Decoration problem at Loughlinstown (St Colmcille's) hospital

Boulevardier

Recently a friend of mine, a Bray-based artist, arranged with the management of Loughlinstown Hospital to put up pictures of angels on some corridors in order to releive what some would see as very dull and spartan wall decoration.

The pictures in question were all reproductions of well-known classical (Botticelli, Fra Angelico, etc.) depictions of angels.

However, within a few days there was an "outcry" within the hospital, and management caved into pressure to remove the pictures. The fact that angels are accepted in Islam and in non-Catholic Christianity was to no avail. They had to go. Some pre-existing religious pictures were left up.

This seems to me like it may be an instance of a rather blinkered faux-secular philistinism.

ted1

Unfortunately that’s the society we now live in. People get offended quite easily.

Kingp35

I'm a staunch Atheist but I see no issue what having paintings of Angels etc. in hospitals as it may give patients hope and comfort. Ridiculous they were removed, especially considering they have othe religious pictures on the walls.

schemingbohemia

It's a State funded hospital, it should not have any religious decoration at all, angels, saints, crucifixes or anything else.

Boulevardier

But they still have several religious images. Why are they still there and not the angels?

ted1

schemingbohemia wrote: »

It's a State funded hospital, it should not have any religious decoration at all, angels, saints, crucifixes or anything else.

Often when people are sick , having some faith helps. If you don’t believe in religion what difference do the pictures make ?

I’d have no problem with any faith putting up pictures that give hope. I’d walk past them as if they are the female toilets I.e I know that they are there put they are if no use to me.


Also would the name of the hospital not imply it’s religious origins

coylemj

ted1 wrote: »

Often when people are sick , having some faith helps. If you don’t believe in religion what difference do the pictures make ?

I doubt if one of the patients complained, it was most likely a member of staff.

Aggressive secularism is the flavour of the month, any new images with a religious bent will probably get the same reaction in any public building.

I'm not in the least bit religious myself but was taken aback recently when I listened to an interview by Mary Wilson on RTE's Drivetime. She was talking to some priest about the forthcoming visit of the Pope to Ireland and the sneering attitude she adopted was pretty appalling.

That said, I agree with poster schemingbohemia (post #4) that there should be no religious images or statues in public hospitals. Of course the reason most of them are there is because a lot of the hospitals were founded by religious orders but as 100% of their funding now comes from the HSE, they should have all those images and statutes removed.

There was a program on RTE TV back in the 1970s about religious minorities in the Republic. Several members of the Protestant community who were interviewed went to great lengths to stress that, despite the claims of the likes of Ian Paisley and his ilk, they were not an oppressed minority and lived in harmony with their (mostly) Catholic neighbours. When pressed to state what they would change if they had a choice, one of them said that the large number of religious images and statues in public buildings was of concern, clearly they saw it as a daily reminder of who was in the majority.

ectoraige

Boulevardier wrote: »

But they still have several religious images. Why are they still there and not the angels?

Maybe they just felt that depictions of dead people might not fit in with the idea of people getting better.

gctest50

Boulevardier wrote: »

......

This seems to me like it may be an instance of a rather blinkered faux-secular philistinism.

Occams razor :


Maybe they were just sh!te, they were too polite to say and this is how they dealt with it - forever


Anyway they're just copies

and who knows what an angel would look like anyway ?

Larbre34

Religious / social fora type stuff?

rubadub

ted1 wrote: »

If you don’t believe in religion what difference do the pictures make ?

Depends on where the money came from to pay for these. It's a public hospital.

I am not surprised at the reaction at all, only surprise here is the morons who did not have the foresight to see it happening, and investigate potential reactions before going ahead with.

ted1

rubadub wrote: »

ted1 wrote: »

If you don’t believe in religion what difference do the pictures make ?

Depends on where the money came from to pay for these. It's a public hospital.

I am not surprised at the reaction at all, only surprise here is the morons who did not have the foresight to see it happening, and investigate potential reactions before going ahead with.

Are you ok when the state paying for councilling sessions for patients? When people are ill they often turn to faith which gives them the courage to get through.

I see the two as the same and while I wouldn’t be particularly religious I’m open minded enough to know that other people are.

bucketybuck

Angels? In other words, those things people think they will see when they die?

Might as well have a few pics of the grim reaper as well, he is the angel of death after all...

Seriously, who the **** wants to look at angels when you are sick and in hospital?

coylemj

ted1 wrote: »

Are you ok when the state paying for councilling sessions for patients? When people are ill they often turn to faith which gives them the courage to get through.

Counselling is provided by trained lay (non-religious) counsellors and doesn't involve angels. Though I'm not sure if that type of support is provided in Loughlinstown which is a general hospital. Addiction centres and psychiatric hospitals certainly do provide counselling while faith-based counselling is provided by religious chaplains who are present in every hospital.

schemingbohemia

Without turning this into a discussion on the current referendum, do people not see the link between religious iconography in hospitals and staff taking decisions that place a priority on the potential life of a zygote or foetus rather than the mother?

coylemj

schemingbohemia wrote: »

Without turning this into a discussion on the current referendum, do people not see the link between religious iconography in hospitals and staff taking decisions that place a priority on the potential life of a zygote or foetus rather than the mother?

I'm seeing a variation of Godwin's Law * here..... any thread to do with religion will eventually veer towards a discussion on abortion and the referendum on the 8th amendment.

You don't want to turn the thread into a discussion on abortion and the referendum? Then just don't mention those subjects.

* As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Hitler approaches

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

Boulevardier

Well at least nobody has mentioned Nazis.

ted1

schemingbohemia wrote: »

Without turning this into a discussion on the current referendum, do people not see the link between religious iconography in hospitals and staff taking decisions that place a priority on the potential life of a zygote or foetus rather than the mother?

No ,

We have a prayer room at work to appease some staff but mainly Middle East clients who come over. We do not find that as a result the catering staff stop feeding us during Ramadan.

rubadub

ted1 wrote: »

Are you ok when the state paying for councilling sessions for patients? .

as long as it was widely accepted as beneficial and not a con or highly questionable treatment I would have little issue. e.g. if the sessions were tarot card reading I would have an issue. Even if they have a placebo effect I might be concerned.

I have no real issue with the angel crap, I was playing devils advocate in my previous comment, or maybe that should be varadkars advocate or some other despised secular term.

My main point was my disgust at the apparent idiocy of people involved to have not foreseen this issue. If I was the original artist commissioned to this I would have questioned it. It makes me sick to hear cop out comments like "oh hindsight is a great thing", which I suspect some idotic assholes with no reasonable foresight involved with this are now saying.

ted1 wrote: »

No ,

We have a prayer room at work to appease some staff but mainly Middle East clients who come over. We do not find that as a result the catering staff stop feeding us during Ramadan.

if your workplace was say a public library then I would also expect there would be objection to it having a prayer room. I could not care too much if mcdonalds decided to have a room to appease devil worshipers. But I might be concerned that it could lead to an increase in what I buy there, so would be aware, and monitoring burgerking to see if there prices were now relatively cheaper, due to not having to cave into the devil worshipers. They could well be more profitable by caving into the devil worshipers, resulting in lower prices across the board, in which case I would welcome the move.