Bishop says Yoga is not suitable for a parish school

Mrs OBumble

Strumms wrote: »

Yoga plays a massive part now for people involved in recovery from serious chronic physical illness and injury... I know because of what I’ve read, what I’m told by doctors, sports people and physiotherapists.. I know because I’m one of those people who needed it to help me walk again and get back to health.

Where is your yogi from?

If you don't have one, then it's arguable that what you were doing is really yoga.

briangriffin

olestoepoke wrote: »

Catholic priest is against school children bending over and stretching. Now theres a shocker! Religion has no place in schools and the Catholic Church should be kept a million miles away from the children of Ireland.

Can you see any benefit to religion in schools?

Strumms

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Where is your yogi from?

If you don't have one, then it's arguable that what you were doing is really yoga.

It is yoga, you are saying it’s ‘arguable’ that what I’m doing is really yoga ? Unless you are at these sessions and qualified to make this proclamation then you are clearly talking gibberish and you are, that’s not arguable, that’s a fact in stone. My gym instructor is Irish, a medical doctor, the foremost expert in sports medicine in the country, a fact universally acknowledged by the medical and sports industries in this country and abroad as well as education experts...

Snow Garden

briangriffin wrote: »

Can you see any benefit to religion in schools?

I think all the main world religions should be taught in a general informational kind of way. All the sacrament stuff and practice should be handled outside schools by parents and religious leaders.

One eyed Jack

Snow Garden wrote: »

I think all the main world religions should be taught in a general informational kind of way. All the sacrament stuff and practice should be handled outside schools by parents and religious leaders.

That works of course for educational facilities that aren’t established and owned by the religious organisations. But it doesn’t work for schools that are established and owned by religious organisations, founded with the purpose of providing education to people in their religious communities.

The type of educational facilities you’re talking about do exist - schools in which the Patron body aren’t a religious organisation - An Foras Pátrúnachta, Educate Together, ETB, etc, but there’s just not that many of them in comparison to the number of schools established by religious organisations.

Snow Garden

One eyed Jack wrote: »

That works of course for educational facilities that aren’t established and owned by the religious organisations. But it doesn’t work for schools that are established and owned by religious organisations, founded with the purpose of providing education to people in their religious communities.

The type of educational facilities you’re talking about do exist - schools in which the Patron body aren’t a religious organisation - An Foras Pátrúnachta, Educate Together, ETB, etc, but there’s just not that many of them in comparison to the number of schools established by religious organisations.

Correct and that situation is very wrong. Only a matter of time before it's rectified.

The more nonsense bishops and priests spout, the more irrelevant they become.

One eyed Jack

Snow Garden wrote: »

Correct and that situation is very wrong. Only a matter of time before it's rectified.

The more nonsense bishops and priests spout, the more irrelevant they become.

I dunno SG, and I’m not being funny or anything but it does appear to me as though people will put up with an awful lot of shìte as long as they’re benefiting from it in one way or another, and for the vast majority of people it does appear as though they prefer to benefit from the current system as opposed to the idea of having to inconvenience themselves in any way for the minority who would prefer the widespread adoption of a system which suits them, but they expect everyone else who doesn’t appear to want it, should have to pay for it’s implementation.

In short, essentially - if the majority of people wanted what you’re suggesting, it wouldn’t even be a matter of time as it would have happened long ago. However, because the implementation of the system you want costs money, people aren’t nearly so eager to support it. This is shown in the budget every year where Government allocates a mere pittance for funding education on behalf of the State.

Snow Garden

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I dunno SG, and I’m not being funny or anything but it does appear to me as though people will put up with an awful lot of shìte as long as they’re benefiting from it in one way or another, and for the vast majority of people it does appear as though they prefer to benefit from the current system as opposed to the idea of having to inconvenience themselves in any way for the minority who would prefer the widespread adoption of a system which suits them, but they expect everyone else who doesn’t appear to want it, should have to pay for it’s implementation.

In short, essentially - if the majority of people wanted what you’re suggesting, it wouldn’t even be a matter of time as it would have happened long ago. However, because the implementation of the system you want costs money, people aren’t nearly so eager to support it. This is shown in the budget every year where Government allocates a mere pittance for funding education on behalf of the State.

You are thinking about it using a tainted generation with loads of inherited baggage. The next generation and the one after that will not be so 'brainwashed' and will not be afraid to do the right thing. Shure look at the gombeens we have in the Dail today. Only a few brave politicians among them.

The difference between when I grew up (70s/80s) and today is frankly unbelievable. People feared priests and their Roman leaders so so much. Not anymore.
Parents are nearly embarrassed to make a big deal of communion these days. They know they are being shallow and to be honest cowardly. It's the easy 'cultural' option I guess. Many essentially only bring their kids to mass for 1 season. In time parents will be asking schools to replace religion with more worthwhile endeavours.

One eyed Jack

Snow Garden wrote: »

You are thinking about it using a tainted generation with loads of inherited baggage. The next generation and the one after that will not be so 'brainwashed' and will not be afraid to do the right thing. Shure look at the gombeens we have in the Dail today. Only a few brave politicians among them.

It’s easy to be ‘brave’ when they never actually have to do anything, just say all the things that the people who elect them want to hear, until they get their knuckles rapped and are put back in line.

I’m not looking at it from any perspective other than simply pointing out that reality doesn’t match your expectations. Government will never be willing to spend the kind of money it would take to offer people the kind of educational services you’re expecting. It’s just not going to happen, because you’d very quickly find out how ‘brave’ some of those politicians are when it comes to putting public money where their mouths are and still hoping to be elected in the next general election.

Snow Garden wrote: »

The difference between when I grew up (70s/80s) and today is frankly unbelievable. People feared priests and their Roman leaders so so much. Not anymore.
Parents are nearly embarrassed to make a big deal of communion these days. They know they are being shallow and to be honest cowardly. It's the easy 'cultural' option I guess. Many essentially only bring their kids to mass for 1 season. In time parents will be asking schools to replace religion with more worthwhile endeavours.

Bit of an exaggeration now seeing as I grew up in the same era and people were more fearful of their reputations among their neighbours than they were of any clergy. That much hasn’t changed as people are still more concerned about their reputations and ensuring their children get into a school with a good reputation in traditional education as opposed to the more progressive type of education offered by Patrons who are of the same idealistic bent as the ‘brave’ politicians you alluded to earlier - John Halligan being a good example of the type of gobshìte you’re pinning your hopes on.

I’ve yet to experience a parent who is embarrassed for their children making communion tbh. I’ve certainly experienced plenty of the opposite - parents who are embarrassed their children aren’t making their communion, and to make up for the idea that their children won’t be making their communion, they do things like bringing them on trips to Anfield or Disneyland so their children have something to talk about in school.

I don’t think parents actually will generally be asking schools to replace religion with something they consider more worthwhile endeavours to be honest, because that would undermine the fundamental purpose of schools with a religious ethos. It’s far more likely if anything will happen, the minority of people who value the type of education you hope for will be expected to establish their own Patron body and apply for funding from the State in the same way as every other Patron body is expected to do.

Snow Garden

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It’s easy to be ‘brave’ when they never actually have to do anything, just say all the things that the people who elect them want to hear, until they get their knuckles rapped and are put back in line.

I’m not looking at it from any perspective other than simply pointing out that reality doesn’t match your expectations. Government will never be willing to spend the kind of money it would take to offer people the kind of educational services you’re expecting. It’s just not going to happen, because you’d very quickly find out how ‘brave’ some of those politicians are when it comes to putting public money where their mouths are and still hoping to be elected in the next general election.

Bit of an exaggeration now seeing as I grew up in the same era and people were more fearful of their reputations among their neighbours than they were of any clergy. That much hasn’t changed as people are still more concerned about their reputations and ensuring their children get into a school with a good reputation in traditional education as opposed to the more progressive type of education offered by Patrons who are of the same idealistic bent as the ‘brave’ politicians you alluded to earlier - John Halligan being a good example of the type of gobshìte you’re pinning your hopes on.

I’ve yet to experience a parent who is embarrassed for their children making communion tbh. I’ve certainly experienced plenty of the opposite - parents who are embarrassed their children aren’t making their communion, and to make up for the idea that their children won’t be making their communion, they do things like bringing them on trips to Anfield or Disneyland so their children have something to talk about in school.

I don’t think parents actually will generally be asking schools to replace religion with something they consider more worthwhile endeavours to be honest, because that would undermine the fundamental purpose of schools with a religious ethos. It’s far more likely if anything will happen, the minority of people who value the type of education you hope for will be expected to establish their own Patron body and apply for funding from the State in the same way as every other Patron body is expected to do.

We will have to agree to disagree. Time will tell but I am confident the next generation will see the flaws in having Rome control the schools and remedy the situation.

This was a good start: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/state-run-secondary-school-pupils-may-opt-out-of-religion-classes-1.3391353

Pupils in State-run secondary schools are to be given the option of opting out of religious instruction and studying alternative subjects on an annual basis.

The move is aimed at reflecting the changing profile of students attending schools and a decrease in religious belief.

It will affect tens of thousands of students in 275 of the State’s 700-plus secondary schools run by Education and Training Boards (ETBs).

One eyed Jack

Snow Garden wrote: »

We will have to agree to disagree. Time will tell but I am confident the next generation will see the flaws in having Rome control the schools and remedy the situation.

This was a good start: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/state-run-secondary-school-pupils-may-opt-out-of-religion-classes-1.3391353

Rome have always controlled their own schools and will continue to control their own schools is the point I’m making, and the State will have their ETB’s and other Patrons will have their types of schools, but until such a time as the majority of people who enrol their children in religious ethos schools choose not to do so, then religious ethos schools will continue to receive funding from the State for the provision of the type of education which is preferred by the children’s parents or guardians.

Snow Garden

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Rome have always controlled their own schools and will continue to control their own schools is the point I’m making, and the State will have their ETB’s and other Patrons will have their types of schools, but until such a time as the majority of people who enrol their children in religious ethos schools choose not to do so, then religious ethos schools will continue to receive funding from the State for the provision of the type of education which is preferred by the children’s parents or guardians.

Yeah yeah we'll see. Time will tell. And money.
I doubt you or I will be alive to see the day but I fully expect religious practice to be taken out of education.
I wonder when the history books will start to document the decades of institutional child abuse facilitated by the dysfunctional Roman organisation.

One eyed Jack

Snow Garden wrote: »

Yeah yeah we'll see. Time will tell. And money.
I doubt you or I will be alive to see the day but I fully expect religious practice to be taken out of education.

But it is already taken out of education!

Basically there’s two things here - there are religious organisations which provide education, and there are non-religious organisations which provide education. Both types of education are funded by by the State because they teach the National Curriculum (one of the criteria to qualify for State funding). I don’t see any way in which religious ethos schools could be denied funding, and the ideas that have been put forward to try and deny religious ethos schools State funding, generally consist of violating people’s human rights, so they’re a bit of a non-starter.

Snow Garden wrote: »

I wonder when the history books will start to document the decades of institutional child abuse facilitated by the dysfunctional Roman organisation.

With History being an optional subject in Irish schools now, children are even more unlikely ever to read about institutional child abuse facilitated by religious organisations, which is a good thing if you ask me tbh, who wants to read about that crap?

Snow Garden

One eyed Jack wrote: »

With History being an optional subject in Irish schools now, children are even more unlikely ever to read about institutional child abuse facilitated by religious organisations, which is a good thing if you ask me tbh, who wants to read about that crap?

Are you serious? "that crap"?? The holocaust and famine are ok to teach but let's not expose our young people to the truth about the endemic rape and abuse of Irish children in Roman Catholic care?

KWAG2019

The underlying problem is clear: the state cannot continue to farm out education to "patron" bodies. Funding teachers for schools controlled by bodies who claim their "ethos" overrules state law is intolerable. The argument that parents don't want the change has no merit: parents are not offered a clear choice. The state schools are tied to "ethos" and the 1998 act. If parents knew that by sending their child to a proper state school they would get more subject choice and more support as teachers would not need to be diverted into RE I think it would be game over very quickly. The politicians are hoping to head in this direction through incremental steps while religion collapses under the weight of its own absurdity. It protects them and it achieves the goal but it could easily take another 50 years.

One eyed Jack

Snow Garden wrote: »

Are you serious? "that crap"?? The holocaust and famine are ok to teach but let's not expose our young people to the truth about the endemic rape and abuse of Irish children in Roman Catholic care?

Well it is crap, and you’re yet to answer my question - who wants to read about that crap?

KWAG2019

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Well it is crap, and you’re yet to answer my question - who wants to read about that crap?

I'm afraid asserting that the systematic and protected abuse of minors is "crap" and expecting that to form the premise for any subsequent discussion is...well...****e. I'm looking for the mute button.

One eyed Jack

KWAG2019 wrote: »

I'm afraid asserting that the systematic and protected abuse of minors is "crap" and expecting that to form the premise for any subsequent discussion is...well...****e. I'm looking for the mute button.

I don’t expect that crap to ever form the basis of anything taught to children in schools, nor would I want it to be, nor would I expect it to form the premise of any discussion as to whether or not religious ethos schools should continue to be funded by the State for the provision of education to children whose parents want that type of education for their children.

If that’s something Snow Garden feels strongly enough about that they feel their children should know about it, that’s fair enough, but I see no reason as to why it should be taught in schools of any description as it is of no educational value whatsoever as far as I’m concerned. I wouldn’t want my child exposed to it any more than I would expect an anti-religious person should want their child exposed to ideas and values that they do not share or support.

Snow Garden

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Well it is crap, and you’re yet to answer my question - who wants to read about that crap?

History is not about who wants to read anything or whether it's crap or not. Its about revealing the truth and learning from it. You sound either very shallow or an apologist. The child abuse committed by the church should never be hidden.

One eyed Jack

Snow Garden wrote: »

History is not about who wants to read anything or whether it's crap or not. Its about revealing the truth and learning from it. You sound either very shallow or an apologist. The child abuse committed by the church should never be hidden.

I’m not advocating hiding anything, I’m just not interested in reading about it is all, it’s miserable and I certainly wouldn’t quantify a biased opinion as accurate and objective lessons in history that should be taught to children. You might as well be encouraging them to read Angela’s Ashes if you want to expose children to that kind of misery porn. You’re nowhere near revealing the truth when you’re only presenting half-truths and you appear to be unwilling to acknowledge that the State and society were just as much willing collaborators in maintaining the status quo throughout what is a fairly murky period in Irish history.

What you’re doing is like taking something like Yoga out of context and wanting to present your own spin on it to have children participate in it when they don’t know any better.

Snow Garden

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I’m not advocating hiding anything, I’m just not interested in reading about it is all, it’s miserable and I certainly wouldn’t quantify a biased opinion as accurate and objective lessons in history that should be taught to children. You might as well be encouraging them to read Angela’s Ashes if you want to expose children to that kind of misery porn. You’re nowhere near revealing the truth when you’re only presenting half-truths and you appear to be unwilling to acknowledge that the State and society were just as much willing collaborators in maintaining the status quo throughout what is a fairly murky period in Irish history.

What you’re doing is like taking something like Yoga out of context and wanting to present your own spin on it to have children participate in it when they don’t know any better.

What are you on about? I haven't presented anything. Actually forget about it, I think your blinkers are too big for a rational discussion.

Snow Garden

KWAG2019 wrote: »

The underlying problem is clear: the state cannot continue to farm out education to "patron" bodies. Funding teachers for schools controlled by bodies who claim their "ethos" overrules state law is intolerable. The argument that parents don't want the change has no merit: parents are not offered a clear choice. The state schools are tied to "ethos" and the 1998 act. If parents knew that by sending their child to a proper state school they would get more subject choice and more support as teachers would not need to be diverted into RE I think it would be game over very quickly. The politicians are hoping to head in this direction through incremental steps while religion collapses under the weight of its own absurdity. It protects them and it achieves the goal but it could easily take another 50 years.

Great post, totally agree. It will happen but it will take time.

YFlyer

Esel wrote: »

A course in Transcendental Meditation will help His Grace to chill.

All he needs is an apple and a clean white handkerchief; nothing too spooky about that.

The puja may spook him. People of faith take extra lectures prior to learning TM.

YFlyer

Gynoid wrote: »

Technically the Bishop is correct.

It is nothing new. I have been teaching Yoga for 30 years - long ago the Parish Priests would regulrly preach about the local yoga class from the pulpit, but so what, that is their right. It has never bothered me even a tiny bit. I feel respectful of their religion. The nuns have always graciously rented convent spaces. Some priests likewise rent community spaces over which they have control.

It is kind of a pity that the Bishop does not use his objection as an opportunity to hone his metaphysical argumentation, instead of some infantile dismissal. It would be more honest if the clergy appreciated the intellectual capacity of their flock, rather than shepherding them as a helpless flock, but then I think this intellectual contempt for their congregation is more behind the decline in Catholicism than any abuses. Bishops could draw on fascinating theologians such as Thomas Aquinas or Johannes Scotus to make arguments for the raison d'etre of their positions, but instead they choose to finger wag as the all-knowing paternalists.

Anyway Yoga, in spite of the bastardisation of it by almost all western practitioners, whereby the metaphysical element has been reduced to a feel good, Im all right Jack, New Age NLP-style delusion, is in fact deeply roted in Vedic metaphysics. I don't teach that aspect though I have never tried to pretend that Yoga is simply a stretching routine. It is not. There are many ultra physical types of yoga out there but they simply trade under the name yoga - they are (often extreme) aerobics under a presumptive name. Nothing wrong with them - they are what they are.

Thing about Vedic metaphysics and its later interrogations is that it runs the gamut from full on atheism to full on union with God. And owing to the very open nature of the Hindu psyche people from opposite ends of this spectrum can be happily married to each other and understand and accept the others point of view. Our western psyches with their emphasis on individualism are far more polarised.

But essentially Yoga is a metaphysical practice with a deeply religious background. The physical elements especially were codified in the late middle ages in books like Hatha Yoga Pradipika and the Samhitas. Its philosophical elements were codified much earlier by great thinkers like Patanjali and Shankaracharya - people often claim these philosophers were atheist but they were not (it could be argued that Shankaracharya was responding to the atheistic terms of the growing popularity of Buddhism of his times, and thus arguing on that level...but then again I think there is even an argument to be made that the atheism of Buddhism has been over-stated) . These philosophers were deeply rooted in the religious persuasions of their times. Elements of Yoga can be traced back to the Rig Veda, but it goes back even further and one could say that there are elements from the early shamanic cultures that are the beginnings of all religion planet wide. It is a highly elemental metaphysics.

The traditional metaphor of uniting Shiva and Shakti through the practises of yoga, refer on one level to those deities, and in India that would be a common understanding, not even as an allegory but as pure reality for the devotee, and on other levels to the potential inner union of the forces of nature or matter (Prakriti - Shakti) and pure consciousness (Purusha - Shiva). Yoga on all levels of manifestation is de facto full of gods, goddesses, metaphysics, religion. The Bishop is correct to know that in many ways, as a system which anticipates the human potential of self reliance when it comes to the experience of the numinous, yoga is antithetical to any Abrahamic religion that relies - in its exoteric manifestation, at least, which is what most know - on a priestly caste to intercede with the Divine on behalf of its adherents. Although there are interesting people like Bede Griffiths who made great inroads into bridging any divide.

Anyway. Fair cop, Bishop.

Maharishi Mahesh Yogi has stressed that yoga and TM does not affect ones religion.

LoughNeagh2017

Yoga is just an excuse for young women to dress in leggings, do you see the state of them? You can basically see the entire shape of a woman's ass nowadays just by looking at them on the street and sometimes you can even see their underwear. If that is acceptable dress nowadays then I'd rather not go outside, if I ever become muscular I am going to walk about in little muscle vests with sweat dripping from me in centra and see how women like it. Then there is the short shorts in the summer, they should have a section in New Look called "Slut wear"

Odhinn

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I’m not advocating hiding anything, I’m just not interested in reading about it is all, it’s miserable and I certainly wouldn’t quantify a biased opinion as accurate and objective lessons in history that should be taught to children. You might as well be encouraging them to read Angela’s Ashes if you want to expose children to that kind of misery porn. You’re nowhere near revealing the truth when you’re only presenting half-truths and you appear to be unwilling to acknowledge that the State and society were just as much willing collaborators in maintaining the status quo throughout what is a fairly murky period in Irish history.

What you’re doing is like taking something like Yoga out of context and wanting to present your own spin on it to have children participate in it when they don’t know any better.

So do we drop the famine, the holocaust, massacres of native americans, the dropping of the a-bomb because they're "miserable"? Replace it with a sing song - "shiny happy people holding hands"

Gynoid

YFlyer wrote: »

Maharishi Mahesh Yogi has stressed that yoga and TM does not affect ones religion.

Maharishi 2 billion in the bank pink aeroplane sex mad guy who preached celibacy guru of a worldwide cult Mahesh Yogi? That one?

One eyed Jack

Odhinn wrote: »

So do we drop the famine, the holocaust, massacres of native americans, the dropping of the a-bomb because they're "miserable"? Replace it with a sing song - "shiny happy people holding hands"

You could do if you wanted I suppose, but the original argument was concerned with teaching children about the history of institutional child sexual abuse perpetuated by the religious orders and the poster was wondering when that would appear on the history curriculum. I wouldn’t be interested in arguing for it to appear on the curriculum, whatever about anything else that already appears or doesn’t on the history curriculum that’s been made an optional subject in Irish schools.

Odhinn

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You could do if you wanted I suppose, but the original argument was concerned with teaching children about the history of institutional child sexual abuse perpetuated by the religious orders and the poster was wondering when that would appear on the history curriculum. I wouldn’t be interested in arguing for it to appear on the curriculum, whatever about anything else that already appears or doesn’t on the history curriculum that’s been made an optional subject in Irish schools.

The minister rejected plans for it to be made optional
https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/minister-to-ignore-curriculum-bodys-advice-and-give-history-special-status-954110.html



https://www.education.ie/en/Press-Events/Press-Releases/2019-press-releases/PR19-10-01.html

weldoninhio

youknowitstrue wrote: »

i imagine the type of school that has yoga teachers also has children with the names Sebastian, Tarquin, Sloan, Jasper, India, Kingsley,Margaux, Brinsley, Orson, Quentin,Francesca and so on, you know the type.
Nothing to see here more on, let them at it, they will all be hooked on antidepressants/coke and the rest by their mid 20's, Yoga will be the lest of their worries

I left school in 2000. We used to do yoga for a few weeks of the school year most years. This wasn't a leafy south Dublin school, it was rural North County Dublin