Roisin Ingle is out...

fisgon

.....of the church, I mean. She wrote about in today's Irish Times.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/magazine/2010/0424/1224268736840.html

What do we think? I still believe the idea about the census, and persuading people to mark down 'no religion' is more useful.

Also, I think I disagree with fintan o'toole, and with Roisin Ingle, the problem is not just with power, it's a fundamental problem with the nature of catholicism.

Zombrex

I often wonder about people like this, who turn away from the RCC because of recent events?

Do they not believe the RCC represented God and the Bible? If so what has recent events got to do with anything, the RCC has been around for 2000 years.

If they don't, the question is did they ever?

She says she "evolved" spiritually to find God in other places? Does she still consider herself a Christian? If so does she think the RCC mis-represented Christianity?

Ah so many questions. :pac:

Wacker

I remember a column of hers from a few years back when she was raging at some idiots that had written to her saying that she should be ashamed of herself for being pregnant and unmarried. Her column basically boiled down to God is Love. Sounds like a deist to me.

Dades

The cynic in me thinks it makes for a good column inches.

hiorta

Wicknight wrote: »

Do they not believe the RCC represented God and the Bible? If so what has recent events got to do with anything, the RCC has been around for 2000 years.
Ah so many questions. :pac:

The RCC has only ever represented itself in securing its own material future.
The methods are many varied, but the power of money is high on the list.

rovert

The RC church can keep Ingle, loathsome woman.

fisgon

rovert wrote: »

The RC church can keep Ingle, loathsome woman.

Wow, that's a bit harsh, no idea where that comes from. I like what she writes, she has a sense of humour and is self-deprecating, and insightful. And, though i still don't know how much good defecting will do I think she has done us a service in highlighting the idea, and the possibility of leaving this irredeemably corrupt organisation.

Wacker

rovert wrote: »

The RC church can keep Ingle, loathsome woman.

Yeah, I'm going to have to agree with Fisgon below. I've never found her to be objectionable in the least. What am I missing here?

lynski

Wicknight wrote: »

I
Do they not believe the RCC represented God and the Bible? If so what has recent events got to do with anything, the RCC has been around for 2000 years.

I:

2000yrs ?? ahem did you not listen in history class? there has been a church in rome for 2000 yrs, but there is a difference between that and the corporation that exists now,

fitz0

lynski wrote: »

there has been a church in rome for 2000 yrs, but there is a difference between that and the corporation that exists now,

Yeah, this ones more lenient. No inquisitions, no burning at the stake, no crusades. We have it pretty easy. Plus now we're taking away all those young boys so they can't even have that. This "corporation" is getting away with a lot less than the one that existed even 50 years ago.

antiskeptic

Wacker wrote: »

I remember a column of hers from a few years back when she was raging at some idiots that had written to her saying that she should be ashamed of herself for being pregnant and unmarried. Her column basically boiled down to God is Love. Sounds like a deist to me.

Sounds like a god-in-her-own-wishful-thinking-image-Christian to me.

Grawns

Haven't read the article and don't intend to as I can't stand her at all. Her maternity leave was a fabulous respite. Anyhoo her partner is a northern proddie so I would put money on her having her twin girls baptized protestant. Also she wrote extensively about yoga and hinduism and spirituality - her brother lives in India. A deist alright. Next thing she'll be getting married in a protestant church and attending high mass.

Zombrex

fitz0 wrote: »

Yeah, this ones more lenient. No inquisitions, no burning at the stake, no crusades. We have it pretty easy. Plus now we're taking away all those young boys so they can't even have that. This "corporation" is getting away with a lot less than the one that existed even 50 years ago.

Thank you, that was my point. I'm mazed at anyone who is a Catholic who turns away from the RCC because of recent events. They must be very ignorant of history

PeterIanStaker

Dades wrote: »

The cynic in me thinks it makes for a good column inches.

dont think I'll bother reading this. Written to provoke some "how dare she" letters to the editor for some free publicity, maybe that crank who writes in to the Indo will post one Geraldine's way now?

Undergod

Wacker wrote: »

I remember a column of hers from a few years back when she was raging at some idiots that had written to her saying that she should be ashamed of herself for being pregnant and unmarried. Her column basically boiled down to God is Love. Sounds like a deist to me.

Yeah, I read that article. Was a nice "**** you!" response.

But this defection because of recent scandals makes zero sense. Either what they're saying is true or it isn't. If it is true, then it's just a corrupt organization preaching truth while some elements are engaged in horrendous activity. If it isn't true, then defect for that reason. The fact that they have covered up abuses is irrelevant in the discussion of whether their doctrine is true.

Bill2673

Heard a story about her a while back.

She wrote an article about how she had bullied some other girl in her school when she was a kid, and how she was so sorry about it now when she looked back on the whole thing, and felt so bad about it. It was a confessional type thing, written in a way that would elicit sympathy for herself more than anything else.

My sister knew the girl in question: did Roisin Ingle contact her, to say, hi there, do you mind, I am going to write this article, to drag up all these terrible memories for you, in a national newspaper, is that ok.......? No she did not.

So she has officially left the church eh? Me me me me me me meeeee.

Wacker

Undergod wrote: »

But this defection because of recent scandals makes zero sense. Either what they're saying is true or it isn't. If it is true, then it's just a corrupt organization preaching truth while some elements are engaged in horrendous activity. If it isn't true, then defect for that reason. The fact that they have covered up abuses is irrelevant in the discussion of whether their doctrine is true.

I think the central problem is people's apathy towards religion. The reason for the defections now is that the scandals are finally making people think about the whole thing.