Latinos Leaving the Catholic Church

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='Eutychus']Pentecostals give on average, $4,000 per annum per family. Roman cheapskates last year according to the USCCB donated a whopping $600 per family. The Catholics are RICHER on average than most Pentecostals, yet the level of giving is UNDER 1% of gross income, the LOWEST level of giving of ANY church tracked.[/quote]With statements like these, it's a wonder that you malign the Catholic Church by claiming that it is focused on "fill(ing) those collection baskets."

[quote]It makes me angry how IGNORANT Catholics claim people leave the Catholic Church for "the easy way out"[/quote]Everyone has his own reason for leaving. You may personally associate with ex-Catholics who embrace fundamentalism or pentacostalism; but ex-Catholics don't all become fundamentalists/pentacostals. From the Catholic perspective on ex-Catholics--as opposed to your narrow viewpoint--the statement is anything but ignorant.

Edited August 9, 2006 by Mateo el Feo

[Aloysius]

Catholics who leave for more liberal protestant churches do take the easy road out. Protestantism is not united, and as such cannot be clumped together. It all depends where you go in protestantdom.

and by the way: Jesus Christ drank alcohol. So did all the Apostles. So did the Virgin Mary. So did saints throughout 2000 years of the Christian Church as it grew around the Mediteranean cultures. this is not a "soft sin", it is a NON-sin. The sin is in excess, just like an excess of food is sin but food itself is not sin. Same goes for smoking and gambling: puritanism in this regard does nothing but breed more violent paganism because people recognize that puritanism is completely un-natural, sub-natural, and sub-human.

anyway, I commend protestant churches for the good that they do. But I absolutely condemn and detest them (in the same way Jesus does) for going contrary to the wishes of Jesus Christ that His Church may be one. this lively and vibrant christian community exists throughout the Catholic Church in many places, not the least of which is Latin America itself (notice it's not until the latinos come to the US that they convert in large numbers). Jesus Christ hates that you keep His Church divided. Jesus Christ most hates that you (seem to) think the whole beaver dam thing is a competition.

It's sort of a love-hate relationship ... they could do so much more good if they were united to the Church Jesus built

Here's the real deal: the Catholic Church in the United States is sick. We need help. But all you do is cry "we give more money to our churches than you do to yours" and "we have a better christian community than you". God help you for that type of attitude... nay, God forgive you for that kind of sinful attitidue. But the Catholic Church in Latin America is alive and well; it is immigrant latinos coming into the US finding a US Church that does not have the same vibrant christian community as they had when they were in Latin America. your vibrant pentecostal communities could be converting into the Church and re-invigorating her with new life: instead you choose to reject the Apostles of the twelve Apostles of Christ.

And he who rejects them rejects Jesus Christ, no matter how much you shout to Him "Lord, Lord"

One more comment: I find it amusing that you label the clergy of the Catholic Church prideful... but then move on to say it is good that you have a prideful laity who acts just like our clergy do: having a say in the church and assigning/removing pastors et cetera et cetera. I suppose you think it is worse to have a group of people who believe they have a heavy burden on them to tend to the Lord's sheep correctly according to guidelines outside of theirselves than to have a laity who control their pastors and beliefs based solely upon their guts.

Paul instituted Timothy as a pastor in a location where Paul was not a member of the Church, where Paul didn't even live (except, perhaps, for a short period of time during travels). Timothy remained the pastor there because Paul had set him up as a pastor there. Timothy was not elected. Timothy could not be "fired" from his community. The people of the time understood: Timothy represented Paul who represented Christ. What Timothy taught would be what Paul would teach, and by extension what Christ would teach.

[littleflower+JMJ]

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='1039520' date='Aug 7 2006, 10:48 PM']
From a sociological standpoint, the phenomena seems an expected result of assimilation insofar as Hispanic communities are assimilative (i.e. later generations of converted Latinos who have material success and adapted to the "American way"). For immigrants, a change in religion symbolizes one's own transformation from a migrant worker to living the American dream.

That, and many Catholic priests who minister to Latino populations in the States often have very poor Spanish-speaking skills. This isn't any kind of cause, but it certainly doesn't help and it indicates some of the apathy and the "taken-for-grantedness" toward Latinos that certainly seems to characterize some portions of the Catholic heirarchy in the Americas.
[/quote]

Thats funny because my bishop was born in Ireland, grew up there, still has his thick Irish Accent and speaks better Spanish that most around these parts. The same is for many priests.


[quote name='Eutychus' post='1039733' date='Aug 8 2006, 11:21 AM']
Indeed. Looking for FREEDOM they come here, obtain economic freedom and hence prosperity, and then want spiritual freedom and become mere Christians, leaving the oppression of the Catholic Church behind like the bad memories they had of Mexico. [/quote]

You obviously have no idea about them if this is what your thinking. Do you have any idea how Mexico is??

For years and years, it has been the Catholic Church that has saved and protected the people of Mexico, from the dangers they have faced. It has been the one thing to always helped them and been there for them. If they didn't want to be Catholic, they didn't have to move anywhere to do that.

[quote]
What was lacking before, was indigenous hispanic non-Catholic vibrant communities. Now that they are well established, a riverswimmer can cast off the priests, nuns, and bishops, and still stay within a [b]supportive and understanding[/b] linquistic community. [/quote]

A riverswimmer? Is that all you can call them? Wow. That was real supportive.

[quote]I suspec that within a few years, the MAJORITY of those coming here, will be, within 10 years, Pentecostal or Evangelical Christians, and the Catholic Church will be encouraging some new group to come here to fill those empty pews and collection baskets.
[/quote]

I'm sorry but I disagree. With the future, the majority I believe will be Catholics and stay Catholics. Obviously you do not understand their culture if you feel they would just drop something that is a part of their major identity, nor have such a mistaken view of their relationship with the Church. The Catholic Church will continue to be a comfort to these people in Mexico.


As for the Sunday Visitor, I did not see any mention of Latinos.

For the sake of adding to this topic, my diocese is seeing a very fast growth in the Latino population and its only getting bigger.

Numerous parishes have added 2 to 3 more Spanish masses for the Latino poplution and its amazing because every single spanish mass is packed to the full capacity. It really is beautiful to see!

[Guest Pepe]

I am a latino. For a while it was hard to identify with the Catholic Church here in America. It is something completely differenty from the one we are used to from our homeland. That and the fact that sometimes the priests or the people in charge of the parish don't speak spanish, or have a very negative attitude toward us. I have been called every racial slur and insult you can think off. In my own parish. Not from clergy, but from parishoners who feel we are here to dominate, take over, whatever you want. From that aspect it is really easy to see why Latino leave the church. Why go where you are not wanted? What happens? Other churches pick up on this, learn spanish and lure them in with money, a job, among other things. Most of the time they leave the church not becuase of their faith, but because of convinience. It has happend to friends of mine. After you truly experience the majesty of the Eucharist you are never the same. That is why I have never left. After a talk with my pastor about the negative comments going around he sprung into action and put a stop to them. He is an incredible pastor. There is a saying in spanish, "Catolico Ignorante Pronto Protestante." An Ignorant Catholic is Soon A Protestant. It's true. Prod churches are filled with people who don't understand the faith, or misinterpret the scriptures. Archbishop Fulton Sheen said, 99 percent of the people who "hate" the Catholic church don't hate it, rather they hate the misconception they have of it. True knowledge of the scripture can not come from just reading the bible alone. I can not be a surgeon just because I pick up a medical book and read it. I have to have the proper guidance and training. All these "prods" are self magestering. (I think I invented a word here). Each prod church is it's own magisterium. Who would you rather follow, a magisterium this only a couple of decades old at best, or a magisterium that is 2000 years old?

The Catholic Church was the first Christian Church, historical fact. It has withstood test after test after test. Latinos will continue to leave, just like prods will continue to come back to Rome. But eventually we will all be one faith again. Guess which one? The pentecostal church that used to be a bank, or the Roman Catholic Church that was founded by Christ?

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1040036' date='Aug 8 2006, 10:45 PM']
Catholics who leave for more liberal protestant churches do take the easy road out. Protestantism is not united, and as such cannot be clumped together. It all depends where you go in protestantdom.[/quote]That is an unfair characterization and erroneous generalization.
Catholics, as well as any other follower of any other religion, whether Christian or non-Christian, just as easily misrepresent their religion's teachings in thought, word, and deed.

I've seen it, and if you are honest, you know you've seen it. People can do great harm to another's faith, whether they are clerics, or the glaring person standing next to you in the pew.

The Temporal Church is a mixture of theology, culture, and social interaction. Divine and Human. I've belonged to parishes with large Hispanic population and parishes with small Hispanic populations. I've belonged to incredibly wealthy parishes and 'mission' parishes.

Hispanics leave the Catholic Church for real and painful reasons, not just 'taking the easy road out.' I also know of Hispanics that have left other denominations and have come to my most recent Catholic parish because they've been more welcomed.

[Eutychus]

[quote]I commend protestant churches for the good that they do.[u] But I absolutely condemn and detest them (in the same way Jesus does) for going contrary to the wishes of Jesus Christ that His Church may be one. this lively and vibrant christian community exists throughout the Catholic Church in many places, not the least of which is Latin America itself (notice it's not until the latinos come to the US that they convert in large numbers). [/u][color="#660000"]J[b]esus Christ hates that you keep His Church divided. [Jesus Christ most hates that you (seem to) think the whole beaver dam thing is a competition.[/b][/color]
[/quote]

My my, the hubris that seeps out in your arrogant belief that you are the OTC.

First we examine the STARTING erroneous assumption that Jesus expected a SINGLE DENOMINATION, all united under one living man, all singing from the same songbook, all marching in unison.

First, we have the DIRECT testimony of Jesus in Revelation. Where Jesus writes to SEVEN different churches, note... SEPARATE churches, addressing each with a different message, and each with different problems and triumphs. Jesus could have, and did NOT write to THE CHURCH in asia, but to THE CHURCH[b][u]*ES*[/u][/b] in asia. There we have an admission that as early as 90-95 there were differing programs, emphasis, and issues on a LOCAL LEVEL.

Now even before then, pre-crucifixion the matter of those independent of the main apostolic group was brought to the attention of Jesus, shall we examine it?

[quote]Mark 9:38 (KJV)

And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, [b]and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.

39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not:[/b] for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.

40[u] For he that is not against us is on our part.[/u][/quote]

There you have TWO examples that put to bed the concept of a OTC with ONE apostolic head. FORBID HIM NOT, is there for our example.

It is pure arrogance, unbridaled pride that drives the Catholic Church, always has been. One only has to review history, the Greek Orthodox got sick of the posturing and pretending of the boys in Rome, and in 1054 a good 30% of all Christians told Rome where to put it, and left. As did the Copts, and others.

But ignoring reality, Rome continues to strut and posture as the OTC, when in fact, today, ACTIVE Christians, going to church weekly, outside of the Catholic Church may in fact be larger than the fabricated numbers that Rome continually posts out there. I doubt very many leave for liberal protestantism, it is dying on the vine, the stepchild churches of the reformation are all on a steep downhill trajectory and even they are losing members to the vibrant, growing, evangelical and pentecostal fundamentalist churches.

Most that leave, do NOT leave for easy, they leave for HARDER, they leave because they believe the bible, they want morality, they want accountability, and they do so at great personal costs, in terms of time, money, and family relationships that are strained.

Edited August 9, 2006 by Eutychus

[avemaria40]

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1040079' date='Aug 9 2006, 07:57 AM']
Most that leave, do NOT leave for easy, they leave for HARDER, they leave because they believe the bible, they want morality, they want accountability, and they do so at great personal costs, in terms of time, money, and family relationships that are strained.
[/quote]

OK, so you think Catholics don't have any of these things?

1. Of course Catholics believe in the Bible, we put it together! Not only that, but many saints DIED protecting the Bible.
2. Catholics don't believe in morality? Funny, because people tend to complain that our morality is too strict. Why do you think we're so strict on marriage and sexuality? Not to mention all the pro life work we do?
3. As for accountability, what do you think Confession is for? It keeps you accountable!

[Eutychus]

[quote] 1. Of course Catholics believe in the Bible, we put it together! Not only that, but many saints DIED protecting the Bible.[/quote]

I rather think a LOT MORE died trying to get it printed and in the hands of the laity, of course, history and the truth surrounding the bible, isn't something that is taught in RCIA classes anymore.

You did NOT "put it together" at best, we owe the scribes credit for the staples.

[quote]2. Catholics don't believe in morality? Funny, because people tend to complain that our morality is too strict. Why do you think we're so strict on marriage and sexuality? Not to mention all the pro life work we do?[/quote]

Odd, a billion dollars is a lot of proof in the morality department, don't you think?

[quote]3. As for accountability, what do you think Confession is for? It keeps you accountable![/quote]

No.

First of all, you sin, go to confession, and say the required prayers. There is NO requirement that you STOP sinning, REPENT, and change. Just go to the priest, he waves his hand, and poof, off you go clean and spruced up, to do it all over again, and again.

[Aloysius]

the canon of the new testament was put together by a Church council called by an Emporer and ratified by a Pope.

There is certainly accountability. A confession is considered invalid if you go with no "strong purpose of ammendment", i.e. a purpose to stop sinning. You have to repent, stop sinning, and move on. If you sin again, you must be forgiven again (duh) but you have to stop.

in Revelation Jesus writes to seven different churches? In the Catholic Church there are 23 sui juris churches all in union with the pope. In addition to that, individual dioceses are considered their own "church". And individual parishes are also considered their own "church". read the Catechism of the Catholic Church. That we use the word "church" to describe our larger body of united believers as well just shows that we kept the word after we spread the gospel to the ends of the earth.

"he that is not against us is with us"--precisely why I love and support everything protestants do for good and for Christ. but the evils you also do need to be exposed and rooted out-- the evil of not having a Church that is one even as the Son is one with the Father.

Jesus intended for us to be one in our body of beliefs. That's the assumption I make. And since this is found nowhere except in the Catholic Church, I then draw the conclusion that He thusly intended it to be one through a hierarchy of Apostles.

This competition thing grows tiring and certainly cannot please Our Lord. Percentages don't prove a Church: otherwise I'd be saying that we're the only truly Universal Church with more churches throughout the world than any protestant church, or even all protestant churches combined; and I'd be saying that we are responsible for the most charitable work out of any organization in human history, UN included. or I'd be saying that we're the longest lasting and most powerful institution in human history (I'm sure that's clearly the work of the devil, huh budge? but what happened to " For he that is not against us is on our part."... how can we be of the devil if we do so much good in Jesus' name? yeah, I thought so, same reason I tell you your protestant divisiveness is from the devil)... but I don't want to be saying these things. I don't want to be competing for who's doing more good: I want to be cooperating in doing good while at the same time having solid theological dialogue for who is right about what Jesus wanted. that does not include ramming heads over who has the most vibrant Christian Communities (we have tons of vibrant chrisitan communities, fellow, even if they don't match the emotionally-charged system you're used to)

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1040102' date='Aug 9 2006, 08:54 AM']First of all, you sin, go to confession, and say the required prayers. There is NO requirement that you STOP sinning, REPENT, and change. Just go to the priest, he waves his hand, and poof, off you go clean and spruced up, to do it all over again, and again.[/quote]
I've been to evangelical churches where the pastors tell this story. I have to say that I have found no support for this mischaracterization of the sacrament of confession, in all my life as a Catholic, and I don't know why evangelicals have to bear false witness against Catholics like this. Could spreading lies be part of God's plan?

[avemaria40]

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1040102' date='Aug 9 2006, 08:54 AM']
I rather think a LOT MORE died trying to get it printed and in the hands of the laity, of course, history and the truth surrounding the bible, isn't something that is taught in RCIA classes anymore.

You did NOT "put it together" at best, we owe the scribes credit for the staples.
Odd, a billion dollars is a lot of proof in the morality department, don't you think?
No.

First of all, you sin, go to confession, and say the required prayers. There is NO requirement that you STOP sinning, REPENT, and change. Just go to the priest, he waves his hand, and poof, off you go clean and spruced up, to do it all over again, and again.
[/quote]

Actually, the Church decided which books got in and which ones didn't. I'd say that would be putting it together. Also, it wasn't that Protestants tried getting the Bible in the hands of the laity, it is that they were teaching something wrong. Not to mention that many Catholics died DEFENDING what they believed. Not that I condone the Roman Inquisition, I don't but sadly, Catholics AND Protestants were not immune to brutality in those times. And I'm NOT talking about money, I'm talking about the fact that we are still standing strong against birth control, abortion, gay marriage, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, prostitution, premarital sex, etc. while many churches have gone completely by the wayside. Also, would you argue that the saints were immoral people? And if you knew anything about the Sacrament of Confession, the requirement is to repent and change, or you are not forgiven. It's not, oh just say a Hail Mary and you're done, it's say the Hail Mary AND go and sin no more.

[Jesuspaidtheprice]

Every Roman Catholic is required to make an act of contrition before the priest says the words of absolution. I actually rather like this prayer, IMHO.


[quote]O my God,
I am heartily sorry for
having offended Thee,
and I detest all my sins,
because I dread the loss of heaven,
and the pains of hell;
but most of all because
they offend Thee, my God,
Who are all good and
deserving of all my love.
I firmly resolve,
with the help of Thy grace,
to confess my sins,
to do penance,
and [b]to sin no more[/b].

Amen.[/quote]

[mortify]

[quote name='Budge' post='1038137' date='Aug 5 2006, 09:29 AM']
I think most Catholics here would run even to know that most Bible churches require attendance at three services a week;)
[/quote]

Three times a week? Where's that in the bible?


Silly budge, trix are for kids

[Eutychus]

[quote]Three times a week? Where's that in the bible? [/quote]

Acts 2. You really ought to try reading the bible every now and then, amazing what you might learn....



[quote] it wasn't that Protestants tried getting the Bible in the hands of the laity, it is that they were teaching something wrong. Not to mention that many Catholics died DEFENDING what they believed.[/quote]

My dear....did you not know, that Wycliffe, Tyndale, Huss, Luther et al were ROMAN CATHOLIC priests or professors when they tried to get the bible to the laity?

The Catholics died for a church. The Christians died for the book.

Can't you differentiate the two? If not, you should.

[Justified Saint]

I like to avoid overly generalizing segments of society but the [b]Bottom Line[/b]: Many Latinos (1st, 2nd generations, immigrants) don't have the time nor them money for religion (these are mostly Catholics). If they do have time then they have probably been in the States for many generations and are well-off financially and thus their religious preferences would reflect the national profile.

I am not necessarily accepting this interpretation, but this is how a sociological one would take account of the facts.

That said, many people on the right who strongly oppose nearly all forms of immigration see this as an unlikely trend (culturally, but also religiously) since Latinos are not easily assimilated. On that account, then, it is unlikely that Latinos will every be a Protestant majority.

[mortify]

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1040259' date='Aug 9 2006, 11:52 AM']
Acts 2. You really ought to try reading the bible every now and then, amazing what you might learn....
[/quote]

You ought to take your own advice and read the chapter
No place does it say to meet three times a week. Verse 46 does say the followers met every day:

"Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts..."

My Catholic church offers mass everyday. Why don't the "bible churches"? And who came up with the notion of three-day-a-week service? Certainly not biblical.

Lets just add this to the list of inconsistencies and hypocrisies.

Edited August 9, 2006 by mortify

[Eutychus]

Good grief...

The question was WHERE DOES THE BIBLE state meeting more than once a week. I offered Acts 2.

And mysteriously that turned into a defense of the daily mass { which 1% or less might attend } and a condemnation of pentecostals that actually DO gather more than once a week for a real, heartfelt extended service and prayer and teaching exercise.

I give up.

The PRIDE here is getting a tad too much to take.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1040456' date='Aug 9 2006, 06:49 PM']
I give up.

The PRIDE here is getting a tad too much to take.
[/quote]
Indeed, Eutychus, indeed . . . .

Maybe try a little humility and charity for a change. Your continuous bile and insults are getting quite tiresome.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1040259' date='Aug 9 2006, 01:52 PM']
The Catholics died for a church. The Christians died for the book.

Can't you differentiate the two? If not, you should.
[/quote]

Allow me to pose an honest question (hoping you return to see it)...

The first books of the New Testament were not written until about 30 years after Christ ascended into Heaven. During those 30 years, did Stephen the martyr, ten of the original disciples, and the hundreds (if not thousands) of other martyrs die for the Church or... the Scriptures that had not even begun to exist?

Edited August 10, 2006 by LouisvilleFan

[mortify]

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1040456' date='Aug 9 2006, 06:49 PM']

The question was WHERE DOES THE BIBLE state meeting more than once a week. I offered Acts 2.
[/quote]

That was not the question asked.
Guess you chose to answer your own imaginary question.

But anyway, since Budge brought it up perhaps he could explain the unbiblical practice of going to service three times a week.