Do grottos & statues of the virgin mary serve a purpose?

LordSutch

In modern day Ireland . . . .

I am talking about the 'man made' road side variety, and the ones in housing estates.

We have a giant Virgin Mary in a concrete housing near to where we live, she's about ten feet tall with blonde hair bright blue eyes and a blue shawl, hands outreaching.

So I guess they served a purpose in the past when Ireland was a deeply "Catholic" and conservative country, but do these floodlit statues with bright colours belong in 21st century Ireland?

Personally I am not aginst them, but sometimes I wonder why?
Just wondering what other people think.

homer911

I put these statues in the same category as the Angelus on TV - they define our culture, but not necessarily our faith

Into The Blue

Suppose just a throw back to 1950s Ireland.. Reminder of just how far we've had to come as a country.

jimd2

I dont like them. I hope that gradually they are removed because, as you say, they serve no purpose at all. And most of them are horrible / poor state of repair.

shamrock55

There is one a stones throw from me that some old lad is forever tending and looking after but i never see anyone stop at it, everyone just walks past like its not even there

yellowlabrador

Some people identify more with the mother goddess than with Zombie Jesus.
I've heard some of my neighbours say that they are catholic, don't believe in god but pray to the virgin for all their needs. They don't believe in an afterlife but go to Lourdes and Knock. You'll remove the grottos over their dead bodies.

Manach

Historically Shrines occur in most cultures. In the Medieval period this gave an impetus to the major building phase that gave rise to the Cathedrals. The later shrines are a reflection of a popular sentiment by the community and for the community to act as a focus of its communal Catholic ethos.
As well we hold mass rocks in reverence as a remembrance of former persecutions when the faith was driven underground and modern shrines reflect a reaction to this period.

punisher5112

Think it should be looked on the other way around why does everything have to be negative.

Go to any other country and see how things are preserved and attract tourists.

Ireland and its people seem to think ah sure it be grand what use is it anyway.

We need to hold onto our heritage and look after historical buildings, monument and so on.

Take for example along the Quays where the articles were found from the Vikings but the council had to build there big horrible offices instead of turning into a money spinner for tourists.

Castles that have been left to crumble away etc etc.
New isn't always better.

looksee

Leaving aside my aetheistic tendencies, I have no great problem with grottos, but the standard statues used in the huge majority of Irish grottos are beyond kitsch. There is something very community enhancing about people caring for a grotto.

Cen taurus

punisher5112 wrote: »

Think it should be looked on the other way around why does everything have to be negative.

Go to any other country and see how things are preserved and attract tourists.

Ireland and its people seem to think ah sure it be grand what use is it anyway.

We need to hold onto our heritage and look after historical buildings, monument and so on.

Take for example along the Quays where the articles were found from the Vikings but the council had to build there big horrible offices instead of turning into a money spinner for tourists.

Castles that have been left to crumble away etc etc.
New isn't always better.

When travelling in East Asia I always expected to see, and enjoyed seeing shrines to Buddha, Shinto etc. etc., in varying states, ages and quality. They never bothered me.
I also enjoy seeing traces of the Irish megalithic peoples today, standing stones etc.
Cultures and communities are all different.
It seems to be mostly the Taliban types and those insecure in their own beliefs/lack of beliefs get annoyed by such things.

Into The Blue

Cen taurus wrote: »

It seems to be mostly the Taliban types and those insecure in their own beliefs/lack of beliefs get annoyed by such things.

Lol, touche!!

hfallada

They are very much only a rural Ireland thing. In Dublin City I only know of the two. One beside the old Maxol at Broadstone and the one for taximen at O Connell Street.

MouseTail

I know they are simply a throwback to our past, however I don't like them, as I think they also symbolise the dreadful way women and children were treated under a Clericalist State.

mikom

hfallada wrote: »

They are very much only a rural Ireland thing. In Dublin City I only know of the two. One beside the old Maxol at Broadstone and the one for taximen at O Connell Street.

You haven't visited many halting sites so.......

LordSutch

Two things,

Do they still erect statues of the Virgin Mary outside churches/hospitals etc, or are they a thing of the past?
And if so, will she still look like a northern European (as per post#1) or middle eastern in appearance?

Curious.

Cen taurus

1) That depends on the individual church / hospital etc.
2) That's up to the artist portraying her. As a symbol for all mankind, I've seen her portrayed all over the world as anything from Chinese in traditional Chinese clothing to a black African lady in traditional African costume. I can't do links but if you google our lady of Africa, or our lady of china, you'll see examples. Some of them are very beautiful representations.
It’s a bit like the false notion some people have that God is an old man with a white beard sitting on a cloud, or that cherubim are small chubby baby angels because an artist has artistically shown them that way.

katydid

MouseTail wrote: »

I know they are simply a throwback to our past, however I don't like them, as I think they also symbolise the dreadful way women and children were treated under a Clericalist State.

How?

eviltwin

There is one on the main road where I live, doesn't bother me. It's quite small, well maintained and not an eyesore so it's not a big deal. It's been there since the 50's or 60's and is maintained by locals. Once public money isn't being used to build these things I don't mind.

Greenmachine

No statues would mean no moving statues.

MouseTail

katydid wrote: »

How?

I think perhaps the whole idolatry of the Virgin mother v demonisation of 'fallen women', and the prevalence of such statues in industrial schools, laundries etc.

Rubberchikken

Have to wonder is there a foreign forum out there with people deinegrating religious objects in their country

Kept well, these statues reflect a time in this country that will be eroded by people with ajendas of their own.

MouseTail

I suppose in time they will fade and be removed, perhaps with the odd Marian cross remaining. It seems to be mostly elderly people who are tending and repainting them, tying ribbons in May etc. I wonder has anyone documented them before this happens.

XxMCRxBabyxX

katydid wrote: »

How?

Any time I see them I think of poor Ann Lovett. The poor girl lying there dying probably praying that Mary could save her. I don't know if that's why the OP makes the association but that's why I do.

Berserker

LordSutch wrote: »

Two things,

Do they still erect statues of the Virgin Mary outside churches/hospitals etc, or are they a thing of the past?
And if so, will she still look like a northern European (as per post#1) or middle eastern in appearance?

Curious.

I think it's a thing of the past and she does look very northern European in the ones I have seen which is quite odd.

As a matter of interest, can anyone tell me what their religious purpose is in a RC context?

keano_afc

The only purpose they serve is idol worship.

looksee

Kinda funny that the ancient custom of well-dressing has been re-introduced in England and is proving to be a popular tourist attraction. https://www.google.ie/search?q=well+dressing&rlz=1C1AVNC_enIE603IE603&espv=2&biw=1318&bih=813&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=IHT7VPeiCsTD7gbRs4GICg&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ&dpr=1

Cen taurus

keano_afc wrote: »

The only purpose they serve is idol worship.

I'm not sure you understand those two words, or Catholic teaching, if you're attempting to put them in the same sentence as a statue of Mary.

It's a statue, the same as every and any other statue.

Idol - is an image that is in itself considered a God and worshipped, like the golden calf
No Christian image, including the cross, fits that description.

Worship - is an act of religious devotion directed towards God

Catholicism in no way considers Mary in any way a God.

If you're going to be critical, at least be factual about it.

katydid

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

Any time I see them I think of poor Ann Lovett. The poor girl lying there dying probably praying that Mary could save her. I don't know if that's why the OP makes the association but that's why I do.

I was actually talking about her today to someone in their thirties who had never heard the story. I was shocked that a whole generation seem to be ignorant of what happened to that poor girl.

Still, she happened to pick a grotto, presumably because it was quiet or secluded. It could have been an abandoned house, or a hedge. We can hardly blame the RC church, or indeed the people that built the grotto. An unfortunate situation.

katydid

MouseTail wrote: »

I think perhaps the whole idolatry of the Virgin mother v demonisation of 'fallen women', and the prevalence of such statues in industrial schools, laundries etc.

A bit of a stretch. The main users of those grottos were harmless devout women who like saying the rosary.

Having said that, I have a very poignant memory of a grotto; back in '68, when I was 8, I was going to hospital for a serious heart operation, my mother drove me to the hospital. On the way, I remember her stopping the car at a grotto on a country road on the way, and getting out to say a prayer. I was pre-occupied with my new doll, and I was impatient, and didn't understand why we were "wasting time". Looking back now, as a parent, I realise that my poor mother must have been terrified for me, and had stopped to say a prayer. Maybe it was a spur of the moment thing, maybe she planned it; I never asked, and it's too late now. But for her, it was an important thing. A focus for her worries and to direct her prayers.

And maybe it worked...the operation went fine and I'm still here :-)

MouseTail

katydid wrote: »

I was actually talking about her today to someone in their thirties who had never heard the story. I was shocked that a whole generation seem to be ignorant of what happened to that poor girl.

Still, she happened to pick a grotto, presumably because it was quiet or secluded. It could have been an abandoned house, or a hedge. We can hardly blame the RC church, or indeed the people that built the grotto. An unfortunate situation.

If you are older than the person you relayed that story to, surely you know the grotto had much more significance than an abandoned house.

Cen taurus

katydid wrote: »

A bit of a stretch. The main users of those grottos were harmless devout women who like saying the rosary.

Having said that, I have a very poignant memory of a grotto; back in '68, when I was 8, I was going to hospital for a serious heart operation, my mother drove me to the hospital. On the way, I remember her stopping the car at a grotto on a country road on the way, and getting out to say a prayer. I was pre-occupied with my new doll, and I was impatient, and didn't understand why we were "wasting time". Looking back now, as a parent, I realise that my poor mother must have been terrified for me, and had stopped to say a prayer. Maybe it was a spur of the moment thing, maybe she planned it; I never asked, and it's too late now. But for her, it was an important thing. A focus for her worries and to direct her prayers.

And maybe it worked...the operation went fine and I'm still here :-)

Nice memory. One Mother to another. Is the grotto still there ?

katydid

Cen taurus wrote: »

Nice memory. One Mother to another. Is the grotto still there ?

I'm not sure, I haven't been on that road for a long while.

keano_afc

Cen taurus wrote: »

I'm not sure you understand those two words, or Catholic teaching, if you're attempting to put them in the same sentence as a statue of Mary.

It's a statue, the same as every and any other statue.

Idol - is an image that is in itself considered a God and worshipped, like the golden calf
No Christian image, including the cross, fits that description.

Worship - is an act of religious devotion directed towards God

Catholicism in no way considers Mary in any way a God.

If you're going to be critical, at least be factual about it.

Are you telling me nobody prays to the statues in these grottos?

Cen taurus

keano_afc wrote: »

Are you telling me nobody prays to the statues in these grottos?

- Do you know the difference between prayer and worship ?
- Do you know what the word pray means ?

I don't think you do from what you have said so far.

To pray means to ask, as in "pray tell"

Have you ever asked anyone to pray for you, or have you ever prayed for someone else ?

Someones been drumming anti-Catholicism into you without explaining what Catholicism actually teaches. Most probably not your fault my seperated brethern friend.

StudentDad

These grottos, religious notices etc. remind me of gangland graffiti. They denote territorial 'boundaries,' claimed by religious or other groups. Like crosses or churches erected on mountain tops.

SD

keano_afc

Cen taurus wrote: »

- Do you know the difference between prayer and worship ?
- Do you know what the word pray means ?

I don't think you do from what you have said so far.

To pray means to ask, as in "pray tell"

Have you ever asked anyone to pray for you, or have you ever prayed for someone else ?

Someones been drumming anti-Catholicism into you without explaining what Catholicism actually teaches. Most probably not your fault my seperated brethern friend.

Yes, often. But I know my request has been heard. Are you saying inanimate stone objects can hear our prayers?

galljga1

keano_afc wrote: »

Yes, often. But I know my request has been heard. Are you saying inanimate stone objects can hear our prayers?

And they're off.

galljga1

katydid wrote: »

I was actually talking about her today to someone in their thirties who had never heard the story. I was shocked that a whole generation seem to be ignorant of what happened to that poor girl.

Still, she happened to pick a grotto, presumably because it was quiet or secluded. It could have been an abandoned house, or a hedge. We can hardly blame the RC church, or indeed the people that built the grotto. An unfortunate situation.

Personally, I do blame the Catholic church. This was one fcuked up country. No contraception, little or no sex education, little girls afraid to talk to their own parents, parents putting their own family reputations above the needs of their own children.
At the time Ann Lovett was pregnant, girls were being expelled from schools because their pregnancies were contra to the catholic ethos of the school, a teacher (woman of course) was sacked because she had a baby with a separated married man, again the reason being that her behaviour was contra to the catholic ethos of the school, bishops, priests and various other nutbags were touring the country pontificating about the rights of the unborn while some of them were raping young boys and girls, others fathering children and forcing adoptions.

You don’t think the catholic church played any part in creating the prevailing atmosphere of fear in which Ann Lovett found herself? Blame society. Correct. The point is, society at the time was ruled by the Catholic Church.

noel farrell

i have to agree with you ,correct and very much to the point , fear and guilt was their weapon, thank god i got rid of it through reading the holey scripture , and the helper the spirit of god that he left us in the upper room.

Cen taurus

keano_afc wrote: »

Yes, often. But I know my request has been heard. Are you saying inanimate stone objects can hear our prayers?

As you well know, no, and it’s a rather cheap, cowardly, dishonest and sectarian way to try and portray Catholicsm.

galljga1

noel farrell wrote: »

i have to agree with you ,correct and very much to the point , fear and guilt was their weapon, thank god i got rid of it through reading the holey scripture , and the helper the spirit of god that he left us in the upper room.

Had to google that one. Forgot he/it was called the helper, we had a house elf.

looksee

noel farrell wrote: »

i have to agree with you ,correct and very much to the point , fear and guilt was their weapon, thank god i got rid of it through reading the holey scripture , and the helper the spirit of god that he left us in the upper room.

Hmmm...

katydid

galljga1 wrote: »

Personally, I do blame the Catholic church. This was one fcuked up country. No contraception, little or no sex education, little girls afraid to talk to their own parents, parents putting their own family reputations above the needs of their own children.
At the time Ann Lovett was pregnant, girls were being expelled from schools because their pregnancies were contra to the catholic ethos of the school, a teacher (woman of course) was sacked because she had a baby with a separated married man, again the reason being that her behaviour was contra to the catholic ethos of the school, bishops, priests and various other nutbags were touring the country pontificating about the rights of the unborn while some of them were raping young boys and girls, others fathering children and forcing adoptions.

You don’t think the catholic church played any part in creating the prevailing atmosphere of fear in which Ann Lovett found herself? Blame society. Correct. The point is, society at the time was ruled by the Catholic Church.

It wasn't all down to the Roman Catholic church. It was a prevalent attitude in society in the past, in other countries as well as ours. The attitude in the UK to unmarried mothers and the like was not far off the attitude in Ireland. The RC church may have exacerbated the situation, but it wouldn't have been able to if the people weren't willing to play along.

galljga1

katydid wrote: »

It wasn't all down to the Roman Catholic church. It was a prevalent attitude in society in the past, in other countries as well as ours. The attitude in the UK to unmarried mothers and the like was not far off the attitude in Ireland. The RC church may have exacerbated the situation, but it wouldn't have been able to if the people weren't willing to play along.

I have to disagree. I am not talking about attitudes in other countries or the UK. Even if you take this into account, prevalent attitudes in other countries excuses this? The RC church WAS society in this country and a horrible hypocritical society it was too. The people playing along, who were they? Roman Catholics.

katydid

galljga1 wrote: »

I have to disagree. I am not talking about attitudes in other countries or the UK. Even if you take this into account, prevalent attitudes in other countries excuses this? The RC church WAS society in this country and a horrible hypocritical society it was too. The people playing along, who were they? Roman Catholics.

No, the RC church was not society in this country. It was a large part of it, but it didn't comprise it. The Ann Lovett tragedy happened in the eighties, when a new generation of young people was already turning their backs on the morals and teachings of the RCC.

Attitudes in other countries are relevant; the UK is not a Roman Catholic country, and there was was judgement of such things.

Of course it played a huge role, but it is simplistic to blame it and no one else.

galljga1

katydid wrote: »

No, the RC church was not society in this country. It was a large part of it, but it didn't comprise it. The Ann Lovett tragedy happened in the eighties, when a new generation of young people was already turning their backs on the morals and teachings of the RCC.

Attitudes in other countries are relevant; the UK is not a Roman Catholic country, and there was was judgement of such things.

Of course it played a huge role, but it is simplistic to blame it and no one else.

I cannot understand how you consider how 'judgement of such things' in another country would have influenced a 15 year old in Granard in 1984.
Yes my generation in the eighties were throwing off the shackles of the catholic church. Were our parents? No. They were very much still subservient to the catholic church. The attitudes of the society in this country at that time were based primarily on the 'morals and teachings of the RCC'. Yes there were other minor influences and yes this was the beginning of a period of major change in Ireland but shame and fear resulted in this girls death, the society the catholic church created was responsible for her fear.

katydid

galljga1 wrote: »

I cannot understand how you consider how 'judgement of such things' in another country would have influenced a 15 year old in Granard in 1984.
Yes my generation in the eighties were throwing off the shackles of the catholic church. Were our parents? No. They were very much still subservient to the catholic church. The attitudes of the society in this country at that time were based primarily on the 'morals and teachings of the RCC'. Yes there were other minor influences and yes this was the beginning of a period of major change in Ireland but shame and fear resulted in this girls death, the society the catholic church created was responsible for her fear.

I never said that the way things were in another country influenced Ann Lovett. What gave you that idea?

I said that it wasn't just in Ireland that such things happened. A totally different point.

Some of our parents weren't throwing off the shackles. Some were. My parents were very accepting of the changes that were happening back then. It was definitely a time of change for many people.

A church doesn't create a society. It contributes to it, sometimes more, sometimes less. In Ireland, more. But it was not the only factor. That's just simplistic.

galljga1

katydid wrote: »

I never said that the way things were in another country influenced Ann Lovett. What gave you that idea?

I said that it wasn't just in Ireland that such things happened. A totally different point.

Some of our parents weren't throwing off the shackles. Some were. My parents were very accepting of the changes that were happening back then. It was definitely a time of change for many people.

A church doesn't create a society. It contributes to it, sometimes more, sometimes less. In Ireland, more. But it was not the only factor. That's just simplistic.

I responded to a post of yours in which you brought up the death of a girl in a grotto in Ireland: "We can hardly blame the RC church, or indeed the people that built the grotto. An unfortunate situation."
This is the subject of discussion as I took it.

You brought up attitudes in other countries particularly the attitude to unmarried mothers in the UK. I could not see the relevance to Ann Lovett and responded accordingly. You again stated that attitudes in other countries are relevant. Again, I could not understand how this girl could care about any other attitudes other than those of the people in her immediate community.

Glad to see your parents were more enlightened than others and yes it was a time of change but not for all and certainly not for all in the generations before me.

I will agree that a church does not create a society but in this country, at that point in time, in the area in which that girl grew up, a large proportion of her parents' generation and previous generations were still very much subservient to the catholic church. The attitudes of the society in that area were based primarily on the 'morals and teachings of the RCC'. Shame and fear resulted in this girls death, the society the catholic church moulded was responsible for her fear.

katydid

galljga1 wrote: »

I responded to a post of yours in which you brought up the death of a girl in a grotto in Ireland: "We can hardly blame the RC church, or indeed the people that built the grotto. An unfortunate situation."
This is the subject of discussion as I took it.

You brought up attitudes in other countries particularly the attitude to unmarried mothers in the UK. I could not see the relevance to Ann Lovett and responded accordingly. You again stated that attitudes in other countries are relevant. Again, I could not understand how this girl could care about any other attitudes other than those of the people in her immediate community.

Glad to see your parents were more enlightened than others and yes it was a time of change but not for all and certainly not for all in the generations before me.

I will agree that a church does not create a society but in this country, at that point in time, in the area in which that girl grew up, a large proportion of her parents' generation and previous generations were still very much subservient to the catholic church. The attitudes of the society in that area were based primarily on the 'morals and teachings of the RCC'. Shame and fear resulted in this girls death, the society the catholic church moulded was responsible for her fear.

There was no relevance to Ann Lovett...I've already explained what the relevance was to.

The attitudes of society may have been based "primarily" on the teachings of the RCC, but it doesn't meant that every member of society was influenced by them, or that other factors weren't at play.

galljga1

katydid wrote: »

There was no relevance to Ann Lovett...I've already explained what the relevance was to.

The attitudes of society may have been based "primarily" on the teachings of the RCC, but it doesn't meant that every member of society was influenced by them, or that other factors weren't at play.

We were discussing Ann Lovett's death. At least your posts citing attitudes in other countries gave me no reason to believe we were not, therefore, I inferred relevance to Ann Lovett from your posts. I am not sure what else I could have done.

Agreed, not every member of society was not influenced by the RCC and its teachings, just the vast majority of adults in the area, including those who would have been in regular contact with Ann at that age.

Eramen

Into The Blue wrote: »

Suppose just a throw back to 1950s Ireland.. Reminder of just how far we've had to come as a country.

Imagine if the Japanese or Koreans thought that way about about their Shinto or Buddhist shrines. These things are an intrinsic part of who they are and they still know and remember this, despite being highly advanced peoples.

It seems only 'white people' forget who they are just to be trendy.. and put politics before their identity and cultural unity. Therefore we end up lacking the direction and confident demeanor that only people secure in themselves can feel.

Ireland is rife with this under-confidence because we have abandoned our positive identities and replaced them with the bland sub-cultural/political nonsense. Your way of thinking is completely backward, even though your 'ideological brand' may tell you otherwise.