Hi,

I understand that it isn't altogether uncommon for one who has experienced a deconversion to retain an appreciation of their erstwhile faith, an affection which may even translate into a sort of vestige of tribal loyalty. Richard Dawkins (who considers himself to be culturally Anglican), Christopher Hitchens and Stephen Fry all admit to a certain love of the Anglican communion in spite of their atheism, and I feel as though I can sympathize with this sensation. 

I'd like to better understand this phenomenon.  Is it perhaps because it appeals to our innate need for theatrics and ceremony? 

Do any of you who were formerly religious esteem some aspects of your old faiths? What of those of you who've never actually experienced the religious impulse, what do you make of this?

Ugh. Former catholic. Trust me, no sentiment here.

Hmm. I can understand a kind of nostalgia for the parts of religion someone used to enjoy, and for the artwork, music and so on. I can appreciate those, even having never been religious.

Religion is really what you make of it anyway. People may have their own version of "Jesus" or whatever in their mind who they developed as a kind character rather than the questionable weird one in the bible. I could understand not wanting to let go of that completely.

As for the core doctrines, I wouldn't understand a fondness for them once you're outside the religion, because they are so stupid and harmful.

Oh, I'm definitely alive to those vestigial longings for the church.

I love the architecture of old cathedrals, I love Celtic Crosses, I love quaint little roadside chapels.
And I think many Atheists love Christmastime.

Ever since becoming an Agnostic, I've always said that Church wouldn't be so bad,
if it wasn't for all the fucking Christians.

This little paradox applies to many things.


Working in retail wouldn't be so bad, for example,
if it wasn't for all the goddamn customers.


Anyway.


Many non-believers go to Church for social reasons.

And I personally think that humans do derive something from ritual.


The problem is when the dependence upon the ritual surpasses the purpose of being a vehicle,
and instead becomes a crutch....a good example is an old woman saying her Rosary Beads.

Then the hat is wearing you, as it were.

I don't much experience that. I used to be a sincerely believing Christian, but I didn't actually like what I believed. I always thought it was a really unfair and hopeless situation we were in to have been created by and at the mercy of such a hypocritical dick, and that said hypocritical dick gets to decide who goes to heaven and who burns. Heaven also never sounded that great to me either. Better than hell, I guess, but from biblical descriptions it always sounded like an eternity of boredom and tedium.


Humans tend to think in terms of narratives. The images, the actions, the words...ceremony is a way to punctuate life and highlight plot points. This is why it continues to exist, even amongst those who don't use ceremony in a religious way. It's very human.

(July 12, 2015 at 9:20 am)MTL Wrote: The problem is when the dependence upon the ritual surpasses the purpose of being a vehicle,
and instead becomes a crutch....a good example is an old woman saying her Rosary Beads.

Then the hat is wearing you, as it were.

I completely understand.  It was more the vibrancy of the rituals and the assumption of a distinctive identity that caused me to gravitate to my religion, not really concurrence with its philosophy.

I guess because I'm surrounded by it, I'm used to it. I'm comfortable with it. It helps that the people I've met aren't the loud fundie type who will throw you under the bus as soon as they find out you don't agree with them. Christianity does seem less weird to me than islam, but I know it can be just as violent sometimes.

Also I don't like to have bad feelings about people I like who happen to be christian, as long as they aren't being vitriolic about it.

(July 12, 2015 at 9:24 am)Redbeard The Pink Wrote: I don't much experience that. I used to be a sincerely believing Christian, but I didn't actually like what I believed. I always thought it was a really unfair and hopeless situation we were in to have been created by and at the mercy of such a hypocritical dick, and that said hypocritical dick gets to decide who goes to heaven and who burns. Heaven also never sounded that great to me either. Better than hell, I guess, but from biblical descriptions it always sounded like an eternity of boredom and tedium.


Humans tend to think in terms of narratives. The images, the actions, the words...ceremony is a way to punctuate life and highlight plot points. This is why it continues to exist, even amongst those who don't use ceremony in a religious way. It's very human.

Right, and religion seems to be one of few things which dignifies any demonstrations of ceremony. I mean a lot of these rituals are stupid enough to begin with, but their ridiculousness would be redoubled further still if they were performed by somebody who wasn't animated at all by the religious impulse. 

When I was a believer I could behave ceremoniously without shame. Now, as an atheist, any attempts at ceremony on my own part make me cringe slightly.

May I ask which Church/denomination you belonged to Redbeard?

(July 12, 2015 at 9:32 am)Aaran Wrote:

(July 12, 2015 at 9:20 am)MTL Wrote: The problem is when the dependence upon the ritual surpasses the purpose of being a vehicle,
and instead becomes a crutch....a good example is an old woman saying her Rosary Beads.

Then the hat is wearing you, as it were.

I completely understand.  It was more the vibrancy of the rituals and the assumption of a distinctive identity that caused me to gravitate to my religion, not really concurrence with its philosophy.

Exactly.  Humans like to belong, we are social, we like to feel safe, empowered, like someone has our backs;
and we like for the world to make sense, for justice to be served, we dislike ambiguity when it comes to matters of right and wrong,
and we certainly like the idea of everlasting life.

All these things are benefits that Theists reap, sometimes unconsciously, from attending church.

Sadly we also often like to judge others and control people, and that is one of the downsides of belonging to a church.

Raised Methodist, converted to UU in 1980 m/l, 12 Stepper starting in '86.

As for Methodism, I'd say they seem rather more benign to me these days, having been exposed to so much whackadoodle BS in other schisms now.  Never heard anyone speak in tongues while growing up, for instance.  They eschewed serpents and snakes too.  Their church ladies put on a good feed too, your standard Midwestern comfort food.  I've enjoyed (snicker) watching their views evolve over the years as they attempt to stay 'hep'.  My Sunday school experience back in the 60s has been helpful here in helping me catch apostasy and heresy in the postings of most all the supposed christers I encounter as a grownup now.

Even in 1980, the UU franchise I joined was profoundly liberal.  Pastor was openly gay, and he introduced at least one boyfriend to the congregation.  They took pride in being unable to locate an actual bible in their church building.  They also allowed a gay AA meeting to use the building for their meetings.  (I didn't avail myself of the opportunity)  UU isn't big on hellfire, dogma, strictures, or much of anything I considered actual 'religion'. For me, a nice way station on my way here.

12 Stepping has been interesting.  It presents itself not unlike an Ap you can put on your smart phone.  It's compatible with every faith (they acknowledge atheism as the only incompatible platform to run it on) and it has been useful me.  The 'Higher Power' stuff  I've come to realize is a necessary fiction (from my viewpoint, YMMV) for most of the newcomers and I'm not really troubled by it*.  In all faiths and religions, the 12 Stepper 'Higher Power' stuff is obviously heresy, those other faiths, however, for the most part find it convenient to ignore the conflict with their Message.



*for new members here, an unfortunate characteristic of the addict is a near universal corrosive thought process regarding attribution of their deliverance from their addiction.  If attributed to an external agency, no matter how contrived or specious, the 12 Stepping effort is more effective than if the addict realizes they alone have achieved control via abstinence entirely by their own efforts and volition. It's a necessary fiction, from my viewpoint, and I haven't much trouble with it.  That the 'Higher Power' stuff as presented is clearly heretical to just about every faith, I view as actually promoting agnosticism/atheism for anyone in 12 Stepping that realizes the 'necessary fiction' dodge.  The 'One True God' after all, isn't going to 'cure' any addict of the wrong faith obviously, yet it appears to happen all the time nevertheless.