Catholicism steepest declining religion in US, Nones fastest growing

[sticknstring73]

In the end it doesn’t matter. If YOU believe then thats all there is to it. I understand the possibility of discouragement but, as individuals, we can’t let it win.

Pope Benedict xvi predicted the church would be smaller, Cardinal George predicted that future archbishops would be publicly executed, when I think of what the early Christians went through… I mean it’s just smiles all around (tongue firmly in cheek).

The things I think we should be asking ourselves is do WE really believe? Do WE really trust God? Can WE really accept God’s will? Either you do or you don’t. If you want to but dont have it yet then pray for it. John 14:13,14

Whenever something comes up that just seems too much I ask myself Who am I to turn down God’s will or His challenges?

Scared or unnerved by the Nones? I am too, a little. Evangelize them, bit by bit. Be a good example; pray before meals in restaurants, cross yourself in front of churches and when emergency vehicles with sirens on pass by, etc. I was in a restaurant in Williamsburg, Brooklyn and prayed and crossed myself (with my girlfriend who was doing the same) and looked up to see someone smirking at me. Who cares? I would think God does and I’m as sure as I can be that he is happy that I suffered that incredibly small humiliation in His name.

I’m sorry if this seems a bit over the top but whenever I read these posts about polls I just think it doesn’t really matter. Padre Pio said when something bad happens don’t ask God why ask God what. What does God want us to do? Evangelize those Nones. May God bless all of us, Nones too.

 

[Wannano]

The conversation rate concerns people who aren’t Catholics who become Catholics. The article referenced by OP indicates that there’s alarge imbalance in Catholics leaving versus non-Catholics joining the Church.

What I recall (though again without a source, this is just my memory) is that for the entire US population, about 2% are Catholic converts but something like 11% are former-Catholics. And this is with 21% being Catholic in total.

I also just noticed that this article indicates only 38% of immigrants are Catholic. I had read somewhere else was more like 50%, but I don’t have source at my finger tips and it might have been wrong. Either way, immigrants are much more Catholic than the underlying population.

I am taking it to mean conversion rate?

 

[carefullytread]

I am taking it to mean conversion rate?

Ha, yes, I see the typo now. You are right, I just can’t spell.

 

[Randy_Carson]

I feel the “church” has left me, rather than the other way around. Because of a lot of pride and obsession with power, the Catholic Church has been restlessly changing its liturgy for the last 50 years. One priest prays the optional prayers of the Mass, at the next parish the priest weeds out all the optional prayers and uses the shortest Eucharistic prayers, etc.

One church has kneelers, the next church has none. some say there has been a strategy of making the Catholic liturgy more “Protestant” to attract more membership – I think that has failed and even backfired.

Priests and bishops have been involved in sexual abuse especially of minors, and this just undermines the credibility of the Church. as this sexual abuse scandal plays out, the Church is now promoting the “new evangelization” – which is trying to get Catholics back to the Church. My pastor does not even TALK about, much less do anything about it. In his homilies he sings songs from his younger years, the Moody Blues and John Denver, and reflects on these. We’re not being spiritually fed as we should be. For various reasons, I’m barely at the fringe of my parish. I’ve complained about nonsense that goes on in the parish at Mass time, and he is deaf to the complaints.

There should be a plan for developing spirituality that is actually implemented.

I get what you are saying. Here are two books you might like to read:

Forming Intentional Disciples by Sherry Weddell
Rebuilt by Michael White and Tom Corcoran

 

[Wannano]

Ha, yes, I see the typo now. You are right, I just can’t spell.

Thought it was what you meant but I have learned new terms here!

 

[boldlygo]

I beg to disagree. How much religious revival did we have within the 12 years of conservatism between Reagan and Bush Senior. I do not see a correlation. Secularism will keep marching on so long as there are no wars or major major cataclismic events that will jolt people into accepting the existence of our Creator, regardless of whether a conservative or liberal government is elected into office.

The problem as I see it is that, generally, we Catholics do not understand or make sufficient effort to understand and defend/explain our faith. Compared to other christian denominations, it is not easy being a Catholic, what with mandatory going to confession, holidays of obligation etc etc. It is very tempting and easy for a lukeworm catholic to join a protestant group because it is more convenient but not because the group offers something better.

If this is true, why was the Church stronger pre-VaticanII?? Vocations to the priesthood and to becoming nuns and brothers were statistically much higher in the Church during the time of meatless Fridays, veiled females, monthly confessions, etc. There were four young men [13-14 years old] who went straight to the seminary from our 8th-grade class. We never thought of it in terms of being ‘easy’…it simply defined us as who we were - Catholics, and proud of it!

 

[boldlygo]

I am 28 years old, and very Catholic. I think we need better grounding in philosophy. I find the people that reject religion reject it, not because they don’t believe, but because they don’t know why to believe. Atheists and agnostic arguments are unconvincing to me, as a believer, but I was never a complete unbeliever (hence why I sometimes call myself a former agnostic, but never a former atheist). I think we, as Catholics, need to stop politicizing everything. We need to stand up for both traditional marriage and the rights of the poor. We need to stand up for those that don’t have clean drinking water and against those that think abortion is right. We are not left, we are not right. We are Catholic. ** Our Christianity should come before any political party**.

Well said! ……

 

[CrucisLucia]

The categories of non Catholic Christians are very open to doubt.* Why should there be a* Historically Black category at all? That lumps together groups ranging from Mainline to everything else, positions that are very different, often opposed.

The category for Evangelicals is also questionable. There are Baptist conventions that support legal abortion and gay marriage. Are they listed as Evangelical because they are Baptist, or mainline because they are liberal?

Non denominationals should really be a separate category. It seems ludicrous to lump together LCMS Christians and fundamentalists, who have very firm but different ideas about doctrine, with people who like to attend the mega churches, with almost no doctrine. Mormons and JW’s would be much more identifiable as evangelicals than the non denoms.

Exactly. What criteria did Pew use to determine which is Evangelical and which is Mainline? I thought that Evangelical Protestant groups referred to newly-established denominations and Mainline to groups with historical ties with the Reformation.

 

[Cyril_Of_Canada]

As an outsider and a protestant, I believe I can offer some helpful insight:

• The CC is seen in unfavourable light; Scandles by people in authority within the CC who represent the church(takes away trust); historical scandals and injustices(Creates suspicion); Protestant reformation and modern protestant churches creating doubt about the CC; Ignorance on the part of the people and a tendancy to believe conspiracy theory over truth; Modern authors attacking church’s credibility(Davinci code).

That is to name a few. Also there is a church everywhere with someone from some denomination claiming to be part of a church and a christian, so joining the CC is unnecessary. A lot of protestant churches do hospitable works of charity; Are hospitable to newcomers and believers, have many social events, come across as warm and friendly; have modern music and sermons that jive well with people.

CC is seen as a woman oppressing, secrative, untrustworthy, outdated, corrupt institution that has no kept up with the times and people feel disconnected with the CC. Hope this helps. I find people are generally cynical and do not want to be played for fools. That’s why they like it as a social club but don’t follow what it teaches or subscribe to it’s truths.
People generally have modernistic attitudes towards sex, contraception, science, and are agnostic or athiest or find another religion such as Buddhism to be appealing due to it’s perceived peacefulness.

 

[exnihilo]

The US experienced a period where religious affiliation and participation was exceptionally high after WWII. We, very much including me, tend to remember a society that was much more religious and we lament the change. But in many ways this reflection is upon a high tide moment in US history. We shouldn’t shrug this off as historical ebbs and flows, but we also shouldn’t think it means the end of the Faith.

One church has kneelers, the next church has none. some say there has been a strategy of making the Catholic liturgy more “Protestant” to attract more membership – I think that has failed and even backfired.

I’ve encountered this supposed motive before. As a convert I can say I want the traditions of the Church and not something watered down to appeal to Protestants. But maybe the attitude towards Protestants has produced good fruit. Maybe the more welcoming attitude has allowed those who would never have given Catholicism a thought to do so and actually enter the Church.

Without starting another argument, the reforms of Vatican Council II, both the actual ones and the "spirit of Vatican II " disasters weakened the Church. The relativism that many roads lead to God accounted for many who left the Church for protestant denominations.

Maybe they did weaken the Church. Maybe it was headed that way anyway. Maybe it would have been worse had Vatican II not happened. I myself cringe when I hear ‘spirit of Vartican II’, but maybe Vatican II isn’t to blame. Maybe before there was more dissent then we commonly realize. Whatever may be blamed on Vatican II is it worse then the fracture of Christendom the Reformation caused?

If this is true, why was the Church stronger pre-VaticanII?? Vocations to the priesthood and to becoming nuns and brothers were statistically much higher in the Church during the time of meatless Fridays, veiled females, monthly confessions, etc. There were four young men [13-14 years old] who went straight to the seminary from our 8th-grade class. We never thought of it in terms of being ‘easy’…it simply defined us as who we were - Catholics, and proud of it!

It may have been more of an ethnic thing than religious. You had significant ethnic communities of recent immigrants. Religion was part of their bond. I know for my Sandinavian Lutheran family it was. I see this still in the local Greek community. In modern US society which is so highly individualistic you don’t have the same social pressure to adhere to religious practice. Priests brought up in that pre-Vatican II world were responsible for Vatican II and still are prominent in the Church today.

 

[ComplineSanFran]

Exactly. What criteria did Pew use to determine which is Evangelical and which is Mainline? I thought that Evangelical Protestant groups referred to newly-established denominations and Mainline to groups with historical ties with the Reformation.

Mainline churches in the US are few in number: Methodist, Episcopal, Lutheran (ELCA), Presbyterian (PCUSA), American (not Southern) Baptist, Disciples of Christ, Congregational (now UCC), Quakers (I believe) and a few smaller communities. So as you can see, they are not all defined by the Reformation.

Evangelicals according to Pew are most of the rest, some newer, some non-denominational, but mostly defined by conservative theology and mission.

Pew also categorizes Black churches and subcategorizes LDS and JWs.

It’s a typical sociological categorization.

 

[SyroMalankara]

This might be an ‘out there theory,’ but does anyone think a bit of this is goodol American racism? I mean, as the Church in the US gets more Latino, African, Asian, Indian, etc, suddenly the white population shifts to none, mainline, evangelical, and liberal Christianity? I mean, despite putting on a good show of liberalism, progressivism, inclusiveness etc, the Episcopal Church is 95%+ white. And they waste their time creating a so-called “hiphop Mass” and GospelSoul hymns, when theirs no one that these would apply toward.

 

[thecolorsblend]

This might be an ‘out there theory,’ but does anyone think a bit of this is goodol American racism? I mean, as the Church in the US gets more Latino, African, Asian, Indian, etc, suddenly the white population shifts to none, mainline, evangelical, and liberal Christianity? I mean, despite putting on a good show of liberalism, progressivism, inclusiveness etc, the Episcopal Church is 95%+ white. And they waste their time creating a so-called “hiphop Mass” and GospelSoul hymns, when theirs no one that these would apply toward.

I realize how trendy it is to blame everything on racism but your thesis requires one to believe that America had a strong Catholic identity in the past and is only now turning away from it. It further requires one to believe that the liberal Protestant groups are growing. I don’t know of anybody who believes either of those propositions.

 

[carefullytread]

This might be an ‘out there theory,’ but does anyone think a bit of this is goodol American racism? I mean, as the Church in the US gets more Latino, African, Asian, Indian, etc, suddenly the white population shifts to none, mainline, evangelical, and liberal Christianity? I mean, despite putting on a good show of liberalism, progressivism, inclusiveness etc, the Episcopal Church is 95%+ white. And they waste their time creating a so-called “hiphop Mass” and GospelSoul hymns, when theirs no one that these would apply toward.

No. It appears to me (although I had a hard time finding precise statistics) that Hispanics leave the Church as much as whites do once they’ve been here a generation.

Yes, Hispanics are a rising percentage of US Catholics. ~40% of the total and more that ~50% of younger Catholics so soon to be an absolute majority.

But according to this article by Pew, 55% of US Hispanics are Catholic and 24% are former Catholics. That suggests to me that about one if every three Hispanic Catholics eventually leave the Church which is only slightly lower than the rate for all US Catholics.

So, no, that doesn’t seem to be the case to me. White Catholics leave the Church just a little more readily than Hispanic ones do, so I don’t think you can attribute their leaving the Church to racism.

Usually when you see the surveys of ex-Catholics over why they left, you get usual answers. You can find lots of articles that give a pretty good overview of the reasons and I don’t think they’re missing hidden racism.

 

[commenter]

Any church that goes up against the secular culture is going to take a beating. Probably 90% of the media attacks on religion are attacks on the Catholic Church. This impacts on persons who are marginal anyway; they get far more religious formation from the media than from their Church.

The resultant drop in numbers does not prove mean the Church is not following God.

 

[Sy_Noe]

A conservative victory in the Presidential election would be the first step for a religious revival in America.

I don’t need a President to talk with God. I do that daily.

 

[Sy_Noe]

No. It appears to me (although I had a hard time finding precise statistics) that Hispanics leave the Church as much as whites do once they’ve been here a generation.

Yes, Hispanics are a rising percentage of US Catholics. ~40% of the total and more that ~50% of younger Catholics so soon to be an absolute majority.

But according to this article by Pew, 55% of US Hispanics are Catholic and 24% are former Catholics. That suggests to me that about one if every three Hispanic Catholics eventually leave the Church which is only slightly lower than the rate for all US Catholics.

So, no, that doesn’t seem to be the case to me. White Catholics leave the Church just a little more readily than Hispanic ones do, so I don’t think you can attribute their leaving the Church to racism.

Usually when you see the surveys of ex-Catholics over why they left, you get usual answers. You can find lots of articles that give a pretty good overview of the reasons and I don’t think they’re missing hidden racism.

I agree racism has nothing to do with Catholics leaving the practice of the faith. But can you share exactly how according to Catholic teaching one becomes an ex-Catholic once baptized or confirmed?

 

[Sy_Noe]

I would not worry about the Catholic Church in America. There are as many good solid American Catholics as there are in most Western countries. Look at the faith in Europe. Where I live, Australia, secularism is at the peak of its influence with the Church fighting the scandal of sexual perversion throughout its ranks of teaching orders and the priesthood. We cannot expect an increase in numbers when the world has been given such an armory against the Church from the very Church itself.

Religion in America is on the decline across the board, along with its economy, foreign policy, farcical politics and a massive increase in the working poor. Its decline as a nation, exacerbated by any future war will bring the population back to religion, if not the Catholic faith itself.
The future of the Church is in Africa and Asia and South America, not in the West, invaded and in decline for decades.
A smaller Church may be a better church and seeing the lukewarm being spewed from the mouth of the Lord may be the emetic we need for those at the buffet rather than the feast.

So how’s that working out? Smaller I mean. With such a small percentage of Catholics actually attending Mass weekly etc. You think that’s better? And you must have better vision than I because I can’t see beyond far enough from here to see who has been spewed from the mouth of the Lord.

 

[St_Francis]

If this is true, why was the Church stronger pre-VaticanII?? Vocations to the priesthood and to becoming nuns and brothers were statistically much higher in the Church during the time of meatless Fridays, veiled females, monthly confessions, etc. There were four young men [13-14 years old] who went straight to the seminary from our 8th-grade class. We never thought of it in terms of being ‘easy’…it simply defined us as who we were - Catholics, and proud of it!

How many of those boys became priests? How many remained in the priesthood?

Those Catholics of the 1950s are the ones who left the Church in *droves *in the 1960s and 70s. My whole family–aunts and uncles included, as well as a 1950s convert–left the Church by the end of the 60s; few have returned.

 

[Michael19682]

So how’s that working out? Smaller I mean. With such a small percentage of Catholics actually attending Mass weekly etc. You think that’s better? And you must have better vision than I because I can’t see beyond far enough from here to see who has been spewed from the mouth of the Lord.

Ironically, the protestant and evangelical world is beginning to embrace the sophistication and simplicity of Romance Catholic teaching. Thus, in actual numbers, there are far more catholics then ever before. The people who say none to organized religion, they too are probably more catholic than they realize. WITH rare exception does a person reject Him. How can anyone deny the truth?