Catholicism: WOW! 

This is what I wanted to say about religion, in general.

I no longer totally believe in the messianistic aspects of the Abrahamic religions. Which means that, while I think Jesus (not Christ) was a great religious philosopher with some good ideas (like the way the Islamic faith sees him), I don't really think he was the son of/part of God. This comes from study and soul-searching, and in many ways makes me feel horrible for saying (you know, Catholic guilt is there whether you believe or not. I think it's in my blood...).

But I still have ties to the church. When I'm feeling Christian (it comes and goes; nothing in my heart is set in stone), I tend to lean more toward the church I was baptized and raised in (call me crazy). And I tend to defend whoever's being attacked.

On an ML I used to be a member of, someone brought up the topic of religion asking if anyone had ever faced religious persecution/narrow-mindedness, etc. I answered honestly about my beliefs, as well as my extreme tolerance for other faiths as well as agnotics/aetheists. I made sure not to point fingers at the few groups of people who have told me that I'm going straight to hell (whatever) or the like. (Why point fingers at sects? Doesn't that just make matters worse?)

Well, apparently not everyone there wanted to react as politely, I'm afraid. (which is their right, of course). However, it was clearly a case of people not even bothering to learn the history of Christianity, in many cases. For example, when someone mentioned that "the Christians, and some Catholics" spread Christian faith into Southern Europe. Er, do they even realize that it was all one Christian faith at first (hence the word "Catholic?") I've never understood why other Christians are quick to say that Catholics aren't Christian.   

Other misconceptions made it worse. I mean, Luther was trying to REFORM the church, and only broke away when they couldn't agree on the Eucharist/Lord's Supper. ^_^;; It wasn't just protesting crusades and the Inquisition, you know. And people tend to forget that Protestant faiths are rooted in Catholicism, and thus generally share the history preceding 1517 (except in the cases of the lesser-known pre-Luther protestors).

And it's not like the Catholics are the only ones guilty after 1517, either. In one case, both Catholic and Protestant armies descended on a city of Anabaptists and slaughtered every person they could. (then the two armies stared at each other, for a minute, and walked back home.) When the concessions were made in Augsburg (in 1556, methinks?) to have the city follow the religion of its leader, that was only in regard to Catholic/Lutheran/Calvinist. Had a leader become Anabaptist or Eastern Orthodox, I'm sure they would've been stopped.  Heck! Martin Luther himself wrote one of the most vicious articles about the Jewish faith that I've ever read. (He once said that the truth of his reform would show when the Jewish converted. But they didn't. So he turned against them quite scathingly.)

And people tend to forget that religious disagreements were as much political as faith-based. Look at Henry VIII. While he's known for "reforming" the church to support his marital tendencies, it should also be noted that his hereditary title of "Defender of the Faith" that the British throne still holds was granted by the Pope, for Henry's essay attacking Luther.  Henry supported the Tynesdale Bible & Protestant underground in England only after the Pope refused him, and he announced that the church was a state matter. He needed support from people who were not personally ruled by the throne. No one even knows if Henry believed in the Reformation. There's no evidence (unlike the Elector of Saxony, who at least packed away all of his relics in his latter years--something that shows a leaning away from Catholicism). It wasn't until Elizabeth that the English church matter was decided. (and then it was decided permanently in 1689, when William & Mary joined the Parliament in deciding that no royal shall marry a Catholic or convert to Catholicism, or they shall lose their place in the succession.)

Now, it should be noted that I'm not declaring the Innocence of the Catholic Church. I always personally had good experiences with it (no, my priest did not do questionable things, damn it!), but I was in one church in one diocese in one century. Every situation is different from every other, and there are ranges of comfort and atrocity everywhere. I refuse to be an apologist and say, "Well, it's okay because everyone else was doing it." It's not okay. It isn't okay that anyone did this. But I think religious tolerance/acceptance/embracement is something we can learn from it. If it was wrong to expel the Jews and Muslims from Spain in 1492, what is the opposite thing we can do now?

I think every secular and religious group of power has a black mark on their history. The greater (in power, not quality) and longer the reign, the more chances for more atrocities. And I think it's safe to say that everyone has been persecuted at one point in history. In many cases, our families don't have to look further back than 1945 to find someone they relate to being killed or incarcerated for reasons we don't agree with. We have to change this record with our actions and our words, and I don't think that attacking any group is going to do the job. L