Exactly what percentage of the population is "christian"?

alaimacerc · 12-01-2014 11:50PM

Piliger wrote: »

Can we see evidence of that ? or are you just making things up again ?

Isn't it obvious on its face? The rules are there to see, written directly into the CCC. They're not barred from having such rules, at least in this jurisdiction. (Lucky for them that the Equal Status Act doesn't have full effect with respect to them.)

Now, whether you accept their definition (or definitions, as they distinguish between baptised Catholics, Catholics in full communion, and so on) as the final word for day-to-day use of the terminology is a matter for common consent. While people are seemingly more or less content for the sort of doublespeak about what a "Catholic affiliation" means, then from a linguistic point of view, that's what it means. At such time people start to apply terms like "Protestant" and "Catholic" and "Muslim" to describe actual belief and actual practice, rather than what we believed three generations ago and practice two ago, we might have less of a "semantic gap".

Piliger · 12-01-2014 11:55PM

Mark Hamill wrote: »

This would be the same church that doesn't even exclude people for not following the pope, yes? That the church doesn't even follow its own rules properly (why would they, when it would obliterate their numbers?) is no argument that said rules do not exist.

This is like Monty
Python all over again.

Nodin wrote: »

Certain things are expected of a Catholic, in order to be in full communion with the church.

You are all over the place. Show us where the vatican states that catholics must do these things and are not catholics if they do not.

Mark Hamill wrote: »

your argument falls apart under its own inanity. Lets say that the doctrine is just a guide and it doesn't actually matter if someone follows any of it. Does it matter if anyone follows any of it? Can we not just declare all as catholics regardless of what they say or do? Bless the rain clouds and baptise everyone and then everyone is catholic regardless of what they actually believe or do (its not like catholics wait for the babies permission to baptise them after all). You would save everyone from eternal hell.

No. It is up to a person to decide what they are, not others. It's not your right to tell me I am an Atheist. I'll decide. I'm a liverpool fan. I get to decide and not you. Liverpool don't get to decide.

If catholic can mean anyone regardless of belief or ritual, then "catholic" is a meaningless word.

No it's not. It's what they personally decide they are.

The relationship between a person and their church is not private, its why we have a specific label for it, hence we ask people for their label in the census, hence the church will use the numbers of self labelled people to argue that they have significant support. Words exist outside your head, you can't use your own internal subjective meanings in the public sphere and expect anyone else to be able to discuss them with you. How is anyone supposed to know what you mean by catholic if catholic means nothing? This is not me claiming an authority, no more than me telling someone the first letter in a sentence is capitalised is mean claiming an authority - its how communication works among humans, words and their meanings are social constructs, they have to be to be in any way useful.

Wrong from start to finish. Religion is what you chose it to be. It is up to the person to choose and decide, not you. It's a private personal decision and you have to right to apply some kind of subjective test that you have no evidence to support.

So, again, this time without the utter BS deflections: At what point does a persons complete contempt and disdain for catholic doctrine actually stop them from being a catholic?

Not following some guides for a religion doesn't constitute contempt. It just means some people don't agree with all of the beliefs. You can be a member of the boy scouts and have contempt for their attitudes toward gay people and still be a boy scout. I can have contempt for the Liverpool manager and owner and remain a fan. Your arguments are really so so so silly.

Show us where the catholic church says you are not a catholic if you don't go to mass every week, or not a catholic if you use condoms, or not a catholic if you don't go to communion, or not a catholic if you have contempt for the pope.

This is all a load of utter hot air, supported by no evidence whatsoever, You just make it up as you go along.

alaimacerc · 12-01-2014 11:56PM

Brown Bomber wrote: »

You tell me. You are the one making the claim.

So how did you come into this "direct evidence" that you have but refuse to share?

Got men on the inside? Hacked into the CSO and the MRBI's computers. Could you at least send it to wikileaks anonymously so we can all see it?

What the *heck* are you driveling on about now? Are you suggesting that the evidence of a survey, as well as being "objectively disordered" compared to the Immaculate Census, somehow isn't evidence at all?

Someone answers a survey and says "yes, I'm a Catholic", then "no, I don't believe in god". Are you, or are you not, 100% happy to take this person's "Catholicism" at face value, and to completely ignore their statement of lack of any actual belief?

We're wasting our time discussing the prevalence of this category of person if you're simply going to ignore their existence as a matter of lalala-ism.

Piliger · 13-01-2014 12:02AM

alaimacerc wrote: »

Isn't it obvious on its face?

Wild claims are being make about the 'definitive rules' of the catholic church and what constitutes rules and who can and cannot be a catholic .... show us some EVIDENCE.

The rules are there to see, written directly into the CCC. They're not barred from having such rules, at least in this jurisdiction. (Lucky for them that the Equal Status Act doesn't have full effect with respect to them.)

Quote one that says you are not a catholic if you don't do those things.

Now, whether you accept their definition (or definitions, as they distinguish between baptised Catholics, Catholics in full communion, and so on) as the final word for day-to-day use of the terminology is a matter for common consent.

Eh no. The claim is being made that these are the rules and if people calling themselves are not keeping to the rules then they are not catholic. That is the claim. Back it up with evidence please, or it's just so much hot air.

While people are seemingly more or less content for the sort of doublespeak about what a "Catholic affiliation" means, then from a linguistic point of view, that's what it means. At such time people start to apply terms like "Protestant" and "Catholic" and "Muslim" to describe actual belief and actual practice, rather than what we believed three generations ago and practice two ago, we might have less of a "semantic gap".

It's you who is making the semantic gap up. There is no semantic gap. People are whatever religion they decide in their hearts they are. I's not for you to decide.

Piliger · 13-01-2014 12:08AM

alaimacerc wrote: »

What the *heck* are you driveling on about now? Are you suggesting that the evidence of a survey, as well as being "objectively disordered" compared to the Immaculate Census, somehow isn't evidence at all?

Someone answers a survey and says "yes, I'm a Catholic", then "no, I don't believe in god". Are you, or are you not, 100% happy to take this person's "Catholicism" at face value, and to completely ignore their statement of lack of any actual belief?

We're wasting our time discussing the prevalence of this category of person if you're simply going to ignore their existence as a matter of lalala-ism.

Again this just beggars belief. An organisation that counts people as catholics whether they are or not, that refuses to remove people who write to them to resign as catholics, that lies through it's teeth about the crimes of it's officials, that moves criminal officials from one location to another over a period of fifty years to avoid them being caught raping and abusing children, that is built on the biggest lie in human history ... and you are actually telling us here in 2014 that a document produced by this organisation is to be treated as 'evidence' of anything ? Have we entered the twilight zone along the way here ?

Mark Hamill · 13-01-2014 12:28AM

Piliger wrote: »

No. It is up to a person to decide what they are, not others. It's not your right to tell me I am an Atheist. I'll decide. I'm a liverpool fan. I get to decide and not you. Liverpool don't get to decide.

You're not getting this. It's not a case of me telling you what you are, its a case of me telling you the correct label for it. I can't tell you whether or not you actually support liverpool or not, but I can tell you that if you do not support them in any way then you are not a liverpool supporter.

Piliger wrote: »

No it's not. It's what they personally decide they are.

Which makes it meaningless, not to mention completely useless. The whole point of a label is that it is an abbreviation for a set of criteria, used in communication to get across ideas in a quick manner. If someone asks me "where are you from" I say I'm Irish, then that label "Irish" gives them some information about where I was born and grew up. If "Irish" can mean anything to anyone, then it is useless as a label, as me saying Irish wouldn't tell anyone anything.

Piliger wrote: »

Wrong from start to finish. Religion is what you chose it to be.

A persons beliefs may be what they choose to be but the label for those beliefs is whatever label best matches those collection of beliefs. You can have your own religion, but you cannot call it "catholic" if its collected beliefs don't sufficiently align with that of catholic doctrine. You can put whatever ingredients you like into a meal, but you can only call it a BLT if it's a sandwich with bacon, lettuce and tomatoes.

Piliger wrote: »

Not following some guides for a religion doesn't constitute contempt.

How about not following any? Contempt for the church is the reaction I see from a lot of supposed catholics in this country, especially when it comes to issues like abortion, gay rights and the abuses scandals.

Piliger wrote: »

It just means some people don't agree with all of the beliefs. You can be a member of the boy scouts and have contempt for their attitudes toward gay people and still be a boy scout. I can have contempt for the Liverpool manager and owner and remain a fan. Your arguments are really so so so silly.

I am not the one comparing a religion (which threatens eternal damnation to non-believers) with the boy scouts or a football team (which don't).

Piliger wrote: »

Show us where the catholic church says you are not a catholic if you don't go to mass every week, or not a catholic if you use condoms, or not a catholic if you don't go to communion, or not a catholic if you have contempt for the pope.

This is all a load of utter hot air, supported by no evidence whatsoever, You just make it up as you go along.

It's in the cathechism of the RCC, you know, the big list of things you are obliged to do as a catholic? Does it not make sense that if you disregard the rules of the church that you aren't a member of said church? What is the point of said rules if they have no bearing on membership?

Mark Hamill · 13-01-2014 12:30AM

Piliger wrote: »

Wild claims are being make about the 'definitive rules' of the catholic church and what constitutes rules and who can and cannot be a catholic .... show us some EVIDENCE.

How about you show some evidence, for once. Where in the catechism of RCC, or in any of its doctrines, does it say you can believe anything you like and still be a catholic?

Hotblack Desiato · 13-01-2014 12:58AM

Piliger wrote: »

No - it's a complete inability by you to grasp or understand what the catholic church is about and how people chose identity and feel identity.

I should think I have a good idea what the catholic church is about. I was subjected to its hateful propaganda at home and at school daily for 17 years. I even tried my best to believe in it for some of those years.

And in my opinion as a roman catholic according to the records of the parish of my birth, and of the church which officially does not allow me to leave, you're talking complete and utter nonsense.

Turtwig · 13-01-2014 01:32AM

alaimacerc wrote: »

You been smoking the incense especially hard today?

alaimacerc wrote: »

Are you Gregory House when it comes to pieces of information you dislike, and Forrest Gump when it comes to things you do?

alaimacerc wrote: »

You're a guff merchant of the most shameless order..

Mod: Next post that contains a personal attack like the above will earn you a card. You will then be ordered to cease posting in this thread. Any further infringing posts after that will be carded and delete. Consider this fair warning!

@Piliger I'm lazy to pull the quotes but a softer warning also applies to you.

Reminder to all folks, please keep the tone of things civil and constructive. You can still make your points without taking unnecessary swings against the person you're disagreeing with.

alaimacerc · 13-01-2014 02:11AM

Mark Hamill wrote: »

It's in the cathechism of the RCC, you know, the big list of things you are obliged to do as a catholic? Does it not make sense that if you disregard the rules of the church that you aren't a member of said church? What is the point of said rules if they have no bearing on membership?

Well, far be it from me to defend the RCC against fairly well-grounded accusations of pointlessness and illogic in its rules... They may not make sense, and it's not necessarily something that non-prelates have to take seriously, but they are free to make their own rules, for their own purposes.

The church would regard those rules as disciplinary criteria, rather than grounds for removing membership. Even excommunication, which in theory doesn't even prevent one from attending mass, receiving pastoral outreach, and can be remitted at any later time, isn't normally even something that occurs as a matter of course. (There are assorted grounds for "automatic" excommunication, but if no-one actually bothers to notice someone has "automatically" excommunicated themselves, even that's not necessarily a given in practice, unless you're buying into the "eyes of eternity" angle on things.)

Piliger · 13-01-2014 03:57AM

Mark Hamill wrote: »

How about you show some evidence, for once. Where in the catechism of RCC, or in any of its doctrines, does it say you can believe anything you like and still be a catholic?

So you admit. There is actually nowhere where the catholic church says you have to do x, y and z or else you are not a catholic. That is the reality of the situation. People choose their religion. It may drive you crazy ... and it seems evident that it does ... but it's true. And you not liking it, and you thinking you can change it makes no difference. It is how it is and that's the way it will stay.

Piliger · 13-01-2014 03:57AM

Mark Hamill wrote: »

I can't tell you whether or not you actually support liverpool or not, but I can tell you that if you do not support them in any way then you are not a liverpool supporter.

Can you believe that you actually wrote that ?

pauldla · 13-01-2014 05:17AM

Piliger wrote: »

So you admit. There is actually nowhere where the catholic church says you have to do x, y and z or else you are not a catholic. That is the reality of the situation. People choose their religion. It may drive you crazy ... and it seems evident that it does ... but it's true. And you not liking it, and you thinking you can change it makes no difference. It is how it is and that's the way it will stay.

Do they, though? People choose their religion? Do you mean that people are presented with a list of religions and then decide which one to subscribe to? Or would it be more true to say that people are born into religion and, by and large, remain within that religion? Is there any way to know what percentage of a given faith are converts to that faith?

Nodin · 13-01-2014 05:28AM

Piliger wrote: »

Says you. Show us any meaningful significant reference to where the pope says this. He makes the rules after all, 'cos god talks to him.

The catechism has the relevant information on mass etc.

http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/what-are-the-necessary-minimum-requirements-for-catholics

http://www.beginningcatholic.com/precepts-of-the-catholic-church.html

Marriage
http://catholicweddinghelp.com/questions/rules-requirements.htm

Sex
http://ccgaction.org/index.php?q=family/protectmarriage/principles/CatholicSexualEthics

IRLConor · 13-01-2014 07:09AM

Folks, the "are they really a Catholic?" discussion is interesting but it's probably more interesting to work with how people actually behave.

In general when people say "Ireland is a Christian/Catholic country" the subtext is usually "... and hence Ireland opposes abortion/equal marriage rights/etc.". This is clearly nonsense, if as the survey results above suggest that 10% of the self-reported Catholics are actually apostates (and hence excommunicated latae sententiae) then we can't really expect them to obey the letter of the church law and hence we can't make assumptions about what they want.

So how about we all stop making sweeping generalisations about what Ireland wants based on what people say they are? In other words, could those justifying arguments on the strength of "X% of the population are Catholic" please stop? It doesn't actually mean anything unless you strengthen it to a statement of the form of "Y% of people follow the Catholic Church's teaching with respect to Z". If you make statements like that, then perhaps we can have a meaningful debate.

Brown Bomber · 13-01-2014 11:21AM

Days 298 wrote: »

Yes and Hitler was a Catholic.

Not sure if you are being facetious here.

I'll ask a similar question. Was 9/11 "ringleader" Mohammed Atta a Muslim?
This is the same alcohol drinking, drug-taking, infidel-stripper bangin, pork-eating, casino-visiting Mohammed Atta we are talking about.

Brown Bomber · 13-01-2014 11:22AM

IRLConor wrote: »

In general when people say "Ireland is a Christian/Catholic country" the subtext is usually "... and hence Ireland opposes abortion/equal marriage rights/etc.". This is clearly nonsense,.

Exactly what I've been saying.

Brown Bomber · 13-01-2014 11:24AM

alaimacerc wrote: »

What the *heck* are you driveling on about now? Are you suggesting that the evidence of a survey, as well as being "objectively disordered" compared to the Immaculate Census, somehow isn't evidence at all?

Someone answers a survey and says "yes, I'm a Catholic", then "no, I don't believe in god". Are you, or are you not, 100% happy to take this person's "Catholicism" at face value, and to completely ignore their statement of lack of any actual belief?

We're wasting our time discussing the prevalence of this category of person if you're simply going to ignore their existence as a matter of lalala-ism.

Could you please explain the difference between illustrative and comprehensive?

Could you also please share this top-secret evidence you have that lets you know how individuals have responded in two separate confidential surveys.

IRLConor · 13-01-2014 11:24AM

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Exactly what I've been saying.

It's not quite how I've interpreted your posts, so I'm sorry if I haven't been following your argument.

Just to be clear, I'm saying that anyone who says "Ireland is 90% Christian" and draws any inference from that is, at best, misguided.

Ash.J.Williams · 13-01-2014 11:26AM

I think it's very important to fill in the next census properly....If you do not go to mass or practice Catholicism, do not agree with their stance on issues, then DO NOT say you're catholic on the census.

Brown Bomber · 13-01-2014 11:33AM

Mark Hamill wrote: »

I don't know if this is the same survey, but it is a bishops conference survey. It has a very interesting graph on page 12 though:

This is survey of catholics in the Republic of Ireland, done by the Irish Catholic's Bishops Conference (reported in 2010), showing that 10.1% of catholics do not believe in god. Given that everyone in the country fills out their own section in the census, this means that ~10% of the self-identified catholics in this country do not believe in god.

First of all it would give your argument more credibility if you understood the source you are providing. It was commissioned by the Bishop's Conference; not carried out by them. Also, it was not a survey of Catholics in the Republic it was a survey of people in the island of Ireland.

Secondly, for someone who likes to poke holes in surveys you have missed the contradictions contained in this one. Page 14 gives a far more accurate number for the number of Catholics who don't believe in Go, seeing as it's not a Yes/No question.

This more accurate number is 4.7% Why do you think anyone, including yourself, would take a less accurate reflection of the truth?

Also, it doesn't give the margin of error, but I've worked it out at 3.1% which leaves us with potentially 1.6% or 150 people of Catholics surveyed in this poll not believing in God.

Not exactly census shattering information is it?

Brown Bomber · 13-01-2014 11:36AM

IRLConor wrote: »

It's not quite how I've interpreted your posts, so I'm sorry if I haven't been following your argument.

Just to be clear, I'm saying that anyone who says "Ireland is 90% Christian" and draws any inference from that is, at best, misguided.

... including all Christians think/do X, Y or Z otherwise they are not Christian, right?

IRLConor · 13-01-2014 11:56AM

Brown Bomber wrote: »

... including all Christians think/do X, Y or Z otherwise they are not Christian, right?

I think the confusion for me is that when I think of "Catholic" I think "someone who follows the rules of the Catholic Church". So from that point of view, if I say something like "All Catholics believe in god" then - to me at least - that seems like a self-evident truth. If you don't believe in god then the RCC doesn't think you're a Catholic. If they don't think you're a Catholic why should I?

Either anyone can call themselves anything and hence all discussion on "what people want" (including using census data - because people aren't even being consistent there) is nonsense OR you accept that a chunk of the people are deluded and aren't Christian/Catholic/whatever and hence the census data is wrong. I'm willing to accept either world view but would prefer the latter since it gives us all a basis to have a reasonable discussion.

You can't have it both ways though. Either the census data is meaningless or it's wrong.

CramCycle · 13-01-2014 12:29PM

I have no issue with people putting down Christian if they only believe in a few things that the church says (any of thet Christian ones), or if they just believe or are guided by the teachings of Jesus. Its those who put down Catholic when they do not follow the teachings of the Church. That is the difference and the issue then is that these census figures may influence policy decisions.

I Heart Internet · 13-01-2014 01:56PM

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

I think it's very important to fill in the next census properly....If you do not go to mass or practice Catholicism, do not agree with their stance on issues, then DO NOT say you're catholic on the census.

What if you just can't help yourself? Is it a crime to fill out a census form with a "wrong" answer? (Serious question)

Has anyone suggested an alternative, verifiable and non-subjective way of establishing the number of Christians that doesn't involve the census?

CramCycle · 13-01-2014 01:59PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Is it a crime to fill out a census form with a "wrong" answer? (Serious question)

AFAIK it is, not that seems to be enforced or can be, although I know are neighbour used to read through ours after collection to make sure it was correct but that was 20+ years ago, pretty sure they are not meant too.

Ash.J.Williams · 13-01-2014 02:06PM

Many irish identify as Christian as a group. They've gone through all the rites of passage in school and the census is the only time they are ever asked about it!

swampgas · 13-01-2014 03:48PM

CramCycle wrote: »

I have no issue with people putting down Christian if they only believe in a few things that the church says (any of thet Christian ones), or if they just believe or are guided by the teachings of Jesus. Its those who put down Catholic when they do not follow the teachings of the Church. That is the difference and the issue then is that these census figures may influence policy decisions.

It would be interesting to know if the census figures on religious affiliation have been used in the past to guide government policy, and if they are being used today for policy decisions - perhaps relating to school patronage.

CramCycle · 13-01-2014 03:57PM

swampgas wrote: »

It would be interesting to know if the census figures on religious affiliation have been used in the past to guide government policy, and if they are being used today for policy decisions - perhaps relating to school patronage.

Well that would be my major issue with it, if it does not guide policy in anyway, then I don't care as much, I care, but not as much. All that happens is when historians look back in years to come, they will collate data from other sources that would have bias in favour and against Catholicism, as well as completely neutral sources and they will see that alot of Irish probably didn't understand what religion they were, or even if they were actually in the religion they claimed they were, which does not paint us in the brightwest of pictures but I will be long dead so that not a major issue either.

My favourite one was my Catholic neighbour who was dubious that Mary was a virgin, but did believe in Christ.

eyescreamcone · 13-01-2014 04:08PM

I can't understand why people who show no support for the Catholic church:

Don't go to mass, confession, don't believe/understand transubstantiation
Don't ally with the church's teachings on abortion, contaception, divorce, homosexuality
Don't really believe that Jesus is a god.

Yet they then turn around and say I want my children taught the church's teachings and I want them taught it in school (because I couldn't be arsed doing it myself probably!?)

Are these people hypocrites or nutters or both???

Exactly what percentage of the population is "christian"?

Comments