The Christian Church and Ireland

Vader

I was baptized a catholic and I still believe in God but I just cant support the Catholic Church. I cant see it as ever doing anything for Ireland.

These are just some of the things I have a problem with, leaving out the hypocrisy and inconsistency of Catholic Doctrine.
Can somebody please show me the other side of the coin or explain all this in an acceptable way?

•Rewriting Irish myths and folklore to make the characters less appealing and having the secondary effect of making the stories less appealing

•Lying to people about their heritage and traditions i.e. telling people you celebrate this or that not for the reason your father did but because Christ or some saint did something similar or on the same day(supposedly)

•Ruining peoples life’s. Introducing corporal punishment on top of abstinence from everything or you’ll burn in hell

•Tithes

•Treating women as second class citizens i.e. they cant enter monasteries, any religious building while pregnant, enjoying sex is a crime, they bear all the responsibility for adultery and conception out of wedlock

•Attracting the Vikings here

•Destroying “offensive” Celtic art and poetry

•Legalising and encouraging the Norman invasion of Ireland

•Stifling economic growth. You cant lend money, you shouldn’t grow extra crops to sell for profit, you should give huge amounts to charity, you cant leave inheritance, monks hoarding valuables etc etc

•Terrorising and manipulating the ignorant and weak willed

•The “abuses” – the main 7 faults of the church

•Holy wars---Plantations, Cromwell, Cogadh an Dha Ri, Modern Ulster

•Divine right of Kings

•Opposing every revolutionary movement. They even went to the bother of inventing a story about Fr. Murphy who led the Wexford men in 1798 when they saw the were on the wrong side of popular history

•Not doing enough to help during the famine. The Brits set up more soup kitchens than the church which was infinitely richer

•Keeping people ignorant—banning Catholics from Trinity

•Industrial schools

•Promoting sectarianism in the south

•Interfering in the State’s business—mother and child scheme, abortion, divorce, use of contraceptives, reunification

•Sexual abuses

PHB

Unfortunately some of those actions are unacceptable, but I personally believe that you have the right idea, you have the faith in god, which is all that he/she probably wants anyway.

Anyway I think that this might be better suited to Humanities, so Its moved.

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Vader
Can somebody please show me the other side of the coin or explain all this in an acceptable way?

Right. I’ve no great interest in defending the church, but reading your post, I had to laugh. I’ve not seen such an anti-clerical rant in a while. So:

•Rewriting Irish myths and folklore to make the characters less appealing and having the secondary effect of making the stories less appealing

Fair enough, but every culture that gains dominance over a previous one tends to rewrite its history and myths. This is particularly true where the new culture adapts the old so as to integrate itself.

Let’s not forget, the Celts, with the myths and folklore you’re harking back to, weren’t the first on this isle, were they? Ever wonder what happened to the myths and folklore that preceded the Celts?

•Lying to people about their heritage and traditions i.e. telling people you celebrate this or that not for the reason your father did but because Christ or some saint did something similar or on the same day(supposedly)

See above.

•Ruining peoples life’s. Introducing corporal punishment on top of abstinence from everything or you’ll burn in hell

Corporal and capital punishment existed in Ireland long before the Church arrived.

•Tithes

All organized religions raise money in similar fashions.

•Treating women as second class citizens i.e. they cant enter monasteries, any religious building while pregnant, enjoying sex is a crime, they bear all the responsibility for adultery and conception out of wedlock

Because every other religion and faith promoted equality of the sexes. Sure.

•Attracting the Vikings here

What, Bord Failte put an advert in Valhalla Weekly? The monasteries brought some wealth to Ireland, which may have made us a slightly more attractive target for raids, but it’s probably rather naive to thing that the Vikings wouldn’t have invaded anyway.

•Destroying “offensive” Celtic art and poetry

See above.

•Stifling economic growth. You cant lend money, you shouldn’t grow extra crops to sell for profit, you should give huge amounts to charity, you cant leave inheritance, monks hoarding valuables etc etc

Just like they stifled commerce and banking in Italy at the same time? I wonder what line of business the De Medici family were in then?

•Terrorising and manipulating the ignorant and weak willed

No one else would ever do something like that :rolleyes:

•The “abuses” – the main 7 faults of the church

What - explain?

•Holy wars---Plantations, Cromwell, Cogadh an Dha Ri, Modern Ulster

Which Church are we talking about now? Not the one in Rome if you’re talking about the above.

•Divine right of Kings

Actually the Church was not hot on this as it diluted its temporal power with the European monarchs. It was they rather than the church who came up with this concept - hence Charlemagne’s heir crowning himself rather than letting the pope do so like his father.

•Keeping people ignorant—banning Catholics from Trinity

Didn’t they set up al lot of the schools in Ireland too?

•Industrial schools

What - explain?

chill

Originally posted by Vader
I was baptized a catholic and I still believe in God but I just cant support the Catholic Church. I cant see it as ever doing anything for Ireland.

I agree. It is sad when a movement formed for all the best intentions is corrupted by man's greed for power and control.
The Catholic Church is just another in a long line of such movements and the truth of it is that no movement/organisation can be free of such corruption when it is operated with such fierce secrecy, authoritarianism, sexism and hypocricy.
As long as the ordinary people allow the Catholic Church, as an organisation, to continue to behave the way it does then nothing will change.
Irish Catholics should, imho, take a leaf from the book of the US Catholics who are showing definite signs of NOT accepting it. Taking action though your wallet is the first step.

bonkey

Originally posted by Vader
Can somebody please show me the other side of the coin or explain all this in an acceptable way?

Well, I don't think most of those arguments can be explained away, but consider what would happen if you applied the same timeframe to everyone.....

We'd hate the Norse nations, because their ancestors pillaged our nation.

We'd hate the English forever for the injustices they carried out at various points in history.

We'd hate the French and the Germans (at least), because they peopled England (Normans and Saxons), and therfore carry the blame.

(I'm still within the timeframe your items cover, by the way).

We'd hate ourselves because of the crimes carried out by the Irish......

OK.....you get the picture....

What I'm driving at is that I don't believe we should judge a nation or religion today for the sins of the distant past. We should judge them on recent history and current events - considering both the actions within the church, and the influences it exerts without.

Now, that doesn't rule out all of your points.....but those remaining points could also be applied to current groups such as immigrant cultures, neighbours, etc. as in all of those there are individuals or "sub-groups" who are also problematic. It could also be applied to the people of Ireland themselves. It seems wrong to me that we could draw a conclusion about whether or not we are better off or not because of one significant influence without also applying the same logic, criteria and standards of judgement to other significant influences, and every one of them is guilty of "unpardonable" offences to some degree or another.

The question - for me - should really be whether or not. on balance the Church is beneficial. I'm sure that many of those who believe in the Church - or any formal religiousbody[/i] - would insist that it adds something vital to their lives which they are better off for. As it is also at least somewhat responsible for moral attitudes in Ireland - both bad and good aspects - it should share in some of the credit for the advantages this gives society as well as some of the blame for the problems it causes.

I'm by no means suggesting that we should ignore any of the significant problems that exist today, but I think that we should ultimately seek to deal with those, rather than just settling on a blanket condemnation.

jc

Nevyn

I was baptized a catholic and I still believe in God but I just cant support the Catholic Church.

Then don’t, if you find it THAT objectionable then you don’t need to be there.

Did not Jesus say, " where ever 2 or 3 are gathered in my name I will be there.”
He never said what gender, race or if one of those 3 had to be a priest.

All churches that are governed from such a vast hierarchy will always be out of touch with people but that does not mean your god is out of touch with you.

All of the things you mentioned were put in placed and came about do to mans fallibility. Funny for the true essence of Christian is base on the life of a man who live patently 2000 years ago who said love your neighbour as yourself and was a rebel and sought to bring done the structure of the church in his day.

Don’t give up on your faith; anger will not undo what has been done .
Forgive, and as they say Let go and Let God.*




*God being your deity of choice thare are a hell of a lot of them out there

JohnnyBravo

i think this goes to the topic in do you have faith or believe in religion

Vader

Which Church are we talking about now?

I have problems with all of the christian churchs in Ireland.

Did not Jesus say, " where ever 2 or 3 are gathered in my name I will be there.”

Yes but you wont get a special tax status, or the economies of scale!

gom

Originally posted by Vader

•Rewriting Irish myths and folklore to make the characters less appealing and having the secondary effect of making the stories less appealing

•Lying to people about their heritage and traditions i.e. telling people you celebrate this or that not for the reason your father did but because Christ or some saint did something similar or on the same day(supposedly)

I think that I should add that not only did they intervene. They rewrote. In most Irish Folklore books(esp. at primary level), all the heros and characters are Christians???? The Celts more-or-less were extinct from Celtism after the Vikings arrived and added more diversity to the island. How can the church claim that all those Mythological Celtic Characters were Christian when Christianity had only gone as far as France at that stage?

bloggs

One of my reasons for leaving the RC Church is the breaking of the first commandment, about havign false Gods. The idea of worshiping Saints, Mary, Relics (kissing a gold box with bones in it), crosses, and other religious items, along with regarding the Pope (a nice guy none the less) (elected by a bunch of guys) as God's rep on earth.

Chaos-Engine

Originally posted by bloggs
One of my reasons for leaving the RC Church is the breaking of the first commandment, about havign false Gods. The idea of worshiping Saints, Mary, Relics (kissing a gold box with bones in it), crosses, and other religious items, along with regarding the Pope (a nice guy none the less) (elected by a bunch of guys) as God's rep on earth.

Fair point and one which got me a slap from my teacher way way back when I was doing my conformation in the time of slaps


I think to be honest. Most people that turn away from Catholism in this country but still call themselfs Catholic(the fact that u don't go to mass means you are no longer catholic as mass is an integral part of Catholisism) should probably think about Unitarianism or one of the reformation churchs. Prespraterionism and Methotism are what you lot should be looking at. Modern Institutions that respond to change and stay near-ish(but not near enough for me) to the basics of the faith..

Why not start another church if u don't fancy becoming a prod?

bloggs

I have given up on religion fully stop, although my g/f is a pagan.

sanvean

Originally posted by bloggs
The idea of worshiping Saints, Mary, Relics (kissing a gold box with bones in it), crosses, and other religious items

I don't think anybody wants you to worship the saints or Mary.

bloggs

Originally posted by sanvean
I don't think anybody wants you to worship the saints or Mary.

People pray to Mary and the Saints, what's the difference in my praying to a George Lucas or someone like that?

In the bible it says that people shouldn't worship anything apart from God him/herself. So it's the church that invented angels and Mary worship.

sanvean

Originally posted by bloggs
People pray to Mary and the Saints, what's the difference in my praying to a George Lucas or someone like that?

The difference would be that in one situation you're praying to saintly people, elevated slightly above us mere sinful human beings. The other would mean you were praying to a crap film director, and wouldn't make much sense within the Catholic Church.

In the bible it says that people shouldn't worship anything apart from God him/herself. So it's the church that invented angels and Mary worship.

Yeah, the Bible says alot of things. And I can't think of one Christian (or pseudo-Christian) Church who follows every single order given in the Bible. Every religion, to varying degrees, puts their own spin on certain aspects.

AngelofFire

(im not a catholic btw) I agree with all the points he makes except for the one referring to the viking and norman invasions. Before the vikings invaded every1 in ireland had red hair. It was the vikings who brought in other hair colours. dublin was a viking town therefore the whole population of Dublin is Viking decent. I doubt theres a single irish person without some norse genetic makeup.

chill

Originally posted by Chaos-Engine
I think to be honest. Most people that turn away from Catholism in this country but still call themselfs Catholic(the fact that u don't go to mass means you are no longer catholic as mass is an integral part of Catholisism)

I don't accept this at all. People should start to realise that there is a difference between the Catholic hierarchy and adminstrators and the central beliefs that make up the Catholic Religion.
Not going to Church or rejected the adminstration/hierarchy does not mean a person is not a Catholic. It is not the hierarchy that deteremines a person's religion, it is them themselves.

IrishMike

Originally posted by chill
It is not the hierarchy that deteremines a person's religion, it is them themselves.

If thats the case then i could call myself muslim while having no
interest in following muslim traditions or supporting any of their
beliefs

Your point is comparable to saying you are a spanish citizen because you went their twice on holidays

If u dont believe in the institution and in its teachings and
sacraments then my friend u are in no way a catholic
Remember jews and muslims also believe in god, doenst make them catholic

ixoy

I'd also think it doesn't make you Cathloic. It makes you a Christian with some Catholic beliefs. However, mass, for example, is an integral part of Catholicism - no ifs or buts: you need the priest to communicate with God. He is the conduit. However if you feel you don't need the priest than you're more adopting some of the Protestant beliefs. Along similiar beliefs, Catholicism believes in transubstantiation (the wafer and wine become the embodiment of the body and blood of Christ) - and this needs to be administered by a priest. Not going to mass disavows this concept, again more echoeing the Protestant concept of consubstantiation (whereby the wafer and wine only symbolise the sacrifice of Christ).
Personally, I'm more agnostic, but believe the generally thrust of Christianity ("love thy neighbour") is spot on.

Silent Bob

Originally posted by sanvean
The difference would be that in one situation you're praying to saintly people, elevated slightly above us mere sinful human beings. The other would mean you were praying to a crap film director, and wouldn't make much sense within the Catholic Church.

Elevated by whom though?

It wouldn't be the Roman Catholic church would it?

sanvean

Originally posted by Silent Bob
Elevated by whom though?

It wouldn't be the Roman Catholic church would it?

Yes, of course. That was the basic point of my post.

IrishMike

Originally posted by Silent Bob
Elevated by whom though?

It wouldn't be the Roman Catholic church would it?

Praying 2 saints is not worshiping other gods
You are praying for them to intercede on your behalf to God
They are not the ones who will answer your prayer
It is like getting an interview with a company because u know the
managers secetary
Its not the secetary that can give u the job, however she helped
you get into a better position to ask

Silent Bob

Originally posted by sanvean
Yes, of course. That was the basic point of my post.

Well bloggs asked what was the difference between praying to the various saints et al that have been beatified by the RC church and praying to (for e.g.) George Lucas.

His point being that the Bible says one shouldn't have any false idols/gods etc. yet the RC church 'invented' these ones.

You make the circular argument that it is OK for the RC church to pray to saints since they are above us because the RC church chose them to be 'above us'.

Specky

What I'm driving at is that I don't believe we should judge a nation or religion today for the sins of the distant past. We should judge them on recent history and current events - considering both the actions within the church, and the influences it exerts without.

Ooo I had to comment on this one!

Do you really think you can judge a "nation" (and I presume its people) by it recent or current events? Now we're on really shakey ground.

For a start hasn't it been reasonably shown that many US and British people (to name the main two antagonist states) were against the war in Iraq? But still the war went (and continues to go) ahead. So who should you judge from this? The nation? The people? Its government?

What about other closer to home events? What about the Anglo-Irish relationship? Events such as Bloody Sunday add fuel to the fire of hatred still burning in some towards the British but ask the average Englishman or woman in the street and they couldn't even point to Derry on a map never mind tell you what it was about.

So there's another nation you can't really judge by its actions.

...and finally what about Ireland? A "neutral" country providing direct supports to a non-UN sanctioned military invasion of another country for purely economic reasons without the consent of its people? I think that's pretty current isn't it? So by your argument this should be the basis on which the Irish nation is judged by the world.

Back on the subject...I think there's a fundamental problem here that today "religeon" and "belief" have become overly intertwined, mostly as a result of the dominance and oppression of the established religeons which do not tolerate competition for the available flock.

The longer I live, the more amazing the world appears to me and I have to admit the occassional crises of faith...not the traditional crises where I sometimes find it difficult to believe in a god, mine are the other way around where I occassionally find it difficult to believe there isn't one. However, so far my beligerant (stubborn) non-belief has held firm and I continue to be a reasonably open minded cynic. I hate the formalised intitutionalised catholic religeon. It seems to be so far from the real world and the values that are important as to be totally irrelevant in today's world, and its continued existance in its current form is preventing whatever good a body of people dedicated to helping and nurturing proper values in people could possibly have.

Oppressing vulnerable people, nurturing guilt and shame and abusing, physically and mentally, those least able to protect themselves has to be one of the greatest state sponsored scandals in history and it carries on today across the world with the blessing of the very people to whom it does most harm.

Like moths to the flame the vulnerable seek help from an organisation that stifles their ability to think and act for themselves, and instills within them an adiction that will keep these poor people dependant on the church for the whole of their lives.

...and all the while they get richer on the backs of those they abuse.

Look around at the towns and villages in Ireland. What is the biggest, most expensive building you can see? The church. Built when the local communities were living in huts made from cow dung and straw, populated by people who worked back breaking days living on barely anything and all the while paying for these monuments to oppulance to be built in their midst. Disgusting.

Don't talk to me about the caring catholic church and its great works around the world. Look at the Swiss bank accounts, the Vatican and the fat old men in bishop's robes. Hypocrites one and all.

sanvean

Originally posted by Silent Bob
His point being that the Bible says one shouldn't have any false idols/gods etc. yet the RC church 'invented' these ones.

You make the circular argument that it is OK for the RC church to pray to saints since they are above us because the RC church chose them to be 'above us'.

No. my point was that all religions make up their own rules (or interpretations), disregard certain aspects or ideologies that contradict their own and so forth. Also, I was trying to say that the RC Church would think that you were all missing the point if you believed that saints and Mary etc were to be worshipped as false Gods. For the RC Church these people aren't Gods.