It sounds to me as though Ms Doogue has come to a somewhat late realisation that everything which was drummed into her as a child was not the whole truth. As we grow into adults and learn more about the world we have an ongoing responsibility to audit our beliefs and test their accuracy against new information.

Kudos to her for undertaking this process in respect of her Church upbringing. The sad truth is that escaping from such long-established beliefs is far from easy - probably on a par with a two-pack-a-day smoker trying to quit cold turkey but she has made a start and that is great.

On the matter of religion I am a devout athiest. I believe that, long ago and far away, a man called Jesus Christ did indeed live a remarkable life and founded a movement which still exists in various forms today. He naturally riled the existing rulers who were not very tolerant of alternative ideas and paid a harsh price in line with the legal practises of the day.

Modern religions are all basically founded on the basis of ancient writings describing this man's life and accept his claim to be divine. This is where I beg to differ. Remarkable man, yes but divine - a resounding no.

Churches, throughout history have influenced Governments, sometimes benignly and sometimes for their own ends. This process continues in Australia today with far too many politicians influenced by institutions which are no longer relevant to most people as proven by declining church atendances.

I welcome comments like Ms Doogue's which put the focus on this problem and encourage people to ask these questions.

GrahamY,
I think it's clear I meant reconcile adherents to their earthly lot, with the promise of extraterrestrial life (where exactly this "other world" is, I wouldn't know.
I agree that the Catholic church "doesn't eschew this world"; I've said repeatedly above that it "parodies" and "pays lip service" to Christ's radical teachings.
Nevertheless its evolved function is symbiotic "support" for the prevailing order, rather than changing it. It's only in the post-colonial era and since the second Vatican council that the Catholic church has woken-up to the fact that its "missions" were in effect cultural/economic imperialism. But even given its new "sensitivities", and whatever its espoused intentions, its hardly aligned with the Gospels or genuine emancipation. Indeed, the current pope is a reactionary and has excommunicated Liberation Theology for being at odds with Church and State hierarchy and prevailing class structures!
The Catholic Church has no interest in "changing" the world; it is "engaged with the poor and those in distress" as a means of maintaining it, and of staying rich and influential in the process.
It's true that the church is vital to democratic capitalism, but that's also maintenance, since a free-market system would have been long-since overthrown. The rub is that democratic capitalism is unsustainable.
The Catholic church wears all the semblance of a compassionate organisation, but its sincerity is dubious at the top (as Doogue suggests) and delusional below. Doogue's gushing enthusiasm for "abundant life"--whatever that means in the context of her article, presumably not abundant procreation--is nothing more than a species of mystical Jouissance. Unless she cares to elaborate her epiphany for blockheads like me, I can only dismiss it as Western narcissism.

We all live in a big house with many windows. One opens a window on one side, sees the sunshine and says ' What beautiful sunshine; how good is MY sun!' Another one opens another window, sees the sunshine and also says, ‘What beautiful sunshine; how good is MY sun!’, and another, and another, and they do not realize that all the sunshine is from the same SUN!

Then there are others, who open a window, see the sunshine and say ‘What beautiful sunshine; but there is no sun!’ These I find difficult to understand.

Silly analogy, Lato - there is demonstrably a sun. No one can say the same of any god.

Raycom:

...There is no right to misbehave implied in my comment. I gave a comparison between the Catholic Church structure and the more Democratic non-denominational Protestant Christian movements in particular, as a reason for the failure of the Catholic Church to deal with Corruption.

...It is difficult to argue that the top down rule of the RC Church is a prime reason in the development of entrenched corruption, and their unwillingness to deal with the obvious anomalies, in particular the covering-up of paedophilia: In stark contrast to the RC Church, matters of discipline are initiated and concluded from the congregation level in most Protestant environments. This represents the true nature of the Christian church where the congregation are the “Church of Christ”.

..If you are (an) RC and offended by my comments, I can assure you none was intended. I have great respect for the honest folk of the RC Church; but not a lot for the entrenched culture of its hierarchy, when such of them smother corruption.

GY:

…I think you are missing a very basic point, the RC Church would continue to operate effectively as an institution, without a congregation at all. It is so overweighted with top-end structure, (and all the money control), that the will of the congregation is simply overruled in arrogance!

...Quite simply, the Roman Catholic Church is, (and again) quite obviously, a defective model of Christianity!