Would you still regard yourself as been Catholic?

paky

Todays independent has revealed that there were 272 child abuse claims against Catholic priests last year. This is the main reason I would no longer consider myself Catholic. Would you still consider yourself Catholic, if not why?

Bottle_of_Smoke

I don't consider myself Roman Catholic because I no longer believe in their God, or any other.

It is a bit of a disgrace Catholics have not overthrown the system and continue to support it whilst the apologies and reforms have been token at best. Though I accept theologically they may not have a choice there.

paky

the area where i live, people still go to mass in their hundreds. i was discusted when i saw teenagers and young adults coming out of church last sunday. do these people actually believe in god or do they just go because it was bet into them?

Scofflaw

Not really Politics. Moved to Christianity.

moderately,
Scofflaw

georgieporgy

not really christianity either. is there a garbage forum?

PeterIanStaker

I stopped believing in all that nonsense when I was a small child.

catbear

I was brought up in a Roman Catholic house but knew I'd outgrown it when I started to think for myself.

Fanny Cradock

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

I stopped believing in all that nonsense when I was a small child.

Then it is time to reconsider with mature reflection

catbear

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Then it is time to reconsider with mature reflection

You talking to me and if so reflect on what?

PeterIanStaker

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Then it is time to reconsider with mature reflection

Not a hope. Even laissez - faire exposure to that nonsense is harmful enough. Good riddance.

philologos

OP: I was never formally Roman Catholic and as a result I don't identify as such but I do have some respect to the positive role it has had in communities. I don't believe that the vast majority of priests were abusers, but I believe it was a huge issue within the RCC which I hope they can resolve.

paky wrote:

the area where i live, people still go to mass in their hundreds. i was discusted when i saw teenagers and young adults coming out of church last sunday. do these people actually believe in god or do they just go because it was bet into them?

Firstly, I don't think it is any of your business as to what people decide to do on a Sunday morning. In this country there is such a thing as freedom of religion (and freedom from religion).
Secondly, I think you're making a big mistake in correlating belief in God with the child abuse scandal that has happened in the RCC.

I believe that these issues as well as other issues in churches are huge failures on man's part. Why on earth would you reject God on the basis of mankind screwing up? That's my issue with that logic. I believe in the Lord Jesus as a Christian, I don't trust blindly in the church I happen to go to.

PeterIanStaker: How is my faith, or the faith of Fanny Craddock or PDN for example harmful?

PeterIanStaker

philologos wrote: »

PeterIanStaker: How is my faith, or the faith of Fanny Craddock or PDN for example harmful?

Faith is the great cop out - the ultimate excuse to avoid thinking for yourself.
Faith is nothing more than wishful thinking - a vain hope that something may turn out to be true despite all evidence to the contrary. Faith dupes people.

"We only speak of faith when we wish to substitute emotion for evidence" - Bertrand Russell.

philologos

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

Faith is the great cop out - the ultimate excuse to avoid thinking for yourself.

You couldn't really think that though, given that many Christian posters on this site, and indeed in the general population have proven themselves capable of thinking for themselves.

In fact PeterIanStaker the reason I am here as a Christian to have this discussion with you is because I decided entirely of my own free will and my own choice to follow Jesus while I was reading the Bible.

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

Faith is nothing more than wishful thinking - a vain hope that something may turn out to be true despite all evidence to the contrary. Faith dupes people.

Only if we have good reason to believe that Christianity is false. If we have good reason to believe that Christianity is true it is the atheists who are duping people. Not only duping people, but preventing people to come to know Jesus and be saved from eternal condemnation.

It also assumes that faith is inherently blind. Personally I can see that faith and reason go together. Or as Anselm of Canterbury put it "faith seeking understanding".

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

"We only speak of faith when we wish to substitute emotion for evidence" - Bertrand Russell.

Well, it is predictable that Russell would state such a thing. Indeed, as a philosophy student I appreciate irreligious philosophy. Ultimately I have to believe that such people are ultimately mistaken even if some are highly intelligent.

Michael G

paky wrote: »

Todays independent has revealed that there were 272 child abuse claims against Catholic priests last year. This is the main reason I would no longer consider myself Catholic. Would you still consider yourself Catholic, if not why?

There were 272 claims, not proven incidents. But even if they were all true it would have nothing to do with whether I "considered myself" Catholic (I do). The fact that some priests have behaved wickedly and that some bishops have protected them from the law is shameful and they should all be punished; but it has no bearing on the fundamental question, which is whether the Catholic Church is the true Church. I believe that this is the Church that Christ founded and that, as he promised, it will last in some form to the end of time, no matter whether some opportunist perverts use it as cover to abuse children or some weak time-serving bishops try to hide it.

PeterIanStaker

I was only baptised, communioned and confirmed as a child, to keep the grandparents happy. Thats as far as it went. If I ever marry, it will be a civil ceremony, and if I ever have children they will not be baptised or jump through any of the other hoops.


I, a grown man, am not a catholic, and with all due respect, you are wasting your time trying to tell me otherwise.

Good night.

catbear

I agree your post Michael G and wish to ad that it takes a complicit society to tolerate evil behavior from those who say they are gods workers. I can understand an earlier posters feeling towards the flock that so far has not held one Bishop accountable by state law, the same law that should have pedophile handlers in jail.

philologos

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

I, a grown man, am not a catholic, and with all due respect, you are wasting your time trying to tell me otherwise.

I have no interest in telling you to be a Roman Catholic. I have interest in telling you that irrespective of whether or not that church, or other churches have done wrong, there is still the question that you have to face up to. Is God real, and is Jesus Christ who He said He was?

Good night indeed...

catbear wrote: »

I agree your post Michael G and wish to ad that it takes a complicit society to tolerate evil behavior from those who say they are gods workers. I can understand an earlier posters feeling towards the flock that so far has not held one Bishop accountable by state law, the same law that should have pedophile handlers in jail.

As far as I'm aware this was largely down to the Education Minister at the time, Michael Woods who capped the charge to the RCC to €100mn. I'm afraid your finger has to be turned to the Government as well as the RCC. I don't understand why 16% of us at least who aren't Roman Catholics should have ever been asked to foot the bill for that.

catbear

I have to turn you finger back to the electorate that voted for that government. Correct me if I am wrong but did the electorate vote back in the same government that put every taxpayer, including non roman catholics on the hook for their crimes.
It's nearly ten years later and not one Bishop has been arrested. I must conclude that the majority of the electorate see nothing criminal with child abuse being covered up.
A lot of their victims are being taxed to pay for the crimes committed against them.

bmaxi

If God exists, which I doubt and He loves us all regardless to who we are or what colour or creed then as things stand, He has a pretty strange way of showing it.
If, as we are taught, all our ills are due to "Original Sin", then God is top notch at holding a grudge, what happened to "visit the sins unto the third and fourth generation" although even to do that is really being miffed.
My biggest problem with religion is basic logic, none of them make logical sense. Christianity, for example tells us that an omnipotent God saw his only recourse against a sinful world was to subject His own "Son" to unspeakable torture.
Sorry, I'm a long ways off omnipotent but I think if was Him, I'd think of a better way.

Michael G

philologos wrote: »

As far as I'm aware this was largely down to the Education Minister at the time, Michael Woods who capped the charge to the RCC to €100mn. I'm afraid your finger has to be turned to the Government as well as the RCC. I don't understand why 16% of us at least who aren't Roman Catholics should have ever been asked to foot the bill for that.

That settlement was for people who were abused in orphanages and industrial schools. I think the argument was that those were operated on behalf of the State so the State was partly responsible as well.

Compensation for children who were abused outside those institutions is a separate matter. That will have to be paid in full (rightly) by the dioceses and religious orders concerned. The taxpayer will have no liability.

philologos

The State ended up paying 90% of it though Michael, the costs ended up being over €1bn.

Michael G

philologos wrote: »

The State ended up paying 90% of it though Michael, the costs ended up being over €1bn.

Yes, I know. I think part of the contribution from the religious orders was to be from the sale of property and that hasn't happened in some cases.

philologos

Michael G wrote: »

Yes, I know. I think part of the contribution from the religious orders was to be from the sale of property and that hasn't happened in some cases.

Isn't that unfair really though? I'm not arguing that the RCC should go into demise like some other posters have suggested. In fact for the most part the RCC is a positive influence in communities. Or at least the one I happen to find myself in (there is also a very good inter-church relationship).

Michael G

philologos wrote: »

Isn't that unfair really though? I'm not arguing that the RCC should go into demise like some other posters have suggested. In fact for the most part the RCC is a positive influence in communities. Or at least the one I happen to find myself in (there is also a very good inter-church relationship).

Yes, it is unfair.

I suppose one thing that ought to be considered is that the Catholic orders that were involved in running the institutions are now occupied mainly in providing or subsidising free educational and social services, which are generally held to be a good thing as they make up for shortfalls in what the State provides. If the orders were to be cleared out in compensating people who were abused in the institutions, they would have to cut back or close down what they are doing, so their clients would become a new set of victims. There are really no winners in this.

prinz

paky wrote: »

Todays independent has revealed that there were 272 child abuse claims against Catholic priests last year. This is the main reason I would no longer consider myself Catholic. Would you still consider yourself Catholic, if not why?

272 claims, the vast majority of which relate to alleged incidents which are described as 'historic'. 12 of which relate to clerics still in ministry while the balance of 260 relate to either dead, retired, removed or laicised priests. Let's not jump the gun and insinuate that there was 272 claims of abuse occuring last year.

On a side note, I wouldn't consider myself in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church.

paky wrote: »

the area where i live, people still go to mass in their hundreds. i was discusted when i saw teenagers and young adults coming out of church last sunday. do these people actually believe in god or do they just go because it was bet into them?

Do you wonder the same when you teens and young adults leaving the GAA grounds around the country?

Knight990

In my very humble opinion (and I don't usually put it forward on issues like this because society is polarised, but sure why not this time), people mix up the idea of Christianity with the perverse, demented animals that carried out the abuse.

Catholic Christianity is the religion, the collection of beliefs.

The Catholic Church is the earthly institution, which is made up of people.

So many people are quick to claim that it was the very belief in Christianity that led to all the abuse cases, that it, in a way, facilitated this. I absolutely refute this. A person believing in God is a personal choice. Just because a person decides to go to mass often, because they wholeheartedly believe in what they are practicing ,it does not automatically mean that they condone what those scumbags did.

Case in point.

I'm a Catholic, always have been. I was as horrified as anyone by the crimes of these absolute monsters. I was and still am very angry that the organisation that claims to represent my beliefs covered this up for so long.

Don't mistake believing Catholics for zombies with no personal will. We're not stupid, by any means. Belief in God does not mean that we suddenly decided to let the crimes go. We did not. Every Catholic I know was as furious as anyone else around the country was.

These scumbags used the religion's name and beliefs to torture those poor children, and all the other people who have been abused throughout the decades. They abused all trust.

The organisation committed the crimes and covered them up. People. Human beings. Believing in Catholicism does not mean automatic complicity in this.

So yes, I still consider myself Catholic, and I most likely always will. And incase it's not painfully obvious from the above: I do not condone what those people did, in any way. No punishment is enough for what they put people through.

So don't look down your nose at people who still go to mass. It still holds personal value for a lot of people.

branie

I still consider consider myself as catholic, because not all priests are like those who destroyed the lives of children

bmaxi

Knight990 wrote: »

In my very humble opinion (and I don't usually put it forward on issues like this because society is polarised, but sure why not this time), people mix up the idea of Christianity with the perverse, demented animals that carried out the abuse.

Catholic Christianity is the religion, the collection of beliefs.

The Catholic Church is the earthly institution, which is made up of people.

So many people are quick to claim that it was the very belief in Christianity that led to all the abuse cases, that it, in a way, facilitated this. I absolutely refute this. A person believing in God is a personal choice. Just because a person decides to go to mass often, because they wholeheartedly believe in what they are practicing ,it does not automatically mean that they condone what those scumbags did.


Case in point.

I'm a Catholic, always have been. I was as horrified as anyone by the crimes of these absolute monsters. I was and still am very angry that the organisation that claims to represent my beliefs covered this up for so long.

Don't mistake believing Catholics for zombies with no personal will. We're not stupid, by any means. Belief in God does not mean that we suddenly decided to let the crimes go. We did not. Every Catholic I know was as furious as anyone else around the country was.

These scumbags used the religion's name and beliefs to torture those poor children, and all the other people who have been abused throughout the decades. They abused all trust.

The organisation committed the crimes and covered them up. People. Human beings. Believing in Catholicism does not mean automatic complicity in this.

So yes, I still consider myself Catholic, and I most likely always will. And incase it's not painfully obvious from the above: I do not condone what those people did, in any way. No punishment is enough for what they put people through.

So don't look down your nose at people who still go to mass. It still holds personal value for a lot of people.

The ability to distinguish Roman Catholicism from Christianity is not a talent shared by the masses unfortunately, particularly on this island. I am not a Roman Catholic, in fact I don't subscribe to any ideology but I have always been an interested observer.
Roman Catholicism, among all Christianity, appears to me to be the easiest denomination to belong to, followed by Orthodoxy and the mainstream Protestant sects. The reason I say this is because it seems to be more ritual based than faith based, I have been to Mass on many occasions and my observation has always been the same, "does anybody really know what is going on here"?. I attended a memorial Mass for a work colleague during which a decade of the Rosary was recited, it was as if it was a race between the priest and the congregation to see who could finish first, I was left thinking, "How could you possibly be feeling anything during a performance like that"?
These are observations, not criticisms, I really couldn't care how people choose to spend Sunday, or any other, morning but I suspect that what people like you experience is a sense of Christianity, not Catholicism, it's only years of conditioning that makes them think themselves Catholics, you could probably be at home in any denomination.
The Roman Catholic church is only a part, not the whole, of Christianity. The institution of the Church is discredited by it's failure to deal with and it's deliberate efforts to shield the wrongdoers and this blame goes right to the top. I could no have any respect for anybody in authority, particularly in an institution which professes to show us the road to Heaven, who ignored or concealed what has happened. Personally speaking, if I was a Roman Catholic and wanted to remain a Christian, I would be making my own arrangements, I doubt it will make much difference to God if you come on your own or with a crowd.

Terrlock

Didn't the Catholic church change the 10 commandments.

Take a look at the 10 commandments thought by the Catholic church, then look at the ones that Moses took out of the Mountain.

Why are they not the same?

How can you follow any group who alter the word of god for the glory of themselves.

Quo Vadis

Terrlock wrote: »

Didn't the Catholic church change the 10 commandments.

Take a look at the 10 commandments thought by the Catholic church, then look at the ones that Moses took out of the Mountain.

Why are they not the same?

How can you follow any group who alter the word of god for the glory of themselves.

Exodus 20:2-17 and Deuteronomy 5:6-21 give us the commandments.

These passages are referred to elsewhere in the Bible as the ten devarim (statements), which is the basis for dividing them into ten parts. ( Exodus 34:28, Deuteronomy 4:13, and Deuteronomy 10:4)

The exact partitioning of the passages into ten parts is not specified in the bible and therefore varies slightly between different religions and their denominations, as do their translation, interpretation and significance.

Donatello

bmaxi wrote: »

Roman Catholicism, among all Christianity, appears to me to be the easiest denomination to belong to, followed by Orthodoxy and the mainstream Protestant sects. The reason I say this is because it seems to be more ritual based than faith based, I have been to Mass on many occasions and my observation has always been the same, "does anybody really know what is going on here"?. [...] I really couldn't care how people choose to spend Sunday, or any other, morning but I suspect that what people like you experience is a sense of Christianity, not Catholicism, it's only years of conditioning that makes them think themselves Catholics, you could probably be at home in any denomination.

Not quite. In the Protestant denominations, there is no valid Eucharist. This is the heart of the faith.

Catholic faith is the fullness of Christian faith. That many Catholics do not live the faith from the heart is unfortunate. But there are many lukewarmers in the Protestants sects as well. These are bruised reeds who could be brought round but too often are left to languish and fall away through the neglect of pastors of souls.

Part of the thinking behind the Second Vatican Council was the desire to have people really understand what the whole purpose of the Mass is, rather than what we got afterwards. Rather than an empty ritual, the people (and priests) were to be catechise as to the purpose of the mass so that it would impact their whole lives and not just 40 minutes on a Sunday which made no difference to their life. See here.

The Catholic Church is a hospital for sinners. It is full of bruised reeds which need to be nurtured and given the proper growing conditions. Sadly, too many priests and bishops do not seem to be capable of providing the leadership and care we need.

bmaxi wrote: »

The institution of the Church is discredited by it's failure to deal with and it's deliberate efforts to shield the wrongdoers and this blame goes right to the top. I could no have any respect for anybody in authority, particularly in an institution which professes to show us the road to Heaven, who ignored or concealed what has happened. Personally speaking, if I was a Roman Catholic and wanted to remain a Christian, I would be making my own arrangements, I doubt it will make much difference to God if you come on your own or with a crowd.

You highlight the effect the scandal had on the Church's mission. My friend, a non-Catholic, but interested in the faith, asked me why he would want to be part of a Church that did what it did. We must remember though that it was the members of the Church who did this. See here.

Quo Vadis

Donatello wrote: »

You highlight the effect the scandal had on the Church's mission. My friend, a non-Catholic, but interested in the faith, asked me why he would want to be part of a Church that did what it did. We must remember though that it was the members of the Church who did this. See here.

We should also remember that for every 12 apostles there can be one Judas,
and knowing who could be the Judas was never easy.