How many Catholics become Protestants because of divorce?

  • Thread starter Thread starter BartBurk
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I wonder why so many assume that only unchurched or ignorant people become Protestants? There are many good, intelligent, thoughtful people out there who make a conscious decision to become Protestants and they live a godly life, even more godly than you and I perhaps. It’s sad that Protestants are always painted in the negative. They either become Protestants because of being unchurched, ignorant, not being well-catechized as Catholics, or just plain ole bad luck. 😦 I know people in here who have been Catholic for years and are now becoming Protestants and they’re some of brightest, most loving, godly people I know. 🙂
"How many Catholics become Protestants because of divorce?"

I don’t know. My guess is not very many.

Most probably become unchurched, sometimes very skeptical about all things religious.

It’s the children and grandchildren, growing up unchurched or just barely so, who may become Protestants.
 
'158 **The Church maintains that a new union cannot be recognized as valid, if the first marriage was. If the divorced are remarried civilly, they find themselves in a situation that objectively contravenes God’s law. **!
The above, though is talking about remarriage after a divorce. My understanding, which may also be wrong in your view, is that divorce or separation are not necessarily wrong under certain conditions. In the end, the teaching is rooted in the Catholic teaching that sex is reserved for one man and one woman married to each other and who are open to life.
 
I wonder why so many assume that only unchurched or ignorant people become Protestants?
I don’t presume that.

But generally speaking, and within my sphere of family and relatives, divorce has been the common denominator among those who left the Church. They were weak Catholics and they are weak Protestants. Go figure.
 
I wonder why so many assume that only unchurched or ignorant people become Protestants? There are many good, intelligent, thoughtful people out there who make a conscious decision to become Protestants and they live a godly life, even more godly than you and I perhaps. It’s sad that Protestants are always painted in the negative. They either become Protestants because of being unchurched, ignorant, not being well-catechized as Catholics, or just plain ole bad luck. 😦 I know people in here who have been Catholic for years and are now becoming Protestants and they’re some of brightest, most loving, godly people I know. 🙂
I wasn’t knocking Protestants.

From my experience (really, I have known a lot of people who went through this since I was young) many Catholics just stop going to church when they smack into this wall. It’s like they lose interest in religion altogether, or it depresses them.

I can also recall when the thought of going to a Protestant church in the older generation was just not an option, at least in the circles I ran in :o. It was like a one-way ticket to hell, thanks to the powerful catechetical efforts of the nuns when we were young. After all, these people weren’t converting to anything, they had their whole world fall apart in a most gut-wrenching and soul-killing way, and that on top of the financial mess and the shame (in those days, there seemed to be more embarassment over failed marriages than today).

So many Catholics who saw their marriages fall apart just fell into discouragement, they did not run over to any Protestant churches in some predictable pattern, they just stopped attending church (and so did their children BTW).
 
I think the biggest reason divorced Catholic go to Protestant churches is they are accepted without any questions or restrictions. You made a mistake, God forgives you, get on with your life. No big deal.
Divorce is no big deal to many Protestants because they don’t consider it to be a sin in the first place. You don’t even have to repent for them not to hold divorce against you. Their standards of sin come from the secular world, not scripture. If you had done something that they considered a sin, you wouldn’t get, “You made a mistake, God forgives you” (which they say to discourage you from feeling guilty).

If your wife left you, then you’ve done nothing wrong. But, there still should be consequences to divorce. This is not to punish you, but to uphold righteousness and to deter others from taking marriage lightly. Divorce is a big deal. It hurts people and God hates it.
 
Hi Mark,

No worries; I never said you did! My reply was to Hesychios, my good friend, Michael, not your posts. I think you’re just, as you say, looking at your own anecdotal evidence within family and not the whole picture. There are many reasons for folks to go Protestant. I currently remain at an Anglican church because I find several Catholic teachings to be extremely shaky and things I personally at this point cannot believe. I am not divorced nor do I plan to be. I adore my wife. I do know a couple or two like the ones you describe. But I also know a lot of Anglicans who left catholicism because they didn’t believe or agree with several key tenents. To be intellectually honest and true to themselves as well as God, they left. I think it’s far worse and more insulting to the Catholic Church to stay in her and not believe many key particulars. That’s hypocrisy and disrespectful to the Catholic Church and her membership IMO. Blessings.
I don’t presume that.

But generally speaking, and within my sphere of family and relatives, divorce has been the common denominator among those who left the Church. They were weak Catholics and they are weak Protestants. Go figure.
 
Hi Mark,

No worries; I never said you did! My reply was to Hesychios, my good friend, Michael, not your posts.
Ok.

Your response before the quote that you are responding to kinda thrrew me, not that I wouldn’t comment anyway.

Do you have a response to #61?
 
Hi Michael,

I know. I’m just saying that the notion is one I read a lot in CAF—that all Protestants are either just typical folks who were unchurched and signed up blindly with a denomination, or they’re not theologically savvy, or they’re not well-catechized. It’s a common theme I see from Catholic apologists. Most Catholics I’ve spoken with at CAF think that anyone in their right mind who reads and thoroughly understands Catholicism will logically and automatically become Catholic. Problem is, people like yourself chose Orthodox over Catholicism after a ton of reading, study, prayer, and analysis. Same is true for some Protestants. I know Orthodox Christians who have become Calvinists, Catholics who’ve gone Orthodox, Anglicans who’ve gone Catholic, Catholics who’ve gone Anglican (sounds familiar! :p), etc. etc. As GKC says, history and theology are complicated! 😛
I wasn’t knocking Protestants.

From my experience (really, I have known a lot of people who went through this since I was young) many Catholics just stop going to church when they smack into this wall. It’s like they lose interest in religion altogether, or it depresses them.

I can also recall when the thought of going to a Protestant church in the older generation was just not an option, at least in the circles I ran in :o. It was like a one-way ticket to hell, thanks to the powerful catechetical efforts of the nuns when we were young. After all, these people weren’t converting to anything, they had their whole world fall apart in a most gut-wrenching and soul-killing way, and that on top of the financial mess and the shame (in those days, there seemed to be more embarassment over failed marriages than today).

So many Catholics who saw their marriages fall apart just fell into discouragement, they did not run over to any Protestant churches in some predictable pattern, they just stopped attending church (and so did their children BTW).
 
Ok. 😛 Not sure what I said that threw ya, but don’t sweat it. My response to 61? I’d say that the Catholic Church has no such thing as divorce ever, period. But they do permit a couple to have a civil divorce as long as said couple doesn’t remarry and neither party shack up or date people. A couple can have a civil divorce and still take Holy Communion. You are correct that sex and marriage is always between a man and a woman only, yes.
Ok.

Your response before the quote that you are responding to kinda thrrew me, not that I wouldn’t comment anyway.

Do you have a response to #61?
 
Some Protestant ministers in this area indicate that they marry as many, perhaps even more, Catholics than Protestants. What happens? If the couple is pleased with the wedding, the minister, etc., they often become part of that congregation.
Code:
Why do they go to the minister to be married to begin with? There are a variety of reasons.

 1. They are divorced and choose not to go through the annulment process. Thay have many reasons for that, from delay, cost, fear of refusal, feeling that to declare their earlier marriage invalid is somehow deceptive, etc. Many believe their first marriages were valid when they were performed, but various circumstances that arose later caused that marriage to disintegrate. Searching for a flaw in that first marriage can make them and/or their children very uncomfortable, almost as though those children were not quite legitimate.

 2. Many Protestant ministers - not all - are not seriously troubled by the divorce issue in certain situations. Since they themselves are married, they are likely to understand the struggles marriage can bring. They usually inquire as to why the couple were divorced and then decide whether or not to perform the ceremony. Many are ready, say, to remarry someone who was married first when very young, or the partner strayed, or abuse of some sort, etc. 

 3. Many Protestant ministers - not all - do not require attendance ar a pre-Cana event. They may require (often) three or four conferences with the pastor instead. 

 4. Often, and especially if the marriage is a mixed one - say, Catholic groom and Protestant bride - the Protestant (and maybe the Catholic, too) is alienated by certain rules governing Catholic marriage -  e. g., the Catholic promising to exert religious influence on his partner, to try to raise the children Catholic, rules re who can be witnesses, etc. Maybe the Protestant is the one more involved in his/her church.  

  5. Millions of Catholics are of the cafeteria variety, and when they find a likely mate who is committed to some other religion they have no problem switching. (Mainline Protestants often don't speak of Catholics as 'converting' since they are likely to be ecumenical and not hostile toward other Christian groups. Evangelicals emphasize  being 'saved' and developing a 'personal relationship' with Christ, and conversion means that rather than changing church affiliation.) Protestants seldom herald converted Catholics as 'Journey Home' heralds those who convert to Catholicism.

  6. Many ministers interpret the command of Christ differently. To begin with, he did not say that divorce and rermarriage is an unforgiveable sin. In addition, they regard the teaching of Christ in its context as a defense of women. At that time, as I recall, Jewish men could say to their wives three times "I divorce you" and that was it. They see Christ's words as mainly a response to this severely unjust, patriarchal tradition.

  7. Let's face it. An annulment usually is seen as a church-sanctioned divorce. It is widely regarded as an escape valve by which someone can remarry with the blessing of the church. I've read that they are much more likely to be granted in some dioceses than in others, which can raise additional questions.

  8. What about prolific adulterers like JFK - or that convert from Georgia who hopes to be president? It can seem hypocritical that because G's first two marriages were not performed by a priest his divorces are acceptable, glossed over. There is something very offensive about that - at least in my mind. Is it somehow less of a sin when an adulterer is married by a minister than by a priest? 

  9. Some ministers who marry divorced people think this way: regardless, it's better to marry this couple and keep the church's foot in their door than to have them go to a JP - and possibly carry with them some resentment against the church generally. This means a better chance that they will have a church wedding and stay in the church once married.

  God bless everybody - no exceptions. And a blessed Christmas season to one and all!
 
Some Protestant ministers in this area indicate that they marry as many, perhaps even more, Catholics than Protestants. What happens? If the couple is pleased with the wedding, the minister, etc., they often become part of that congregation.
Code:
Why do they go to the minister to be married to begin with? There are a variety of reasons.

 1. They are divorced and choose not to go through the annulment process. Thay have many reasons for that, from delay, cost, fear of refusal, feeling that to declare their earlier marriage invalid is somehow deceptive, etc. Many believe their first marriages were valid when they were performed, but various circumstances that arose later caused that marriage to disintegrate. Searching for a flaw in that first marriage can make them and/or their children very uncomfortable, almost as though those children were not quite legitimate.

 2. Many Protestant ministers - not all - are not seriously troubled by the divorce issue in certain situations. Since they themselves are married, they are likely to understand the struggles marriage can bring. They usually inquire as to why the couple were divorced and then decide whether or not to perform the ceremony. Many are ready, say, to remarry someone who was married first when very young, or the partner strayed, or abuse of some sort, etc. 

 3. Many Protestant ministers - not all - do not require attendance ar a pre-Cana event. They may require (often) three or four conferences with the pastor instead. 

 4. Often, and especially if the marriage is a mixed one - say, Catholic groom and Protestant bride - the Protestant (and maybe the Catholic, too) is alienated by certain rules governing Catholic marriage -  e. g., the Catholic promising to exert religious influence on his partner, to try to raise the children Catholic, rules re who can be witnesses, etc. Maybe the Protestant is the one more involved in his/her church.  

  5. Millions of Catholics are of the cafeteria variety, and when they find a likely mate who is committed to some other religion they have no problem switching. (Mainline Protestants often don't speak of Catholics as 'converting' since they are likely to be ecumenical and not hostile toward other Christian groups. Evangelicals emphasize  being 'saved' and developing a 'personal relationship' with Christ, and conversion means that rather than changing church affiliation.) Protestants seldom herald converted Catholics as 'Journey Home' heralds those who convert to Catholicism.

  6. Many ministers interpret the command of Christ differently. To begin with, he did not say that divorce and rermarriage is an unforgiveable sin. In addition, they regard the teaching of Christ in its context as a defense of women. At that time, as I recall, Jewish men could say to their wives three times "I divorce you" and that was it. They see Christ's words as mainly a response to this severely unjust, patriarchal tradition.

  7. Let's face it. An annulment usually is seen as a church-sanctioned divorce. It is widely regarded as an escape valve by which someone can remarry with the blessing of the church. I've read that they are much more likely to be granted in some dioceses than in others, which can raise additional questions.

  8. What about prolific adulterers like JFK - or that convert from Georgia who hopes to be president? It can seem hypocritical that because G's first two marriages were not performed by a priest his divorces are acceptable, glossed over. There is something very offensive about that - at least in my mind. Is it somehow less of a sin when an adulterer is married by a minister than by a priest? 

  9. Some ministers who marry divorced people think this way: regardless, it's better to marry this couple and keep the church's foot in their door than to have them go to a JP - and possibly carry with them some resentment against the church generally. This means a better chance that they will have a church wedding and stay in the church once married.

  God bless everybody - no exceptions. And a blessed Christmas season to one and all!
Another awesome post.
  1. What about prolific adulterers like JFK
Honest question: Was he or the Mrs. seeking an annulment?
  • or that convert from Georgia who hopes to be president? It can seem hypocritical that because G’s first two marriages were not performed by a priest his divorces are acceptable, glossed over.
I agree with what you are saying, but keep in mind that even one’s own previous deficient view of marriage can justify a decree of nullity. Annulment tribunal members aren’t clairvoyant. They rely on the information they are given, which may or may not be correct.
 
=BartBurk;7319099]I wonder how many Catholics become ex-Catholics because of divorce? We have a Protestant church located about 30 seconds from the parish which advertises a ministry for divorced people on their sign out front – it is almost as if they are fishing for divorced Catholics. I wonder how many Catholics are simply unwilling to go through the annulment process and just wind up going to an accepting Protestant congregation.
Divorce like marriage itself is a PERSONAL Choice. Both have there consequences.

Divorce does not force one to leave the CC. That too is a personal [and possibly soul endangering decision]. The Chuch does refuse participation in the Sacrament of Holy Communion; as one must be in union with Christ as well as in the State of Grace [no unconfessed Mortal sins] .

This fact united along with excessive personal PRIDE is often the reason for the split.
 
Hi Roy5:
A civil divorce does not dissolve the marital bond made between the couple and God.
Nor does an annulment.
An annulment examines if that bond truly existed with full consent, full intention, and full knowledge. If the examination determines if the three f’s existed the maritla bond stands.
St.Matthew 19:3-9
St.Mark 10: 2-12
St.Luke16:18
Jesus does not make the exmption for those that have been put away for gounds of infidelity.
St.Paul’s 1st Epistle to the Corinthians 7:10-13 StPaul is clear that those who are divorced are not to remarry.
Since you lack belief in the Eucharist you could not appreciate the Church’s reason for the examination process of an annulment.The Church would be a very poor mother if she deliberately let her children take Holy Communion in a state of mortal sin.
Just Curious…Matthew 19:9 notes that Christ said that “sexual immorality” is an exception the no divorce mandate. What does the Church teach regarding that comment which is not in the other gospels?

thanks
 
So many Catholics who saw their marriages fall apart just fell into discouragement, they did not run over to any Protestant churches in some predictable pattern, they just stopped attending church (and so did their children BTW).
This is quite an interesting reality and I know quite a few who are in this category. They stop attending church and the new family becomes unchurch. Their new life restarts from there and the chances of getting back to the Catholic Church is especially remote. It is then a matter of what they find along the way - Protestants, Muslims, atheists.

From the Church’s point of view this is always tragic and the problem is a mountain to climb. There are many such people however who faithfully maintain their place in the Church, even still active in the Church life, eventhough they may not partake in the Eucharist.
 
Just Curious…Matthew 19:9 notes that Christ said that “sexual immorality” is an exception the no divorce mandate. What does the Church teach regarding that comment which is not in the other gospels?

thanks
The same thing St.Paul teaches in his Epistle to the Romans.7:2
That though immorality is grounds for seperation the couple remained married. By the law of husband the woman is bound to her husband and vice versa.
Refer to St.Matthew 5:32 “and he who marries a woman who has been put away commits adultry” if the marriage bond no longer exists how can one commit adultry by marrying some one who has been put away.
 
does anyone REALLY take marriage seriously (until parted by death)
anymore?
nope. It is until they want out and then they find their new boyfriend/girlfriend.
Then they want it fixed in God’s eyes.
so they can be guilt free and have the blessing of the chruch.
 
I’ve been trying to stay off the forums, but this is an issue on which I feel strongly and on which I think many Catholics are kidding themselves.

The Catholic teaching is of course a very difficult one on this issue, but I think bad catechesis and pastoral implementation of the teaching drive away a lot of people who might be open to the teaching if it were properly explained.

The widespread impression I have received from divorced Catholics and ex-Catholics on this issue is that they think the refusal to give communion to divorced and remarried people is a disciplinary “rule” imposed by the Church. Rarely if ever do they seem to understand that the Catholic Church simply doesn’t believe marriage can be dissolved. Never, it seems, has any of them been told that they are living in a state of adultery, even though that’s objectively what your Church teaches (and what I was taught about remarried people growing up as a very strict Protestant). Instead, they get the impression that the Church is punishing them for not “having it all together,” and that the only way to avoid this punishment is to jump through a bunch of bureaucratic hoops and lie about the status of their first marriage.

Here are what I think are some very common and very bad Catholic ways of approaching this problem:
  1. “Why not get an annulment?” Sure, there are cases where annulments may be appropriate. But the assumption that most marriages can be annulled (implicit in the OP’s reference to people being "unwilling to go through the annulment process) makes a mockery of the Catholic Church’s teaching.
  2. “Not receiving communion is a form of asceticism–a desert experience that may simply be a cross laid on you by God.” Nonsense. And I say that even though Pope Benedict, a wise and holy man, has endorsed this approach. That he is driven to such expediencies further shows how out of control this issue has become. Divorced and remarried people are unable to receive communion because, objectively, they are in a state of adultery–grave sin. Adultery is not an ascetic practice or a cross laid on you by God. It’s a sin, and you should repent of it.
  3. “Divorce is a form of brokenness, and the Eucharist is about wholeness.” (I’ve heard this from a Catholic priest in RCIA–granted, he said some other really bizarre things!) Again, nonsense. The Eucharist is medicine. It is medicine for repentant, not impenitent sinners, but it is certainly for the broken. See the previous point–this kind of language is another way of avoiding the offensive statement that remarried people are impenitent adulterers. An extreme example of the damage wrought by this approach is a lady I knew is my Episcopal parish in NC, who had been divorced and remarried twice. She was refused absolution by a Catholic priest because he said she had to get annulments for her marriages. (At least, that’s what she claimed–I’d like to hope that she misunderstood.) This in spite of the fact that she was living celibately at the time. No wonder she wound up with us!
The bottom line is this: either the Catholic Church needs to bite the bullet and call on all divorced people to remain celibate and all remarried people to live as brother and sister, or the Catholic Church needs to change its position, probably in the direction of the Orthodox teaching on “economia.” I am honestly not calling for one or the other of these things. I could respect either. But the present position, as it is normally explained and applied, is simply impossible to respect, because it is incoherent and dishonest.
When I was young, a very long time ago, I would often see an elderly aunt and uncle at the Mass our family attended. They always sat in the back of the church with their only daughter who was my age. Once the daughter was old enough, she would go up to Communion, but never my aunt and uncle. This was not so unusual then as many people would not receive Communion if they hadn’t gone to confession the Saturday before Mass.

Anyway, when I was a teen this aunt and uncle began receiving Communion regularly. And they had such sweet smiles on their faces whenever they went up. When my uncle died his daughter spoke of how happy he was to be able to receive Communion. He did not think he would ever be able to, but he was faithful and always practiced his Catholic religion the best way he could. It was then I found out that my aunt had been married before. But when her ex-husband died suddenly they were able to have their marriage blessed and receive the Eucharist. None of my family ever spoke disparagingly of this aunt and uncle.
 
**Going through the process of having a marriage declared invalid is not for the faint of heart or the thin skinned. It involves an intense process of self examination. My first marriage ended in a civil divorce and I then married a Catholic…I was perfectly willing to convert but we were told by an old time monsignor that it would involved time and more money than we had…and if my finance married me our children would be bastards which was not true. This turned my husband away from the Catholic Church and he grew up a devout Catholic from a devout Catholic Family. It was many years later that I converted…our Parish priest and a deacon were extremely kind and helpful as I went through the invalidity of my first marriage process…at the time my husband was diagnosed with cancer…It took days to fill out the paper work and believe me the questions asked were intensely personal. The Sister in charge of my case was relentless in trying to prove me a liar.and I have no idea why. I married young and for all the wrong reasons…in the end our Priest knowing that the paperwork would not be complete before the Easter Vigil offered my husband and myself the option of living as brother and sister until the nullifcation was final. He promised me that I would be confirmed at the Easter Vigil and I was. He was kind and compassionate…I’ll never forget his kindess toward me. My confirmation was for me such a joy that it was worth everything I went through. I had to find my first husband who was more than glad to help me in every way he could…he was and still is a Mormon.

My second marriage has not always been easy believe me…but I stood the course and we had out marriage co validated.

I can understand why I had to do what I did…and by doing that the Church gained two members…my Come Home Again husband and myself…and my youngest son is also a convert. He stood as a witness for his Father…it was a special time. But it took time and great resolve…

The Church stands firm…the divorces as was said earlier was not the sin but the adultery was…but I had didn’t know that then…Confession took care of that and it was more than a relief to say it.

stormy**
 
**Going through the process of having a marriage declared invalid is not for the faint of heart or the thin skinned. It involves an intense process of self examination. My first marriage ended in a civil divorce and I then married a Catholic…I was perfectly willing to convert but we were told by an old time monsignor that it would involved time and more money than we had…and if my finance married me our children would be bastards which was not true. This turned my husband away from the Catholic Church and he grew up a devout Catholic from a devout Catholic Family. It was many years later that I converted…our Parish priest and a deacon were extremely kind and helpful as I went through the invalidity of my first marriage process…at the time my husband was diagnosed with cancer…It took days to fill out the paper work and believe me the questions asked were intensely personal. The Sister in charge of my case was relentless in trying to prove me a liar.and I have no idea why. I married young and for all the wrong reasons…in the end our Priest knowing that the paperwork would not be complete before the Easter Vigil offered my husband and myself the option of living as brother and sister until the nullifcation was final. He promised me that I would be confirmed at the Easter Vigil and I was. He was kind and compassionate…I’ll never forget his kindess toward me. My confirmation was for me such a joy that it was worth everything I went through. I had to find my first husband who was more than glad to help me in every way he could…he was and still is a Mormon. **

**My second marriage has not always been easy believe me…but I stood the course and we had out marriage co validated. **

I can understand why I had to do what I did…and by doing that the Church gained two members…my Come Home Again husband and myself…and my youngest son is also a convert. He stood as a witness for his Father…it was a special time. But it took time and great resolve…

The Church stands firm…the divorces as was said earlier was not the sin but the adultery was…but I had didn’t know that then…Confession took care of that and it was more than a relief to say it.

stormy
Thank you for this thoughtful, insightful post.🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top