Carol, just one note: You or your husband wouldn’t really judge ANY group by its portrayal in a movie or TV program, would you?
How could any one movie (even, using as an example of “good”, “The Passion of the Christ”) possibly convey EVERYTHING about any subject? Especially one so truly universal as the Catholic church? We can’t even convey EVERYTHING KNOWN about an individual MOLECULE in ONE movie or program, far less the church established by Jesus Christ Himself nearly 2000 years ago.
If I judged American teenagers of 2004 by movies and TV programs, the kids would ALL be spoiled, shallow, vacant, immoral, know-it-alls who lived only to have sex, look good, and get things. But is that a TRUE picture of American teens of 2004? Of course not. And we can look right around us because we are right here in the year 2004. You’d think that with plenty of examples of teens who DISPROVE those stereotypes that Hollywood etc. would be able to stop making those stereotypes. . .but they don’t. Lots of people either believe those stereotype, or they can make the distinction between the FANTASY of movie and TV and the reality of ACTUAL TEENS. They like the fantasy, and they figure, “I know teens REALLY aren’t like that, but so does everybody else.” Hmmm, but if these movies are shown 10, 20, 30 years from now to teens THEN, will THEY know the difference? How many kids today think that the 1950s were ALL “Leave it to Beaver” and “Happy Days”, and the 70s was “That 70s Show”, and that the CHARACTERS on the TV show what REALLY happened then? Plenty. Picture World War II. You probably weren’t alive then, but there are still plenty of people who were. Even of those people who actually LIVED through WW2, there is nowhere near a consensus of what people were like then. Every person’s experiences was different. Somebody from that time may try to talk to people today who believe the 40s were all John Wayne pictures, and guess what? Even with an eyewitness from that time, most people are STILL going to think the 40s was all John Wayne pictures, and that the FANTASY then was the REALITY then.
Now, picture the Civil War. There isn’t ANYBODY alive today who experienced it. All we have (since this is pre TV, radio, telephone etc.) are letters, the written word, from a select number of people (obviously many people never wrote about their experience, were illiterate, or wrote and the letters have disappeared or destroyed). So we have even LESS knowledge of what actually went on. And we don’t have any face-to-face experience of our own to know whether the letter we read represents what actually happened to that person, or whether that person’s views were distorted, knowingly or unconsciously, etc. Different historians present different points of view. A lot of times people will espouse a certain POV because the historian is engaging, writes a “good” story, reinforces “tradition” or, even more popular today, DEBUNKS tradition!
Have, or had, individual priests and nuns acted cruelly at certain times to certain people? Of course. Being a priest and nun makes you a religious but it sure as heck doesn’t make you perfect. If you’re looking for the Catholic church because you think everybody in it is going to be “more saintly” than anybody else, then you aren’t looking for Jesus, you’re looking for a country club. He never promised his church members would be infallible. Plenty of Catholics sin. The key is, look at the Catholic catechism. This is what we are SUPPOSED to be doing. If you think it’s the word of God you’ll be following, trying your best to follow, then it won’t matter to you (except as a matter for prayer and sorrow for your fellow man) if Catholic A is a bad priest or Catholic Q a sinner in the year 1537, in January. IMO.
