Perhaps this is a question without an easy answer (also: I am not owed an answer!), but I would be interested to better understand the transition from Catholic to non-Catholic, rather than from something like "conservative" Catholic to "liberal" Catholic (or whatever we want to call it). Only because it struck me that the core list of serious problems – "lack of inclusion and hatred toward LGBTQ people; the dismissal and violence toward BIPOC folks; the dehumanization of immigrants and refugees; the dismissiveness and covering up of sexual abuse in the church" – are all things that I've seen communities of Catholics working to fight against. So a big part of me was still left wondering something like "wait but why were THOSE communities not the landing pad?". Maybe it's partly a regional thing, where visibility of and/or access to those communities is lacking? Or maybe (probably?) it's more to it than that. But it feels like there's another layer to the deconstruction being described, or something, that I'd be interested to better understand!
Thanks for your comment and question Daniel! You're definitely right, those communities do exist. And the answer for me is multi-faceted. Part of it is that there's lack of access to "liberal" Catholic communities where I live. Another bigger reason is that I no longer believe a lot of what the Church teaches, and don't find myself at home in the church in general anymore. There's more, but that's some of the gist. :)
I imagine that, for people inside the bubble Therese describes, the view that such communities of Catholics are not "real Catholics" becomes internalized. I see this a lot, in a different context, in the science-religion discourse. There are fundamentalist Christians on one side and ex-fundamentalist scientists on the other side. The one thing they both agree on is that non-fundamentalist Christians are not "real Christians" but rather just secularists pretending to be Christian. It requires a real gestalt shift to see that, no, the truth is actually the opposite. Very roughly speaking, the contrast that matters is between the catholic/inclusive mode of social togetherness (of which the Church is called to be a sign) and the fundamentalist/binary mode seeing the world as divided between good and bad (whether the fundamentalism in question is explicitly religious or something else like scientism or what Yascha Mounk calls the "identity synthesis"). But I'm curious for Therese's reaction to my speculation that such a gestalt shift might actually be more difficult, initially at least, than a clean break with Catholicism as a whole, even if there were "liberal" Catholic communities nearby.
I don't think it was internalized for me, at least not anymore. I know and fully recognize "real Catholics" include anyone that calls themselves Catholic, not just the tiny community I was raised in. I don't see anything as binary anymore, which was part of where I've landed post-deconstruction. As I mentioned in my comment to your other question just now, I no longer believe much of the teachings anymore, so it no longer fits for me and I've found a home somewhere else. Whether someone chooses to stay or leave is all valid. :)
From my perspective, it seems possible that some of the people leaving the Church (not presuming to explain your thinking) might still believe the core doctrines if it weren't for the mistaken current teaching on homosexuality (and the associated concrete cruelty and harm) and the affinity of many American Church leaders with "conservative" politics. But those things of course raise the serious question (for Catholics like me who lament them) of why anyone should trust Catholic teaching or otherwise regard the Catholic thing as good. These are questions of ecclesiology, on which I have found the writing of James Alison so helpful---and on which I hope to one day make the time to write more.
I was inside of the bubble Therese describes for 20 years. For another 10 I tried to be in more progressive Catholic circles. Then I came to a point where I realized that I don't believe in the doctrine of Original Sin, penal substitutionary atonement, the theology of the priesthood and sacraments, the saints and every other foundational doctrine the church teaches. Not only did I witness profound harm to folks that are not heterosexual or cisgendered I witnessed it with the church's teaching re: contraception. Plus once I realized how deeply the abuse of power that perpetuated the sex abuse crisis is embedded in the theology of the church I could not longer remain and have a clear conscience. Sure, progressives dissent from teachings but I no longer had a sustainable container. I still appreciate the work of priests like Richard Rohr and Greg Boyle and learn from the.
Yeah, folks like Greg Boyle and the people he ministers to in prison and the barrios are at the heart of the Church, in my view. Thankfully, penal substitutionary atonement is not Catholic doctrine (but merely one interpretation among others). No, the wrath appeased by Jesus's death was that of us humans. Jesus deliberately and peacefully occupied the place of shame at the foundation of human cultures generally (the workings of which in one particular bubble Therese's account illuminates). The crucified and risen Jesus subverted the hegemony of shame and death which had so disfigured the goodness of our humanity (which is what original sin really is---the way our beautiful human hearts had become misdirected into polarized hatred, deadening addictions, and blaming victims). At their best, the sacraments make present Jesus' power to undo the knots of our hearts, opening us to love and enlivening us to stand up for the truth. The harmful moral teachings you reference are not part of the core of Christianity (obviously, from my perspective). Rather, we are witnessing the core dynamic of Christianity revealing those teachings as tragic mistakes (with the Holy Spirit sometimes working through official channels but perhaps more often outside of them).
Your description of the shortcoming of "progressive" Catholics (including even Greg Boyle's writing to an extent) is well put: to merely dissent from the mistaken teachings (including the core misconception of penal substitution) is a positive step but is exclusively destructive. No, what sustains my faith and hope is constructive theology such as that of James Alison, presenting basic Christianity in a fresh way, making it comprehensible and livable in our time. Unflinching in naming the culture of deceit at the root of the sex abuse crisis, his writing also builds up a deeper understanding of what it means to be church, and to be Catholic.
Tim, where do you live? I’ve been in New Hampshire for 30 years and Massachusetts and Buffalo prior to that. I’ve never been in a parish where penal substitutionary atonement was not the primary belief system with priests as the gatekeepers of grace via the sacraments to save you from eternal torture. The bubble you are in is not the norm in Catholicism. To be honest, all the religious language you are using is triggering for me. I have a simple faith. I believe in Universal Benevolence and embrace what leads me to love more deeply. I have no desire to belong to a church or all encompassing belief system.
I'm that case I'll stop. I live in Wisconsin but it's only isolated friends here and there that I connect with about this stuff. I ignore priests when they say false things (like eternal hell, contrary to the best scholarship like David Bentley Hart), but I recognize that may be partly a white male privilege thing that makes that easier for me. In any case, I know I'm a weird Catholic but just try to share the things I find helpful in hopes of being less alone in them. For what it's worth, I share the beliefs in your simple faith (and maybe would be better off keeping it simpler).
I understand the time and labor it takes to undergo this journey. I hope that Therese' story will lead others to pause and listen and understand how deep, wide and influential that Catholic bubble she was in is. Those of us who were deeply committed put in enormous mental, physical and emotional labor exploring all of our avenues. It is an exhaustive process and one we did not take lightly.
I couldn't have said it better myself, Beth. Thank you. It can be an excruciatingly painful choice and journey after investing your entire identity, life choices, heart, job, and spiritual trust, only for it to end up in harm.
Wow, I'm grateful to you for sharing your story so honestly and vulnerably, and it feels kind of shallow and inappropriate to even comment on it. But I am moved to say that the c/Church is much broader than what a certain (admittedly influential) bubble considers "faithful"/"good" Catholics. (You may already agree with this, but I just wanted to make it explicit.) From my perspective (and that of Pope Francis, I think), they are merely a tiny portion of the c/Church, a weak and confused group, persons in special need of mercy, like the pre-conversion St. S/Paul. The core of the c/Church is the ordinary faithful who don't read religious essays online and simply dismiss teachings they disagree with, for better and worse: both mistaken teachings like that on homosexuality and certain teachings on justice you and I agree with. (There is such a thing as extraordinarily faithful and good Catholics, the s/Saints, but they're not typically easy to identify without the benefit of hindsight.)
I had the good fortune to grow up in a parish staffed by Franciscans, attend a Jesuit high school, participate in a broad-minded Catholic Student Center in college, and continue to enjoy the company of Catholics with wide-ranging views. It sometimes feels like the number of people around me who share my understanding of the Church is dwindling, but I am also blessed with faith that the Holy Spirit is at work. And being in communion with people who strongly disagree with my political views and some of my theological views is part of what I value about being Catholic. (To be clear, though, I also respect your choice to leave and would probably do the same if I had had your experiences. I'm grateful that there are a wide variety of parishes and non-Catholic churches, so that those who are unjustly excluded or traumatized can find welcome elsewhere.) Some specific ways I have found belonging (though always partial) are the Focolare movement (for which belief is explicitly *not* a membership requirement, as with your non-denominational church), the Catholic Worker movement, and the community of Rene Girard scholars and fans.
A particular recommendation (for readers of this substack) that fleshes out my own understanding of the Church is this church service interweaving music and storytelling: https://www.youtube.com/live/FlPSPH4tP1U?t=987s
Thanks for reading and for your comment, Tim! Personally, I no longer believe much of what the Catholic Church teaches anymore, so I no longer identify as Catholic. Some may go through the same things I went through and choose to stay, others may choose to leave. It was my choice. I don't want to be a part of something where I can't show up as my true self 100% of the time. And I can never reconcile the teaching on homosexuality. If queer people are not fully accepted, then neither am I. Because I no longer believe much of the teachings, it makes more sense for me to find communities that I resonate with, rather than staying in something that doesn't fit me at all anymore. But I completely respect people's decisions to stay for whatever reason! It can be a beautiful religion, which I still admire in many ways. We all land in different places with our deconstruction journeys.
That all makes sense to me (well, except that I can't imagine a place on earth where I can show up as my true self and be accepted 100% of the time--but I think I know what you mean). Thanks again.
Tim, the bubble Therese describes is not small. It encompasses the largest Catholic media organizations in the world, Catholic Answers and EWTN. It encompasses 95% of the new priests in my diocese.
I am glad you have found a space in the church that you can thrive in. I personally came to realize I left an abusive relationship midlife. I can hold space for both of our stories.
Fair enough. Agreed that it looms large in the United States, especially with young priests. Partly what I have in mind is that normie Catholics like my parents and sister have probably neither heard of Catholic Answers (though it's possible they've received one of their odious voter guides on their car windshields at some point) nor watched EWTN. And in my less normie circles, CA/EWTN are ignored as fringe.
I am glad folks like you and Therese got away and have landed somewhere better. And I appreciate the conversation.
Perhaps this is a question without an easy answer (also: I am not owed an answer!), but I would be interested to better understand the transition from Catholic to non-Catholic, rather than from something like "conservative" Catholic to "liberal" Catholic (or whatever we want to call it). Only because it struck me that the core list of serious problems – "lack of inclusion and hatred toward LGBTQ people; the dismissal and violence toward BIPOC folks; the dehumanization of immigrants and refugees; the dismissiveness and covering up of sexual abuse in the church" – are all things that I've seen communities of Catholics working to fight against. So a big part of me was still left wondering something like "wait but why were THOSE communities not the landing pad?". Maybe it's partly a regional thing, where visibility of and/or access to those communities is lacking? Or maybe (probably?) it's more to it than that. But it feels like there's another layer to the deconstruction being described, or something, that I'd be interested to better understand!
Thanks for your comment and question Daniel! You're definitely right, those communities do exist. And the answer for me is multi-faceted. Part of it is that there's lack of access to "liberal" Catholic communities where I live. Another bigger reason is that I no longer believe a lot of what the Church teaches, and don't find myself at home in the church in general anymore. There's more, but that's some of the gist. :)
That makes sense to help bridge the gap for me, thank you!
I imagine that, for people inside the bubble Therese describes, the view that such communities of Catholics are not "real Catholics" becomes internalized. I see this a lot, in a different context, in the science-religion discourse. There are fundamentalist Christians on one side and ex-fundamentalist scientists on the other side. The one thing they both agree on is that non-fundamentalist Christians are not "real Christians" but rather just secularists pretending to be Christian. It requires a real gestalt shift to see that, no, the truth is actually the opposite. Very roughly speaking, the contrast that matters is between the catholic/inclusive mode of social togetherness (of which the Church is called to be a sign) and the fundamentalist/binary mode seeing the world as divided between good and bad (whether the fundamentalism in question is explicitly religious or something else like scientism or what Yascha Mounk calls the "identity synthesis"). But I'm curious for Therese's reaction to my speculation that such a gestalt shift might actually be more difficult, initially at least, than a clean break with Catholicism as a whole, even if there were "liberal" Catholic communities nearby.
I don't think it was internalized for me, at least not anymore. I know and fully recognize "real Catholics" include anyone that calls themselves Catholic, not just the tiny community I was raised in. I don't see anything as binary anymore, which was part of where I've landed post-deconstruction. As I mentioned in my comment to your other question just now, I no longer believe much of the teachings anymore, so it no longer fits for me and I've found a home somewhere else. Whether someone chooses to stay or leave is all valid. :)
From my perspective, it seems possible that some of the people leaving the Church (not presuming to explain your thinking) might still believe the core doctrines if it weren't for the mistaken current teaching on homosexuality (and the associated concrete cruelty and harm) and the affinity of many American Church leaders with "conservative" politics. But those things of course raise the serious question (for Catholics like me who lament them) of why anyone should trust Catholic teaching or otherwise regard the Catholic thing as good. These are questions of ecclesiology, on which I have found the writing of James Alison so helpful---and on which I hope to one day make the time to write more.
I was inside of the bubble Therese describes for 20 years. For another 10 I tried to be in more progressive Catholic circles. Then I came to a point where I realized that I don't believe in the doctrine of Original Sin, penal substitutionary atonement, the theology of the priesthood and sacraments, the saints and every other foundational doctrine the church teaches. Not only did I witness profound harm to folks that are not heterosexual or cisgendered I witnessed it with the church's teaching re: contraception. Plus once I realized how deeply the abuse of power that perpetuated the sex abuse crisis is embedded in the theology of the church I could not longer remain and have a clear conscience. Sure, progressives dissent from teachings but I no longer had a sustainable container. I still appreciate the work of priests like Richard Rohr and Greg Boyle and learn from the.
Yeah, folks like Greg Boyle and the people he ministers to in prison and the barrios are at the heart of the Church, in my view. Thankfully, penal substitutionary atonement is not Catholic doctrine (but merely one interpretation among others). No, the wrath appeased by Jesus's death was that of us humans. Jesus deliberately and peacefully occupied the place of shame at the foundation of human cultures generally (the workings of which in one particular bubble Therese's account illuminates). The crucified and risen Jesus subverted the hegemony of shame and death which had so disfigured the goodness of our humanity (which is what original sin really is---the way our beautiful human hearts had become misdirected into polarized hatred, deadening addictions, and blaming victims). At their best, the sacraments make present Jesus' power to undo the knots of our hearts, opening us to love and enlivening us to stand up for the truth. The harmful moral teachings you reference are not part of the core of Christianity (obviously, from my perspective). Rather, we are witnessing the core dynamic of Christianity revealing those teachings as tragic mistakes (with the Holy Spirit sometimes working through official channels but perhaps more often outside of them).
Your description of the shortcoming of "progressive" Catholics (including even Greg Boyle's writing to an extent) is well put: to merely dissent from the mistaken teachings (including the core misconception of penal substitution) is a positive step but is exclusively destructive. No, what sustains my faith and hope is constructive theology such as that of James Alison, presenting basic Christianity in a fresh way, making it comprehensible and livable in our time. Unflinching in naming the culture of deceit at the root of the sex abuse crisis, his writing also builds up a deeper understanding of what it means to be church, and to be Catholic.
Tim, where do you live? I’ve been in New Hampshire for 30 years and Massachusetts and Buffalo prior to that. I’ve never been in a parish where penal substitutionary atonement was not the primary belief system with priests as the gatekeepers of grace via the sacraments to save you from eternal torture. The bubble you are in is not the norm in Catholicism. To be honest, all the religious language you are using is triggering for me. I have a simple faith. I believe in Universal Benevolence and embrace what leads me to love more deeply. I have no desire to belong to a church or all encompassing belief system.
I'm that case I'll stop. I live in Wisconsin but it's only isolated friends here and there that I connect with about this stuff. I ignore priests when they say false things (like eternal hell, contrary to the best scholarship like David Bentley Hart), but I recognize that may be partly a white male privilege thing that makes that easier for me. In any case, I know I'm a weird Catholic but just try to share the things I find helpful in hopes of being less alone in them. For what it's worth, I share the beliefs in your simple faith (and maybe would be better off keeping it simpler).
I understand the time and labor it takes to undergo this journey. I hope that Therese' story will lead others to pause and listen and understand how deep, wide and influential that Catholic bubble she was in is. Those of us who were deeply committed put in enormous mental, physical and emotional labor exploring all of our avenues. It is an exhaustive process and one we did not take lightly.
I couldn't have said it better myself, Beth. Thank you. It can be an excruciatingly painful choice and journey after investing your entire identity, life choices, heart, job, and spiritual trust, only for it to end up in harm.
Wow, I'm grateful to you for sharing your story so honestly and vulnerably, and it feels kind of shallow and inappropriate to even comment on it. But I am moved to say that the c/Church is much broader than what a certain (admittedly influential) bubble considers "faithful"/"good" Catholics. (You may already agree with this, but I just wanted to make it explicit.) From my perspective (and that of Pope Francis, I think), they are merely a tiny portion of the c/Church, a weak and confused group, persons in special need of mercy, like the pre-conversion St. S/Paul. The core of the c/Church is the ordinary faithful who don't read religious essays online and simply dismiss teachings they disagree with, for better and worse: both mistaken teachings like that on homosexuality and certain teachings on justice you and I agree with. (There is such a thing as extraordinarily faithful and good Catholics, the s/Saints, but they're not typically easy to identify without the benefit of hindsight.)
I had the good fortune to grow up in a parish staffed by Franciscans, attend a Jesuit high school, participate in a broad-minded Catholic Student Center in college, and continue to enjoy the company of Catholics with wide-ranging views. It sometimes feels like the number of people around me who share my understanding of the Church is dwindling, but I am also blessed with faith that the Holy Spirit is at work. And being in communion with people who strongly disagree with my political views and some of my theological views is part of what I value about being Catholic. (To be clear, though, I also respect your choice to leave and would probably do the same if I had had your experiences. I'm grateful that there are a wide variety of parishes and non-Catholic churches, so that those who are unjustly excluded or traumatized can find welcome elsewhere.) Some specific ways I have found belonging (though always partial) are the Focolare movement (for which belief is explicitly *not* a membership requirement, as with your non-denominational church), the Catholic Worker movement, and the community of Rene Girard scholars and fans.
A particular recommendation (for readers of this substack) that fleshes out my own understanding of the Church is this church service interweaving music and storytelling: https://www.youtube.com/live/FlPSPH4tP1U?t=987s
Thanks for reading and for your comment, Tim! Personally, I no longer believe much of what the Catholic Church teaches anymore, so I no longer identify as Catholic. Some may go through the same things I went through and choose to stay, others may choose to leave. It was my choice. I don't want to be a part of something where I can't show up as my true self 100% of the time. And I can never reconcile the teaching on homosexuality. If queer people are not fully accepted, then neither am I. Because I no longer believe much of the teachings, it makes more sense for me to find communities that I resonate with, rather than staying in something that doesn't fit me at all anymore. But I completely respect people's decisions to stay for whatever reason! It can be a beautiful religion, which I still admire in many ways. We all land in different places with our deconstruction journeys.
That all makes sense to me (well, except that I can't imagine a place on earth where I can show up as my true self and be accepted 100% of the time--but I think I know what you mean). Thanks again.
Tim, the bubble Therese describes is not small. It encompasses the largest Catholic media organizations in the world, Catholic Answers and EWTN. It encompasses 95% of the new priests in my diocese.
I am glad you have found a space in the church that you can thrive in. I personally came to realize I left an abusive relationship midlife. I can hold space for both of our stories.
Fair enough. Agreed that it looms large in the United States, especially with young priests. Partly what I have in mind is that normie Catholics like my parents and sister have probably neither heard of Catholic Answers (though it's possible they've received one of their odious voter guides on their car windshields at some point) nor watched EWTN. And in my less normie circles, CA/EWTN are ignored as fringe.
I am glad folks like you and Therese got away and have landed somewhere better. And I appreciate the conversation.