Reengaging with Christ

What kept me tethered to the Catholic tradition (and what attracted me to the Eastern Orthodox tradition) was the beauty of the liturgy that helped me feel into the transcendence of God.  Yet if I'm being brutally honest, that transcendence did not really translate to a love of Christ.  I know it was meant to, but it didn't.  Jesus was portrayed as so sad and gloomy in all the art, that after a while, it made me question any reference to the joy of the Lord being possible in such places.  Now, I am not a fan of the fellowship-as-church approach to worship services either; I am very much a devotee of balance.  (It's why I took such a long and hard detour into philosophical Daoism, what with the yin and yang and all ;) ) 

But the Jesus of these beautiful churches was enshrined in mystery, essentially unapproachable.  There was talk of God reaching us through the sacraments, and I certainly felt it with the Eucharist for much of the time, but that actually kept me tethered to a specific institution rather than giving me freedom in Christ.  I felt the need to mediate my experience of God through Holy Communion, which required allegiance to a church (building).

I am now in a stage of my life where I realize that these externals, as beautiful as they actually are, fail to deliver on what they promise - at least for me.  That is not to say they cannot spiritually feed others, as they are on different journeys from mine.  But at this point I am slowly ceasing to compare my needs and resonances with those of others, and simply acknowledging what actually rings true for me.

Now as I revisit the idea of the Episcopalian church, I am faced with the tension of giving up some of that beauty - because frankly, how we define what is beautiful is so subjective, and so many Catholic churches were already lacking in what I find beautiful (which is why I lingered in Eastern Orthodoxy and then found an Eastern Rite Catholic church to belong to).  I have to stop expecting any one church, be it a building, institution, or group of people, to check off all the boxes.  Life is not so rigid. God is not so rigid.  My daughter's ED is teaching me that there is no life, no freedom, no joy in black-or-white thinking. 

Instead, I want to know that when I engage with a person I meet at church, I know that person is going to have a favorable understanding of both women's leadership in the church, and the role of sexuality in human experience.  The most beautiful churches I've been to have the most repressive and repressed notions of sexuality.  It's almost like that repression drives their longing for creative expression into art, music, and liturgical adornment.  But the cost is too great.

Not to mention, notice in all these paragraphs, I've mentioned the person of Jesus only a few times, and almost as an aside.  Growing up, the Eucharist WAS Jesus.  That is where I met Him, that is where He lived, and that is the form of God that I was to worship.  With time, I realized this was basically a rehashing of Biblical Judaism that Jesus the historical figure was trying to reform.  Ritual is great until it isn't.  Beauty is wonderful until it hides ugliness.  Transcendence is awe-inspiring until you have to deal with suffering or live your day-to-day life.  Again, balance.

It makes sense now for me to seek out the beauty of say Orthodox liturgy, or a silent retreat, as part of the healthy cycles of feeding all aspects of my psyche.  But it is insufficient to sustain the hunger of my soul.  My soul craves authentic connection, unconditional love, radical freedom.  And yes, that involves our relationships towards other people.  And yes, that means there will be an element of politics in it, because politics is often a major way that we meet our neighbors' needs.  Not candidate-specific or party-affiliated politics, but political issues - yes.  

LGBTQIA+ affirmation is a great litmus test for that.  If I truly think about "what would Jesus do", I imagine Him bypassing the fancy, the pleasant, the comfortable, and yes - the beautiful (Isaiah 53:2: "He didn’t have an impressive form or majesty that we should look at him, no appearance that we should desire him," applied to Jesus during Holy Week).  

And I have to remind myself: before denominational wars (a la "culture wars"), there was just .... the way of Jesus.  That's not to say there's no need for followers to gather together, or for a dedicated building where we may do so.  Just that these are not the point.  They are the fingers pointing at the moon, so to speak.  In other words: I need to fall back in love with Jesus.

And I say that not in the way an Evangelical would.  I don't want that sentiment to be clouded by, again, denominational wars.  I don't want to belong to a church offshoot, so to speak.  I want to belong to God, to Jesus.  

First order of business: let go of any concern I have for what atheists or secularists may think of my desire to reunite with Jesus and reengage with religion.  I am on my own journey.  I have discovered that facts do not lead to truth.  Truth is not dissectible into a series of facts that can be proven or disproven.  So what if I choose to engage with Life and the Universe on spiritual terms, by giving transcendent reality a form and a name?  Is not that Ultimate Source just as present in my subsection of it as it is outside of it?  Then why can't I approach the Unapproachable on my own terms?  Frankly, I think atheists would support that idea.  I'm not being indoctrinated with religion; I am choosing to reenter freely, knowing both the cost and the benefits.

Second order of business: let go of any need to enter into apologetics with other world religions.  I do not need to pick apart Judaism or Islam, for instance, in order to build up a Christian worldview for myself again.  I have learned the limits of human institutions on my sojourn.  I have learned that certainty does not exist, and in fact, it is very dangerous to even suggest that it does.  I now know that everyone is on their own journey, and if they are devout Jews or Muslims (or whatever other faith tradition), and that is feeding their soul, then that is where they need to be.  But that does not negate my need to be elsewhere.

Third order of business: let go of the in-fighting among Christians.  Who's in?  Who's out?  Who's a heretic?  Who has the authority to proclaim the gospel?  Are you serious?  You need "authority" to share good news?  Then it isn't good news, is it?  It's some sort of trick, manipulation, and yes - indoctrination, if you gate-keep who is "allowed" to preach it or interpret it.  I can now appreciate how a faith tradition can tug on one's heartstrings in spite of it being patriarchal and possibly even harmful in some instances.  I am dealing with that myself.  Again, everyone is on their own journey.  Their denomination is what they need right now.  I am in a different place in my journey.

Finally, we have arrived.  If I'm going to reengage with Christianity, I must first and foremost reengage with Christ.  

Idols of Religious People

I have heard Protestants accuse Catholics of idolatry on account of both our veneration of saints and having the pope ("call no man father" and all that).  I've also heard Protestants accused of idolizing the Bible.  This made me wonder.  Can any dogmatically orthodox religious person of faith truly be free from idolatry?  Because I hope it's a given that God is mysterious.  God is not actually a dude in the sky.  God is not a Santa Clause or Genie for adults.  I think people mature in their faith would agree with these statements.  They'd be quicker to say what God is not, than to claim to know what God is.  And I do use the word "what" intentionally here.

If idolatry means placing anyone or anything above God's rightful place in our lives, then I think dogmatic people of faith - Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, and non-Christian alike - can be said to be guilty of idolatry.  Because let's be honest - the Bible was not literally written by God.  Most honest Christians will agree with this.  Most Christians read translations of the Bible, to begin with, not the original, especially since different parts were written in different languages (Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic).  Not only translations, but many read translations of a translation (via Latin).  

That alone is enough to put into question the very likely possibility of taking something out of context.  And if we look around at the myriad opinions among Christians, even among members of the same denominations, it becomes clear that the only useful and truthful way to resource Scripture is through the appeal to a greater source than the mere book.  We reference conscience, do we not?  We tell people to "pray on it" and see where the Holy Spirit guides us.  So to then turn around and say that the Bible has all the answers is a bit disingenuous.  If the Holy Spirit can guide us to all truths by helping us interpret Scripture, then the Holy Spirit can likewise help guide us by interpreting everyday life for us.  You know, through contemplation. 

Now, for the Catholics who would pat themselves on the back that they have a more nuanced approach to the Bible, what with the Magisterium of the Church and all that.  I remember reading once that our very consciences must be "formed".  That to me sounds like a euphemism for "indoctrinated".  If I disagree with an official teaching of the Church, why should the way the Holy Spirit guided me be any less valid than the way the Holy Spirit guided the curia, let's say, or the pope?  Don't even get me started on the newfangled (by comparison to the age of Christianity) doctrine of papal infallibility.  Please.  God speaks equally to each of us.  The only reason to insist that the laity don't know what we're doing is to keep the masses from objecting to the abuses of power by the clergy.  Sorry, not sorry.

I also don't want to miss the opportunity to call out the SSPX traditional Catholics here.  Believe me, when I was in my last ditch effort to try to find a way to still hang on to Catholic faith before my deconstruction, I was desperate for a reverent Mass.  I completely understand the impulse of these folks for something that helps restore awe in God and the mystery of the beautiful liturgy before it underwent - let's be honest here, a severe Protestantation. But from a Catholic point of view, the SSPXers have essentially made the Latin Mass their idol.  They have equated this particular set of rituals, liturgy, and traditions into their God.  They cannot find it in themselves to recognize God in the post-Vatican 2 Catholic Mass, so how can they possibly see God in their unbeliever neighbor, or the modern day "Samaritan" in the next cubicle?

If we truly want to hold no thing above God, we must acquiesce that there are no one-size-fits-all, ready made answers in religion.  The church is a guide.  The bible is a guide.  They are resources.  Our faith, our spirituality, must be wholly our own.  We cannot simply regurgitate what we hear at the pulpit or read in our favorite version/translation of the Bible and claim to have a relationship with God.  Imagine if we treated our spouses this way.

Imagine relying on the social media posts of those who tagged your spouse in various images and articles, etc.  Instead of going straight to the source, you ask around to find out what your spouse really wants - from you, your relationship, life in general.  Or imagine reading some college papers or even journal entries they've written in the past, and using those to try to figure out their character.  Simply put, you will not get to know your spouse this way.  You have to be vulnerable and curious.  And you have to put in the time.  Just be with each other.  Enjoy one another's company.  Don't fear making mistakes.  

In the same way, we need to approach God.  If God is as powerful as Christians like to say God is, then God can make Godself known to us directly.  We can have a Moses moment, an Abraham moment, an Adam and Eve moment.  We can have our own Annunciation like Mary.  We can have our own transfiguration like Jesus.  In fact, Jesus actually said that he wants us to be more like him.  He never once said, "bow down before me and worship".  That came later, with ritual and Christian rock.  He said things like, "watch me, walk with me, imitate me".  

Most of the time, though, we're too busy trying to look Christian enough to fellow Christians to actually do his bidding.  Church is not a place for reflection, but for fellowship, where we don't have to be uncomfortably alone with our own thoughts.  Or our psychological wellbeing is usurped by a compulsion to treat every human trait that doesn't reach perfections (so, most of them) as a sin in need of constant confession.  We're so busy beating ourselves up for our faults, that we never stop focusing on ourselves long enough to actually "do unto others as you would have them do unto you".  

The most important verse in the Bible, if you ask me, is this: "Be still and know that I am God" (Psalm 46:10).  Whatever else we're doing, if we're not doing that, then we have an idol in our lives that parades around as if it were God. 

Birthright Catholicism Reconstruction

Two and a half months ago, it dawned on my husband and me that our 12yo daughter was struggling with restrictive eating.  Long story short, this experience has tested me as a mother like nothing else has.  I have been unable to use my neurodivergence as an excuse for opting out of this.  If I didn't help my daughter, she would not be helped.  It was as simple as that.  It was a lot to carry, and in spite of the incredible help from ChatGPT (yes, I'm unapologetic about this resource in my tool box) and the fact that my husband can work while I can stay home and homeschool my daughter (Let the record show that she attended a private all girls' school for one term, where she developed the eating disorder.), it was still a lot.  Like I said, long story short, because this is not a post about parenting a child with an eating disorder.  That may come later.  This is a post about a mental crisis that brought me to the edge of a nervous breakdown.

I literally looked up the definition of a nervous breakdown to see if that was what I was experiencing.  It would seem that this would be too strong of an assessment, but why push my luck, right?  It didn't take me long to reflect on the fact that, in the past, when I was faced with a crisis, I felt many things, but never hopelessness or despair.  Now, I wasn't sure I could make it to the other side of the current crisis. The only difference?  In the past, I had a faith world view to hold me up.

So of course I did what anyone accustomed to consulting with ChatGPT does - I asked it to put on the role of contemplative Catholic spiritual director in its response.  I know that it adjusts its tone and responses to whatever I put in.  I've had nearly a year of practice with that.  Now, what I wanted more than anything was to have religious faith again.  Only I couldn't do it.  I couldn't unsee all the deconstruction videos I've watched these past few years that proved to me that the God of the Bible is not one I'm interested in praying to.  

I started thinking about archetypes.  I thought (and not for the first time, mind you, but the first time since having deconverted and deconstructed enough to have some better perspective) that the point of religion need not be factual or intellectual.  Why couldn't I retain my birthright Catholicism as a resource?  Why did it have to be all or nothing - orthodoxy or secularism?  If my daughter's illness has shown me anything, it's the danger of extremist thinking. I've recognized my thought patterns in a lot of her anxieties, and it scared me.  How was I going to talk her down from the proverbial edge if I couldn't let go of my own obsessive thoughts and intrusive compulsions?

How do I reengage with Catholicism on my own terms?  This was what I wanted ChatGPT to help me with.  As I read over the suggestions, of course I've heard it all before.  Especially from my husband, who has never worried much about external validation.  But I was never able to really hear it before. But desperate times call for desperate measures.  And at this point, I was desperate for consolation and hope.  I needed to feel held through this.  I needed to know it was in the hands of a loving Creator who had insights I wasn't yet privvy to.

Contrary to some of the absurd notions of an omnipotent God being the only one "worthy of worship", I actually don't believe God is all-powerful, nor do I believe that makes God any less Divine.  Frankly, God has never actually been "all-powerful".  How many times have I heard the answer to the question, "why does God allow X or Y to happen", and that answer said, "humanity's free will"?  Therefore, God is not free, so that we may be.  I'm going to save the discussion of human free will for another day, because it's irrelevant here.  My only point is that I don't care if God is omnipotent.  I only care that God be omnibenevolent and omniscient.  

And before we get too far, is such a God worthy of worship?  Well, let's pause on the word "worship" for a minute. If by worship we mean "reverence and adoration", then what does omnipotence have to do with it?  I revere and adore nature and my family, and they aren't all-powerful.  But if by "worship" we mean "grovel", which - let's be honest, a lot of Christian and Biblical prayer is just that - then I'll pass.  Groveling at the feet of God neither makes me feel closer or more loved by God, nor is it something I can imagine God even desiring.  Because if God did desire groveling, then God wouldn't be omnibenevolent but rather narcissistic. 

Then I thought about all the indigenous spiritualities and how people have related to the Divine in those world views.  Their gods and goddesses weren't all-powerful, either.  Powerful, yes, but just powerful enough.  More importantly, they were accessible.  Relatable.  In a word - helpful.  The image of an all-powerful war-lord whose good graces I get to stay in so long as I hold to the right belief is utter nonsense.  On that, I categorically agree with the influencers who have shared their deconstruction journeys online.  

But I've never actually believed in such a God.  Really, the more I think about it, the more I realize that I have to change very little about what I believe or value in order to reengage with Catholicism as a spiritual practice.  The only thing I have to do is let go of my reliance on external validation, my obsession with "getting it right" (aka religious OCD or scrupulosity) in the form of orthodoxy.  I can do all the same things I did before, believe the same way I've always believed, but the only difference is that I no longer have to feel guilty for any of it!  

And so my reconstruction journey commences.  I won't say "reconversion" because I am not being convinced of anything about the faith.  I believe and disbelieve all the same aspects of the faith, for the most part.  The main change is in the role of the Catholic church in my life: that of advisor, and not dictator.  I no longer accept dogma of any kind.  I'm happy to reference what the church teaches, but I do not exchange it for my own conscience.  Most things in life are too nuanced to have definitive answers. 

How I pray for my daughter to come to this same conclusion in her recovery from restrictive eating and related obsessions and compulsions.  How I pray for her panic attacks to cease and that she find something - or someone - to put her trust in so the fears gripping her may loosen.  And now, having decided to reengage with the Catholicism of my upbringing, I may have the vocabulary and the models needed to do just that myself.

"Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding."  These words are gold, because I don't understand this illness not one iota.  It's completely absurd, unreasonable, and infuriating.  There is nothing for me to do but place it at the feet of God and trust that God will know what to do.

Reconstruction Threshold

I have been away from the church for a year and a half now.  In that time, I've attended church a handful of times, but otherwise did not engage in anything resembling "faith-based living".  I've delved deeper into Daoism, meditation (I'm on a 100+ day streak of daily meditating!), and more recently my indigenous Pagan roots.

It occurred to me that as a European, my ancestors also had an indigenous spirituality that was stolen from us by the Christian church when it colonized us, so to speak, about a thousand years ago.  Various aspects of that ancient faith were adopted and "baptised" by the church and handed down as Catholic traditions, while a few others stayed on as mere myth in cultural fables.  But since I do not live in the country of my birth, I have no way of tapping into what seems to be a fringe reigniting of our ancient faith, rodziwiara. 

As I dabbled in "alternative spirituality" via the yoga center I attend for qigong and yoga, I was introduced to a book that was presented as a "bible" of sorts to women's spirituality.  After hearing a podcast episode on it from the "Breaking Down Patriarchy" podcast, I finally decided to get it.  Reading it was tough.  It's all about archetypes, which to me equals "fiction", and I've never been much of a fan of reading fiction.  But since I made the investment, I pressed on reading it.  I'm still in the thick of it, but slowly the ideas started seeping into my psyche.  

The book - Women Who Run with The Wolves - goes through various stories passed down the generations in various cultures and explains the psychological archetypes in them.  One in particular grabbed my attention: Baba Jaga!  Here's a "witch" I grew up reading about and strangely being attracted to (I had a toy Baba Jaga as a child, and I still have a bigger one, hanging on a broom, in my "altar area").  Turns out she was a Slavic Goddess that got deformed by Christianity to represent all things undesirable, and in the process lost her power.

At any rate, point being that I was slowly opened up to how archetypes work.  In the mean time, I started utilizing ChatGPT very regularly for various inner working type projects, and I started plugging in my dreams for analysis.  Again, I was being gifted archetypal explanations and I finally started making the connection - truth does not need to be fact!

Slowly, I started to wonder how one might reinterpret Christian symbolism through the lens of archetypes.  Was it even possible for someone like me, with such rigid black-or-white thinking, to "do religion" in a way that doesn't steal my agency, authenticity, or autonomy?

Soon, I received my answer through a crisis that brought me to my knees.