Ex-Catholics - Why Did YOU Leave?

[Bruce S]

Recently, I noticed that everyone in my chruch I was meeting seemed to be a former Catholic, our denomination is Assembly of God. So I asked the minister how many he thought there were here. To my complete amazement, he answered, "about 60%' ... WOW, that blew me away.

So, the question on the floor, to my fellow former Roman Catholics who have left, and gone elsewhere...

Why? What prompted your leaving?

For me, it was the human baggage, the rules, the inconsistancies that I thought were there, particularly the rule changes, first this or that is demanded, then one day, not.

Truth to me is eternal, truth that fluctuates with the whim of the day, or the Pope in office seems unbiblical.

And the Mass, however beautiful, is boring, hardly sufficient to get me worked up and inspired to worship. I have the utmost respect for Catholics, and Catholic clergy, they are some of the finest people alive, well trained, and highly educated. But I needed MORE than the Catholics offered, and LESS too, for that matter.

How about you?

 

[ZiSunka]

Because the church made no attempt to meet my spiritual needs and instead did plenty of things to show me that it did not have the ability to meet my spiritual needs.

 

[Brian Daniel]

I originally left because I was struggling with scrupulosity, and I did not have that problem until I joined the RCC. After leaving the RCC, I read the Bible a several times, then concluded that Jesus doesn't have brand loyalty with Christian churches. He can work in my life no matter what kind of Christian church I go to. Anyways, how can I be subject to my local Catholic bishop when he isn't Catholic?

 

[stray bullet]

And the Mass, however beautiful, is boring, hardly sufficient to get me worked up and inspired to worship. I have the utmost respect for Catholics, and Catholic clergy, they are some of the finest people alive, well trained, and highly educated. But I needed MORE than the Catholics offered, and LESS too, for that matter.

I take it you don't believe in the Real Presence? If so, I can't imagine saying that being before God is "boring".

I often wonder how many people should have left their parish instead of the entire Catholic Church.

Truth to me is eternal, truth that fluctuates with the whim of the day, or the Pope in office seems unbiblical.

And protestantism is made up of a whole myriad of conflicting churches and ideas. One church might be led by a homosexual, another one preaching that homosexuality should be punishable by death. One could say truth is truth, but you go to a protestant church to get which version of it is pleasing to your ears.

 

[ZiSunka]

I take it you don't believe in the Real Presence? If so, I can't imagine saying that being before God is "boring".

I often wonder how many people should have left their parish instead of the entire Catholic Church.



And protestantism is made up of a whole myriad of conflicting churches and ideas. One church might be led by a homosexual, another one preaching that homosexuality should be punishable by death. One could say truth is truth, but you go to a protestant church to get which version of it is pleasing to your ears.

Debating is for another forum, the Interdenominational discussion forum. If you would like to open a similar thread there to get these things off your chest, you may. But please don't argue with the thoughtful reasoning of the responses to the original question.

 

[stray bullet]

I'm not arguing, I'm asking. If you look at my post, I am getting nothing "off my chest", I'm simply asking some questions.
I didn't know I wasn't allowed to ask questions back. I didn't reply saying the reasons in the post were wrong. I'm trying to understand the reasoning, just as he is trying to understand the reasons of others.

 

[ZiSunka]

I'm not arguing, I'm asking. I didn't know I wasn't allowed to ask questions back. I didn't reply saying the reasons in the post were wrong. I'm trying to understand the reasoning, just as he is trying to understand the reasons of others.

It's a thread asking for people's reasons for leaving the catholic church. If you would like to share a testimony about why you left the church, please go ahead and post it. Otherwise, open a new thread in the Discussion area to refute what you read here.

 

[stray bullet]

I figured trying to understand more about other people's reasons and getting a further explanation was ok, as I didn't see the original posting expressing otherwise.

 

[eldermike]

This forum is not for debating. The question is "why did you leave". You may post your personal reason/reasons but do not use the chance to do so as an open invitation to bash our Christian Brothers/Sisters in the RCC. If this simple requirement is met then all should go well. Note: You can always use the report feature.

 

[ZiSunka]

This forum is not for debating. The question is "why did you leave". You may post your personal reason/reasons but do not use the chance to do so as an open invitation to bash our Christian Brothers/Sisters in the RCC. If this simple requirement is met then all should go well. Note: You can always use the report feature.

Oh dear! I think this time it was our Christian brother/sister bashing us!

 

[stray bullet]

I'm not trying to bash anyone. I'm really sorry if I came off that way. I'm really just trying to understand more about why people left. I just meant to ask for a further explanation, that's all. And yes, I am a Christian, I don't mean to judge or anything.

 

[ZiSunka]

Then just read and listen. People will tell you why they left.

 

[eldermike]

Oh dear! I think this time it was our Christian brother/sister bashing us!

I was speaking to those who might be thinking about posting. I saw what had already been posted. I am watching

 

[Bruce S]

I take it you don't believe in the Real Presence? If so, I can't imagine saying that being before God is "boring".

And protestantism is made up of a whole myriad of conflicting churches and ideas. One church might be led by a homosexual, another one preaching that homosexuality should be punishable by death. One could say truth is truth, but you go to a protestant church to get which version of it is pleasing to your ears.

The idea of Transubstantiation is unique to the RCC, now most outide of the RCC find the Bread and Wine, SYMBOLIC, not real. Real only came about after a few centuries. I find worshipping a wafer of bread in a Monstrance wrong now, it is so demeaning to actually worship bread as if it were the REAL substance of Christ that it is one of the things that keeps me away. It MAY be, but I'm not convinced that is the way we were instructed, and for now, I want to go with symbolic, it feels right that way.

The heirarcy thing does too, the modern RCC is more akin to an old feudalistic setup, with King, Dukes, and Knights than first centrury Christianity. Of course, there WERE leaders then, but less formally constituted than is now the case.

Papal infallibilty is another doctrine that has RCC approval, but in my own lifetime Popes have changed quite a few things, and it does strike one as being subject to HUMAN interaction, not divine, for divine would never, ever change.

Protestants are at least variable, and every man, organization seems to be free to interpret the actual written instructions as they see fit. It IS confusing, that I will grant you. But then, BEFORE everything was codified that is how it was too, so I guess that one could say that lack of formalized heirarcy was how it was designed to be, and man just tried to clean the mess up with church councils and things.

One of the benefits of NOT being RCC anymore is hiring and firing the minister. Get one that holds firm to the Biblical teaching, and if, some humans are prone to do, he falls, you can without petitioning anyone fire him. The scandals of the RCC church would not have gotten as out of hand with local control of leadership.

 

[ZiSunka]

I agree. Transubstantiation is not a real conversion of bread and wine to real flesh and blood. I seen it and tasted it and it is still bread and wine, not matter how the priest prays over it. Anglicans largely believe the same thing, transubstantiation, that is, but they concede that it still tastes like bread and wine.

So being part of a church that has as an essential belief that Christ's real body is present in the cup and wafer is a real problem to me.

 

[Bruce S]

I agree. Transubstantiation is not a real conversion of bread and wine to real flesh and blood. I seen it and tasted it and it is still bread and wine, not matter how the priest prays over it. Anglicans largely believe the same thing, transubstantiation, that is, but they concede that it still tastes like bread and wine.

So being part of a church that has as an essential belief that Christ's real body is present in the cup and wafer is a real problem to me.

When I was younger, and going to church, the Priest used to place the wafer in a golden holder, shaped like a cross with a starburst, put cloth around it, hold it up, and we all worshipped the bread. Not TOOK the bread, worshipped it. Even then I found that one a bit too much. Now I see that and go to the bible, look for anything at all that backs that one up, and it isn't there. Pure ritualism, first class for the masses.

The other thing is sweeping up all the crumbs, and acting like they are so important that HOUSEKEEPING during the Mass is part of the worship service, come on now, am I the only one that chuckles as the Priest does the vacuum cleaner number? Sorry, I got a little out of control with that comment, will try harder.

Anyway, ritualism has been the hardest thing for me, sort of like being subjected to the Mosaic Legalisms, with all those requirements, and pre-written prayers for any and every event of life.

I prefer more spontaneity.

 

[stray bullet]

Maybe we could stick with the original topic and make a seperate topic about bread and wine?

 

[ZiSunka]

Sure.

 

[ZiSunka]

When I was younger, and going to church, the Priest used to place the wafer in a golden holder, shaped like a cross with a starburst, put cloth around it, hold it up, and we all worshipped the bread. Not TOOK the bread, worshipped it. Even then I found that one a bit too much. Now I see that and go to the bible, look for anything at all that backs that one up, and it isn't there. Pure ritualism, first class for the masses.

A lot of young catholics and recent converts don't have any memory of how it was, what was taught to us, or how many times each pope changed the infallible teaching of the pope before.

In our church, the priest dumped the bread into the the chalice and held it up for all to worship, but it was worship of a non-God thing nonetheless.

 

[Bruce S]

http://www.camdendiocese.org/monstrance.gif


For those who don't know what a Monstrance is or what it looks like.

Anyone else here old enough to remember the Latin Mass too? Man, that one was a snoozer, zzzzz, didn't understand anything then, learned what was going on, but missed out most of it. Thank goodness the RCC took a clue from the Protestants and turned the Priest TOWARDS the people, and took down the Rudescreens. Grin, but most wont know what those were, more a European thing, but saw them in all the mediaval RCC churches.

Contrast the formalized service to the lively ones you find in Pentacostal churchs, grin, it really took me a long time to become a hand waver, my old RCC and Presbyterian side of me resisted that for quite a few months.

Oh, and the incense, forgot about that one. In this one, I think the RCC is right, and we should have some in our services/