>Over at Unlocked Wordhoard, I made the comment that I’m “culturally Catholic, but not actively religious.” You don’t really need to read the whole comment, but I link to it as a reference and courtesy. To give you some context: it’s a small part of a long-winded comment in which I try to explain where I was coming from in a previous post because Dr. Nokes misunderstood it. That misunderstanding I attribute to bad writing on my part — assuming all of my audience has deep knowledge about where I’m coming from.
But that’s not the point here. Rather, right after writing that comment, I turned to Bullock (or rather, called from my study to his) and asked, “Can a person be ‘culturally Catholic’?” And his response was an immediate: “Yes. You are.”
But what do you think? Is there such a thing as “culturally Catholic”?
Btw, this post may be confusing to readers who remember the two or three times I’ve called myself an “atheist.” I really shouldn’t toss that word around since it implies an active disbelief in a god or gods (not to mention the connotations it has for some people of being actively anti-religion) and I’m just not that adamant. Conflicted, maybe, but not adamant. “Agnostic” is probably more accurate, but I have a hard time with the wishy-washy connotations that term has developed alongside its more precise meaning. It’s not like I’m flaky and can’t make up my mind or something. While it’s true that I’m “without knowledge,” I choose not to practice any kind of devotion, and I do so rather continuously, day after day, with a lot of thought and sometimes even angst involved. And yup, there goes my chance at ever running for higher office in the U.S. (Or can I claim plausible deniability with an anonymous blog? Te-hee!) Not that I was planning on it anyway.