Definitely not Catholic, John, but much of my family is.
I've never liked turbulence (or heights, for that matter, though that's a discussion for another time). The problem is that typically a fire is wind driven, and one seldom gets launched on a fire until the wind is driving it, and by then the turbulence becomes significant in many cases. Add the heat of the day and mountains, and voila! Instant turbulence.
The best speaker I ever heard on low level turbulence and mountainous terrain was Sparky Imeson, who recently passed away (ironically, in an aircraft, in the mountains). The man was a natural teacher, and could probably have made a lecture on how to thread a needle into an interesting dinner event.
An interesting thing about turbulence, aside from it's general subjectivity, is how it's experienced in different aircraft. Wing loading makes a tremendous difference in how a given airplane will behave in turbulence, and subsequently how the pilot will perceive and report the conditions. Mass makes a big difference. The experience of the crew does too, and I suspect the nature of the operation, as well. The pilot of a passenger aircraft may be more sensetive to how his passengers may perceive the turbulence, than the cargo pilot who has no passengers (and no one therefore "looking over his shoulder").
I flew a Piaggio Avanti for a while. I'd notice that when other aircraft in the area were reporting moderate, we'd feel light chop. I don't doubt they were feeling moderate, but the airplane rode through the turbulence of chop differently, and it felt much more subdued.