HSE to review removal of statue of Jesus at Kerry hospital for the Elderly

Quo Vadis

'' THE HEALTH Service Executive has been forced to revisit a decision to remove a religious statue from the facade of a Killarney hospital last year, following a ruling this week by An Bord Pleanála.


Killarney Community Hospital is a 39 bedded centre which presently caters for older people needing respite care, palliative care, rehabilitation, and awaiting continuing care.



The board ruled that the removal of the statue was not an “exempted development”, and would require planning permission.


A war of words erupted in March 2010 when the statue, which had been in situ at the landmark Killarney Community Hospital for more than 70 years, was taken down.


Fr Kevin McNamara, a curate in Killarney, said: "People I visited [in the hospital] today are extremely upset. We are demanding it be put back."


"This statue didn't fall on anybody," the priest said, rejecting the [Health & Safety] "excuse" from the HSE.


The decision has been welcomed by the mayor: “I always felt it was taken down wrongfully, and that it would have needed planning. ''


“I always felt they were taking away a part of the history of the town. The ball is in their court now. If I were them, I would put back the statue.”


http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0602/1224298259276.html

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/moving-statue-causes-holy-row-2090842.html?start=2

Donatello

That's good news. We need to stand up for our faith, our culture, our traditions etc... and not allow the liberal iconoclasts to destroy these things. One is reminded of the Taliban who blew up those historic monuments in the desert.

There is a definite drive to remove all reminders of our Christian heritage from Irish public life. The removal of the statues is one more step towards their nefarious goal.

lmaopml

I don't know. Has the hospital some kind of Christian affiliation?

If it was dangerous than it should have been taken down and made safe. Common sense has to rule.

If it upset somebody looking at the statue then I don't know what the world is coming to that it should be taken down when clearly it's lived there so long - it's not exactly a symbol of 'hate' or anything. Seems par for the course in Ireland at the moment though...

At the end of the day it's only a statue though....There is a very small grotto where my little boy attends school, and to be honest, I often stop and say a small prayer there - I'd be upset if 'it' had to go too..:( I feel for the old folk who just don't understand what the harm is..

Quo Vadis

lmaopml wrote: »

I don't know. Has the hospital some kind of Christian affiliation?

If it was dangerous than it should have been taken down and made safe. Common sense has to rule.

If it upset somebody looking at the statue then I don't know what the world is coming to that it should be taken down when clearly it's lived there so long - it's not exactly a symbol of 'hate' or anything. Seems par for the course in Ireland at the moment though...

At the end of the day it's only a statue though....There is a very small grotto where my little boy attends school, and to be honest, I often stop and say a small prayer there - I'd be upset if 'it' had to go too..:( I feel for the old folk who just don't understand what the harm is..

There was nothing wrong with the statue, it was an excuse. It stood there safely for 70 years, and in the unlikely event it became unsecure it could have been resecured. Just some smart arse HSE manager with an anti Catholic grudge. He must think people are stupid. He had it moved into a storeroom first of all. After the complaints started, he moved it outside to the garden area and then told people they could "pray over there." Its a disgrace that this was removed. Welcome to the new "tolerant" Ireland.
What harm was it doing ? If you lived in Thailand would you object to Buddhist statues ? If you lived in Rio would you demand the Statue of Christ the Reminder was removed ?
Statues of Ancient Greeks etc. decorate many Irish public buildings and no one objects.

old hippy

Donatello wrote: »

One is reminded of the Taliban who blew up those historic monuments in the desert.

There is a definite drive to remove all reminders of our Christian heritage from Irish public life. The removal of the statues is one more step towards their nefarious goal.

Comparing the removal of a possible hazard to the actions of the taliban. That's your argument?

Stick it in a museum, if people really miss it they can visit it, pay their respects etc.

Catari Jaguar

Good riddance. And as for the "pray over there" comment - why do you need a statue to pray to?!

Any one else annoyed by the Jesus in a box statue on O Connell St, Dublin? I wish they'd get rid of that one.

lmaopml

No I've travelled quite a bit, and tbh those things don't bother me. I don't understand that mentality. However, it makes us sound 'shallow' when we think it's wrong to remove a statue lol....even though it's more 'saddening' to me to be honest that people feel victimised by one, particularly if it's almost a landmark for locals. It's all mad.

Quo Vadis

cherub rock wrote: »

Good riddance. And as for the "pray over there" comment - why do you need a statue to pray to?!

The pray over there comment was a sarcastic one by the HSE manager. Exactly like your own.

cherub rock wrote: »

Any one else annoyed by the Jesus in a box statue on O Connell St, Dublin? I wish they'd get rid of that one.

Sure why don't you smash it up if it bothers you that much.

Quo Vadis

lmaopml wrote: »

However, it makes us sound 'shallow' when we think it's wrong to remove a statue lol

No its not, its the thin end of the wedge. It was a local landmark that stood there for 70+ years.

strobe

Quo Vadis wrote: »

There was nothing wrong with the statue, it was an excuse. Just some smart arse HSE manager with an anti Catholic grudge.

Have you got any source or anything for this claim Quo?

The Independent's version of the story says "but later hinting the decision had more to do with political correctness in not offending non-Catholics, Jesus was sent packing yesterday." but don't quote the hint or cite anything.

It wouldn't have been the oddest thing done in the name of health and safety by a long way without there having to be a secret anti-Catholic bias at play.

Seems silly to remove it either way though, could have just cemented it solidly to the roof if there was a risk of it falling.

(Was almost going to post with 'nail it to the roof' written there but thought that might be taken the wrong way.)

Quo Vadis

strobe wrote: »

Seems silly to remove it either way though, could have just cemented it solidly to the roof if there was a risk of it falling.

Exactly, obviously the HSE manager made the mistake of thinking people were stupid enough to be bluffed off by his excuse.

lmaopml

I know QuoVadis, it astonishes me too. I don't know how to fight that one though - The counter arguement is that 'so you love the statue then..' or some other arguement about it causing offense to the easily offended.

I doubt all of them will go, but you will always get somebody who thinks the statue is non inclusive, and is overly precious about it, or else thinks the statue doesn't represent what they would like the area or building to represent. It depends I guess..

I don't know the area in question, or the building itself. However, I do feel for it's inhabitants who think it's all a bit mad too....

Since when did the HSE get anything right anyways? No surprise.

strobe

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Exactly, obviously the HSE manager made the mistake of thinking people were stupid enough to be bluffed off by his excuse.

Well I don't know about 'obviously'. He might have just thought no one would be that pushed that the statue was placed in the grounds rather than on the roof.

I'm not saying there is no chance the guy is just an asshole, might be. I just would need something more than the opinion of outraged villagers before I string the guy up as the second coming of Hitler. Could just have been doing his job.

Donatello

lmaopml wrote: »

I know QuoVadis, it astonishes me too. I don't know how to fight that one though - The counter arguement is that 'so you love the statue then..' or some other arguement about it causing offense to the easily offended.

I doubt all of them will go, but you will always get somebody who thinks the statue is non inclusive, and is overly precious about it, or else thinks the statue doesn't represent what they would like the area or building to represent. It depends I guess..

I don't know the area in question, or the building itself. However, I do feel for it's inhabitants who think it's all a bit mad too....

Since when did the HSE get anything right anyways? No surprise.

There's nothing wrong with statues. What could possibly be offensive about a statue of the Redeemer of the World? What's non-inclusive about that? It's daft. It's all part of a drive to push religion, literally, out of the public square. It ought to be resisted with the utmost force.

Meanwhile, the statue of the Sacred Heart in Dublin at the taxi rank appears to be in memory of a taxi driver. It's protected by what looks like armoured glass so it should be OK.

who the fug

Quo Vadis wrote: »

No its not, its the thin end of the wedge. It was a local landmark that stood there for 70+ years.

That is all it is, can we please stop destroying the past on a whim

lmaopml

LOL Donatello ...:pac:

Quo Vadis

strobe wrote: »

Well I don't know about 'obviously'. He might have just thought no one was be that pushed that the statue was placed in the grounds rather than on the roof.

I'm not saying there is no chance the guy is just an asshole, might be. I just would need something more than the opinion of outraged villagers before I string the guy up as the second coming of Hitler. Could just have been doing his job.

He knew exactly what he was doing when he took it down and tried to hide it away in a store. He must have thought he was too smart for the locals.

How much did it cost to remove it ?

What about the risk to the workmen that had to try and get it down ?

How much did it cost to move it again from the store to the grounds when the complaints came in ?

Refixing it securely in place (if anything was wrong with it in the first place) would have been the cheapest option. At the very most the fixings might have needed some maintenance.
It was fixed there safely through 70 years of rain, hail, sleet, snow and gales and storms.

Onesimus

Donatello wrote: »

That's good news. We need to stand up for our faith, our culture, our traditions etc... and not allow the liberal iconoclasts to destroy these things. One is reminded of the Taliban who blew up those historic monuments in the desert.

There is a definite drive to remove all reminders of our Christian heritage from Irish public life. The removal of the statues is one more step towards their nefarious goal.

One is reminded of Ukraine and how the communists tore town the churches and statues and crosses. Yet again this is an example of what can happen if we were to allow atheists/people like Richard dawkins gain control in government.

strobe

Quo Vadis wrote: »

How much did it cost to remove it ?

I don't know, you tell me. Less or more than hiring a worker to reafix it?

What about the risk to the workmen that had to try and get it down?

Presumably the same amount of risk to workmen that would have to go up and reafix it?

How much did it cost to move again it from the store to the grounds ?

I think hand trolleys cost about 50 euro but presumably they have some in a hospital, so...nothing?

Refixing it securely in place (if anything was wrong with it in the first place) would have been the cheapest option. At the very most the fixings might have needed some maintenance. It was fixed there safely through 70 years of rain, hail, sleet, snow and gales and storms.

Well, yes the HSE say "The statue is being removed as it is posing a health and safety risk due to deterioration from weathering." 70 years of rain, hail, sleet, snow, hail and storms would tend to cause "deterioration from weathering" on occasion.

Quo Vadis

strobe wrote: »

I don't know, you tell me. Less or more than hiring a worker to reafix it?

Presumably the same amount of risk to workmen that would have to go up and reafix it?

I think hand trolleys cost about 50 euro but presumably they have some in a hospital, so...nothing?

Well, yes the HSE say "The statue is being removed as it is posing a health and safety risk due to deterioration from weathering." 70 years of rain, hail, sleet, snow, hail and storms will do that alright.

I work in construction and you're talking balls. Are you a manager in the HSE by any chance ?

Donatello

strobe wrote: »

Well, yes the HSE say "The statue is being removed as it is posing a health and safety risk due to deterioration from weathering." 70 years of rain, hail, sleet, snow, hail and storms would tend to cause "deterioration from weathering" on occasion.

Well then, I'm sure the locals would be happy to raise funds for a replacement statue if it was necessary. Maybe a fibreglass one that could flex in the wind. :pac:

strobe

Onesimus wrote: »

Yet again this is an example of what can happen if we were to allow atheists/people like Richard dawkins gain control in government.

Maybe he was a Protestant rather than an atheist. I hear some of that lot aren't mad on the auld statues of Jesus...

Onesimus

strobe wrote: »

Maybe he was a Protestant rather than an atheist. I hear some of that lot aren't mad on the auld statues of Jesus...

That is another possible ruling.

strobe

Quo Vadis wrote: »

I work in construction and you're talking balls.

Talking balls? Maybe you missed all the question marks in that post? They mean someone is asking a question of you. Not making statements. You know, these guys >>?????

Are you a manager in the HSE by any chance?

No, I run a company that sells scaffolding, harnesses, statue securing ropes and occasionally rents out storage space to medical facilities. Why do you ask?

lmaopml

strobe wrote: »

Maybe he was a Protestant rather than an atheist. I hear some of that lot aren't mad on the auld statues of Jesus...

Quo Vadis

strobe wrote: »

Why do you ask?

Because it didn't work for him either

AhSureTisGrand

Onesimus wrote: »

One is reminded of Ukraine and how the communists tore town the churches and statues and crosses. Yet again this is an example of what can happen if we were to allow atheists/people like Richard dawkins gain control in government.

The same can happen if we allow black people or gingers to gain control in government, but I don't see how this is a valid argument against voting for them

gigino

Quo Vadis wrote: »

"This statue didn't fall on anybody," the priest said, rejecting the [Health & Safety] "excuse" from the HSE.

Ah, but did'nt other statues move , and one once fall and hurt someone ? If the statue was very heavy and very high up and did fall, who would be responsible for the injuries received by anyone standing underneath ? Maybe the HSE felt it was not an appropriate use of taxpayers money ?

Quo Vadis

gigino wrote: »

Ah, but did'nt other statues move , and one once fall and hurt someone ? If the statue was very heavy and very high up and did fall, who would be responsible for the injuries received by anyone standing underneath ? Maybe the HSE felt it was not an appropriate use of taxpayers money ?

What about all those church bells that could fall and hurt an innocent passer by, you missed that one. Don't forget to remove all the other statues on public buildings as well. All those steeples look a bit shaky as well. Report them all to the HSA. Oh ! Satellite dishes and TV aerials as well !

robindch

Quo Vadis wrote: »

"This statue didn't fall on anybody," the priest said, rejecting the [Health & Safety] "excuse" from the HSE.

Perhaps they were worried about itinerant religious stone and plaster work.

The statue of Mary, 150 yards away in the stone grotto on the main Killarney to Tralee road was famously (and hilariously) mobile during the Moving Statues scare in 1985.

If the priest was quite sure that the Jesus statue wouldn't up stakes and head off for a wander, but the HSE was concerned it would, then we're in a strange place indeed -- the priest denies the likelihood of a miracle which the secular HSE believes is possible.

georgieporgy

I was driving down the M50 the other day and reached a spot where I had to drive under a big sign that said "pay toll, etc". It was a windy day, made me feel quite nervous in case the sign would fall on my car:eek:.

Quo Vadis

georgieporgy wrote: »

I was driving down the M50 the other day and reached a spot where I had to drive under a big sign that said "pay toll, etc". It was a windy day, made me feel quite nervous in case the sign would fall on my car:eek:.

If you could convince the HSE that it was an offensive Catholic symbol, they'd take it down for you. Surely Pay Toll could be twisted in some way to have offensive religious overtones ?

robindch

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Surely Pay Toll could be twisted in some way to have offensive religious overtones ?

No idea, but I'm sure there's a religious group out there who'd manage it

Quo Vadis

robindch wrote: »

No idea, but I'm sure there's a religious group out there who'd manage it

Like atheist.ie

robindch

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Like atheist.ie

If you're stuck, why not ask them?

They're a helpful lot!

strobe

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Like atheist.ie?

Why yes... Yes I do.

Nah, I don't really.

old hippy

Donatello wrote: »

There's nothing wrong with statues. What could possibly be offensive about a statue of the Redeemer of the World? What's non-inclusive about that? It's daft. It's all part of a drive to push religion, literally, out of the public square. It ought to be resisted with the utmost force.

I like the one in Lisbon and Rio but it's all down to personal taste. I'm sure the statues of Saddam weren't missed in Iraq, nor Stalin in Russia and when NK finally implodes, the Kim dynasty statues. All set themselves up as demigods...

Zombrex

The Irish Times article says the statue was simple moved to some where in the hospital.

But by all means don't let that fact stop any one from
PANICING ABOUT THE INCREASING SECULARISATION OF IRELAND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

sorry, not sure what came over me there.

btw I would be very interested in meeting a member of the public who even noticed it was gone without being told, let alone someone who was "extremely upset" as this priest claims :rolleyes:

robindch

Wicknight wrote: »

The Irish Times article says the statue was simple moved to some where in the hospital.

See. Moving statues. I told yiz!

gigino

I though Statues only moved if the tourism season was a bit quiet, so if we get a month or two of rain in the summer, stranger things could happen ? lol

Quo Vadis

Wicknight wrote: »

The Irish Times article says the statue was simple moved to some where in the hospital.

But by all means don't let that fact stop any one from
PANICING ABOUT THE INCREASING SECULARISATION OF IRELAND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

sorry, not sure what came over me there.

btw I would be very interested in meeting a member of the public who even noticed it was gone without being told, let alone someone who was "extremely upset" as this priest claims :rolleyes:

Looks like you're the one panicking about this thread, resorting to the large font etc., take a deep breath. The statue stood there for 70+ years, bottom line there was no need to take down a peaceful symbol that was harming no one, or were there no atheists until recently ?

Zombrex

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Looks like your the one panicking about this thread, resorting to the large font etc., take a deep breath. The statue stood there for 70+ years, there was no need to take it down or move, or was there no atheists for the last 70+ years ?

The HSE already gave the reason to take it down.

You are imagining a vast anti-Catholic conspiracy, rather at odds with the fact that they just moved it some where else, instead of simply taking the explanation given for why it was moved.

That seems like a ridiculous over reaction. Hence my parody of such silliness, which was mainly directed at the priest who claimed that people are "extremely upset" by this. Anyone who is extremely upset that the HSE moved a statue from one place in a hospital to another place in a hospital is looking for a reason to be outraged TBH.

Quo Vadis

Wicknight wrote: »

The HSE already gave the reason to take it down.

You are imagining a vast anti-Catholic conspiracy, rather at odds with the fact that they just moved it some where else, instead of simply taking the explanation given for why it was moved.

That seems like a ridiculous over reaction. Hence my parody of such silliness, which was mainly directed at the priest who claimed that people are "extremely upset" by this. Anyone who is extremely upset that the HSE moved a statue from one place in a hospital to another place in a hospital is looking for a reason to be outraged TBH.

Like the HSE manager you can try to spin it anyway you want.
So does that mean An Bord Pleanala is part of a huge pro catholic conspiracy then ?
Would you like it if the protestant memorials were removed because of "health and safety" ? There is enough room for everyone in this country.
The thin end of the wedge is just that, thin.
No the HSE manager thought he'd pull a smart arse stunt, was caught in the act, then made up an excuse, thinking that would fob people off, and that we're all stupid.
It was a hospital for the elderly, and like it or not, quite a few of the patients the priest visited were upset by its removal. What was the point of that after 70 years ? It was a local landmark, and if the fixing was loose, it could have just been repaired and left alone. It was not moved, it was removed for good until local people complained.

Zombrex

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Like the HSE manager you can try to spin it anyway you want.

You are telling everyone to take a deep breath and then you instantly jump on a conspiracy that the HSE are trying to "spin" something and are acting all anti-Catholic.

Calm down. Take a deep breath. No one is trying to spin anything.

There is no evidence that the HSE has done anything other than remove a statue that they consider to be danger.

The only people making a fuss over this are the local priest and people on this forum who seem to take any old excuse to rail against perceived injustices to Catholics. :rolleyes:

Quo Vadis

Wicknight wrote: »

You are telling everyone to take a deep breath and then you instantly jump on a conspiracy that the HSE are trying to "spin" something and are acting all anti-Catholic.

Calm down. Take a deep breath. No one is trying to spin anything.

There is no evidence that the HSE has done anything other than remove a statue that they consider to be danger.

The only people making a fuss over this are the local priest and people on this forum who seem to take any old excuse to rail against perceived injustices to Catholics. :rolleyes:

No big text this time ? Glad you breathed, but you're still spinning.

Why did they not re secure it in place ? The place it had for 70 years without a problem ?

Why did An Bord Pleanala uphold the complaint ?

antiskeptic

I know atheists would say their belief in God/gods already registers at zero on the scale of faith but would wonder nonetheless whether this 'graven issue' doesn't cause the needle to press all that bit more firmly against it's stop.

Robert ninja

"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth." - Exodus 20:4


"Ye shall make you no idols nor graven image, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone in your land, to bow down unto it: for I am the LORD your God." - Leviticus 26:1

Maybe the manager was just flicking through his bible and felt he had some holy duty.

Fanny Cradock

This thread is not about "graven images".

We have had a thread on idolatry recently.

Please stay on topic.

That is all.

Zombrex

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Why did they not re secure it in place ?

No idea. Perhaps it was not possible. Perhaps it would cost to much money. Perhaps they just couldn't be arsed.

Can you give me a good reason why the HSE shouldn't simply take down a statue in their own hospital if they judge it to be unsafe?

If this was a golden eagle or Jackie Healy Rae would you care at all that it was taken down?

Quo Vadis wrote: »

The place it had for 70 years without a problem ?

Umm, having worked in a state run building and having had part of the roof collapse I think you will find the excuse It has been up there for a very long time is not the best reason in the world to keep something like this as is :P

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Why did An Bord Pleanala uphold the complaint ?

It says so in the article. Removal of the statue constituted a change in the structure and look of the building and thus requires planning permission. That is perfectly normal. Try building an extension to your house, you will run into the same objection. Nothing to do with religion.

The planning board wouldn't give a hoot about a Catholic priest wanting to make a statement about perceived attack on his religion.

Robert ninja

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

This thread is not about "graven images".

We have had a thread on idolatry recently.

Please stay on topic.

That is all.

I never said this was a thread related to anything other than what it's about. I'm just quoting my bible, which doesn't mean I'm automatically off topic just because there's a thread about certain bible quotes. If that was the case, any post containing any well-known bible quotes would be off topic just because there's a thread dedicated to it.

And secondly, I don't care about that thread and I'm not obliged to post in it. I was interested in this thread, I thought of a reason why the manager may have removed the statue, and then posted about it. Just like everyone else.

Fanny Cradock

Robert ninja wrote: »

And secondly, I don't care about that thread and I'm not obliged to post in it.

Well said!