Why do people leave the Catholic Church?

[jlhargus]

SpiritMeadow: There are instances of double papacies. Were both right?

JL: There has never been double papacies, just confusion of which was the true pope

 

[sambos671]

Well, I disagree. How homosexuality was viewed in those days is not at all like it is today. It had nothing whatsoever to do with nakedness. It did have to do with pedastry and temple prostitution. It had to do with choice, lust, and power. They had not a clue about what it really entailed. I respect that you believe Paul wrote Timothy. Many experts do not agree of course, but either way, as I said, Paul reflected his times.

I thought i made it clear that intestate was what I was talking about. If there is no rights to be gained, then I can’t imagine why gays are arguing for something non-existant. Of course one can execute legal documents to gain one’s partner rights. But of course that doesn’t prevent family from filing countersuits. I see no valid reason why gays should be put to additional effort to make their wishes legal.

I don’t disagree with your examples.

I don’t know what you mean to say here. If you prejudged me, you might have been right? Thank you I think.

I was in a bad mood and felt that here once again Conservative Catholics were disparaged once again so I lashed out (which I was appoligizing for) against liberal Catholics whom I said believed that Homosexuality was ok. I was jumped on (probably justly so) for assuming that Liberal Catholics thought this. My mother is a very liberal catholic so I was using her beliefs as a model. She also believes being Budhist is ok and it really doesn’t matter what you believe if your a relatively good person. That was the context.

BTW in the ancient world Homosexuality weren’t only of a violent nature. Again homosexuality was more accepted in the ancient world than it is today. There are all sorts of ancient literature to that affect.

 

[WarriorAngel]

WarriorAngel,

Thanks for the above contribution. May I ask from where comes the 80% figure?

Numerically,
Mick

Just an observation based on the number of folks i know of.
Statistically [put together on paper] I havent found that yet.

 

[Marsha_Adams]

Just an observation based on the number of folks i know of.
Statistically [put together on paper] I havent found that yet.

It would make sense if you were right. There is an economic principle that has been found to cross all subject lines. The name starts with a “P” but I’m blanking on it at the moment. It says that 20% of any population will have 80% of the income. It turns out that 20% of car models are driven by 80% of consumers, and 20% of employees do 80% of the work and most people use 20% of their time to do 80% of their work. It just goes on and on, it is amazing to me that whatever you apply this principle to the vast majority of cases it is correct. So it would not surprise me one bit, if the statistics showed that 20% of Catholics leave the Church and 80% of them return.

 

[Peter_J]

See the point is that the EO would argue that they are the continuation of THE true church. They would argue that Rome strayed. So would Anglicans and anybody else for that matter. The point of break would change no doubt. It’s just that as far as I know, nobody seems concerned about this except some RCC members. I certainly recall no such teaching as an RCIA member or frankly in my reading. But of course, I don’t tend to apologetics which I don’t feel is actual scholarly investigation.

I’m just not sure why it’s so important to the RCC or at least some adherents that this be true.

Actually, it’s important to Catholics and Orthodox alike. (We claim to be the one true Church; they claim to be the one true Church.)

The Anglican way of looking at it is a little different since they believe in (a form of) Branch Theory.

 

[SSTeacher]

Just an observation based on the number of folks i know of.
Statistically [put together on paper] I havent found that yet.

Thanks for your honest answer.

It would make sense if you were right. There is an economic principle that has been found to cross all subject lines. The name starts with a “P” but I’m blanking on it at the moment. It says that 20% of any population will have 80% of the income. It turns out that 20% of car models are driven by 80% of consumers, and 20% of employees do 80% of the work and most people use 20% of their time to do 80% of their work. It just goes on and on, it is amazing to me that whatever you apply this principle to the vast majority of cases it is correct. So it would not surprise me one bit, if the statistics showed that 20% of Catholics leave the Church and 80% of them return.

I think it’s generally acknowledged within Evangelical circles that 20% of the congregation does 80% of the work. Is it the same story amongst the Catholics who stay in the Catholic Church?

Ecumenically,
Mick

 

[WarriorAngel]

It would make sense if you were right. There is an economic principle that has been found to cross all subject lines. The name starts with a “P” but I’m blanking on it at the moment. It says that 20% of any population will have 80% of the income. It turns out that 20% of car models are driven by 80% of consumers, and 20% of employees do 80% of the work and most people use 20% of their time to do 80% of their work. It just goes on and on, it is amazing to me that whatever you apply this principle to the vast majority of cases it is correct. So it would not surprise me one bit, if the statistics showed that 20% of Catholics leave the Church and 80% of them return.

Wow, that’s awesome.

 

[emeraldcoast]

It would make sense if you were right. There is an economic principle that has been found to cross all subject lines. The name starts with a “P” but I’m blanking on it at the moment. It says that 20% of any population will have 80% of the income. It turns out that 20% of car models are driven by 80% of consumers, and 20% of employees do 80% of the work and most people use 20% of their time to do 80% of their work. It just goes on and on, it is amazing to me that whatever you apply this principle to the vast majority of cases it is correct. So it would not surprise me one bit, if the statistics showed that 20% of Catholics leave the Church and 80% of them return.

I believe that you are talking about the Pareto Principle.

God Bless!

 

[wanner47]

I see what you are saying. But I think it may be inappropriate to assume that because the leadership comes to agree with what is the opinion of most, that it is necessarily led by them. It is an inference that would require some evidence I think.

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.

Moreover, would that be so bad if true?

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.

Our laity is deeply involved in choices for rector for instance. I can’t speak to the relative powers of vestry and parish council, but I’d rather “assume” the vestry has more. I could be wrong.

In some matters of discipline and liturgy and so forth, the laity does have (name removed by moderator)ut. But we are talking about doctrine and dogma here, not who is going to give the readings at the Easter service.

You have to account for popes and other clergy who have clearly done wrong.

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.

If the HS leads without error, why is there any error whatsoever? You see the problem? There is nothing slanderous intended nor to be concluded.

Development of Dogma

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

“Although the teaching that priestly ordination is to be reserved to men alone has been preserved by the constant and universal tradition of the Church and firmly taught by the magisterium in its more recent documents, at the present time in some places it is nonetheless considered still open to debate, or the Church’s judgment that women are not to be admitted to ordination is considered to have a merely disciplinary force. Wherefore,** in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance**, a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Luke 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful” (*Ordinatio Sacerdotalis *4).

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.

If everyone simply assumes that a church or any other institution can be assumed to be correct, then we have abdicated our responsibilities to make sure that it is doing as it should. Would excesses or failings be ever brought to light otherwise?

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.

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.

I’m sorry, could you explain what you mean here?

Godwin’s Law.

I said as much if you read carefully. And of course the human problem exists in equal proportions in all walks of life. It is the handling of it that causes such concern.

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.

I would argue that JPII has spoken so very clearly that there can be no mistake here. I believe the USCCB agrees and calls for an end to CP in this country.

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.

 

[Marsha_Adams]

I believe that you are talking about the Pareto Principle.

God Bless!

Thank you, so much. I knew it started with a ‘P’ but all I could come up with was Partlo and I knew that wasn’t right. Thanks again.

 

[mangy_dog]

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

where is David Letterman when you need him??!!!

Number 10: Insane in the mem-brain.

1. Stupidity
2. The grass is greener on the other side.
3. I have scars on my knuckles from nuns hitting me with a ruler.
4. The devil made me do it.
5. I have more college degrees than a thermometer.
6. We need to be pluralistic and ecumenical.
7. All christian religions are the same.
8. Catholics at mass are all hipocrites.

and the number one reason…(I’m no David Letterman)

1. I prefer a relgion that fits my lifestyle.

 

[mark_a]

I think it perhaps unfair to assume that all Catholics who want change want it for “selfish” reasons.

I meant most. As a Catholic, I know “all” doesn’t necessarily mean “every”.

I am neither gay nor have able to conceive at my age. I believe deeply in gays rights and that the bible does not speak against it.

Gays are treated most cruelly by society, that’s for sure. They are the whipping boys for every sinner out there. The Church knows, however, that turning a blind eye to sexual sin (including contraception) is detrimental to the family, the most basic unit of society.

Am i missing some definition of “selfish” that would explain it differently?

Maybe I should have said short-sighted.

 

[Peter_J]

I don’t think it’s necessarily a tangent. Perhaps those who leave the Catholic Church to face East do so because they perceive the reasons for faith found within Orthodoxy to be superior to those relied upon by Catholics?

Hypothetically,
Mick

Yes. And vice versa.

 

[Peter_J]

SpiritMeadow: There are instances of double papacies. Were both right?

JL: There has never been double papacies, just confusion of which was the true pope

If I might add on to what JL already said, the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia contains an interesting commentary on the question of “which was the real Pope?” (Or, more precisely, the question of which was the real papal line.)

To contemporaries this problem was, as has been sufficiently shown, almost insoluble. Are our lights fuller and more brilliant than theirs? After six centuries we are able to judge more disinterestedly and impartially, and apparently the time is at hand for the formation of a decision, if not definitive, at least better informed and more just …

I won’t quote the whole paragraph, but you can read it here. (Scroll down to the last paragraph.)

 

[wcknight]

WCKNIGHT,

Thank you for the best testimony I have ever heard! It was straight to the point and honest. But one statement stood out to me and I think you could help me with a friend who left the Church.

You stated this, “I was finally able to conclude that everything the Church was teaching was right and all my obejections and disagreements with it, were wrong.” My question for you is this.

What was happening in your mind and heart to keep you from seeing the truth about the teachings of the Church, and then what happened in your mind and heart, after the life-threatening incident, that finally allowed you to have a conversion of heart and say to yourself that you had to rethink Catholic Teaching.

I hope that this makes sense.

I married a non-Catholic, at the time I was a lapsed Catholic. So contraception was a big issue in our family. She also is ultra liberal and pro-choice. I also tend to be liberal but more so in line with the Church.

I fell into the liberal trap that if God is everywhere then we can worship him anywhere and not just in a Church (it’s now a common refrain from my kids). Why should I have to get up every Sunday and go to mass when I can just pray at home ?

As I grew further from the Church, I looked into other faiths. At some point I began to doubt if God and an afterlife really existed. It was a bit terrifying to think that nothingness was a possibility. It made me intensely afraid of death, to the point of being a bit too preoccupied with thinking about death and what might follow.

I read whatever I could about a possible after life, people surviving NDE-near death expriences, some new age stuff like Shirley Maclaines books. I read Hal Lindsays books on the end times.

It was an unsettling time in my life. In the back of my mind I’ve always felt that I would return to the Church at some point. But I didn’t want to go to mass because I ‘had’ to go. I wanted to go, because I really wanted to be there.

Now I do really want to be there, but it took a horrific experience to spur me back to the Church. It’s not that I disagreed with Church teachings, it was that I could not live up to its teachings at the time. Over time with a lot of prayer and help from above, I’ve been able to overcome my weaknesses. I’m not perfect by a long shot, but I’m much further along than when I left.

I’ve always led a fairly decent life. It was just that for a long time, I was not receiving the sacraments. I don’t think God would have condemned me for that, but I may have had some extended Purgatory time for not living up to what our faith requires. Some of our stricter friends may say eternal damnation would have been more likely had I not made it back to the Church. I hope not, because a lot of my friends are still in that same boat.

 

[PJM]

I had thought the Catholic Church taught that God judged everyone according to their lights. It does seem wise to defer to the Lord in this matter of salvation, don’t you think?

Cautiously,
Mick

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.

 

[Arlene7]

I left for many reasons. What got the ball rolling was that I realized that I was involved in idolatry. Praying to Mary and the saints. Getting on my knees in front of statues…etc

hi i think people leave because they have very little faith and have forgotton there teachings from the church,and its fine to pray to the Blessed Mother and the Saints,even if you are standing in front of a statues or kneeling you are prayingto the Blessed Mother or whom ever you pray for. Barbara

 

[needgodsgrace]

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.

 

[PJM]

Originally Posted by JustHuman
I left the Catholic Church because (over time), I came to conclude that there was no compelling evidence for a personal God, survival after death, or the historical credibility of the gospels, etc.

My dear friend in Christ?

Can't possibily be the same Catholic Church that I belong too:nope:

 Or could it just be that I know what we believe

 What we practice

 Why and how

 And have with study, found super-abundant biblical evidence that teaches, clarifes, affirms and confirms these positions and beliefs.

 My dear friend, did you sincerely TRY:blush: :shrug:

** No evidence of a “personal God?” **

 Jn. Chapter 19: "**14*  Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover; it was about the sixth hour. He said to the Jews, "Behold your King!" 15 They cried out, "Away with him, away with him, crucify him!" Pilate said to them, "Shall I crucify your King?" The chief priests answered, "We have no king but Caesar." 16 Then he handed him over to them to be crucified.

17* So they took Jesus, and he went out, bearing his own cross, to the place called the place of a skull, which is called in Hebrew Golgotha.(Picture) 18 There they crucified him, and with him two others, one on either side, and Jesus between them"**

Is this NOT personal enough for you? Me thinks you didn’t look to hard:blush:

I think it’s a bit unfair to suggest people only leave this religion because their lifestyle conflicts with doctrine.

I agree with this; it is ignorance of Sacred Scripture, which St. Jerome quite correctly points out "is ignorance of GOD!'

**The relply: **

You are on a journey, along with the rest of us. Your life is not finished, just as our are not. Many of us have had similar periods in our own lives. Please do not rule out a return to the faith, as the Lord often reveals Himself to those of little or no faith in most unusual times and under unusual circumstances.:clapping:

---

I am being sifted like wheat. Praise God
that I have been found worthy of being sifted.

How very beautiful and true.:tiphat:

I would add dear friend, that heaven and hell are real, and that it is me and you, NOT God, who decides where we will spwns eternity.

**I humbly suggest that make a serious effort to prove or disprove this statement. Not only does your Salvation hang in the balance, but also a very high degree of joy and comfort in this life.

We will be at your call to answer any and all questions and concerns I susspect you have, because your on a Catholic Forum, and Jesus is “the Way, the Truth and the Light”**

John Chapter 12: "35 Jesus said to them, "The light is with you for a little longer. Walk while you have the light, lest the darkness overtake you; he who walks in the darkness does not know where he goes. 36 While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become sons of light."

I shall pray that God will bring you to "The Light!"

 

[Hisalone]

hi i think people leave because they have very little faith and have forgotton there teachings from the church,and its fine to pray to the Blessed Mother and the Saints,even if you are standing in front of a statues or kneeling you are prayingto the Blessed Mother or whom ever you pray for. Barbara

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