would you say most priests actually believe in god?

One eyed Jack

o1s1n wrote: »

Because if it doesn't it's more than likely going to fade into obscurity and vanish.

Society is becoming more and more atheistic with every subsequent generation. Something I do enjoy seeing, so am happy for them to continue being a celebate males only club.

Has it occurred to you at all that the reason it has persisted for as long as it has and will continue to do so, is precisely because it portrays itself as a celibate males only club which doesn’t ordain women?

o1s1n

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Has it occurred to you at all that the reason it has persisted for as long as it has and will continue to do so, is precisely because it portrays itself as a celibate males only club which doesn’t ordain women?

Nope, it's persisted as long as it has due to mankind's ignorance.

Thankfully with the advent of the internet and the light speed spread of knowledge throughout the world in the last few decades, it's in massive decline - long may it continue.

Cee-Jay-Cee

RandomViewer wrote: »

Up until the early 80s it was considered a big thing to have a priest or nun in the family, lots pushed into it,

So true. My gran died in the mid 80’s, I used to stay with her during the week when at school. One morning I found her dead in bed. All my aunts thought this was some sort of ‘calling’ and were rattling on to me saying I should consider joining the priesthood after I finished school! What a crock of ****e! It was stupid aul women like that that drove innocent boys into the priesthood against their wishes. I’d say there were/are very few older priests who joined of their own accord and were pushed into it by family members who thought it was something to be proud of.

Gregor Samsa

I did have a Christian Brother religion teacher in secondary school who spent quite a bit of time arguing against the divinity of Jesus, refuting his miracles and stuff like that. Unfortunately most of the class just slept through it, but he had a big impact on me.

Seemingly this guy had been a successful business man, but had a drink problem and lost his business. There may have been a drink related accident of some sort involved too. He joined the Brothers in his 40s, in an attempt (as he saw it) to redeem himself and contribute to society without enriching himself.

timthumbni

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

I did have a Christian Brother religion teacher in secondary school who spent quite a bit of time arguing against the divinity of Jesus, refuting his miracles and stuff like that. Unfortunately most of the class just slept through it, but he had a big impact on me.

Seemingly this guy had been a successful business man, but had a drink problem and lost his business. There may have been a drink related accident of some sort involved too. He joined the Brothers in his 40s, in an attempt (as he saw it) to redeem himself and contribute to society without enriching himself.

That sounds more like a cry for help to me. The unfortunate thing is that he probably joined the worlds worst organisation regarding enriching society. Unless abuse of children and vulnerable adults were your thing. Who would let a priest into their home nowadays ffs?

Upforthematch

timthumbni wrote: »

Who would let a priest into their home nowadays ffs?

As much as I would anyone else? Talk about stereotyping....anyway back on topic.

Dutch pastor on 'believing in a God that does not exist'

The BBC's religious affairs correspondent Robert Pigott talks to Rev Klaas Hendrikse known in Holland as the "atheist pastor".

After writing a book called Believing in a God That Does Not Exist, disciplinary proceedings were taken against him by church authorites.

However he remained in his post as it was felt too many people in the Dutch Protestant Church held similar views.

A study by the Free University of Amsterdam found that one in six clergy in the Dutch Protestant Church were either agnostic or atheist.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-14410482/dutch-pastor-on-believing-in-a-god-that-does-not-exist

I would say most catholic priests do believe in God. There's so much "supernatural" stuff in catholicism compared to the protestants, so really how could you live out priest duties everyday otherwise?

B.A._Baracus

Tough question to answer.
As said before in the thread many of the old stock priests got into it as a way to hide being gay. But today being gay is accepted and accordingly the numbers of new priests is dwindling each year.

Given the fact you devote your life to God you have to figure a lot do genuinely have faith and believe in God. Not all tho.

It's a hard question to answer as am sure a lot of priests question their faith after a while which is natural. Some may no longer believe but be afraid to leave the church as what else can they do? (Easy choice to make when young but hard when you're older), there are those who are rouges who put the collar on and give a sermon but going with hookers and the like. Then of course who fully believe no matter what.

I dunno. It's the type of world where you'd have to be in it to fully understand what goes on.

I Am Nobody

Kylta wrote: »

I wrote this 18years ago.

The fiend behind the collar

I stand on the altar, to deliver a mass
I know people's trust just won't last
Jesus loves you, I do pray
With God's precious children, I will soon have my way
I am very sorry lord for the vows I took
I'm the pervert, thatyou overlooked
I make them kneel, I can make children bend
This urge I have I won't pretend
Forgive me father, I'm about to sin
To sodomise your children, I'm about to begin

I pray to the lord to set me free
Then more children I do see
A priest in God's house a reward for me
Anal butchery is all I see
The children scream and start to cry
God in heaven let me die
My reward for these disgusting crimes
A bishops position in the sunshine
With this mitre and this cape
More of God's children I get to rape
Nobody knows the damage I've done
In the name of the father and his holy son.


Guess if I wrote that in the middle ages. I'd be the number one draw on the auto de fe

That is very disturbingly good. I've only met two Priests in my life,one here and the other in the US.Both very much believed in God.Can't speak for the rest of them.

John Hutton

beveragelady wrote: »

I don't think any adult could really believe in God. Not really, not if they consider it seriously for more than a few seconds.

Priests belong to an organisation that had policies and procedures for protecting members from the consequences of their depravity. There's no way any of them really think there's an omniscient being who will make them face judgement and everlasting torture.

When I see footage of the pomp and ceremony in the Vatican, the gold leaf and velvet and the hideous excess, I often wish Jesus would float down on a sunbeam and ask them what the fluich they think they're doing, faffing about in unimaginable luxury while people die of preventable disease and hunger.

There's simply no way any of them really believe it. It doesn't mean they're all bad people, some of them have bought into it to such an extent that they need to keep pretending, but they know it's all horseapples.

Millions of people, over thousands of years, some of them the capital minds of their day, and today, deeply considered the subject and believe in a God.

Airyfairy12

I don't know the ins and outs of being a priest but from an outside perspective, Id imagine it's far from a handy number as its a total lifestyle, priests have to study for years before being qualified and it's basically a minimum wage job after 5 years of University education.
Besides saying Mass, doing funerals and weddings theyre called upon night and day to give last rights and deal with grieving families.
Then theres the sacrifices they have to make, no sex, no partner, no kids. It seems like a very lonely and boring life.

John Hutton

Most people who become priests do so because they feel that they are called to be a priest.

They generally have to discern for a year or two before seminary, and then attend seminary for seven years. It's not something you just apply for! It's a massive commitment and process to go through and lie all the way.

As for the Catholic church going forward, it's gone through worse periods before. Will become smaller for sure but who knows what the future holds.

To return to the OP, the gay aspect is missing the point. People are gay and also catholic. They are not incompatible. Gay people can and do believe in God.

I can't see how people would become priests if they do not believe in God. I'm sure there are some who are priests and maybe stopped believing but again it must be a minority.

beveragelady

John Hutton wrote: »

Millions of people, over thousands of years, some of them the capital minds of their day, and today, deeply considered the subject and believe in a God.

I just don't buy it. How could an adult think about it critically and still believe for one second that there might be any truth in it? If I 'deeply consider' something from the standpoint of 'Of course there's a god, and here's why,' then I'm unlikely to arrive at any independent conclusion. I might tie myself in knots playing word games like poor, clever old St Anselm, but I'm thinking like a child, swallowing axioms without applying any real thought.

It's this simple...
Which of these statements is false?
God is good.
God is omnipotent.
Somewhere in the world, in the 21st century, babies are dying of malnutrition.

The third is definitely true, which means at least one of the others isn't.

At this stage people might resort to the 'mysterious ways' card. This is the theological equivalent of a five year old insisting that they should be allowed to go up the snakes in a game of snakes and ladders. Logic and mature discussion goes out the window.

beveragelady

beveragelady wrote: »

The third is definitely true, which means at least one of the others isn't.
.

No it doesn't. It just doesn't mean that God doesn't equate with the scenario you set up.

Look. Religion is one thing. God is another. This is what many on this thread are mixing up.

I know quite a few priests, who are either family members or friends. They would all be people who likely believe in God, however, their belief in the rules and organisation of the RCC are a different thing entirely. The various Popes, and 'Princes' have for centuries tried to make people believe that their word equals that of God, but we live in a more enlightened time. People are generally educated enough to be able to separate concepts and hold them apart to be judged separately.

God is God. Even within the RCC there are hundreds, if not thousands, of different perceptions as to what God represents and whether his power is of this world or a more spiritual manifestation. We know that Religion is a man made structure and so it is flawed. It's corrupt. It's political.

I get that people want to say that God doesn't exist. I went through a similar phase when I was younger, and I added my own convoluted arguments to suggest that God was a figment of peoples imagination.. and that's the point. God is a figment of the imagination... doesn't make him less real to those people though. Actually, by "proving" to myself through hundreds of arguments that God didn't exist, it simply made me believe that God did exist.

Just not within the boundaries that people want to imprison God within.

Most priests I know well, would say that God is a personal belief, and that everyone has their own version to believe in. How God manifests depends entirely on that person... And you can believe in God, believe in aspects of the RCC, while also disagreeing with other aspects, or honestly, not believing in other teachings such as the Saints, but... still... follow the overall path.

People are complex. They can have conflicting beliefs... I've noticed that threads like these tend to try make the world into a very simple place. It's not.

marklazarcovic

both Catholicism and Scientology are the same fundamental thing, and zero proof of any of their core beliefs having ever existed,one group are classed as cult members,the other good Christians.


"believe our teachings ,they are the word of god", "hang on ,ours are ,believe ours",nonsense the whole lot of it.

John Hutton

beveragelady wrote: »

I just don't buy it. How could an adult think about it critically and still believe for one second that there might be any truth in it? If I 'deeply consider' something from the standpoint of 'Of course there's a god, and here's why,' then I'm unlikely to arrive at any independent conclusion. I might tie myself in knots playing word games like poor, clever old St Anselm, but I'm thinking like a child, swallowing axioms without applying any real thought.

It's this simple...
Which of these statements is false?
God is good.
God is omnipotent.
Somewhere in the world, in the 21st century, babies are dying of malnutrition.

The third is definitely true, which means at least one of the others isn't.

At this stage people might resort to the 'mysterious ways' card. This is the theological equivalent of a five year old insisting that they should be allowed to go up the snakes in a game of snakes and ladders. Logic and mature discussion goes out the window.

You have moved the goalposts here from talking about the existence of God to saying that because God doesn't fit your definition of good, God doesn't exist.

But then again, you don't believe that "adults" believe in God despite irrefutable evidence that they have done so for thousands of years and continue to do so, with some of the best minds the world has had believed in God.

But all of them, as per you, are irredeemably biased because you feel they all started from a position of already believing in God (this isn't true). But of course, you aren't biased are you? Or if you are, your bias is ok?

And you think that people haven't applied critical thought? That's just ignorance. Tomes and tomes of critical thought have been written about religion and religious belief. Just because their conclusions differ from yours doesn't mean they didn't think about it.

You are not half as clever as you think.

John Hutton

Btw the whole "evil exists, how can God exist, or how can he allow evil" has been a topic "critically thought" to death for centuries now, you're not the first to come up with it.... All old news.

ThewhiteJesus

John Hutton wrote: »

Do any of you know actually know any priests?


Or just ignorantly speculating?

I do, and I don't know how they could do it if they don't believe, or never believed.

It's a very tough life. It's ain't just saying Mass for a half hour on a Sunday.

Burials, weddings, confessions, counselling, school boards, visiting the sick and dying, administration of a parish(financial and just plain organisation, communions etc), spiritual direction, dealing with headcases moaning because the priest changed a mass time, multiple masses everyday sometimes over 2 parishes, loneliness (for some, more now because in the past priests didn't live alone), last rites to people splattered on a road at 3am, etc. etc. It goes on and on. Plus a significant proportion of society thinking you might be a pedo, and a vocal minority loathing you.

All for 24k a year.

They wouldn't do it if they didn't believe in God.

It’s not 24k a year, throw a house and car ect into the pot, they also choose to do this

John Hutton

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

It’s not 24k a year, throw a house and car ect into the pot, they also choose to do this

You're right, they got their wages cut so it's less now.

Whatever way you spin it it's hardly a lucrative money spinner after spending 7 years studying.

Of course they chose it, I never said they didn't? My point is that you wouldn't choose it if you didn't believe in God

ThewhiteJesus

John Hutton wrote: »

You're right, they got their wages cut so it's less now.

Whatever way you spin it it's hardly a lucrative money spinner after spending 7 years studying.

Of course they chose it, I never said they didn't? My point is that you wouldn't choose it if you didn't believe in God

I’m not spinning, you are.

Loafing Oaf

Interesting and valid question OP. There's a conservative Catholic poster on politics.ie who claims about 90% of contemporary Catholic 'priests' are atheists/agnostics. Like this guy:

beveragelady

There's a very good book by Will Storr called "The Heretics." It doesn't just deal with religion, it covers alien encounters, holocaust denial, imaginary diseases, that sort of thing. It's very entertaining and informative. What it repeatedly highlights is the tendency 'believers' have to claim absolute knowledge in the absence of evidence and to refuse to contemplate the implications of evidence that weakens their position. In fact they double down as more evidence is presented, adopting a firmer position in defiance of all logic.

The common thread I see is that these are all people who have hitched their wagon to a cause and it has become so important that to question it would be to question their own identity. Rather than examine the reality they're living in they keep playing along. This is not belief or faith, whatever you want to call it. It's a childlike willingness to comply.

John Hutton wrote: »

You are not half as clever as you think.

You have descended to personal comments. What does that tell us about the strength and integrity of your arguments?

One eyed Jack

o1s1n wrote: »

Nope, it's persisted as long as it has due to mankind's ignorance.

Thankfully with the advent of the internet and the light speed spread of knowledge throughout the world in the last few decades, it's in massive decline - long may it continue.

Reading that I’m sure you were referring to religion (which is actually spreading , as opposed to being in decline), but that’s not surprising given that contrary to your claims that the Internet has spread knowledge, it appears to have solidified people’s ignorance - it’s just a different sort of religion, if you will.

I’m not referring to non-religion as ignorance btw, of course it’s not, but fake news - that feeds mankind’s ignorance and perpetuates it. Now they’re not called priests any more, but life coaches.

El_Duderino 09

I doubt many become priests while not believing in a god. But I'd say plenty lose their belief while they are priests.

There's an organisation called The Clergy Project which helps religious professionals who stop believing. Priests usually have absolutely no marketable qualifications so they can't go and do any other job except unskilled labour. So they tend to stay priests even if they stop believing.

https://clergyproject.org/

tim3000

I'd say he percentage of them that do believe has declined greatly through the ages. I'd imagine this correlates with increased education, increased outside influence T.V. the internet etc.

These would expose a developing mind to arguments against a god with far more regularity than before. Given that 50 or 60 years ago our state broadcaster, our government and our society were firmly held in the grip of the C.C. this wasn't a time where critical thinking could flourish or open debate could take place for fear of social exclusion. Even if a young man contemplating the priesthood had doubts with whom could he talk with?

I'd say a large percentage of priests now don't have the same level of belief as older generations.

beveragelady

tim3000 wrote: »

Even if a young man contemplating the priesthood had doubts with whom could he talk with?

Not just men contemplating the priesthood. I was talking recently to a woman in her 70s who attended a school reunion a few years ago. She said that she had always gone along with the praying, the confessing and all the other outward displays of faith. She never believed a word of it though and in her youth she thought there was something different about her. She went to great lengths to disguise the fact that she didn't have this all-important faith in order to fit in. Nobody ever spoke about any of the obvious problems with Catholicism in particular and religion in general, so there was no opportunity to voice her opinion. Unsurprisingly she even had her children baptised and it wasn't until their confirmations loomed on the horizon that she began to say to them that if they didn't believe in it they didn't have to do it. She felt she left it too late, they all went ahead with it despite having no real belief themselves.
At her recent school reunion the became reacquainted with her group of school friends. They discovered that of the five of them who had been close friends in school, not one retained any religious inclination. They had all being playing along and they had all started their children along the same path.
That's how religion survives.

John Hutton

beveragelady wrote: »

There's a very good book by Will Storr called "The Heretics." It doesn't just deal with religion, it covers alien encounters, holocaust denial, imaginary diseases, that sort of thing. It's very entertaining and informative. What it repeatedly highlights is the tendency 'believers' have to claim absolute knowledge in the absence of evidence and to refuse to contemplate the implications of evidence that weakens their position. In fact they double down as more evidence is presented, adopting a firmer position in defiance of all logic.

The common thread I see is that these are all people who have hitched their wagon to a cause and it has become so important that to question it would be to question their own identity. Rather than examine the reality they're living in they keep playing along. This is not belief or faith, whatever you want to call it. It's a childlike willingness to comply.




You have descended to personal comments. What does that tell us about the strength and integrity of your arguments?

You're the one who hasn't engaged in any meaningful discussion, and instead denigrated those who believe in a God to "childlike" unthinkers, despite ample evidence in world history that people have critically engaged with the concept of God for thousands of years, many of whom emerge with a believe in a creator/God. You just can't accept that people can come to different conclusions that you, so you just repeatedly say, in different ways, that you are so smart, and anyone with a different conclusions or belief than you is "childlike".

When your argument boils down to you making the case that you are smarter than others then it is perfectly valid to engage with this underlying claim and say that you are not as smart as you think you are.

And to catagorise ontological reasoning as childlike is bizarre.

John Hutton

tim3000 wrote: »

I'd say he percentage of them that do believe has declined greatly through the ages. I'd imagine this correlates with increased education, increased outside influence T.V. the internet etc.

These would expose a developing mind to arguments against a god with far more regularity than before. Given that 50 or 60 years ago our state broadcaster, our government and our society were firmly held in the grip of the C.C. this wasn't a time where critical thinking could flourish or open debate could take place for fear of social exclusion. Even if a young man contemplating the priesthood had doubts with whom could he talk with?

I'd say a large percentage of priests now don't have the same level of belief as older generations.

Much of priestly formation involves the study of philosophy and extensive engagement with the arguments discussed on this thread. Plenty of people went to seminary and didn't finish, it's the same today.

John Hutton

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

I’m not spinning, you are.

It is a verifiable fact that priests in Ireland receive pay of an average of 24k. In Dublin, and elsewhere, this has been cut by a quarter.

How is this spinning?

Sure they get to live in a house and sometimes a car but it's a 24/7 job, and they can be moved on the whim of the Bishop.

No one is doing it for the cash! In fact today the average age of someone entering seminary is rising, with many leaving far more lucrative careers to study for the priesthood.

I have to say I find the two main arguments in this thread very unconvincing. People become priests because they are gay, or for the cash. Not buying it.

An argument that they are ordinary people who get super "brainwashed" into fervently believing the religion and hence become priests would be more persuasive.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

The strange thing about the priesthood, is not only that they need to take a vow of celibacy... but also no masturbation either. That's also a sin, right?

So basically, we are supposed to believe that anyone who joins the priesthood is basically asexual? Or is just so committed to god, that they deny their natural urges and desires? (Both scenarios are unlikely imo)

I mean, what sort of demented BS is that anyway? :P

I find all priests to be creepy in some way or another. I'm not saying every one of them is a pedo... but every priest I've encountered, seemed odd or weird in some way. And not the cool interesting kind of weird... the unsettling/unnerving sort of weird.

tea and coffee

beveragelady wrote: »

It's this simple...
Which of these statements is false?
God is good.
God is omnipotent.
Somewhere in the world, in the 21st century, babies are dying of malnutrition.

The third is definitely true, which means at least one of the others isn't.
.

Hope I'm not getting into the weeds on this one....
Yes the 3rd is true but is it not humans fault for allowing this? If we treated one another fairly, shared the wealth, were not corrupt (I mean the corrupt governments that allow their people to suffer), helped one another etc then this would not be the case.
For me God is love - whether that su scribes to any particular religion is immaterial. However if we all treated one another with "love" then these issues would not exist.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

John Hutton wrote: »

No one is doing it for the cash! In fact today the average age of someone entering seminary is rising, with many leaving far more lucrative careers to study for the priesthood.

Isn't it very interesting, that the word "seminary" sounds remarkably similar to the word "semen".... :P

I'll just leave that thought hanging there in the breeze!

Galwayguy35

I sometimes wonder do they watch porn.

John Hutton

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

The strange thing about the priesthood, is not only that they need to take a vow of celibacy... but also no masturbation either. That's also a sin, right?

So basically, we are supposed to believe that anyone who joins the priesthood is basically asexual? Or is just so committed to god, that they deny their natural urges and desires? (Both scenarios are unlikely imo)

I mean, what sort of demented BS is that anyway? :P

I find all priests to be creepy in some way or another. I'm not saying every one of them is a pedo... but every priest I've encountered, seemed odd or weird in some way. And not the cool interesting kind of weird... the unsettling/unnerving sort of weird.

For those interested, the vow of celibacy is a vow to never get married.

The thinking is that Priests are spiritual "father's" to the faithful and to engage sexually with people is a form of spiritual incest and abuse of position and authority. I think this is a fair enough teaching and we'd all have been better off if all priests had kept this over the years.

As for masterbation the church teaches that it is sinful, but no one expects a priest not to sin so I suppose they are the same as the rest of us and presumably do these things and go to confession?

In an age of sexual liberation I think a choice to not engage in sexual activity is as legitimate a choice as any other ( although probably far more difficult!)

My experience with priests, I know a few and a Bishop is a long-standing family friend, is that some are sound, some are pricks.

John Hutton

Of course, many eastern orthodox priests are married, and a significant number of priests who were formerly Anglican are married...

Galwayguy35

o1s1n wrote: »

Because if it doesn't it's more than likely going to fade into obscurity and vanish.

Society is becoming more and more atheistic with every subsequent generation. Something I do enjoy seeing, so am happy for them to continue being a celebate males only club.

There is about a billion catholics in the world so don't think its going away anytime soon.

beveragelady

tea and coffee wrote: »

Hope I'm not getting into the weeds on this one....
Yes the 3rd is true but is it not humans fault for allowing this? If we treated one another fairly, shared the wealth, were not corrupt (I mean the corrupt governments that allow their people to suffer), helped one another etc then this would not be the case.
For me God is love - whether that su scribes to any particular religion is immaterial. However if we all treated one another with "love" then these issues would not exist.

Love can exist without any god.

If you're going to give a god credit for rainbows and the wonders of nature and the perfection of a snowdrop then you have to give him credit for famine. Locusts, drought and desertification have the same origins as snowdrops.
Over the centuries politics and religion have been inextricable. War, another cause of famine, is so often fought over religion that it's not considered at all strange. Political regimes sought support and legitimacy from religious organisations and vice versa. This is the history of religion. Even now a coronation is a religious service, not a secular ceremony, implying that the monarch has been endorsed, if not chosen, by a god.

Remember it suits organised religion nicely to if the masses are hungry and desperate. It's no coincidence that when Ireland emerged from the grim eighties into the relative comfort of the nineties and the fluctuating wealth of the 21st C that we have simultaneously forced the church to loosen its hold on society. The church's stance on contraception in Africa despite the Aids epidemic tells you everything you need to know about its respect for the congregation. Keep 'em procreating, keep 'em hungry.

Loafing Oaf

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

The strange thing about the priesthood, is not only that they need to take a vow of celibacy... but also no masturbation either. That's also a sin, right?

So basically, we are supposed to believe that anyone who joins the priesthood is basically asexual? Or is just so committed to god, that they deny their natural urges and desires? (Both scenarios are unlikely imo)

I mean, what sort of demented BS is that anyway? :P

I find all priests to be creepy in some way or another. I'm not saying every one of them is a pedo... but every priest I've encountered, seemed odd or weird in some way. And not the cool interesting kind of weird... the unsettling/unnerving sort of weird.

'Rebel bishop' Pat Buckley often quotes a priest friend of his on this whole issue: "Pat, they wouldn’t let us get rid our semen and it went our head and made us mad”.:P

YellowBucket

One thing I’ve always noticed is you’ll run into people who were in college in the 1970s and were originally on the priesthood or nun path. It seems one or two were using it as a way to pay for university. Three people I’m thinking of became either very agnostic or are diehard atheist and are married, have kids, all great craic (two men one woman). The fourth moved to SF and is gay and similarly very non-religious.

It was just very expensive to get a degree if you had no money and it was a way to do it and opened doors. I think it was a bit like the way you see a lot of Americans who join the army to get educated and have little or no intention of being career military. Ireland’s education systems were equally inaccessible in the old days and the religious orders played the same role as the military might in the USA in terms of being able to access degrees and opportunity if you had no money.

Also I think you have to remember that we still have the vast majority of our schools in religious ownership, and in the old days they were extremely religious and were recruiting grounds for their sponsors.

Plenty of people were guided and pushed towards religious vocations by that system. I’ve talked to a few priests and nuns who just seemed to regret their choices.

I also know a few women of that era and older who were away to be nuns and typically left before it went too far. Again I think in a lot of cases it was seen as a sensible career option and pathway for some women who wanted to be teachers in particular and in aspects of nursing.

The one thing that struck me is that for women in the era before any notion of a women’s liberation movement in the 1960s (and really the 1970s in Ireland) being a nun was one of the few areas that you could wield real managerial power within organisations or political structures.

Nuns ran seriously big organisations like hospitals, schools, colleges and entire healthcare systems and were taken absolutely seriously, while “ordinary women” had few opportunities to ever be taken seriously in senior roles due to a culture of baked in, often very extreme sexism. I suspect that was a big draw for some as a way of achieving something.

Also in Ireland being a nun or a priest was a route into social service work and even, rather bizarrely particularly in Dublin (less so in Cork, as UCC is secular) areas like academic psychology before the 1980s were full of nuns and priests as they ran the institutions and the universities. I would suspect a lot of people who feel they want to work in socially beneficial services in modern times might become social workers, psychologists, follow career paths into medicine or nursing etc whereas in those days an element of that was linked to religious vocation. You still see traces of it through nursing in particular.

The most depressing story I heard was when I got talking to a Christian Brother. The guy would be dead a long time at this stage but it was when I was at the end of secondary school in about 2000 and he was maybe 80 back then.

I happened to ask him how he ended up as a Christian Brother and he was telling me how he wanted to play football. He was 13 and was basically on a path toward being a Brother from that point on. He wasn’t allowed meet girls. He was saying he had never had a girlfriend (or a boyfriend he actually half jokingly said that too) and he’d never kissed or hugged anyone his whole life - he seemed extremely bitter about it.

He also started saying how he had been beaten up a lot and treated like a skivvy spending years basically doing endless housework. I didn’t delve much into it but he certainly spent much of his life being under constant threat of serious physical abuse at the very least.

He went to school though and became a teacher but he had had no freedom whatsoever by the sounds of it. He was also telling me how he had only really begun to enjoy life in his 70s and 80s and was able to do more and the whole organisation was less oppressive since the scandals and power structures broke down. So he was off just being himself much more in his elderly years.

It was just a very sad story of a life regretted.

tim3000

beveragelady wrote: »

Not just men contemplating the priesthood. I was talking recently to a woman in her 70s who attended a school reunion a few years ago. She said that she had always gone along with the praying, the confessing and all the other outward displays of faith. She never believed a word of it though and in her youth she thought there was something different about her. She went to great lengths to disguise the fact that she didn't have this all-important faith in order to fit in. Nobody ever spoke about any of the obvious problems with Catholicism in particular and religion in general, so there was no opportunity to voice her opinion. Unsurprisingly she even had her children baptised and it wasn't until their confirmations loomed on the horizon that she began to say to them that if they didn't believe in it they didn't have to do it. She felt she left it too late, they all went ahead with it despite having no real belief themselves.
At her recent school reunion the became reacquainted with her group of school friends. They discovered that of the five of them who had been close friends in school, not one retained any religious inclination. They had all being playing along and they had all started their children along the same path.
That's how religion survives.

It's a shame they couldn't talk freely about it isn't it? There was too much control over day to day life by the church it has stunted the growth of our country.

Like that lady in your post my little one is baptised even though I don't practice, it was just done for peace sake. It is still a pervasive influence in society despite the several catastrophic knocks the C.C. has taken in recent decades.

tim3000

John Hutton wrote: »

Much of priestly formation involves the study of philosophy and extensive engagement with the arguments discussed on this thread. Plenty of people went to seminary and didn't finish, it's the same today.

Why do you think rates of ordination are falling?

John Hutton

Blaaz_ wrote: »

They used get big payoffs codding old people out of money and getting them to leave money/valuables in their will to the priest

So people became priests so they could con people out of their money?

You do know a large amount of religious priests take vows of poverty.

I'm not convinced people become priests for the cash.

John Hutton

beveragelady wrote: »

Love can exist without any god.

If you're going to give a god credit for rainbows and the wonders of nature and the perfection of a snowdrop then you have to give him credit for famine. Locusts, drought and desertification have the same origins as snowdrops.
Over the centuries politics and religion have been inextricable. War, another cause of famine, is so often fought over religion that it's not considered at all strange. Political regimes sought support and legitimacy from religious organisations and vice versa. This is the history of religion. Even now a coronation is a religious service, not a secular ceremony, implying that the monarch has been endorsed, if not chosen, by a god.

Remember it suits organised religion nicely to if the masses are hungry and desperate. It's no coincidence that when Ireland emerged from the grim eighties into the relative comfort of the nineties and the fluctuating wealth of the 21st C that we have simultaneously forced the church to loosen its hold on society. The church's stance on contraception in Africa despite the Aids epidemic tells you everything you need to know about its respect for the congregation. Keep 'em procreating, keep 'em hungry.

Interesting as this all is, it has zero bearing or relevance to the argument over whether or not there is a creator/god. Or is you point merely "if there is a God he must be a prick by my standards, therefore there's no God"?

John Hutton

tim3000 wrote: »

Why do you think rates of ordination are falling?

Because less people believe in God in Ireland (well thats debatable, it may be more accurate to say "actively engage with religious practice".)

Which is my point precisely, that people who become priests, certainly the vast majority, believe in God.

Of course people drip out of seminary for all reasons, the majority to get married, it doesn't mean they no longer believe.

beveragelady

tim3000 wrote: »

It's a shame they couldn't talk freely about it isn't it? There was too much control over day to day life by the church it has stunted the growth of our country.

Like that lady in your post my little one is baptised even though I don't practice, it was just done for peace sake. It is still a pervasive influence in society despite the several catastrophic knocks the C.C. has taken in recent decades.

I think the cycle is being broken though. It's slow but it's happening. I've been to a number of secular 'naming ceremonies' or 'baby welcoming ceremonies' in recent years, so it's becoming more common to ditch the baptism.


My father was the second of eight children. His older sister was sent off to a convent and is a retired nun now. She's good fun and was a beloved teacher in her day. When my father was coming to the end of secondary school his father took him in for a chat. The options were to inherit the farm or become a priest. If he studied to become a priest his parents would help him as much as they could, financially. If he didn't choose either of those options he was going to have to finance his own education. My dad had no notion of living the rest of his life on that farm, but he had no money and very few options for earning. He got his act together and collected the price of the fare to London where he worked on building sites, saving every penny, so he'd be able to get a degree.

Every single chance he got during his years in college, he was on the boat to London to scrape together the finances to continue. His parents contributed nothing, none of the help they would have been prepared to offer if he had joined a seminary.

One after the other my Dad's brothers did the same thing after the same chat with their father. There are no priests in the family because my Dad helped to blaze a trail to third level on his own terms. I don't know if it's true but I'm told he was the first boy from his primary school ever to enter third level.

This is why Ireland was producing priests, and the increased availability of education is why we've all but stopped.

John Hutton

Blaaz_ wrote: »

I know of several instances in my local area where sums of several hunderd thousands were codded out of old people by priests over a number of years?



I know antedocally of similar cases occuring across the state, this seems to been widespread


Large amounts of priests also take vow of celibacy and well we all know how much a joke,they made of that

Wouldn't there be easier ways to con people.out of cash if that's all your interested in?

I have to say, I think any priest would find the idea that the are priests for the money greatly amusing

John Hutton

beveragelady wrote: »

I think the cycle is being broken though. It's slow but it's happening. I've been to a number of secular 'naming ceremonies' or 'baby welcoming ceremonies' in recent years, so it's becoming more common to ditch the baptism.


My father was the second of eight children. His older sister was sent off to a convent and is a retired nun now. She's good fun and was a beloved teacher in her day. When my father was coming to the end of secondary school his father took him in for a chat. The options were to inherit the farm or become a priest. If he studied to become a priest his parents would help him as much as they could, financially. If he didn't choose either of those options he was going to have to finance his own education. My dad had no notion of living the rest of his life on that farm, but he had no money and very few options for earning. He got his act together and collected the price of the fare to London where he worked on building sites, saving every penny, so he'd be able to get a degree.

Every single chance he got during his years in college, he was on the boat to London to scrape together the finances to continue. His parents contributed nothing, none of the help they would have been prepared to offer if he had joined a seminary.

One after the other my Dad's brothers did the same thing after the same chat with their father. There are no priests in the family because my Dad helped to blaze a trail to third level on his own terms. I don't know if it's true but I'm told he was the first boy from his primary school ever to enter third level.

This is why Ireland was producing priests, and the increased availability of education is why we've all but stopped.

None of this anecdote, even if it were replicated widely, necessarily means that those who became priests didn't also believe in God.

John Hutton

Blaaz_ wrote: »

Given the respect and stature old people tradionally hold priests in,id say no.....there should be greater penalties for those abusing position of power/trust



Be that as it may,its the truth

So your evidence for this statement is that some priests conned people out of their money?

That's not very convincing

timthumbni

I’ve always been amazed at how big a hold the RC church had and still has over some people in Ireland.

For a people who are supposedly so feisty and rebellious it’s just seems bonkers that they were able to get away with the nonsense they did. A friend of mine had to go to marriage classes with the priest before he would do their wedding. I couldn’t stop laughing. What would a celibate catholic priest know about marriage exactly? It would be like stevie wonder playing darts.

Anyway my pal is an intelligent guy in general and would be an atheist. But still went through this bollocks. He said his family would disapprove if the priest wasn’t involved. It’s like a form of mass hysteria still exists that stops otherwise rational and intelligent adults from just saying balls to the whole thing.

John Hutton

Blaaz_ wrote: »

Its the truth though



Have you anything to suggest otherwise,pointing at vows of xy and z is pointless,when its fairly obvious they just paid no heed to em

My evidence is their average pay of 24k (before covid it's less now) and that they could easily have studied something else and got a better paying job, especially today.

Your rebuttal of this was an anecdote that some priests stole money.

That's not very convincing is it...

John Hutton

timthumbni wrote: »

I’ve always been amazed at how big a hold the RC church had and still has over some people in Ireland.

For a people who are supposedly so feisty and rebellious it’s just seems bonkers that they were able to get away with the nonsense they did. A friend of mine had to go to marriage classes with the priest before he would do their wedding. I couldn’t stop laughing. What would a celibate catholic priest know about marriage exactly? It would be like stevie wonder playing darts.

Anyway my pal is an intelligent guy in general and would be an atheist. But still went through this bollocks. He said his family would disapprove if the priest wasn’t involved. It’s like a form of mass hysteria still exists that stops otherwise rational and intelligent adults from just saying balls to the whole thing.

In the Catholic Church marriage is a sacrement. Who is better placed than a priest to explain the religious nature of marriage. I dont think it's unreasonable for the church to ask people to attend a course about a religious ceremony and what it means before they go through with it.

I mean he didn't have to, he could have had some backbone instead of lying his way through the whole thing.