23 million ex-Catholic adults in US; 6 million converts to Catholicism

[Moby]

I doubt whether the statistic in the article captures the number of people that “leave” the church only to return later in life. Many people let their faith lapse for a period, but return to the church at some point later in life (whether they plan to when they leave or not). I would even hazard to guess it’s a reasonably high percentage of Catholics.

 

[LoveJesus]

i believe that the catholic church has been negligent about the way it promotes the faith.
It has clearly not been effective at guiding the flock and does not seem to take account of the fact that many people do not have active catholic parents to teach their kids the truth and therefore there is liitle chance that the children will themesleves become practicing catholics.

I agree with you…though remember that the way that Catholic church in America runs does not reflect the way that the Catholic church runs in other parts of the world. I think that this Church should take a look at how African priests teach their laity: they tell it like it is whether you like it or not. In America is seems to be the opposite: they’re afraid of telling it like it is for fear of losing parishioners, but that approach is not working anyway. Look at the rate of ex-converts. Meanwhile, the Church in Africa is growing like crazy.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I am inclined to believe nearly every explanation (and doubtful question) posted above. It certainly does seem that there has been a lot of negligence on the part of parents in the last 40 years, a lot of misdirection and outright dissent among Catholic clergy and religious, and the catechetic instruction has been abominable for a very long time; both from the pulpits and in the classrooms of Catholic schools.

Nevertheless, I am not persuaded that the attrition is, in an absolute sense, as great as the original post suggests. Possibly my uncertainty about it is colored by experiences of where I live.

I live in the Bible Belt. Some Catholics do drift away, and they seem to fall into one of two categories. First are young adults who drift off. Some return eventually. I can’t tell whether it is most of them or not. The other consists in people who get divorced and they are typically men who leave their wives for another, usually younger, woman and want to marry the latter. I don’t see the divorced women doing that. It’s always the men, at least by my observation. Typically, those men do not return, likely because they have mentally walled themselves out because the Church will not ratify their decisions.

Our converts greatly outnumber those who leave. I’m not sure why that is, but it’s possibly because in this region people really are serious about religion; possibly more than in other places. (Well, I think it’s statistically true.) Protestants who are not mainline (and even some of those) tend to go from one church to another over time. Sometimes its for social reasons. Sometimes because the preacher in the church “down the way” preaches more to their liking. But so many really are searching earnestly, and many eventually find the Catholic Church, usually through some friend.

Because of that, I’m not entirely persuaded that it’s the often boring homilies that cause people to drift. Our converts have heard far more eloquent sermons than what our parish priest delivers. I think it’s that sense of “getting close to Jesus”; a goal so many fundamentalists have, and which is answered only in the Eucharist. Better homilies would be nice, but I don’t think that’s really it.

Now, why some people have that sense of seeking and others don’t seem to, I couldn’t really say. Possibly it’s because maybe their parents didn’t. I don’t know. I see families, including those of relatives, living in cities, in which the children lose their faith. I see others who do not. Looking at the ones I know whose children have left, I have sometimes thought perhaps an excess of “tolerance” and “acceptance” of the relative equivalence of other faiths has affected the outcomes; whereas I don’t really see that in families I know in which the parents are not only practicing, but are unwavering within the family in the notion that there really is only one truth. If that’s so, then, e.g., the relativistic expressions of a Father Jenkins or a McBrien are far more deadly than people give them credit for being, particularly if the parents of those addressed are of like mind with those “teachers”.
I wonder too, about the effect on young people of parents who, though Catholic, support abortion-supporting politicians. If “it’s all relative” and if one “must consider all issues” even if one ends up opposing the teachings of the Church in doing so, then how can such people expect their children to consider any teachings of the Church to be the truth?

One can, and must, pray for those who leave, that they will come back. And many do. But doubtless many don’t. At the same time, we should insist, in our schools and from our pastors and to ourselves, that the truth is presented as the truth; not simply one of many choices.

 

[saieditor]

PEW are well known for doing their surveys on all sorts of topics. And as others have said, this has never been a numbers game, its really about the ultimate questions in life and how people choose to resolve those questions, or avoid those questions.

There is the question of people leaving after the age of 24. Youth is determination, and youth an inner quality with. Some other spiritual organisations regard young people as “youth” until they are 35 … … if this were the case in the Church, then a lot more resources would be allocated to formation in the faith of young adults, parenting programs, families, etc, etc.

Why did I leave the church at 18? We only attended mass sometimes, and then we were always late, just in time for communion (my mom is habitually late, still is), Church wasn’t discussed outside the doors of mass.

Interesting. Seems your mother or your family had an inability to discuss the larger questions of life, the deeper questions of what we are all here for and where we are going.

Yes, I went to CCD and was confirmed. Do I remember the classes? Yes, they were boring, we were talked at, not to, and sent to the priest if we we cut up or asked questions the teachers deemed wrong or heresy

Yes, that was the evidence of an education system where teachers themselves were not formed in the faith, had no faith or no catechism, and anything that was in the “too hard” basket was sent off to Father to fix.

At 18 the priest refused to give me communion because I was pregnant; He told me that I shouldn’t be at church, what would people say?

And this Priest’s model of church was “Church as pure, spotless, bride of Christ” … never mind universal salvation and your personal needs. How sad that he was worried about scandal instead of your spiritual needs.

Thats why I left 30 years ago.I really knew nothing about the faith.

Yes.

I believe that we must recognize the reality that many people are leaving the Church. They leave because they do not understand, because they are disappointed by some bad experience with a particular person, but mainly because they do not KNOW their faith and the Church at all.

This is correct. The Church is supposed to lead you to God; to provide you with the community of believers and the grace of Christ via sacraments, to help you on your way …

It often happens that people “lose interest” when they are quite young. The solution is not just more activities aimed at youth, IMO. The real problem is that parents have the same lack of knowledge, so they do not speak about the faith at home, they do not practice regularly, they do not show their love for God…

That’s correct. Spot on. Very, very few parents are actually taught how to be good parents in the faith, and most exercise their parenting the way their own parents took up the task.

Modelling faith is critical. Children learn what they live. Mothers are the first teachers for every child, and mothers are the first teachers of the faith for their children. A family that prays together, stays together; they have bonding, spiritual meaning and purpose and an unbreakable sense of family.

This is one more reason why there are so few vocations.

I am not sure what to put this down to; the lack of role models, the power of the modern bop and the electronic age and its intrusion into every compartment of life, and the absence of stillness and silence in the young. If they all have ipods, walkmans, headphones, mobile phones, Blackberrys, you name it, then how on Earth is the still, small voice of the Lord going to be heard?

How?

I feel that there should be more activities for families and parents, to educate them, strengthen them, help them to grow in the faith … Then the children would follow.

Yes, if the children are given the example of faith and the example of integrity, then yes, they will follow.

 

[St_Francis]

Preaching has never seemed to be the strong point of the Catholic clergy as a whole. Some are good at it, some not so good, some miserable at it. Because we are a liturgical and sacramental church (as opposed to those denominations which have lesser, little or no identifiable liturgy) and those which have less, little or no sacramental theology, we have a focus that has all too often given short shrift to either sermons or homilies.

Homilies, however, are not for the purpose of doctrinal exposition, but rather are to focus on the Scriptural readings of the day. That is not to say that doctrine plays no part; however, doctrine is not the primary purpose of a homily, just as a historical exposition of the reading is not the focus. Our doctrines are not distinct and separate from Scripture; however it is an issue of focus; we are supposed to hear from the priest or deacon how Scripture is to influence and focus our lives.

Having said that, I have sat through all too many homilies that did a poor job (if at all) in breaking open the Scripture of the day to make it something I could focus on that week.

This was interesting; it made me think.

The role of the homilies was developed centuries ago when society and church members were very different. Right now, I can find and read literature on several different types of spirituality in one evening–back then, it was definitely little by little. People couldn’t read, they didn’t have access to books or to the plethora of information we have now…

I just wonder if perhaps we need to change the homilies. We live in different times, and I think that perhaps we should acknowledge that. We are more educated at 10 than most peasants were throughout their lives. Some babies travel a longer distance when they come home from the hospital than some peasants traveled in their entire lives. *Knowing *is lauded throughout the land, and if the Church doesn’t either teach us or clarify why we should learn, then it’s no wonder people drift away. If Catholics don’t know why they should be excited about their Faith, then they won’t make the effort to find out more.