So who's going to see the Pope?

AlanG wrote: »

The incompetence of the NTA kept a lot of people away - of 11 people who asked me to get them tickets online only 1 went once their their transport routes came through - People living in belville, 10 meters from Ashtown gate were been told to walk through the dunard gate - an 5km detour. Those who wanted to cycle were told to park their bikes in Blanchardstown village - 5.5 KM from the site and further out than the ridiculous bus hubs. Meanwhile hundreds of acres that were used for Ed Sheerhan and could have been utilised as a bike / coach park in the Park itself were simply closed off. The whole orgaisation of the mass was a shambles and reflects very poorly on whoever was in charge.

Amen

Camila Famous Granule wrote: »

A roll-eyes emoticon? What a rebuttal.



The European Social Survey, published last November, found that 36 percent of Irish adults attend a religious service at least once a week.

If you believe the European Social Survey is "not really credible," feel free to make your case for why academics who devote their time to measuring attitudes, beliefs, and behavioural patterns across 30+ nations should not be viewed as "credible."

Well the census figures are self evidently not credible but whatever

The ESS is interesting - can you link to the section in the report itself rather than the homepage?

I'd be interested to see the source data, questions asked and of whom and how the results are broken down.

Camila Famous Granule wrote: »

Great. Have a look for it yourself, then. I'm not your research assistant.

Could you please back up your point with the data? FIND IT YOURSELF.
Very helpful :D

Avatar MIA wrote: »

No, but have you an interest in being credible?

This is after hours.

Harvard style proofs belong in the legal/debating forums thataway--->

Camila Famous Granule wrote: »

A less thesis-driven observer might look at numerous other metrics, such as the percentage of the Irish population identifying as Catholic (78 percent in Census 2016, or 3,729,100 people -- more than the entire population of Ireland in 1979)

Isn't that just more proof that the RCC is in a shambles? 3.7m people "identifying" as Catholic, yet just 3.5% of that figure came out for a once-in-a-lifetime event to celebrate with the deified head of their religion?

Gather together the 3 events and that's still only 7% of the reported # of Catholics in Ireland who came to witness the Pope. The planned and available capacity was 17.5% of the country's "Catholics".

And those numbers are assuming everyone only attended on a single a event and that the volume of foreign visitors was very low. Both of which are assumptions that can't be made.

So whatever figures you want to use, it's proof that the church in Ireland is in a terrible state. Less than a tenth of Irish Catholics came to see "God's representative on earth" - the highest and most celebration position in the church - and less than half of the capacity made available, was taken up.

or the percentage of Catholics attending weekly mass (around 35 percent, very high by European standards).

A: I would love to know your source for this figure because it matches up with nothing else.
B: "Very high by European standards" sounds really like someone desperately looking for something positive to say. 35% is about half of the attendance rate at the turn of the millenium.

If you genuinely believe that there are only 130,000 observant Catholics in Ireland to "carry the can" in 20 years' time, or that there will be no Catholics left in Ireland in 20 years, you really need to think again.

https://www.irishcatholic.com/young-irish-mass-attendance-still-remarkably-high-numbers-show/

Crunch the numbers here:
54% of 16-29 year olds claim to be Catholic
10% of these attend Mass weekly.

That's approx. 472,000 young people who claim to be catholic, and 47,200 who attend on a weekly basis.

Less than 50,000 young Irish people attend Mass weekly. If we assume they will remain to do so and all go on to have 3 children, who also attend weekly (lofty assumption), then in 20 years' time when the older generation are dead, you'll have 100,000 weekly attendees between the ages of 16 and 49 at Mass.

Sure, you might have the same figure again in the 49+ age bracket. But this cannot be spun as anything but a disastrous and immense decline for the RCC in Ireland.

Anyone claiming otherwise is the embodiment of comical Ali saying "Everything is fine" while tanks roll through the streets.

And tbh, I'm perfectly happy for the church to stick its fingers in its ears about this.

Trasna1 wrote: »

I never said there wasn't a count done, only that tickets weren't checked. They weren't, I was one of the scum there, as you said.

A count was done - using overhead radar like you'd see at a marathon, or other mass non-ticket events

It's immaterial how the count was done. There was a count done by emergency services, and that count is accurate.


I've already received moderator comment for, and corrected, the scum comment. I don't see the need for you to continue to refer to it, while it was not even on this thread. It's getting tedious now.
IN the interest of bringing your tedious tangent to an end, here are the related comments:

ELM327 wrote: »

Apologies.I'm just rather annoyed at those who can support such an organisation given that the head of it can continue to lie, from the lies about the mother and baby homes, to the fact a known paedophile cover up priest was in the cavalcade directly behind the pope yesterday.


What I was trying to say was that the RCC organisation is corrupt and they derive validation from the numbers who tick boxes or attend events.

Perhaps I could/should have worded my initial post a little clearer. Mea Culpa.

ELM327 wrote: »

I will not respect nonsense and bunkum tbh, but that doesn't mean it is acceptable to insult people because of it. Hence why I have apologised for the comment.


There's a big difference between respecting someone's beliefs and respecting their right to hold those beliefs.


I will do the latter begrudgingly but not the former.