Prior to my conversion to Catholicism in 2001 I hardly knew the difference between a Catholic, a Protestant and a Fundamentalist. I had little interest in organized religion, spending childhood in awe of nature and my late teens seeking answers through Freud and Jung. After exploring most facets of philosophy, the New Age and non-Christian religions, I ended up a bona fide Catholic.

Since then I've encountered all sorts of critics of Catholicism. From this I have a pretty good grasp as to why people dislike it. I should clarify that this article is not about bashing the Catholic faith. Rather, it's a kind of dialogue based on everything I've heard since converting. It's also a reply to those critics, mostly because I continue to experience the holy within the Catholic tradition. As the saying goes, "Give credit where credit is due."

Religion deals with truth and, ironically, most religions seem to have the final word. In life we often demand but don't want to hear the truth when faced with it. This maxim usually applies to social and political truths but most likely wouldn't apply to genuine religious experiences such as an epiphany. A genuine epiphany would be difficult to ignore. As Rudolf Otto suggests, it's marked by certainty and shakes the person to his or her ontological foundations. Imaginary epiphanies, on the other hand, could be ignored. And difficult political truths may also be overlooked because they're upsetting merely on conceptual and emotional levels. Reading about political corruption isn't quite the same as being turned around by one's Creator. One can always ignore a newspaper article. Not so with a genuine epiphany.

Concerning politics, Machievelli once said in The Prince that effective ruling means "one must know how to colour one's actions and to be a great liar and deceiver," Sociologists have picked up on this with notions of 'ideology,' 'false consciousness' and 'hegemony.' More recently the idea of 'spin' has become a fairly common media term. Since the 1970's postmoderns like Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida and Jean Baudrillard have had a significant impact on sociology and the arts in general. Prefiguring the idea of spin, Foucault once said he 'fictions' truth. Meanwhile, Baudrillard published a book called Forget Foucault/Forget Baudrillard.

Sociologists and philosophers alike say the Catholic religion generates 'truth claims.' Non-Catholics usually maintain that many Catholic truth claims are culturally and politically motivated. For believers, on the other hand, some Catholic truths are infallible while most others are slightly less certain, even if taken as guidelines for good behavior.

If you went to the C.I.A. and said "How is the situation today in South Vietnam?" I think they would say it's worse. You see it in the desertion rate, you see it in the morale. You see it in the difficulty to recruit people. You see it in the gradual loss of population control. Many of us in private would say that things are not good, they've gotten worse. Now while we say this in private and not public, there are facts available that find their way in the press. If we're going to stay in there, if we're going to go up the escalating chain, we're going to have to educate the people, Mr. President. We haven't done so yet. I'm not sure now is exactly the right time.

Former US Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara apparently believed he was doing the right thing, given the political realities he was faced with during the Vietnam war. Hindsight is 20/20. But those in power don't have the benefit of hindsight and must make decisions in the heat of the moment. McNamara, now in a safe position to do so, admits to having made egregious mistakes.

Detractors say, however, that Catholic leaders perpetuate outdated dogmas stretching back to ancient times, apparently legitimized under the guise of a sacred 'Tradition.' For those unfamiliar with Catholicism, Tradition refers to the Catholic Church's teachings which are said to complement the Bible with equal weight and authority "like two branches of the same tree," to quote a metaphor popular among Catholic apologists.

Against this is the sola scriptura approach. Sola scriptura means the Bible is the only source of God's revelation to mankind. One form of sola scriptura, sometimes called solo scriptura, selects individual passages from the Bible to apparently prove a point of view. We've all encountered this before. Believers in solo scriptura cite the Old Testament book of Leviticus, for instance, to prove the evils of highly visible moral issues such as homosexuality: "If a man lies with a male as a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death, their blood is upon them" (Lev. 20:13). But these same people often conveniently overlook other passages from the same Old Testament about the evils of usury. "You shall not lend him your money for usury, nor lend him your food at a profit" (Leviticus 25:35-37). Any Christian who profits from a bank account (or any other kind of investment) would be sinning if this particular Bible passage were upheld as eternally true.

Another social and political reason people dislike Catholicism also falls under theology and psychology, depending on how one looks at it. This is the exclusion of women from the upper end of the Catholic hierarchy. To critics the absence of female priests leaves a dry, one-sided feeling among the entire faith assembly. That yin-yang feeling of balance and complementarity just isn't there. The psychologist Carl Jung, coming from a Protestant background, argued that the strong presence of the Virgin Mary in Catholic dogma was a step in the right direction. Jung felt that Mary played an important compensatory role for Catholics' psychological needs. But critics say that doesn't help real flesh and blood Catholic women wanting to enter the priesthood. Nor does it help Catholic women and men who grow tired of the male presence at the altar.

Critics also say that celibate priests conforming to pre-established, male-dominated structures find it all too easy to avoid dealing with women as equals. As far back as 1972 The US Catholic bishops conducted a Freudian study and concluded that many priests are emotionally arrested at a young adult stage of development. This and other studies have been hastily upheld as alleged proof that arrested emotional development results from celibacy, the lack of women among the ranks or some combination of these and other factors, such as repressed or clandestine homosexuality. As to the validity of this study, Patrick Guinan, M.D. says "Freudian theory is incapable of acknowledging religious experience or integrating the concept of chastity or asceticism into its idea of healthy human development." Likewise Elizabeth Abbott argues that celibacy can be a healthy choice and cultural attitudes are quickly changing in this area, especially with the drastic and sometimes deadly increase in sexually transmitted diseases (STD's).

On the gender-equality issue the Church replies by saying men and women are equal but essentially different. Regardless, the lack of female presence in the upper register of the Catholic hierarchy is taken by some as culturally backward, resulting in the current scarcity of ordinations into the priesthood.

Dealing with people who dislike Catholicism predominantly because of their psychological makeup can be demanding and sometimes unnerving. Some Christians seem to blind themselves to the fact that they routinely advocate angry, hateful behavior. If they see vice among Catholics they seem to project their own anger - and other shortcomings - onto Catholicism as a whole. This type of Christian perceives him or herself as genuine while all Catholics are jaded. They're often eager to become embroiled in long, heated e-mail wars over specific points of doctrine. All too often 'loving in Christ' seems more like negative attention seeking.

Of course, projecting one's personal shortcomings onto the "Big Institution" doesn't only refer to non-Catholic Christians and Catholicism. People from all walks of life are prone to falling into this defense mechanism called projection. It's a convenient way to ignore personal issues when something outside the self can be blamed for everything. People from non-US nations, for instance, often single out the US as the Big Bad Wolf. As if other countries aren't doing the same kinds of things as the US, perhaps less humanely, and certainly less effectively.

We also find certain New Age enthusiasts and alleged psychics who believe they have psychic powers or perhaps special inter-dimensional knowledge of phenomena like ET's and UFO's. For some of these people religion and genuine spirituality are entirely different. There's no overlap. With regard to self-proclaimed psychics critical of Catholicism, if their perceptions were from God they'd be accurate and used humbly for the common good. But sometimes alleged psi and arrogance mingle unhappily. Little or no attempts are made to verify truth claims, occasionally given on public TV and through the internet. What remote viewers now call "analytic overlay" remains almost entirely unchecked.

Remote viewing also involves the awareness that we can incorrectly interpret incoming data. A misperception can occur when our conscious minds get in the way and our imagination or existing mindset fills in the blanks or jumps to a conclusion about a remote viewing impression. Remote viewers call this "analytic overlay" and good remote viewers take steps to minimize it.

In fact, some psychics appear so entrenched in their paranormal or perhaps imaginative, possibly pretend world that they have no appreciation whatsoever for the interior life of mystical Catholics. The self-important psychic knows best. And that's that. Most mature Catholics, however, don't advertise their spiritual gifts for mere profit or self-aggrandizement. But that doesn't mean they haven't received any. St. Paul states, I think rightly, that any such gifts are utterly meaningless without true, unselfish love (1 Corinthians 13:1-13).

We also encounter some so-called 'fallen-away' Catholics who dislike Catholicism. Assuming no untoward activity took place in the context of their past experiences with the Catholic Church, it seems probable some - certainly not all - individuals began Catholicism as 'cradle Catholics' in a routine manner, possibly compelled by family rules. Due to their conditioning and psychological makeup these people might never have become firmly established in the Holy Spirit. Catholicism just wasn't a good fit for them. Later in life they embrace something different that provides tangible numinous experience and communal support—for example, a non-Catholic religion or a cult.

These individuals may be quite content with their new path for the rest of their lives. Memories of Catholicism combine with feelings of familial coercion, boredom, etc. No wonder they dislike Catholicism as adults. They've perhaps never encountered the holy within that tradition. Or if they once did, negative memories and other interests come to replace it. The parable in Mark 4:2-9 of seeds variously planted on a path, rocks, thorns and good soil comes to mind:

In his teaching he said, "Listen! A farmer went out to plant his seed. He scattered the seed on the ground. Some fell on a path. Birds came and ate it up. Some seed fell on rocky places, where there wasn't much soil. The plants came up quickly, because the soil wasn't deep. When the sun came up, it burned the plants. They dried up because they had no roots. Other seed fell among thorns. The thorns grew up and crowded out the plants. So the plants did not bear grain. Still other seed fell on good soil. It grew up and produced a crop 30, 60, or even 100 times more than the farmer planted."

Then Jesus said, "Those who have ears should listen."

Nevertheless, many who leave Catholicism continue to experience God in their daily lives. These individuals may be on an extremely healthy and necessary path, in keeping with God's plan. And clearly many Catholics stop going to church simply because it no longer speaks to them, or perhaps it's practically impossible to attend. But in their heart, mind and soul these individuals still regard themselves as true Catholics or God-fearing persons.

Finally, there are historical reasons why people dislike Catholicism. Often when I say the words 'Mass' or 'Church' people instantly recall the destructive aspects of Catholic history, such as the bloody Inquisitions, the torture of so-called witches and greedy, reprobate Popes. And that's unfortunate because it leaves very little room to consider the good aspects of contemporary Catholicism.

Overlapping with psychology, many people have been raised in non-Catholic families which extend back for centuries. The importance of psychohistory (how past generations influence present ones) cannot be overemphasized. When our roots are deeply defined in a given tradition, it's arguably difficult to graft on a new set of beliefs. Not impossible, of course. But difficult. And that's another reason why people dislike Catholicism. They're psychologically put together by a non-Catholic ancestral past. They may believe they're open-minded but their psychology prevents them from exploring the Catholic vision on its own terms.

Many who believe they're freethinkers arguably aren't as liberated as they think they are. In fact, some seem to completely close off when it comes to talking about Catholicism in a mature, adult way. They've got it all figured out. At least, they think they do.

But for me being open-minded means investigating even apparently rigid and authoritarian areas to discern if there's anything good inside. It's about coming full-circle and getting past one's preconceived beliefs about intellectual freedom. It's also about humbly recognizing the limits of the intellect and understanding how past and current experiences inform our preferences and opinions. This kind of inner transformation involves exploring new avenues to see if fresh encounters with the spirit compel us to rethink old, ingrained perspectives on truth. And for so-called fallen-away Catholics, it might mean revisiting old things in an entirely unfamiliar way.

One rarely knows until one tries or perhaps tries again.

1.  "I am well aware that I have never written anything but fictions. I do not mean to say, however, that truth is therefore absent...a true
     discourse engenders or 'manufactures' something that does as yet not exist, that is, 'fictions' it. One 'fictions' history on the basis of a
     political reality that makes it true, one 'fictions' a politics not yet in existence on the basis of a historical truth." Michel Foucault,
     Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews & Other Writings, 1972-1977, ed. Colin Gordon, trans. C. Gordon et al. New York: Pantheon Books,
     1980, p. 193.

2.  Forget Baudrillard, a "reverse dialogue" with Sylvere Lotringer, was published in the US along with Forget Foucault. New York: Semiotext(e),
    1987. Why I bought a book in which the author asks the reader to forget him is perhaps a testament to the allure of clever foolishness.
    More recently I spied another title by Baudrillard on a bookstore dollar table. This time around his reasoning seemed specious and the
    allure of clever foolishness had pretty much worn off. I left Baudrillard on the dollar table. Foucault's thinking, however, has fared somewhat
    better over the years.

3.  Dr. Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, Rockford, Illinois: 1974 [1960], Tan Books, pp. 8-10 » See online discussion at
     socrates58.blogspot.com

4.  Source: Steve Hammons, 'Remote Viewing' has Basis in Science, Military Intelligence.

5.  This article isn't primarily concerned with the spirituality of non-Catholics. Of course, many non-Catholics, religious or not, have extremely
     healthy relationships with God. And from a Catholic perspective even those who don't necessarily believe in God or belong to a particular
     religion, to include agnostics and atheists, are part of God's plan.