nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Was Catholic Ireland better than Modern Ireland?

Asus X540L

Hardly any crime(Dublin went from having the lowest murder rate for a capital city in Europe to one of the highest during the Tiger), no African gangs terrorizing North Dublin, women not going around dressed like prossies.

A real sense of community. Ok most people didn't have fancy goods but everyone had a roof over their heads and never went hungry unlike today.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

ancapailldorcha

One eyed Jack wrote: »

They could if they were to ignore what they don't see as any of the negative aspects of society then when comparing it to all the negative aspects of society today. In the same way, anyone who would argue that todays society is better has to ignore what they don't see as all the negative aspects of society today when comparing it to society as it was then.

I would suggest that there's a mixture of both good and bad aspects to society in both periods, but I really don't think Irish society and social attitudes really have changed all that much at all.

Which positive aspects from back then don't exist today if Irish society hasn't really changed? I honestly can't think of a single thing from back then that's superior than the modern equivalent.

[Deleted User]

Some aspects of modern society are better today, I doubt morally but economically perhaps. The suicide rates are far higher today which is worrying and certainly does not reflect a better Ireland !

This end of the country back in My Parents Childhood, people, both Men and Women were quiet poor, worked slave labour for local Farmers tinning beat etc. No running water, no electricity, and my Grandparents were worse off again.

Rabbit was a popular dish and nettle soup.

Most Clergy members were and are decent people with a fraction of them abusers, the cover up was wrong but the facts remain, if it were not for the Church there'd have been no schools, the Government had no money at the time to educate people and it suited them not to have the burden of education.

The only people that would have got an education at the time only for the Church would have been the Sons and Daughters of farmers, Guards and Teachers , certainly this would have been the case in this end of the country.

Mother and baby homes were set up to take the children who's parents threw them out on the street. This was the responsibility of the Parents not the Church, when people talk about Mother and baby homes they should talk about the Mothers and fathers that threw the young Women out on the street.

The fact remains, most Children abused are abused by Family members , in fact, most abuse occurs in the home.

If we're talking about abuse then look at what goes on in old folks homes across Ireland today.

So is Ireland a better place today ? not really it's just our perception of what's better that has changed but some things are better the fact you got running water and electricity and food and "most" people got a roof over their heads.

A lot worse things happened to Ireland, the British being one. The atrocities and Genocide carried out by the British was far far worse. Yes we've moved on from this but I'm just putting things in perspective.

The likes of the property crises today is no joke and property prices are far too high , the state should not ever have to support any working person , a working person should not be forced into social housing . Property developers and land owners should be ashamed and people charging high rents. This is one of the most disgusting things now in our time.

ancapailldorcha

Deleted User wrote: »

My father managed it.

You know how? He just didn't bother going to Church and had no great time for it all. As did many people. He wasn't seething with anger about it, or banging on about cults and indoctrination, it wasn't obligatory to be a practising Catholic, and it wasn't for him.

And for the people who weren't so lucky? Kids taken from single parents and abused?

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

Deleted User wrote: »

My father managed it.

You know how? He just didn't bother going to Church and had no great time for it all. As did many people. He wasn't seething with anger about it, or banging on about cults and indoctrination, it wasn't obligatory to be a practising Catholic, and it wasn't for him.

So I suppose he found non religious hospitals and schools for his family?

seamus

Deleted User wrote: »

Still, it only took a single income to buy a house in Dublin; nowadays two people must work to pay for the exact same house. Not exactly advancement by any definition. For some reason people can overlook that massive infringement on our personal freedom in 2018.

I do think this is quite overstated as some new or unique phenomenon.

My Dad bought the house I grew up in on a single salary, I think he paid £30,000 in the late 70's.

His own father thought that he was off his rocker spending that much on a house; that he'd be paying it off until he retired.

I have no doubt that the increased spending power of dual incomes have inflated property prices to a certain extent, but to pretend that the prices our parents paid for their properties was reasonable or more affordable is falling victim to the same old rose-tinted fallacy.

Our children will be amazed at how cheap our houses were and we'll nearly choke at the prices that they're paying.

Elemonator

Statistically, Ireland is a lot safer today than it was back then. Less god fearing people around now however, that may play a part. The advent of social media and the internet has certainly played a part in people being aware of what news is going on around them however.

.......

This post has been deleted.

[Deleted User]

Elemonator wrote: »

Statistically, Ireland is a lot safer today than it was back then. Less god fearing people around now however, that may play a part. The advent of social media and the internet has certainly played a part in people being aware of what news is going on around them however.

Social media is a joke and causing terrible depression among younger people.

.......

This post has been deleted.

eviltwin

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Still, it only took a single income to buy a house in Dublin; nowadays two people must work to pay for the exact same house. Not exactly advancement by any definition. For some reason people can overlook that massive infringement on our personal freedom in 2018..

Not so. Myself and my husband bought our house in Dublin 15 years ago and we can cover it on one wage. We both work because we want to.

[Deleted User]

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

And for the people who weren't so lucky? Kids taken from single parents and abused?

Attitudes towards the elderly have changed, the sick, the less well off, homelessness has rocketed, we have no Church charities to fall back on, we have commodified care, no one will look out for anyone else now unless they are paid X amount per hour and allowed Y hours of a break from the old coot, the days when neighbours looked out for one another as a matter of course are over.

So for all people who "aren't so lucky", not sure things have really improved. But there is far more opprobrium of child abuse, far more willingness to out abusers from priests to sports coaches, and that is certainly welcome.

.......

This post has been deleted.

[Deleted User]

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Don't put words in my mouth !

That's a load of crap !

"the Church did it" LOL, Mothers and fathers were quiet happy to throw their daughters on the street after a good O'l beating so as not to shame them in the local community. These people were part of the church, without the people there would have been no Church. Everyone was responsible !

Sonics2k

Deleted User wrote: »

Still, it only took a single income to buy a house in Dublin; nowadays two people must work to pay for the exact same house. Not exactly advancement by any definition. For some reason people can overlook that massive infringement on our personal freedom in 2018.

Yeah, but the Catholic Church had literally no impact on that system back then. In fact that system was incredibly common, but it had nothing to do with the Church.

ancapailldorcha

Deleted User wrote: »

Attitudes towards the elderly have changed, the sick, the less well off, homelessness has rocketed, we have no Church charities to fall back on, we have commodified care, no one will look out for anyone else now unless they are paid X amount per hour and allowed Y hours of a break from the old coot, the days when neighbours looked out for one another as a matter of course are over.

How exactly have attitudes changed? As for homeslessness, it's probably always been there but the way of measuring it has changed. Is there a reason that non-Church charities can't do anything about it?

[Deleted User]

Duffy the Vampire Slayer wrote: »

So I suppose he found non religious hospitals and schools for his family?

Oh no, we went to Catholic hospitals...but are you seriously saying the health system (as opposed to medicine or advances in health care) has improved? I think many would have them back in a heartbeat.

We went to Catholic schools too. And guess what? We turned out to be pretty cynical about it all. No indoctrination, no brainwashing, no cult.

[Deleted User]

People should bear in mind that the Church was made up of ordinary Men and Women from "normal" homes, usually the Sons and Daughters of the pillars of the community, the Teacher, the Doctor, the Farmer !

aidoh

Asus X540L wrote: »

Hardly any crime(Dublin went from having the lowest murder rate for a capital city in Europe to one of the highest during the Tiger), no African gangs terrorizing North Dublin, women not going around dressed like prossies.

A real sense of community. Ok most people didn't have fancy goods but everyone had a roof over their heads and never went hungry unlike today.

Probably shouldn't bother but I'll bite:

1. Hardly any crime my arse! Institutional physical and sexual violence against children, women covered up by the Church and Gardaí for the guts of a century not a crime in your eyes? Constant sectarian bombings in (mostly) Northern Ireland not a crime?

2. African gangs? As a lifelong northside Dub I've no idea what you're referring to.

3. What some women (or anyone else) choose to wear is none of your business

4. Sense of community. Yeah sure, at best people were spied on for going to LOI matches and had their names read out in mass so they'd be shamed by the community for not being "Gaelic enough". At worst people were effectively imprisoned for either having sex outside of marriage, or sometimes just for being too pretty. And the rest of the good old community turned a blind eye for fear of also being shunned by the community.

Clearly it wasn't all bad, and I intentionally only highlighted some of the issues that I find more repulsive to rebut your points. There are good things I could mention and there are a lot of much worse things I could've also bentioned but for God's sake, Ireland really sounds like it was a lot more of a sh!thole before the 80s than it is today.

BarryD2

Deleted User wrote: »

My father managed it.

You know how? He just didn't bother going to Church and had no great time for it all. As did many people. He wasn't seething with anger about it, or banging on about cults and indoctrination, it wasn't obligatory to be a practising Catholic, and it wasn't for him.

Well he likely went along to some extent. Were you baptised and confirmed etc.? Still difficult in many parts to participate with education services here without at least going along with the basic ceremonies.

[Deleted User]

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

How exactly have attitudes changed?

I think of the days when many people simply took in elderly relatives or neighbours, it wasn't avoided, it wasn't a job or a chore, it was just done because it was right to do so. Most people regard it as a job now. People actually engaged with their neighbours, called to them, looked out for them.

ancapailldorcha

Deleted User wrote: »

I think of the days when many people simply took in elderly relatives or neighbours, it wasn't avoided, it wasn't a job or a chore, it was just done because it was right to do so. Most people regard it as a job now. People actually engaged with their neighbours, called to them, looked out for them.

People still call over to their neighbours and look after the elderly. I've seen no signs of what you're talking about. There's also the fact that people are living longer and healthier lives largely abnegating the need to be taken in by a family member.

[Deleted User]

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I've seen no signs of what you're talking about.

None?

You've never heard of carers and how many billions we now pay for a task that was done out of a sense of duty and morality in decades gone by?

[Deleted User]

seamus wrote: »

I do think this is quite overstated as some new or unique phenomenon.

My Dad bought the house I grew up in on a single salary, I think he paid £30,000 in the late 70's.

His own father thought that he was off his rocker spending that much on a house; that he'd be paying it off until he retired.

I have no doubt that the increased spending power of dual incomes have inflated property prices to a certain extent, but to pretend that the prices our parents paid for their properties was reasonable or more affordable is falling victim to the same old rose-tinted fallacy.

Our children will be amazed at how cheap our houses were and we'll nearly choke at the prices that they're paying.

How much was he earning?

Trying to deny that two salaries are now necessary is hilarious. My parents could have bought an almost-new 3-bedroom house in the late 70s for roughly their combined annual income in low-skilled jobs. That doesn't apply these days.

One eyed Jack

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Do you think the result of the marriage equality referendum could have happened 20 years ago?

I'd have to agree with you on that one, I don't think it could have happened 20 years ago, but I also think that the RCC then provided a 'safe haven' so to speak for men and women who were gay and lesbian who wanted to avoid the social pressures of having to be married off to increase the family's social status.

Both the priesthood and to a similar but lesser extent the sisterhood were revered in Irish society in a way they aren't today, so both gay men and women gained status in society above even the ordinary heterosexual family status setup, and their sexual identity as members of the clergy or as members of the sisterhood were never openly questioned, but rather whispered about in hushed acknowledgements.

Quite similar in a way to which the sudden disappearance of 'fallen women' (as they were viewed at the time) was 'conveniently' explained away by suggesting to the neighbours that their daughters had 'found their calling' and joined the Convent, as this was viewed in society as something virtuous, something to boast to the neighbours about.

I can remember times even in the 90's when young girls were threatened with being sent to the Convent if they were ever to 'bring shame upon the family', so in that respect, no, I couldn't see marriage equality ever being considered.

Now that's not to say things were all bad 20, even 30 years ago either for gay and lesbian women, and I remember notorious spots in Dublin like the Baggot Inn, and celebrities like Mr. Pussy, long before Panti Bliss was ever on the scene -

Life was a drag in 1970's Dublin: Before Panti there was Mr. Pussy

Who also made regular appearances on RTE television (which I was never allowed watch as a child apart from when my parents would switch on the TV to catch the news and nuacht and then turn it off again :pac:)

One eyed Jack

....... wrote: »

You must be living in a different country to me then. Or else your own attitudes reflect the past so strongly that you think nothing has changed.

Because from where I sit I can see that attitudes towards women have changed dramatically (although I know you still wish to subjugate them)...

In every way above Irish society has changed.

Whatever... :pac:

ancapailldorcha

Deleted User wrote: »

None?

You've never heard of carers and how many billions we now pay for a task that was done out of a sense of duty and morality in decades gone by?

There's no need to be condescending. Old age isn't what it was. You now have how many elderly people with dementia needing a lot more care than most working people can provide, ie round-the-clock care. It's a bit simplistic to blame the younger generation for this given that the amount of work involved has increased substantially.

SEPT 23 1989

[Deleted User]

Whether life is "better" now than in the past (not specifically Catholic Ireland) is a much much more complex question than people seem to acknowledge. Not everything about nowadays is automatically better just because it is associated with nowadays, even if there are many features of nowadays over the past which are inherently better eg. absolute poverty much rarer, children beaten less etc. When material needs are taken care of the mind automatically concerns itself with higher-order needs like social needs which can be more complicated to satisfy and sometimes not possible to.

Odhinn

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Something got lost along the way all right.

Mass child abuse, horrific hypocrisy, vast amounts of poverty, misery and suffering, marginalisation of women, children, men......

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

You would worry about the moral fabric of modern Ireland.

Aye, god be with the days you could earn a few pennys for a bumming off Father Feely, while the local garda kept sketch.

One eyed Jack

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Which positive aspects from back then don't exist today if Irish society hasn't really changed? I honestly can't think of a single thing from back then that's superior than the modern equivalent.

It would completely depend upon your perspective as to what you might see as positive and negative aspects then vs. today and I don't think there's any objective way to measure that which doesn't fall into the trap of subjective moral relativism.