Anne Rice not a "Christian" but still "committed to Christ"

[lpetrich]

Some years back, Interview with a Vampire author Anne Rice made a much-advertised return to Catholicism. But now, in Facebook | Anne Rice (http://www.facebook.com/annericefanpage):
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.

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.

h/t to Friendly Atheist by @hemantsblog » Anne Rice Still Believes in Nonsense (http://friendlyatheist.com/2010/07/29/anne-rice-still-believes-in-nonsense)

Many liberal Xians would likely agree with many of Ms. Rice's sentiments, but they have not been very willing to challenge the Religious Right in public. So they end up letting the Religious Right be the public face of their religion.

[Ray Moscow]

OK, she didn't think of any of this before joining back up with the Catlick church?

Better late than never, I suppose.

[Ray Moscow]

Hemant: In other words, she’s not a “Christian.” She’s a “follower of Christ.” Don’t you feel better now…?

This isn’t really news to me.

I’m thrilled she’s not anti-gay/feminist/science/etc. But educated people like her don’t get bonus points for being tolerant and rational. That’s just to be expected.

When she tells me she’s stopped believing in God, the Resurrection, the Virgin Birth, and the existence of Heaven and Hell, I’ll pay more attention.

Well, to be fair there some non-religious humanists who do admire Jesus -- Richard Dawkins, for instance.

I suppose her use of the "Christ" title might mean that she still believes Jesus is especially divine or something, which makes her "Christian" by the usual standard.

[Monad]

Some years back, Interview with a Vampire author Anne Rice made a much-advertised return to Catholicism. But now, in Facebook | Anne Rice (http://www.facebook.com/annericefanpage):
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.

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.

h/t to Friendly Atheist by @hemantsblog » Anne Rice Still Believes in Nonsense (http://friendlyatheist.com/2010/07/29/anne-rice-still-believes-in-nonsense)

Many liberal Xians would likely agree with many of Ms. Rice's sentiments, but they have not been very willing to challenge the Religious Right in public. So they end up letting the Religious Right be the public face of their religion.

Good for her - took long enough but a public statement like this does mean something

[Notta]

I have no reason to pay attention to the ramblings of a woman who is a faithful Catholic, leaves the church and rails against it, makes a very public return to the church and writes books about it, and now leaves it again while still proclaiming to be a christian.

I've always thought she had unresolved emotional issues.....

[Bane]

That's quite possible--I think she might desperately want to believe, but find religion pretty damn abhorrent.

[LoneWolf]

That's quite possible--I think she might desperately want to believe, but find religion pretty damn abhorrent.

That might very well be. I can't be too judgmental of her because I became a born again Christian in my early 20s and later abandoned it.

I still don't get if she think Christ is the Son of God though or just a teacher.

[Monad]

That's quite possible--I think she might desperately want to believe, but find religion pretty damn abhorrent.

That might very well be. I can't be too judgmental of her because I became a born again Christian in my early 20s and later abandoned it.

Exactly - and she's an ex Catholic - I know what sort of hold that has on people. Anyway who doesn't have issues? It's admirable that she has struggled with this in her conscience and made a public statement drawing a line - particularly in the context of what is happening globally in Catholicism it is significant. That she cannot yet make the leap to Atheism or Agnosticism (if she ever would) seems secondary to me - people are complicated, things don't happen that way.

[Bane]

That's quite possible--I think she might desperately want to believe, but find religion pretty damn abhorrent.

That might very well be. I can't be too judgmental of her because I became a born again Christian in my early 20s and later abandoned it.

Exactly - and she's an ex Catholic - I know what sort of hold that has on people. Anyway who doesn't have issues? It's admirable that she has struggled with this in her conscience and made a public statement drawing a line - particularly in the context of what is happening globally in Catholicism it is significant. That she cannot yet make the leap to Atheism or Agnosticism (if she ever would) seems secondary to me - people are complicated, things don't happen that way.

Oh yeah. Catholicism sounds particularly insidious, but Abrahamic religions are pretty big on guilt and terror.

[Ray Moscow]

I blame Memnoch and his adversary Jebus. Up till then, her books were actually pretty good. After they showed up, she and her books went downhill fast.

[Clivedurdle]

Spike Milligan - once a catholic....

[BioBeing]

So, she doesn't have a religion, just a personal relationship with Jesus? Don't we hear this all the time from believers?

I think that this statement of hers is both good and meh.

Good in that she is distancing herself from the more fundamentalist aspects of the religion. The more liberal Christians that speak up and do that, the better.

meh in that she is still a Christian, whatever she says she is. If you follow Christ as your God, you are pretty much a Christian.

Although this brings me to something I've said time and time again: Christians need to split into several groups, with different names. There needs to be a "name" for people people like Rice that distinguishes them from people like Fred Phelps and Ted Haggard. That way, we'd see that there were way less "Christians" than either side actually claims right now (whichever side got to keep that particular moniker).

[David B]

So, she doesn't have a religion, just a personal relationship with Jesus? Don't we hear this all the time from believers?

I think that this statement of hers is both good and meh.

Good in that she is distancing herself from the more fundamentalist aspects of the religion. The more liberal Christians that speak up and do that, the better.

meh in that she is still a Christian, whatever she says she is. If you follow Christ as your God, you are pretty much a Christian.

Although this brings me to something I've said time and time again: Christians need to split into several groups, with different names. There needs to be a "name" for people people like Rice that distinguishes them from people like Fred Phelps and Ted Haggard. That way, we'd see that there were way less "Christians" than either side actually claims right now (whichever side got to keep that particular moniker).

It's also possible to see Jesus as a great secular moral teacher. If you cherry-pick enough. Some people do. :bang:

http://www.atheists-for-jesus.com/about.php

David

[BioBeing]

Right - but I didn't see where Anne Rice was giving up on the God bit, just the religion.

[Ray Moscow]

In Japan they call themselves "no church Christians" (or that's how I've seen it translated, at least). There are quite a few of them, maybe 1% of the population (IIRC).

[Politesse]

Although this brings me to something I've said time and time again: Christians need to split into several groups, with different names. There needs to be a "name" for people people like Rice that distinguishes them from people like Fred Phelps and Ted Haggard. That way, we'd see that there were way less "Christians" than either side actually claims right now (whichever side got to keep that particular moniker).
I'd be a part of it. But why should we be the ones to give up the name? The fundagelicals are the new kids on the block. And therein lies the problem, since they aren't ever going to admit just what a recent development their supposedly conservative faith actually is. Other Christians refer to themselves "mainstream Christians" or "traditional Christians" on occasion, though the fundies have pirated both of those as well, generating the same confusion. On the edge there are "progressive Christians", "gnostic Christians", and "the unchurched". "New Christianity", in some circles. I think a lot of people have given up on those altogether and fallen back to just "Christian" or "Spiritual", with further explanation as necessary.

[BioBeing]

Although this brings me to something I've said time and time again: Christians need to split into several groups, with different names. There needs to be a "name" for people people like Rice that distinguishes them from people like Fred Phelps and Ted Haggard. That way, we'd see that there were way less "Christians" than either side actually claims right now (whichever side got to keep that particular moniker).
I'd be a part of it. But why should we be the ones to give up the name? The fundagelicals are the new kids on the block. And therein lies the problem.
Well, I'm not saying who should give up the name! I'll let you fight that out between yourselves! :D

[Politesse]

Although this brings me to something I've said time and time again: Christians need to split into several groups, with different names. There needs to be a "name" for people people like Rice that distinguishes them from people like Fred Phelps and Ted Haggard. That way, we'd see that there were way less "Christians" than either side actually claims right now (whichever side got to keep that particular moniker).
I'd be a part of it. But why should we be the ones to give up the name? The fundagelicals are the new kids on the block. And therein lies the problem.
Well, I'm not saying who should give up the name! I'll let you fight that out between yourselves! :DI think a lot of "Christians" would agree with you, is what I'm saying. It's just that your average ELCA Lutheran or Presbyterian or Eastern Orthodox monk is not about to surrender the name, and neither are the loonies, or it would have happened already. In the past, newer splinter groups have tended to lose the moniker whether they want to or not- for the most part, only Mormons name themselves Christians, and only Anglicans name themselves Catholics, and so forth. I don't think it's going to happen with the conservative-evangelicals though, since they have the advantage of numbers, and domination of the media, and their stubborn determination to be perceived as leaping right from the pages of Paul's epistles, rather than the mad ravings of Hal Lindsey. And everyone else as liberal heretics.

[Rie]

But commited to Christ ??? Like me when at age 11 having her first orgasm clutching a crucifix? True. And my sisters were snortling in the dark. But it just crept up on me. It's a funny anecdote but I'm posting it as I believe there is something sick about 'love' of Christ.
I was a child but committing to a long ago would be prophet ?

[columbus]

I have no reason to pay attention to the ramblings of a woman who is a faithful Catholic, leaves the church and rails against it, makes a very public return to the church and writes books about it, and now leaves it again while still proclaiming to be a christian.

I've always thought she had unresolved emotional issues.....

Cynic that I am, this looks more like professional issues to me.:D I can't say that I really know a lot, as I have little interest in the personal lives of celebrities. But what it looks like to me is when her witch and vampire books were spectacularly successful she didn't need no stinkin' religion. When they started being less successful she repositioned herself in the market by getting right with God and publicly announcing her RCC christianity. Becoming christian was generally a commercially successful move about then. Now that the RCC is the most reviled religious organization(amongst her potential customers) short of the Taliban, she is leaving it. While also getting another wave of publicity that might possibly help her low sales figures.

To be fair, it also possible that she is just another victim of Ratzinger's program to return the RCC to the Middle Ages. But let's face it "this quarrelsome, hostile, disputatious, and deservedly infamous group." didn't just get that way since she rejoined.

Tom

[Daydream]

It's about time she came to her senses! :rolling:

[Garnet]

I have no reason to pay attention to the ramblings of a woman who is a faithful Catholic, leaves the church and rails against it, makes a very public return to the church and writes books about it, and now leaves it again while still proclaiming to be a christian.

I've always thought she had unresolved emotional issues.....

Cynic that I am, this looks more like professional issues to me.:D I can't say that I really know a lot, as I have little interest in the personal lives of celebrities. But what it looks like to me is when her witch and vampire books were spectacularly successful she didn't need no stinkin' religion. When they started being less successful she repositioned herself in the market by getting right with God and publicly announcing her RCC christianity. Becoming christian was generally a commercially successful move about then. Now that the RCC is the most reviled religious organization(amongst her potential customers) short of the Taliban, she is leaving it. While also getting another wave of publicity that might possibly help her low sales figures.

To be fair, it also possible that she is just another victim of Ratzinger's program to return the RCC to the Middle Ages. But let's face it "this quarrelsome, hostile, disputatious, and deservedly infamous group." didn't just get that way since she rejoined.

Tom

^^^This. I've suspected all along that her reconversion was a matter of marketing.

[Notta]

I've suspected all along that her reconversion was a matter of marketing.Too bad her vampires weren't sparkly and attended high school with the werewolves. Then she'd REALLY have a franchise to exploit!

[Worldtraveller]

Although this brings me to something I've said time and time again: Christians need to split into several groups, with different names. There needs to be a "name" for people people like Rice that distinguishes them from people like Fred Phelps and Ted Haggard. That way, we'd see that there were way less "Christians" than either side actually claims right now (whichever side got to keep that particular moniker).
I'd be a part of it. But why should we be the ones to give up the name? The fundagelicals are the new kids on the block. And therein lies the problem.
Well, I'm not saying who should give up the name! I'll let you fight that out between yourselves! :D
This makes me really want to support the second amendment. ;)

[BioBeing]

Although this brings me to something I've said time and time again: Christians need to split into several groups, with different names. There needs to be a "name" for people people like Rice that distinguishes them from people like Fred Phelps and Ted Haggard. That way, we'd see that there were way less "Christians" than either side actually claims right now (whichever side got to keep that particular moniker).
I'd be a part of it. But why should we be the ones to give up the name? The fundagelicals are the new kids on the block. And therein lies the problem.
Well, I'm not saying who should give up the name! I'll let you fight that out between yourselves! :DI think a lot of "Christians" would agree with you, is what I'm saying. It's just that your average ELCA Lutheran or Presbyterian or Eastern Orthodox monk is not about to surrender the name, and neither are the loonies, or it would have happened already. In the past, newer splinter groups have tended to lose the moniker whether they want to or not- for the most part, only Mormons name themselves Christians, and only Anglicans name themselves Catholics, and so forth. I don't think it's going to happen with the conservative-evangelicals though, since they have the advantage of numbers, and domination of the media, and their stubborn determination to be perceived as leaping right from the pages of Paul's epistles, rather than the mad ravings of Hal Lindsey. And everyone else as liberal heretics.

Plus the Xian right nutters probably have all the guns too, right? ;)

[Politesse]

Plus the Xian right nutters probably have all the guns too, right? ;)
It's possible.

[columbus]

Plus the Xian right nutters probably have all the guns too, right? ;) As anyone who remembers Bob "rlogan" knows, this isn't true.

Tom

[Free in Freeport]

I concur. There's plenty of atheist gun nuts. They're just as scary as the christian ones.

[Bane]

Plus the Xian right nutters probably have all the guns too, right? ;)

Don't forget the "Reconstructionist" Pagans....there's a load of teabaggers for ya!

[bearshit]

Okay, I'm frankly a little relieved. I thought her vampire books were pretty fair fiction, but her life of Christ was HORRIBLE! And she was congratulating herself all over for writing her fiction and acting as if biblical scholarship was a no brainer. She is generally thought poorly of in New Orleans and though I do not suspect that her conversion was selfish, I am just as glad she's backed out again. Maybe her books will be good once more.