Just be honest with yourself. You're not a Catholic. That's ok.

Cr4pSnip3r

The Backwards Man wrote: »

In the future atheism will be known as the counterweight religion, the yang to the yin, night to the day, Hardy to the Laurel.

One coin, two sides.

It is unfortunate we ever developed the term Atheism, as it is simply an absence of faith and not some doctrine to be followed. I believe those who identify as Atheist and attack religion 24/7 would be known as Anti-Theists.

The_Pretender

I think the OP is being accused of trying to turn people to Atheism because it is the easiest thing for people to respond with. If you tick all the boxes in the OP's list, then you are not a Catholic. Maybe you are an Athiest, or maybe you would better fit in with another religion/ branch of Christiantity. All the OP is doing is trying to get you stop identifying as one and corrupting data such as the Census.

As for people saying it's condescending, I can understand where they're coming from in saying this. However, should people be looked up becuase they are choosing to identify with something they are not? If you're been offended by the OP then it's possible you're insecure about your religion or else the OP has hit home, and you realise that you aren't a good catholic but yet you still like to be able to call yourself one and so you try to turn it around on the OP.

Shenshen

crockholm wrote: »

I have a friend who says that he weighs 13 and a half stone,in truth,he would be about fifteen stone.Why does he say it? More pertinently-Why should I care?

Ought I Point out to him that he is,in my opinion not 13 and a half stone whenever the subject is brought up.

If I did,people might rightly label me an asshole for being so anal about it.

It's his business and once again, why should I care?

Given all the fatty-bashing threads that regularly jump up in AH, I'd say a lot of people care - a lot!

rob316

I denounced my Catholic faith so could the church open back up the loop hole that you can leave the church please?

I'll happily not tick any box on a form then.

eamonnq

Shenshen wrote: »

Actually, I expect food and "healthy lifestyle" to become that counterweight. People show much more fervent belief in that these days.

Darn, I must be doubly atheist now !!

crockholm

Shenshen wrote: »

Given all the fatty-bashing threads that regularly jump up in AH, I'd say a lot of people care - a lot!

Then join forces and become the Fatholics,not too many calories in Christ crackers.

WeHaveToGoBack

WeHaveToGoBack wrote: »

The thing is, it does matter. Its because of religion that gay people cant get married (yet), people couldn't get divorced until recently, people cant get abortions, people who are truthful about their beliefs cant get their child into a school. People may think their beliefs don't affect others, but they most certainly do.

But we made divorce legal because of the people. We will likely make same sex marriage legal because of the people. It's the people, which are still predominantly Catholic.

Valetta

The_Pretender wrote: »

I think the OP is being accused of trying to turn people to Atheism because it is the easiest thing for people to respond with. If you tick all the boxes in the OP's list, then you are not a Catholic. Maybe you are an Athiest, or maybe you would better fit in with another religion/ branch of Christiantity. All the OP is doing is trying to get you stop identifying as one and corrupting data such as the Census.

As for people saying it's condescending, I can understand where they're coming from in saying this. However, should people be looked up becuase they are choosing to identify with something they are not? If you're been offended by the OP then it's possible you're insecure about your religion or else the OP has hit home, and you realise that you aren't a good catholic but yet you still like to be able to call yourself one and so you try to turn it around on the OP.

Which is it?

The Backwards Man

Cr4pSnip3r wrote: »

It is unfortunate we ever developed the term Atheism, as it is simply an absence of faith and not some doctrine to be followed. I believe those who identify as Atheist and attack religion 24/7 would be known as Anti-Theists.

I dunno, I think atheist is a fair enough term, it defines a particular mindset alright. I know a few people that don't believe in anything, including professing their absence of religion at every opportunity. I'd call them pragmatists.

Cr4pSnip3r

The Backwards Man wrote: »

I dunno, I think atheist is a fair enough term, it defines a particular mindset alright. I know a few people that don't believe in anything, including professing their absence of religion at every opportunity. I'd call them pragmatists.

Militant Atheism is what you might call that, I suppose. A loud minority is something we all suffer from.

IRLConor

Polo_Mint wrote: »

For all the people who are baptised Catholic and say they are an Atheist, Have they actually contacted the Church to denounce their Religion?

As mentioned above, it's not possible to do this any more.

Never fear however, all atheists are automatically excommunicated latae sententiae as apostates (Can. 1364 §1). It doesn't make you not-a-Catholic in the eyes of the church, but surely it's enough that you'd consider not ticking the Catholic box on a census?

catallus

WeHaveToGoBack wrote: »

Go to Confession.
But then, most Catholics dont bother with that either.

Who needs confession when we have facebook? :pac:

Shenshen wrote: »

Isn't the idea though that you repent your sins?

Can't imagine many people on here repent that last time they were in bed with the girlfriend/boyfriend, or missed mass for a good Sunday-morning lie-in.

This is a question which is as old as time itself; is it better to know your Redeemer and be blind to your wretchedness? Or to acknowledge one's wretchedness and know not your Redeemer?

Can one choose one's own sin?

I'm reminded of a recent episode of the Daily Show with Jon Stewart where a lot of Americans couldn't identify certain members of the US government (it was in relation to the Snowden saga); the ultimate point for me was "what of it? Most people don't go around the place thinking about issues that are for them a million miles away" Same with religion, I think.

The Backwards Man wrote: »

In the future atheism will be known as the counterweight religion, the yang to the yin, night to the day, Hardy to the Laurel.

One coin, two sides.

Hahaha:D

You're having a laugh surely. There is not enough weight in the dark nothing of atheism to counter children's cartoons. A failed internet meme that cannot define itself other than by that which it is not?

To say that you, for example, backwardsman, are nothing except a piece of meat that stands at 5foot something and weighs 14 stone or whatever and you are nothing else?

Can you not see that this is the very definition of Lucifer?

The_Pretender

Valetta wrote: »

Which is it?

If you aren't a Catholic, then you can hardly be a good Catholic :rolleyes:

TheBeardedLady

You can't remove yourself from the baptismal roll in Ireland and I know this because I've tried.

Valetta

The_Pretender wrote: »

If you aren't a Catholic, then you can hardly be a good Catholic :rolleyes:

But you acknowledge that one can be a bad catholic, and answer yes to some or all of the points in the OP?

Macy0161

Polo_Mint wrote: »

Scrap Baptism for babies

People should not have a forced religion until they actually have an understanding of religion and choose themselves.

Baptism isn't really the issue imo, it’s confirmation that is ridiculous. Confirm your faith for the rest of your life, before you've even left primary school?

I'm not sure "lapsed" is the right term - it's really cultural Catholicism. We go through the bs around communions, confirmations, weddings and funerals, and then forget about it. And I am kinda ok with that - a lot of the symbols and ceremony pre-date Christianity anyway.

The best way to measure faith and commitment to faith formation by parents would be to ban indoctrination and sacrament preparation from school time. Whether there would still be the commitment to communion and confirmation if it was down to the parents actually being involved in even dropping them to evening and/ or weekend classes, then we’d see a real picture. All the moaning that goes on about “having” to go to mass in the lead up would really make me doubt the numbers would be as high.

Knex*

Deleted User wrote: »

I genuinely believe most atheists are much worse than devouts of any religion.

Especially all those Atheists in the Middle East, what with their beheadings and suicide bombings and such.

And even then the ones closer to home, who like to infringe on the basic human rights of others, such as marriage, or in the past, being able to raise a child, as a single parent, without shame and in a normal environment, even if it was born out of wedlock.

Devout Atheists are the worst.

crockholm

TheBeardedLady wrote: »

You can't remove yourself from the baptismal roll in Ireland and I know this because I've tried.

Would that be because it was an historical event,in the sense that it happened,you were baptized catholic.To get that scrapped would be re-Writing history-no?

Polo_Mint

kylith wrote: »

The church closed the avenue to formally leave.

IMO baptism doesn't make me a Catholic. I had no choice in the matter, it was done before I could make an informed decision or voice an opinion. I was once signed up to Swim Ireland, but I'm sure as hell not a lifeguard any longer.

If there was a church tax here like there is in Germany there'd be a grand total of a couple of hundred people putting Catholic on the census.

Cr4pSnip3r wrote: »

So, in this thread, it's not cool for OP to try make people think about what they do in the next census, but it's cool for you to tell me that because someone else decided I should be baptised, I am forced to consider myself Catholic (in the eyes of the state at the very least)? Now that's just mad.

Shenshen wrote: »

Question : If it had been necessary to circumsice you as a baby, would you now consider yourself Jewish?

I will Quote myself again because you are taking me out of context to what I was replying too

Polo_Mint wrote: »

Scrap Baptism for babies

People should not have a forced religion until they actually have an understanding of religion and choose themselves.

Many People in a census ticket Catholic for the sole reason that they were Baptised a Catholic when they were a baby.

To get an accurate census you would need that people to choose there beliefs when they actually understand what religion is and then register to that religion.

Most people will say "Im a Catholic"

Then ask them do they actually believe in it and a lot will say no

They only know they are Catholic as they were baptised one

The Backwards Man

Knex. wrote: »

Especially all those Atheists in the Middle East, what with their beheadings and suicide bombings and such.

And even then the ones closer to home, who like to infringe on the basic human rights of others, such as marriage, or in the past, being able to raise a child, as a single parent, without shame and in a normal environment, even if it was born out of wedlock.

Devout Atheists are the worst.

Behold a pale horse. And his name that sat on him was hyperbole, and whataboutery followed with him

Polo_Mint

Shenshen wrote: »

Question : If it had been necessary to circumsice you as a baby, would you now consider yourself Jewish?

I would have classified it as a medical condition.

Unless there was Rabbis doing the job and I was handed a piece of paper saying I am

The_Pretender

Valetta wrote: »

But you acknowledge that one can be a bad catholic, and answer yes to some or all of the points in the OP?

You could answer yes to a couple of the points and be a bad Catholic, but if you've answered yes to all of them then you can't be a Catholic if you're against key elements of the Religion.

Rational Male

Ok here's my take on it, Ireland is a very conservative, conformist country..its simply easier to be a gaa playing, catholic than be different. Also in rural ireland, there isn't much hope for a lot of people so being a 'good catholic' gives they're lives purpose and meaning.

Zebra3

wendell borton wrote: »

The catholic church does put on a good show in fairness, they are the Christian equivalent of the rocky horror show and for that reason alone I will continue to use their services for social events.

Horror show may well just be a phrase that springs to mind for the church's rape victims.

Knex*

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Behold a pale horse. And his name that sat on him was hyperbole, and whataboutery followed with him

Which is funny, because that's what I was highlighting in the original idiotic post.

Valetta

The_Pretender wrote: »

You could answer yes to a couple of the points and be a bad Catholic, but if you've answered yes to all of them then you can't be a Catholic if you're against key elements of the Religion.

Ok. Now we're getting somewhere.

The last time you were in a church was a baptism, a wedding or a funeral (or
to keep the folks happy)

You have had sex before marriage.

You disagree with the churches teaching on homosexuality.

You live in "sin".

You ticked the catholic box in the census "by default" without any critical
self evaluation.

You wouldn't be mad about the idea of baptising your child but you want a
school place and/or keep the parents/in laws happy.

You have had a child out of marriage and there is absolutely nothing wrong
with that.

You call yourself a "cultural" catholic.

Which of the points are ok to still be a catholic, and which definitely rule it out?

RobertKK

This should be moved to the Christianity forum.

Maybe some don't believe that forum exists...

Knex*

RobertKK wrote: »

This should be moved to the Christianity forum.

Maybe some don't believe that forum exists...

But can you prove it does?

Choochtown

I would argue that the question on the 2011 Census was very misleading.

It asked: "What is your religion?"

The assumption being that everyone has a religion.

This was directly followed by a list of a choice of 6 boxes to tick with "Roman Catholic" being top of the list.

The last choice of the 6 was "Other" with a space of 20 white boxes to write in your religion.

Only after all of this was a single choice at the very bottom with a box to tick for "No religion"


I believe a much different pattern of results would emerge had the question been worded as follows:

"Do you practise a religion?" Followed by a simple choice Yes or No.
If Yes is ticked then a choice of boxes to tick is given.

RobertKK

Knex. wrote: »

But can you prove it does?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=333