Is it realistic to think of a place inside or outside the Church? Isn’t the actual “category” Child of God? From my perspective as a former Catholic, it is very simplistic to think that Catholicism as an institution is the be all and end all of a way “to” God, something I find intellectually not possible anyway. People leave the Catholic or any other christianist church or Abrahamic church, or any such thing, for the same reason they might leave a political party: they start to think, or feel, or both, beyond the level of their initial indoctrination.
Having had some insightful experiences in my younger years, I found no one in the Church–who was accessible to me, living or dead, who could reasonably address my experiences and the conclusions made necessary by them. I mean there were answers, but “pray and have faith,” “your hormones are acting up,” or “you have a vivid imagination” do not constitute practical or even remotely useful answers.
Eventually, after what with my resources amounted to an exhaustive search, I was forced to conclude that Catholicism serve many who were willing to give up a sincere inquiry for pat answers, vagaries, and the ever present “it’s a mystery” paradigm. Well, it’s not, only to the extent that having faith prevents one from an assiduous self inventory in terms not necessarily included in standard practice. And in the case of christianisms, all 40,000 or more version, the really useful questions are not even glanced at. So, I left.
It is great if people are happy with what they have as faith. But that happiness doesn’t include that there is greater, far greater depth to human experience than what religion has room for, and restricts intelligent inquiry about, due to adamantine and, I’m sorry, not necessarily accurate, presuppositions. And therein lies the danger, great danger, of faith. Or of abject atheism. Both are the end of curiosity, having presupposed a conclusion about Diety, and therefore there is suffering. At least for christianists, as the atheist has the great psychological advantage of not having a god or devil to blame.
And that is why I often say that atheism is sometimes a necessary interim step to a practical spiritual understanding. But a religion is not. Any religion. It is a temporary and vague involvement akin to blame, if you look sincerely. And many are way too complex, therefore, as a means of keeping one’s attention. Truth is simple. And it is not in a religion, as far as I’m concerned. And it is arrogant to think that in the infinitude of Creation, one recently formed and rather controversial organization is the be all and end all for all of humanity, no matter what its, or its members, rationalizations might be.
So if someone asks me what church I go to, I simply ask them to demonstrate that I am ever out of Church.