Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Catholic guilt?

264 replies

Felixfox · 22/05/2026 00:31

I only went to catholic school for 3 years (first 3 years of school) and I am CONSTANTLY feelingly guilty . Is it the school or just me? It was a terrible place. I remember one of the fathers coming into our classroom just as a pupil was leaving as he was feeling sick. Father promptly sent him back to his desk for us all to pray, this boy was physically sick but we had to carry on with the prayer. His parting shot was a question. To a bunch of 6 year olds. Do you all pray before bed at night? We all mumbled yes. To which he replied,’Good, because otherwise you will go to hell.’ It scared the crap out of me. V complicated story with parents and my brother and I going there. My mother was a nun and left
’God will never forgive you’ and so maybe to usage some hideous and unfair guilt from that was to send us to a catholic school. The point is, I am nearly 50 and I still feel guilty all the time about pretty much anything. Will it go? I’ve tried counseling. What do I do? How do you leave a part of yourself behind?

OP posts:
RedTagAlan · 25/05/2026 13:46

SixtySomething · 25/05/2026 13:35

I don’t know of a country that has no religious tradition, be it Islamic, Hindi, Buddhist or whatever. I’m always ready to learn, though.
I don’t see your point about Aristotle. Christianity evolves within a context. Yes, I’m sure it did take on board the teachings of Aristotle. That refers back to the earlier point of the church adapting over time.
Do you think Early Christians would have done better to have taken a stand against him?

But you said above, quote:

"If only it could be that simple. Our society is inextricably bound up with the Christian tradition which is a sophisticated expression of our societal morality. Our idea of ‘kindness’ cannot really be separated from our societal morality ie Christian values, like it or not."

Are you now changing from that to "any religion" ?

I am working off the concept of society being global here.

SixtySomething · 25/05/2026 13:43

PS I expect they’ve all read their Aristotle!

SixtySomething · 25/05/2026 13:37

EasilyPleased · 25/05/2026 13:35

No, it considerably predates Christianity, even in countries which are now culturally/historically Christian. And virtually identical concepts exist in non-Christian cultures, like the Buddhist concept of ‘loving kindness’. The main concepts of Hindu ethics are broadly the same as the Ten Commandments.

Edited

Well, that’s good isn’t it. So we can all be friends. 👍

EasilyPleased · 25/05/2026 13:35

SixtySomething · 25/05/2026 13:22

Yes, but our idea of eg kindness is shaped by the Christian tradition.Eg 14 th century Mother Julian of. Norwich called Jesus ‘Our Kinde Lorde.’
Likewise I’m sure ‘decency’ is a complicated concept that needs a framework surrounding it, so one can discuss what it actually means, not just anarchy and everyone for themselves. 😱

No, it considerably predates Christianity, even in countries which are now culturally/historically Christian. And virtually identical concepts exist in non-Christian cultures, like the Buddhist concept of ‘loving kindness’. The main concepts of Hindu ethics are broadly the same as the Ten Commandments.

SixtySomething · 25/05/2026 13:35

EasilyPleased · 25/05/2026 12:50

And yet many countries that have never had any kind of significant Christian tradition have somehow evolved an ethics that is essentially similar, based on being compassionate, just and loving, not causing harm to others etc. Also ‘Christian values’ considerably predate Christianity. Aquinas was essentially adapting Aristotle.

I don’t know of a country that has no religious tradition, be it Islamic, Hindi, Buddhist or whatever. I’m always ready to learn, though.
I don’t see your point about Aristotle. Christianity evolves within a context. Yes, I’m sure it did take on board the teachings of Aristotle. That refers back to the earlier point of the church adapting over time.
Do you think Early Christians would have done better to have taken a stand against him?

Mischance · 25/05/2026 13:35

Humanism does not imply anarchy; or maybe it does to someone who cannot conceive of a worlds without carrots and sticks from a deity.

RedTagAlan · 25/05/2026 13:29

SixtySomething · 25/05/2026 13:22

Yes, but our idea of eg kindness is shaped by the Christian tradition.Eg 14 th century Mother Julian of. Norwich called Jesus ‘Our Kinde Lorde.’
Likewise I’m sure ‘decency’ is a complicated concept that needs a framework surrounding it, so one can discuss what it actually means, not just anarchy and everyone for themselves. 😱

So my DD (14), who lives in a non Christian country. goes to a state school where religion is banned, and who only knows of Christianity in terms of Santa, will be an anarchist ?

SixtySomething · 25/05/2026 13:22

Yes, but our idea of eg kindness is shaped by the Christian tradition.Eg 14 th century Mother Julian of. Norwich called Jesus ‘Our Kinde Lorde.’
Likewise I’m sure ‘decency’ is a complicated concept that needs a framework surrounding it, so one can discuss what it actually means, not just anarchy and everyone for themselves. 😱

RedTagAlan · 25/05/2026 13:16

Well. A few hours ago the Pope released his first major theological document.

And here it is ( Link to Vatican, so should be safe):

Encyclical Letter of His Holiness Leo XIV Magnifica Humanitas (15 May 2026) (vatican.va)

Skimming through it before a more detailed read, I see this:

"129. Christian humanism does not reject science or technology, but embraces them with gratitude and realism, and grounds them within a higher vocation. "

I am not going to comment before I fully get the context, But is the Pope appropriating Humanism here ? Rhetorical question of course, cos context.

Encyclical Letter of His Holiness Leo XIV Magnifica Humanitas (15 May 2026)

ENCYCLICAL LETTER MAGNIFICA HUMANITAS OF HIS HOLINESS POPE LEO XIV ON SAFEGUARDING THE HUMAN PERSON IN THE TIME OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE [ Multimedia ] ___________________________

https://www.vatican.va/content/leo-xiv/en/encyclicals/documents/20260515-magnifica-humanitas.html

EasilyPleased · 25/05/2026 13:08

BlueSherbet · 25/05/2026 12:50

Regarding humanists, I recall their "Good without God" slogan which I always thought was very revealing.

Christians are Christians because their starting point is to recognise that we are all fundamentally flawed people.

I find it concerning to start with a stance of "I am good" especially when it is a self-referential stance, with no objective, distinct standard to compare to.

That’s not what they’re saying. They’re saying that a truly adult ethics involves acting with justice, compassion and generosity

without the carrot of eternal salvation or the stick of damnation. That it’s possible, indeed necessary, to be good without thinking some invisible but supposedly omnipotent deity will reward you.

EasilyPleased · 25/05/2026 12:50

SixtySomething · 25/05/2026 11:38

If only it could be that simple. Our society is inextricably bound up with the Christian tradition which is a sophisticated expression of our societal morality. Our idea of ‘kindness’ cannot really be separated from our societal morality ie Christian values, like it or not.

And yet many countries that have never had any kind of significant Christian tradition have somehow evolved an ethics that is essentially similar, based on being compassionate, just and loving, not causing harm to others etc. Also ‘Christian values’ considerably predate Christianity. Aquinas was essentially adapting Aristotle.

BlueSherbet · 25/05/2026 12:50

Mischance · 25/05/2026 12:17

Indeed. Would that this inextricable link could be broken.
The value of the concept of "christian values" is debatable .... humanists seem to manage just fine without it.

Regarding humanists, I recall their "Good without God" slogan which I always thought was very revealing.

Christians are Christians because their starting point is to recognise that we are all fundamentally flawed people.

I find it concerning to start with a stance of "I am good" especially when it is a self-referential stance, with no objective, distinct standard to compare to.

Mischance · 25/05/2026 12:42

I do not think Humanists have appropriated christian values at all. Their values are based on kindness and decency.

RedTagAlan · 25/05/2026 12:38

SixtySomething · 25/05/2026 12:27

I don't consciously know any humanists but I assume they have appropriated Christian values without acknowledging the source. I don't think it is possible to make up moral values alone . Moral values are those shared by society in borad terms.

And how do these Christian values work in non Christian countries ?

SixtySomething · 25/05/2026 12:27

Mischance · 25/05/2026 12:17

Indeed. Would that this inextricable link could be broken.
The value of the concept of "christian values" is debatable .... humanists seem to manage just fine without it.

I don't consciously know any humanists but I assume they have appropriated Christian values without acknowledging the source. I don't think it is possible to make up moral values alone . Moral values are those shared by society in borad terms.

Mischance · 25/05/2026 12:26

TheignT · 25/05/2026 12:19

Do they ever feel guilt if they don't live up to their own standards?

They feel disappointed in themselves I am sure. We can all only do our best.

TheignT · 25/05/2026 12:19

Mischance · 25/05/2026 12:17

Indeed. Would that this inextricable link could be broken.
The value of the concept of "christian values" is debatable .... humanists seem to manage just fine without it.

Do they ever feel guilt if they don't live up to their own standards?

Mischance · 25/05/2026 12:17

Indeed. Would that this inextricable link could be broken.
The value of the concept of "christian values" is debatable .... humanists seem to manage just fine without it.

SixtySomething · 25/05/2026 11:38

Mischance · 25/05/2026 11:29

For me it is all very simple.
Humankind needs to free itself from the ancient religions and all the misery that these have brought.
By all means hold a private theist belief but this needs to be yours and yours alone.
The rest of society - education legal systems, government - need to be based on kindness and humanity and scientific progress.
This harms no-one, believers and non-believers. All are free to hold their beliefs, but the society in which they live is not gratuitously constrained by any particular faction.

If only it could be that simple. Our society is inextricably bound up with the Christian tradition which is a sophisticated expression of our societal morality. Our idea of ‘kindness’ cannot really be separated from our societal morality ie Christian values, like it or not.

Mischance · 25/05/2026 11:29

For me it is all very simple.
Humankind needs to free itself from the ancient religions and all the misery that these have brought.
By all means hold a private theist belief but this needs to be yours and yours alone.
The rest of society - education legal systems, government - need to be based on kindness and humanity and scientific progress.
This harms no-one, believers and non-believers. All are free to hold their beliefs, but the society in which they live is not gratuitously constrained by any particular faction.

RedTagAlan · 25/05/2026 11:22

BlueSherbet · 25/05/2026 10:58

With respect Alan, this post shows you do not have a firm foundation on these topics. Lots of basic errors here.

You need to better understand:

-what is the Christian Church

  • the relationship between the old and new testament
  • the place of the Bible vs the teaching authority of the Church, which significantly predates it. Ppl seem to view the Bible as a big magic rule book and often think it is the supreme authority, a protestant error.
-what Christian morality is actually based on

For example, you mention 'gay sex'.

The Churchs opposition to homosexual acts isnt based on Leviticus from the old testament.

Leviticus was a code for the ancient levites, a jewish tribe. Why would Christians today adhere to it?

The Church's opposition is actually based on natural law, that is in this case, biological science. Ie what our bodies sexual functions are for and how they work.

Its not a surprise that the Levites agreed, but basing any stance purely on what it says in a book is not a convincing argument.

Things will be a lot clearer if you get the foundational concepts correct. 👍

Wait a moment. I make a post about the new covenant of Jesus, and I say I wonder how some Mosaic laws were kept, and some were dumped, and you reply by saying I made a lot of errors and that I need to understand.

Then, you mention Leviticus re gay sex, say the Church ruling is nothing to do with that, but it is a natural law of some sort that is the reason the Church calls it a sin.

Quote : " The Church's opposition is actually based on natural law, that is in this case, biological science. Ie what our bodies sexual functions are for and how they work."

What is this natural law. What does science say about gay sex that it is wrong to do it ?

And you say this : "Ppl seem to view the Bible as a big magic rule book and often think it is the supreme authority, a protestant error. "

So it's not about the Bible then ?

TheignT · 25/05/2026 11:21

Do only Catholics feel guilt. Explains a lot

SixtySomething · 25/05/2026 11:14

BlueSherbet · 25/05/2026 10:58

With respect Alan, this post shows you do not have a firm foundation on these topics. Lots of basic errors here.

You need to better understand:

-what is the Christian Church

  • the relationship between the old and new testament
  • the place of the Bible vs the teaching authority of the Church, which significantly predates it. Ppl seem to view the Bible as a big magic rule book and often think it is the supreme authority, a protestant error.
-what Christian morality is actually based on

For example, you mention 'gay sex'.

The Churchs opposition to homosexual acts isnt based on Leviticus from the old testament.

Leviticus was a code for the ancient levites, a jewish tribe. Why would Christians today adhere to it?

The Church's opposition is actually based on natural law, that is in this case, biological science. Ie what our bodies sexual functions are for and how they work.

Its not a surprise that the Levites agreed, but basing any stance purely on what it says in a book is not a convincing argument.

Things will be a lot clearer if you get the foundational concepts correct. 👍

Lovely post from someone who knows what they’re talking about .❤️
I was hoping someone knowledgeable would post.
I don’t consider myself to have a thorough knowledge of Catholicism really.
However, I sure can recognise anger and obsession and will try to argue against the spread of misinformation and disinformation , 💯

Mischance · 25/05/2026 11:11

The problem is that old testament ideas have been taught as fact to generations who lived in fear of this irrational vengeful deity.

Whyhaveibeencutoutofmamsnot · 25/05/2026 10:58

DH is like that - feels guilty when he is not actively doing stuff - has to be busy all the time. If someone asks him to jump he says how high. Goes off to help at this that or other organisation. All because of what was drummed into people at Catholic church and school.
There is one voice he is deaf to though.

Swipe left for the next trending thread