I was raised Catholic. I went to Catholic grammar, middle and high school. I was even named Catholic. (My first name and middle name are both places were the virgin mary appeared: Fatima, Portugal and Lourdes, France)

I was confirmed at 8, sang in the church choir and was a lector in school and at our spanish masses.

I can rehearse Psalm 23 verbatim in English and Spanish. I know almost every conventional prayer in both languages. I've been to Assisi, Padua, the Vatican and at least 8 more churches all over europe.

Still, the only one that moved me was the one in Fatima, and not just because it's my name (ha).

As a matter of fact, the one in Venice even filled me with rage. It contains a sinful amount of gold; most likely collected and constructed at the expense of its starving parishioners.



That church is one, of the many reasons for why I, despite living and breathing Catholicism for more than half of my life, no longer call myself Roman Catholic.



I think people attend mass for the consistency of it all. They need someone to implore and an outlet for relieving guilt (confession).

Still, real faith is awe-inspiring. I can still picture my fragile, adorable great-grandmother clutching her rosary.



What makes Catholicism any more valid than the beliefs of the Aztecs, Mayans, Native Americans, Ancient Egyptians, and Greeks?

Why are we entitled to scoff at their beliefs? Why does one deity make more sense than multiple ones?

Wasn’t it the ancient polytheists that gave us astronomy, architecture, physics, philosophy and the Olympics?

Humanity is blind. And until the apocalypse (if there is one), we will remain so.

This isn't necassarily a bad thing.



I think, that Catholicism was the most honest at its inception (which I suppose was when Peter became the first pope). Before it became this pseudo-empire that demanded conformity to its numerous and often arbitrary rules, which are entirely man-made. Councils, Popes and theologans throughout history were the ones that decided on stipulations, and interpretations of the bible (which was also written by men) which today is still fighting for spiritual supremacy.


I just feel that these people are trying too hard to overly simplify and explain something that is much to complex, convoluted and mysterious to ever be completely fathomed.

Even so, at least go with some kind of coherent explanation, because Genesis is a heaping pile of nonsense.

Also, where does Muhammad come into play?
What makes him any less of a prophet?
Catholics just so happened to accept that some dude from Nazareth spoke for God.
What if those same people had been in Mecca or Medina?


What if this triple O being (omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent) was trying to reach people in every corner of the world?
He chose Moses, Jesus, Muhammad and 3 children in Portugal and various other unsuspecting people to deliver his message.
But somewhere along the line the message was muted behind conflict.

What if we are all right?
What if we are all wrong?