Catholic Ireland dead? **Mod Warning in Post #563**

So in my mind that catholic ireland is dead

Now at least I have a better understanding of what you meant earlier - that particular form of Catholic Ireland is dead. One of the ways though by which to address the issue of recruitment, and its acknowledged that it is by no means a long term solution, is to recruit men from abroad:

https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20190927-the-imported-priests-saving-irelands-ageing-clergy

There are simply more opportunities for young men in Ireland today than there were in the 60s and 70s which has contributed to the dramatic decline in young men joining the priesthood. Also contributing to this decline is the fact that the role of the priest in Irish society is not seen with the reverence and respect it once was, where priests were often in positions of authority, power and influence in their communities - a very attractive prospect for a young man with no prospects. Certainly when I was young in the 90s, I considered joining the priesthood, though not because I felt I’d been called by God, it had more to do with the idea that it seemed like a great way to meet women (Bishop Casey and Father Cleary were regularly featured on RTE television, for all the wrong reasons, much the opposite reason they were featured on RTE television in previous decades).

Little had I known at the time (and it wasn’t the only thing we now know the Hierarchy were in denial about), that the priesthood was also a ‘safe haven’ or a cover, as it were, for men who were expected to remain celibate throughout their lives, given that homosexual acts were illegal in Irish Law. It allowed such men to avoid not only prosecution, but persecution. Later, attempts were made to scapegoat such men as the cause of the abuse of young boys by members of the clergy, in spite of all evidence to the contrary. It was the access that was given to priests is the reason it became an attractive position for men who wanted to abuse young boys, and nothing whatsoever to do with anyone’s sexual orientation:

Study after study shows that homosexuality is not a predictor of child molestation. This is also true for priests, according to a famous study by John Jay College of Criminal Justice in the wake of revelations in 2002 about child sex abuse in the church. The John Jay research, which church leaders commissioned, found that same-sex experience did not make priests more likely to abuse minors, and that four out of five people who said they were victims were male. Researchers found no single cause for this abuse, but identified that abusive priests’ extensive access to boys had been critical to their choice of victims.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/17/us/it-is-not-a-closet-it-is-a-cage-gay-catholic-priests-speak-out.html

The priesthood now just doesn’t offer the same opportunities it once did to such men, which is also a contributing factor in the decline of the priesthood in Ireland.

The Roman Catholic Church in Ireland as a whole, has dramatically changed from what it once was, though the Catholic Faith remains relatively unchanged. It’s why there is such an apparent disconnect between the figures from the census, and the practice of what was once considered the embodiment of expression of the Catholic Church in Ireland with all its false humility and pietous preaching.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/the-faith-of-ireland-s-catholics-continues-despite-all-1.3592019

You’re trying to equate the recent referendums with Catholicism…you should maybe get down off the high horse before you hurt yourself.

Census figures show a decline in Catholic numbers, mass numbers are drastically down, shortage of nuns and priests.

Are you sure about your statement?

It’s not the dumbest conflation I’ve ever heard, considering the idea that according to census figures in 2022, there were over 3.5 million Catholics in Ireland, about 2 million of those eligible to vote, and we could say half of those turned out to vote, so that’s still 1 million Catholics of the total polled (1.5 million), with 2/3 of those polled voting against the proposed amendments.

The fact that the outcome of the referendums coincided with the Bishops appeals to vote no doesn’t mean however that people voting paid so much as a blind bit of notice to anything the Bishops had to say on the matter, it would just as easily be explained by Irish society’s pervasive attitude to unmarried mothers and their children being a burden on Irish society and the Welfare State:

Founder of One Family, Maura O’Dea Richards, said, “When we set up Cherish/One Family in October 1972 unmarried mothers were being ostracised in society and imprisoned in the laundries. Now 50 years later, it’s so sad to see these ridiculous attitudes to people parenting alone persist. A lot has changed in Ireland since 1972, and we now like to think of ourselves as a progressive forward-thinking country, but we still seem to have this blind spot about those parenting alone. It’s just not right and will continue until Ireland embraces all families. A good first start would be to change article 41.3 of the Constitution on the definition of the family.”

https://onefamily.ie/press-release-80-of-lone-parents-report-experiencing-stigma-or-judgemental-attitudes/

I’m not sure the outcome of the referendums would have been any different even if the Government hadn’t made a complete balls of the wording.

One thing I will say though is they really should allow priests to marry as there would be no shortage of priests then.

Church of England, which allows priests to marry (though marriage after divorce is not permitted), and allows women to be ordained, is seeing a similar shortage of vocations, so it ain’t about that:

https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/02/church-of-england-ageing-clergy-crisis

It’s a false equivalence to say (what the poster was trying to say, at least) that the no vote somehow aligned with being a Catholics standing to be heard.

There is no evidence to suggest that, it had nothing to do with religion at all. Saying “we catholics kicked butt” to somehow suggest that it was catholics that cause the No vote is pure fantasy. It’s coincidence that Bishops happened to say to vote No, there were plenty of others saying to vote No as well. It’s jumping on the bandwagon.

????? In my constituency the local ultra catholic parish activists are essentially the local FF constituency party. FF were one of the government parties who proposed the referenda changes and campaigned for a Yes/Yes vote. In this context, you could say that the catholic church got its butt kicked and suffered its biggest referenda defeats in history.

Yes.

You do see how completely dumb that sounds, right?

It’s simple.

There is a difference between people voting No because of their Catholic faith, and people voting No and happen to be Catholic.

The church can bandwagon hop if they wish, but there is no clear sign or evidence that points to a link between a No vote victory and Catholic ethos.

Do you honestly think that what bishops said had that much of an impact on this referendum, over say the general dissatisfaction with the current government that it's more likely that the No vote was a way of communicating that to the current coalition?

You are making a false equivalency (again) but bringing in the constitution. Go and look at the thread on boards about that referendum and it will give you a pulse check on the reasons why, you yourself pointed out the wording was confusing.

But you are giving credit to bishops over everything else (the original poster was) despite no evidence to prove it.

Edit

Case in point -

So as you can see, the vagueness and confusing aspect of the referendum was the driving factor, not what catholic bishops said.

You are pointing at the constitution and I am pointing at the legislation that was proposed for the referendum. It makes no difference that the constitution was constructed with bishops in the room, I am only talking about the reasons why the No vote succeeded. You have no evidence (again) to back up that you think even if the wording was done better, it would still have been a No, it was very clear from voters that the confsion with the wording was a factor in the No decision.

I really don't think the poster was on a wind up either, not going off their posting so far in this thread. No clue about the excitable part either, if it was a dig then it went over my head, as does the pacifist comment as well.

And I have no clue whatsoever what your last point is meant to mean, you know a priest? That is great...

Sounds good to me.

This is just taking the mick

Many who wouldn't proverbially píss on the RCC if it was on fire called for no votes.

Winning hearts and minds, and maybe even souls!, one spittle-flecked abusive post at a time. Well done.

BTW I'm a confirmed Catholic also 👍️

It’s obviously not the way you intended it, but that kind of rhetoric reminds me of the lads who claim that we’re going to be a minority in our own country at some unspecified point in the distant, like really, really distant future. Another claim I’ve seen bandied about is that Islam is going to take over Europe by 2050.

Both those things are as likely to happen as the idea of Catholicism becoming a minority cult in Ireland. A long road to travel… you sure you’ve given yourself enough time to be correct about that? It’s not as though any of us will live long enough to see it, so I wouldn’t spend too much time thinking about it.