Well, it's happened. Someone has made me think! ;) Blogging around this afternoon--something I have neglected this week--I discovered this post by Entropy on the subject of being a "Cradle Catholic" vs. a Convert. Now, this is a topic that is near and dear to my heart, so I couldn't help adding my $0.02. I think it becomes a particularly relevant question to Catholic converts, or should, whether converting is "better," somehow, than being raised in the Faith, since practicing Catholicism involves choosing Catholicism for one's children, which is not something that can be said of most Christian churches, and which is in contrast to the experience of some (many?) coverts to Catholicism. In particular, the churches I was exposed to as a child required a personal conversion experience, and in fact, many tried ("revival"-style) to induce a conversion experience (in the manner of Langston Hughes' "Salvation," which has always been a favorite short story of mine). So I was "touched by Jesus" several times when visiting weird youth-groups with friends, only to realize when I returned home that what I mistook for "repentance" was actually guilt for some minor or imagined teenage transgression, and that I had been duped into feeling something that was not, in fact, genuine. Over the years, one of my issues with the churches I had attended (the more mainstream ones, that is) was this emphasis on the Ultimate Conversion Experience--that is, the moment of Being Saved. It struck me as being so intangible as to be unreliable, first of all (child of reason that I was), and second, so wrapped up in emotion as to be, to my mind, distasteful. (I've said before that I've had to gradually "grow into" spirituality, in part because I had been warm & fuzzied to death over the years. . .) I wondered how one recognized the One Moment, what happened if one lapsed (this from observing the "Saved" around me, or the hairdresser who declared her son to be "Saved" anew every time he came back home needing money), and any number of other things. I believe I understand things a bit better now, but suffice it to say that I was skeptical, and rejected the whole concept out of hand. I came to wonder if not everyone was capable of the Ultimate Conversion Experience, so when I was looking for a conversion experience, I looked to reason rather than the lightening bolts I was told to expect. (Is it any wonder I liked the Hughes story?)
Now, this is not to say that my conversion experience, when it came, was not recognizable as something unique and momentous, and suffused with emotion, but that's not where I'm going with this. Rather, I want to think about the difference in the way "conversion" is represented within Catholicism. Certainly, "conversion" is the act of becoming Catholic--or Christian, if one is not Catholic. It involves Baptism if one is not Baptized already, and in Catholicism, it involves the acts of receiving the other Sacraments of Initiation--First Communion, First Reconciliation (if one is already Baptized) and Confirmation. But I was surprised to find, within Catholicism, a discourse of conversion that went beyond initiation into the membership of the Faith--something beyond that first acceptance--of the individual by the Church and of the Church by the individual. During Lent in particular, there was a discourse of "turning away," of "converting"--turning one's mind and actions away from sin and toward God. Those Catholics who had turned away from the Church, but returned were described as having "conversion experiences" (though they were not called "converts"), and even those who had never left the Church were sometimes referred to as having a conversion of mind, heart, spirit, etc., sometimes to a new acceptance or a closer understanding of Church doctrine. In addition, the Eucharist is a means toward our continual conversion. I found comfort in this expanded definition of "conversion" which placed emphasis on a continual affirmation of faith rather than a one-time faith event that was supposed to sustain the love of God and the will to remain relatively sinless. It placed more responsibility on the individual and acknowledged the individual's weakness simultaneously. It also somewhat modified my understanding of what "conversion" means.
Thinking about Entropy's post, then, my initial response addressed the question of what I gained from being a convert, and what I thought my children stood to gain from being raised Catholic rather than being allowed to convert later, in the manner of many Protestant denominations, which teach that Baptism should follow the individual conversion experience rather than being chosen by the parents. I did value my choice, but this was from the perspective of rejecting organized religion (int he form of all Christian churches). However, I do think that even had I been raised Catholic (as I "should" have been, given that my parents were Catholic and were married in the Catholic Church), I would have rebelled at some point. But perhaps I would have had a better vantage point for converting, that is, for turning back. I still would have had the ability to "claim" my faith, and perhaps (ideally) I would have had a better idea of what I stood to gain or lose. Who knows? But this is my point: that what we really mean by "converting" when we talk about the Ultimate Conversion Experience (or even Being Saved) is the act of Claiming one's faith. And though Catholics are Baptized at birth, all Catholics have various opportunities to claim our Faith. Inevitably, it is (or should be) an act of will to convert--to claim one's faith; however, everyone should at some point exercise their own will in choosing their faith, even to choose the faith that they were given from birth by their parents.
8 comments:
Absolutely! I'm a cradle Catholic, but I've had several 'conversion' moments from my mid-teens onward, to this day. Even those born into faith must at some time claim that faith for their own. That many cradle Catholics are content to claim the Faith only as a cultural heritage is our present tragedy, but one that I think we can hope to discourage in our children through good catechesis and (more effectively and importantly) letting them see the ins and outs of a lived faith in our own lives.
And...there I stop, before I co-opt your comments box for what really is material for a whole series of posts. :-)
An interesting topic. I'm always fascinated by conversion stories and I think that converts do have some advantages over us cradle Catholics.
Entropy wrote"I've said before I feel there is Truth in the Church and I have wondered if I feel that way because I grew up here. When you choose a religion or a denomination for your own you have ownership in it Being a cradle Catholic I think I'll always wonder if my decision to stay is really mine."
As a cradle Catholic, I recognize Entropy's feeling. I was definitely there once, wondering if being Catholic was just something I had inherited from my parents, whether it was really my choice. This was especially true at the time of my confirmation, when I did believe in the faith but I also felt like half the reason I was doing it was for my parents. That was also the dominant mood during my college years.
But I have since then had moments of choice, moments of what you call "conversion" or some call "reversion". And now I know it is a conscious choice. I no longer have that sense of doubt.
For one thing, I've spent time studying, investigating the truths of the faith from an adult perspective.
I think one area where the Church is really needing improvement is in adult formation and education. We have this sense somehow that when you are confirmed you are done, graduated. You know what you need to know and are through with your education. But the truth is you've just begun. We need to convince cradle Catholics who think they know and understand their faith to continue a lifelong process of learning and growing, making their faith ever deeper and richer. The Church's store of wisdom is inexhaustible. I doubt one lifetime would be enough for anyone to read all the writings of all the saints and all the doctors of the Church and the early Church fathers, all the papal encyclicals and other magesterial documents and all Biblical commentaries. The Bible itself is an endless font, you can drink from it continuously and never exhaust its riches. So I think most importantly we need to rid ourselves of that attitude of being done. In its way it's the cradle Catholic's version of being "saved", reaching a moment at which you think you no longer need to strive.
I have to add that I also like Langston Hughes' story. In fact, I was just referring to it the other day in conversation. It's kind of a touch point for me.
There is a similar sense with converts that once you're finished RCIA, you're "there." It's also not the case, as Jen's blog reminds us!! And also, that first, wonderful "fervor" of conversion does wane, regrettably. But then, I'm not sure it would be possible to go through everyday life with that kind of "high"! That would be the benefit of a convent or monastery! There does need to be more formation, but each person's needs are so different, that I'm not sure what could be done on the parish level. There is a "follow-up" to RCIA that exists in theory, but I have not heard of it actually being practiced. Especially in those parishes where RCIA is primarily composed of future (or current) spouses of cradle Catholics! The follow-up would be difficult, I think.
I've never liked the use of the term "revert" or "reversion" for someone returning to the Church. When one "reverts" to a former behavior, it is usually a negative or primitive type of behavior. For example, one "reverts" to one's previous sinful behavior if the "salvation experience" was not a genuine one. The terms have negative connotations. I much prefer when those who return to the Church are discussed in terms of "conversion."
For that matter, though, I never heard the term "cradle Catholic" used in New Orleans when I lived there. Nor had my husband. And it's not one I like, either. We always said that someone was "born & raised" Catholic. I initially considered "cradle Catholic" to be somewhat insulting, because, again, it sounded like something involuntary, possibly forced, something almost confined to infancy--and it reminded me of cradle cap, to boot!
Lots of interesting stuff!
To address Entropy's original post, I think that one big advantage to being a convert is that you don't have looming "what if this is wrong?" questions in the back of your mind that freak you out, since that's the position you started from before you converted.
Of course there are big disadvantages too -- it's frustrating to me that living a Catholic life doesn't come naturally to me. When Fall hits I'm going to have to pull out some book and look up when Advent starts, remind myself what it is again, and what sort of decorations I need to be getting out. I wish that that were just a natural part of life for me. How nice that it will be for my children.
Also, I like your point that conversion is ultimately about claiming your faith, and that that is something that everyone can do, whether they're embracing a new belief system or coming to actively choose the one they were brought up with. I'd never thought about it that way, but it's a great point.
And per your comment from email, I definitely think of atheism as a belief system. (I hesitate to even write that since it's been debated AT LENGTH on my blog with atheist readers who adamantly disagree, but it's the way I feel.) I even had my own sort of atheism "conversion experience" in college. I'd never really thought too much about my faith (or lack thereof) before college. But as a freshman at a very heavily Christian campus, I looked around at what I saw, took classes on science and philosophy, and began to embrace atheism as my own personal belief system and not just the way I was raised. It's kind of funny, just like the Christian kids who were doing the same with their own religion, I became very vocal and on fire about my own beliefs.
Anyway, sorry to ramble in your combox. Once again, you really got me thinking. :)
I have had a few 'conversion' moments. I've had them when I felt on fire for God with Protestants but in Catholicism I've felt it deeper, not a shallow emotional feeling (though those are good too) but it has always been a serious 'click' when I would understand something all of a sudden at my core.
I'm with Melanie that we need more adult education classes. Our church has had a few Bible study courses but I would really love a catechism class for adults. I've been doing it one my own but I really need someone to bounce my thoughts off of--hence the blog!
I like the term 'cradle Catholic' because the only people that I've ever heard say they were 'born and raised Catholic' are people who aren't Catholic anymore.
"There does need to be more formation, but each person's needs are so different, that I'm not sure what could be done on the parish level."
Entropy kind of touched on that. What I'm thinking we need wouldn't necessarily have to be a formal program. It would be a whole series of options. Bible study, book clubs, seminars on Church history, groups that read papal encyclicals, movie clubs, discussion groups.... There are all sorts of ways a parish could promote the idea that all adults whether lifelong Catholics or recent converts need to continue to grow and learn in our faith.
When we started dating and then became engaged my husband was leading a young adult Bible study out of his home. It wasn't a formal program organized by the parish, just something he felt called to do. it was great because not only did we read and pray about the lectionary readings for the coming Sunday, we also talked about current events, questions we had about the faith, living a Catholic life. We all also met once a month on a Saturday morning to go to confession followed by a lunch at a nearby Italian restaurant. Sadly, that group has fallen apart as people have moved away, gotten busy with young children, etc. I really miss having a group of my peers to support me in my faith, especially that confession support group. I dread going to confession and making a festive occasion really helped. That was the only period in my life when I went as regularly as once a month.
Anyway, back to the idea of adult education. It seems to me that it's not so much about parishes having formal programs, as getting the idea through people's heads that there is still more out there to know. I think priests can help by addressing the question of ongoing formation during their homilies, by letting people know how much there is to know.
I know this conversation is old and dead; but I was just reading an article at First Things and this passage jumped out at me. It seemed to shed an interesting light on the subject of conversion: "Christianity is a religion of transformation. No one is literally born into it; even infants at baptism are converted to it. There is not a Catholic on the planet or in the history of the Church who is not a convert."
Post a Comment