1000's of kids making their communion today

robindch wrote: »

Last time I checked, the RCC was organizing the general form of the main day itself, plus insisting that it was necessary, and via the RCC's control of over 90% of the country's primary school network, was also insisting that school kids waste an average of 2.5 hours per week which could be used to educate kids, but was instead spent with the teacher trying to persuade gullible children that the RCC's preposterous religious stories are actually true.

But no child has to participate in first Eucharist preparation or confession prep or actually get their first Eucharist unless the parent actually wants them too.
You do know that children of other faiths and no faith are not only not forced, but not permitted to get first Eucharist?
And I’ve given you a link to what happened in even one parish when the RCC tried to do away with organizing the “main day” as you call it but you didn’t read the article.
Your trying to pretend that the RCC are frogmarching families into the church, when you actually know that that’s not true.
If catholic parents do want to have catholic children then they must be baptized and when their ready, get the sacraments of first Eucharist and confirmation.
But that’s entirely voluntary, and so is the dressing up and the party and the gifts, and if the catholic schools and the local clergy want to facilitate that wish for the parents then I really can’t understand what business it is of anyone else?
Can you explain specifically what your objection is?

smacl wrote: »

No idea about other people, but I find it worrying that an important mechanism used by the major religion, that runs the larger part of our school system, perpetuates their religion is by agreeing and even encouraging the parents of young children to use bribery to get them to take part. As a religion, why is Catholicism in this country promoting greed in vulnerable young people for its own ends? Surely that is contrary to fundamental Christian tenets.

I’ve already said that the children actually being put forward for first Eucharist, and the style in which they get the sacrament of first Eucharist is entirely in the control of the parents.
Where have you seen a priest encouraging bribery??!?
The parents voluntarily bring their children forward for sacraments.
The parents voluntarily make all the unnecessary purchases and arrangements for parties etc for the day.
The friends and family and neighbors voluntarily fill cards with money.
Millions of children all over the world make their first Eucharist with none of these trappings.
The school and the church are in control of none of these things.
Please tell me in what aspect you see the church “promoting greed”?

smacl wrote: »

By virtue of the simple fact that they condone and openly preside over this wanton excess. One might think that the true Christian spirit would emphasize donating this excess wealth to the needy rather than spoiling young children but apparently not. Give the kids a day to remember so that they'll give their kids a day to remember and this self serving cycle of greed can grow and perpetuate itself seems more the case. That it serves the churches interest and they do nothing to stem it is blindingly obvious.

I posted an article pointing out what happened in Carlow when the parish tried to tell the parents that they weren’t going to do it any more.
But you’re not interested and I know that you’re totally frustrated by the vast volumes of people still bringing children to communion, year in year out but that’s entirely their choice as yours is not to have anything to do with it.
If your waiting for the RCC to die I wouldn’t hold my breath if I were you.
A religious statue on church property in our town has been vandalized this week and the whole town is totally outraged.
Our large Syrian population are horrified and were on local radio today offering to contribute to the restoration.
I don’t have to tell you that nothing will encourage Christians as much as persecuting them. Because you know that already.

splinter65 wrote: »

But no child has to participate in first Eucharist preparation or confession prep or actually get their first Eucharist unless the parent actually wants them too.
You do know that children of other faiths and no faith are not only not forced, but not permitted to get first Eucharist?
And I’ve given you a link to what happened in even one parish when the RCC tried to do away with organizing the “main day” as you call it but you didn’t read the article.
Your trying to pretend that the RCC are frogmarching families into the church, when you actually know that that’s not true.
If catholic parents do want to have catholic children then they must be baptized and when their ready, get the sacraments of first Eucharist and confirmation.
But that’s entirely voluntary, and so is the dressing up and the party and the gifts, and if the catholic schools and the local clergy want to facilitate that wish for the parents then I really can’t understand what business it is of anyone else?
Can you explain specifically what your objection is?

You do know that kids not making their communion/confirmation are usually shoved in the corner or another classroom while their teacher wastes 2.5 hours per week preparing for communion/confirmation. If it was the children making their communion/confirmation that left the class with a different teacher then I'd sday your argument has a point.

The funny thing about the Communion in carlow was that the majority of the parents had never graced the door of the church before. Too interested in the keeping up the Jones and the inevitable piss up

splinter65 wrote: »

The majority of the Catholic children sent to the catholic school by their catholic parents would be expecting to get catholic sacrament instruction.
If the parents of the minority children not getting instruction are upset then why do they not make more of a fuss?
The Muslim children don’t join in any music or entertainment either as well as and they are all excelling and very happy.

I agree with the premise of your first point but it caused conflict with the overwhelming majority of schools being catholic owned but public funded. Most people don't have the option of sending their child to a non-catholic school. The teachers are paid by the state they shouldn't be involved in preparing for religious sacrements.


Makning a fuss in a school is often much more trouble than it's worth. Teachers will on occasion gang up on children of problem parents. This is of even more importance now that teachers will be grading a % of their own students state exam material.

eviltwin wrote: »

My objection is the amount of time allocated to FHC preparation during the school day.

I noticed when my youngest was in 2nd class a lot more art and project work coming home. He's in an ET so there's no time spent on sacrements but because Catholic schools are doing them his school had to fill the time with other stuff so as not to be at an advantage.

It seems ridiculous and while I've no objection to the kids doing non curriculum things, it seems unfair to expect other schools to deny students access to lessons they may need or benefit from

FAKE NEWS - Again more sh*te talk. This s simply not true. Schools ALL have the same curriculum to get through.

They don't have to "fill" any time - most teachers are under pressure to get the curriculum covered- they certainly aren't waiting for other teachers to get other stuff done

eviltwin wrote: »

My objection is the amount of time allocated to FHC preparation during the school day.

I noticed when my youngest was in 2nd class a lot more art and project work coming home. He's in an ET so there's no time spent on sacrements but because Catholic schools are doing them his school had to fill the time with other stuff so as not to be at an advantage.

It seems ridiculous and while I've no objection to the kids doing non curriculum things, it seems unfair to expect other schools to deny students access to lessons they may need or benefit from

Where on earth did you hear this? That’s just nonsense!

GarIT wrote: »

I've found that the people who shout loudest about fake news are always the ones spouting it. Try to be a grown up and engage in a discussion without resorting to throwing a tantrum like a spoiled child

I've engaged quite clearly where there is a repeated ridiculous claim. unlike yourself where you haven't articulated where I'm spoutng fake news.

Tiana Silly Caterpillar wrote: »

Catholic Communion is the act of consuming the physical blood and body of a man who died 2000 years ago. The bread and wine are transformed into that by the priest.

............

Cannabilism then ? amazing they don't hold their hands up to the sky too

splinter65 wrote: »

You do know that children of other faiths and no faith are not only not forced, but not permitted to get first Eucharist?

Most of the children doing it would not have any actual religious belief. I doubt that most of their parents would, either...

Your trying to pretend that the RCC are frogmarching families into the church, when you actually know that that’s not true.

They're pushing this ridiculous event as the norm in over 90% of state funded primary schools, and wasting a great deal of the time of teachers and pupils promoting utter nonsense.

But that’s entirely voluntary, and so is the dressing up and the party and the gifts, and if the catholic schools and the local clergy want to facilitate that wish for the parents then I really can’t understand what business it is of anyone else?

Putting non-catholic parents in the position of having to explain to their child why he or she isn't getting a party and loads of money like their friends are...

Like everything else in relation to religious instruction, it has no place in schools. Let the parents and the parishes facilitate it outside of school if they want.

Wow, it's almost as if the non-theistic festivals of the solar cycle which were appropriated by christianity for their own ends are returning to their original meaning...

magicbastarder wrote: »

i'm just jealous of kids these days. i got i think £57 for my communion and £78 for my confirmation (the communion would have been 1983).
i must work out how that much is with inflation taken into account.

I must be almost exactly the same age as you, and apart from literally a few pounds I was allowed spend at the time in both instances, I was made save the rest. I got a £20 savings certificate after my communion and a £50 one after my confirmation (a couple of years later the first was cashed in towards a 16K Sinclair Spectrum and a while later the second was cashed in towards a B/W TV to use it on)

I can remember the uncle who was the richest member of either extended family by a very long way, a director of a large and very profitable company, giving me £2! I'm sure my other cousins got way more than that, but my mother made the mistake of marrying the wrong sort and my uncle perhaps forgot that while the house he grew up in may have been in Dublin 4, it had an outside toilet.

My classmates who had very large (and less tight fisted, perhaps) extended families made multiples of what I got.

Not that I'm bitter about it or anything.

Can't remember offhand who the presiding bish was at my confo bash, but he was definitely named in that report on the Dublin diocese, not for what he had done but for what he had failed to do. (cue long-repressed mind-refrain of "and I ask the blessed Mary, ever virgin, all the angels and saints..." :eek: )

Can opened, worms everywhere :pac:

I was going to edit one of the previous posts to say how unfair it was that I got much less money than some classmates who clearly didn't take it seriously - while I took it seriously or so I thought.

But.. but.. but... maybe "taking it seriously" even then was just going along with it for the cash. I went to a junior primary run by nuns, but we had to stay back after the normal school day for communion classes in the period leading up to it - (yet, in the last days the actual wafer swallowing practice was done during the school day) - this 'detention' was unpopular with me so my mother said there'd be a treat in it for me - and she bought me a blue plastic cap-gun. I didn't ask for a cap gun, and tbh I'd have rather been spared hanging around nuns a minute more than necessary, but even then the bizarreness of that reward for that undertaking struck me as odd.

I hated the nuns (due mainly to the violence and injustice they routinely dished out) so having to spend more time with a nun after going home time was a cruel and unusual punishment!

The gun may have been after my mother tried giving me a prayer book and working on me that way :pac:

For all I know, she probably went to a priest and was told some guff along the lines of "The questioning child... their inquisitiveness must be encouraged, but in the right way... if they need to be given an incentive to overcome their resistance then it is all in the greater good.. etc"

Blue plastic cap guns tho.

Everybody knew the good cap guns were DIE-CAST made out of metal, had "Lone Star" cast into the side and when my dad was having a row with my mother and wanted to curry favour with us kids that's what he bought me.

This sort of parental behaviour on both sides may have caused some issues ...and the blue plastic cap-gun always had a certain unpleasant memory associated with it, the long-barrelled green metal one another. They both thought they were buying me something that would make me happy, but all either object did was remind me of the unhappy reasons they were trying to make me happy.

By the time of my confirmation the only time I'd heard the word 'atheist' was in a conversation involving the deceased owner of the local laundrette who supposedly had been one, he had gone to Ballymun flats and threw himself off the top. No church funeral anyway... so it looked like everyone thought that life without god was hopeless, but I'm pretty sure by then I didn't just doubt but not believe. Thanks to books outside of school I'd already known that Genesis was nonsense, can't say I was ever that impressed by the rest of it. I did resent having to do confirmation and if I'd been allowed to, I wouldn't have. I was still made wear a godawful suit on the day, and even worse, have the most godawful pictures taken later when we were made go into school dressed up like saps (except for the cool lads who had leather jackets) and stick our hands together and bow our heads for the tw@t photographer - I obtained release a few years later by taking all the prints and burning them in the back yard :pac: my mother never found out.

You can't help but look cute in a pic when you're 7 even if it's a religious occasion, but when you're an unconvinced 12 year old bowing your head and clasping your hands in an unconvinced gesture of faith, all while sporting a Steve Davis hairdo, you can't help but look like a twat :pac: