« The Condition of following Christ | Main | Anne Rice and the "plight of the liberal Catholic" »

August 02, 2010

Ann Rice and Christianity

On Facebook, Ann Rice has announced that she continues to follow Christ, but is no longer a Christian. On July 28, she said, “For those who care, and I understand if you don't: Today I quit being a Christian. I'm out. I remain committed to Christ as always but not to being ‘Christian’ or to being part of Christianity. It's simply impossible for me to ‘belong’ to this quarrelsome, hostile, disputatious, and deservedly infamous group. For ten ...years, I've tried. I've failed. I'm an outsider. My conscience will allow nothing else.  

Five minutes later, she elaborated, “As I said below, I quit being a Christian. I'm out. In the name of Christ, I refuse to be anti-gay. I refuse to be anti-feminist. I refuse to be anti-artificial birth control. I refuse to be anti-Democrat. I refuse to be anti-secular humanism. I refuse to be anti-science. I refuse to be anti-life. In the name of Christ, I quit Christianity and being Christian. Amen."  

The next day she said this: “My faith in Christ is central to my life. My conversion from a pessimistic atheist lost in a world I didn't understand, to an optimistic believer in a universe created and sustained by a loving God is crucial to me. But following Christ does not mean following His followers. Christ is infinitely more important than Christianity and always will be, no matter what Christianity is, has been, or might become.”  

The response has been enormous. Thousands responded in one way or another on Facebook. The United Church of Christ invited her to become a member, because it believed its understanding of Christianity matches hers. But Rice has arrived at the conclusion that organized religion is not for her.

Joseph Bottums at First Things heaped sarcasm on her decision. In a post that exuded superiority, Bottoms criticized her for exhibiting a sense of superiority. I cannot help but thinking that Bottom’s post exhibits a form of argumentation that is itself not Christian.  

It would be the rare Christian liberal who did not understand the impetus for Rice’s position. Although conservative Christians are a minority of  Christians – at least in the United States, the media has constructed an image of Christians that is decidedly in the conservative mold. Conservative Christians and the mass media have given Christianity a bad name – at least from the perspective of progressives. For them, it is necessary to say, “I am a Christian – but” Or, as I am often forced to say, “I am a Catholic – but.” In the case of Catholicism, the ordinary citizen and the traditional Catholic thinks that what the Vatican says defines Catholicism – even though the vast majority of American Catholics as a matter of conscience reject many solemn Vatican pronouncements and the ordinary citizen is generally unaware of the Church's many Christian commitment's to social justice or the Church's non-resistance to science.  

In the end, although I admire Rice, in the end, I do not agree. I do not think the term Christianity should be ceded to anti-feminists and anti-gays. Enormous progress has been made in this area within Christian sects in the past few decades (although, if I may resort to euphemism, Rice’s former Catholic home has registered less progress on both fronts). The tide of history runs against conservatives on these issues.  

Even more important, a major strand of Christianity from the progressive perspective is to fight for social justice and in most cases that is best done with others. Moreover, Christianity is all about loving, supporting, and helping others. That is less easy to accomplish in an isolated mode.   Of course, Rice is in a position to do much as a prophet. But I do not think most followers of Christ should take the individualistic road she recommends.

cross-posted at religiousleftlaw.com             

Posted by Steve Shiffrin on August 2, 2010 at 08:50 AM in Shiffrin, Steve | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515a9a69e2013485ef519d970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Ann Rice and Christianity:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

When I read about Rice on CNN.com this morning I was fairly puzzled. I'm not entirely certain of how she hopes to follow Christ without following any of his followers (aka Christians). It seems that the only we can begin to "know" Christ in the first place is through witness and through following. The witness makes the proposal that I verify in my life. If Rice can do without this and still follow Christ, more power to her. For me in my weakness, however, I have to follow.

On another note, I'm also puzzled by her hope, and what often seems to be the hope of "liberal" Catholics ("conservative" Catholics have their issues, too), to judge Christianity by a secular humanist criteria. Yes, when I judge Christianity with a man-made secular criteria, it fails miserably. But to follow Christ, for me, has meant coming to judge things by an entirely different criteria. Christ is not an add-on to a secular human life that gives justification to secular humanist dispositions. Christ is a person through whom all of reality is united and consumed. The experience Rice purports to have of Christ, simply put, has not been my own. Insofar as I am convinced of what I have lived, I wonder who this "Christ" is that Rice is "following."

Posted by: Joey | Aug 2, 2010 12:10:12 PM

Ann Rice's heart is in the right place, but I think she just has a problem with not sounding completely nuts. That's hard not to do when you're sending out declarative communiques via twitter, but she seems to be taking it to the next level. Though I do agree with her in theory. I mean it hard to be Christian when the organization that runs it is full of contradictions and anachronisms. Did all the American Christian groups forget why our forefathers came to America in the first place: http://lawblog.legalmatch.com/2010/06/30/religious-freedom-gender-discrimination-and-pregnancy/

Posted by: Raynor K | Aug 2, 2010 2:04:31 PM

What makes a Person anti Gay or anti Feminist?

I think that should be defined a tad

Posted by: jh | Aug 3, 2010 12:55:44 AM

The Dignity of the Human Person, inherent in our complementary nature as Male and Female, is endowed to us from God.

"Let Us Make Man In Our Image..." The Blessed Trinity

Love is not possessive, and thus we can know through Faith and Reason, that The Blessed Trinity exists within an ordered, complementary relationship of Perfect Love between The Father and The Son through the Unity of The Holy Spirit, and thus The Holy Spirit proceeds from both The Father and The Son.(Filioque)

From The Beginning, we were made in the Image of God and called into a communion of Perfect Love.


Posted by: Nancy D. | Aug 3, 2010 10:59:31 AM

Perhaps we did Ms. Rice no favors by allowing her to return when she was not really ready. We let her think that you can just take the parts you like and leave the rest. Hopefully her hunger for the Eucharist will lead her to discover that the Church was right all along. I am sure her son influenced her decision. We do homosexuals no favors either by pretending that sin is virtue and vis versa.

Posted by: Fr. J | Aug 4, 2010 1:59:32 PM

From "Blue Catholic" (full disclosure--that's me. But as an avid reader of MOJ, I hope I'm permitted to join this discussion while shamelessly plugging a new Catholic blog!):

Regardless of whether this was intentional on her part, AR clearly equates abandoning the institutional Church with leaving Christianity itself. For many, the suggestion that there is synonymy between the Church and Christianity is a mistake. Could not AR simply join a Christian congregation whose political leanings and doctrinal emphases are more in line with her own? I read somewhere that, since her de-conversion, the United Church of Christ has professed some kindred spirit with AR and invited her into its fold. She allegedly declined on the grounds that she wishes to avoid any institutional form of Christ following

Now, there is some honestly here I can appreciate. I may be attributing to her more theological acumen than she really has, but that she should disavow Christianity while still professing love for Christ suggests an awareness that Christianity is, in fact, ecclesial, and necessarily so. That is, there is no Christianity apart from the organized structure that attempts to administer the sacraments and mediate faithfully the teachings of Christ and the apostles. So conceived, the notion of “institutionalized Christianity” is a bit redundant. It is no surprise to me, therefore, that by abandoning the institution that is the church, she is abandoning Christianity for a more (in her view) authentic form of personal faith.

I take note of this part of AR’s narrative precisely because an increasing number of my students profess to be Christians but resist identifying with any particular ecclesiastic tradition. In fact, many of them insist that ecclesial affiliation has nothing to do with being Christian. Students increasingly exhibit a conscious aversion to institutionally-prescribed beliefs and practices and instead align themselves with less formal, “Christ-centered” or “relationship-based” movements (I’m actually using some of the phrases from just such a movement). It doesn’t occur to them that one cannot be Christian and a self-governing spiritual being who selectively identifies with certain theological beliefs. Historically (and you know this), the term “Christian” signaled an affiliation with a body of believers and a subordination to teachings and sacramental rituals bequeathed by Christ and preserved by duly appointed teaching authorities. Anne Rice seems to understand this, which is why (I suspect) she, by rejecting the legitimacy of the aforementioned authorities, rejects Christianity as such. On this score, at least, I applaud her refusal to use the term “Christian” so promiscuously, and would like to see some of my students follow her example. Link here:

http://bluecatholic.wordpress.com/2010/07/26/hello-world/

Posted by: Blue Catholic | Aug 6, 2010 11:29:35 AM

First of all, I believe it to be tremendously incompetent that the above writer Steve Shiffrin and numerous others choose to write about the Author Anne Rice but neglect to spell her name correctly. Yes, Indeed, hundreds responded with their nasty comments on facebook, including my facebook page. Ms. Rice does look like me but we do not share values and beliefs, but the woman can believe whatever she wants! So leave the both of us alone!

Posted by: Ann Rice | Nov 3, 2010 5:33:38 PM

.

If I could meet her in person, I would
love to say "Thank you Anne Rice –
for so very articulately stating what
I have felt in my heart for years" !!!!

One's 'Faith-in-Christ’ should IN NO WAY
be tied into the man-controlled 'Religion'
that so many refer to as "Christianity"
(especially that apostate, psuedo-religious
political-movement called 'evangelicalism')

It took me forever to realize that my
relationship with God (as established
through Christ Jesus, God The Son) was
IN NO WAY dependent on the apostate
psuedo-religious movement sweeping
America in the name of the "church".

If Christ were walking the earth today,
a lot of these same "religious" types
would be the first to demand that He
be 'crucified' -- and based merely on
who He chose as FRIENDS (women,
gays, foreigners, immigrants, the poor,
the rejected, the downtrodden, the rich,
men, old, young, happy, sad, and so on).

The "evangelicals" (not to be mistaken
for TRUE FOLLOWERS of Christ) and
other "church" types have essentially
hijacked the Christian 'Faith' in order to
turn it into a mammon-worshipping,
power-mongering, "Religion" of hate.

These people are more akin to a system of
ANTI-CHRIST (i.e. “against”-Christ) than
to anything tied into WHO CHRIST IS.

Their evil has reached such profound levels
that even people who know and love Christ
are turned off from them and their words
(again proving these “church” types are
really nothing more than anti-Christ,
self-righteous Pharisees and are not
even remotely related to Jesus Christ).

Never again will I waste my time stepping
into the psuedo-religious social-club that
is known as "church" or associate myself
with the political-clique that is known as
'christianity' -- because FROM NOW ON
-- I realize that I do NOT "need" either
in order to have a relationship with MY
LORD JESUS CHRIST (in fact, those
two entities were actually 'interfering'
with my relationship with God)

THROUGH CHRIST -- GOD HAS OPENLY
EXPRESSED HIS LOVE TO 'EVERYONE'
(no matter if rich, poor, gay, straight, male,
female, sickly, healthy and so on) -- AND
CHRIST (not the so-called"church") IS
'THE DOOR' and 'THE WAY' TO GOD!!

ALL ARE WELCOME TO APPROACH AND
TO ENTER THROUGH 'THE DOOR' TO GOD!!

NO ONE IS REJECTED BY JESUS CHRIST !!!

JESUS LOVED AND LOVES EVERYONE !!!

LET’S ALL TRY TO REMEMBER
THE BIBLE VERSE OF ‘JOHN 3:17’:

“For God did NOT send His Son
into the world – to condemn
the world, BUT that the world,
THROUGH HIM, might be SAVED !!!!”

JESUS CHIST – and *not* the institution known
as “the church” or the religion called “christianity”
--- IS THE WAY, THE TRUTH AND THE LIFE!!!

LIKE MANY OTHER PEOPLE – I AM DONE
WITH THE CHURCH & WITH CHRISTIANITY
-- AND FROM HERE ON OUT – MY FOCUS IS
ON (AND FAITH IN GOD RELIES IN) JESUS
CHRIST AND JESUS CHRIST ALONE !!!

.

Posted by: APG | Dec 12, 2010 8:08:11 PM

Post a comment