God is a human invention through which we manage our primitive inclinations by the application of our higher brains and sensibilities; some would say God is the method by which we refine and justify our primitive inclinations; certainly absolution in the Catholic Church is one of the greatest methods of crowd control ever invented; sins are designated which are impossible to not commit, a tacit recognition of our primitive selves, and forgiveness, for a price, including loyalty to the institution, is provided for the inevitable contravention.

That there are so many religions with their own Gods is testimony to both the fact that God is a human invention, as is culture, and the futility of any one religion seeking dominance. It also contradicts the narcissism of those who allign their ego with a religion and use that self-subjugation to taunt, oppress and vilify any who don't belong or commit as they do. Ms Doogue's piece is a minor example of that form of narcissism.

Paul Collins in his book, "Believers: Does
Australian Catholicism have a future?"
points out that:

"I would have thought it difficult to argue
convincingly that Australia is the most secular
place in the world. Certainly parts of Europe
could make a strong claim, including Benedict's
own Germany, or France, where Catholicism has
suffered long-term decline. Australians are not
crass materialists, nor are they secular, lazy
beach-loving slobs. And the local branch of
Catholicism, while it may be seriously ill, is
not yet in its terminal stages. Benedict's XVI's
perceptions about Australian "Godlessness" may
be explained by the fact that our religiosity
is non-dogmatic, egalitarian and simply doesn't
take institutional authority seriously..."

Collins continues: " most of us are rather independent,
sceptical and rather laid back. What we don't agree
with, we ignore. This doesn't mean that we're not
spiritual in understated ways. We can be surprisingly
reverent in unexpected places, like the bush. All the
evidence suggests that there is a strong belief in
the transcendent; this is especially true of those
who are in touch with our extraordinary landscape and
nature. Perhaps Australians are quietly spiritual, rather
than explicitly religious, holding what historian
Manning Clark called, "A shy hope in the heart."

Carnivore writes;
"Perhaps when some of our young, healthy, enlightened posters are on their deathbed, about to exit this life, they may have an about face & cling onto whatever slight ray of hope that brings them peace".

At almost 82 I don't match your criteria. Live your life fully, while willingly helping others less well off (as recommended by Peter Singer and others), and the approach of the end will not worry you. Thinking or worrying about something that may not have happened 2000 years ago when the homo species have been around for a few million years if a deluded, debilitating and wasteful effort.

About all I thing I will miss, or rather miss out on out on, is the ability to know how the human race will solve the problems of its future. I know that no religion will play a major part if finding whatever constructive solutions are necessary.

I hope to die still curious about such matters.

Foyle,

Most eloquently spoken and echoed by a rapidly growing number of people who have wrenched their being from those who erroneously state they have all the answers.

Your words express the poetry of that part of humanity that requires no false hope to be able to live life the only life available in the fullest possibly way.

Goodonya.

David

I, like Graham Y, am astonished at the failure of most posters to address the essence of Geraldine's article, but have rather simply vented their bile at the institution which Geraldine herself has taken pains to point out is imperfect and in need of revision to meet the expectations of its parishioners. (Lexi is a notable exception.)

Does Geraldine abhor the sexual abuse and the cover-ups? Certainly, that is made quite clear. But you choose only to twist the knife. Pathetic. She has bared her anguish and concern, and all you do is jeer. (Or attack features or failings of her 'public' life. How sad, and how very 'human'.) How many of you have undertaken such a depth of re-appraisal of your convictions? Few, I would venture.

Squeers, do you listen to yourself?

>"As if her insights are of great moment and she's compelled to share them, that we all might benefit. "< Talk about calling the kettle black!

My story. My mother was quite a devout Catholic, but in a quiet, solemn, personal way. She was also a wonderful human being, a great mother, and kind to all. One would be very hard pressed to find a better person in any of these categories, let alone all of them. She was my example, and I have tried to live up to her expectations. A mammoth task, and I have failed in some categories. But I continue to adhere to the underlying teaching and example as well as I can. (Unfortunately I have not been able to adhere entirely on this thread.)

I, as Geraldine (and I believe most sensible Catholics) also abhor the institutional failings of the Church, but I too am hopeful of the required revision, for I too believe the teachings in what it means to be a good person are worth preserving and expounding.

As for some of the attacks on the Church, have some of you considered the impacts of radical Islam lately? But, we are tolerant - until there is a march down George Street yelling "Allah Akbach". (I too have my limits.)

Saltpetre

quite well put.