Bishops misrepresenting meeting as ‘the Church-State structured dialogue process'

Michael Nugent · 21-01-2013 12:46pm #1

The Irish Catholic Bishops are misrepresenting their meeting with the Government last Friday as part of “the Church-State structured dialogue process.”

But this process is not “the Church-State structured dialogue process” and it is not limited to faith groups. It is important that this terminology does not gain credibility by going unchallenged.

The process is one of dialogue between the government and representatives of churches, faith communities and nonreligious philosophical bodies in Ireland.

It explicitly goes beyond ‘church-state’ dialogue, despite attempts by the Vatican at EU level to limit such dialogue to churches.

The process arose from developments at European Union level during the draft Constitutional Treaty for the European Union and ended up being included in the Lisbon Treaty.

Article 17
1. The Union respects and does not prejudice the status under national law of churches and religious associations or communities in the Member States.
2. The Union equally respects the status under national law of philosophical and non-confessional organisations.
3. Recognising their identity and their specific contribution, the Union shall maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with these churches and organisations.

Atheist Ireland is a partner in this process in Ireland, having met with officials at the Taoiseach’s department, and we are currently seeking a meeting with the Government to discuss our aims for an ethical, secular state that is neutral on the question of religion.

We do not believe that these type of meetings are necessary or appropriate, although we accept that they are enshrined in the Lisbon treaty at EU level. Political institutions should not give special access to bodies on the basis of their religious or nonreligious beliefs.

However, for such time as the Government is in practice meeting with churches to listen to their religiously-inspired input to public policy, it is important that the Government also directly hears the secular viewpoint to counter that influence.

If you think this is important, you could email the Taoiseach (taoiseach@taoiseach.gov.ie) and your local TDs (first name dot surname at oireachtas.ie) and let them know your views.

lazygal · 21-01-2013 12:49pm

As always, thanks for the good work Michael. Any news on whether there'll be a meeting with Atheist Ireland and the government?

Michael Nugent · 21-01-2013 12:53pm

lazygal wrote: »

As always, thanks for the good work Michael. Any news on whether there'll be a meeting with Atheist Ireland and the government?

Still waiting to hear back from them.

Bloodwing · 21-01-2013 1:08pm

Michael Nugent wrote: »

It explicitly goes beyond ‘church-state’ dialogue, despite attempts by the Vatican at EU level to limit such dialogue to churches.

Hi Michael,

Have you a link to any articles about these attempts? I'd be interested in reading up on it. Thanks.

robindch · 21-01-2013 1:28pm

Michael Nugent wrote: »

The process arose from developments at European Union level during the draft Constitutional Treaty for the European Union and ended up being included in the Lisbon Treaty.

The article you've quoted above refers to a dialog with the EU, but does this include talking with national governments without the EU?

Michael Nugent · 21-01-2013 1:36pm

Bloodwing wrote: »

Hi Michael, Have you a link to any articles about these attempts? I'd be interested in reading up on it. Thanks.

There is a brief overview here on the website of the European Parliament platform for Secularism in politics.

Article 17 of the Lisbon Treaty

I'll find some more comprehensive links when I get time.

robindch wrote: »

The article you've quoted above refers to a dialog with the EU, but does this include talking with national governments without the EU?

The legal obligation to have such dialogue is only on EU institutions. But it does have a politically persuasive influence at national level.

Having selective meetings at national level could also be challenged under other international treaty clauses such as freedom of religion or belief and equality before the law.

edanto · 21-01-2013 1:50pm

Fair play to you and thanks for posting about what you're doing. I had no idea it was happening, but it's great to hear about things like this going on that I completely support.

expectationlost · 21-01-2013 4:25pm

the state calls it this

Speech by an Taoiseach, Mr. Bertie Ahern T.D. at the Inauguration of the Structured Dialogue with Churches, Faith Communities and Non- Confessional Bodies

http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/eng/News/Archives/2007/Taoiseach%27s_Speeches_Archive_2007/Speech_by_an_Taoiseach_Mr_Bertie_Ahern_TD_at_the_Inauguration_of_the_Structured_Dialogue_with_Churches_Faith_Communities_and_Non-_Confessional_Bodies_on_Monday_26_February_2007.html

I would like to say a little about the background to the Government’s decision to embark on this process. The first consideration was the fact that engagement with and, respecting the voice of the key institutions of civil society is a key part of the democratic process. This was reflected, most forcefully in the draft constitutional treaty for the European Union.

Peregrinus · 22-01-2013 2:35am

I don't think Michael's objection is to the term "structured dialogue". His concern is that characterising it as a "church-state structured dialogue" eclipses the involvement of non-confessional organisations in the dialogue.

Michael Nugent · 22-01-2013 12:18pm

Peregrinus wrote: »

I don't think Michael's objection is to the term "structured dialogue". His concern is that characterising it as a "church-state structured dialogue" eclipses the involvement of non-confessional organisations in the dialogue.

Yes, that's correct. And it is even subtly worse than that. They are calling it "the Church-State structured dialogue process."

By the way, here is what the Bishops discussed with the Government:

protecting human life;
child safeguarding;
addressing mental health issues in society especially in the context of suicide;
civil unrest in Northern Ireland and the threat to the peace process from dissident paramilitaries;
the De Silva Report (Pat Finucane);
education in the primary, secondary and tertiary sectors;
the national economy;
the vital role of chaplains in hospitals and prisons;
justice and peace issues specifically on poverty and social need;
the Constitutional Convention;
Ireland’s embassy to the Holy See; and
Ireland’s Presidency of the European Union.

Sarky · 22-01-2013 1:32pm

So no mention of the 400-odd million euros they still owe their abuse victims?

the culture of deference · 24-01-2013 6:18pm

"the Church-State structured dialogue process."

what the Bishops discussed with the Government:

and what we know they have done in the past

protecting human life FAIL
child safeguarding; FAIL
addressing mental health issues in society especially in the context of suicide; FAIL
education in the primary, secondary and tertiary sectors; FAIL

[/QUOTE]

Sarky wrote: »

So no mention of the 400-odd million euros they still owe their abuse victims?

No mention of a national investigation into all diocese's for cover ups.

The miserable coward Brady still allowed to look down on the rest of us with contempt, probably secretly wishing for pre Lutheran times. Oh for the days when they could just burn people like us. Or the choice offered to the Inca emperor. Death by burning or if you convert to christ death by garotting.

Michael have you done up a pamphlet for schools with the real history of the rcc.

expectationlost · 13-12-2013 2:26pm

update on church state diaglouge still seems to about the churches http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2013121000020?opendocument

why 4 Tds suddenly decide to ask this question

Brian Shanahan · 13-12-2013 9:59pm

Michael Nugent wrote: »

protecting human life;

child safeguarding;

addressing mental health issues in society especially in the context of suicide;

civil unrest in Northern Ireland and the threat to the peace process from dissident paramilitaries;

the De Silva Report (Pat Finucane);

education in the primary, secondary and tertiary sectors;

the national economy;

the vital role of chaplains in hospitals and prisons;

justice and peace issues specifically on poverty and social need;

the Constitutional Convention;

Ireland’s embassy to the Holy See; and

Ireland’s Presidency of the European Union.

And we all know how that goes:
1) protect the foetuses, after they're born frankly we don't give a ****.
2) protect us from the victims of our priests' abuse.
3) suicide is a mortal sin, it should be recriminalised.
4) give nothing to them black prods.
5) not sure on this one. I don't think the rcc is too hot on civil rights though.
6) brainwash the kids, they don't really need to know about physics, foreign languages etc.
7) there's too little money going to the church, bring back tithing.
8) brainwash the desperate sick and downtrodden poor as well. Nobody's so poor that they can't afford to give us their last penny.
9) the church is "really poor" give us all the social welfare money. It'll magically trickle down to the jobless, we promise.
10) bring back the "special position of the catholic church" clause. In fact, let the inquisition* write a new one for you.
11) bring it back. We need to have someone around so we can pass on our orders to your government.
12) remember the pope is your true ruler, convert all them northern european heretics.

*congregation for the doctrine of the faith= inquisition. It is still extant, though the thumb-screws &c. are currently in storage.

expectationlost · 11-06-2015 12:48am

https://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2015-06-09a.255&s=I+propose+to+take+Questions+Nos.+%22inclusive%2C+together%22#g268.r

Enda Kenny When I met with representatives of the Islamic community here last week

expectationlost · 30-06-2015 10:36pm

Taoiseach's Meetings and Engagements
http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2015063000026?opendocument

EK: Since I last reported to the House, I met representatives of the Humanist Association of Ireland on 29 January 2015, and representatives from Atheist Ireland on 10 February 2015. At both meetings discussions covered a wide range of topics of mutual interest. The discussion with Atheist Ireland focused on the philosophy and aims of the organisation, a secular constitution, laws and practices, matters concerning the education system, and the constitutional and human rights of atheists in Ireland. At the meeting with the Humanist Association of Ireland the matters discussed were education issues, hospital chaplaincy, religious declarations under the Constitution and the census.

With regard to the holding of a referendum on blasphemy, I pointed out that the Government had decided to put two referendums before the people in May 2015 and that a referendum on blasphemy would not be held in the lifetime of the current Government.

I met representatives from the Islamic community on 4 June 2015 and representatives from the Jewish community on 16 June 2015. Discussions with the Islamic community focused on blasphemy, an Islamic Sharia council, forced marriages, the wearing of the hijab and community and cultural aspects. Discussion with the Jewish community focused on Jewish life in Ireland, access to education, religious practices and rites, and anti-Semitism.

is that the first meeting with taoiseach why did it take 4 years?

recedite · 03-07-2015 10:27pm

Discussions with the Islamic community focused on blasphemy, an Islamic Sharia council, forced marriages, the wearing of the hijab and community and cultural aspects.

Could it be that the Islamic community in Ireland want;

Blasphemy to be outlawed (properly) and punished properly
Sharia Law and Sharia Courts for policing themselves, overseen by a new Sharia Council, recognised by the State
Forced marriages legalised, girls held against their will abroad in arranged marriages to be abandoned, even if Irish citizens.
Islamic Sharia Council allowed to dictate that females to wear hijab in all public places and schools.

Or perhaps the lobbying of Enda Kenny was against all these things?

Hotblack Desiato · 04-07-2015 12:32am

recedite wrote: »

Or perhaps the lobbying of Enda Kenny was against all these things?

Yes, that is entirely possible. [/SARCASM]

Have not the people of this island suffered enough already from religious oppression? Could they not inflict their middle ages shít on some other poor undeserving buggers instead of us?

feargale · 04-07-2015 12:53am

Michael Nugent wrote: »

Political institutions should not give special access to bodies on the basis of their religious or nonreligious beliefs.

Follow this to its logical conclusion and the government would consult with no special interest group e.g. the IFA, trade unions, the IRFU, Irish language bodies etc. etc..
I have nothing to say about your other points.

expectationlost · 04-07-2015 3:12pm

feargale wrote: »

Follow this to its logical conclusion and the government would consult with no special interest group e.g. the IFA, trade unions, the IRFU, Irish language bodies etc. etc..
I have nothing to say about your other points.

the Minister for Agricultural meets the IFA, the Minsiters of Jobs and Finance job meets the unions, the Minister of Arts, Heritage and Culture meets the Irish language bodies.

why do the churches get to meet the Taoiseach?

feargale · 04-07-2015 7:35pm

expectationlost wrote: »

the Minister for Agricultural meets the IFA, the Minsiters of Jobs and Finance job meets the unions, the Minister of Arts, Heritage and Culture meets the Irish language bodies.

why do the churches get to meet the Taoiseach?

I know. It's not fair. And Mother ( Father? ) Sinead Bernadette O'Connor got to meet Albert Reynolds.

I wouldn't mind but I can't even get the ear of my T.D..

feargale · 04-07-2015 9:04pm

expectationlost wrote: »

why do the churches get to meet the Taoiseach?

Would it have anything to do with the fact that we don't have a Minister for Holy Water?

Bishops misrepresenting meeting as ‘the Church-State structured dialogue process'

Comments