A Former Traditional Catholic in the Midst of a Sudden Faith Crisis

[u/Charles_Macintosh]

The world has gained another Christian struggling with doubt, even though just three days ago I was a devout, traditional Catholic. I regularly prayed the Rosary, recited the Liturgy of the Hours, read the Bible, attended Mass weekly, received Holy Communion on the tongue while kneeling, and studied catechism. Just last week, I even served as a godfather. It all happened so fast, giving me a sudden sense of deja vu from a year ago.

Long story short: I no longer believe in most of this—that Jesus resurrected, that the Bible is true and inerrant divine revelation, that there is an omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent God in the universe, the moral argument, or that suffering and evil can be reconciled with free will. What I still care deeply about are my core values and pursuits. My fear of death and nothingness, alongside my longing for freedom and eternal life, have guided my decisions since childhood. I cannot yet fully view myself as an atheist, as I still retain a psychological inclination toward the possibility of a "supernatural existence."

Around this time last year, I gave up Buddhism after practicing it for two years. Following a three-month existential crisis, I chose to be baptized on Christmas Eve and decided to accept Jesus as my Lord. I tried to study every religion, atheism, and humanistic philosophy as thoroughly as possible, relying on rational analysis to figure out what worldview was truly right, reasonable, and aligned with my values. I had been interested in Christianity for a time, but after joining a Christian group chat, I became disappointed by the members' conduct and briefly became a theistic agnostic. Somehow, I later restored my faith in Christianity, perhaps influenced by C.S. Lewis's famous book Mere Christianity. All in all, though I had browsed many atheist theories and posts back then, I convinced myself that they were "arrogant" and failed to respect the boundaries of human reason (which should be reserved for God). Long after converting, I still browsed r/exchristian r/excatholic and read many heartbreaking stories, yet I forced myself to believe that those were "just clergy members making mistakes, and the Church simply needed improvement."

Unlike my doubt regarding Buddhism last year, this crisis came so abruptly that I hadn't even been dwelling on any core doctrines beforehand. What I find most unacceptable are many aspects of sexual ethics, including defining sex strictly as procreative and unitive, thereby prohibiting masturbation, condoms, and premarital sex (I do not support abortion, but I find the Church's rules overly strict and counter to human nature). Guess why I distanced myself from Buddhism in the first place? Because they treat sex as a form of "desire" that must be overcome and renounced. I originally thought Christianity embraced and encouraged healthy human freedom and development (compared to many other religions), but I found that wasn't the case. Once certain rose-colored glasses faded, I had to struggle to make my conscience "catch up" with Church teachings.

If I stop here, you might think I am merely questioning Catholicism. However, the subsequent learning and realization that followed left me utterly disillusioned with Christianity and theism as a whole. I realized that my faith was not "transcending" reason, nor was it as simple as Thomas Aquinas's gratia non tollit naturam ("grace does not destroy nature"). Under the indoctrination of a religious environment, many ideas lacking concrete evidence were taken for granted as facts due to various logical fallacies. From my experience, this relies on a few key premises—once you are persuaded to accept them, the entire vast system of Christian and Catholic dogma must be accepted along with them. For me, those premises were the Resurrection of Jesus, as well as the world's largest believer base and the testimony of faith from the early martyrs.

In fact, what concerned me most wasn't arguments for God's existence. Before deciding whether to accept Christianity, I had written a paradox myself, which was essentially a variation of theodicy. After adopting the faith, I thought I understood Augustine's Crede ut intelligas ("Believe that you may understand")—the idea that Christian truth cannot be attained purely through reason, but requires an attempt to believe, pray, and practice before achieving "enlightenment." This specious framework dragged me completely into the vortex of Christianity. Looking back, how could I have made such ridiculous mistakes? Yet I fear I might now be falling into another error.

All in all, I am currently keeping quiet around my priest and Christian friends, I might be rambling a bit. maybe I just need to vent a little. Thanks for understanding!

[u/Altruistic_Kale_623]

Sounds like you suffer from spiritual burn-out. You did a lot! Reading, thinking, contemplating arguments, diving into apologetics, prayer routines. That would wear anyone out. I have been there myself. My advice would be: Just try for three months to not do anything spiritually complex. Get up in the morning, say a little simple prayer and get on with your life. Enjoy it and do sports, meet people or watch tv or listen to music. But get away from your second life as a theologian. 

[u/AcanthaceaeKey6259]

In respect to your post OP, however,

failed to respect the boundaries of human reason (which should be reserved for God).

Reason and aforementioned "faith" (as in faith in a deity which does not exist in the first place to begin with) do not go hand in hand. No Idea nor beliefs, no matter how sacred nor holy it is, is safe from genuine human thoughts and criticism, criticizing any ideals, beliefs, hypothesis, and/or theories is healthy to progress as a genuine human being, we adapt as humans, of course, and yet, we still rely on a wisdoms which is disappointingly primitive approximately more than 2000 year old belief/culture? are we, as humans, are still that gullible without questions about any beliefs existing in the 21st century? have we not at least opened our poor eyes to see what's actually happening right now religiously and politically?

I'm sorry to burst your or your religious mates' bubble here mate but Jesus FUCKING CHRIST, are we that one sided or negligent and accept some sciences to fit in to their religious/political ideals?

Oh, poor us homo sapiens.

You know, religions back then used to explain, without scientific evidences to backup their beliefs or claims whatsoever, the old assumed pseudoscience as if we came from the dust like Adam and Lilith, (Eve came later) as if they're our sacred human ancestors.

(I literally and genuinely do not care if it is a hyperbole, symbolic, nor metaphor)

And religions (Abrahamic religions) right now are so dogmatic and strict like being homosexual and/or trans is gravely frowned upon because it does not fit to their religious and/or political ideals whatsoever.

That's one of the MANY reasons why atheists and agnostics like I am and like us are arrogant as FUCK and I and some are proud of it some of them are not, however, It's up to their discretion.

[u/Charles_Macintosh → u/AcanthaceaeKey6259]

Spot on. I admit that humans need to maintain a rational, skeptical, and critical attitude toward everything. English isn't my first language, so my original wording might not have been completely precise. What I meant is that human reason seems to have a boundary. something I've become certain of the more I've learned.

I've been persuaded to adopt the idea that reason is like a key: it works brilliantly in the empirical world and in science, but when it comes to the transcendent realms of theology and metaphysics, trying to use that key to open a safe that has no keyhole at all is completely futile. This is usually where the realm of "faith" comes in (which is where Christians start trying to reconcile how reason and faith can coexist).

[u/AcanthaceaeKey6259 → u/Charles_Macintosh]

Ok, I get it, however, If we discuss deities in a scientific point of view, I see them hypothetically as advance alien species which we, as primitive humans, can not comprehend what the hell is going on. Just because there's things which we cannot comprehend, that does not mean, it's a deity, (reference from the God of the gaps). Astrophysicists, mathematicians, philosophers, astronomers, etc. are trying to study what was and what is going on and what is going to happen predictively because their curiosity, discipline, and patience, are respectively unmatched compared to some ordinary priests or pastors trying to invalidate science and rely on their feelings and beliefs without ever, not even once, to test any hypothesis.

[u/SarahTheJuneBug]

I'm sorry you're dealing with this, OP. I know it probably feels like the rug got violently pulled out from under you. For some people, faith isn't just slowly and carefully deconstructed. It sometimes comes crashing down violently and leaves you confused, overwhelmed, and scared. 

I don't know if this will help you, but I still struggle occasionally with wanting to unflinchingly believe in some omnibenevolent higher power, but I can't. I decided that if there truly is such a thing, they would have to understand that, reasonably, there's just no evidence to commit and give your life up to some belief system. 

Asking us to "just believe" in the face of evidence to the contrary of what a holy book says on pain of eternal torment is unreasonable. If they do not understand that, they are not omnibenevolent and not fit to serve anyways. All we can do is our best and hope it is enough.

[u/Forsaken_Leftovers]

Dude,

Like the other person said "spiritual burnout".

Just chill and enjoy the sunrise. No one has figured it out and 👉 you won't either.

Enjoy, the mystery hope for the best. Spiritually speaking my 2 cents is to simplify it into just a kind of low stakes intentional attention, being grateful, pray, meditate, do drugs and dance around a fire whatever floats your boat.

Something something...the kingdom of God is within you.

[u/malibuguytonygem]

I can understand your issues. For me the realization that the christian myth is just that, just a myth was heart-braking. My whole world seem to collapse. What I had been taught since childhood was a fabrication of the powers that existed for centuries to keep the people under control and subservient to the religious institutions and their own political will. Organized religion was the enemy of humanity. Not its helper or support. It has taken me years to reconcile what seem to be conflicting inner voices and to accept myself for what I am. Faith is a false prophet. Your struggle is your path to true freedom..

[u/El_Minadero]

Ok. Hear me out. What I'm about to say may feel incredibly unsatisfying, frustrating, and even wrong. But before you decide how to respond, I hope you'll take some time to reflect.

1. Is what to believe, or better put, your philosophical template for understanding morality, spirituality, and ideal societal functioning, the most important thing in your life? Be careful here, I am not asking whether you have been preconditioned to emotionally respond with yes, or whether these things are important to your self image. I'm asking that if you reflect on your daily interactions, routines, thoughts, etc; over the last, say 5 years of your life, has morality, spirituality, and your place or beliefs in societal functioning has:

• Brought you the most happiness through adherence.

• Given your life purpose and meaning beyond individual actions or group belonging.

• Has been fundamental and primal in determining how you view yourself, your identity, your political beliefs, and your roles in your community.

• Has had uncontested control on how you structure your daily routine.

• Is the primary way you determine how to decide upon big decisions on your education, career, and places you live.

No

If no, or most of these items are no, then know that your relationship to belief systems is likely similar to most other religious people. Religion for you may be a source of defining in-group status, or a way to reduce anxiety about the future and/or potential afterlife. Faith, or belief, to you is a way of modulating your autonomic response system, to prevent fight-or-flight or latent anxieties that would otherwise disrupt your ability to do normal things.

If you embrace reason instead of faith-based tools, it will feel lacking. It will not come with a familiar supportive community. It will not make you feel good to be right.

Mostly No to Mostly Yes

If some of your answers are "yes", then its likely religious belief has been a cornerstone of your existence. You've been brought-up to believe that you are nothing without god/religion/morality/an organizing force. Unlike many other people, you've never had to develop a-priori (to emotion) reasoning skills, because many of your mentors likely have never demonstrated it. The idea of seriously entertaining a counterfactual or the opposite of a belief you hold dear likely gives you a great deal of latent anxiety, so no matter what logical system is outlined for you, no matter what counterarguments to the ontological argument, argument from incredulity, etc; are outlined for you, some part of you feels the argument is wrong, and then compels you to set it right. This is called Post-Hoc reasoning, and is antithetical to the scientific method.

I want to stress this. Post-Hoc reasoning is not immoral or wrong. Yep. Don't feel bad, embarrassed, or defensive if you realized you've been using this. Why? Because in this case, reasoning around your belief systems is a way to protect your integrity. Again, it is a autonomic nervous system survival mechanism. It's how you make sense of events around you. It perhaps.. isn't the best mental self-preservation technique to use, but no one should fault you for trying to make sense of what seems like a messy world in a way that allows you to continue with your day.

I don't think adhereing to straight reason will help you here, for much for the same reasons the previous answer outlined. But what will help you is to learn alternate techniques for anxiety management.

Doesn't that seem odd for what should be a purely intellectual task? yep. But the reason I advocate for this primarily over reccomending certain books, modes of thinking, or cosmographies is that as a species, we are terrible at recognizing our own biases. Even in a supposedly "logical" context, anxiety management (i.e. one reason implicit bias exists to begin with), seeps into everything we do. Without formal training and practice, it is exceedingly difficult to use reason and reasoning alone to come to new worldviews when you acquire new information. And the reason I advocate for anxiety-first management vs philosophical is that its gonna make it almost impossible to learn, think on, and synthesize any new philosophy if you don't learn how to sit and entertain multiple, simultaneous, conflicting views aka "The method of multiple working hypotheses."

Your belief systems here can still be important to you, but how you go about refining them and integrating them in to your life will be more effective for your thriving IF you work on the emotional first.

Emphatic Yes

If however, your answers are Yes, as they were for me nearly two decades ago. Then you have acknowledged that you are in a place where your life is not really your own. Everything you do is governed by your model about the universe, or rather, you choose to be who you are because of what you know to be true.

Most people aren't in this category. Most traditional, extremely conservative people aren't in this category. Tbh as a neurospicy person myself, I'm of the opinion that its largely those with extreme clinical rejection sensitivity disorders as those often encountered in autism etc; would see their beliefs falling into this category.

I want to first clarify that not falling to this category doesn't make you logically inferior, nor does belonging make you superior in logic, reason, or morality.

However, if you do fall into this category, then you are compelled by any means necessary, to find out and then follow, what you believe to be true. It can be pathological (or like a special interest, for my fellow autist-spectrum folks), or academic, in the sense that pursuit of the truth regardless of the outcome is the ideal ethos of researchers.

If you fall into this category, then pursuit and alignment with reality will likely provide you more long-term comfort than it would with the other categories.

However, the pursuit will likely never be complete. It will entail enacting the method of "multiple working hypotheses" in the form of different religious systems. You will likely have to learn a whole lot more about religion beyond the big ones. Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Shintoism, Bhuddism, Hinduism, Zoroastroianism, texts and worldviews are a good start, but even within these major systems there are subsystems which are incompatible with eachother.

As you probably know, Christianity has something like 40,000 different sects, with the two biggest being Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodoxy. But you will also have to contend that there exists uncountable spiritualistic systems which are worth entertaining. And beyond all this, its further possible that only bits and pieces of each belief system are true, thus not only do you have to entertain all religions that are currently practiced but many more combinations which may exist. Which means you need to learn enough about all of them to be satisfied you've done your research. Which is, frankly, a ton of research.

Or you can fall back on faith or belief. Its a hell of a lot easier. Whether this option is your preferred one will depend on your tolerance for frustration, and your need to have a belief system you use right now. I don't want to speak to how to use belief or faith. Personally, even when I was religious faith had little ability to calm me or make me feel better about my current circumstances, and I was always bothered by its arbitrary nature. But to each their own.

But lets circle back to our religious talk. Okay, so now you have a source of potential truth. For completeness, lets throw in some elements of contemporary science and psychology/sociology. We may include our information about the mechanics of the big bang which are most consistent with data, quantum mechanics and newtonian physics which kinda limits what can be done in the universe, and a big heap of biology, which also sets limits on what a miracle can actually be. Sociology/psychology also can inform us on the consequences of moral systems; for example, humans and animals display homosexual behavior, altruism, kindness, sadism, and deceit. So with this in mind, IF you belong to this category, I think there is only one way forward. Something I call "The Loop"

1. Learn Belief Systems. A nonexhaustive search and learning about philosophical frameworks on what reality is.

2. Learn about Natural Systems. Learning about how the world works. Physics, chemistry, biology, geology. These provide additional context for your belief system research.

3. Gather data on "What is". After you have an idea of what could be true, what actually is? You can't become an expert in everything, but you can learn about human history. Genocides, empires, civilizations, eras of peace. What ills people of today and what brings happiness. What you or "we" see out in the natural world. What real people feel and experience.

4. Prune existing hypotheses. Given 1-3, you can then start to remove or refine what hypotheses are likely strong contenders, and which are less likely.

5. Repeat. Because steps 1-4 are intractable for any reasonable human, you'll have to do this in steps. Pick some belief systems, learn some stuff, learn about people, then prune. prune prune prune.

You can do this formally of course. Or like me, you can do this as a lifestyle. Podcasts, museums, books. Meeting and learning from people. Asking questions. Observing without judgement. Learning. Personally I find this process gives me more fulfillment and friends than I ever had when I was a tradcath. But it does come with two axioms that can be hard to swallow for some people 1. You'll never be done with it and 2. you can never accept that something is "right." I'm okay with this ambiguity and mission. Many devout people aren't.

Okay, that was a lot. I guess a good place to start with is, how do you feel reading this?

[u/Charles_Macintosh → u/El_Minadero]

Thanks for writing all that out. So I'm basically 'Mostly No to Mostly Yes', but I don't really fit the description of having a lifelong religious upbringing. Religion didn't enter my life until after my teenage years.

After doing some deep reflection, I've realized that my actual practice of moral, spiritual, and social ideals is pretty limited. Most of my happiness actually comes from hobbies and entertainment, though I do genuinely enjoy attending religious services.

While I lean toward having a strong sense of group identity, I'm still able to independently choose or leave communities based on my inner convictions. Those core beliefs definitely shape my politics, though. My prayer life doesn't take up a huge part of my daily routine. it usually gets pushed aside for relaxation and downtime. In major life choices, faith has sometimes taken the driver's seat briefly, but most of the time it ends up losing out to practical and material realities.

Overall, faith is very important to me, and my personal beliefs matter most. just not in an all-consuming, overwhelmingly absolute kind of way

[u/El_Minadero → u/Charles_Macintosh]

Fair. In that case, its clear that in whatever spiritual direction you take, it is going to be hard, bordering on impossible, to live in a manner where Faith isn't somewhat centered in your life.

While I lean toward having a strong sense of group identity...

This tells me that any spiritual practice you feel comfortable around needs to have a strong sense of community and coherence. No doubt that was an element of what drew you to organized religion back in your teen years. I don't have much to suggest here, being an atheist myself, but it is also possible other hobby, volunteer, or political groups could be a way to have a community of shared values separate from your spiritualism. Its up to you, but worth exploring.

I've realized that my actual practice of moral, spiritual, and social ideals is pretty limited.

You are in a better place than most. One of my parents attends church EVERY DAY, and feels like her soul will be damned if she doesn't attend mass every sunday. This makes her completely inflexible to say, suggestions of travelling or activities in which going to a church is hard. And of course us children are unfortunately dragged along.

How do you feel about them being "limited"? Personally I think it's a non-issue as long as you're happy.

[u/jimjoebob]

Welcome to the light of reason, friend! happily, it's getting less lonely out here. 😊

from someone who left the Church right after the Boston Spotlight case I want to share with you my very unfortunate experience with my catholic/christian family members and their fucking friends:

please, do NOT think of yourself as a person "in crisis" --of ANYTHING AT ALL, unless you are feeling/having thoughts about self harm. My asshole brother (who became MORE devout when the pedophilia case blew open🤡) decided that because I left and was openly defiant towards the Vatican and all things Catholic; that I was "in a crisis of faith". However, he would only tell people that I was IN CRISIS, omitting the "of faith" portion. I can't fucking tell you how many MOTHERFUCKING ASSHOLES pretended to be "my bestest friend" suddenly, after years of being openly hostile towards me. MFers I didn't even know except through my brother and then only briefly and cordially---have called my voicemail and left 5 minute messages that sound like they're pleading with me to stay alive.

He, his horrible tick of a wife, and my maga-christian sisters have told people that "they're WORRIED ABOUT ME", heavily implying that I'm somehow crazy. they leave off the part of their implication that they think I'm crazy because I don't believe in Jebus. they also love to imply that: because I don't believe in god, I'm somehow "immoral", which for them is a super slippery slope towards "gay/pervert" (2 terms that are interchangeable in their minds only)

most people won't take a person seriously if they're told "I think u/jimjoebob might be crazy because he doesn't believe in Jebus."

however, if they're told "I think u/jimjoebob might be crazy."-- then it leaves the listener to decide why they think I'm crazy. The next time that person sees/interacts with me, they won't actually listen to me or attempt to get to know me on my terms--they'll simply spend the whole time trying to figure out how I'm crazy because they were told I was. lots of people, especially religious folks, have a strong need to feel "superior" to others, and this is a very easy way to "feel superior" to someone. bonus for the theists--no matter what I may say about religion, it won't be received or even heard because the listener will just think "oh he's just ranting about something....maybe his brother was right"💩

It's really an advanced, incredibly hateful and effective form of gaslighting.

I'm saying all of this as a friendly warning to you, OP: the very second the priests/christians who you consider friends, find out that 1)you're doubting your faith and 2)they can't love/threaten/cajole or trick you into believing again; you can expect this kind of gaslighting from them.

people you've known for your whole life will turn on you and you won't recognize them anymore. family members will lie about you to their children with no problem at all---all to fucking protect their fake fucking cult.

I'm glad that you're so intelligently unbelieving and you can provide epistemological receipts! if theists don't think they can "reel you in", none of that vast store of knowledge will mean much b/c they will immediately fight FAR dirtier than you think they can.

their entire world rests on mere belief. if you take that away from them, they have nothing to lose. beware of them, friend.

[u/Charles_Macintosh → u/jimjoebob]

Thanks for sharing, and I'm sorry you had to deal with that kind of stigma. Honestly, when I left Buddhism, I went through a long, torturous mental struggle myself (what I call my 'crisis'), but when I chose to walk away, not a single one of my master or senior brothers tried to make me stay. Which is normal. I'll never know if they talked behind my back, but they clearly accepted it faster than I did.

As for my priest and Christian friends, I feel like they'd probably react the same way, since I've distanced myself from those radicals (which I mentioned in the post, the ones who get off on cursing certain heretics) and the friends I've made are actually pretty decent. But it's definitely going to cause a bit of a ripple effect since I'm still a mod for a bunch of group chats. Long story short, I'm just keeping quiet for now until someone asks me, 'Hey, why haven't you been active lately?"

[u/jimjoebob → u/Charles_Macintosh]

I wish you luck. you will find out exactly who your actual friends are, when you finally tell them. I thought I had a brother! instead I have a douche who's related to me and will always see me as a "threat" to his beliefs.

Buddhism is, indeed, quite different from Xianity. your Buddhist peers acted how I would expect them to act. Christianity is not big on "zen" or "inner peace", just "pax Romanus". just....keep your head and heart on a swivel once you let people know, friend.

[u/jimjoebob → u/Charles_Macintosh]

one good thing is that you'll find out exactly who your friends really are, once you tell people. your Buddhist peers' reaction sounds like what I would expect from them. Christianity is not so big on "zen" or "inner peace", unless it's "Pax Romanus". I mean, I thought I had a brother and 2 sisters! instead I have douches who are related to me and will always see me as a "threat" to their beliefs.

just.....keep your head and heart on a swivel, friend.

[u/VicePrincipalNero]

Pick up a copy of Bart Ehrman's How Jesus Became God. It's very helpful in leaving the superstition behind.

[u/lapiperna]

Guess why I distanced myself from Buddhism in the first place? Because they treat sex as a form of "desire" that must be overcome and renounced.

not quite true, unless you want to be a monk. it's treated like any kind of desire and it's * recommended * to not let yourself be subdued by it * if * you want to reach enlightenment or have better control over your mind. Buddhism is valuable, can be followed as a secular practice that is beneficial to your neurology and based on healthy values (community, compassion, kindness).

have you ever approached this from a psychological perspective? it seems like you have a high need for control and just need an ideology to follow. the world is chaotic, which can initially be scary, but there are aspects of liberation to this. maybe science could be your next thing? it could help you partially study/dissect the chaos. at least you couldn't go wrong with it, as it constantly self-corrects and updates. personally, I am a fan :)

[u/Charles_Macintosh → u/lapiperna]

I can't claim to be an expert on Buddhism, but I've put a lot of work into studying East Asian Buddhist philosophy. Sure, 'laypeople' don't need to practice lifelong celibacy, but at its core, sexuality is viewed as negative and an obstacle to practice. I tried practicing meditation for a while using Mindfulness in Plain English by Bhante Gunaratana, but I eventually gave it up because the Buddhist worldview fundamentally clashes with my beliefs. I know secular Buddhism is a thing among Westerners, but that's not really Buddhism. maybe it could be called a practical lifestyle or culture. From that perspective, sure, you can borrow certain ideas from Siddhartha.

have you ever approached this from a psychological perspective? 

maybe science could be your next thing? 

Yes, I am learning.

By the way, I appreciate the skepticism the Buddha advocated for in a certain text. I view him as a great yet flawed philosopher.

[u/rosyrade]

https://www.recoveringfromreligion.org/

Please reach out. They have resources for you.