So my ma doesn't believe in god.....

MagicMarker

... and she was gonna stick herself down as catholic on the census.

Thankfully I got to her just in time!

Does anyone think they should rephrase the question, and instead of asking what religion you are it should ask whether you're a theist/deist/pantheist etc? A lot of people will put down catholic without much of a thought but with this question I think the results would be a little more accurate overall.

Aswerty

To be fair if someone doesn't believe in God but still considers themselves Catholic they should still put down Catholic. Or course they have to justify the contradiction to themselves. On the other hand if they are doing it out of habit I think the AI push for people to consider if they are being truthful is a push in the right direction.

I don't think your belief is important in the census just your religious affiliation. Whats the difference to the government if you are a non religious theist or an atheist.

Aswerty

Aswerty wrote: »

To be fair if someone doesn't believe in God but still considers themselves Catholic they should still put down Catholic. Or course they have to justify the contradiction to themselves. On the other hand if they are doing it out of habit I think the AI push for people to consider if they are being truthful is a push in the right direction.

I don't think your belief is important in the census just your religious affiliation. Whats the difference to the government if you are a non religious theist or an atheist.

you what

Ghost Buster

Aswerty wrote: »

To be fair if someone doesn't believe in God but still considers themselves Catholic they should still put down Catholic. Or course they have to justify the contradiction to themselves. On the other hand if they are doing it out of habit I think the AI push for people to consider if they are being truthful is a push in the right direction.

I don't think your belief is important in the census just your religious affiliation. Whats the difference to the government if you are a non religious theist or an atheist.

:eek::eek: Funnily enough I would have thought "No religion" would be slightly more apt?

MagicMarker

bluewolf wrote: »

you what

This...

Aswerty wrote: »

I don't think your belief is important in the census just your religious affiliation. Whats the difference to the government if you are a non religious theist or an atheist.

you wha

Zillah

Aswerty wrote: »

To be fair if someone doesn't believe in God but still considers themselves Catholic they should still put down Catholic. Or course they have to justify the contradiction to themselves. On the other hand if they are doing it out of habit I think the AI push for people to consider if they are being truthful is a push in the right direction.

I don't think your belief is important in the census just your religious affiliation. Whats the difference to the government if you are a non religious theist or an atheist.

You know, that's actually an interesting point. The government doesn't care about your philosophical position, if you count yourself as Catholic, will attend Catholic services, will baptise your children an send them to a Catholic school...then I suppose you probably should put yourself down as Catholic, even if that whole Jesus thing is silly nonsense. The purpose of the census is to predict the nation's needs, not a survey of philosophical positions.

mariebeth

Zillah wrote: »

You know, that's actually an interesting point. The government doesn't care about your philosophical position, if you count yourself as Catholic, will attend Catholic services, will baptise your children an send them to a Catholic school...then I suppose you probably should put yourself down as Catholic, even if that whole Jesus thing is silly nonsense. The purpose of the census is to predict the nation's needs, not a survey of philosophical positions.

But if people who don't practice Catholicism & don't have any faith put down that they have no religion, it will help to predict the nations needs in terms of how religion has an impact on daily life for people who don't believe. If there are more non-religious, it will go a long way to reducing the impact of the Church on everyday life in things such as education, or even having the pubs closed on Good Friday.

I do believe and have faith in God, but I don't think that the beliefs of what seems to be a minority should impact on the majority.

Zillah

Zillah wrote: »

if you count yourself as Catholic, will attend Catholic services, will baptise your children and send them to a Catholic school

mariebeth wrote: »

But if people who don't practice Catholicism

And mariebeth stumbles at the first hurdle.

Ghost Buster

Zillah wrote: »

And mariebeth stumbles at the first hurdle.

Not sure I get ya either but I do need coffee.:o

Aswerty

Ok I put down the clause of people having to justify the contradiction of supporting a religious organisation with their own personal non-beliefs. I didn't say it was a reasonable position to be in but I'd imagine there is many in this country who fit it due to cultural pressures. From this I would conclude putting oneself down as Catholic is a far truer representation than anything else as information being fed back to the state. Surely the fact that you participate in the Catholic religion is more important than your personal belief. Considering the fact that most people here seem to agree with having a secular government I would have assumed that telling the government which particular personal delusions you hold would not be all that important.

From my lurking here I've seen much scoffing of the notion of putting down atheist. Atheists don't put down their belief they put down their religion (or lack of it).

I'm not saying those atheist who have zero contact with the church should put down Catholic. I'm also not saying those who attend a Catholic service such as a wedding or funeral should (including all other unavoidables such as baptism to get into a school). I'm saying those who participate voluntarily for whatever reasons they have should put down Catholic.

The flip side of this coin is people who are areligious with christian beliefs shouldn't put down a religion in the census. They fall under the non religous with all us heathens.

I'm open to correction on why religion is taken in the census, it's not something I've ever looked at closely. Nor is it something I've considered closely. I hadn't expected any disagreement so it's something I can chew on.

Dan_Solo

Shouldn't be on the census at all. Simple as. And you can get sent to jail for filling it out incorrectly, so if you put down Catholic and you're not it's the slammer for you!

MagicMarker

Aswerty wrote: »

Ok I put down the clause of people having to justify the contradiction of supporting a religious organisation with their own personal non-beliefs. I didn't say it was a reasonable position to be in but I'd imagine there is many in this country who fit it due to cultural pressures. From this I would conclude putting oneself down as Catholic is a far truer representation than anything else as information being fed back to the state. Surely the fact that you participate in the Catholic religion is more important than your personal belief. Considering the fact that most people here seem to agree with having a secular government I would have assumed that telling the government which particular personal delusions you hold would not be all that important.

From my lurking here I've seen much scoffing of the notion of putting down atheist. Atheists don't put down their belief they put down their religion (or lack of it).

I'm not saying those atheist who have zero contact with the church should put down Catholic. I'm also not saying those who attend a Catholic service such as a wedding or funeral should (including all other unavoidables such as baptism to get into a school). I'm saying those who participate voluntarily for whatever reasons they have should put down Catholic.

The flip side of this coin is people who are areligious with christian beliefs shouldn't put down a religion in the census. They fall under the non religous with all us heathens.

I'm open to correction on why religion is taken in the census, it's not something I've ever looked at closely. Nor is it something I've considered closely. I hadn't expected any disagreement so it's something I can chew on.

Do you know anyone who partakes in catholicism who doesn't believe in god? And by partake I don't mean getting married in a church or going to a catholic school.

If you don't believe in god, you're not a catholic, ergo, you shouldn't label yourself as one.

brianthebard

There are faiths that allows people room to interpret what they believe on their own, and the are some that don't. The Catholic Church does not allow you to do that, but as a Catholic you still have the opportunity to do so under that umbrella term. You could also become a Quaker or something else but people might not realise. Bottom line people will see themselves as culturally or spiritually Catholic despite not adhering to all aspects of Catholic faith. I know a lot of Catholics would have a problem with transubstantiation for instance, which is just as much a key principle of Catohlicism as whether they believe in God or not.

Zillah

Ghost Buster wrote: »

Not sure I get ya either but I do need coffee.:o

Most people don't actually realise the purpose of the census. It might have a side benefit for posterity, but they're not asking out of curiosity. For example, lets look at the current situation with education. Right now most schools are run by the Catholic Church, and they are planning on handing many of them over to state operation. During that planning phase they need to know answers to questions like "How many people will want to send their children to a Catholic school?" or "Five years from now, what percentage of children will be doing their confirmation?"

They don't care about your opinion on the divinity of Jesus, transubstantiation, or the authority of the Pope. Even if you're sending your kids to a Catholic school because you like being around nuns, for their purposes it is no different to Joe and Mary Popegood sending their wee one to school, its still just a +1 on the demographics.

Hence, if you think Jesus was a load of bollox, but think the Catholic Church are just the bee's knees anyway, and go to mass and will send your kid to a Catholic school, then you should put yourself down as Catholic, because from a planning point of view there's no difference between you and the Popegoods. (For the exact same reason that atheists, agnostics and the theologically disinterested are all just "no religion")

Their position is a retarded and inconsistent mess, but that's a private matter.

magicbastarder

brianthebard wrote: »

Bottom line people will see themselves as culturally or spiritually Catholic despite not adhering to all aspects of Catholic faith. I know a lot of Catholics would have a problem with transubstantiation for instance, which is just as much a key principle of Catohlicism as whether they believe in God or not.

can someone explain to me what being culturally catholic means, bar having been baptised as one?

Ghost Buster

magicbastarder wrote: »

can someone explain to me what being culturally catholic means, bar having been baptised as one?

"ah sure I dont think too much about it. Its what we are"....

Thats kinda it

Zombrex

MagicMarker wrote: »

... and she was gonna stick herself down as catholic on the census.

Thankfully I got to her just in time!

Does anyone think they should rephrase the question, and instead of asking what religion you are it should ask whether you're a theist/deist/pantheist etc? A lot of people will put down catholic without much of a thought but with this question I think the results would be a little more accurate overall.

It should ask you what religious organisation you regularly attend, stressing the regular bit, and give the option "None"

That is all we need. I nor the State see much difference in terms of resource planning between an atheist and a "Catholic" who goes to church once every 12 years.

robindch

brianthebard wrote: »

There are faiths that allows people room to interpret what they believe on their own, and the are some that don't. The Catholic Church does not allow you to do that [...]

Quite false. The Vatican specifically allows people to believe whatever they want, while still permitting themselves to believe they're "catholic".

See what's known as the "Supremacy of Conscience" clause in the Vatican's catechism. Paragraph 1800 here:

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a6.htm#1800

robindch

magicbastarder wrote: »

can someone explain to me what being culturally catholic means, bar having been baptised as one?

It means that the church can pretend that you are a full-on member, even though you're not, and it knows that you won't complain about it.

Aswerty

Do you know anyone who partakes in catholicism who doesn't believe in god? And by partake I don't mean getting married in a church or going to a catholic school.

If you don't believe in god, you're not a catholic, ergo, you shouldn't label yourself as one.

Well what I have been saying is in relation to the OP's question. Which was should the census be changed to allow people to put down their belief as opposed to religion. My points were made primarily to disagree with this. The fact of whether or not I know any atheist Catholics (by their standards) is moot (though I don't) because I'm merely putting forward the premise that entering a belief as opposed to the religion that you avail of generates no worth while data.

You could sum my argument up into, if a person (e.g. a father) is for some reason attending a religious service (e.g. going with his family to church) even though he holds no belief he still has to be accommodated for. This is not arguing that people that go to other peoples ceremonies (e.g. marriage/funeral) or due to problems in the system (e.g. schools prioritising baptised children) fall into this same category. The former the person is choosing to accommodate his family and the latter is people being forced into services because there is no alternative.

I suppose this brings up the fact that people actually are putting down their "belief" even though they don't practice it. This causes the data to become corrupt anyways. So maybe it's all a bit redundant because everyone is answering the question within a different context.

I would agree with others that the current questions is pretty terrible for gathering any usable data.

can someone explain to me what being culturally catholic means, bar having been baptised as one?

Someone who does the Catholic thing to some sort of degree but don't have any philosophical reason for doing it. They do it because they've always done it.

brianthebard

robindch wrote: »

Quite false. The Vatican specifically allows people to believe whatever they want, while still permitting themselves to believe they're "catholic".

See what's known as the "Supremacy of Conscience" clause in the Vatican's catechism. Paragraph 1800 here:

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a6.htm#1800

Fine go to 100 parish priests and tell them you are catholic but don't believe in transubstantiation, see how that goes down.

robindch

brianthebard wrote: »

Fine go to 100 parish priests and tell them you are catholic but don't believe in transubstantiation, see how that goes down.

Er, I'm pointing out what the Vatican's rules are -- chapter and verse. Not my fault if the guys on the front line disagree!

Aswerty

brianthebard wrote: »

Fine go to 100 parish priests and tell them you are catholic but don't believe in transubstantiation, see how that goes down.

I don't imagine they'd do anything beyond tut tut, or would they?

The one priest that I'd have known wouldn't even go as far as tut-tutting.

Bloody Nipples

My dad attends mass every sunday despite being an atheist. My mom is quite religious so he goes with her, and he says it's good discipline and a social event. He's probably going to put himself down as Catholic, which for all intents and purposes he is. I'd say the fact that he actively partakes in the religion would trump the fact that he doesn't believe in it from a governmental standpoint.

My brother and I are putting ourselves down as Jedi on the census as a tongue-in-cheek method of saying "no religion" because it would upset our mother if we put it down...

MagicMarker

Bloody Nipples wrote: »

My brother and I are putting ourselves down as Jedi on the census as a tongue-in-cheek method of saying "no religion" because it would upset our mother if we put it down...

That's not a tongue in cheek method of putting down no religion, it's just a stupid method of achieving nothing but inconsistency.

I have to suggest putting down no religion would be more productive

The Mad Hatter

I think the Jedi thing was funny in its time, but the point has been made and now we need real figures for non-believers.

Ghost Buster

Bloody Nipples wrote: »

My dad attends mass every sunday despite being an atheist. My mom is quite religious so he goes with her, and he says it's good discipline and a social event. He's probably going to put himself down as Catholic, which for all intents and purposes he is. I'd say the fact that he actively partakes in the religion would trump the fact that he doesn't believe in it from a governmental standpoint.

My brother and I are putting ourselves down as Jedi on the census as a tongue-in-cheek method of saying "no religion" because it would upset our mother if we put it down...

Yup. That'll will help you in getting your kids into Jedi school down the line..:rolleyes:

RandomName2

bluewolf wrote: »

you what

"Come on Ted, you don't really believe all that"
"It's the cornerstone of our religion!"
"Oh... right."

Morbert

Zillah wrote: »

You know, that's actually an interesting point. The government doesn't care about your philosophical position, if you count yourself as Catholic, will attend Catholic services, will baptise your children an send them to a Catholic school...then I suppose you probably should put yourself down as Catholic, even if that whole Jesus thing is silly nonsense. The purpose of the census is to predict the nation's needs, not a survey of philosophical positions.

People baptise children and send them to catholic school because they have to. If the census accurately reflected the theological positions of the population, this would no longer be the case. In otherwords, those are not needs, but vestiges of an earlier time.

Regarding tending services, that is generally moot, as very few people attend services and don't believe in God.

Peregrinus

Religion can be a matter of

(a) what you believe; or

(b) how you live; or

(c) the community with which you identify.

(Obviously, there can be some overlap between these.)

Atheists/agnostics/sceptics who object to the non-believing identifying as “Catholic” (or anything else) are implicitly accepting that (a) above is the appropriate way to understand religion. (Ironically, they are adopting a classically Protestant position.)

The State, however, is not really concerned with what people believe (and, in my view, rightly so). It is much more interested in (and affected by) religion as a social phenomenon. Therefore (c) above is what they care about, and the census question is phrased accordingly.

You can’t rely on the census to give an accurate picture of what people believe, and it is silly to object that the census doesn’t do so - that is not its purpose. If you want an overview of people’s beliefs or religious practice, you’ll need to look for more focussed and relevant forms of social research.