I am a product of the Roman Catholic Church. It was my birthright: my parents were Catholic, and so where my grandparents. The Church had a monopoly in the countries my mom and dad came from -- Puerto Rico and Cuba, respectively.
So, even though I grew up in Manhattan -- a vastly different island with countless other faiths to choose from -- my parents, understandably, raised me Catholic. They baptized me, paid for Catechism classes, and sent me to Catholic schools, where the curriculum was infused with Church teachings. There, I also had to attend church with my class every Friday and still attend Mass on Sundays.
I like to say that I put in my time, spending years of my life understanding Church doctrine. But the perpetual hypocrisy of the Church gnawed at me until I decided I could not longer be a part of an institution that has not atoned for waging war in the name of Jesus, enslaving others, and its brutal treatment of Jews and other "non-believers."
I also could not accept the Church's sexist attitude towards nuns and women in general, its homophobia, and its insistence that couples should not use birth control, even though this insistence has resulted in keeping women and their families in underdeveloped countries enmeshed in poverty. (Last year, Pope Benedict XVI had the audacity to tell reporters that condom use in Africa "increases the problem" of AIDS.)
Though I am no longer a practicing Catholic, I am, undeniably, culturally Catholic. And I, like many others who have left the flock, should have a say in pressuring the Church to reform itself. The vow of celibacy is a big lie. Ask anyone who has spent time at a seminary. It has become clear, after dozens of sexual abuse scandals have come to light, that the Church not only attracts sexual deviants, it protects them. If the Vatican is serious about weeding out pedophiles, it must allow priests and nuns to live like fully human beings. That means ending the charade of chastity.
Years ago, I would never dare say these things publicly. As a "good Catholic girl," I had been instilled with the idea that saying anything negative about the Catholic Church was blasphemous. (It's like conservatives who quiet war critics by calling them unpatriotic for speaking out.)
It wasn't until 2002, when the newspaper I was working for at the time, The Boston Globe, published a series of stories that documented hundreds of cases of sex abuse by priests in the Boston Archdiocese, that I felt free to speak about my contempt for Church leadership. It was their policy to pay off the parents of the abused children in exchange for their silence. The revelations angered me. How could the Church talk about protecting unborn children when it clearly was not protecting children from countless pedophile clergy in their ranks?
Eight years have passed and the sex abuse scandals keep coming. Now, there is evidence, in the form of internal Church documents, that then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who headed the Vatican office that determined whether priests should be defrocked, did not take disciplinary action against a Wisconsin priest who abused 200 deaf boys. The New York Times published many of those documents on their website, yet the Vatican's response has been to accuse the Times of being "in attack mode."
All that obfuscating only hurts Catholics who want church leadership to live up to the teachings of Jesus. Many Catholics understand that those of us who express our anger at the way the church handles pedophile priests are not condemning Catholicism; we just believe it is a sin to coddle priests who abuse children.
Just like a true patriot speaks out when its government fails the people it is supposed to serve, it is necessary for Catholics -- fallen and otherwise -- to call for Vatican reform. The chorus is only getting louder. When will the Church hear us?
Cindy E. Rodríguez teaches at New York University and Hunter College and is the author of the forthcoming Pendeja No Más: A Latina's Guide to Liberation.
Follow Cindy Rodriguez on Twitter: www.twitter.com/cindyerodriguez
I have a right to develop my own beliefs. I have a right to know who I am; to know what I love, who I love, why I love, how I love, and when I love. And I am grateful to all those who have protected those rights for me until that day came when I could exercise them. I would and will encourage all women, men and children to do the same.
Thank you for the opportunity to post. It is not my intention to offend, but to stand up and against violence towards women and children. And yes the fella's too.
Jesus said, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and the church sure gives it a try.
I too was raised Catholic, and have attended the Protestant church. I realized one day that something was wrong. It took me a while to figure it out but I finally did; they took my sovereignty away. They took away my right of ownership over my mind and body. I felt the pain of that loss.
I don't consider myself "fallen" either, as if I am a disgrace, cast from heaven, for promiscuity or whatever other sin they can imagine. I refuse to be a martyr for Christianity, or any other religion ever again, as though or in agreement with any doctrinal lie that I was anything less then perfect from the very beginning of my birth. I refuse to believe that about any other as well.
How charmingly winsome--but a journalist, rather than a cutesy-wutesy with the benefit of a college experience, is unlikely to refer to Roman Catholics as the "Church" without qualifying the statement. If you are sincere, though, and want to address the issues, why don't you read Foxes' Book of Martyrs and think about why those people were willing to die? Or, because your concern does not seem that sincere, you and the Catholic "us" might follow the examples of others who have organized to withhold financial and moral support from corrupt or inadequate organizations to compel repentance.
That's what the Reformation was about--but because you are in the modern US, the wizened version of Catholic rule will not be able to martyr you without your cooperation, thanks to Protestants and others who risked all for their right to think and rule themselves and without whom you wouldn't have the fine liberty to publish your article. The fact that Catholics seem to need the advantages of American liberties in order to criticize their so-called Church should be enough for any thinking person to dump the whole charade.
Otherwise, admit that it's your vanity to identify with a group that can't be defended as "the Church," by comparison to the Bible or by reason, and forget it.
Sadly, it probably explains my need for domination...
the goal of Buddhism is world peace through changing one's karmic tendencies . . . that is ultimately more rewarding than reforming the unreformable
Thanks again for the article.
I come from a similar background.
I'm not as good at containing my fury at the church, though.
http://shoryland.com/2010/04/pope-benedict-is-monster-and-so-are-you.html
Perhaps one of the most significant things about the RCC that must die is the ubiquitous use of "Father" and "Papa". Words mean things and those words are clearly power mechanisms, designed to make the average members of the church feel like children who must be instructed and condescended to while making the Priests, Nuns and hierarchy feel like well, Fathers and Mothers and Masters. The self aggrandizing titles of Father, Mother, Lord, Excellency, Holiness (god, what a joke), Papa have the effect, perhaps the design of making the average catholic feel "less than" while making the leadership feel "more than". The development of hubris and arrogance among the "more than" is self-fulfilling in such a power structured system. And the hubris leads to blind self-righteousness, and the law-unto-themselves the hierarchy has become. The "simple, humble and poor....like Jesus" church that Rev Martin hopes to see cannot and will not happen until the words are changed.
Of course, then it would no longer be the RCC. The Roman hierarchy is caught in a trap of it's own making.
The reason for religion is to bring god's word to the people not to have people tell god what he should be.
I see a big difference here, in order to have a functional society you need government to operate properly. You can have a great life without the church and many have moved “beyond religion” and are better off for it.
You are correct that one doesn't need a pope and magesterium to follow their own beliefs -- be your own pope! It's really only important for those who want to follow Christ who established the Church and gave authority to the first Pope, Peter, and the apostles. The same Church which determined which books conformed to Christ's teaching and belonged in the bible -- the same new testament and essentially the same old testament that every other Christian denomination now claims as their sole authority.