How can I cease to be a Catholic?

HellFireClub

Well, I refuse to accept that I can be bound to a religion and an organisation that I utterly despise, despite being a christened and confirmed Catholic.

I don't want to cause offence or hurt to any person in this forum who may have a different perspect than I have, but equally, for obvious reasons, I no longer want the word "Catholic" to be associated with my name, character or person.

As to what religious denomination I might wish to be in the future, that's for another day.

As to the consequences, (you cant have a church wedding, you can't do this and you can't do that blah blah blah, I couldn't give a fiddlers).

The only question I ask here, is that is it possible to formally, totally and completely separate from the Roman Catholic Church?

Lastly, I'm dead serious about this, so please don't try to debate it with me, just "yes you can" or "no you can't" please.

busyliving

HellFireClub wrote: »

Well, I refuse to accept that I can be bound to a religion and an organisation that I utterly despise, despite being a christened and confirmed Catholic.

I don't want to cause offence or hurt to any person in this forum who may have a different perspect than I have, but equally, for obvious reasons, I no longer want the word "Catholic" to be associated with my name, character or person.

As to what religious denomination I might wish to be in the future, that's for another day.

As to the consequences, (you cant have a church wedding, you can't do this and you can't do that blah blah blah, I couldn't give a fiddlers).

The only question I ask here, is that is it possible to formally, totally and completely separate from the Roman Catholic Church?

Lastly, I'm dead serious about this, so please don't try to debate it with me, just "yes you can" or "no you can't" please.

Apparently you can no longer get out of the church, i remember there was a website who you could fill out a form and you were free.

But the pope made up a new rule to stop people doing so...he did his because people were leaving the church in record time, so it could still boast great number in the followers/members column

JMcG92

You have to get legally un-baptized and un-confirmed, a hard and lenghty process I'm afraid.

But in all seriousness, you really don't have to do anything, it's not a crime or anything to be non-religious.

charlemont

Was it not possible to send your baptism cert back to your parish and get de baptised, I heard something about this before, If your not legally able to leave the church then its a cult...

busyliving

JMcG92 wrote: »

You have to get legally un-baptized and un-confirmed, a hard and lenghty process I'm afraid.

But in all seriousness, you really don't have to do anything, it's not a crime or anything to be non-religious.

But i'm sure, OP just doesn't want to be a member of the church anymore, i reckon you should be able to say no more and be stricken off the list of Catholics...

I think if you become a member of another faith, then your out of the catholic church...but a member of another church, but i'm sure most other religions are easier to get out of...but probably harder to get into aswell:(

HellFireClub

I don't want to get too emotive about this, but being in a state of association or communion with the Roman Catholic Church, I feel is injuring and hurting me.

There was until recently (apparently), a way of departing on a voluntary/opt out basis, via a website, that has been since blocked off.

I don't think it's fair on any person, that they cannot disassociate themselves from any organisation that they no longer wish to be a part of.

My parent's have clearly made a pledge to bring me up in the traditions associated with the Catholic Faith. My consent was not sought and if it had been sought, I was in no position to give it being a new born baby.

However now, I have a position on this matter, as an informed adult. I no longer wish to be a part of this organisation and I no longer wish to have any association or connection with it.

HellFireClub

I know my post here is hurtful to some folks, I don't want to rub anyone up the wrong way, I just want out and I can't see a way out.

Duddy

http://www.countmeout.ie/

Here's the website mentioned above, however some Canon Law BS now makes the process of defection kind of vague.

jill_valentine

charlemont wrote: »

Was it not possible to send your baptism cert back to your parish and get de baptised, I heard something about this before, If your not legally able to leave the church then its a cult...

It was possible, but as has been noted, this process has now been "suspended", for debatable and dubious reasons.

zenno

I no longer want the word "Catholic" to be associated with my name

well if that is the case that you do not want the catholic stamp attached to you then all you have to do is to discard that name "catholic" from your intelligent brain. you are not bound by it. you are what you want to be. and there is no stamp on this planet that can take over your mind or intelligence.

Spread

Go out on the lash. Drink some more Brandy & Baileys after you get home. Say threee Our Fathers, Hail Mary's and Glorys backwards before going to sleep. If on waking you have a headache ..........it's been fixed. If no headache, try again, increasing the load 'til it happens.
Best of luck.

How about doing something that would get you excommunicated?

hubba

zenno wrote: »

well if that is the case that you do not want the catholic stamp attached to you then all you have to do is to discard that name "catholic" from your intelligent brain. you are not bound by it. you are what you want to be. and there is no stamp on this planet that can take over your mind or intelligence.

There is a bit more to it than that, Zenno, unfortunately. The catholic church uses the fact that it apparently has so many members to lord a certain power over the state which has resulted in an abuse of that same power which is being exposed on a daily basis.

I managed to get out just in time, before the vatican changed the rules on leaving the church. I'm so glad I did, I wanted absolutely NO association with them at all.

catbear

Deleted User wrote: »

How about doing something that would get you excommunicated?

When they had greater influence in state affairs excommunication was a tool to keep people in line but like the fudging of the countmeout option they'll probably just ignore it.

catbear

I doubt they'll excommunicate anyone as they're trying to run away from their failings. They'll keep everyone on the books, that's why the census is so important. They have no respect for gods gift of free will.

Joining another church is an option but it's funny to think that you have become a christian to escape the Roman Catholic Church.

Fanny Cradock

charlemont wrote: »

Was it not possible to send your baptism cert back to your parish and get de baptised...

You can't rewrite history.


OP, why not write a letter to your PP explaining your position and then never darken the door of a RCC if you so decide. If you already don't agree with the teachings of the RCC and don't actively attend church then it would seem to me that you are not a Roman Catholic anyway.

derrydemesne

I am a Believer. That is, I believe in the writings and teachings of the Old and New Testament.
You don't have to be in a denomination to be in God's family - it's not in His Book. There are lots of examples of being told by God to leave, move away: ie Lot and his wives from Gomorrah.
May I suggest you find another group of believers first, and then go forward with their support? It's a hard place to be, but if you are positive that God wants you leave, then it's the only thing to do. It will be a painful process initially.But you may find that you have a new view of the place of God in your belief,as opposed to the place of church.

The bishop had a statement read out: if it were me wanting to leave and there were barriers put in the way, I'd write an open letter and put it on the noticeboard so that there was no mistake about what you mean, then rumourmongers can be held to account.

PDN

Deleted User wrote: »

How about doing something that would get you excommunicated?

Wouldn't work. Excommunication does not stop you from being a Catholic.

The short answer to the OP is that there appears to be no official or legal way to remove your name from the membership roll of Catholicism - and all that goes to show is how meaningless such a list of members truly is.

You could, of course, set up your own religion (Reformed Pastafarianism?), write in the names of everybody on the electoral register as members of your church, and then claim you have a membership of 4 million. It would have just as much validity as the membership claims of the Catholic Church based on the premise that somebody else enrolled you as a member without your signature, will or consent.

Or, you could just treat their claim to own you as a member with the contempt it deserves and worship wherever you want, or nowhere at all if you so choose, as is the perogative of any citizen of a modern western democracy.

Manach

Are you getting confused with some branches of Protestantism (LDS), which seem to hold that death is no barrier to baptism?

lmaopml

OP, in order not to be 'Catholic' all you have to do is say exactly what you are saying, i.e. 'I am not a Catholic anymore'...and decide not to be.

The Church can't go back in time and 'unbaptise' you - you have been Baptised and received the Sacrament in the past tense. What they were doing was putting a note on the register that the person decided to defect. In reality to become Atheist or Buddhist or whatever else all you have to do is go and be one...no big deal really to do...

As far as the State is concerned, the baptismal register is of very little value. At Census time if you tick 'No Religion' then in effect you are not counted as anything other than 'No Religion' for any decision making purposes. Hope that helps.

Suzie Sue

HellFireClub wrote: »

Well, I refuse to accept that I can be bound to a religion and an organisation that I utterly despise, despite being a christened and confirmed Catholic.

I don't want to cause offence or hurt to any person in this forum who may have a different perspect than I have, but equally, for obvious reasons, I no longer want the word "Catholic" to be associated with my name, character or person.

As to what religious denomination I might wish to be in the future, that's for another day.

As to the consequences, (you cant have a church wedding, you can't do this and you can't do that blah blah blah, I couldn't give a fiddlers).

The only question I ask here, is that is it possible to formally, totally and completely separate from the Roman Catholic Church?

Lastly, I'm dead serious about this, so please don't try to debate it with me, just "yes you can" or "no you can't" please.

To remain a Catholic you must keep the 5 precepts of the Church, namely

1. You shall attend Mass on Sundays and on holy days of obligation and remain free from work or activity that could impede the sanctification of such days.
2. You shall confess your sins at least once a year.
3. You shall receive the sacrament of the Eucharist at least during the Easter season.
4. You shall observe the days of fasting and abstinence established by the Church.
5. You shall help to provide for the needs of the Church.

If you don't keep these precepts you are no longer a Catholic, you are a lapsed Catholic.

If you no longer share the beliefs of the Catholic faith, you are an ex-Catholic, which I imagine is your case.

So don't sweat it, you are no longer a Catholic.

prinz

HellFireClub wrote: »

There was until recently (apparently), a way of departing on a voluntary/opt out basis, via a website, that has been since blocked off.

You can still follow the steps of application which the site detailed. IIRC it involves getting in touch with your priest/getting documents like birth cert and that and then forwarding it on to the bishops office. The process has been suspended but you can still get your application in ready for when they start again.

HellFireClub wrote: »

I don't think it's fair on any person, that they cannot disassociate themselves from any organisation that they no longer wish to be a part of..

It is unforutnate that it has been suspended, the problem is there's a very good reason for it.

jill_valentine wrote: »

It was possible, but as has been noted, this process has now been "suspended", for debatable and dubious reasons.

Debatable and dubious reasons including people abusing the system for personal gain.

keane2097

prinz wrote: »

It is unforutnate that it has been suspended, the problem is there's a very good reason for it.

Debatable and dubious reasons including people abusing the system for personal gain.

Cliff notes on this?

prinz

keane2097 wrote: »

Cliff notes on this?

The problem was under Canon Law the act of defection had a knock on effect on marriages conducted by the RCC. If someone later defected, was their marriage by the RCC still valid and legally binding (of special importance in a country like ours where the religious ceremony and legal state accepted marriage are not always separated)? It would be a lot easier to defect and then contest the validity of your marriage than go through divorce proceedings etc.

Here's what the Archdiocese of Dublin has to say..

The Holy See confirmed at the end of August that it was introducing changes to canon law and as a result it will no longer be possible to formally defect from the Catholic Church. This will not alter the fact that many people can defect from the Church, and continue to do so, albeit not through a formal process. This is a change that will affect the church throughout the world. The Archdiocese of Dublin plans to maintain a register to note the expressed desire of those who wish to defect. Details will be communicated to those involved in the process when they are finalised. Last year 229 people formally defected from the Church through the Archdiocese of Dublin. 312 have done so, so far this year.

http://www.dublindiocese.ie/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2103&Itemid=373


Countmeout.ie says..

Why has the Church made this change?

The first reference to the act of formal defection was introduced in the 1983 revision of the Code of Canon Law and was intended to create a special dispensation that absolved those who had defected from canon law pertaining to marriage. The Church considers canon law to hold for everyone who has been baptised; this change introduced a special case such that the marriages of estranged former-Catholics were now considered to be valid.

In practice, the Church found this difficult to interpret, as it was unclear what the process of formal defection actually entailed. So in 1997, a process of consultation began with the intention of removing these dispensations.

In parallel to this discussion, an issue arose in countries such as Germany, where citizens are required to pay a Church Tax unless they make a statement to the tax authorities. An annotated baptismal cert was sometimes requested for this purpose, resulting in a 2006 papal note that finally explained the process of defection in more detail. These are the steps we describe on CountMeOut.ie.

This position remained unchanged until November 2009, when the Vatican approved the document "Omnium in Mentem", removing the dispensations introduced in 1983 and with them all references to formal defection. This came into effect on April 9th 2010.

http://www.countmeout.ie/suspension/

Some other reading on the change..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnium_in_mentem

AFAIK you can still have your baptism cert stamped to show that you no longer want to be part of the RCC, the difference is that the sacraments received afterwards are still held to have been valid. You can still do this and go to another religion/or none.

keane2097

ty

Corsendonk

Funnily enough someone asked the exactly same question on politics,ie and basically got the same responses.

FISMA

HellFireClub wrote: »

Well, I refuse to accept that I can be bound to a religion and an organisation that I utterly despise, despite being a christened and confirmed Catholic.
...
Lastly, I'm dead serious about this, so please don't try to debate it with me, just "yes you can" or "no you can't" please.

With all due respect HellFireClub (love the name!) - you're being very dramatic.

What exactly are you looking for? A ritual, a rite, a get out of Catholicism card?

One question before you go.

Were you ever really a Catholic?

Most people I meet who think they are Catholic believe they are so because: the auld fella dragged them to church every once in a while, they were forced to say a decade or two, or got huist'd during the Angelus.

Rarely can anyone eloquently discuss the Catechism of the Church.

I am not sure what you think you were. However, if you are anything like the Catholics I see all too often then congratulations, you don't have to leave, because you were never there to begin!

Slan.

gimmebroadband

FISMA wrote: »

With all due respect HellFireClub (love the name!) - you're being very dramatic.

What exactly are you looking for? A ritual, a rite, a get out of Catholicism card?

One question before you go.

Were you ever really a Catholic?

Most people I meet who think they are Catholic believe they are so because: the auld fella dragged them to church every once in a while, they were forced to say a decade or two, or got huist'd during the Angelus.

Rarely can anyone eloquently discuss the Catechism of the Church.

I am not sure what you think you were. However, if you are anything like the Catholics I see all too often then congratulations, you don't have to leave, because you were never there to begin!

Slan.

Couldn't have said it better!!!

HellFireClub

FISMA wrote: »

HellFireClub wrote: »

Well, I refuse to accept that I can be bound to a religion and an organisation that I utterly despise, despite being a christened and confirmed Catholic.
...
Lastly, I'm dead serious about this, so please don't try to debate it with me, just "yes you can" or "no you can't" please.

With all due respect HellFireClub (love the name!) - you're being very dramatic.

What exactly are you looking for? A ritual, a rite, a get out of Catholicism card?

One question before you go.

Were you ever really a Catholic?

Most people I meet who think they are Catholic believe they are so because: the auld fella dragged them to church every once in a while, they were forced to say a decade or two, or got huist'd during the Angelus.

Rarely can anyone eloquently discuss the Catechism of the Church.

I am not sure what you think you were. However, if you are anything like the Catholics I see all too often then congratulations, you don't have to leave, because you were never there to begin!

Slan.

Yes I was a practising Catholic up until a certain time in my life. I was also a believing Catholic and was someone who I believe had a strong faith.

All the more reason why I cannot accept the way the Catholic church behaves these days. The church that I'm looking at, is to my mind, the exact opposite of what is explained in the messages of the gospels insofar as the teachings of Christ are explained. How on earth can it be right that all this sexual abuse of children was covered up, by high ranking supposedly "holy" people with theology degrees of all things???

What I'm reading in the Cloyne report is very hard indeed to reconcile with a church that is meant to care for it's congregation. I just cannot accept that the church is capable of reform, the attitude is so wrong, I don't see a way back for the church.

antiskeptic

HellFireClub wrote: »

All the more reason why I cannot accept the way the Catholic church behaves these days. The church that I'm looking at, is to my mind, the exact opposite of what is explained in the messages of the gospels insofar as the teachings of Christ are explained. How on earth can it be right that all this sexual abuse of children was covered up, by high ranking supposedly "holy" people with theology degrees of all things???

It could be that that church has gone off the rails. Indeed, the Reformers figured it had gone off the rails a good few hundred years ago and did something about it.

What I'm reading in the Cloyne report is very hard indeed to reconcile with a church that is meant to care for it's congregation. I just cannot accept that the church is capable of reform, the attitude is so wrong, I don't see a way back for the church.

The fantastic thing about human antennae is the ability to detect bullsh1t without necessarily being able to prove it. The response of the Roman Church is precisely as you detect: self-protecting / denying / damage limiting. The rot which permits that must be excised before healing can take place. It might never happen


What I don't understand is your desire to cut off from it to the point of excising all connection you had with it. You were married to it at some point, the church committed adultery on you ( as it were). You are permitted by Christ to divorce her as a result. There is no need to deny you were once married though.

You don't have to divorce Christ at the same time. He is always faithful.

gimmebroadband

antiskeptic wrote: »

It could be that that church has gone off the rails. Indeed, the Reformers figured it had gone off the rails a good few hundred years ago and did something about it.

During it's 2000 year History, members of the Church went off the rails due to fallen human nature, the teaching of the Church remained intact. However, one example of reform came from St. Catherine of Sienna a Doctor of the Church who reformed it from within, she didn't start a new church. The Papacy was in Avignon, France and she was bold enough to tell the Pope that God wanted him to return to Rome.

http://www.doctorsofthecatholicchurch.com/C.html

When the reformers started their own church, that too became 'reformed' and branched out into thousands of other denominations!!

antiskeptic

gimmebroadband wrote: »

During it's 2000 year History, members of the Church went off the rails due to fallen human nature, the teaching of the Church remained intact.

The teaching on Indulgences didn't remain intact and that was a teaching of the Church. It's a bit rich to try to separate members from the Church teaching when without members to produce the teaching there is no teaching to be taught.

When the reformers started their own church, that too became 'reformed' and branched out into thousands of other denominations!!

I think you'll find that one aspect of the reformed church was it's breakaway from the idea of a monolithic authority. Only if you are stuck with that idea will the notion of multi-denominations seem ill fitting.

gimmebroadband

antiskeptic wrote: »

The teaching on Indulgences didn't remain intact and that was a teaching of the Church. It's a bit rich to try to separate members from the Church teaching when without members to produce the teaching there is no teaching to be taught.
/QUOTE]

Rubbish!

"Those who claim that indulgences are no longer part of Church teaching have the admirable desire to distance themselves from abuses that occurred around the time of the Protestant Reformation. They also want to remove stumbling blocks that prevent non-Catholics from taking a positive view of the Church. As admirable as these motives are, the claim that indulgences are not part of Church teaching today is false."

http://www.catholic.com/library/Primer_on_Indulgences.asp

antiskeptic wrote: »

I think you'll find that one aspect of the reformed church was it's breakaway from the idea of a monolithic authority. Only if you are stuck with that idea will the notion of multi-denominations seem ill fitting.

Jesus handed down Authority to the Apostles, and to their successors!!

Spacedog

Clearly excommunication is the only remaining option. However the RCC is no so desperate for numbers now that you probably don't want to know how low you would have to sink as a person to get excommunicated.

Considering the RCC will happily accept child rapists (which is what they are) in their own ranks, and are still willing to protect child abusers in confession. Basically the only way to get yourself excommunicated to to repetitively challenge the authority of the church hierarchy from within.

Either that or turn to Satanism, you'll find them to:
-be more tolerant, respectful people,
-have a 0-tolerance policy to child sexual abuse, and other serious criminal activity,
-have kinkier, hotter sex,
-not take their deity so seriously,
-have better hymns (mainly iron maiden and death metal)

I'll see you in hell, I'll be the drunk dude laughing my ass off, surfing on the lake of fire with bill hicks and jimmy hendrix.

gimmebroadband

Spacedog wrote: »

Clearly excommunication is the only remaining option. However the RCC is no so desperate for numbers now that you probably don't want to know how low you would have to sink as a person to get excommunicated.

Considering the RCC will happily accept child rapists (which is what they are) in their own ranks, and are still willing to protect child abusers in confession. Basically the only way to get yourself excommunicated to to repetitively challenge the authority of the church hierarchy from within.

Either that or turn to Satanism, you'll find them to:
-be more tolerant, respectful people,
-have a 0-tolerance policy to child sexual abuse, and other serious criminal activity,
-have kinkier, hotter sex,
-not take their deity so seriously,
-have better hymns (mainly iron maiden and death metal)

I'll see you in hell, I'll be the drunk dude laughing my ass off, surfing on the lake of fire with bill hicks and jimmy hendrix.

Have you 'evidence' of coverups enmasse, I'm sure the police would like to know????

kylith

prinz wrote: »

The problem was under Canon Law the act of defection had a knock on effect on marriages conducted by the RCC. If someone later defected, was their marriage by the RCC still valid and legally binding (of special importance in a country like ours where the religious ceremony and legal state accepted marriage are not always separated)? It would be a lot easier to defect and then contest the validity of your marriage than go through divorce proceedings etc.

What?! Of course your marriage is legally binding if you defect from any religion. The legal part of being married is the signing of the marriage register, the whole 'church' bit is just window dressing on this signing.

antiskeptic

gimmebroadband wrote: »

"Those who claim that indulgences are no longer part of Church teaching have the admirable desire to distance themselves from abuses that occurred around the time of the Protestant Reformation.

What is now termed abuse was once the teaching of the Roman church. You said the teaching hasn't changed.

Jesus handed down Authority to the Apostles, and to their successors!!

The question of who precisely the successors are is another issue at the core of the Reformation. This can't be used in evidence as to why the reformers are unusual in their too being subject to reform.

FISMA

HellFireClub wrote: »

Yes I was a practising Catholic up until a certain time in my life. I was also a believing Catholic and was someone who I believe had a strong faith.
...
What I'm reading in the Cloyne report is very hard indeed to reconcile with a church that is meant to care for it's congregation. I just cannot accept that the church is capable of reform, the attitude is so wrong, I don't see a way back for the church.

HellFireClub,
So you're just going to overlook all of the good things that 99% + the priests, nuns, and all do on a daily basis?

You just don't know what you're talking about. You're a victim of the nightly news. You have no idea what the Catholic Church does on a daily basis throughout the world.

Have you ever been to a cancer ward and seen nuns changing the diapers of grown-ups that can no longer get out of bed? Or caring for AIDs patients? Probably not. But images like those are not nice 30s news cycles.

Have you ever seen a nun cleaning up a bed soaked with blood, urine, vomit, or excrement?

Probably not, but go on, read your report, enjoy your cuppa, and tell me how bad of an organization it is.

You probably have nothing good to say about the church. Well I do...

How about the fact that the Catholic Church is THE MOST CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION ON EARTH?

Again, I am not trying to be offensive, however, I am beyond tired of listening to people like yourself and the media bad mouth an organization that I see doing more good than anyone else on a daily basis - worldwide.

You obviously are not involved with: Catholic Charities, soup kitchens, distribution of food, giving out clothing, educating children, building shelters, ...

Instead, you want to paint the entire church with the same brush. Make more than 99% of the institution guilty for the crimes of less than 1%.

With all due respect again HellFireClub, I would like to see the Church rid itself of the holiday Catholics, posers, and wedding photo op crowd.

It these types that are dragging down the church.

We would better off without them.

I would rather see one good priest for ten parishes than 10 bad priests for one.

Same with the parishioners.

saa

I filled out the form on the website over a year ago.... never heard anything back so am I off the register now or what?

And seriously un baptised and un confirmed? I didn't even give consent to par take in those life time binding contracts

Fanny Cradock

saa wrote: »

I filled out the form on the website over a year ago.... never heard anything back so am I off the register now or what?

And seriously un baptised and un confirmed? I didn't even give consent to par take in those life time binding contracts

Baptism and confirmation are events that happened in space and time. Bar the invention of a time machine you can't get "unbaptised".

The RCC don't recognise "unbaptisms" so they are unlikely to get back to you. If you don't believe in God (or at least the value of infant baptism - I'd have sympathy with you there) then I don't see what difference a splash of water on your forehead could possibly make. Of course, you might actually want it to make a difference as some form of protest, which would go a long way to explaining your post.

mcmoustache

My reading of this is that HFC wants his name off the list so that the RCC can't use him to prop up their numbers. From my reading of this thread, it doesn't really seem possible.

It's a shame really but on the bright side, when it's time for his kids to go to school and there is no ET school around, he'll be able to pretend to be a Catholic to get into the local RCC school.

L1011

mcmoustache wrote: »

It's a shame really but on the bright side, when it's time for his kids to go to school and there is no ET school around, he'll be able to pretend to be a Catholic to get into the local RCC school.

Its highly unlikely that the sole school in an area will be let to be a faith school under Ruairi Quinns plans. Thankfully.

Captainsatnav

Been reading this thread (inwork ) with interest. I'm an atheist who (some might say get over yourself) actually finds it quite distressing attending rc cereomonies (funerals etc) in a church. Obviously I don't do any of the kneeling, standing, mumbling b0ll0cks, but it does rile me up the way it's seen as a given by all the holy marys around you that you're in this thing as much as they are.

Also, last week (this made me fume and laugh at the hypocrisy) was listening to 'Drive Time' cooking my dinner. It was the day of the Taoiseach's (laudable) outburst at the Vatican and RTE had all sorts of commentators in the studio remarking how this was a much overdue final departure from the rc Ireland of yore and so on...then it was 6pm and those f*ckin' bells started clanging in my ears. And my taxes fund RTE!