Increase in people identifying as having No Religion

Press_Start

infogiver wrote: »

I was surprised to see that only 20% of UK identified as having no religion and of that 20% some of them believe that there is life after death.
I was even more surprised that 78% here still identify as RC.
I would have thought with all the continuing scandals it would have been far less.

Just because there are scandals in the church doesn't mean that people abandon their faith. People believe in God because it might give them hope or reconciliation in their lives. Not just for all the negative connotations it brings.

Mellor

beauf wrote: »

Unless there aren't any as in this case

Of course. I wasn't suggesting attendance records should be the method btw, that was somebody else.

Deleted User wrote: »

Essentially I'm disappointed that real Catholics aren't telling boxticking Catholics that it's a sin to lie (even when the results are politically expedient for the real Catholics)

If you disappointed that's your own emotional issue tbh.

Trying to label people in a certain way that fits with your view is frankly, ridiculous. As is setting standards for when people have your permission to call themselves catholic.
That sort of stuff is obviously expected from religious extremists, but an atheists preaching to catholics about their religion is all sort of LOL.

topmanamillion wrote: »

I would contend that censi are fundamentally flawed as an exercise.
People put down falsehoods on censi for all kinds of reasons, ranging from they don't want the census enumerator (usually a local) to know their business to its simply what was always put down and its a habit.
It is a fact that the number of practicing Catholics has taken a nose dive in this country in the recent past. There isn't a hope the number of practicing Catholics/home prayers is anywhere close to 78% of Ireland population (circa 3.7 million people).

I would imagine most often, people stop attending mass, and only after a period do thy decide they are have no religion. You should allow people time to make that realisation, instead of demanding that people fit neatly into one pile or the other.

smacl

Mellor wrote: »

If people no longer associate with the Catholic Church, buy their belief in God is unchanged they should be selecting Christian and not No Religion

How people wish to choose their own religious identity is clearly a personal choice and not one that can be dictated by anyone else. Where I have a problem is the notion that because someone self identifies as Catholic that their views are aligned with the hierarchy of the Catholic church which is demonstrably not the case. So while 73% of the population might identify as Catholic this is not a figure that is useful in many decision making processes. For example the church opposed same sex marriage, the Irish people overwhelmingly support it. The church opposes contraception, the Irish people use it freely. The church consider the morning after pill a form of abortion, the vast majority of Irish people do not. The church pushes religious ethos schools yet more than half of educate together places are taken by Catholics who want an inclusive secular education for their children.

There isn't a box on the census for Catholic who doesn't support their church even though they probably make up the largest single group at this stage.

smacl

Absolam wrote: »

What purpose would such a box serve? Aside from enabling a sense of self congratulatory triumph in anti-theists, obviously...

Clarification. To describe someone as a Roman Catholic implies that they are guided by the teachings of the Roman Catholic church. Irish Catholics clearly are not so the description needs some qualification.

magicbastarder

smacl wrote: »

There isn't a box on the census for Catholic who doesn't support their church even though they probably make up the largest single group at this stage.

that's unworkable and would clearly come across as agenda-driven.

the section is about religious identity, not about religious attitudes.

magicbastarder

magicbastarder wrote: »

that's unworkable and would clearly come across as agenda-driven.

the section is about religious identity, not about religious attitudes.

Can you elaborate briefly on what the difference is between the two and the purpose of the question?

magicbastarder

there's a hell of a difference between asking someone 'are you catholic?' and 'what do you think of the church?'.

smacl

magicbastarder wrote: »

that's unworkable and would clearly come across as agenda-driven.

the section is about religious identity, not about religious attitudes.

That's well and good until the data relating to religious identity is used to justify the current status quo which gives the Catholic church an unduly favourable position in society. The misuse of data to support an agenda is already there.

Mellor

smacl wrote: »

How people wish to choose their own religious identity is clearly a personal choice and not one that can be dictated by anyone else.

Yeah, of course.
You suggested some of the NR people, where Catholics who didn't identify with the church. It's possible.
I'm just pointing out that it would make more logical sense for them to select Christian. In either case we don't know what people are actually doing.

Where I have a problem is the notion that because someone self identifies as Catholic that their views are aligned with the hierarchy of the Catholic church ...

I don't think suggest that was the case tbh.

Mellor

smacl wrote: »

[
To describe someone as a Roman Catholic implies that they are guided by the teachings of the Roman Catholic church.

No it doesn't tbh. Your post above proves that.
In fact you specifically said you've a problem with that sort of notion. Strangely ironic.

Where I have a problem is the notion that because someone self identifies as Catholic that their views are aligned with the hierarchy of the Catholic church ...

beauf

topmanamillion wrote: »

It forms a fundamental part of infrastructure, healthcare and other public service planning for the next numbers of years.
Its needs to be a tad better than "good enough".

No it doesn't. That's the meaning of good enough.

Otherwise it would be "not good enough"

Religion shouldn't have any impact on public services. It should be removed from them all.

smacl

Mellor wrote: »

No it doesn't tbh.

So what exactly distinguishes someone as being a Roman Catholic if they don't follow the teachings of the Roman Catholic church?

Mellor

smacl wrote: »

So what exactly distinguishes someone as being a Roman Catholic if they don't follow the teachings of the Roman Catholic church?

I notice you edited out the part where I highlighted your hypocrisy.

If somebody wants to identify as Roman Catholic. That's fine with me. I could care less how rigidly somebody follow the "rules". That's their business.

eviltwin

The numbers are just one part of it. Church attendees are another. I was reading in the indo at the weekend how in some parts of Dublin attendance is just 3% and how an attendance of 17% is considered good. The church relies on donations and bums on seats. It can make what it wants from the census figures but if people aren't participating in the church they are in trouble. Weddings, christenings etc aren't enough to sustain it.

beauf

smacl wrote: »

So what exactly distinguishes someone as being a Roman Catholic if they don't follow the teachings of the Roman Catholic church?

Technically it not possible to leave once baptized.

However that's really of no interest to anyone. All we're really want to know if someone wants to be classified as RC. The Census serves its purpose in that regard.

TBH though removing religion from state schools should have nothing to do with the census data. Really if you want what to happen, you should stop fixating on the how many RC there are, and concentrate that the functions of state and public education should disconnected from any religion.

looksee

beauf wrote: »

Technically it not possible to leave once baptized.

However that's really of no interest to anyone. All we're really want to know if someone wants to be classified as RC. The Census serves its purpose in that regard.

TBH though removing religion from state schools should have nothing to do with the census data. Really if you want what to happen, you should stop fixating on the how many RC there are, and concentrate that the functions of state and public education should disconnected from any religion.

We have heard over and over that the majority of the country is Catholic and therefore the school system should represent the preferences of the majority. How can we argue against this unless we show that there are not as many Catholics as is being suggested?

beauf

eviltwin wrote: »

The numbers are just one part of it. Church attendees are another. I was reading in the indo at the weekend how in some parts of Dublin attendance is just 3% and how an attendance of 17% is considered good. The church relies on donations and bums on seats. It can make what it wants from the census figures but if people aren't participating in the church they are in trouble. Weddings, christenings etc aren't enough to sustain it.

You lost me at indo.

infogiver

smacl wrote: »

Clarification. To describe someone as a Roman Catholic implies that they are guided by the teachings of the Roman Catholic church. Irish Catholics clearly are not so the description needs some qualification.

But why does it need to be qualified? Why do you feel that other people need to explain themselves to you?
do you feel that you need to explain your lack of belief to others?
Do other people regularly demand that you explain yourself?

beauf

looksee wrote: »

We have heard over and over that the majority of the country is Catholic and therefore the school system should represent the preferences of the majority. How can we argue against this unless we show that there are not as many Catholics as is being suggested?

By using the example of other countries where religion is separated from the state schools. Regardless of the how popular any religion is.

smacl

Mellor wrote: »

If somebody wants to identify as Roman Catholic. That's fine with me. I could care less how rigidly somebody follow the "rules". That's their business.

How people self identify is clearly their own concern. If however someone was to suggest that the Roman Catholic church should be allowed maintain state sponsored patronage of 73% of our schools for example, on the basis of the population being 73% Roman Catholic, as is very commonly the case, I'd say it is a nonsense. The reason being there is nothing to indicate that these self identified Catholics are not also secularists who might prefer a more secular education system. We don't know this because it is not asked on the census. Certainly Christians on this forum would appear to favour secularism, and the relative over subscription of secular schools versus Catholic schools would seem to confirm this as a broader trend, but given the layout of the census we don't know whether this is the case or not. At the same time, given the national debate on the baptism barrier this is certainly information we would like to have, so why not collect it?

smacl

looksee wrote: »

We have heard over and over that the majority of the country is Catholic and therefore the school system should represent the preferences of the majority. How can we argue against this unless we show that there are not as many Catholics as is being suggested?

If we want to know whether Irish people want the church to run our schools what better way than to ask the Irish people whether they want the church to run our schools? Too easy to confuse religious belief with secular preference.

looksee

beauf wrote: »

By using the example of other countries where religion is separated from the state schools. Regardless of the how popular any religion is.

How does that reply answer my question?

smacl

beauf wrote: »

However that's really of no interest to anyone. All we're really want to know if someone wants to be classified as RC. The Census serves its purpose in that regard.

So what's the value of this statistic and do you think it has a role to play in any decision making at a national level?

infogiver

eviltwin wrote: »

The numbers are just one part of it. Church attendees are another. I was reading in the indo at the weekend how in some parts of Dublin attendance is just 3% and how an attendance of 17% is considered good. The church relies on donations and bums on seats. It can make what it wants from the census figures but if people aren't participating in the church they are in trouble. Weddings, christenings etc aren't enough to sustain it.

Don't know what you mean by "in trouble".
If the church cant afford to keep buildings of worship open because the maintenance of them is too expensive, then they will just close them and possibly sell them, demolish them sell the land, who knows.
What difference this could make to anyone outside of the church, or how it would even be of any interest to anyone is a mystery to me.
its highly unlikely that the church attendance will ever reach 0 in Ireland.
I live in largish rural town with a large cathedral that is busy all day with 2 fairly well attended masses on weekdays, lots of people calling to say a prayer, light a candle, have a nap, have a cry, pass some time with a small grandchild, arrange flowers, clean, use the toilet, speak to the sacristan, visit the Easter garden, the crib at Christmas, look at pictures of communion and confirmation children who they may know or who may be related to them, sit in front of the exposition of the blessed sacrament.
too many churches were built in Dublin by ego centric bishops who were determined to leave a mark and a lot of them will have to go.

smacl

infogiver wrote: »

Don't know what you mean by "in trouble".
If the church cant afford to keep buildings of worship open because the maintenance of them is too expensive, then they will just close them and possibly sell them, demolish them sell the land, who knows.
What difference this could make to anyone outside of the church, or how it would even be of any interest to anyone is a mystery to me.

Maybe the orders involved could even use the proceeds to pay of some of their long outstanding debts to the state? :rolleyes:

infogiver

smacl wrote: »

How people self identify is clearly their own concern. If however someone was to suggest that the Roman Catholic church should be allowed maintain state sponsored patronage of 73% of our schools for example, on the basis of the population being 73% Roman Catholic, as is very commonly the case, I'd say it is a nonsense. The reason being there is nothing to indicate that these self identified Catholics are not also secularists who might prefer a more secular education system. We don't know this because it is not asked on the census. Certainly Christians on this forum would appear to favour secularism, and the relative over subscription of secular schools versus Catholic schools would seem to confirm this as a broader trend, but given the layout of the census we don't know whether this is the case or not. At the same time, given the national debate on the baptism barrier this is certainly information we would like to have, so why not collect it?

if parents are unhappy with the way the schools are run then why don't they organise and lobby the government to change the way the schools are run?
The anti water movement had no problem mobilising 100,000 protestors, a far more important issue such as the education of our children should bring out far more then that, if, as you seem to think, there is widespread dissatisfaction. I'm amazed really.
If they are unhappy with how the schools are run then the parents council in each school should be dealing with constant objections, no?

infogiver

smacl wrote: »

Maybe the orders involved could even use the proceeds to pay of some of their long outstanding debts to the state? :rolleyes:

Absolutely they could I don't see why not, that's got nothing to do with me really.

Mellor

smacl wrote: »

How people self identify is clearly their own concern. If however someone was to suggest that the Roman Catholic church should be allowed maintain state sponsored patronage of 73% of our schools for example, on the basis of the population being 73% Roman Catholic, as is very commonly the case, I'd say it is a nonsense. The reason being there is nothing to indicate that these self identified Catholics are not also secularists who might prefer a more secular education system. We don't know this because it is not asked on the census. Certainly Christians on this forum would appear to favour secularism, and the relative over subscription of secular schools versus Catholic schools would seem to confirm this as a broader trend, but given the layout of the census we don't know whether this is the case or not. At the same time, given the national debate on the baptism barrier this is certainly information we would like to have, so why not collect it?

Well the church control on the school system isn't based on the census data. It's not like the leasehold is based on maintaining a two-thirds majority.
Also, they link is arguing that we need more non-domination schools, literally the opposite of what your suggesting.

And, how does qualifying how many times a real catholic goes to mass give us any information about their opinions on how schools should be run. It's completely unrelated tbh.
It really just looks like thinly veiled pop at religion. It baffles me why atheist would care.

beauf

smacl wrote: »

So what's the value of this statistic and do you think it has a role to play in any decision making at a national level?

None.

No.

Which is why you shouldn't seek to associate the census data with the ethos and patronage of State schools.

beauf

looksee wrote: »

How does that reply answer my question?

Because we should be looking at the 'best practice' elsewhere.

By fixating at the RC numbers you're really stuck in a 1950's mindset.