The Collapse of Cultural Catholicism

[RI]

If someone from a non-Catholic lineage became Pope, I'd obviously fully support him or her as a spiritual leader, but they wouldn't be really Catholic in the same sense. Sure they'd be Catholic in faith, but they wouldn't be Catholic.

Glad to know I'm not really Catholic. Thanks.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

If someone from a non-Catholic lineage became Pope, I'd obviously fully support him or her as a spiritual leader, but they wouldn't be really Catholic in the same sense. Sure they'd be Catholic in faith, but they wouldn't be Catholic.

Glad to know I'm not really Catholic. Thanks.

Do you consider yourself culturally Catholic? Clearly not. It's not a slight. You either are or you're not. We are debating cultural Catholicism. I don't doubt your faith. You might argue that it's better to be a Catholic convert or someone of faith that happened to be born into the Church, as many of what I referred to as "real Catholics" are completely irreligious. I am not speaking on religious matters or the value of either type of Catholic. I am speaking about a particular culture, which I generally think is something to be proud of. It's an identity rather than religion.

As we've been over many times before, if I converted to Judaism, I would not be Jewish nor would my heirs.

[afleitch]

If someone from a non-Catholic lineage became Pope, I'd obviously fully support him or her as a spiritual leader, but they wouldn't be really Catholic in the same sense. Sure they'd be Catholic in faith, but they wouldn't be Catholic.

Glad to know I'm not really Catholic. Thanks.

I couldn't call you culturally Catholic as you converted into it. Which is what this discussion is about.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

So the pastor at my church who was raised Catholic in an Irish neighborhood in Northeast Philly is more Catholic than the vast majority of the people who attend Mass weekly in the state?

...

Geez, this is f[inks]ing bizarre. Downright incomprehensible to me. I mean everyone knows that Lutherans are disproportionately Scandinavian, but I can't imagine anyone ever saying that people who aren't Scandinavian aren't "real" Lutherans. There are heavily Hispanic and African immigrant Lutheran churches in Minnesota. I can't imagine even the olds out in rural areas where everyone has a last name that ends in -son or -sen would argue that these aren't "real" Lutherans. Wow. This is stunning me.

This is why I'm not joining any church linked to ethnic identity. The only standard should be affiliation. If you attend Church X, then you're part of it, if you don't, you aren't. Period. Emergents use no other standard, have absolutely no ties to ethnic background, and don't seem to be disproportionately of any ethnicity (aside from perhaps being more white) and do a pretty effective job at getting adherents to cut their ethnic background out from their constructed identity. And that's the only logical way for religion to work. The truth doesn't change for certain people based on which part of the world their ancestors were from.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Regarding Lutherans, I believe it would be so much nicer if they behaved similarly to us. So much potential there!

"The truth" is utter silliness, particularly the idea that you and I are able to determine what it is and even more so that our idea has to mesh exactly with a million other versions. No two people will view it as exactly the same.

[Simfan34]

If true, RIP cultural Catholicism, FF.

I wonder if this has to do with the jettisoning of anything worth taking cultural pride in in many Catholic parishes in favor of hand-raising and Marty Haugen 'music'.

I don't know if this is true, but I am more than happy to blame this for anything and everything.

[Cranberry]

Anyone is free to join the religion if they desire for whatever reason. However, Catholicism at its core must be attached to a cultural identity, especially in America. You may be somewhat right with Benedict as that he is from Bavaria which does have quite a few Catholics so it might have a local Catholic identity, but for descendants of immigrants to have an attachment to such a particular region of their home nation is odd. I understand Phil and myself and many others remain attached to Napoli, but that is a bit more unique in the sense that a huge portion of the immigrants are from there and neighboring towns. Even if descendants were to lose that eventually, they'd still have the national identity of Italy which remains Catholic. Germany is just a mush-up of a hundred different things in the center of Europe. It is a bit telling that Benedict is the only German pope since Martin Luther.

There are several heavily Catholic regions in Germany outside Bavaria, and these regions up until not too long in the past, and certainly up to the point the ancestors of German-Americans left Europe, placed a heavy emphasis on them being, as Catholics, different from the Prussian (and others) Protestants. The Augsburg Peace and the principle of cuius regio, eius religio had such a long lasting impact that basically up until World War II Germany was sharply divided between near fully Catholic areas (Bavaria, the Palatinate, Baden, the Rhineland, the Saarland) on the one hand and near fully Protestant areas on the other (Prussia, Saxony, the whole North and East). Secondly, I'd guess a few people with a German background have ancestors that originally came from Austria, but who would at the time of their migration obviously think of themselves as Germans; while being just as Catholic as any Italian or Irishman.

I do find that discussion quite interesting; and I agree about your views on the correlation between Cultural Catholicism and ethnicity. While I have obviously little to add on that in regards to America, I can say that this is also very much a thing back in Europe - in the sense that there is a Cultural Catholicism to several areas (Spain, France, Italy, Austria, Poland, Ireland) that does not necessarily correlate with actual exercise of beliefs.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

And that's the only logical way for religion to work.

I mean not according to most reputable sociologists but whatever.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Anyone is free to join the religion if they desire for whatever reason. However, Catholicism at its core must be attached to a cultural identity, especially in America. You may be somewhat right with Benedict as that he is from Bavaria which does have quite a few Catholics so it might have a local Catholic identity, but for descendants of immigrants to have an attachment to such a particular region of their home nation is odd. I understand Phil and myself and many others remain attached to Napoli, but that is a bit more unique in the sense that a huge portion of the immigrants are from there and neighboring towns. Even if descendants were to lose that eventually, they'd still have the national identity of Italy which remains Catholic. Germany is just a mush-up of a hundred different things in the center of Europe. It is a bit telling that Benedict is the only German pope since Martin Luther.

There are several heavily Catholic regions in Germany outside Bavaria, and these regions up until not too long in the past, and certainly up to the point the ancestors of German-Americans left Europe, placed a heavy emphasis on them being, as Catholics, different from the Prussian (and others) Protestants. The Augsburg Peace and the principle of cuius regio, eius religio had such a long lasting impact that basically up until World War II Germany was sharply divided between near fully Catholic areas (Bavaria, the Palatinate, Baden, the Rhineland, the Saarland) on the one hand and near fully Protestant areas on the other (Prussia, Saxony, the whole North and East). Secondly, I'd guess a few people with a German background have ancestors that originally came from Austria, but who would at the time of their migration obviously think of themselves as Germans; while being just as Catholic as any Italian or Irishman.

I do find that discussion quite interesting; and I agree about your views on the correlation between Cultural Catholicism and ethnicity. While I have obviously little to add on that in regards to America, I can say that this is also very much a thing back in Europe - in the sense that there is a Cultural Catholicism to several areas (Spain, France, Italy, Austria, Poland, Ireland) that does not necessarily correlate with actual exercise of beliefs.

Appreciate your thoughtful response. Do you think a significant number of German-Americans are Catholic though? Maybe I'm not familiar with the immigrant base, but I'd be stunned if it were even close to a majority. When they move into a German community in America, does the Church become the center part of the community? It really can't if there are a mix of groups identifying in different ways. Other groups have everyone in their community under the same extending umbrella.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

And that's the only logical way for religion to work.

I mean not according to most reputable sociologists but whatever.

I have a feeling the woman who frequently preaches at my church who has a PhD in Sociology would disagree...

But actually I was wondering what you'd say about the "Germans aren't real Catholics" talk. Because that struck me as something that you would find rather offensive and disagree strongly with. I mean seriously, the Northeast Philly pastor at my church is more Catholic than most weekly Mass congregants in the state or the rosary praying olds in old German towns? I seriously can't comprehend the thought process there. It's pure absurdity.

And as far as the sociologist talk goes, is the view of most of them actually along the lines of "NO CONVERSIONS. EVER." and believing that everyone should be stuck in whatever they're born into and anyone ever leaving is destructive to society? That view is not only extremely authoritarian but could also be seen as racist for reasons I'll cover in a follow up post. And the what about such traditions like the emergent church that are completely separated from ethnicity? How do they fit in?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Regarding Lutherans, I believe it would be so much nicer if they behaved similarly to us. So much potential there!

I'm not too sure what you mean by "potential". But let's stop and consider the implications of this. You are basically saying that Lutherans should more excluding of people who aren't of Scandinavian heritage. And in my example, many Hispanics and Africans...

Now I think it's pretty clear why this way of thinking wouldn't go over well, nor should it. "You must be a Nordic white to be a True Lutheran^TM is a mindset that I think it's really obvious why it'll never be endorsed or become widespread.

"The truth" is utter silliness, particularly the idea that you and I are able to determine what it is and even more so that our idea has to mesh exactly with a million other versions. No two people will view it as exactly the same.

Of course. Which is why the thousands of denominations that already exist will keep growing. That's obvious.

But what one person interprets as the truth shouldn't be based exclusively on where their ancestors lived. Or even primarily. Especially in a developed country in 2015.

Anyone is free to join the religion if they desire for whatever reason. However, Catholicism at its core must be attached to a cultural identity, especially in America. You may be somewhat right with Benedict as that he is from Bavaria which does have quite a few Catholics so it might have a local Catholic identity, but for descendants of immigrants to have an attachment to such a particular region of their home nation is odd. I understand Phil and myself and many others remain attached to Napoli, but that is a bit more unique in the sense that a huge portion of the immigrants are from there and neighboring towns. Even if descendants were to lose that eventually, they'd still have the national identity of Italy which remains Catholic. Germany is just a mush-up of a hundred different things in the center of Europe. It is a bit telling that Benedict is the only German pope since Martin Luther.

There are several heavily Catholic regions in Germany outside Bavaria, and these regions up until not too long in the past, and certainly up to the point the ancestors of German-Americans left Europe, placed a heavy emphasis on them being, as Catholics, different from the Prussian (and others) Protestants. The Augsburg Peace and the principle of cuius regio, eius religio had such a long lasting impact that basically up until World War II Germany was sharply divided between near fully Catholic areas (Bavaria, the Palatinate, Baden, the Rhineland, the Saarland) on the one hand and near fully Protestant areas on the other (Prussia, Saxony, the whole North and East). Secondly, I'd guess a few people with a German background have ancestors that originally came from Austria, but who would at the time of their migration obviously think of themselves as Germans; while being just as Catholic as any Italian or Irishman.

I do find that discussion quite interesting; and I agree about your views on the correlation between Cultural Catholicism and ethnicity. While I have obviously little to add on that in regards to America, I can say that this is also very much a thing back in Europe - in the sense that there is a Cultural Catholicism to several areas (Spain, France, Italy, Austria, Poland, Ireland) that does not necessarily correlate with actual exercise of beliefs.

Appreciate your thoughtful response. Do you think a significant number of German-Americans are Catholic though? Maybe I'm not familiar with the immigrant base, but I'd be stunned if it were even close to a majority. When they move into a German community in America, does the Church become the center part of the community? It really can't if there are a mix of groups identifying in different ways. Other groups have everyone in their community under the same extending umbrella.

Like I said, it depends on region. Per ARDA, the four most Catholic counties in Minnesota are Red Lake, Stearns, Morrison and Brown. Stearns and Brown are two of the most German places in the state, and Brown is considered the hotbed of German heritage in the entire Midwest.

The biggest problem with trying to identify Germans and pigeonhole them into Catholic and Protestant categories is there aren't very many pure Germans in the country, and in the region not very many people of purely Catholic or Protestant ancestry. I mean take me for example. I don't know where my German ancestors came from, but they apparently about half Lutheran and half Catholic. My father's side of the family is predominately Lutheran (but not in the extended family, since her son with the most kids converted to an evangelical denomination), from both German and Swedish. My mother's side is half German Catholic and half Swedish Baptist. The whole family was raised Catholic, but there is now more practicing Protestants on that side of the family than Catholics. Which is part of why I have such a hard time comprehending this premise, since my family is so split up and varied and there's hardly a common religious thread amongst us, and I'm not exactly some bizarre anomaly. People like me are everywhere in the US.

But whatever the case, there are many Catholic universities in Minnesota and especially around the German areas near St. Cloud. Now can you see the issue with stating that people like Northeast Philly pastor and Tom Tancredo (who is an evangelical Presbyterian convert), are more Catholic than the people actually practicing Catholicism in that area, most since birth? Just because German Catholics here are quite prone to convert doesn't change that most of the Catholics here still have been their whole lives.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Regarding Lutherans, I believe it would be so much nicer if they behaved similarly to us. So much potential there!

I'm not too sure what you mean by "potential". But let's stop and consider the implications of this. You are basically saying that Lutherans should more excluding of people who aren't of Scandinavian heritage. And in my example, many Hispanics and Africans...

Now I think it's pretty clear why this way of thinking wouldn't go over well, nor should it. "You must be a Nordic white to be a True Lutheran^TM is a mindset that I think it's really obvious why it'll never be endorsed or become widespread.

I'm certainly not saying exclude. Hispanics should have their unique Catholic churches. African-Americans have their hugely historic Methodist and Baptist Churches. No one should be excluded anywhere. It's just silliness to decide "Oh, I don't want to be a part of this because of x, y, and z disagreements of ideology" and leave the denomination. Also, when people are assimilated with the remaining groups in the country, that culture can really drop off or disappear, which is a travesty for everyone. The whole society loses something special.

With regard to the second quote, I find it absurd that thousands of denominations need to exist to say the same exact thing, except with "but we don't so-and-so" or "we also so-and-so". Your interpretation of the truth is still different from everyone in your denomination. It doesn't even have to remotely align with your denomination. I don't see why it matters so much what the truth is...

I don't see the need to continue this unless you really want to call out something in this post. We won't see eye-to-eye on this, and you don't feel attached to any of your ethnicities like much of the Midwest. As a result, I'm very happy that you can form your own thing (even though I'm not sure playing Ingress while in mass is something I seriously support). Maybe one day, it can be a culture of its own for people of your background though I'm not sure that's what you'd like. If Madeline would like to comment, you can continue in that direction.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Regarding Lutherans, I believe it would be so much nicer if they behaved similarly to us. So much potential there!

I'm not too sure what you mean by "potential". But let's stop and consider the implications of this. You are basically saying that Lutherans should more excluding of people who aren't of Scandinavian heritage. And in my example, many Hispanics and Africans...

Now I think it's pretty clear why this way of thinking wouldn't go over well, nor should it. "You must be a Nordic white to be a True Lutheran^TM is a mindset that I think it's really obvious why it'll never be endorsed or become widespread.

I'm certainly not saying exclude. Hispanics should have their unique Catholic churches. African-Americans have their hugely historic Methodist and Baptist Churches. No one should be excluded anywhere. It's just silliness to decide "Oh, I don't want to be a part of this because of x, y, and z disagreements of ideology" and leave the denomination. Also, when people are assimilated with the remaining groups in the country, that culture can really drop off or disappear, which is a travesty for everyone. The whole society loses something special.

This is what I mean about authoritarian. You are basically saying people from these cultures and ethnicities don't have a right to make their own choices and decisions. It's akin to a caste system.

Also why is leaving a church because you disagree with the ideology any more silly than leaving a political party because you disagree with it?

With regard to the second quote, I find it absurd that thousands of denominations need to exist to say the same exact thing, except with "but we don't so-and-so" or "we also so-and-so". Your interpretation of the truth is still different from everyone in your denomination. It doesn't even have to remotely align with your denomination. I don't see why it matters so much what the truth is...

Because some people are pretty uncomfortable professing things they vehemently don't believe in, or if they end up believing in something that's polar opposite. Imagine if someone raised in Mormonism decides it's just as silly as most people not raised in Mormonism think it is. Or conversely someone who for whatever reason decides Mormonism is probably true, they do get plenty of converts after all. Then it would be pretty illogical to not join the LDS church. Should people raised in prosperity theology preaching churches who find the theology repulsive not leave?

I don't see the need to continue this unless you really want to call out something in this post. We won't see eye-to-eye on this, and you don't feel attached to any of your ethnicities like much of the Midwest. As a result, I'm very happy that you can form your own thing (even though I'm not sure playing Ingress while in mass is something I seriously support). Maybe one day, it can be a culture of its own for people of your background though I'm not sure that's what you'd like. If Madeline would like to comment, you can continue in that direction.

I don't go to mass.

I fail to see how this isn't a culture. I've made a point many times about how my scene is a culture too despite how flippant many are of it, and thus it's not surprising that people who get involved in it basically completely throw away their ethnic cultures and what they were raised in. As an also synthetic non-ethnic tied culture, the emergent church fits it well (assuming you aren't just some jaded atheist like ~50% of the people in the scene). What I like about both is it something that you choose. Why one shouldn't feel more tied to things that they choose than what is chosen for you. I mean that strikes me as just plain common sense.

Also this makes me very happy to be from the Upper Midwest where my mindset is pretty much dominant (although obviously in many locations in a far more conservative version) than somewhere where that's not the case because quite frankly I find this train of thought to be F[INKS]ING TERRIFYING.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

I don't have a problem with authoritarian especially if no one if forceful about it; it's just norms that should be adhered to. People clearly need less choices as well, but that's a debate for another time.

Since it was proposed to me, you know I still have yet to leave the GOP over my many disagreements. It doesn't stop me from believing and voting however I want. We joke about a radicalized GOP, but it's not like they are that different from Democrats. It's not as if I dropped everything and decided to become a Communist. Then a conversion might make some sensibility, but c'mon - Episcopalian vs. Catholic? What's the difference except that my grandparents built the Churches of one. Sure the former has some nice things (as do Catholics I guess), but it's not mine.

As for your final point, I do believe you have the semblance of a culture, but I believe it really needs to have a lasting impact that many are aware of for it to be extremely meaningful for society at-large to recognize it. Certainly not a knock. I don't doubt that is could happen, but if it ended today, what would be its history? A loose definition of culture, sure, but I'm looking for something a bit deeper.

Goodnight

[TJ in Oregon]

Oh boy, so much in this thread, where should I start?

For most of our nation's history Catholicism was culturally connected to a variety of immigrants. People fled from some forgotten slice of Europe to come over to American cities that were settled along ethnic lines. The ethnic neighborhoods were often nearby heavy industrial areas which provided a source of employment, but evenmoreso they were build around the Church as the center of their community. The Catholic immigrants were often discriminated against in employment and socially stigmatized even if there was no language barrier (and yes, that included German Catholics). That social structure led to an identity as ___-American Catholics often said without the -American attached. This structure existed primarily in the industrial cities in the Northeast and Rust Belt and still exists to this day in places like Northern Ohio where I am from.

In the Upper Midwest, where a majority of the Catholic settlers were Germans, particularly farmers, integration around the time of the World Wars led to less of an ethnic identity to go along with the religious one. The late 1800s were fraught with numerous political and cultural feuds between German and Anglo Midwesterners but the complete separation of identity died quicker here than in the cities. There are "cultural Catholics" in the Upper Midwest but not necessarily as a separate ethnic group. For instance, practically nowhere in the US has more Friday fish fries than Wisconsin. That's a pretty obvious piece of cultural Catholicism. Unlike the picture BRTD paints, there are still a whole lot of people who identify as vaguely Catholic because their grandparents actually were and the identity remains even if it is devoid of real meaning today.

Weirdly though, I do find myself agreeing with BRTD an awful lot here. I completely disagree with him than cultural/ethnic identities are bad and I love the idea of ethnic neighborhoods still built around a Church wherever they still exist unscathed by time. But the Church is not meant to be an ethnic group; the Church is meant to be Catholic. The Church's purpose is to serve Christ rather than to have a beer and brat festival (again I am a German Catholic and that's what we do). There's nothing wrong with having a beer and brat festival and though my extended family would probably drag me there I would probably even enjoy it. Catholicism, unlike Judaism, is not an inherited genetic trait though parents often pass it to their children for obvious reasons. One of the major repeated decisions made in the Acts of the Apostles (and the Gospels and almost the entire New Testament really) is that the Church needs to be spread outside that Jewish lineage. The entire point was to go and make disciples of every nation, not to dig into a stone bunker with the Irish, Polish, and Italians and call it a day.

[TJ in Oregon]

Anyone is free to join the religion if they desire for whatever reason. However, Catholicism at its core must be attached to a cultural identity, especially in America. You may be somewhat right with Benedict as that he is from Bavaria which does have quite a few Catholics so it might have a local Catholic identity, but for descendants of immigrants to have an attachment to such a particular region of their home nation is odd. I understand Phil and myself and many others remain attached to Napoli, but that is a bit more unique in the sense that a huge portion of the immigrants are from there and neighboring towns. Even if descendants were to lose that eventually, they'd still have the national identity of Italy which remains Catholic. Germany is just a mush-up of a hundred different things in the center of Europe. It is a bit telling that Benedict is the only German pope since Martin Luther.

There are several heavily Catholic regions in Germany outside Bavaria, and these regions up until not too long in the past, and certainly up to the point the ancestors of German-Americans left Europe, placed a heavy emphasis on them being, as Catholics, different from the Prussian (and others) Protestants. The Augsburg Peace and the principle of cuius regio, eius religio had such a long lasting impact that basically up until World War II Germany was sharply divided between near fully Catholic areas (Bavaria, the Palatinate, Baden, the Rhineland, the Saarland) on the one hand and near fully Protestant areas on the other (Prussia, Saxony, the whole North and East). Secondly, I'd guess a few people with a German background have ancestors that originally came from Austria, but who would at the time of their migration obviously think of themselves as Germans; while being just as Catholic as any Italian or Irishman.

I do find that discussion quite interesting; and I agree about your views on the correlation between Cultural Catholicism and ethnicity. While I have obviously little to add on that in regards to America, I can say that this is also very much a thing back in Europe - in the sense that there is a Cultural Catholicism to several areas (Spain, France, Italy, Austria, Poland, Ireland) that does not necessarily correlate with actual exercise of beliefs.

Appreciate your thoughtful response. Do you think a significant number of German-Americans are Catholic though? Maybe I'm not familiar with the immigrant base, but I'd be stunned if it were even close to a majority. When they move into a German community in America, does the Church become the center part of the community? It really can't if there are a mix of groups identifying in different ways. Other groups have everyone in their community under the same extending umbrella.

Yes. It's not a majority but it's a significant amount and in many places is a large majority. In my hometown in Northern Ohio there are 3 Catholic Churches that were built in the 1800s: one German, one Irish and Italian, and one for everyone else. The German one had all non-Latin speaking in German rather than English until WWII. When my grandparents decided to leave that parish for the Irish/Italian one (my grandmother is half Irish so they could get away with it) they were specifically told that since it was a German parish they could not rejoin if they left because they spoke English rather than German at home. There are tiny villages scattered all across the midwest that are over 90% German and over 90% Catholic.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

In the Upper Midwest, where a majority of the Catholic settlers were Germans, particularly farmers, integration around the time of the World Wars led to less of an ethnic identity to go along with the religious one. The late 1800s were fraught with numerous political and cultural feuds between German and Anglo Midwesterners but the complete separation of identity died quicker here than in the cities. There are "cultural Catholics" in the Upper Midwest but not necessarily as a separate ethnic group. For instance, practically nowhere in the US has more Friday fish fries than Wisconsin. That's a pretty obvious piece of cultural Catholicism. Unlike the picture BRTD paints, there are still a whole lot of people who identify as vaguely Catholic because their grandparents actually were and the identity remains even if it is devoid of real meaning today.

The "fish fries" point actually doesn't show cultural Catholicism, but people actually practicing. What I am basically saying is that the idea of a "Catholic atheist", or that it's akin to an ethnicity ala Judaism would be considered pretty absurd in this region. Seriously try telling a St. Louis Park Jew that being born Catholic is just like how they are a Jew. If people here drop out, they basically leave. Think of the people who live on the Madison isthmus or the lakeshore in northern Milwaukee. It's a safe bet that outside of the few actual practicing Catholics there (I suppose there might be a non-negligible number in Milwaukee, even that part), none identify as such, or would answer "Catholic" if the question was asked on the Census. Much like south Minneapolis or inner-city Des Moines. But even outside of those obvious ultra-liberal inner city areas it's still quite weak, I can't think of any Twin Cities suburbs that anyone would describe as heavily "culturally Catholic". And in the cities in the Dakotas (maybe not some remote towns where there are certain parishes where some people have gone their entire lives), the denominational loyalty is hilariously weak. Where I grew up someone "converting" just because they moved to a different part of town and going to a Catholic church was now more inconvenient wasn't an absurd scenario to envision at all, rather something that frequently happened. There was absolutely no Catholic/Protestant division in my high school, no one ever saw this as something that divided people or formed a key part of their identity as opposed to the things cliques are based on, and in my high school it wasn't even uncommon for people who were still teenagers to actually already convert on their own (think the daughter on The Good Wife). You might hear about North Dakota is such a religious place, but this does not translate to strong denominational loyalty.

Something else I've noticed here, if someone is from a diluted background, they might vaguely affiliate with something like in the cultural sense, but not the thing that they're raised in. So if Parent A is one denomination and Parent B is another, and they're raised in Parent A's but decide later they prefer Parent B's, then Parent B's becomes what they'll claim as a nominal affiliation even if it's not exactly what they were raised in. Although honestly this doesn't exactly contradict what smilio is promoting, after that's just as much a part of their heritage just as Obama is just as white as he is black.

Another thing too about the emergents (and I'm willing to bet, tons of other evangelicals), there's many ex-Catholics here in them, but I don't think many if any actually directly converted from Catholicism. No one went to Mass regularly and then one week decided to go check out an emergent church instead and preferred it. Nah these are all people who completely fell out of it, went unaffiliated, and then had a calling back in young adulthood (mirrors that Northeast Philly pastor's story almost exactly). And that's not likely to happen if you still retain some nominal affiliation with Catholicism.

[TJ in Oregon]

BRTD I know dozens of people, even in the ultra-liberal isthmus, who still identify as Catholic but aren't practicing. It is probably less common here than in Cleveland but there are no shortage. Not every generic liberal is a member of the hipster antifada. Many are apathetic other than hating Scott Walker.

And fish fries are not a religious practice. Plenty of people go to them who don't go to Mass, and heck, often aren't even Catholic.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I don't have a problem with authoritarian especially if no one if forceful about it; it's just norms that should be adhered to. People clearly need less choices as well, but that's a debate for another time.

Since it was proposed to me, you know I still have yet to leave the GOP over my many disagreements. It doesn't stop me from believing and voting however I want. We joke about a radicalized GOP, but it's not like they are that different from Democrats. It's not as if I dropped everything and decided to become a Communist. Then a conversion might make some sensibility, but c'mon - Episcopalian vs. Catholic? What's the difference except that my grandparents built the Churches of one. Sure the former has some nice things (as do Catholics I guess), but it's not mine.

As for your final point, I do believe you have the semblance of a culture, but I believe it really needs to have a lasting impact that many are aware of for it to be extremely meaningful for society at-large to recognize it. Certainly not a knock. I don't doubt that is could happen, but if it ended today, what would be its history? A loose definition of culture, sure, but I'm looking for something a bit deeper.

Goodnight

OK so in regards to the Episcopalian vs. Catholic thing, what is the difference? Well, women priests, attitudes on gays, birth control...

Now in the past you've been pretty flippant in dismissing this issues, but you fail to realize that to many people they are really, really important.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

BRTD I know dozens of people, even in the ultra-liberal isthmus, who still identify as Catholic but aren't practicing. It is probably less common here than in Cleveland but there are no shortage. Not every generic liberal is a member of the hipster antifada. Many are apathetic other than hating Scott Walker.

And fish fries are not a religious practice. Plenty of people go to them who don't go to Mass, and heck, often aren't even Catholic.

So then either Minneapolis actually is pretty different than Madison, or I hang out with a very narrow group of people in general. Although it's possible Catholicism has a lot more stigma in Minnesota. 2012 wasn't that long ago.

And I'm still pretty confident in saying that these types in Madison do not compromise "almost everyone" who was raised Catholic, or even a majority, which is what many of the staunch defenders of "cultural Catholicism" seems to think is the case.

Have you ever met anyone who basically chooses a cultural affiliation from a different part of the family than the one they were raised in like I described above? It honestly wasn't until I started talking to some people on Atlas that I thought anyone would even find that odd or unusual...

[TJ in Oregon]

BRTD I know dozens of people, even in the ultra-liberal isthmus, who still identify as Catholic but aren't practicing. It is probably less common here than in Cleveland but there are no shortage. Not every generic liberal is a member of the hipster antifada. Many are apathetic other than hating Scott Walker.

And fish fries are not a religious practice. Plenty of people go to them who don't go to Mass, and heck, often aren't even Catholic.

So then either Minneapolis actually is pretty different than Madison, or I hang out with a very narrow group of people in general. Although it's possible Catholicism has a lot more stigma in Minnesota. 2012 wasn't that long ago.

And I'm still pretty confident in saying that these types in Madison do not compromise "almost everyone" who was raised Catholic, or even a majority, which is what many of the staunch defenders of "cultural Catholicism" seems to think is the case.

Have you ever met anyone who basically chooses a cultural affiliation from a different part of the family than the one they were raised in like I described above? It honestly wasn't until I started talking to some people on Atlas that I thought anyone would even find that odd or unusual...

I have met people before with parents of two different denominations who choose the religion of the parent in which they were not raised. I wouldn't say it's common but it's not weird either.

I do think the majority of people raised Catholic still identify as such even in ultra liberal places like the Isthmus of Madison (and in north shore MKE without a doubt). Most will tell you they're sort of Catholic or something along those lines but when presented with a form with boxes will check the Catholic box. Remember BRTD you're hipster Christianity subculture has an extreme bias toward people who actually do stop identifying as Catholic because you have a protestant church. For a counterexample, I personally know way way more converts to Catholicism than is statistically representative because of selection bias.

[tpfkaw]

When I was a kid, it was always nice when spring rolled around and the school cafeteria would serve fish sticks on Fridays, because it was one of the few edible things they ever made.

I only just now realized that this was to accommodate the observant Catholics in my class. So far from "cultural Catholicism" being dead, I (both parents Catholic, live in predominantly Catholic area, but not raised with any religion) participated in "cultural Catholicism" without even knowing it!

(Do people in places without a lot of Catholics really not eat fish sticks?)

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

And that's the only logical way for religion to work.

I mean not according to most reputable sociologists but whatever.

I have a feeling the woman who frequently preaches at my church who has a PhD in Sociology would disagree...

She's free to disagree, but she's likely aware that in sociology of religion the idea that religion (usually) operates or ought to operate entirely separately from and orthogonally to family and cultural background is extremely atypical.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, I'm in agreement with you on that.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't know much about the sociology surrounding subcultural groups that operate without reference to transgenerational cultural transmission or the family unit, so I can't really answer this question.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

BRTD I know dozens of people, even in the ultra-liberal isthmus, who still identify as Catholic but aren't practicing. It is probably less common here than in Cleveland but there are no shortage. Not every generic liberal is a member of the hipster antifada. Many are apathetic other than hating Scott Walker.

And fish fries are not a religious practice. Plenty of people go to them who don't go to Mass, and heck, often aren't even Catholic.

So then either Minneapolis actually is pretty different than Madison, or I hang out with a very narrow group of people in general. Although it's possible Catholicism has a lot more stigma in Minnesota. 2012 wasn't that long ago.

And I'm still pretty confident in saying that these types in Madison do not compromise "almost everyone" who was raised Catholic, or even a majority, which is what many of the staunch defenders of "cultural Catholicism" seems to think is the case.

Have you ever met anyone who basically chooses a cultural affiliation from a different part of the family than the one they were raised in like I described above? It honestly wasn't until I started talking to some people on Atlas that I thought anyone would even find that odd or unusual...

I have met people before with parents of two different denominations who choose the religion of the parent in which they were not raised. I wouldn't say it's common but it's not weird either.

I do think the majority of people raised Catholic still identify as such even in ultra liberal places like the Isthmus of Madison (and in north shore MKE without a doubt). Most will tell you they're sort of Catholic or something along those lines but when presented with a form with boxes will check the Catholic box. Remember BRTD you're hipster Christianity subculture has an extreme bias toward people who actually do stop identifying as Catholic because you have a protestant church. For a counterexample, I personally know way way more converts to Catholicism than is statistically representative because of selection bias.

But you got to remember that: 1-I wasn't really involved in the hipster Christianity stuff until 2011 and 2-as stated before ~50% of the people in the scene and who go to things like Dude Fest are really jaded and pissy atheists.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

And that's the only logical way for religion to work.

I mean not according to most reputable sociologists but whatever.

I have a feeling the woman who frequently preaches at my church who has a PhD in Sociology would disagree...

She's free to disagree, but she's likely aware that in sociology of religion the idea that religion (usually) operates or ought to operate entirely separately from and orthogonally to family and cultural background is extremely atypical.

I'm just talking in terms of what she would prefer as opposed to what the truth is.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No.

That's honestly the only real conclusion I can see from this type of thought process though, and is basically advocated by smilo above.