I suppose one could become Eastern Orthodox
The Orthodox permit, as a concession to human weakness and out of mercy in certain cases, an ecclesiastical divorce and re-marriage.
It’s hard to say what I would personally do in the event that Catholicism disqualified itself. Many of us have personal encounters with God that would be difficult to dismiss, even in the absence of a religious tradition. But I can see why an individual might relax their behaviour in some areas in the absence of a credible religious tradition.
I can see that too but this is not what the individual said.
He claimed he would become a “hedonist”, not simply that he might change his views on a few lifestyle choices. That’s qualitatively different to what your saying.
You do not have to have a religious bone on your body to see that hedonism does not lead to actual happiness or well-being, its a well-recognised thing in psychology:
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_hedonism
**The paradox of hedonism, also called the pleasure paradox, refers to the practical difficulties encountered in the pursuit of pleasure. Unfortunately for the hedonist, constant pleasure-seeking may not yield the most actual pleasure or happiness in the long run—or even in the short run, when consciously pursuing pleasure interferes with experiencing it.
The philosopher Henry Sidgwick was first to note in The Methods of Ethics that the paradox of hedonism is that pleasure cannot be acquired directly.[1] Variations on this theme appear in the realms of ethics, philosophy, psychology, and economics…
Happiness is often imprecisely equated with pleasure. If, for whatever reason, one does equate happiness with pleasure, then the paradox of hedonism arises. When one aims solely towards pleasure itself, one’s aim is frustrated. Henry Sidgwick comments on such frustration after a discussion of self-love in the above-mentioned work:
I should not, however, infer from this that the pursuit of pleasure is necessarily self-defeating and futile; but merely that the principle of Egoistic Hedonism, when applied with a due knowledge of the laws of human nature, is practically self-limiting; i.e., that a rational method of attaining the end at which it aims requires that we should to some extent put it out of sight and not directly aim at it.[11]**
You only need to look at the lives of real-life doctrinaire hedonists to see the sorry results, like the 17th century Earl of Rochester. Johnny Depp played him in a 2004 movie called
The Libertine:
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Libertine_(2004_film
**The Libertine is a 2005 British-Australian drama film, the first film directed by Laurence Dunmore…
Themes explored in the film include the corruption of a people by their self-indulgent monarch and the pursuit of hedonism…
The story begins with John Wilmot, Second Earl of Rochester (Depp), delivering his prologue, the main themes of which are his fondness for drink, his sexual proclivities, and his disdain for his audience…
Rochester writes Sodom, or the Quintessence of Debauchery, a scathing satire of the King’s reign, which he claims is indeed “a testament to Charles” — just what the King had asked for. The play involves live sex acts, vulgar imagery, and a brutal portrayal of the King, played by Rochester himself…
Hiding from the King in the English countryside and sick with symptoms of syphilis, Rochester peddles phony gynaecological “treatments” for women, including the selling of “potions” made from Alcock’s urine. Rochester’s face has become disfigured by syphillitic gummata, which he hides beneath a mask. Charles eventually tracks down Rochester, but decides that the worst punishment possible is to simply “let you be you.” Rochester returns to his wife, Elizabeth (Pike), admitting to having been constantly under the influence of “the drink” for five years straight…
Rochester returns home to his deathbed, where he dies aged thirty-three with Elizabeth, his mother, a priest summoned to “bring God to him” as she did not want Rochester to die as an atheist, and Alcock. Before he dies, Rochester asks the priest to recite from Book of Isaiah, chapter 53; he also asks his wife to retell the story of how he had abducted her as an 18 year old lady when they fell in love…**
Rochester died aged only 33 from the effects of syphilis, gonorrhea, and other venereal diseases, combined with the effects of alcoholism and overeating.
Too much alcohol, sex and food horridly disfigured and then killed him. A cautionary tale. We are simply not biologically meant to live like that. We’re supposed to strive for a balanced, healthy lifestyle.
It is not a wise or rational way to live, irrespective of one’s religion or lack thereof.
If hypothetically losing one’s religion leads a person to live so recklessly when convinced atheists are capable of living exemplary lives, well…
Hypothetically - though it would be nigh impossible in practise for me to ever lose my Catholic Faith - I would like to that I am made of better stuff as person and have some integrity, such that I would continue to live a balanced, prudent life.
