Various polls have been conducted to determine the reasons why people leave the Church. A recent Pew Research poll was conducted of why young people leave the Church. Many of the reasons given could have been answered with additional reading and studying. The cause of young people being unaware of answers to challenges of their faith could be, as some believe, due to a lack of Apologetical teaching in the Church environment. The avatars of secularism, as is there job, will attack religion, yet if the Church is not providing apologetical teaching and instruction, then when those of faith, who have limited knowledge and understanding when dealing with secularism, may walk away with secular reasonings that are answerable. Part of the failure to teach apologetics is that teachers and leaders in the church have not risen to the need of task at hand. If the church wants to keep their young people, then the intellectual challenges must be answered.
Now on to some of the reasons why young people have mentioned as to why they are leaving the Church. I will also briefly discuss each reason.
The first common issue that is often encountered and mentioned is that of science and religion or science versus religion. The phrase, “rational thought just makes religion go out the window,” is commonplace among the science versus religion category. Those who utter such a phrase have, more than likely, never read any works from writers such as Augustine, Jerome, John Chrysostom, Thomas Aquinas, Ignatius of Antioch, John Henry Newman, or G.K. Chesterton. These philosophers are some of the brightest and best that Western Christianity have produced. One would find it an extremely difficult task to convince any of these writers that rational thoughts makes religion go out the window. Another common phrase related to this science versus religion response is that there is no scientific evidence for God. The problem with this phrase is that, at its root, this is a categorical mistake. There is nothing wrong with the sciences and the church has embraced the sciences over the centuries. The sciences are methods for analyzing things and events in the empirically verifiable world. Beginning with empirical analysis and moving through hypothesis and experimentation and deducing and so on and so forth. Through this process one comes to a deeper understanding of the empirical, verifiable world. But the sciences, even in principle, cannot say anything about why there is something rather than nothing. They cannot say why there is a world or universe at all. God is not an item within the universe. God is not one thing among many. There is no physical trace for God. God is above and outside of the Creation; therefore, empirical analysis cannot test for God because God is out of its scope. He is the reason of why there is something rather than nothing. None of this is to say that there are no rational warrants for God. The Church has, among its followers, several philosophers, such as those mentioned above, who have created several different philosophical arguments for God. So, don’t look for the empirical sciences to adjudicate this question one way or another because it is out of scope.
Another common issue that is often encountered and mentioned is that religion is the opium of the people. This idea is from Carl Marx. Marx said the we live in a terribly corrupt world where people suffer from political and economic injustice, so what do people do? People created and invented a wild fantasy world of religion. They invent these dreams about eternal life, about God, about the establishment of justice in heaven, so they can deal with their struggles and sufferings in this world. Marx used this phrase at a time when opium dens were all the rage in London. People would go into these places and smoke and inhale opium, and they would live in a fantasy world to get away from the struggles of this world. Sigmund Freud sees religion as an illusion and a waking dream. This argument, however, is extremely susceptible to a Tu quoque. Marx and Freud can accuse religion of being opium, but the atheism embraced by Marx, Freud, and others can be accused of the same thing. Atheism is also susceptible to such psychological deductionism. Atheism says that religion is opium or an illusion while atheism itself is guilty of the same behavior. Atheism can be of great psychological appeal. If someone claims that there’s no God, then that means there’s no objective moral norm, there’s no final judgment of one’s actions, and that one’s life is entirely their own and no one else’s. This allows a person to do whatever one wishes. It’s attractive because one can behave how ever he or she wants without worry. However, this is a wishful fantasy and illusion because it is not reality. So, in the end, the objection that religion is opium is invalidated because the same can be said about that which argues against it.
Another issue that is encountered and mentioned is that up and down the centuries Christians have behaved really badly; there are a lot of examples of bad Christians. Following this logic would be the same as thinking that since there are bad doctors, lawyers, embezzling Corporate Executives, nurses, police officers, politicians, etc, then no one should participate in any of those career fields. Is this true? No, of course not. It is true that Christians have behaved very badly. But does that tell against Christianity? No, it tells again people not the group; otherwise, no one should become a doctor, lawyer, Corporate Officer, nurse, police officer, politician, etc. because those careers have really bad people, too, especially bad doctors, police officers, and politicians because they’re supposed to be helping people. Americans have behaved very badly such as those who owned slaves and those who, during World War 2, did carpet bombings of Japan and who dropped the atomic bomb on Japan. There are lots of examples of Americans doing very bad things. But does that tell against the American ideals? Does that tell against the ideals in the Declaration of Independence or against the governmental structure in the US Constitution? Does it mean that the ideals of the American political system are corrupt in and of themselves? Or what about Germany? It caused two major wars in the last Century, so does that tell against Germany? No, it is all evidence of original sin and that human beings have a very hard time living up to their ideals. The same is true of religious people.
The last issue that will be mentioned in this article is that religion, and Christianity particularly, is responsible for all the wars; that’s why there is so much conflict and so much violence; it can be traced back to religion. It is true that religion is responsible for some of the wars over the centuries; however, this claim is false. Recent research on this topic shows a different truth. In the book, Encyclopdia of Wars by Charles Phillips and Alan Axelrod, it is stated that it is reasonable to say that only approximately 7% (seven percent) of all wars are a result of religion. This is very different from the unsupported assertion by some to the contrary. Look, for example, at the great wars of the 20th Century: World War 1, World War 2, Vietnam, Korea. These wars of genocide were not fought due to religious causes. Far more people died, and far more corpses were piled up in the name of the secular, modern State than have been piled up in the name of religion. So acknowledging religion’s role in fostering war, it is by no means the primary cause of war.
These are some of the reasons young people leave the Church and a brief discussion and analysis of each given reason.
For further reading on the Church’s view on these issues, I suggest beginning with the books The Everlasting Man and Orthodoxy by G.K. Chesteron. Other authors who were mentioned above provide additional resources. For more recent authors read Frank Sheed, Fulton Sheen, and Peter Kreeft. All of these philosophers and modern church apologists provide ample reasons for maintaining the faith that has been past down from Jesus’ Apostles and the early church.