Exactly what percentage of the population is "christian"?

Mark Hamill

Brown Bomber wrote: »

J


That explains it. Just to be clear I am very much for secular education, it's just that I don't see the connection between a religious education which hypnotises adults into answering one way or the other in a census.

Then you are either being disingenuous, a victim or said religious educational indoctrination, or just plain wilfully ignorant.

Brown Bomber

alaimacerc wrote: »

And we're red in the ears listening to this same old denialist rubbish. Let me try to take you through this once more, as slowly as I can:

1. Person tells the census that they're "Catholic".
2. Same person tells a survey conducted by the bishop's conference they don't believe in god. (Among various other things I'll spare you, in the interests of getting a straight answer to this one point you've dodged every time to this point.) We have direct evidence this has happened.

Are you telling me that the answer given in the second case is "inaccurate"? Because it's not a census question, therefore it doesn't count? Or are you merely so deliberately ignorant of basic statistics that you feel that no conclusions whatsoever can be drawn from this, beyond this person's own "discrepancy" between "affiliation" on whatever basis, and their actual belief? To be dismissed as "just one person" as you have the assorted anecdotes here of outright "responsible person" misrepresentation?

Your use once again of the weaselly "affiliation" is noted. Are we slowly getting you to acknowledge by inches that ticking the box marked "Catholic" implies essentially nothing about actual practice, or indeed actual belief?

Share it then.

Brown Bomber

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Then you are either being disingenuous, a victim or said religious educational indoctrination, or just plain wilfully ignorant.

Prove this Catholic "brainwashing" leads to non-Catholics considering themselves Catholics in the census. State specifically the number. Provide references.

Turtwig

weisses wrote: »

Fine

Where do you get the impression that what you are saying above regarding polls is used in below example ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_Republic_of_Ireland#Public_opinion

original post

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=88415437&postcount=560

Ok there are two issues here:
Opinions polls often ask people their position e.g which party they support, what their religious affiliation. In some opinion polls, for example those commissioned by Gallup or various third parties for Iona, the number of religious adherents is identified directly in the poll. This is because the poll generally asks question directly relating to religious issues. Gallup frequently tests people's knowledge of scripture and teachings. TP for Iona asks about attitudes towards the Church, sermons, mass attendances.


The second is regarding the application of data from past opinion polls to previous ones. For instance, if the Census or another poll, finds that 90% of a population self identify as Christian. Then it is a reasonable assumption to compare that to findings in other polls. It's not as reliable as first asking your respondents which religion they belong to. It's still a very reasonable assumption to make. If you disagree how much would think the actual value of religious respondents polled would vary from the assumed value? For example, in any poll commissions by Red C of Irish people that is intended to reflect the entire nation as a whole what would you say the difference is between the assumed proportion of people identifying as Catholic and the number of people who corresponded in the poll who would identify as Catholic?

If the population is 100% Catholic and yet another survey shows a divide on issues such as contraception, transubstantiation, eternal life etc. Then that shows there is at least an inconsistency between Catholic identity and Catholic attitudes. A person can identify as a Man Utd fan all they wish but if their actions and attitudes seem more in line with that of Man City supporters then what do you do? The answer when considering religion isn't easy.

Mark Hamill

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Prove this Catholic "brainwashing" leads to non-Catholics considering themselves Catholics in the census. State specifically the number. Provide references.

I already did. 84.2% people self identified as catholics in the census, yet only (at best) 30% of "catholics" attend mass.

Brown Bomber

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Exactly, a belief in a ritual is a belief, so you cannot separate them. Catholic doctrine says that catholics have to follow certain rituals. Those who do not follow them because they don't believe the have to, are therefore not catholics. They don't follow the ritual or the belief.

Final time now.
Belief (thinking) and ritual (doing) or not the same thing.

Consider the devout Catholic co-habiting with their long-term partner who doesn't want to get married for personal reasons and the atheist who gets a Catholic wedding for personal reasons.

Mark Hamill wrote: »

I dont need any references,

Actually you do.
You are claiming that every instance of failure to comply with every aspect of the set of instructions set out in the Cathecism results in the "sinner" instantly becoming de-Catholicised.

Provide references if that is the case instead of stating your opinion as fact,

Mark Hamill wrote: »

At what point does a persons complete contempt and disdain for catholic doctrine actually stop them from being a catholic BB?

OK, I am going to repeat myself once again and hopes it sinks in this time.

The relationship between an individual and their Church is a private one and has sweet **** all to do with you or me.

While you seem to have appointed yourself as the final authority on who is and isn't a Catholic your opinion doesn't count. If an individual freely opts-in to a society and this society accepts them they are legitimate members until one of two things happen. 1) The individual opts-out of the society 2) The societies authorities exclude them.

robindch

Brown Bomber wrote: »

1) The individual opts-out of the society 2) The societies authorities exclude them.

Aside from the "once baptized, always a catholic" nonsense, the RCC has a more general set of rulebooks which explain what you have to do and what you have to believe in order for the church to consider somebody a "catholic".

Most people merrily ignore these rules. So the question is: are they still catholics?

While the answer seems clear enough to most posters here, you seem unable to accept it.

Brown Bomber

Mark Hamill wrote: »

I already did. 84.2% people self identified as catholics in the census, yet only (at best) 30% of "catholics" attend mass.

So in your head 100% of Catholics attend mass.

Can you point out a single precedent where a Catholic was excluded from the Church for not attending mass?

Or is this another case of "I don't have to provide any references"?

Brown Bomber

robindch wrote: »

Aside from the "once baptized, always a catholic" nonsense, the RCC has a more general set of rulebooks which explain what you have to do and what you have to believe in order for the church to consider somebody a "catholic".

Most people merrily ignore these rules. So the question is: are they still catholics?

While the answer seems clear enough to most posters here, you seem unable to accept it.

Could you explain why the opinions of a bunch of atheists on the internet carries more weight than the individual themselves in making a personal decision that relates solely to the individual?

Nodin

Brown Bomber wrote: »

So in your head 100% of Catholics attend mass.

Can you point out a single precedent where a Catholic was excluded from the Church for not attending mass?

Or is this another case of "I don't have to provide any references"?

...whats the imposition or non-imposition of a penalty got to do with it? Church attendance is required of catholics by the RC, as is abstention from non-procreative sex, sex outside marriage, divorce, homosexuality etc. While these are rarely penalised they are still church doctrine, and those who dismiss such teachings are not, whether they see it or otherwise, in good standing with the church.

Turtwig

Bb,

Someone says they deny the holy spirit and then turns around to you and tells you they're Catholic. Surely you appreciate the difficulty in describing this person's beliefs as Catholic. I can't assume that any Catholic I meet would deny the holy spirit. Such an assumption is blatantly assuming the person isn't Catholic. To accept the majority of Irish people as Catholic means I have to include beliefs into Catholic theology that simply don't exist. I think that's disingenuous to people I know who are actually devout Catholic.

Brown Bomber

Brown Bomber wrote: »

So in your head 100% of Catholics attend mass.

Can you point out a single precedent where a Catholic was excluded from the Church for not attending mass?

Or is this another case of "I don't have to provide any references"?

BB, since you have such faith in the census, does this mean that you believe that 90% of people in Ireland hold the opinions of the Catholic church.
90% of people in Ireland are all against gay marriage, premarital sex, condoms, abortion and the secularisation of public institutions?

robindch

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Could you explain why the opinions of a bunch of atheists on the internet carries more weight than the individual themselves in making a personal decision that relates solely to the individual?

For the reason that you've consistently ignored since you made the claim that "we are as a nation over 90% Christian" -- that the don't meet the requirements as laid down by the organization that sets the standards.

Though I'm sure you'll ignore this post, just as you've ignored every previous post pointing this out to you.

Piliger

MrPudding wrote: »

Are you drunk? Of course they make the bloody rules. Seriously.

MrP

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

Since about 350 A.D.

The catholic church has the same power to declare what constitute the criteria to be a catholic as the Irish state has to declare the criteria for Irish citizenship. They feckin' own the club after all.

What utter nonsense. The catholic church is not like the boy scouts ! They're not like Fianna Fail !!
Are you freaking serious ? are seriously saying that the millions of catholics out there obey the 'rules' as set down by the vatican ???? and if they don't then they are not 'catholics' ? FFS
No. It is not that kind of club. It is WAY bigger than the vatican rules and the vast majority of catholics pick and chose the 'rules'. In fact there are very very few 'rules' at all, and even those are not mandatory.
JMJ

Piliger

Nodin wrote: »

...whats the imposition or non-imposition of a penalty got to do with it? Church attendance is required of catholics by the RC, as is abstention from non-procreative sex, sex outside marriage, divorce, homosexuality etc. While these are rarely penalised they are still church doctrine, and those who dismiss such teachings are not, whether they see it or otherwise, in good standing with the church.

You are living in some kind of fantasy land. Are you taking the pi$$ ??

Nodin

Piliger wrote: »

You are living in some kind of fantasy land. Are you taking the pi$$ ??

What is it that you don't understand?

swampgas

Piliger wrote: »

What utter nonsense. The catholic church is not like the boy scouts ! They're not like Fianna Fail !!
Are you freaking serious ? are seriously saying that the millions of catholics out there obey the 'rules' as set down by the vatican ???? and if they don't then they are not 'catholics' ? FFS
No. It is not that kind of club. It is WAY bigger than the vatican rules and the vast majority of catholics pick and chose the 'rules'. In fact there are very very few 'rules' at all, and even those are not mandatory.
JMJ

So, if most self-styled Irish Catholics are Catholic in name only, and refuse to be dictated to by the church hierarchy as to how they should live their lives, why do they even bother to be Catholic at all? Is it supposed to be some kind of group identifier? Normally when people claim to belong to a particular group which espouses certain ethical or moral positions, they actually do agree with the most of the publicly stated positions of that organisation.

If a member of political party A finds that their personal position is much closer to party B, they may very well resign from one and join the other, or if they stay within their own party, they try to change it from within. Normally you wouldn't claim that you can label yourself a communist just because you want to, while simultaneously claiming that socialism is a load of nonsense.

With Irish cultural Catholics, they are neither following the stated tenets of the church, nor are they making any meaningful effort to change the church's position.

It's a weird, contradictory, apathetic and utterly illogical position to take.

alaimacerc

Jernal wrote: »

Someone says they deny the holy spirit and then turns around to you and tells you they're Catholic. Surely you appreciate the difficulty in describing this person's beliefs as Catholic.

That's not really sufficient to identify them as "Catholic", as distinct from almost any other mainstream Christian denomination. Though just any ol' Christian belief system would suffice for the 90% claim as the thread topic...

Turtwig

alaimacerc wrote: »

That's not really sufficient to identify them as "Catholic", as distinct from almost any other mainstream Christian denomination. Though just any ol' Christian belief system would suffice for the 90% claim as the thread topic...

The point was explicitly that if someone denies the Holy Spirit it's almost impossible to consider them a Christian. As you rightly pointed out. Catholicism is part of Christianity though you can't not be a Christian but still be Catholic. Hope this clarifies.

alaimacerc

swampgas wrote: »

So, if most self-styled Irish Catholics are Catholic in name only, and refuse to be dictated to by the church hierarchy as to how they should live their lives, why do they even bother to be Catholic at all? Is it supposed to be some kind of group identifier? Normally when people claim to belong to a particular group which espouses certain ethical or moral positions, they actually do agree with the most of the publicly stated positions of that organisation.

I think there's a large factor in it of "we're Catholic because we sure as heck ain't Protestant", with all the cultural and historical baggage that comes with that. But that's less well-grounded in the belief surveys, which while they document and measure what "Catholics" don't believe in (much less do) at various rates, don't seem to followup and ask the third-tier questions like... "sooo, you're a Catholic exactly how and why, then?" (i.e. if you believe in contraception, women priests, and not in transubstantiation and Marianology, why aren't you in fact a Prod? And if you don't believe in god, why not "no religion"?)

swampgas

alaimacerc wrote: »

I think there's a large factor in it of "we're Catholic because we sure as heck ain't Protestant", with all the cultural and historical baggage that comes with that. But that's less well-grounded in the belief surveys, which while they document and measure what "Catholics" don't believe in (much less do) at various rates, don't seem to followup and ask the third-tier questions like... "sooo, you're a Catholic exactly how and why, then?" (i.e. if you believe in contraception, women priests, and not in transubstantiation and Marianology, why aren't you in fact a Prod? And if you don't believe in god, why not "no religion"?)

I agree, what's curious is the apparent total lack of self-awareness that seems to go with cultural Catholicism. Or are Irish people that afraid of being different?

alaimacerc

Brown Bomber wrote: »

So in your head 100% of Catholics attend mass.

Can you point out a single precedent where a Catholic was excluded from the Church for not attending mass?

You been smoking the incense especially hard today? Excommunications are ridiculously rare, especially when you compare to the vast and vague grounds they could be carried out on. Complete failure to observe any Catholic practices could be construed as apostasy, for which one could be excommunicated -- but no-one ever is. Agreeing with the Protestants on all the things they've been saying the Catholics are wrong about (see above) for centuries would be heresy. When was the last time there was any effort to excommunicate people for those? But how meaningfully "Catholic" is one when one doesn't agree with the RCC on anything that it says makes one a Catholic?

And as has been pointed out, even excommunication isn't really "exclusion". It's more like the naughtiest of the various RCC naughty steps.

Or is this another case of "I don't have to provide any references"?

It's a little rich, even by your own standards of rampant deflectionism and burden-of-proof games to make up out of whole cloth a claim, then demand "links or it didn't happen!" for your own straw man.

alaimacerc

swampgas wrote: »

I agree, what's curious is the apparent total lack of self-awareness that seems to go with cultural Catholicism. Or are Irish people that afraid of being different?

Afraid of being English, perhaps.

alaimacerc

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Final time now.

Promises, promises. I think we should make a drinking game out of this, and Reverently Consume a shot every time you repeat the same auld nonsense that's been answered endless times, after saying you would not, just because you've run out of meaningful things to say.

Belief (thinking) and ritual (doing) or not the same thing.

And neither is the same as "affiliation", or "ticking a box on the census form", which is the point you seem to be struggling with.

Consider the devout Catholic co-habiting with their long-term partner who doesn't want to get married for personal reasons

i.e. the impenitent sinner. This is one you do get excommunicated for, too. (Certainly informally; not sure how up on the paperwork the local prelate is in all cases of communion-refusal on such grounds.)

and the atheist who gets a Catholic wedding for personal reasons.

Whereas this person is merely a liar (possibly under social duress).

You are claiming that every instance of failure to comply with every aspect of the set of instructions set out in the Cathecism results in the "sinner" instantly becoming de-Catholicised.

Precisely no one is claiming this. Are you really that confused, or just hoping for "getting your reward in heaven" for these little sins of "mental reservation"?

OK, I am going to repeat myself once again and hopes it sinks in this time.

*quaff!*

The relationship between an individual and their Church is a private one and has sweet **** all to do with you or me.

You're in effect arguing it has sweet eff all to do with their church, too.

While you seem to have appointed yourself as the final authority on who is and isn't a Catholic your opinion doesn't count. If an individual freely opts-in to a society and this society accepts them they are legitimate members until one of two things happen. 1) The individual opts-out of the society 2) The societies authorities exclude them.

I think it's a reeeeeal stretch to say that "being baptised a Catholic" constitutes a lifelong "opt in". I think it's an even bigger one to say that ticking a box on the census every five years does so. And yet that's essentially all you have to offer us.

Are you even aware of what the word "religious" means?

swampgas

alaimacerc wrote: »

Afraid of being English, perhaps.

I suppose it would stick in the craw for many people to admit that the English might actually have been right about things like divorce and contraception years before we finally came to our senses here.

So maybe an Irish "Catholic" is simply an atheist or protestant who simply doesn't want to admit that their beliefs are ... English!

alaimacerc

Jernal wrote: »

If the population is 100% Catholic and yet another survey shows a divide on issues such as contraception, transubstantiation, eternal life etc. Then that shows there is at least an inconsistency between Catholic identity and Catholic attitudes. A person can identify as a Man Utd fan all they wish but if their actions and attitudes seem more in line with that of Man City supporters then what do you do? The answer when considering religion isn't easy.

At the risk of seeming like I have an Orson Card fixation, his example might once again prove instructive here. If someone claims to be a (US) Democrat, and might indeed still have that as their voter registration, but consistently advocates policies slightly to the right of Barry Goldberg, does one still have to take their claimed affiliation at face value? i.e., "As a Democrat, I recommend criminalisation of homosexuality", "As a Democrat, I urge you to vote the straight Republican ticket". Hell, no. At best, such claims might be rooted in some rose-tinted view of what one's party might have been before it "moved away from him". Worse, and more likely, it's a pathetic attempt to gain credibility for one's nonsense as pretended "criticism from within".

alaimacerc

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Prove this Catholic "brainwashing" leads to non-Catholics considering themselves Catholics in the census. State specifically the number. Provide references.

"Prove your unremarkable observation, because I sure can't provide any support for my breathtakingly audacious ones. Provide numbers that don't exist. Waste your time meeting a ludicrous burden of proof that in any event I'll simply dismiss out of hand."

You're a guff merchant of the most shameless order. You'd probably be right at home on a Creationist forum someplace.

alaimacerc

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Share it then.

... Did you somehow fail to notice that in the post you managed to ignore almost all of that I yet again told you where this came from?

In the faint hope that the 17th time is the charm, I'll say it again for the slow of reading comprehension: the Conference of Bishop's survey of belief in self-identified Catholics.

I fully expect you to just ignore this, and ask the same question in a couple of page's time. Or else to say "The bishops, what do they know? Credulous fools, and all part of the the Vast Secular Conspiracy."

alaimacerc

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Then you are either being disingenuous, a victim or said religious educational indoctrination, or just plain wilfully ignorant.

My vote is for the trifecta.

Brown Bomber

Nodin wrote: »

...whats the imposition or non-imposition of a penalty got to do with it? Church attendance is required of catholics by the RC, as is abstention from non-procreative sex, sex outside marriage, divorce, homosexuality etc. While these are rarely penalised they are still church doctrine, and those who dismiss such teachings are not, whether they see it or otherwise, in good standing with the church.

The penalty has much to do with it.

I have chosen to be a member of boards.ie forum. Boards.ie has accepted my membership. This relationship will continue until a) I close my account or b) The authorities site-ban me (penalty).

I will still be a member if only log on once a year or incur many bans and break many rules without getting site-banned.