If we put any store on popular opinion Canadians are “liberal” minded and therefore tolerant of contrarian religious views and commitments. They are more “secular” and therefore less hung-up on “moral” issues than are our American cousins. This of course is a convenient exaggeration of the facts, seeing that Canadians are not totally averse to the religious right, and have elected Conservative governments that support American policy at home and abroad. It is also instructive that substantial swaths of rural Canada constitute an ultramontane "Bible Belt," with all the trappings of the real thing.

It is no secret that in recent years the United States government, with an Evangelical wind at its back, has been on a far-right tack, and although less prominent in charting the course than its “Christian” brethren, the Catholic Church sits in the wheelhouse. The better part of twenty six years of John Paul II’s papacy witnessed the installation across North America of bishops hand-picked for their allegiance to a hard-line negative in matters such as married clergy, women priests, abortion, contraception and, more recently, gay marriage; not to mention a host of other issues from the oath of allegiance for Catholic university professors to proscriptions against stem cell research. Overt interference by Catholic Bishops in recent federal election campaigns in the United States and Canada spoke volumes for the Church’s burgeoning rightist agenda. Having suppressed “Liberation Theology” in Latin America, put the “option for the poor” on a back-burner, and pressed the brakes on giving the laity a meaningful role in the Church, Rome all but closed the window that for a twinkling after Vatican II revealed some willingness to commit to inclusiveness and lay empowerment. The elevation of Cardinal Ratzinger to the Chair of Peter holds no promise for change in any of these areas and indeed may be seen as a slap in the face for liberal Catholics around the world, who one suspects would have been much more accepting of a pontiff equally conservative but without baggage strewn over the past forty years.

For “Bible-believing” Christians the window never opened in the first place, so they never saw what was on the other side of the field. Today, fully recovered from their fall from grace after the Reagan years, they have emerged from the bushes and are boasting new and improved influence in the halls of power. With a direct line to God and exclusivist salvation rhetoric, militant Evangelicalism has adopted much the same egoistic, absolutist stance that, prior to the Second Vatican Council, Catholicism boasted. Needless to say the traditional "holier than thou" stand-off between Protestants and Catholics has expanded into the much touted “clash of civilizations,” with Islamaphobia never far below the surface. Mutual suspicion, fear mongering disguised as "homeland security," and ultimately, the horrific bombing of defenseless, downtrodden people are the unfortunate legacies of militarism that, unfortunately, have much to do with a warped Christian ideology. What of Christian ideals? How can professing Christians starve women and children by means of genocidal sanctions and still sleep at night? And finally, what do these aberrations say for those who elected the megalomaniacs in the first place? It is noteworthy that the day after the re-election of George W. Bush a British tabloid asked: “How can 59,054,087 people be so dumb?” At the same time, it would be grossly unfair to suggest that Americans own the franchise on "dumb and dumber;" without doubt, that charter is universal.

This book was not written to debunk Christianity as an ennobling religion, or for that matter the Catholic Church as an empowering Christian institution. It was written out of a deep frustration with the contrivance, control, and blatant unreason that pervades both. While recognizing that the Kantian model of "religion within the limits of reason" is almost a contradiction in terms, and even accepting that, scientifically speaking, religious assertions are absurd, I cannot deny there is a powerful need to reach outside of one's humanity to a higher power, whether or not there is a “verifiable” explanation for it. After all, much of life is unscientific. A rainbow does not captivate us because it exists in a scientific sense, certainly not because it is visible to us as it is to our dog or cat. The impact of the heavenly spectacle transcends the question of its “reality.” Awareness of the interaction between sunlight and water droplets may be important at some level, but adds nothing to our pleasure. Paradoxically, these physical attributes constitute an acceptable irrationality attendant upon that pleasure. On the other hand, the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow is what may be described as a “glaring irrationality" we reject out of hand. I believe skepticism and questioning are necessary attributes for people of faith who wish to avoid the inevitable dilution of Christianity in a sea of sob stories.

The Christian message of unconditional love fills us with wonder, mystery and a resolve to live better lives; whether or not religion is basically "irrational" is of no consequence. What matters is whether we reject the glitz that all but hides the message.

These pages attempt to unearth some of that fool’s gold at the end of the Christian rainbow. Academics will be quick to accuse me of venturing into their territory, stepping out of my assigned “box.” If it helps, I freely admit my shortcomings. However, I do not believe that academic prerogative is a good excuse for disaffected Christians “in the pews” to keep their frustrations to themselves. That said, I hasten to add that my overriding purpose in offering this book is to discuss ideas and actions, not the people or groups behind them. Accordingly, I disavow any malicious intent with regard to my examination and arguments, whether in reference to views, policies, or actions or the individuals or groups identifiable with them; and have no wish to impugn the character or person of correspondents, authors, academics and others cited in, the text. Last, but by no means least, the book does not seek to disparage family or friends, or, indeed, the many priests and religious I have come to know and respect over the years.

The contents are arranged in six parts, each subdivided according to topic. The first two parts comprise a personal confession and a discussion of misogynism in the Catholic Church. The second and third narrow the argument to Catholic and Evangelical “fundamentalism,” with forays into obscurantism - religious and quasi-religious – by means of letters, and reviews of books and film. Finally, the fifth and sixth parts look at the impotence of the Catholic laity, beginning with a personal reading of the history of this condition, and closing with suggestions for confronting the problem.

Because the book includes pieces written over several years, addressing similar issues from various viewpoints, there will be a certain amount of repetition or discontinuity. I pray that readers overlook intrusive echoes wherever found.

Unauthorized copying or use of copyrighted material is specifically prohibited.