persons with such expectations would have left the Church of the Holy Apostles.
Most recently, a cause for many leaving the Church is the scandal of clergy sexual abuse. This has been a stumbling block not only for those directly affected, but for Catholics generally. Because of the questionable role played by a number of bishops, their moral authority is diminished. The time when bishops could command is past. Now, they can only hope to persuade and invite. Loyalty to bishops had been widely identified with loyalty to the Church. As the former loyalty diminished, so did the latter.
Clearly there are times when the Church is more of an obstacle than a help to faith. At Vatican II, the Council Fathers pointed out that the Church is always in danger of concealing, rather than revealing, the authentic features of Christ. Often enough, members of the Churchs leadership have been guilty of a sin typical of many religious teachersnamely, being more concerned about preservation of their authority than about the truth.
While specific reasons can be cited, it is helpful to recognize several underlying attitudes that are operative. (1) There is an anti-dogmatic spirit which is suspicious of the Churchs emphasis on fidelity to traditional teachings. (2) There is the widespread belief that one can be free to ignore, deny, or minimize one or more received doctrines without feeling compelled to break with the Church. (3) There is also the belief that, guided by their own conscience, regardless of how that matchesor fails to matchgenerally accepted Catholic teaching, persons can develop their own understanding of what it means to be Catholic. Someone has coined a phrase that describes persons with those attitudes, calling them cafeteria Catholics, i.e., those who pick and choose what to accept of official Catholic teaching and ignore the rest.
Two questions arise in the face of the phenomenon of vanishing Catholics. One question is of a more theological and ecclesial level: are those departed to be considered heretics or schismatics? A second question arises at the practical level: how can those who have left be reunited with the Church? Regarding the first question, it is worth noting that, while speaking of dissension and division among the faithful, and of separation from the community of believers, the New Testament does not make a distinction between heresy and schism. Since the definition of the Popes primacy of jurisdiction, it is difficult to see how there can be a schism that is not a heresy.
According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (§2089), heresy is the obstinate, post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and Catholic faith, or it is, likewise, an obstinate doubt concerning the same. Schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff, or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him. The Theological Dictionary, compiled by Karl Rahner and Herbert Vorgrimler, defines heresy as primarily an error in matters of faith. The heretic takes a truth out of the organic whole, which is the faith, and because he looks at it in isolation, misunderstands it, or else denies a dogma. Schism occurs when a baptized person refuses to be subject to the Pope, or to live in communion with the members of the Church, who are subject to the Pope.
In any case, given the variety of reasons for people leaving the Church, the degree of separation, and especially assuming good will on the part of those leaving, it is difficult to classify them as heretics or schismatics. Church authorities have the right and the duty to take measures against heresy and schism when those become evident. Clear denial of a dogma cannot be tolerated. But between this and a purely private, material heresy, there are many shades. Not every challenge to accepted theology is heretical. There are many partial non-identifications that endanger faith and unity but do not rise to the level of schism. Nor does every act of disobedience to human laws in the Church imply schism.
While speculative questions about heresy and schism are significant and need to be addressed, they pale in comparison to the practical question of how those departed can be reunited with the Church. That question is as complex as are the reasons for people leaving the Church. That question is further complicated when one addresses the question of the underlying attitudes that are operative.
Obviously, the Church must work at removing any obstacles to reunion. With Vatican II, that work was begun. The Council recognized the Church is semper reformanda, always needing to be reformed. The actual return of individuals requires something more than an adjustment in Church practices or new programs. It is a matter of God touching the individual with his grace.
A final question that can prove troubling is how the massive defection from the Church is to be reconciled with Gods providence. This is simply one of many instances in which we are challenged to believe in an omnipotent God, who is also a loving, provident Father. Providence is not an occasional, intrusive, manipulative presence, but one that is with us both in tragedy and in joy, in the joy that consists not so much in the absence of suffering, as in the awareness of Gods presence. To find the strength to experience calmly the difficulties and trials that come into our lives is a tremendous challenge. If, however, we are able to do that, every event can be providential. In a sermon on the feast of the Ascension, Pope Leo the Great said: For those who abandon themselves to Gods providential love, faith does not fail, hope is not shaken, and charity does not grow cold.
There can be a very subtle, almost imperceptible temptation to think we know better than God how things should be. We can be like the naive little girl, who, in her prayers, told God that if she were in Gods place, she would make the world better. And God replied: That is exactly what you should be doing.
I can definitely see why religion is unappealing to women and women are leaving in droves. The only women who go to church are really old, like some of my aunts in their 60s.
An all too typical state of cecity seen here .
Being called heretics or schismatics would be mild language for many RCs on FR. But the charge is mutual btwn Scripture Christians and RCs.
I see several very clear, distinct reason for those who before called themselves Catholics to no longer do so.
The largest, single reason is that these were CINOs, Catholics in Name Only, who were only socially aligned with Catholicism. Where they had lived the church effectively ruled over them, dominating the government, the police, and all the good jobs. It even after a fashion dominated the criminal element. The ticket to anything was that a person had to call themselves a Catholic and be affiliated with a parish.
When this social omnipotence of the church ended, so did any reason the CINOs had to be anything other than nominal members.
The second biggest reason was Vatican II. To traditional, conservative Catholics, it felt like a betrayal at the top.
I got to see what happened when a church in Phoenix was again allowed to conduct a Latin Mass. Catholics who had not been to church since Vatican II *had* to return. The first two rows of pews were filled with aged invalids, some on death’s door. Standing room only in that large church, with floor fans because of the heat of so many crowded together. A few elderly people carried icons of their deceased spouses.
These were people who felt the church had deserted them. They wanted their religion back, not whatever trendy ideas were popular for the moment.
That is the kind of testimony that is censored, but as i have said before, if the Eucharist were regulated by the FDA as a health supplement, the claims made for it could be cited as false advertizing
Why let lukewarm Catholics designate whether you receive the Body of Christ or not? You’re extending to them too much power.
68% of those raised Roman Catholic still are Catholic (higher than the retention rates of individual Protestant denoms, but less than Jews at 76%). 15% are now Protestant (9% evangelical); 14% are unaffiliated. Pew forum, Faith in Flux (April 27, 2009) http://pewforum.org/uploadedfiles/Topics/Religious_Affiliation/fullreport.pdf
80% of adults who were raised Protestant are still Protestant, but (analysis shows) 25% no longer self-identify with the Protestant denomination in which they were raised. ^
44 percent of Americans have switched religious affiliations since childhood, mostly mainline Protestants. 7% who were raised Protestant are now unaffiliated; 15% now belong to a different Protestant faith. ^
51% of Protestants from a different Protestant denomination cite a lack of spiritual fulfillment as a reason for leaving their childhood faith. 85% say they joined their current denominational faith because they enjoy the services and style of worship. Only 15% left say they left because they stopped believing in its teachings. ^
Those who have left Catholicism outnumber those who have joined the Catholic Church by nearly a four-to-one margin. 10.1% have left the Catholic Church after having been raised Catholic, while only 2.6% of adults have become Catholic after having been raised in a different faith.^
4% of Americans raised Catholic are now unaffiliated; 5% are now Protestant. ^
Over 75% of those who left Catholicism attended Mass at least once a week as children, versus 86% having done so who remain Catholics today.^
Regarding reasons for leaving Catholicism, less than 30% of former Catholics agreed that the clergy sexual abuse scandal played a role in their departure. ^
71% of converts from Catholicism to Protestant faith said that their spiritual needs were not being met in Catholicism, with 78% of Evangelical Protestants in particular concurring, versus 43% of those now unaffiliated. ^
50% of all Protestants converts from Catholicism said they stopped believing in Catholicism's teachings overall. Only 23% (20% now evangelical) were unhappy about Catholicism's teachings on abortion/homosexuality (versus 46% of those now unaffiliated); 23% also expressed disagreement with teaching on divorce/remarriage; 16% (12% now evangelical) were dissatisfied with teachings on birth control, 70% said they found a religion the liked more in Protestantism.
55% of evangelical converts from Catholicism cited dissatisfaction with Catholic teachings about the Bible was a reason for leaving Catholicism, with 46% saying the Catholic Church did not view the Bible literally enough.
81% of all Protestant converts from Catholicism said they enjoyed the service and worship of Protestant faith as a reason for joining a Protestant denomination, with 62% of all Protestants and 74% Evangelicals also saying that they felt God's call to do so. ^
42% of those now unaffiliated stated they do not believe in God, or most religious teaching. ^
54% of millennial generation Catholics (born in 1982 or later) are Hispanics, while 39% are non-Hispanic whites. On the other hand, 76% of pre-Vatican II generation Catholics (born 1943 or earlier) are non-Hispanic whites, while 15% are Hispanics. Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate (CARA) at Georgetown University, September, 2010 . http://www.osv.com/tabid/7621/itemid/6850/Openers-More-evidence-of-the-browning-of-US-Cat.aspx
68% of all Latinos in the U.S. identify as Catholics. Changing Faiths: Latinos and the Transformation of American Religion http://pewforum.org/Changing-Faiths-Latinos-and-the-Transformation-of-American-Religion.aspx Baylor Institute for Studies of Religion - American Piety in the 21 Century 9-2006 http://www.baylor.edu/content/services/document.php/33304.pdf
Among Catholics under the age of 30, 47% are white, and 45% are Latino. In contrast, among Catholics over the age of 65, 82% are white (Pew Forum 2007, reported in http://publicreligion.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Catholics-and-LGBT-Issues-Survey-Report.pdf)
Latinos comprised 32 percent of all U.S. Catholics in 2008, versus to 20 percent in 1990. However, Catholic identification has slipped from 66 percent in 1990 to 60 percent in 2008. There has also been a significant rise in the number of Latinos who do not adhere to a religion. The longer a Latino has lived in the United States, the less likely he or she is to be Catholic. Study of Secularism in Society and Culture at Trinity College, http://theamericano.com/2010/03/18/new-report-on-u-s-latino-religious-identification/
18% of all Latinos say they have either converted from one religion to another or to no religion at all. http://pewhispanic.org/files/reports/75.4.pdf
1,000 Mexicans left the Catholic Church every day between 2000 and 2010, a decline that has continued uninterrupted over the past 60 years, from 98.21 of the population to 83.9 percent today. Latin American Herald Tribune, March 10, 2011, based upon census data and study by sociologist and historian Roberto Blancarte of Colegio de Mexico and the National Autonomous University of Mexico
The percentage of of Protestants and Evangelicals rose from 1.28% in 1950 to close to 8% of the total population in 2010, (excluding so-called Jehovahs Witnesses or Mormons). 5.2 million say they profess no religion. ^
This decline is seen as extending across the region (Catholics represent between 55% to 73% in Central America, 70% in Brazil, 50% in Cuba and Uruguay).^
Brazils National Statistics Institute reported that the number of evangelical Christians in Brazil (the worlds largest Catholic country) has risen from 15% of the population in 2000 to to 22% of the population in 2010, and 4% 40 years ago, while the proportion of Catholic Brazilians fell from 93.% of Brazilians 40 years ago, and 74% of the population in 2000 to to 65% in 2010. http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/06/29/ratio-of-evangelicals-in-brazil-jumps-44-in-10-years/
Almost 20% of all Latino American Catholics have left the Roman Catholicism, with 23 percent of second-generation Latino Americans doing so. http://www.baylor.edu/content/services/document.php/33304.pdf
54% of Hispanic Catholics describe themselves as charismatic Christians. http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=75
51% of Hispanic Evangelicals are converts, and 43% are former Catholics. ^
82% of Hispanics cite the desire for a more direct, personal experience with God as the main reason for adopting a new faith. Among those who have become evangelicals, 90% say it was a spiritual search for a more direct, personal experience with God was the main reason that drove their conversion. Negative views of Catholicism do not appear to be a major reason for their conversion. ^
Latino evangelicals are more than 20 percentage points more likely than Catholics to say that abortion should be illegal in most or all circumstances. http://www.nhclc.org/news/latino-religion-us-demographic-shifts-and-trend
The first generation of Latino immigrants is 74 percent Catholic, and 15 percent Protestant. The second generation is 72 percent Catholic, and 20 percent Protestant. The third generation is 62 percent Catholic, and 29 percent Protestant. ^
According to the Census Bureau, the Latino population in the United States grew from 22.4 million in 1990 to 41.3 million in 2004, adding a staggering 18.9 million people in 10 years. Broader estimates, which include Puerto Rican islanders (4 million) and undocumented immigrants (5 million), put the U.S. Latino population at over 50 million. ^
In 2003, Latinos surpassed African-Americans as the largest minority group in the United States. Latinos now represent about 14 percent of the U.S. population. This growth is a result of both immigration and high domestic birth rates. About 53 percent of all immigrants to the United States come from Latin America. Mexicans and Mexican-Americans make up 58 percent of all foreign born Latin-American immigrants. ^ More :
What kind of church was that?
True. Complaints we all have from every angle: from modernistic Church architecture to people clapping and talking to mundane homilies. Sometimes no different from Protestant “services” reduced to a weekly social gathering. However, at the end of the day, at the center of our Church is the Eucharist, the Mass, and the Nicene Creed. The rest is all bearable.
That being said Vatican II was a disaster only because it allowed for “liberal” forms of teaching and rituals. Ecumenism has been a failure because of irreconcilable differences.
Unlike other heresies, Hillaire Belloc referred to Protestantism as having spawned a “cluster of heresies,” and so it has been. The sheer beauty of the Catholic Mass is not only the “perfect prayer” (Cardinal Newman and Pope Paul VI) but the celebration of the Eucharist as the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ that is a daily miracle as the stigmatist Saint Fr. Padre Pio experienced.
Yes, I'm afraid that's part of the plan: infiltrate academia, both major political parties, unions and the churches. They've succeeded.
That's why I left the church - things are so awful by me that I now have serious doubts about the beneficial value of the Eucharist. I wish this were not the case, but I'm seeing a negative correlation between the frequency that a person participates in the sacrament of Communion and the amount of vile (yet sanctimoniously executed) actions taken by them.So are you referring to daily Mass Catholics when you say "frequency"? If so, are these same Catholics in line for Confession? How often do you see them praying before the Blessed Sacrament or in the Adoration Chapels? How often do you see them praying the Rosary? The Eucharist is not very powerful, if the recipient has mortal sin on their soul. The Eucharist is not very powerful, if the person receiving is otherwise distracted from the whole of its Good.
You are kind of leaving out all those “go and sin no more” verses.
In addition there is the matter of secret sins about which the veracity may be in doubt ... and sins flaunted unrepentantly for all to see. What does scripure say in the latter instances? It is not as if this were unaddressed.
Go back and read a bit more.
we had nuns in nun outfits....
we had processions all the time...and in May we did special devotions to Mary...
we sang simple nice music, but definately not the kumbaya stuff around now...
the old Catholic church was built aroung the family.....all those huge families after WW2...we had cyo basketball...we had church choir picnics...we had blue and gold dinners for our parish boy scout troop...
it was all good...a wonderful time to be a kid...
now....there is little fellowship...at least not like before...we don't know what we believe....we think we need to "reach" out to every pervert and not be judgemental on abortion and birth control and especially, we don't encourage large families....no, not that...we couldn't have large families...
large families is what the Catholic church in America was all about and now its just a moot point...
That is the kind of testimony that is censored, but as i have said before, if the Eucharist were regulated by the FDA as a health supplement, the claims made for it could be cited as false advertizingSince when did the FDA know anything about what makes one healthy? All they do is provide stuff to mask symptoms, and kill [bad with good] bacteria. And they could never measure the power in the Eucharist anyway. As non-believers receive zilch.
But, unless we have Jesus, we cannot give Him; that is why we need the Eucharist. Spend as much time as possible in front of the Blessed Sacrament and He will fill you with His strength and His power. --Mother Teresa of Calcutta, 7-15-96Amen!
My husband grew up in a very Catholic community. He went to a Catholic grade school through 8th grade. Unfortunately, the local Catholic Church had few activities for the young people. My husband had lots of friends in high school and was regularly invited to attend Luther League events. The Lutheran college, only 15 miles away, offered summer courses for high school students. My husband attended one and liked the college so much that he applied there and was accepted. That’s where he met me - a life long Lutheran. His priest’s greatest fear was realized. :-)
So my dear husband has been a Lutheran for many years. I think he may have left the Catholic Church on his own, based on issues he has had with it over the years. But it was the outreach of the Lutheran Church with first drew him away.
There will always be wolves in sheep's clothing. The battle for the soul of the Church ebbs and flows. We're probably at a low spot now.
But I like what Mother Angelica said about this. Paraphrasing: "I wouldn't want to live at any other time. We have a chance to exercise heroic virtue."
If we could all be like Mother Angelica.
It all boils down to “Sin begets sin.”
What do you think you're showing Christ Our Lord by disrespecting and boycotting His blessed Sacraments? By not receiving,you're accomplishing --- what?
Reminds me of an old, old joke. A chestnut, I'll admit:
He: I'm not going to your church, Marge. Your church is full of hypocrites.She: Aw, c'mon. There's always room for one more.
Which is a perfectly logical thing for an atheist to say. But you claim to be a Christian, don't you? If you do, then the only meaningful question is, "Is the Eucharist Jesus, or isn't it?". About that question, the government has absolutely nothing of value to say.
Doctrinal differences here.
The more I read of Scripture, the bigger difference between it and the teachings of the Catholic church I saw.
It finally reached a breaking point and the Word of God won out.
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.