Re:So, what exactly is wrong with it? (Score 1)

I try to think of how to respond to this question and prove that I have no desire to reduce myself to angry invective, as such is not my intention at all. First of all, I will at least "expose" myself to be a Roman Catholic so that you know where I am coming from in general as I respond to your post. As for indoctrination, I agree with you entirely up until the point of attributing child-rearing as a practice in indoctrination. In and of itself, Truth demands Freedom, for if there be a grounding to the world, it must be conformable to reason. However, a dissociation of humanity flows from a lack of desire to rear our children in those experiences which we vouch (with life and practice) to be true. However, I will agree that an essential element of child-rearing also requires the formation of a truly-questioning mind.

The Fathers of the Church viewed Christianity as more akin to philosophy than the religions of the day. Since the Gospel is primarily about an encounter with the Truth (although with personal dimension in Jesus Christ), it remains, in the final analysis, in the category of philosophy than it does in "religion," although it holds within it the dynamism toward re-ligation of humanity with the Truth. While the specifics of this may be contested, I am not trying to give a comprehensive view of doctrine or convince its validity. Instead, it is my desire to show you that, viewed as a branch of philosophy (although with a cultural-historical component which makes it somewhat different), Christianity is not an effort of believers to indoctrinate into the Truth. Instead, it is the higher (and true) calling of the Christian to be a light for the world through living in accord with that Truth. In so many ways, Christian groups try to reduce the end of Christian life to nothing more than political activism. In its essence it is not that at all but is instead an offering of encounter with Love in the lives of the believing community. These acts of love, supported by the Love of Christ, are to be part of the ongoing exodus in which the believers not only act positively but also come upon the limitations of themselves and their reason, continually moving forward in dialogue with the world, while remaining distinct from those portions of life which, by their nature, destroy the dialogical character of man.

With respect to your last comment, I would say this: Undialogical religion is a poison to rationality but philosophical thinking and morality are necessary components of a complete rationality. Without direction, materialistic thinking becomes utilitarian and is thus necessarily placed at the feet of power for its direction. Each century has shown us how any group (Christians included) ultimately destroy themselves and many others when power becomes the measure of action. Truth is the final end of all good science, just as it is the end of all true religion. Philosophy/Morality/Personal-encounter are part of the same complex of rationality of which materialistic science is also a member. The two mutually support each other and most definitely do not abrogate the other's raison d'etre.

I hope that this was not read in a spirit of anger because that is far from my desire. Dialogue is man's highest goal, and I merely mean to enter into dialogue.