Catholics should boycott all church services till further notice.

gerajella

Fionnuala O'Connor makes the point that, since the Catholic Church is not listening to anybody, they [the faithful should make a gesture for a set period of time, and leave the pews empty, especially on high profile dates such as tomorrow, [St. Patrick's Day] and the Easter, although, since Easter week is not binding as normal Sundays are, The Holy Week should be exempted from this. The likelihood of shaming Cardinal Daly and the other senior figures, is from their attitude until now is doubtful, but it's worth a try. Otherwise they will take comfort that this obscene state of affairs can be continued in future without penalty for them. The full title of the Catholic Church is incomplete at present. IUt would be more honest to add 'plc' since it is clearly a commercial concern before anything else.

umpsfar

throw in the pigs and the government too..

jmayo

gerajella wrote: »

Fionnuala O'Connor makes the point that, since the Catholic Church is not listening to anybody, they [the faithful should make a gesture for a set period of time, and leave the pews empty, especially on high profile dates such as tomorrow, [St. Patrick's Day] and the Easter, although, since Easter week is not binding as normal Sundays are, The Holy Week should be exempted from this. The likelihood of shaming Cardinal Daly and the other senior figures, is from their attitude until now is doubtful, but it's worth a try. Otherwise they will take comfort that this obscene state of affairs can be continued in future without penalty for them. The full title of the Catholic Church is incomplete at present. IUt would be more honest to add 'plc' since it is clearly a commercial concern before anything else.

Speaking as a lapsed catholic who hasn't bothered going to mass for years bar the occassional wedding or funeral, I don't think Irish people will do this.
A fair chunk of Irish people would see it as insulting their local priest whom they may think is a great guy.
It's a bit like how lots of people claim they never voted for bertie as Taoiseach, even though they voted for the local ff guys who were seen to be doing good for the locals. :mad:

Besides Irish people, as can be seen from all the other scandals involving our institutions, just roll over and take it. :rolleyes:

mojesius

gerajella wrote: »

Fionnuala O'Connor makes the point that, since the Catholic Church is not listening to anybody, they [the faithful should make a gesture for a set period of time, and leave the pews empty, especially on high profile dates such as tomorrow, [St. Patrick's Day] and the Easter, although, since Easter week is not binding as normal Sundays are, The Holy Week should be exempted from this. The likelihood of shaming Cardinal Daly and the other senior figures, is from their attitude until now is doubtful, but it's worth a try. Otherwise they will take comfort that this obscene state of affairs can be continued in future without penalty for them. The full title of the Catholic Church is incomplete at present. IUt would be more honest to add 'plc' since it is clearly a commercial concern before anything else.

I couldn't agree more, but do you honestly think it's going to happen? My local church has never looked busier the past few months.

Exile 1798

I think most sensible people have already boycotted the Church on a permanent basis.

Those remaining are perhaps immune to such concerns.

VERYinterested

Yes, I'm afraid it's the ones that go every week that will never stay away. Remember the crew that went on the Late Late Show to defend Eamon Casey and attacked Annie Murphy? The ridiculous situation of them arguing that there wasn't a full moon the night she said Casey seduced her, so therefore she was lying :rolleyes:

This type of vermin will always be there licking the altar rails and castigating anyone that dares to speak ill about their church, but don't want to accept that they are harbouring child rapists. They did nothing about them in the the past and will never do anything about them. It is up to people like us to demand that action is taken. I hope that their function is lessened in time and that one day they will cease to exist.

I am sick hearing that they are not all bad, but look right at the top down and they all appear to have something to hide. I am glad I have nothing to do with them, a crowd of sadistic subhumans.

junipergreen

Here's something all us lapsed Catholics can do to get a point across - leave the Church officially. In the process of trying to do it now myself, but can't locate my baptismal cert

http://countmeout.ie/

anymore

junipergreen wrote: »

Here's something all us lapsed Catholics can do to get a point across - leave the Church officially. In the process of trying to do it now myself, but can't locate my baptismal cert

http://countmeout.ie/

I am afraid you will have to go to the relevant church to get a new copy !
I signed as witness for a friend who did get a new copy of his B'Cert in order to defect from RC.

junipergreen

Thanks for the tip! I need to get out, the whole thing makes me feel sick.

IrishTonyO

Just one to be aware of using coutmeout, is that after leaving the church you may have difficulty marrying in a church, funeral in a church and even burial in a cemetery.

But other than these this is a good way for non practising Catholics to show their point with their feet. It reduces the number of Catholics officially in the world etc.

junipergreen

No bother, I have no desire to get married or have a funeral in a church anyway There's no problem with being buried in a municipal graveyard, it's just the ones in the grounds of churches that will be off limits.

theg81der

If you can convince the masses that the Church and priests are not the same as God and religion you might get somewhere. But I fear you`d be wasting your time.

I`m catolic but I don`t go to mass, they don`t represent God to me, if anything the opposite.

SEPT 23 1989

My relations have been boycotting the RC Church since the 16th Century:)

anymore

I'd say a good start would to beto refrain from using honorary titles. So for me its Brady, Ratzinger etc

junipergreen

Absolutely. He'll always be Ratzinger to me, well that or something slightly more unprintable. I'm finding it hard to shake the habit of calling the men in black 'father' but I'm trying my best.

gerajella

mojesius wrote: »

I couldn't agree more, but do you honestly think it's going to happen? My local church has never looked busier the past few months.

Mojesius.. I'm afraid you're right, and the ironic thing is those who do go every Sunday don't even believe in the God they're worshipping so ostenibly. There's probably more actual believers among those who have stopped going years ago. It's more of a social thing in villages where everyone knows everyone else, and trot out on Sunday morning because they can't think of anything else to do. Benedict XVI is exposed as having done exactly the same in his own country. He's unfit to be in his present role, as was his immediate predecessor, who presided over this litany of abuse for thirty years. Depressing is it not?

bmaxi

It's true, the church probably don't care about lapsed Catholics but if they were to become Protestants, then you'd see some animation.

LookingFor

bmaxi wrote: »

It's true, the church probably don't care about lapsed Catholics but if they were to become Protestants, then you'd see some animation.

For the longest time I used to think that if I'd lived during the reformation, I'd undoubtedly have become a protestant.

Yet, here were are today faced with a Church equally rotten to the core, and yet I'm still technically a catholic. It's like I can't be arsed or something.

I wouldn't want to become a protestant now...I've a distinct distrust or pretty much any organised religion. And there's that little 'irish' part of me that hesitates about formally cutting ties with the church.

I lament to say it, but I think I, and many other irish people, are simply too weak to actually make a stand as formal as that (i.e. leaving the church vs simply lapsing).

bmaxi

LookingFor wrote: »

For the longest time I used to think that if I'd lived during the reformation, I'd undoubtedly have become a protestant.

Yet, here were are today faced with a Church equally rotten to the core, and yet I'm still technically a catholic. It's like I can't be arsed or something.

I wouldn't want to become a protestant now...I've a distinct distrust or pretty much any organised religion. And there's that little 'irish' part of me that hesitates about formally cutting ties with the church.

I lament to say it, but I think I, and many other irish people, are simply too weak to actually make a stand as formal as that (i.e. leaving the church vs simply lapsing).

I doubt you'd have to. The idea would be enough to have the Irish hierarchy gathering up their skirts and running to Papparattzi. They've no Government to hide behind now and the Government has no Church to hide behind. This is the true enlightenment, IMO.

Erren Music

theg81der wrote: »

If you can convince the masses that the Church and priests are not the same as God and religion you might get somewhere. But I fear you`d be wasting your time.

I`m catolic but I don`t go to mass, they don`t represent God to me, if anything the opposite.

Then you are not a catholic

super_furry

The thing is, many of the church going public believe that Brady is fully justified in refusing to step down. Listening to some of the comments on Newstalk yesterday was a real eye-opener as they interviewed some people coming out from mass. One lady claimed that the victims have 'had their pound of flesh' and should just let it go now.

IrishTonyO

Erren Music wrote: »

Then you are not a catholic

Afraid you are wrong there, once you have been baptised and confirmed you are a Catholic for life unless you are either excommunicated or follow procedures to officially leave the Church

Kiwi_knock

I know that the actions of some members of the Church has been despicable but not all Priests should be punished. I do not believe in guilt by association which seems to be the view towards the Church today. Boycotting of mass would be an effective message to the Church but I think it is unjustly unfair to a majority of priests who had no idea of the extent of cover up within the Church. They do not deserve to be punished as a single entity, remember they are human beings as well. How you would you like to be viewed as a child molester only because someone that shares the same profession and responsibilties as you has been convicted of being one. I know an absolute boycott of the Church seems like a great idea but I see as being unfair to those priest you had no idea of the corruption within the Church. It may be to some rotten to the core but the Church does have some shining lights who are trying to provide a better image of the Church. At least give the Church a chance to try to change its ways.

jennyjest

Kiwi_knock wrote: »

I know that the actions of some members of the Church has been despicable but not all Priests should be punished. I do not believe in guilt by association which seems to be the view towards the Church today. Boycotting of mass would be an effective message to the Church but I think it is unjustly unfair to a majority of priests who had no idea of the extent of cover up within the Church. They do not deserve to be punished as a single entity, remember they are human beings as well. How you would you like to be viewed as a child molester only because someone that shares the same profession and responsibilties as you has been convicted of being one. I know an absolute boycott of the Church seems like a great idea but I see as being unfair to those priest you had no idea of the corruption within the Church. It may be to some rotten to the core but the Church does have some shining lights who are trying to provide a better image of the Church. At least give the Church a chance to try to change its ways.

They are all part of the institution that covered up the abuse.
Priests and bishops love to try shift the focus back to to the abusers rather than talk about the decades long conspiracy to hide ad facilitate the abuse. Any proest who says " we didt uderstad" is part of the problem, anyone who puts thier vow of obedience to der furher ratzinger is part of the problem

bmaxi

super_furry wrote: »

The thing is, many of the church going public believe that Brady is fully justified in refusing to step down. Listening to some of the comments on Newstalk yesterday was a real eye-opener as they interviewed some people coming out from mass. One lady claimed that the victims have 'had their pound of flesh' and should just let it go now.

It would be interesting to see the age profile of those people. There is a certain section of society which can see no wrong in the church. These people have been brainwashed into never thinking for themselves, that every word which comes out of the priest's mouth is straight from the lips of God himself and to question any action by the church is to defy God. I don't think anybody will dissuade them from their beliefs, they see the Devil's hand in every word or action directed against the church.
What I can't understand is how they can't see the Devil's hand represented in the picture of two abused children, being browbeaten into agreeing to keep silent about their abusers by the very people from whose number their abuse s came. Was their ever going to be anything but one answer from them?
Now, one of these "bullies" is in the top office of this church that supposedly represents God here on earth, moralising and preaching to them on the evil of their ways and they see nothing wrong with that?
They deserve pity more than anything else.

Joey the lips

This have turned into an anti catholic discussion rather than what catholics can do.

Not that you want it but here is my opinion.

I will not be bicotting mass. I will not be boycotting my church. I believe in god i practise my faith. I believe that they who abused will be judged and this is when they will get there rewards.

I go to mass for many reasons I find it an escape where i can gather my thoughts and to be honest I enjoy it. As a catholic I must forgive these abusers this is where I have trouble and I go to mass to pray for strength.

amcalester

Joey the lips wrote: »

This have turned into an anti catholic discussion rather than what catholics can do.


I go to mass for many reasons I find it an escape where i can gather my thoughts and to be honest I enjoy it. As a catholic I must forgive these abusers this is where I have trouble and I go to mass to pray for strength.

Do you have to forgive them even if they show no remorse?

Genuine question.

Joey the lips

amcalester wrote: »

Do you have to forgive them even if they show no remorse?

Genuine question.

Yes as a catholic i do.

However as joey i find this difficult. In fact I dont think i would and I would not make a good judge. but regardless this does not make me perfect but my first rule has always been first do no harm. In other words live how you want to be treated.

fontanalis

bmaxi wrote: »

It would be interesting to see the age profile of those people. There is a certain section of society which can see no wrong in the church. These people have been brainwashed into never thinking for themselves, that every word which comes out of the priest's mouth is straight from the lips of God himself and to question any action by the church is to defy God. I don't think anybody will dissuade them from their beliefs, they see the Devil's hand in every word or action directed against the church.
What I can't understand is how they can't see the Devil's hand represented in the picture of two abused children, being browbeaten into agreeing to keep silent about their abusers by the very people from whose number their abuse s came. Was their ever going to be anything but one answer from them?
Now, one of these "bullies" is in the top office of this church that supposedly represents God here on earth, moralising and preaching to them on the evil of their ways and they see nothing wrong with that?
They deserve pity more than anything else.

Ha wha?

Erren Music

Joey the lips wrote: »

This have turned into an anti catholic discussion rather than what catholics can do.

Not that you want it but here is my opinion.

I will not be bicotting mass. I will not be boycotting my church. I believe in god i practise my faith. I believe that they who abused will be judged and this is when they will get there rewards.

I go to mass for many reasons I find it an escape where i can gather my thoughts and to be honest I enjoy it. As a catholic I must forgive these abusers this is where I have trouble and I go to mass to pray for strength.

What gives you this belief.

Were you at one with this god and church from birth, or did your parents force you into this belief system.

What will happen your beliefs when the church implodes in the next few weeks. What will you believe when you realise everything they told you is a lie.

What about the fact they have been fcuking children for years, and covering up this. What about the children they murdered?

How can anyone be so stupid in 2010 to support this nonsense.

Joey the lips

Erren Music wrote: »

What gives you this belief.

Were you at one with this god and church from birth, or did your parents force you into this belief system.

What will happen your beliefs when the church implodes in the next few weeks. What will you believe when you realise everything they told you is a lie.

What about the fact they have been fcuking children for years, and covering up this. What about the children they murdered?

How can anyone be so stupid in 2010 to support this nonsense.

This is not politics there for not worthy of discussion. You are simply trying to force your belief on others. As for being born a catholic. I dont I had much choice however I CHOOSE to remain and raise my own kids that way. Like you choose to do nothing. We are both free to choose and when my kids become of age I will appreciate them chooseing. However if they choose to leave the catholic faith I as a catholic will pray for there forgiveness. Yes you might think this stupid. That is your decision.

Any one care to actually discuss this topic or just burn the witches again :rolleyes:

Kiwi_knock

amcalester wrote: »

Do you have to forgive them even if they show no remorse?

Genuine question.

A very good question. As a Catholic I can forgive those who have abused even if they deny their guilt and show no remorse. Not sure if my ability to forgive is due to my Catholic background, I think it is just the way I have been raised. I believe everyone has a little bit of good inside them even if they refuse to show it. I do not believe any one is pure evil, I always have felt that someone can change for the better. It may be a naive and innocent belief but I trust in it and it makes me feel better about the world we live in.

jennyjest

Kiwi_knock wrote: »

A very good question. As a Catholic I can forgive those who have abused even if they deny their guilt and show no remorse. Not sure if my ability to forgive is due to my Catholic background, I think it is just the way I have been raised. I believe everyone has a little bit of good inside them even if they refuse to show it. I do not believe any one is pure evil, I always have felt that someone can change for the better. It may be a naive and innocent belief but I trust in it and it makes me feel better about the world we live in.

The olny on e who can forgive the abuser is the person who was abused !

rovert

They should all say 10 Hail Marys and it'll be grand :rolleyes:

Erren Music

bmaxi wrote: »

It would be interesting to see the age profile of those people. There is a certain section of society which can see no wrong in the church. These people have been brainwashed into never thinking for themselves, that every word which comes out of the priest's mouth is straight from the lips of God himself and to question any action by the church is to defy God. I don't think anybody will dissuade them from their beliefs, they see the Devil's hand in every word or action directed against the church.

Thats how the church works.
It brainwashes the ignorant and indoctrinates them into a life of servitude and stupidity.

Erren Music

Kiwi_knock wrote: »

A very good question. As a Catholic I can forgive those who have abused even if they deny their guilt and show no remorse. Not sure if my ability to forgive is due to my Catholic background, I think it is just the way I have been raised. I believe everyone has a little bit of good inside them even if they refuse to show it. I do not believe any one is pure evil, I always have felt that someone can change for the better. It may be a naive and innocent belief but I trust in it and it makes me feel better about the world we live in.

The simple fact is that your god would forgive the rapists/murderer's, rather than an innocent atheist or a practising homosexual.

If you cannot see the problem in this, or how this highlights the stupidity of religion then go to mass. Prop up this insane bronze age mish mash of unknown writings.

Anyone who still attends a church is a fool.

Shame on any parents about to hand their kids over to this communion and confirmation b0ll0x. Open your minds and do something productive instead.

Erren Music

jennyjest wrote: »

The olny on e who can forgive the abuser is the person who was abused !

The only way I will forgive my abuser is when he is lying on the floor beaten to a pulp by my own hands

LookingFor

Kiwi_knock wrote: »

I know that the actions of some members of the Church has been despicable but not all Priests should be punished. I do not believe in guilt by association which seems to be the view towards the Church today.

The church is an association.

We're talking about institutional failings here. Not just a couple of bad apples operating in isolation, but failings at an institutional level.

If you are a member of such an organisation, moreover a representative of that insitution (as priests are)...if you cannot handle being challenged on these failings, you should rethink your association.

I know people who boycott Shell. I also know there are many Shell employees and owners of Shell petrol stations who are completely divorced from and innocent of the actions of Shell, 'the institution', yet as a matter of course, because of their association with Shell, they suffer from these boycotts.

The logic some people try to apply to the church just doesn't hold up in any other context. It's as if the church sees itself as an organisation when that suits, and when it doesn't it dissolves into 'oh, well the church is just a body of independent members'. That just doesn't fly with me, when you're talking about an institution and institutional failures, you're either in or you're out. If you choose to associate yourself with the church and all it apparently stands for today, expect external pressure for it.

bmaxi

Joey the lips wrote: »

This have turned into an anti catholic discussion rather than what catholics can do.

Not that you want it but here is my opinion.

I will not be bicotting mass. I will not be boycotting my church. I believe in god i practise my faith. I believe that they who abused will be judged and this is when they will get there rewards.

I go to mass for many reasons I find it an escape where i can gather my thoughts and to be honest I enjoy it. As a catholic I must forgive these abusers this is where I have trouble and I go to mass to pray for strength.

I wouldn't say I am anti the Catholic Church, it very much depends on what you see as the Catholic church.
Your faith is not Roman Catholic, your faith is Christian. The problem is not Christianity which will allow you to have all the comforts of your beliefs, whether here in Ireland or on a mountain in Tibet, if that's what you choose. Nobody can take that away, that is in your own heart..
The problem is with certain individuals and the organisation called the Roman Catholic church. I don't think these individuals are fit to hold the office they do, their actions and inactions have precluded them from that. The church, as an organisation, has done little to redress the situation, there has been no contrition, even from the very top of the organisation. How does this equate with Christianity?

Scofflaw

Erren Music wrote: »

The simple fact is that your god would forgive the rapists/murderer's, rather than an innocent atheist or a practising homosexual.

If you cannot see the problem in this, or how this highlights the stupidity of religion then go to mass. Prop up this insane bronze age mish mash of unknown writings.

Anyone who still attends a church is a fool.

Shame on any parents about to hand their kids over to this communion and confirmation b0ll0x. Open your minds and do something productive instead.

Banned for a week for trolling.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Kiwi_knock

Erren Music wrote: »

The simple fact is that your god would forgive the rapists/murderer's, rather than an innocent atheist or a practising homosexual.

The simple fact is that Atheists and Homosexuals have turned their backs on God so I do not see why they would be seeking forgiveness for someone they do not believe in. Most Atheists and Homosexuals are good clean living people but when they die they do not want to meet God so why should God concern himself with those who do not believe in him.

Scofflaw

Kiwi_knock wrote: »

The simple fact is that Atheists and Homosexuals have turned their backs on God so I do not see why they would be seeking forgiveness for someone they do not believe in. Most Atheists and Homosexuals are good clean living people but when they die they do not want to meet God so why should God concern himself with those who do not believe in him.

Consider very carefully where you're going with that.

moderately,
Scofflaw

jennyjest

Kiwi_knock wrote: »

The simple fact is that Atheists and Homosexuals have turned their backs on God so I do not see why they would be seeking forgiveness for someone they do not believe in. Most Atheists and Homosexuals are good clean living people but when they die they do not want to meet God so why should God concern himself with those who do not believe in him.

This is a rather confused post - first if there is a God, then why do youassume to know what he/she thinks in relation to Athiests ?
Two, if there is a God, then he decides on peoples sexual orientation, so why would they be seeking forgiveness for the orientation God has given them ?
This seems to be a big big problem for homphobic religions ! God makes homosexuals - get over it !

Kiwi_knock

Sorry if my post confused you, its just based on the views of the people I know who have turned their back on religion. They do not believe that there is an afterlife and that God exists. They could care less about what God thinks of them. I am only a young one so I can only speak for the people I interact with. Sorry if my statement came across as too broad, I did not mean to categorise everyone under the same banner. I believe God can forgive everyone for their sins, but I do believe in my circle of acquaintances that they do not seek God's guidance and forgiveness. I am not trying to be preachy and saying that to live a good life that you need God at your side. There are too many examples of people who have acheived great things in this world without having a belief in a higher power. But then there are people who have attributed their achievements to a divine power.

8kvscdpglqnyr4

IrishTonyO wrote: »

Just one to be aware of using coutmeout, is that after leaving the church you may have difficulty marrying in a church, funeral in a church and even burial in a cemetery.

I formally renounced catholicism and got married in a church 2 years afterwards. No problem! It's a case of a non-catholic marrying a catholic.

I also did so without having a baptisimal cert ... I just mentioned my parish and approx date of baptism. Got a letter back a few weeks later!

bmaxi

jennyjest wrote: »

This seems to be a big big problem for homphobic religions ! God makes homosexuals - get over it !

Are you saying it's a conscious decision or that he makes everybody and some turn out to be homosexuals? Either way, do you really want to go there?

jennyjest

Kiwi_knock wrote: »

Sorry if my post confused you, its just based on the views of the people I know who have turned their back on religion. They do not believe that there is an afterlife and that God exists. They could care less about what God thinks of them. I am only a young one so I can only speak for the people I interact with. Sorry if my statement came across as too broad, I did not mean to categorise everyone under the same banner. I believe God can forgive everyone for their sins, but I do believe in my circle of acquaintances that they do not seek God's guidance and forgiveness. I am not trying to be preachy and saying that to live a good life that you need God at your side. There are too many examples of people who have acheived great things in this world without having a belief in a higher power. But then there are people who have attributed their achievements to a divine power.

Ok, but I have to ask you about the sexual orientation bit: there just isnt anyway to say that people now choose their orientation - for simplicity I'll ignore people who may be bi. It is something they do not control and we now know it presents itself in non - human species as well. It is God decided if you believe in God.

jennyjest

bmaxi wrote: »

Are you saying it's a conscious decision or that he makes everybody and some turn out to be homosexuals? Either way, do you really want to go there?

Well if I had to go with the God thing, then I would go with intelligent design but this also implies humans just arent important at all ! That is the flaw with intelligent design if a person is arguing for it against atheists.
We allow our own sense of self importance to exaggerate our importance in the scheme of things.

Kiwi_knock

jennyjest wrote: »

Ok, but I have to ask you about the sexual orientation bit: there just isnt anyway to say that people now choose their orientation - for simplicity I'll ignore people who may be bi. It is something they do not control and we now know it presents itself in non - human species as well. It is God decided if you believe in God.

I actually believe that is nurture instead of nature. What you turn out in life to be has more to do with the surroundings you grew up in, the people you interacted with. I think the way people turn out has more to do with the surroundings you were raised in rather than something inbuilt into your system. I believe God created you with freedom of choice, nothing in you that makes you special. You have to make yourself special and that depends on your surroundings.

TheRealPONeil

Looks like a lot of other places of worship would also be empty with this strategy ...

http://www.williamhkennedy.com/ramulti.html

jennyjest

Kiwi_knock wrote: »

I actually believe that is nurture instead of nature. What you turn out in life to be has more to do with the surroundings you grew up in, the people you interacted with. I think the way people turn out has more to do with the surroundings you were raised in rather than something inbuilt into your system. I believe God created you with freedom of choice, nothing in you that makes you special. You have to make yourself special and that depends on your surroundings.

This is Sarah Palin talk ! Tell me why on earth in repressive countries would young teeagers choose to be homosexual ? It is not logical.
Why would you choose a condition that meant you would not be hanging out with most of your friends, that you would be too embarassed to tell your parents ?
The big problem here is fear ... fear that accepting one basic reality might lead to questioning more of the ' truths' of religion.