Why do people leave the Catholic Church?

[SpiritMeadow]

It seems pretty clear-cut to me. That’s one of the reasons I left the ELCA; it seemed like it was more of a democracy than a theocracy, and I didn’t think that was the way Jesus intended things to be in His church.

Well you may be right. I recall Jesus talked about how the greatest among you must serve and be the least. I always kind of thought it meant in part that we shouldn’t get too much into being top dog and thus the decider ( a bushism!). We tend to believe generally that out of many, we get the best answer to most things. Our clergy so far as I am able to discern believes very clearly that they are not divided as special from the laity. For instance, most of our clergy prefer be addressed by name rather than by titles. Our laity as I said play a strong part in the choice of new rectors and priests.

It is hard to know what Jesus intended, since he set up no real formal structure before going to the cross.

Yes, it would be bad if it were true, because as B16 has said, Truth is not determined by majority vote. It is the duty of a clergyperson to abide by and preach the will of God, not the will of the people. History has shown us time and time again that the will of God and the will of the people are not often one and the same.

Given that the will of God can be difficult at times to discern, can you give me an example of a time when this occurred? But certainly I agree that we just don’t poll and then decide doctrine. Doctrine must comport with the bible as we understand it, tradition, and with good reason.

No, because infallibility is only exercised under a limited set of circumstances. If the Pope has Cheerios for breakfast, that doesn’t mean that Cheerios are now the only infallible breakfast food that Catholics can consume.

It is sometimes for many of us to determine what is infallible and what is not. Some say only two things have ever been declared infallible (both regarding Mary). Other’s see the matter entirely differently.

URL=“http://www.catholic.com/library/Can_Dogma_Develop.asp”]
Development of Dogma

Actually, you are incorrect about women’s ordination. According to JPII:

I read something submitted by Peter about dogma and with commentary. i believe it said that women’s ordination or the denial of same had not reached infallibility, but was on the way. I defer to your understanding, since it is obviously not of concern to me either way.

As to why there is error, that’s because we are human and we are sin. But the HS, to a certain degree, protects the Church from teaching error in the matters of faith and morals. The HS does not protect Popes or bishops or priests or anyone else from sinning individually.

It seems odd that the HS would protect the dogma from error on issues of faith and morals but not protect the people at large from learning incorrect interpretation from popes, bishops and priests. We have the problem of the trying to unring the bell then.

I would agree that the HS inhabits all of Christendom and in the end leads to perfect truth, no matter how imperfectly all her followers teach or learn. The HS can only nudge I believe, we have to faithfully respond. If we do not, as clergy or laity, we are subject to error. That would be my belief.

I

agree, and to some respects there *is *some “policing” of the Church. When a new encyclical or whatnot is released, you don’t see Catholics just sitting back and worshiping the paper it’s printed on. Rather, the new material is discussed, debated, argued, analyzed, etc. by Catholics and non-Catholics alike. The Church doesn’t squelch discussion; on the contrary, the Church encourages discussion.

That certainly is a good thing.

con’t

 

[SpiritMeadow]

However, after a certain point it comes down to faith. Do I believe that Christ will fulfill his promise that the gates of Hell won’t prevail? Do I believe that he will fulfill His promise to be with us to the end of the age? Do I believe that He built His church upon a Rock-solid foundation? And the answer is yes, I do. I don’t see how – with all the numerous bad popes and bishops and clergy in the Catholic Church for the past 2,000 years – the institution has managed to survive. My only conclusion is the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

So you in the end feel that you must agree. That you must be missiing something? I also agree with you that I believe that Christ fulfills his promise to be with us to the end and that good will overcome in the end evil. I agree we must remain stalwart. I believe that the foundation of Christendom is strong. And I most assuredly believe that the RCC can look to a history that is stellar in many respects. Christendom shares in that longevity does it not?

URL=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin’s_law”]
Godwin’s Law.

Thank you. I was making a point however that is not so easily dismissed.

And if you read the links, you’ll see that the problem isn’t handled any better in any other Christian denomination. The Church just got more press.

You really should read Pedophiles and Priests: Anatomy of a Contemporary Crisis by Dr. Philip Jenkins, an Anglican like yourself.

Are you saying that the RCC was unfairly picked on as regards this issue? That it was just a big a scandal in other faiths? I’m unaware of this if that is true. Do you think the press is inordinately anti-RCC? I ask this only because as a RCC for many years I can think of no incident ever wherein I felt abused for being Catholic. Yet I hear a lot about anti-Catholicism here. I would agree that some denominations of Christians do attack Catholicsm in general, I suspect they would be as harsh to Anglicans as RCC.

My own thinking is that no denomination is free of abuse as regards either children or adults. I had been given to understand that the problem was greater in the RCC because of the celibacy issue. Am I wrong in this?

Having read the editorial and various readers comments I would agree and have never claimed otherwise that this affected a small portion of the church. It is the manner of handling it that has been at issue for me. Do you have evidence that other churchs having similar large scandals of abuse have handled it similarly?

That’s right, but as a previous poster has stated, Catholics are not rebuked or excommunicated for holding a differing opinion. Also, capital punishment is not intrinsically evil; it’s just become unnecessary in the developed world.

I guess my point is, that if a Pope speaks and it is declared dogma it must be believed, but if somehow he speaks but not dogmatically, you are free to dissent or disagree. If a man is worthy of belief in one thing, how do we reconcile that he is not in another (assuming he is speaking of church things of course). It seems odd does it not, that JPII is upheld as authority on somethings, yet freely disagreed with on others. I can understand that in politics, I find it hard to take that position in matter of faith when he is alleged so speak “for God” in a sense.

I found it splitting of hairs as it were, although I can appreciate the legal niceties of "intrinsic evil, ex cathedra, and all that. I would assume you are aware that the infallibility issue is a huge issue for many non-Catholics. And then they find that within the RCC there are all kinds of rules for when it exists and when it doesn’t. It just seems rather convenient in a sense to some of us.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Fascinating. :ehh:

As you may or may not know, a lot of Protestants (and Orthodox of course) would say the problem is just the opposite. I.e. they’ll say that the Catholic Church hasn’t adhered to the unaltered Deposit of Faith, but has introduced “new teachings”.

I guess it just goes to show that you can’t please everyone.

You know Peter, I hadn’t thought of it that way. I’m not sure it advances our issues much, but I can see what you are saying. But as I said, I’m not sure that would make a liberal happy or an Orthodox either! LOL.

 

[Peter_J]

Curious how some people consider that they know all your views from one or two comments you make, especially if they “bash” you for them.

I’m sorry if it came across that way. I may not have phrased it in the best way because (quite frankly) this type of conversation puts me just slightly on-edge: I find that a lot of converts and reverts have a “I’ve-been-there, so-I-know-better-than-you” kind of attitude. (Before I start getting yet another round of angry replies, please everyone note that I said “a lot”, not “most”.)

For example, I’ve found that a lot of reverts to Catholicism say stuff like “When people leave the Catholic Church, it’s usually because they don’t really know Church teaching” and other such judgmental statements.

Conversely, I would be equally suspicious of an answer to the question “Why do people leave the Catholic Church?” given by a self-described “liberal ex-Catholic”. (Please note that I said “equally suspicious”.) I admit that my earlier statement, “… a pretty good idea what you’re going say” may not have conveyed that idea very well.

This cuts down dialogue and ultimately any communication.

If I went back over replies to my posts I am sure I would come up with an interesting list of what it is been alleged I believe, some of which are correct, some wrong and some down the middle.

Actually, I don’t even need to go looking back in order to believe what you’re saying. It’s, shall we say, par for the web.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Someone in a discussion group that I attend at my church once put it very succintly–people leave so they can live the way they want and hopefully not feel guilty about it. I think this says a lot.

What I find interesting is that if you look at the posts to date:

People who have left and stayed left have reasonably valid reasons for doing so that are neither frivolous nor an attempt to live life on their terms.

People who have left and returned mostly claim it is for the reasons you state.

My thinking would be that you are taking one type and extrapolating to another entirely different group.

I think that is unfair.

I don’t think anyone who has left and stayed left has said they did so for your reasons, lazy, untaught, wanting to live a free life style.

 

[ralphy]

There are many answers to that question. Some leave Catholicism out of intellectual laziness (some, I might add, embrace it for the same reason); some leave it because other pastures look greener or easier to deal with; some leave it because of the faults of Catholics themselves, not least the priests involved in the abuse scandals; some leave it because they find another faith truer to humanity’s striving towards the divine; and some leave it because they have no faith at all. And that’s only a few of the possible reasons, although I think they’re the most common. I myself fall into the last category.

People leave the Catholic church because Catholics do not follow God’s word, the Bible. Ralph

 

[Salonika]

Originally Posted by Peter J
Conversely, just knowing that you’re a “liberal ex-Catholic” gives me a pretty good idea what you’re going say about the reasons people leave the Church.

Reply by Salonika
Curious how some people consider that they know all your views from one or two comments you make, especially if they “bash” you for them

**Reply by PeterJ **
I’m sorry if it came across that way. I may not have phrased it in the best way because (quite frankly) this type of conversation puts me just slightly on-edge: I find that a lot of converts and reverts have a “I’ve-been-there, so-I-know-better-than-you” kind of attitude. (Before I start getting yet another round of angry replies, please everyone note that I said “a lot”, not “most”.

For example, I’ve found that a lot of reverts to Catholicism say stuff like “When people leave the Catholic Church, it’s usually because they don’t really know Church teaching” and other such judgmental statements."

Reply by Salonika
And maybe I didn’t make it clear enough that what I was mainly complaining about is when people make assumptions about your beliefs in areas that are not in discussion.

I expect this I may also be slightly slightly on edge about this as this has happened a few times recently on another thread.

And no I don’t intend to make a list of the erroneous beliefs attributed to me! Have more positive things to do. But they would make intreresting reading on a t-shirt.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I just joined the group April, 2008. I am a 53 yr old, always single man. Left the CC at 24 - have only attended an occasional Mass to placate visiting relatives as a good host or guest. Baptized in 1955, confirmed 1962 (Fr Timothy Manning - future LA, CA Cardinal), 1st Holy Communion in 1966.

Had a sporadic Catholic education - Catholic boarding school from 7-11 years old, then a variety of public and private schools until my 1975 HS graduation.

Quite simply, I grew up with a very authoritarian view of God, the CC – basically, I was told to shut up from all parties for my Q’s about the CC. From 7-11, went to Mass 5 days a week – all I ever learned from the CC was blind obedience:bowdown2: to rules, expectations and authority. Funny thing is - I saw all of the same in the large “evangelical/non-denominational” churches I attended in Southern California over 32 years.

I readily admit that none of the Protestant churches can be the true Church that Christ created or intended. I am only receptive to re-exploring the CC I never knew or learned about in my childhood. I am not ready to rejoin the CC – I have too much pain, anger, confusion and negative expectations of not being loved or accepted by any CC person for my long absence. I expect to be scolded, ridiculed, scorned and rejected. I prefer the anonymity of the Internet to safely explore my questions without meeting other Catholics. I’d like to have a better understanding :coffeeread: of what I was supposed to get in my childhood – unfortunately, I have too much anger and mistrust to expect any real change in my heart.

But I appreciate everyone’s insights. I just don’t know where to begin in my spiritual journey today.

may our Lord bless you. my brother, i had no such experience but i do remember being rebelious towards the Church although i could never leave. i too stop going to church many times. i just did not want to learn about her. but in my heart i knew i had love for the CC. i remember the peace i had everytime i went into the Church, the silence. i look to the CC in owe. i pray you come home soon. find a priest, go to confession. i know you feel so much better. tell him exactly how you feel. he will be a father to you. he is gentle and he will pray for you.

 

[johnnydigit]

Do you think people generally leave Catholicism for reasons of conscience or simply because they aren’t much interested in spiritual matters of any kind?

Curiously,
Mick

from what i’ve seen,

#1 - emotional damage by other parishioners and/or family/friends.

#2 - fed misconceptions by protestants / ignorant of Church teachings

#3 - bored.

 

[Ralph_John_Heck]

Why do Catholics leave the church?
It is my opinion that most people leave the church is because of life style. They keep drifting and drifting until they find that their Catholicism is no longer compatible with their life style. For example; married to partners of an another faith, divorced and remarried without an annulment, living in an adulterous situation or in a state of fornication.
I was baptized when I was one day old. That means I have been a Catholic for 76 years. During my years as a Catholic I have been in many discussions (arguments) about religion with many from many religious persuasions. They mostly believe as Luther. The Bible is open to individual interpretation. In actuality they believe what their minister tells them to believe and not from their own interpretations.
The toughest encounters I have had are with fallen away Catholics. Sadly many of them have been educated in Catholic schools.
To be honest with you I am surprised that Catholic Church attendance is as high as it is. In my parish they have really gone off the wall. The music and the homilies leave a lot to be desired. I keep going to Mass because it provides me a way of doing penance.

Ralph Heck

 

[SSTeacher]

My dear friend in our Blessesd Lord Jesus,

While what you present is indeed the position of the RCC, as presented, you have sharred only part of the truth.

All “salvation is thru the RCC,” but why and how?

1. One need not be a Catholic to be saved.
   1. "814 From the beginning, this one Church has been marked by a great diversity which comes from both the variety of God’s gifts and the diversity of those who receive them. Within the unity of the People of God, a multiplicity of peoples and cultures is gathered together. Among the Church’s members, there are different gifts, offices, conditions, and ways of life. “Holding a rightful place in the communion of the Church there are also particular Churches that retain their own traditions.” The great richness of such diversity is not opposed to the Church’s unity. Yet sin and the burden of its consequences constantly threaten the gift of unity. And so the Apostle has to exhort Christians to “maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.”
   2. "846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:
      
      Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.
2. Because the RCC founded By Jesus Christ, Blessed, inspired, and PROTECTED by the Holy Spirit and affirmed ny The Father…Please review: Jn. 16:12-15, Jn. 17: 9-19, 2 Tim. 1: 13-14, Gal. 2:5 and 2Cor. 13:8

3.    The RCC does not claim to be the source of "all truth," the RCC does calim and fulfill Her God given mandate to the the bearer of and the protector of "all Truth" on MATTERS of FAITH and or MORALS! Thus we can't be selective in ignoring certain books of the bible or certain passages of the bible. Please see 2 Tim. 3:16 and Jn. 21: 24-25

4.    One need not be a Catholic. One does need a Christian Baptism in the Blessed Trinity, must obey the commandments (all of them) and be chairitable. These brothers and sisters, are mysteriously CONNECTED to and through the RCC by virtue of the facts that not only is the CC the ONLY Church founded by Christ, but just as importantly the CC is the only Church, where Christ, the REAL PERSON OF THE NOW GLORIFIED CHRIST, still resides and continues to be present in Person, not merely as a sign or symbol.

 5.     Those who through no fault of their own, have no cupability, and thus God in some mysterious way, makes Salvation AVAILABLE to them also, and God is and must be A ALL JUST GOD!

Friend I hope and pray that this is os some help to you.

Thanks for the above contribution.

Cordially,
Mick

 

[mark_a]

Or they see that the teachings of the RCC are not consistant with scripture in regards to these matters.

How 'bout those pesky moral matters??

 

[DominicVobiscum]

I think a significant amount leave because they do not nurture what they have been taught as young people (or as adults for that matter). They may look at the Church as a panacea for all of their problems, and fail to realize it takes cooperation with God’s grace to be able to endure and thrive.

 

[SSTeacher]

Or they see that the teachings of the RCC are not consistant with scripture in regards to these matters.

Hisalone,

I’d be inclined to suppose that people this group would be few in number. My understanding of the Catholic mindset is that a Catholic must do as the Catholic Church teaches. It is the case that the Catholic Church encourages its members to read the Scriptures but I daresay most Catholics probably conclude that as the Catholic Church has already interpreted the Bible for them there is little or nothing to be gained by reading the Bible for themselves.

Father Luther, of course, was a notable exception.

Speculatively,
Mick

 

[pontoon]

Sin is why people fall away from the church. After they have sinned they refuse to go to confession or are embrassed to confess their sin. Refusing to go to confession leads to missing Mass not receiving Holy Communion and then they are gone, If people would just go to confession it would save them and bring them home

 

[josie_L]

Do you think people generally leave Catholicism for reasons of conscience or simply because they aren’t much interested in spiritual matters of any kind?

Curiously,
Mick

I can’t understand people who leave their faith (Catholicism) because of their political/world views (and then call it reasons of conscience). I am sure although well-intentioned they have been snookered by the lies propagated by Secular Humanists -calling good evil and evil good. I cannot state, however, that this is generally the case for most Catholics who leave their faith, probably just one of several reasons. God Bless!

 

[SSTeacher]

Someone in a discussion group that I attend at my church once put it very succintly–people leave so they can live the way they want and hopefully not feel guilty about it. I think this says a lot.

But surely the Catholics who stay in the Catholic Church do so for exactly the same reason – so they can live the way they want and hopefully not feel guilty about it?

Vacillatingly,
Mick

 

[Peter_J]

And no I don’t intend to make a list of the erroneous beliefs attributed to me! Have more positive things to do. But they would make intreresting reading on a t-shirt.

Oh dear.

I expect this I may also be slightly slightly on edge about this as this has happened a few times recently on another thread.

Hmm … I have to agree with you that this is a very, ahem, interesting thread.

I wonder if this is what threads are like on the “CARM” website?

 

[SSTeacher]

People leave the Catholic church because Catholics do not follow God’s word, the Bible. Ralph

Hi Ralph,

I respectfully disagree with your blanket assertion. I’ve been inquiring into the truth claims of the Catholic Church and I’ve yet to discover a major Catholic doctrine or practice that does not have biblical endorsement.

Do you know of one? If so, please post the details.

Expectantly,
Mick

 

[wanner47]

SpiritMeadow,

I’m afraid I don’t have the time to answer your posts tonight, and I’m taking a message board break for Lent so I will not be on the forums again until after Easter. However, at that time I’ll be more than happy to resume our interesting conversation.

I hope everyone has a spiritually fulfilling Lenten season and a joyous Easter!