Fall of the Catholic Church

Starfire, you keep mention religion as been integrated in hospitals.... The schools part I can understand, but Hospitals??? And you think that the Catholic Religion will die out....I would not agree with that Starfire, but there you go.

Any bargain which is expected to be taken on trust (such as God and Heaven and Hell) is not a concept worth subscribing to. In a world expecting such trust anything is possible and there is literally no way of knowing if you have struck a deal with the right "God". Without a clear amount of evidence there is no deal worth striking as you could very easily find yourself in "Hell" without even realizing thats the deal you struck.

Anyone who would be prepared to strike such a deal "just in case" is of low moral conviction and would undoubtedly fail the test "at the gates anyway".

Of course all that is just an intellectual exercise, as there is absolutely no reason to be afraid of "monsters under the bed" anyway.

I wouldn’t know. I suspect that I’m significantly younger than other posters, so will hopefully not be something I experience for many decades. I don’t invest much time concerning myself with others beliefs. Perhaps you could do the same?

If only the church would take the same disinterested approach in schools.

But they’re schools owned and run by the Church Andrew, so the likelihood of the Church being disinterested in their own schools is nil, it’s just not going to happen. What’s even less likely to happen is that the idea that they have any interest in listening to people who want them out of their own schools.

So in a few decades time even, what you’ll have is still the 3,000 or so religious schools, and you won’t even have anything close to the 400 multi-denominational schools that the current Government has said it plans to establish by 2030 -

The Government has been criticised for its “slow” progress in providing access to multi-denominational education as new figures show Catholic schools account for 89 per cent of primary schools.

The Programme for Government commits to improving parental choice by meeting a target of delivering 400 multi-denominational primary schools by 2030.

However, new figures show there are 164 multi-denominational schools compared with 2,750 Catholic primary schools.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/progress-on-multi-denominational-schools-too-slow-1.4772503

What road?

And where did I say any such thing? You are making stuff up now. It is a seriously odd take on what I wrote to come out with this as a response. Did you perhaps hit REPLY on the wrong post entirely? Not one thing you wrote here seems related to anything I wrote at all.

It is, as I said I was told by such people directly, a tactic these people employ. Not just theists though. Other charlatans and extortion artists are good at placing things. Street Magicians do it too, as I learned from a board user who does a lot of street magic. When a street magician pulls a card from your pocket or behind your cafe chair they may have actually planted it minutes or even hours before they showed you the card trick for example.

But street preachers tend to get a lot of disdain and get ignored or even abused. So they have had to refine their craft with more subtle tactics. And dropping psalms under your cafe chair and then pointing out "you dropped something" as you get up to leave is one of the more established tactics. It gets people to talk the psalm into their hand where they otherwise would not have if it was offered to them by hand on the street.

But more importantly it tricks the "mark" into thinking their encountering of the psalm was serendipitous rather than contrived to serve an agenda. As if god or the universe wanted you to get the card in that moment. Basically they are exploiting an aspect of the human psyche to manipulate you, called "Hyperactive agency detection" which is the evolved tendency of humans to see, or over construe, agency even where no agency exists.

So it is somewhat likely the woman in question was manipulating and tricking you and.... from your description of the event and how it affected you.... it worked.

That whole world and the psyche of it is fascinating to me. How they go about manipulating people. Or even how they manipulate EACH OTHER. For example have you ever wondered when people like the Mormons dress up in their suits and go door to door.... WHY they are actually being sent out to do that? The obvious answer is that they are looking for converts to the church. Another answer I heard from talking to one of the people who's job it is to actually send such people out into the world........ is a hell of a lot more insidious and sly and manipulative.

We do not do ANYTHING? Speak for yourself. Many of the rest of us most certainly do. And should.

But the fact is WE as a society DO have a say in how people can or can not raise their children. We do it all the time. We can and should as a society discuss how deep and far that goes, where society should stick it's nose in, and where is should not. You phrase it as "Limiting the states interference" but that is really the same thing phrased another way. We as a society, can, should and do discuss exactly how far the state/societies involvement in it should go. But that said involvement exists is simply a fact, and is a good thing.

So the fact is we DO do it. All the time. And people with a concept that their children are somehow their possessions quickly learn how far that will get them (not far at all) when they cross certain lines in how they think they have a right to go about it.

I gave examples of this already. Try deciding sometime that your method of parenting is to ensure your child does not learn to read, write or do math or get any kind of education. Try deciding that extreme violence is your method of discipline. Try deciding that your means of educating your child on sex is to personally give them hands on demonstrations. Such people will very quickly learn how far their rights go or their concept that "no one else should have a say in how they go about treating them or raising them."

I have said this on many threads before. But I am FASCINATED by this concept that you "Choose" what to believe. I have heard it so many times, from so many people, that I have to entertain the concept that this is what some people are capable of doing. And that is fascinating to me.

It is fascinating because I ENTIRELY lack that ability. I can not "choose" what to believe. I am either compelled without any control to belief by evidence, argument, data and reasoning......... or I fail to believe something because that substantiation is lacking. At no point do I have any choice in the matter. Even a little bit. Intellectually it feels like being thrown out of an airplane naked and then being told I am "choosing" not to fly, when it appears to me I have literally no choice in the matter.

What does it feel like to have that ability? How labile is your credulity? If I give you an empty box can you CHOOSE to believe it is stuffed full of money, and actually have that belief take hold? Or is it limited only to areas of imagination that brook no collisions with evidence or the real world.... such as belief in a god?

My lack of belief in any gods is not a choice therefore. It is a result of the simple fact that not just some, or most, but ALL theists I have ever encountered directly or indirectly simply have no arguments, no evidence, no data, and no reasoning to offer that lends even a modicum of credence or substantiation to their claim a non-human intelligence is responsible for the creation and/or subsequent maintenance of our universe.

Interesting that we had a conversation yesterday about "Tone" in discussing or even deriding the ideas of others.... and how that tone should not extend past the ideas to the PEOPLE themselves. Only to have you do a series of posts with throw away personal lines like your first sentence here. Perhaps the adage of "practice what you preach" would be a useful one to apply at this juncture?

However the rest of your post it a bit semantical. If I as a parent brought my children to the house of a pervert in order to allow him abuse them sexually.... I could pedantically claim "I never raped or abused anyone. That is a fact. Undeniable. You can try verbal gymnastics but you cannot deny it".

But the fact is I would be as complicit in the crime enough to make no functional difference to being a rapist and an abuser. And the history of the church in question is certainly comparable in this regard. They silenced victims. They protected their abusers. They even at times relocated the abusers in such a way that they could continue to conduct their crimes on new or existing victims. They promised reparations and then never paid. And they attempted to undermine the law of the land such as the compulsion to report a crime. And more.

So "the church" as an institution....certainly is comparably complicit and I would suggest therefore that the "verbal gymnastics" here are yours.... and not the user you are replying to.

I have slightly more respect than a few of the posters on the thread so far for those who remain members of that church in an attempt to fix it from the inside. I do not share the position some expressed that anyone still a member of the church must be somehow sick or wrong or evil or immoral. Sure, some are. Some simply do not care either way, which is probably just as bad. But SOME are there because their believe reparation and reform and genuine sorrow and forgiveness is possible.

Acknowledging the failings of the past and working towards a higher future is a respectable goal, for an institution or even for an individual (I certainly have my own such journeys to make). Especially in a world where genuine apology and genuine forgiveness is in such short supply. But verbal hand waving denial and lack of acknowledgement of that past is not the first steps towards that lofty goal.

Nobody is speaking for the majority of parents, and that wasn’t the question. Pointing out that the majority of parents aren’t voting with their feet and shuffling into pews on a Sunday morning is unrelated to parents choices for the education of their children.

If voting with their feet were the measure by which you were to determine parents choices for the education of their children, then it would be rather obvious. Personally, I wouldn’t call that a very useful indication either as to what form of education parents actually want for their children, but I understand that for those parents who choose to do it, they believe it’s better for their children than the alternatives which are currently available to them.

Except that the post I replied to literally did speak for the majority of parents.

The lack of attendance at mass speaks volumes on the actual degrees of commitment to Catholicism, which is fairly negligible. Except when they fancy a bit of a hooley and a new frock.

It didn’t. You were asked the question -

And the majority of parents who are satisfied with the status quo?

And instead of answering the question, you suggested -

Try asking the majority of parents what they actually want.I certainly don’t see a majority of parents voting with their feet and shuffling into pews on Sunday mornings. Why would you think that you speak for the majority of parents?

Asking the majority of parents what they actually want is certainly a reasonable suggestion if the question was whether or not the majority of parents should be asked what they want. That wasn’t the question though. The question referred to the majority of parents who are satisfied with the status quo and what would you suggest for them.

Your point about the idea of parents voting with their feet as a means of determining what parents want, would indicate that in relation to their children’s education, the vast majority of parents are voting in favour of a religious education for their children. That’s why I made the point that I wouldn’t use parents voting with their feet as an indication of what parents actually want.

The lack of attendance at mass doesn’t speak to anything about the level of commitment parents have to Catholicism, nor do the occasions they fancy a frock (or a three-piece suit for that matter) and a hooley. If THAT’s the standard by which you wish to judge anyone’s commitment to Catholicism, it would indicate an enormous commitment, and even more so among Catholics in Educate Together schools who organise hooleys among themselves, eg -

http://www.carloweducatetogether.ie/communion-and-confirmation/

I wouldn’t use that metric myself either though if I were actually interested in determining what parents actually want in terms of their children’s education.

In any case, what the majority of parents want for their own children in terms of their children’s education, has no bearing on the State upholding the rights of parents who want to educate their children in accordance with their values, beliefs and world view, which is not currently adequately provided for in the Irish education system.

That’s why I made the point about the lack of parental choice in the Irish education system - focusing on getting religion out of religious ethos schools, does nothing to accommodate parental choice, in that it isn’t going to force the DES to build more schools, and the idea of the multi-denominational schools it plans to build will still not meet the needs of children who’s parents do not want that model of education for their children.

Or I guess you could continue to focus your energies on wagging fingers at empty pews, for all the good you imagine that will do!

You know little about God and religion do you Shoog??? And its very clear your knowledge of Faith is non-existent. You pick bits here and there that suit your agenda, which is a non-changing attack, attack and again attack the Church, and Christians. To insinuate that anyone can do a bit of wheeling and dealing with God , same as we do here in this life??? WOW>>> Tell me Shoog, how do you do a deal with God, the Creator? Maker of Heaven and Earth, and all that is, seen and unseen?

No, Shoog, that wont work...God does not do "Deal's. Heaven is earned Shoog by obeying Gods commandments in this life. And Shoog, thats what Faith is all about.

PS:

You are such a virulent anti- religion poster Shoog, I just wonder how that happened? Was it personal experience with Clergy etc? Just curious, no need to answer if you don't want, its no big deal either way. Or the sheer concept of accepting something which cannot be proved???

The question asked included the statement that the majority of parents are happy with the status quo. The questioner doesn’t speak for the majority of parents.

Faith is not specific to Christans. Muslims have faith. Jews have faith. Even conspiracy theorists have faith.

it's not an attack on faith, it's an attack on blindly accepting someone else's words for something and going along with rituals and traditions with its what everyone else does. I tried to ascertain where you were on this, but you were a bit elusive and I didn't push it.

Did the CSO question mention anything about satisfaction with indoctrination in schools?

Sorry, but that's an incredibly arrogant statement. You are not the future of religious belief in Ireland or anywhere else for that matter. Your thinking and perspective is unique and valuable, but it's only applicable to you as an individual, not an entire society.

Many, many parents are continuing to raise their children within the faith, receive the sacraments etc. You term it indoctrination; others believe it to be an integral part of their children's upbringing and education. There's also the matter of divergent birth rates between religious adherents and the non-religious. Studies from the US suggest that those who are religious tend to have higher fertility rates than those who identify as non-religious. I would also countenance caution in your suggestion that greater diversity in the Irish population will correlate with a proportional decline in religious observance. Some of our newer communities are significantly more religious than the indigenous population, including those who identify as catholic.

So, the Catholics are going to outbreed the Atheists? Studies? Quote them. Usually Church-sponsored 'science' and based on 'surveys' so not terribly scientific at all. And I can see where a great influx of non-Catholics would indeed have some impact on the indigenous population, if they'd allow it.

As for the criminal enterprise known as the RCC, they know what side the collection plate is paid into; keep women down and keep them pregnant. Basically, livestock for the greater glory of the RCC. Hence their fatwas against contraception and abortion. But, fortunately, modern women in Ireland have access to both, no thanks to the RCC of course.

Thanks for your tone policing. I’ll give it all the attention it deserves.

There is no connection between the CSO question and satisfaction with current education arrangements. Your linkage is pure conjecture.