Anne Rice: from Catholic to atheist to Catholic to ex-Catholic

[4HisChurch]

I don’t see how being informed and leaving organized religion smacks of pride. Disillusionment and frustration at the state of the church perhaps…but what person who’s concerned about the church won’t feel disillusioned occasionally? And if after being informed one leaves the church in good conscience, that’s not pride, that’s just following one’s conscience.

I agree. It is easy to be dismissive of those who struggle with Church teaching and the behavior of its members, but at least in Miss Rice’s case, she really seemed to struggle–she had come back to the Church and wanted to stay–she studied and looked into Church teaching. I don’t think that is pride either.

I will say again that I think there needs to be some sort of outreach to people such as these. There are people who, at one point or another, want to be Catholic, but are having difficulty. Often, these days, they don’t walk away in a prideful huff, they search and study first. It is very sad that they leave.

 

[Willy_Jose]

Catholics respect the primacy of conscience above all, yet we must understand that there is such a thing as an erroneous conscience. The formation of conscience takes a lifelong journey, and when one claims to be a “well educated, well informed, well indoctrinated Catholic” and yet judges the bride of Christ as “anti-secular humanism, anti-science, anti-life, etc., etc.,…”, it can only mean that that person has not studied enough - or understood enough. Such persons, especially when as gifted as Anne Rice, should be very careful in pronouncing their (ir)religious positions with professed finality – as to whom much is given, much will be expected in return.

 

[BobCatholic]

Anybody looking for a Church on earth without hypocrites is a fool. They will have to wait until heaven for purity.

Amen.

I am thankful for the sinners in the Catholic Church. If Christ didn’t allow sinners in the Catholic Church, I could have never gotten in!

 

[Contra_Mundum_1]

I don’t see how being informed and leaving organized religion smacks of pride. Disillusionment and frustration at the state of the church perhaps…but what person who’s concerned about the church won’t feel disillusioned occasionally? And if after being informed one leaves the church in good conscience, that’s not pride, that’s just following one’s conscience.

Mindmapper,
disillusionment and frustration are unpleasant feelings, but not a reason to leave. It has been like that from the beginning: saints and sinners, Jesus crucified between two thieves. The Church is full of flawed people like you and me and Anne and it is our duty to make it holy. I don’t think that being informed and leaving is a moral option. I think it is cowardice.
As for conscience, what does that mean? That we are allowed to do whatever we want as long as our conscience allows it? This is exactly the secular liberal propaganda that has got many western countries into trouble and caused absolute moral relativism. And an intelligent woman like Anne Rice has fallen for it.

 

[edwest2]

We cannot know everything about Anne Rice, but it is common for people to hold their intellect as higher than Church teaching. A close friend of mine has told me that people need to improve their thinking skills. I agree, and the same goes for me. But when you hear the Gospel, God the Father Himself draws you to Christ, and then you are baptized by water and the Holy Spirit.

I pray Miss Rice comes to realize that God still has plans for her. Sometimes, painful and inexplicable things happen to people and they say, Why God? Why did this happen to me or someone I love? I don’t understand it.

Even the Pope goes to confession. Our sinful natures cling to us until our last day on earth.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Gift_from_God]

She’s one of those people that disagrees with the word of God and then just assumes that she’s right and God’s wrong

 

[markomalley]

Anne Rice announced this on Facebook last summer.

First post:
For those who care, and I understand if you don’t: Today I quit being a Christian. I’m out. I remain committed to Christ as always but not to being “Christian” or to being part of Christianity. It’s simply impossible for me to “belong” to this quarrelsome, hostile, disputatious, and deservedly infamous group. For ten …years, I’ve tried. I’ve failed. I’m an outsider. My conscience will allow nothing else.

Second post:As I said below, I quit being a Christian. I’m out. In the name of Christ, I refuse to be anti-gay. I refuse to be anti-feminist. I refuse to be anti-artificial birth control. I refuse to be anti-Democrat. I refuse to be anti-secular humanism. I refuse to be anti-science. I refuse to be anti-life. In the name of …Christ, I quit Christianity and being Christian. Amen.
And, yes, her son is a well-known homosexual.

 

[Poco]

Second post

:As I said below, I quit being a Christian. I’m out. In the name of Christ, I refuse to be anti-gay. I refuse to be anti-feminist. I refuse to be anti-artificial birth control. I refuse to be anti-Democrat. I refuse to be anti-secular humanism. I refuse to be anti-science. I refuse to be anti-life. In the name of …Christ, I quit Christianity and being Christian. Amen.

:ehh: I may be off base here because I’m making an assumption. And we all know what happens when we assume! Anyway, I’m assuming “I refuse to be anti-artificial birth control.” may indicate she is pro-abortion. Yet later on she says, “I refuse to be anti-life”.

Seems like some confusion there.

 

[PRmerger]

Yet later on she says, “I refuse to be anti-life”.

Seems like some confusion there.

I believe she is making a reference to the CC being “anti-life” in its environmental policies, its alleged oppression to women, its alleged oppression of gays…that, to her, is being anti-life.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I don’t see how being informed and leaving organized religion smacks of pride. Disillusionment and frustration at the state of the church perhaps…but what person who’s concerned about the church won’t feel disillusioned occasionally? And if after being informed one leaves the church in good conscience, that’s not pride, that’s just following one’s conscience.

One cannot leave Christ’s Church “in good conscience”. If they leave because they are following their conscience then this shows that they have a malformed conscience. A person with a properly formed conscience would not leave the Church.

To say otherwise is to fall into moral relativism.

 

[mindmapper888]

One cannot leave Christ’s Church “in good conscience”. If they leave because they are following their conscience then this shows that they have a malformed conscience. A person with a properly formed conscience would not leave the Church.

To say otherwise is to fall into moral relativism.

If I’ve only been exposed to catholics who are the most horrible sinners my entire life, I don’t think I can stay in the church in good conscience. At least that’s how I interpret the CCC when it says that those also can be saved who through no fault of their own are not part of the church.

If I leave the church in good conscience, objectively my conscience may have been misinformed but because of my environment that is not my fault. Some sincere seekers may be in this position. Guess my point is that if somebody says they leave the church in good conscience, it’s might not be morally wrong.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

If I’ve only been exposed to catholics who are the most horrible sinners my entire life, I don’t think I can stay in the church in good conscience. At least that’s how I interpret the CCC when it says that those also can be saved who through no fault of their own are not part of the church.

If I leave the church in good conscience, objectively my conscience may have been misinformed but because of my environment that is not my fault. Some sincere seekers may be in this position. Guess my point is that if somebody says they leave the church in good conscience, it’s might not be morally wrong.

You have to read the whole section on conscience from the Catechism. Again, no one can leave the Church “in good conscience”

See Article 4 Moral Conscience

Specifically these parts;
II. THE FORMATION OF CONSCIENCE
1783 Conscience must be informed and moral judgment enlightened. A well-formed conscience is upright and truthful. It formulates its judgments according to reason, in conformity with the true good willed by the wisdom of the Creator. The education of conscience is indispensable for human beings who are subjected to negative influences and tempted by sin to prefer their own judgment and to reject authoritative teachings.
1784 The education of the conscience is a lifelong task. From the earliest years, it awakens the child to the knowledge and practice of the interior law recognized by conscience. Prudent education teaches virtue; it prevents or cures fear, selfishness and pride, resentment arising from guilt, and feelings of complacency, born of human weakness and faults. The education of the conscience guarantees freedom and engenders peace of heart.
1785 In the formation of conscience the Word of God is the light for our path,54 we must assimilate it in faith and prayer and put it into practice. We must also examine our conscience before the Lord’s Cross. We are assisted by the gifts of the Holy Spirit, aided by the witness or advice of others and guided by the authoritative teaching of the Church.
III. TO CHOOSE IN ACCORD WITH CONSCIENCE
1786 Faced with a moral choice, conscience can make either a right judgment in accordance with reason and the divine law or, on the contrary, an erroneous judgment that departs from them.
1787 Man is sometimes confronted by situations that make moral judgments less assured and decision difficult. But he must always seriously seek what is right and good and discern the will of God expressed in divine law.
1788 To this purpose, man strives to interpret the data of experience and the signs of the times assisted by the virtue of prudence, by the advice of competent people, and by the help of the Holy Spirit and his gifts.
1789 Some rules apply in every case:

• One may never do evil so that good may result from it;
• the Golden Rule: “Whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them.”
• charity always proceeds by way of respect for one’s neighbor and his conscience: “Thus sinning against your brethren and wounding their conscience . . . you sin against Christ.” Therefore “it is right not to . . . do anything that makes your brother stumble.”
  IV. ERRONEOUS JUDGMENT
  1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.
  1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man “takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin.” In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.
  1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one’s passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.
  1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.
  1794 A good and pure conscience is enlightened by true faith, for charity proceeds at the same time “from a pure heart and a good conscience and sincere faith.”
  We must not “pick and choose” and take things out of context with the Catechism.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

I believe she is making a reference to the CC being “anti-life” in its environmental policies, its alleged oppression to women, its alleged oppression of gays…that, to her, is being anti-life.

Yet she has no problem being Pro-Abortion. That, to HER, is NOT “Anti-Life.” Sheesh.

 

[mindmapper888]

You have to read the whole section on conscience from the Catechism. Again, no one can leave the Church “in good conscience”

See Article 4 Moral Conscience

Specifically these parts;
II. THE FORMATION OF CONSCIENCE
1783 Conscience must be informed and moral judgment enlightened. A well-formed conscience is upright and truthful. It formulates its judgments according to reason, in conformity with the true good willed by the wisdom of the Creator. The education of conscience is indispensable for human beings who are subjected to negative influences and tempted by sin to prefer their own judgment and to reject authoritative teachings.
1784 The education of the conscience is a lifelong task. From the earliest years, it awakens the child to the knowledge and practice of the interior law recognized by conscience. Prudent education teaches virtue; it prevents or cures fear, selfishness and pride, resentment arising from guilt, and feelings of complacency, born of human weakness and faults. The education of the conscience guarantees freedom and engenders peace of heart.
1785 In the formation of conscience the Word of God is the light for our path,54 we must assimilate it in faith and prayer and put it into practice. We must also examine our conscience before the Lord’s Cross. We are assisted by the gifts of the Holy Spirit, aided by the witness or advice of others and guided by the authoritative teaching of the Church.
III. TO CHOOSE IN ACCORD WITH CONSCIENCE
1786 Faced with a moral choice, conscience can make either a right judgment in accordance with reason and the divine law or, on the contrary, an erroneous judgment that departs from them.
1787 Man is sometimes confronted by situations that make moral judgments less assured and decision difficult. But he must always seriously seek what is right and good and discern the will of God expressed in divine law.
1788 To this purpose, man strives to interpret the data of experience and the signs of the times assisted by the virtue of prudence, by the advice of competent people, and by the help of the Holy Spirit and his gifts.
1789 Some rules apply in every case:

• One may never do evil so that good may result from it;
• the Golden Rule: “Whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them.”
• charity always proceeds by way of respect for one’s neighbor and his conscience: “Thus sinning against your brethren and wounding their conscience . . . you sin against Christ.” Therefore “it is right not to . . . do anything that makes your brother stumble.”
  IV. ERRONEOUS JUDGMENT
  1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.
  1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man “takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin.” In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.
  1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one’s passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.
  1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.
  1794 A good and pure conscience is enlightened by true faith, for charity proceeds at the same time “from a pure heart and a good conscience and sincere faith.”
  We must not “pick and choose” and take things out of context with the Catechism.

Thanks for your feedback- it prompted me to think more about this.

However, I don’t see how the paragraphs you raise show that one cannot leave the church in good conscience. The only paragraph that has the word “church” is para 1793 which says that rejection of church authority etc can be a source of error of judgment in moral conduct.

Yet in para 1793 it says that if the ignorance is invincible, the evil of the person cannot be imputed to him. Doesn’t this suggest my point that you can leave the church and this is not morally wrong if done in good conscience? I drew a parallel with people who are not Christians after sincerely doing their research but cannot in good conscience join the church simply because they don’t believe it. Such people may still be saved according to the CCC because they remained outside through no fault of their own.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Thanks for your feedback- it prompted me to think more about this.

However, I don’t see how the paragraphs you raise show that one cannot leave the church in good conscience. The only paragraph that has the word “church” is para 1793 which says that rejection of church authority etc can be a source of error of judgment in moral conduct.

Yet in para 1793 it says that if the ignorance is invincible, the evil of the person cannot be imputed to him. Doesn’t this suggest my point that you can leave the church and this is not morally wrong if done in good conscience? I drew a parallel with people who are not Christians after sincerely doing their research but cannot in good conscience join the church simply because they don’t believe it. Such people may still be saved according to the CCC because they remained outside through no fault of their own.

The problem I have is your use of the wording “good conscience” for a malformed conscience.

One could leave the Church through invincible ignorance (I believe there is a strong argument against this every happening) but that would not be in “good conscience”.

I believe our disconnect is that you are taking a secular defintion for “good consceience” while I am taking a theological one.

For me a good conscience is a rightly formed conscience.

Anyways in this case, we know that Anne Rice supports abortion so there is no way that she can have a rightly formed conscience and I do not think invincilbe ignorance would apply to her as she is such an educated person and it is our responsiblity to find the Truth even when others are not preaching it to us.

 

[Willy_Jose]

*Invincible ignorance *is borne out of involuntary circumstances, matters over which the person in question has no control. This is certainly not applicable to persons such as Anne Rice gifted with much intellect and all the relevant knowledge base resources and pastoral support at her disposal.

In such a situation of invicible ignorance, the person follows what is written in their hearts, and by their conscience they still become part of the body of Christ, which is none other than the mystical Church. The person still wants to follow the Truth and do whatever it takes to be part of the mystical body. Whatever it takes

But those of us who have been fortunate (with the means at our disposal) to become part of the Church by choice, benefit ourselves with the summit of the Christian faith - the Holy Eucharist, and with it, Christ’s salvific grace. Lord, where would we go…as Peter said. I take note of Father Barron’s reference to what Jesus said to Saul. .Jesus did not say to Saul why are you persecuting the church, He said “why are you persecuting me?”

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

The problem I have is your use of the wording “good conscience” for a malformed conscience.

One could leave the Church through invincible ignorance (I believe there is a strong argument against this every happening) but that would not be in “good conscience”.

I believe our disconnect is that you are taking a secular defintion for “good consceience” while I am taking a theological one.

For me a good conscience is a rightly formed conscience.

Many Catholics do not have much, if any, theological training and I have to assume that they go by the secular definition. Therefore, they would be leaving the Church “in good conscience” in their own hearts even if it doesn’t fit the theological definition.

Also, there are those who come to have intellectual differences with the Church and leave it for that reason. Several friends, who graduated with me as Catholics from Fordham University, are now agnostics and I know that they didn’t leave for petty reasons like pique or because they’re pro-choice or want divorces, etc. Their “falling away,” if you like, was done on intellectual grounds.

Jesus invited all to follow Him. He didn’t say that they couldn’t leave His company.

 

[Willy_Jose]

Many Catholics do not have much, if any, theological training and I have to assume that they go by the secular definition. Therefore, they would be leaving the Church “in good conscience” in their own hearts even if it doesn’t fit the theological definition.

Also, there are those who come to have intellectual differences with the Church and leave it for that reason. Several friends, who graduated with me as Catholics from Fordham University, are now agnostics and I know that they didn’t leave for petty reasons like pique or because they’re pro-choice or want divorces, etc. Their “falling away,” if you like, was done on intellectual grounds.

Jesus invited all to follow Him. He didn’t say that they couldn’t leave His company.

Rich, just out of curiosity where did your friends (who left out of intellectual grounds) go? Would you think it is an agnosticism of the type Anne Rice has embraced? especially when you say “Jesus invited all to follow Him. He didn’t say that they couldn’t leave His company.” I am confused by this kind of position which is akin to saying one professes love for his wife but hates being around her.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

Rich, just out of curiosity where did your friends (who left out of intellectual grounds) go?

To indifference, to an ethical view of life that excludes religious practice. They’re still good men. It’s just that they lost their faith.

Would you think it is an agnosticism of the type Anne Rice has embraced?

I’ve never read anything she wrote, so can’t comment.

“Jesus invited all to follow Him. He didn’t say that they couldn’t leave His company.” I am confused by this kind of position which is akin to saying one professes love for his wife but hates being around her.

As I understand it, Jesus did not compel anyone to either join Him or stay with Him.

 

[Willy_Jose]

As I understand it, Jesus did not compel anyone to either join Him or stay with Him.

True enough, but sad and painful. They need our prayers. When branches fall off, somehow it hurts the whole vine. On the other hand, pruning is good too. But yet again, the branches that are pruned off get to be burned. We need to be good people in the eyes of God. Here is the full verse from Romans 2 which I alluded to in my previous comment, which I believe has much signficance for this thread.

“For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.”