Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Exactly what percentage of the population is "christian"?

1…6791112…70

Comments

  • #242
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    wretcheddomain wrote: »
    It's painfully obvious that the 90% figure is pure fiction
    Prove it then. What are you waiting for?


  • #243
    wretcheddomain
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,094 ✭✭✭wretcheddomain


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Prove it then. What are you waiting for?

    Luckily, you've given me the easy job of proving why it's not 90%. This means, even if I show it's 89% then I've succeeded and your challenge fails.

    Let's assume the figure of 90%.

    Does this 90% include adults, or just adults and children? The latter.

    Can children be defined by an adult when it comes to religion? No. In the same way that it would be ridiculous that a child could be defined as Marxist-Leninist aged 2.

    Therefore, all of these children are not in fact 'Christian' at all.

    In other words, the children are not 'professing' to be a Christian so we cannot possibly include them in the overall quantity of Christians in the country.

    This is what the census asks us to do, to 'profess' a religious position or lack thereof. Children, at best, are neutral on this question.

    Therefore, the amount of Christians is less than 90%.

    I succeed, you fail.


  • #244
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,375 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Not my religion. Let me turn this around on you. What compromises would you (numerically insignificant minority) be prepared to make with the people you are referring to in negative terms repeatedly
    Classy.
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Prove it then. What are you waiting for?
    Its been shown multiple times in thread that it could be theoretically close but it isn't. Like alot of people, I only managed to switch my census forms into saying Athiest at the last census as often the owners of the household in my case, my mamai and later my landlord, filled out the form on my behalf, without asking or discussing. The former as she didn't care about my opinions as a child and the later because it got the lady who knocked at the door during the day to never come back again. Of course both are wrong but assuredly they are not the only ones on the country.

    Basically to answer the thread title, at the minute there is no way of knowing exactly, and even the best figures we have from the CSO seem to be fundamentally flawed from numerous examples given before.


  • #245
    Morbert
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,457 ✭✭✭Morbert


    I'll stress that "Catholic" in the context of the Irish population often has little to do with religious adherence, and I would wager that a significant portion of self-identified (or mammy-identified) Catholics are functionally similar to atheists in matters of religious irreverence, social and political opinion, and even belief in God. This has been observed in the U.K., and there's no reason to suppose the same is not true here, considering the opinions expressed in matters of abortion, gay marriage, etc..


  • #246
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,375 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Morbert wrote: »
    I would wager that a significant portion of self-identified (or mammy-identified) Catholics are functionally similar to atheists in matters of religious irreverence, social and political opinion, and even belief in God.
    My father is a "Catholic" but openly claims that there is no God and you would be an idiot to believe different, attends mass to meet mates who don't go to the pub. My mother is a "Catholic" who doesn't believe in all that stuff in the bible, claims its all a bit bullsh1tty, but that she thinks there is something there in the background, whatever that maybe. My sister is a "Catholic" in that you never know, it could be handy to have the label, in terms of education for future kids or for getting a job in a catholic school (teacher). My brother is, by his own description, nothing, he never thinks about such things, life is too short so does not have time to think about wether he believes in nothing, something or anything, does not care what he is identified as on the census by mother.

    Therefore up until 10 years ago, all 5 of us were catholic on the census wether we were consulted or not. Nowadays, only one of us is not (me), my brother goes with whatever Mam writes down (was at home until this year so that number may increase to two out of five by the next census), as do the rest of them still.

    This is obviously an anecdote but I imagine not far off many irish households situation in regards the census in terms of identifying as Roman Catholic.


  • Advertisement
  • #247
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    CramCycle wrote: »
    My father is a "Catholic" but openly claims that there is no God and you would be an idiot to believe different, attends mass to meet mates who don't go to the pub. My mother is a "Catholic" who doesn't believe in all that stuff in the bible, claims its all a bit bullsh1tty, but that she thinks there is something there in the background, whatever that maybe. My sister is a "Catholic" in that you never know, it could be handy to have the label, in terms of education for future kids or for getting a job in a catholic school (teacher). My brother is, by his own description, nothing, he never thinks about such things, life is too short so does not have time to think about wether he believes in nothing, something or anything, does not care what he is identified as on the census by mother.

    Therefore up until 10 years ago, all 5 of us were catholic on the census wether we were consulted or not. Nowadays, only one of us is not (me), my brother goes with whatever Mam writes down (was at home until this year so that number may increase to two out of five by the next census), as do the rest of them still.

    This is obviously an anecdote but I imagine not far off many irish households situation in regards the census in terms of identifying as Roman Catholic.

    I have been responsible for filling out the census for my mother since the 1980s (even though I haven't lived 'at home' since the same time period). I have also been ticking the 'No Religion' box for her all these years as although she says she is a Catholic she is radically Pro-Choice, Pro-Contraception, Pro-Divorce, Pro-Same Sex Marriage and only goes to Mass for funerals (and weddings but all the recent weddings in the family have been civil ceremonies) :D


  • #248
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    wretcheddomain wrote: »
    Luckily, you've given me the easy job of proving why it's not 90%. This means, even if I show it's 89% then I've succeeded and your challenge fails.

    Let's assume the figure of 90%.
    No. Lets not assume. The actual official number of Christians in Ireland stands at 90%.
    wretcheddomain wrote: »
    Does this 90% include adults, or just adults and children? The latter.
    This is correct.
    wretcheddomain wrote: »
    Can children be defined by an adult when it comes to religion? No.
    That is your opinion. Evidently it is not the opinion of the state nor the EU for that matter. Irrespective of my own religious beliefs I personally would list my own children as "no religion", unless they have decided otherwise for themselves. However, I respect the rights of a legal guardian who has raised their children in a particular religion (or lack of) to consider their children of that Church until they come of age.


    Don't you? What is your answer to this "problem" in your "tolerant", secular utopia? Banning parents raising their children in their faith?
    wretcheddomain wrote: »
    Therefore, all of these children are not in fact 'Christian' at all.

    In other words, the children are not 'professing' to be a Christian so we cannot possibly include them in the overall quantity of Christians in the country.

    This is what the census asks us to do, to 'profess' a religious position or lack thereof. Children, at best, are neutral on this question.

    Therefore, the amount of Christians is less than 90%.

    I succeed, you fail.
    Before you get too excited...There is something crucial you have apparently forgotten - You have to show, with hard evidence that this has happened proportionally more in Christian families than everyone else. Can you do that?


  • #249
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,179 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Before you get too excited...There is something crucial you have apparently forgotten - You have to show, with hard evidence that this has happened proportionally more in Christian families than everyone else. Can you do that?
    It happens in every family with young children. Or are you going to claim all young children voiced their own religious preference?

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #250
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    CramCycle wrote: »
    Classy.
    I think your class-meter needs a service. Where is your comments on the class of considering our elderly demographic as inferior and mentally ill? Where are your comments on the "class" of the suggestion that immigrants responses to the census count as less?
    CramCycle wrote: »
    Its been shown multiple times in thread that it could be theoretically close but it isn't. Like alot of people, I only managed to switch my census forms into saying Athiest at the last census as often the owners of the household in my case, my mamai and later my landlord, filled out the form on my behalf, without asking or discussing. The former as she didn't care about my opinions as a child and the later because it got the lady who knocked at the door during the day to never come back again. Of course both are wrong but assuredly they are not the only ones on the country.

    Basically to answer the thread title, at the minute there is no way of knowing exactly, and even the best figures we have from the CSO seem to be fundamentally flawed from numerous examples given before.
    Tell you what, lets assume that all this anecdotal stuff from anonymous sources on the internet is legit. Remove every example from the Christian total and tell me what effect it has on the overall results.


  • #251
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    SW wrote: »
    It happens in every family with young children. Or are you going to claim all young children voiced their own religious preference?
    No, I am saying it is a matter of opinion whether this is appropriate behaviour and there is no reason to believe that it happens more in Christian households than Jew, atheist etc


  • Advertisement
  • #252
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 16,153 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    You have to show, with hard evidence that this has happened proportionally more in Christian families than everyone else. Can you do that?

    Even the Iona Institute is highlighting the sharp decline in the practise of Catholicism in Ireland. From a wikipedia article based on their figures, the percentage of weekly Church attendance among Irish Roman Catholics has dropped from 91% in the 1970s to about 30% in 2011. If that's what the Iona institute were saying two years ago, it is not unreasonable to assumes figures are lower still today.

    So basically Ireland has shifted from being a largely Catholic country that practised Catholicism to a nominally Catholic country where the majority no longer regularly practises Catholicism. Again, I don't think it is unreasonable to assume that the country won't even be nominally Catholic for much longer on that basis.

    Anyone of my generation (early70s in primary school) doesn't need the studies to understand this. When I was growing up the country was heaving with nuns, brothers and priests, and the BVM seemed to be glaring at you from the rooms of most houses. They're pretty much all gone. No brothers and nuns to batter catechisms into school kids, no nuns at the hospital bedside to say prayer or two for you. Like it or not, those days are long gone.

    Boards.ie need your help to survive, subscribe here



  • #253
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    smacl wrote: »
    Even the Iona Institute is highlighting the sharp decline in the practise of Catholicism in Ireland. From a wikipedia article based on their figures, the percentage of weekly Church attendance among Irish Roman Catholics has dropped from 91% in the 1970s to about 30% in 2011. If that's what the Iona institute were saying two years ago, it is not unreasonable to assumes figures are lower still today.

    So basically Ireland has shifted from being a largely Catholic country that practised Catholicism to a nominally Catholic country where the majority no longer regularly practises Catholicism. Again, I don't think it is unreasonable to assume that the country won't even be nominally Catholic for much longer on that basis.

    Anyone of my generation (early70s in primary school) doesn't need the studies to understand this. When I was growing up the country was heaving with nuns, brothers and priests, and the BVM seemed to be glaring at you from the rooms of most houses. They're pretty much all gone. No brothers and nuns to batter catechisms into school kids, no nuns at the hospital bedside to say prayer or two for you. Like it or not, those days are long gone.

    Thanks be to Jesus.





    :pac:


  • #254
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    smacl wrote: »
    If that's what the Iona institute were saying two years ago, it is not unreasonable to assumes figures are lower still today.

    It's not unreasanable to assume the numbers were lower two years ago. The Iona Institute has an impressive track record when it comes to blatant dishonesty in favor of their agenda.


  • #255
    Piliger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,741 ✭✭✭Piliger


    Appalling as the church's behaviour is ... I personally believe that the numbers used nowadays in political and ancillary discussions tend to be those taken from the census. Correct me if I am wrong.


  • #256
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 16,153 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    Sarky wrote: »
    It's not unreasanable to assume the numbers were lower two years ago. The Iona Institute has an impressive track record when it comes to blatant dishonesty in favor of their agenda.

    Exactly. To the OP therefore, if a genuine Christian is someone who practises their religion, the answer to the question is < 30%.

    Boards.ie need your help to survive, subscribe here



  • #257
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,375 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    I think your class-meter needs a service. Where is your comments on the class of considering our elderly demographic as inferior and mentally ill? Where are your comments on the "class" of the suggestion that immigrants responses to the census count as less?
    Haven't read the full thread so haven't seen those comments, I did not say them so thats all I can say on that, will read the thread in full asap. My comment was in regards to you calling a minority insignificant. I am in a minority of one when you exclude me from every group I am not a member of or from every opinion I do not share, and by that reasoning I am incredibly insignificant but I'd hazard a guess that the majority of people, if not all of them, are as insignificant as me.
    Tell you what, lets assume that all this anecdotal stuff from anonymous sources on the internet is legit. Remove every example from the Christian total and tell me what effect it has on the overall results.
    Hmmm, I acknowledged its an anecdote, based on life experience. To go down the road of using my name to prove an anecdote is true seems futile in that it only works in an incredibly small subset, and even then there are issues over who is honest, and who is not, can I be trusteed, can you be trusted? As my post shows though, despite the illegality of it, several people can, and IMO do, lie on the census forms, and therefore while they can be used to guide policy, they should never be taken as the irrevocable truth. When you start taking what people have written down as the truth or honest without question on paper, you see all sorts of issues start to rise up.


  • #258
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,627 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    wretcheddomain wrote: »
    Can children be defined by an adult when it comes to religion? No.
    That is your opinion. Evidently it is not the opinion of the state nor the EU for that matter. Irrespective of my own religious beliefs I personally would list my own children as "no religion", unless they have decided otherwise for themselves. However, I respect the rights of a legal guardian who has raised their children in a particular religion (or lack of) to consider their children of that Church until they come of age.

    Don't you? What is your answer to this "problem" in your "tolerant", secular utopia? Banning parents raising their children in their faith?
    It's this type of hyperbole that moderators of this forum find grating.


  • #259
    Days 298
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭Days 298


    The biggest problem is the use of Christmas. I think we should all send Micky D Higgins an email asking for him to call next years speech "The Holidays and New Year Address". Problem solved or is it another problem created for devout non secular Christians?


  • #260
    wretcheddomain
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,094 ✭✭✭wretcheddomain


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    That is your opinion. Evidently it is not the opinion of the state nor the EU for that matter. Irrespective of my own religious beliefs I personally would list my own children as "no religion", unless they have decided otherwise for themselves. However, I respect the rights of a legal guardian who has raised their children in a particular religion (or lack of) to consider their children of that Church until they come of age.

    Yes - it is my opinion, or does it belong to someone else? :confused:

    So given you have a preference for "listing" children with names because they've never heard of them, then we can justify calling children Marxist-Leninist, Tory and Pagan.

    After all, when the children come of age, then they can decide whether or not they're a Marxist-Leninist, right?

    However, even if we ignore this aspect, your post does reveal something else quite disturbing. By saying "until the children come of age" you're already conceding they cannot "profess" what they are when it comes to religion. The census asks us to profess our beliefs so according to your own perspective, this must mean only those "of age" can decide whether they're a Christian or not. Hence, from your own post I can disregard the numbers of children in the census figures.

    That's a remarkable concession and I thank you for providing it.
    Don't you? What is your answer to this "problem" in your "tolerant", secular utopia? Banning parents raising their children in their faith?

    I challenge you to find anything in my posts that even remotely suggests any of what you've just said here.
    Before you get too excited...There is something crucial you have apparently forgotten - You have to show, with hard evidence that this has happened proportionally more in Christian families than everyone else. Can you do that?

    I can assure you I won't be getting excited by any of this.

    I don't actually have to prove that because if we grant the % is ~90 then that's the only group I need to consider. My posts and that of others clearly highlight the fatuity of these census results.

    But I respect your faith in believing it's 90% without any "hard evidence".


  • #261
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,858 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    @Brown Bomber: Any response to this post?


  • Advertisement
  • #262
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,195 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    Days 298 wrote: »
    The biggest problem is the use of Christmas. I think we should all send Micky D Higgins an email asking for him to call next years speech "The Holidays and New Year Address". Problem solved or is it another problem created for devout non secular Christians?

    That's the problem with Ireland: why please the majority when you'll upset a very vocal minority (case in point: compulsory Irish in schools)?


  • #263
    TheChizler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,552 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    Somebody asked a few pages back but I missed the response if there was any. Is there any breakdown of the religion question by age so as to exclude children? It would be interesting as that subset would overall be more likely to have answered the question themselves. Or even a subgroup of single person households as there would have been no external pressure, explicit or implicitly, to answer dishonestly.

    I doubt the raw census data is easily available to analyze ourselves. Had a look at the website ages ago and I can't remember how easy it was to sift through the stats.


  • #264
    darjeeling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 962 ✭✭✭darjeeling


    TheChizler wrote: »
    Somebody asked a few pages back but I missed the response if there was any. Is there any breakdown of the religion question by age so as to exclude children? It would be interesting as that subset would overall be more likely to have answered the question themselves. Or even a subgroup of single person households as there would have been no external pressure, explicit or implicitly, to answer dishonestly.

    I doubt the raw census data is easily available to analyze ourselves. Had a look at the website ages ago and I can't remember how easy it was to sift through the stats.

    Here are the figures for people of 'no religion' for all age groups for the 1991, 2002, 2006 and 2011 censuses:

    287779.png

    The figures show that in the last 20 years new generations of young adults have become more likely to declare that they and their children have no religion. As people age, though, they don't tend to become less religious with time.


  • #265
    alaimacerc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,224 ✭✭✭alaimacerc


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    I have been responsible for filling out the census for my mother since the 1980s (even though I haven't lived 'at home' since the same time period). I have also been ticking the 'No Religion' box for her all these years as although she says she is a Catholic she is radically Pro-Choice, Pro-Contraception, Pro-Divorce, Pro-Same Sex Marriage and only goes to Mass for funerals (and weddings but all the recent weddings in the family have been civil ceremonies) :D

    Presumably the RCC would insist that you not do that... After all, they'd want to reserve the potential fun in excommunicating her for any of those things!


  • #266
    Brian Shanahan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,232 ✭✭✭Brian Shanahan


    ninja900 wrote: »
    It is a meaningless distinction. Atheists have no religion.
    You are also comparing a tick-box with a write-in term. A write-in term is always going to be far lower.
    I'm an atheist, but ticked 'no religion', that doesn't make me any less an atheist, just someone who dislikes having to write something in when I can tick a box that means the same thing.

    You know it's because I knew someone would spout the **** like JC is trying to pull that I specifically wrote in atheist, and persuaded my two Slovak openly atheist flatmates to write in themselves (the discussion went "but atheisim is not a religion, so no religion is right", "correct, but the likes of the rcc will try and spin the "no religion" crowd as people who believe but don't go to church").

    Seriously when you put down "no X" in a questionnaire you are saying one of two things 1) I don't know and I don't care (agnostic), 2) I think X is wrong in an intellectual sense(atheist). That is all.


  • #267
    Brian Shanahan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,232 ✭✭✭Brian Shanahan


    Floraidh wrote: »
    Since anytime I tried to reply to a topic on religion and my replies are not going up on the forum.Does that mean my free speech is been curb here?? Just a guess since my last 3 attempts told I have not loaded/log on/wait/wait again and reload. I have given up on replying to any post here.This has been happening all the time.

    Try ticking the button "stay logged in" when you log on next time. Most forum software kick you out after 30 mins- 1 hr if you don't tick that button.


  • #268
    alaimacerc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,224 ✭✭✭alaimacerc


    ninja900 wrote: »
    No, it's really not.
    One would be quite correct in ticking the RC box if baptised RC, irrespective of one's current belief or practice. After all, they won't let me leave...
    I'm not entirely sure, but is that actually for those confirmed, or indeed those who've been communicants? Baptism is in theory a common-Christian thing (at least between trinitarians). Though the distinction is for most purposes moot, given the quick-march of all of them before the Age of Reason and Responsibility.
    It is a meaningless distinction. Atheists have no religion.
    You are also comparing a tick-box with a write-in term. A write-in term is always going to be far lower.
    I'm an atheist, but ticked 'no religion', that doesn't make me any less an atheist, just someone who dislikes having to write something in when I can tick a box that means the same thing.

    Didn't Atheism Ireland run a campaign (well, at least, put a couple of guys up for interview on the radio, and so forth) telling people not to add "atheism" as a "write-in", on exactly those grounds? After all, it's asking about religion (in some poorly defined sense), not a philosophy pop quiz.


  • #269
    Brian Shanahan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,232 ✭✭✭Brian Shanahan


    alaimacerc wrote: »
    Didn't Atheism Ireland run a campaign (well, at least, put a couple of guys up for interview on the radio, and so forth) telling people not to add "atheism" as a "write-in", on exactly those grounds? After all, it's asking about religion (in some poorly defined sense), not a philosophy pop quiz.

    In terms of accuracy its wrong. But then again the religious ranters never think in terms of accuracy, and gladly claim (cf Brown Bomber's posts) that "no religion" means that, somehow, they are religious.

    So for the purposes of ensuring that my data point doesn't get misused as "evidence" of religiosity in this country (of which there is extremely little) I will continue to call myself atheist in censuses for the forseeable future.


  • #270
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 40,107 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Brian Shanahan wrote: »
    You know it's because I knew someone would spout the **** like JC is trying to pull that I specifically wrote in atheist

    I did consider doing that, and am not entirely ruling it out in future...

    "correct, but the likes of the rcc will try and spin the "no religion" crowd as people who believe but don't go to church"

    One would have to be seriously intellectually dishonest to spin 'no religion' as 'having a religion really'

    But then, it is the RCC, Iona et al we're dealing with...


    alaimacerc wrote: »
    I'm not entirely sure, but is that actually for those confirmed, or indeed those who've been communicants?

    I was confirmed in the RCC, not by free choice I might add.
    Though the distinction is for most purposes moot, given the quick-march of all of them before the Age of Reason and Responsibility.

    Indeed. (Edit: I originally took this to mean the RC practice of getting kids all the way down the religious assembly line PDQ before they reached the age of reason and might object. If you mean that all christian denominations are basically the same, I'd have to object - some are far more objectionable than others and the RCC is one of the worst.)
    Didn't Atheism Ireland run a campaign (well, at least, put a couple of guys up for interview on the radio, and so forth) telling people not to add "atheism" as a "write-in", on exactly those grounds? After all, it's asking about religion (in some poorly defined sense), not a philosophy pop quiz.

    I don't think so - they just wanted people who were genuinely not religious to not tick a religious box out of habit / culture / upbringing etc.

    But having 'no religion' and then write-ins for atheist and agnostic is splitting the vote, as it were. I think No Religion couldn't be clearer tbh, and it's one of the few things atheists and agnostics can agree on :pac:

    I'm partial to your abracadabra
    I'm raptured by the joy of it all



  • Advertisement
  • #271
    alaimacerc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,224 ✭✭✭alaimacerc


    AerynSun wrote: »
    When I was a Catholic, there was nothing I hated more than someone telling me "but all of you Catholics believe x, therefore your position is y" - quickest way to get my back up, and not the best opener if you want me to engage in a serious dialogue about a controversial issue.

    It's always annoying when someone tells someone else what they think, why they think it, etc. This is a particular risk in the case of highly hierarchical organisations like the RCC that themselves presume to speak for their "members". If Archbishop Martin, or Other Archbishop Martin, or someone else (that should probably change their name to Archbishop Martin, save a lot of confusion) pops up on the TV to say what The Catholic Position on something is, he, or she (nah, only fooling!) won't bother to hedge around what "some" Catholics might actually think on the matter. They're happy to speak for "the 84%", ignoring that said 84% don't actually themselves believe what they're saying, on the basis that they've failed to actually leave.

    It's a bit like the old Soviet joke of "they pretend to pay us, and we pretend to work".

    While it's become trendy to talk about freedom of conscience, that's not to be construed as the freedom to disagree with them on doctrine. Well, you're free to do so, and they're free to kick you out if they can be bothered, rather than just endlessly threatening. Rather, it's just new gloss on "grant the church more special privileges (or its old privileges under separate cover) by giving people the 'freedom' to ignore the law of the state when it's something we've told them to do."


Advertisement