AH and the Church.....why?

cornbb

panda100 wrote:

The media are delivering certain very specific facts.Facts that will sell a story so they highlight all the negative aspects of the church over and over again.

I never see articles about the many homeless shelters throughout Ireland that catholic priests have set up,or what about the drugs rehabilitation centre in Knock that helps more people then they can cope with, or the 100's of local parish priests that are on call morning,noon and night up and down the country to help and support families when something tragic happens,or the nun in Limerick who is at the forefront of making Limerick a fair trade city.

Are you saying the media should not report stories about child abuse, AIDS scandals etc? Of course they are going to report this stuff in preference over goodwill stories, that's the nature of the media. I don't believe for a minute they have an anti religion agenda. Do you ever see a positive story about Iraq in the media? No. This isn't because they are brainwashing you against Iraq, its because Iraq happens to be in a world of sh1t at the moment.

I appreciate that the clergy do plenty of good work in the community, but none of it is unconditional. The local clergy in my hometown opened a hospice not too long ago, they called it Mercy House. How demeaning is that?

Some people may take solace from the fact that a priest is around for a birth, death, serious illness or whatever. But bear in mind that the catholic church has ensured that it maintains an imposing presence at every major milestone in a catholic's life, such as birth, childhood, marriage and death.

pbsuxok1znja4r

Oh, and confirmation + confirmation money, TBH. Far outweighs any of the other injustices the RCC commited against me.

Catari Jaguar

.

Catari Jaguar

Thaedydal wrote:

Have you any idea how few non denominational or multi denominational schools there are ? esp in comparison with the number of catholic shools ?

\

That is not as easy as it sounds, a lot of schools dont have the rescources.

They aren't Catholic schools as such, like I said they teach with a Christian programme, if at all. Its not a NECCESITY to teach RE as it isn't on the curriculum. Many schools insist that communion practice etc takes place outside school hours. Look at the case in Dunboyne.

Those "Catholic" schools are funded by government but are just on Catholic land/ parish so the bishop gets a say in board of management (hiring/firing etc). Which is ridiculous. But that limits their say over the school's lessons etc.

The other boards are "An Forás Patrúnacha" which is for Gaelscoils, which are popping up everywhere. or "Educate Together" schools which are multi D, there are 28 of them in the country. And shall have 34 up and running by start of next year. There are over 10 of these schools in Dublin are alone. There are of course private schools and special schools too...

Course if you really want to stick it to the oul Catholic Church you could send your kid to one of the many Muslim Schools. But their RE is way over the limit of the allowed hours per week. So I guess that's no good either....

And resources for exemption? I believe that when a child is dyslexic and exempted from Irish they take out an english book and do exercises from that. Exemption from RE means you sit in your place and do something else. Or go down to the library.

Many schools do however, hire RE teachers in for their Muslim/ Hindu/ etc pupils to cater for their needs. If they can find resources for their needs then why not everyone else?

Fratton Fred

mloc wrote:

I just find the whole religion thing kinda funny at this stage. People believing in things that if published in a book nowadays would find itself in the fantasy section.

I guess its just an imperfect species imperfect way of explaining our imperfections.

A guy called Jesus was born in Bethlehem and was cricified 32 year later in Jerusalem. He had followers and people believed him to be the son of god. That is documented and is pretty much beyond dispute.

Actually believing he was the son of god nd performed miracles etc is where faith comes in, but the fact he existed is undeniable.

Nevyn

Lil Kitten wrote:

They aren't Catholic schools as such, like I said they teach with a Christian programme, if at all. Its not a NECCESITY to teach RE as it isn't on the curriculum. Many schools insist that communion practice etc takes place outside school hours.

Many schools can you name 10 out of the over 3,000 school that have the catholic church as thier patron ?

Lil Kitten wrote:

Those "Catholic" schools are funded by government but are just on Catholic land/ parish so the bishop gets a say in board of management (hiring/firing etc). Which is ridiculous. But that limits their say over the school's lessons etc.

The bishop get two reps on the board of mangement one of those the head of the bom which is the local parish priest.
IF a school is on church land then it is against church law to teach anything which is not accpetible or contradicts church dogma such as instrction in other religions.

Lil Kitten wrote:

The other boards are "An Forás Patrúnacha" which is for Gaelscoils, which are popping up everywhere. or "Educate Together" schools which are multi D, there are 28 of them in the country. And shall have 34 up and running by start of next year. There are over 10 of these schools in Dublin are alone. There are of course private schools and special schools

There are so few of these but they are hope for the future.

Lil Kitten wrote:

Course if you really want to stick it to the oul Catholic Church you could send your kid to one of the many Muslim Schools.

Many ? there are two primary schools in the state that have islamic patronage and 1 jewish.

Lil Kitten wrote:

and resources for exemption? I believe that when a child is dyslexic and exempted from Irish they take out an english book and do exercises from that. Exemption from RE means you sit in your place and do something else. Or go down to the library.

Children can not be left unsupervised and while they are young they don't understand and having them in the class but being told to read somthingelse is not good enough.

Lil Kitten wrote:

Many schools do however, hire RE teachers in for their Muslim/ Hindu/ etc pupils to cater for their needs. If they can find resources for their needs then why not everyone else?

Really which ones other then the Educate together schools ?

I was told there was an issue ith church law ans with insurance on the having someone else give non christain instruction and the advailiblity of the school premises after school hours for such instruction.

ArthurDent

Lil Kitten wrote:

They aren't Catholic schools as such, like I said they teach with a Christian programme, if at all. Its not a NECCESITY to teach RE as it isn't on the curriculum. Many schools insist that communion practice etc takes place outside school hours. Look at the case in Dunboyne.

Those "Catholic" schools are funded by government but are just on Catholic land/ parish so the bishop gets a say in board of management (hiring/firing etc). Which is ridiculous. But that limits their say over the school's lessons etc.

The other boards are "An Forás Patrúnacha" which is for Gaelscoils, which are popping up everywhere. or "Educate Together" schools which are multi D, there are 28 of them in the country. And shall have 34 up and running by start of next year. There are over 10 of these schools in Dublin are alone. There are of course private schools and special schools too...

Course if you really want to stick it to the oul Catholic Church you could send your kid to one of the many Muslim Schools. But their RE is way over the limit of the allowed hours per week. So I guess that's no good either....

And resources for exemption? I believe that when a child is dyslexic and exempted from Irish they take out an english book and do exercises from that. Exemption from RE means you sit in your place and do something else. Or go down to the library.

Many schools do however, hire RE teachers in for their Muslim/ Hindu/ etc pupils to cater for their needs. If they can find resources for their needs then why not everyone else?

Lil Kitten - for someone involved in education (sorry- are you training or already trained?) you are frighteningly unaware of the Primary school set up. 95% of all primary schools ARE Catholic - they have Catholic patrons and are legally obilged to uphold the Catholic ethos.


The Dunboyne case - it was an Interdenominational school and the principal was sacked because he wanted no children excluded from lessons - he wanted specific religious instruction( not education - there IS a difference) to take place outside school hours

All national schools are obliged to teach the curriculum laid down by its patron for 30 mins every day - RE in terms of most schools.

Re resources for exemption- if a child is to leave a class for a particular lesson - of course resources are necessary to supervise that child in another place.

I've never heard of a denominational school hiring instructors for their children of other denominations - can you give any examples - I'd be amazed frankly if one denomination will pay for someone to come in and instruct children in another faith.

Sleepy

I hate ignorance, cowardice and arrogance.

These are the only logical motivations for a belief in a religion, hence I will consider anyone with "faith" to have one or more of those traits. Obviously, I'd be pretty lonely if I discounted someone from being a friend for having one of these traits so if they've enough more positive aspects to their personalities I'll overlook the stupidity, cowardice or arrogance of their faith.

o1s1n

Thaedydal wrote:

Children can not be left unsupervised and while they are young they don't understand and having them in the class but being told to read somthing else is not good enough.

Personally, I was exempted from religion in primary school. I would do my own thing while they continued on with their lessons. Once this was finished I would resume work with the rest of the class. I had no problem with this. I was the first to try it out, but once some of the other students saw how well it was working out for me, they followed suit.

My sisters were also exempted a few years later and it also had no ill effect on them.

Don't get me wrong, I'm very against the teaching of religion in schools. There is absolutely no place for it. In my opinion its simply the churches way of getting its claws into the population at a young and impressionable age.

However, having it sit out for a class is no traumatic event. And hopefully once the other students see what a great time you're having doing your own thing for an hour, they'll want to join in

Actually, our teacher would leave a friend and myself alone in the classroom while she brought the rest of them off to church for mass. I can only imagine how illegal that actually was. What great fun we had, running around on the tables and finding where she hid those sweets she gave away as prizes

Catari Jaguar

Educate together schools don't have outsiders to teach them RE. Class teacher does it. Some parents come in to talk about their own faith. And its a smattering of anything and everything as these children are mostly NON denomionational: Buddhism, Sikhism, Christianity, traveller community, islam, hindu. *Let's celebrate Ramadan and make pictures, lets celebrate Christmas and decorate the school....* These schools are most definitely not the way forward from what I have seen in how they are run and the general ethos. Emphasis on art and a poor level of core subjects. Too many outside teachers/parents coming in and general disruption of the day... these schools are run by parents, so where will the funding come from if we ALL decide we want our kids in Educate together schools?

The Church doesn't have loads of power in school runnings as they are owned, built and funded by the state. Salaries of teachers are funded by the state, they come from training colleges run by the state. Schools follow the 1999 curiculum. made by NCCA, NOTHING TO DO WITH CHURCH, the Department of education. And no child is FORCED to make communion/ confiramation or to participate in RE class. The fact that church even has a right to any say at all in running of the school is ludacris.

Outsider education given to pupils doesn't happen outside school hours, sometimes it happens as normal RE is being taught. And as I stated before, why would Catholic Church have any input into the RE prog when it's not even based on Catholic teachings?

I mean for all you guy's talk about the church trying to brainwash kids and teach them whatever in schools to get their claws into em, how many of you have looked at an RE book?

Alive-O programme focuses on:
Christianity
Personal Search
Other World Religions.

Whats the big deal with that? It's not like "You must not do XYZ, cos the Pope says its wrong and you'll go to hell!"

If I had my way Church and State would be completely separate and RE not taught in schools. Have sunday school like in England. But at the mo, the way morals and that are taught through this semi-religious means is ok with me.

I know the principal was sacked but he stood up for himself and his beliefs and was damn right, and if all parents and principals stood up for the idea they aren't guna sack em all are they? But I guess people don't mind RE in schools as much as you folks are making out.

Fratton Fred

Sleepy wrote:

I hate ignorance, cowardice and arrogance.

These are the only logical motivations for a belief in a religion, hence I will consider anyone with "faith" to have one or more of those traits. Obviously, I'd be pretty lonely if I discounted someone from being a friend for having one of these traits so if they've enough more positive aspects to their personalities I'll overlook the stupidity, cowardice or arrogance of their faith.

My grandmother had a very strong faith and she was neither ignorant, cowardly nor arrogant. In fact she was completely the opposite of all three. She drew enormous strength from her belief yet she never preached it to anyone.

We had an urgent call to see her one night as she had taken very ill at my aunts house. The doctor was called and gave her only hours to live. My Aunt was full of guilt, she did not have the space or means to see her through her final hours and she did not want her to go to hospital. My Dad took the decision out of her hands and had her mover to out local hospital in Portsmouth where she mad a miraculous recovery. By the weekend she was able to sit in a chair and take visitors.

During the next three days all her children and grandchildren went to see her and we were all expecting her to be home shortly, such was her humour and mood. She died suddenly on the Wednesday.

I have no doubt she was just waiting to say goodbye to us all and once she had done it, continued her journey.

She was the most loving person you could meet and not at all ignorant, she was very brave, mainly because she had no fear of death because she knew in her own heart where she as going and as for arrogant, she was very humble and every day was a blessing for her.

I’m not a big fan of religion and the Catholic and Anglican churches does wind me up with their approach to a lot of issues, but someone having faith in something, whether you believe in it or not, is not something that other people should criticise.

joe_chicken

Sleepy wrote:

I hate ignorance, cowardice and arrogance.

These are the only logical motivations for a belief in a religion, hence I will consider anyone with "faith" to have one or more of those traits. Obviously, I'd be pretty lonely if I discounted someone from being a friend for having one of these traits so if they've enough more positive aspects to their personalities I'll overlook the stupidity, cowardice or arrogance of their faith.

It's just as well we have intelligent, brave and humble people like you to point out our short comings...

mloc

Fratton Fred wrote:

A guy called Jesus was born in Bethlehem and was cricified 32 year later in Jerusalem. He had followers and people believed him to be the son of god. That is documented and is pretty much beyond dispute.

Actually believing he was the son of god nd performed miracles etc is where faith comes in, but the fact he existed is undeniable.

Documented by whom? Somehow I don't think non-exaggerated properly maintained historical records existed 2000 years ago, especially considering how altered such a disputed topic is bound to become over all those years of translations and interpretations.

There may have been some guy who got crucified and had a few followers. I'm sure there was a hell of a lot more than one. Who knows, who cares.

Fratton Fred

Lil Kitten wrote:

If I had my way Church and State would be completely separate and RE not taught in schools. Have sunday school like in England. But at the mo, the way morals and that are taught through this semi-religious means is ok with me.

It's a ong time since I left school, but I believe in England RE comes under social studies and basically teaches all children about all religions. Mainly to give kids an understanding of why Christmas, Ramadam and Divali (Although that is not a religeous celebration) are celebrated.

It's more about the different cultures rather religion.

mloc

Fratton Fred wrote:

someone having faith in something, whether you believe in it or not, is not something that other people should criticise.

Why not? Blind faith is probably the most singularly biggest flaw in human society throughout history. I'm sure your granny was a great woman, from your description there can be no denying that, but trying to match the arguments up is pure fallacy.

Faith, for the most part, is just delusion. Socially acceptable delusion.

Fratton Fred

mloc wrote:

Documented by whom? Somehow I don't think non-exaggerated properly maintained historical records existed 2000 years ago, especially considering how altered such a disputed topic is bound to become over all those years of translations and interpretations.
.

I don't care if you don't care.

Actualy there were records kept (Mary went to Bethlehem for a census don;t forget.)

The dates are wrong because most of them were filled in to fit around existing pagan festivals, so christianity became more acceptable, but the Isreali historians are pretty certain it all happened.

Sleepy

joe_chicken wrote:

It's just as well we have intelligent, brave and humble people like you to point out our short comings...

Give me one logical, reasonable reason to believe in any deity or higher power that doesn't stem from fear of death, blind stupidity or the arrogant belief that a gut feeling is more correct than logic and I'll join you in whatever religion you believe in.

Fratton Fred

mloc wrote:

Why not? Blind faith is probably the most singularly biggest flaw in human society throughout history. I'm sure your granny was a great woman, from your description there can be no denying that, but trying to match the arguments up is pure fallacy.

Faith, for the most part, is just delusion. Socially acceptable delusion.

I think you mean, you believe faith is just dilusion etc, others don't.

People shoul be free to believe what they want (Even in giant teapots if they so wish) as long as it doesn't interfere with other people (which is where I take issue with the organised church)

pbsuxok1znja4r

Sleepy wrote:

I hate ignorance, cowardice and arrogance.

I love all those things. Hence I'd consider anyone with opinions like yours to be pretty loveable.

wrote:

These are the only logical motivations for a belief in a religion, hence I will consider anyone with "faith" to have one or more of those traits. Obviously, I'd be pretty lonely if I discounted someone from being a friend for having one of these traits so if they've enough more positive aspects to their personalities I'll overlook the stupidity, cowardice or arrogance of their faith.

Just be glad they're probably doing the same thing overlooking yours. Haha TBH I feel more sorry for anyone desperate enough to have to 'overlook' such 'hated' personality traits just to avoid being 'pretty lonely'.

wrote:

reasonable reason

Lawl. I should listen to you.

Sleepy

Fratton Fred wrote:

someone having faith in something, whether you believe in it or not, is not something that other people should criticise.

Do you apply the same view to someone who believes "physical love" between children and adults is acceptable? or to someone's who's faith tells them that non-believers have no right to life? or to someone who believes that one race/sex/creed is more important or somehow superior to another?

I've started a topic on this before in Humanities and been lambasted for it by many of the 'faithful' on these boards but I honestly see no reason why anyone believes that their faith should be respected by others.

Sleepy

scouser.tommy wrote:

Just be glad they're probably doing the same thing overlooking yours. Haha TBH I feel more sorry for anyone desperate enough to have to 'overlook' such 'hated' personality traits just to avoid being 'pretty lonely'.

Can you honestly say none of your friends have traits you dislike? I'd say most of mine would have some trait or other that I don't particularly like and would be very surprised if anyone liked everything about me. Friendship is about liking someone regardless of some of their qualities imho.

cornbb

Sleepy wrote:

Do you apply the same view to someone who believes "physical love" between children and adults is acceptable? or to someone's who's faith tells them that non-believers have no right to life? or to someone who believes that one race/sex/creed is more important or somehow superior to another?

I've started a topic on this before in Humanities and been lambasted for it by many of the 'faithful' on these boards but I honestly see no reason why anyone believes that their faith should be respected by others.

No one believes in God less than me, but I still respect other people's faith (as long as they do not try to impose it on others), regardless of how little I can comprehend why they are that way. Its a matter of human decency and respecting personal freedom. To compare it to tolerating child abuse is plain ridiculous. Believing in god in itself does not harm others, unless of course you implicitly cause hurt through your faith, or start trying to impose your view. To lambast someone just for being faithful is just bullyish, disrespectful and preachy.

pbsuxok1znja4r

Sleepy wrote:

Can you honestly say none of your friends have traits you dislike? I'd say most of mine would have some trait or other that I don't particularly like and would be very surprised if anyone liked everything about me. Friendship is about liking someone regardless of some of their qualities imho.

Whatever man, you do what you gotta do for your social life, but I sincerely doubt 'friendship' entails going on about how much you dislike those few bad qualities and how you had to 'weigh up' the good ones against the bad just to decide if you wanted to be their friend. Sounds like a tentative bond, like, which must suck. So no, I don't have hangups like that about any of my friends becuase I'm just not as judgemental as you seem to be.

Lust4Life

I grew up in America and my folks didn't attend church at all. My Maternal (Irish Catholic) grandparents kidnapped my siblings and me and made sure we were all baptized Catholic.

It wasn't until I was an adult that I decided to find out what I'd been missing.

What I found was that the Catholic Church in America is so hungry for people who are willing to be active participants they will turn a blind eye to most any sin you harbor.

I had to walk away when my son was born. I just couldn't see paying for child care while trying to lead the chior each week.

Maybe some day I'll go back. I do miss the people.

So there's my 2 cents!

Fratton Fred

Sleepy wrote:

Do you apply the same view to someone who believes "physical love" between children and adults is acceptable? or to someone's who's faith tells them that non-believers have no right to life? or to someone who believes that one race/sex/creed is more important or somehow superior to another?

I've started a topic on this before in Humanities and been lambasted for it by many of the 'faithful' on these boards but I honestly see no reason why anyone believes that their faith should be respected by others.

no of course not and if you read my last post you'll see I've said "if it doesn't interfere with anyone else".

pbsuxok1znja4r

Sleepy wrote:

I honestly see no reason why anyone believes that their faith should be respected by others.

Right, well, just interchange 'faith' there with 'beliefs or opinions' and you might see why you've no reason, not without being unashamedly hypocritical, to expect anyone else to respect any of yours, if that's your thinking.

nesf

Remember to keep it civil people. There are both devoted atheists, agnostics and theists posting on this forum and I'd ask people to be somewhat considerate in their comments on this topic.

Or in other words, anyone who I think is pushing it with their comments will earn a ban and cause the thread to become locked.

Sleepy

scouser.tommy wrote:

Right, well, just interchange 'faith' there with 'beliefs or opinions' and you might see why you've no reason, not without being unashamedly hypocritical, to expect anyone else to respect any of yours, if that's your thinking.

That pretty much is my take on things. I don't automatically expect anyone to respect my views, opinions or beliefs and thb I don't understand why anyone feels they have the right to expect the same of me or anyone else.

You've been around boards.ie long enough that there's a good chance you've seen me change my mind on something when I've been presented with a solid enough argument for it. A thread on this ran to hundreds of posts in humanities before without one solid argument for the existance of a deity, I've lived 26 years on this planet, educated by Catholic schools and discussed this topic with quite a few friends, aquantinces etc and never once gotten a satisfactory answer as to why someone believes in god, it's usually something along the lines of 'I just feel it in my gut' or 'I just can't believe that all this comes from nowhere' or 'this must have happened for a reason' or some other form of self-deception.

pbsuxok1znja4r

Sounds fair enough then. I've heard many better reasons for theism than the ones you've just cited but TBH I don't get into that anymore on forums. Unecessary and unproductive hassle, but in my experience many other people do have pretty decent intellectual reasons and logical think ing behind their theism or whatever they believe. Meh, slightly off-topic. The RCC are only human, is the bottom line. They're not in any way particularly more evil than secular peoples.

joe_chicken

Sleepy wrote:

Give me one logical, reasonable reason

Logic?!... pah

Logic only leads to more questions

Life isn't logical or reasonable

So if you don't have faith and you're not either scared or blindly stupid, then you're deluding yourself with some kind of other belief