Okay, this is how I feel:

The purpose of a Catholic School is indoctrination. I know that sounds bad, but it's true. The purpose of all schooling is indoctrination. Very rarely do you find a religious discussion at a Catholic school, one where the students are encouraged to ask the hard questions with difficult answers. In fact, one of my students asked, "If the Catholic Church is the one true faith, then why were there other religions before it?" The priest's answer? "Do you believe that Christ is the Son of God and in the bodily Resurrection? because that's all that matters." He completely brushed aside the student, probably because he felt that my student wasn't capable of an intellectual discussion.

I had the privilege of attending one of his classes of religion today. After five hours, rather than bring me closer to God/the Church, I wonder if I am even a Catholic. This priest had nothing but negative things to say about Judaism and he had many negative things to say about women. I bit my tongue through much of it. If I didn't have my knitting, I would have called him out on the crap that was spewing out of his mouth. I was tempted to call my grandfather and ask him if the priest even had accurate facts about Judaism, which I doubt. What did the priest have to say about Jews? Only that they refused to believe in the truth of Christ, so they willingly sinned. Frankly, that's bullshit. If the Jews didn't exist, neither would Catholicism. In fact, Catholicism steals many traditions from Judaism. Here's the Cliff's Notes of my class:

--Council of Trent: deems the 600+laws from the Torah unnecessary. In fact, states that the Old Testament isn't necessary because Jesus came and now we have the New Testament.
    --My rebuttal: If the Old Testament is unnecessary, then why do we read a segment at every mass? If it's unnecessary, then why do we teach and believe in the 10 Commandments? If it's unnecessary, then why do we read Isaiah, who prophesied about what to look for in regards to the Messiah? If we didn't have the Old Testament, we'd be missing a good chunk of Christianity. Also, if that council picked and chose what to keep and what to throw away, how did it know that was God's will? Or was it simply convenient for those fallible men...

--4 Gospels: There are inconsistencies in the gospels. However, that's a good thing. It's like if you're a judge and you see four witnesses who tell a story, they planned their story. Also, does it really matter if Jesus performed that miracle at this time or if he even did it? Does that change if you're going to Heaven? No, so inconsistencies don't change that Jesus saved us and it doesn't affect your salvation.
   --My rebuttal: If it's good/okay to have inconsistencies, then why can't we read the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Mary Magdalen, or the Gnostic Gospels or Dead Sea Scrolls? If we read them to develop a better relationship with God, then we should read them. People should have access to all of the hundreds of gospels. Again, if we can pick and choose which inconsistencies are important or irrelevant, how can we know if the New Testament tells the truth at all? There are so many interpretations of the Bible, so there are different religions. So what? We are all simply trying to find the best way to develop a relationship with God. Let us read and figure it out for ourselves.

--Jesus: Jesus didn't write because he wanted men's testimonies.
     --My rebuttal: If Jesus had written, we wouldn't need a Church to tell us how to interpret the Word because we wouldn't be able to argue with it; we would simply be willingly sinful (which most of us are anyway). I responded, in front of the group, that Jesus didn't write because he was too busy. The priest told me I was wrong and gave the above response. I should have told him that the best way to teach was through example, which was what Jesus was doing. He WAS busy! He died in his early 30s, but changed groups of people and performed miracles. He was traveling almost constantly and talking to tons of people. Perhaps Jesus didn't even have the education to write. And as far as the testimonies, well, memory is fallible. I have trouble remembering what I taught for my six different classes just the day before. The gospels were written, at the earliest, 70AD, or about 30 years after Christ. The people came from oral history, which tends to change details for cultures and to exaggerate certain things and cut others to make a story more interesting. So the New Testament could have gone through MANY changes in 30 years. So why are those four gospels still similar? They probably came from brother cultures or from a common storyteller. I believe that many things were changed even before the first edition of each gospel. Does this mean I don't believe in the Bible? No, but it means that if we only interpret the Old Testament as figuratively sometimes, then we should do the same for the New Testament. Read the stories to inspire you to be a good person and to become closer to God. That is all. I lived 14 years as a good person simply by living by the Golden Rule. You don't need an institution to tell you not to be mean.

For all of these reasons, and more, I went home wondering if I even fit in my chosen religion. I still believe in God and I love the saints and the Eucharist; I love how mass forgives you of your sins and reminds you to focus on being good and loving thy neighbor. It DOES make me feel good and it makes me feel closer to God. If anything, I bet that if I went to Seminary school, I would be a better priest than the one I heard speak today (I DO think that the Catholic Church should allow women to become priests).

And that's how I REALLY feel.