Catholics make up 78% of free state population.👍👍👍

[seafoid]

Humans are very vulnerable to groupthink. Faith is an integral part of groupthink. Whether it is the forgiveness of sin, 72 virgins in heaven or shares will grow at 10% a year as long as everyone else believes it is very hard to opt out.

   "During the war we were taught that Japan, the land of the Gods, was a righteous, divine country and that America was an evil, barbaric country. We didn't actually believe this, but merely followed along, thinking that, since there was no such thing as a just war , such poisonous, simple minded rhetoric was a way to whip up a state of furious belligerence in the people. Again, we had doubts as to whether or not Japan would be capable of guiding the Greater Asia c0-prosperity sphere.. We did not think we would be defeated. It was not that we were so convinced of victory we never thought of defeat. It was simply unbearable to contemplate it, and because we could not imagine what our fate would be afterward we shielded our eyes from the possibility and went on believing in certain victory.
....
People of the future will find it strange that during the war we so easily accepted an education smacking of distorted self esteem and hostility that advocated such preposterous ambitions, but for us the reasons seemed compelling"
   
Diary of writer Yamada Futaro, October 1945, quoted in "So Lovely a country will never perish" p 152-153

[Owen Brannigan]

In the past and particularly through the early 20th century, the Church was able to exert a power and control over the people. This was based on developing a fear of the consequences of not following the control of the Church leaders from priest to Archbishop and then a peer pressure on those who were not conforming.  It was also essential to have an 'enemy' who threatened the Church, i.e. Protestants or the heathen English. On the back of this the Church developed it catechism which focused on fear and listed all of the things that people should not do.  This ran contrary to the teaching of Jesus who followed up the 10 commandments of the Old Testament based on fear with his two commandments of the New Testament which were based on love and respect.

The development of a detailed catechism covering every aspect of human life and actions was in response to social conditions where control of the masses was the norm in most countries with a fear for what would happen if people did not have tightly prescribed rules for behaviour and living.  Therefore, despite what Tony says, the teaching of the Church changed with the times, reflecting its need for control of the people and where possible their elected governments.

The Church's catechism rejects the teaching of Jesus and his two commandments of love with a teaching of fear for actions and their supposed consequences for the individual.

We now live in more liberal times where control of the masses is more difficult particularly in western democracies. The Church has not moderated its stance from the first half of the 20th century and finds itself out of step with the people and this is exacerbated by the actions and hypocrisy of those within the clerical ranks of the Church in Ireland in relation to abuse of children and abuse of trust and position.

Just a few thoughts on return from Easter Sunday Mass, a day which used to attract as many to Mass as Christmas day and packed the seats and aisles but today at 12-30 pm couldn't fill the church with more than 60% capacity.  Even those who are nominal Catholics as indicated by the census returns in RoI are now not turning up for Easter Sunday celebrations in anything like the numbers of 5 or 10 years ago.

[The Iceman]

In the past and particularly through the early 20th century, the Church was able to exert a power and control over the people. This was based on developing a fear of the consequences of not following the control of the Church leaders from priest to Archbishop and then a peer pressure on those who were not conforming.  It was also essential to have an 'enemy' who threatened the Church, i.e. Protestants or the heathen English. On the back of this the Church developed it catechism which focused on fear and listed all of the things that people should not do.  This ran contrary to the teaching of Jesus who followed up the 10 commandments of the Old Testament based on fear with his two commandments of the New Testament which were based on love and respect.

The development of a detailed catechism covering every aspect of human life and actions was in response to social conditions where control of the masses was the norm in most countries with a fear for what would happen if people did not have tightly prescribed rules for behaviour and living.  Therefore, despite what Tony says, the teaching of the Church changed with the times, reflecting its need for control of the people and where possible their elected governments.

The Church's catechism rejects the teaching of Jesus and his two commandments of love with a teaching of fear for actions and their supposed consequences for the individual.

We now live in more liberal times where control of the masses is more difficult particularly in western democracies. The Church has not moderated its stance from the first half of the 20th century and finds itself out of step with the people and this is exacerbated by the actions and hypocrisy of those within the clerical ranks of the Church in Ireland in relation to abuse of children and abuse of trust and position.

Just a few thoughts on return from Easter Sunday Mass, a day which used to attract as many to Mass as Christmas day and packed the seats and aisles but today at 12-30 pm couldn't fill the church with more than 60% capacity.  Even those who are nominal Catholics as indicated by the census returns in RoI are now not turning up for Easter Sunday celebrations in anything like the numbers of 5 or 10 years ago.

Owen, you write as if the Catechism was formed in Ireland and the church is just the Catholic Church in Ireland. The Catechism has nothing to do with Protestants in the North or the heathen English or Ireland.  It doesn't go against Jesus' teachings.

[J70]

All beliefs are worthy of respect,even those deemed by all worldly standards,illogical or daft even,unless and until they are absolutely disproven factually.

Seriously?

Do you respect the beliefs of the KKK? Do you have empirical proof that racial superiority is an invalid ethos? I mean, it was seen as the norm for much of modern history.

How about the beliefs of murderous Islamic extremists whose basis comes from their interpretation of the Quran? How do we know that they are NOT wrong in brutally killing all around them in the name of Mohammed?

[omaghjoe]

Beliefs proven are no longer beliefs,they are facts

Everything is a belief, nothing is proven, therefore nothing is a fact

[T Fearon]

Obviously beliefs which propose inflicting violence and worse on other humans need to be challenged,but the normal religious beliefs must be respected

[Dougal Maguire]

Beliefs proven are no longer beliefs,they are facts

Great.  I used to believe you were a dick, but you've proven it by your actions. So it's now a fact that you're a dick.

[Owen Brannigan]

In the past and particularly through the early 20th century, the Church was able to exert a power and control over the people. This was based on developing a fear of the consequences of not following the control of the Church leaders from priest to Archbishop and then a peer pressure on those who were not conforming.  It was also essential to have an 'enemy' who threatened the Church, i.e. Protestants or the heathen English. On the back of this the Church developed it catechism which focused on fear and listed all of the things that people should not do.  This ran contrary to the teaching of Jesus who followed up the 10 commandments of the Old Testament based on fear with his two commandments of the New Testament which were based on love and respect.

The development of a detailed catechism covering every aspect of human life and actions was in response to social conditions where control of the masses was the norm in most countries with a fear for what would happen if people did not have tightly prescribed rules for behaviour and living.  Therefore, despite what Tony says, the teaching of the Church changed with the times, reflecting its need for control of the people and where possible their elected governments.

The Church's catechism rejects the teaching of Jesus and his two commandments of love with a teaching of fear for actions and their supposed consequences for the individual.

We now live in more liberal times where control of the masses is more difficult particularly in western democracies. The Church has not moderated its stance from the first half of the 20th century and finds itself out of step with the people and this is exacerbated by the actions and hypocrisy of those within the clerical ranks of the Church in Ireland in relation to abuse of children and abuse of trust and position.

Just a few thoughts on return from Easter Sunday Mass, a day which used to attract as many to Mass as Christmas day and packed the seats and aisles but today at 12-30 pm couldn't fill the church with more than 60% capacity.  Even those who are nominal Catholics as indicated by the census returns in RoI are now not turning up for Easter Sunday celebrations in anything like the numbers of 5 or 10 years ago.

Owen, you write as if the Catechism was formed in Ireland and the church is just the Catholic Church in Ireland. The Catechism has nothing to do with Protestants in the North or the heathen English or Ireland.  It doesn't go against Jesus' teachings.

I know that the catechism is catholic (small c) and applies to the whole Roman Catholic Church (RCC).  My point is that the RCC has developed the catechism in such detail that it virtually covers every single aspect of human life and actions.  It sets out each action and behaviour, the Church's teaching on it and the consequences of not following the Church's teaching.  This gives the RCC its authority over all and hence control.  Given its reliance on consequences, its detailing of all behaviour and control, I believe that the RCC has for its own reasons moved away from the teaching in the Gospels where the ten commandments were reduced to two commandments based on love rather than consequences:

Matthew 22:37-40
37 Jesus replied: "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.'[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

It is worth a look at the link below to see the extent of the catechism:

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM

By concentrating on the detail of the catechism rather than on the commandments of love as above, I believe that the RCC has lost its congregation.  This had already happened across western Europe and in the last 10/15 years it has happened in Catholic Ireland.

[The Iceman]

You've already summarized what happened in Ireland. You're pointing to something now entirely different. So which is it?
The RCC and the Catechism sit fine with me in their content and teaching. I still struggle with their actions of late but the content, the message remains true.
What part of the Catechism doesn't work for you? It's a bit sweeping to say it doesn't line up with Jesus' teaching.... if there was no need for context then we could have saved a lot of trees and just printed those two commandments and added a footnote
*please interpret above as you will.....

[manfromdelmonte]

Catholicism usurped the Early Christianity in Ireland, through imposition of doctrine and Canon law, which had earlier usurped the Celtic polytheism through clever adoption of patronage, important religious dates and feast days

I'm sure Aethisim or Humanism will sowly take over from the other isms that have dominated culture over the past few thousand years on the island

You do also realise that most of the stuff in the new testament was written down maybe 200/300 years (at least) after the event?
I can't even write an account of what i did last weekend

[J70]

Obviously beliefs which propose inflicting violence and worse on other humans need to be challenged,but the normal religious beliefs must be respected

So where do you draw the line?

Is it physical violence alone that renders these beliefs worthy of challenge?

If the KKK preached only segregation and racial purity, but drew the line at lynching and even any use of force, are their beliefs then ok and demanding of respect? If slavery is practiced, but the slaves are treated well and indeed, viewed by some, patronizingly, as being treated mercifully and in their own best interests, is that a defensible belief? Should we respect Muslim theocracies who treat their women as second-class citizens, even if within those boundaries those women are usually treated very well?

Or, getting away from violence and subjugation, how about minor religious cults, where some charismatic leader gathers a group away from society and fills them with some brainwashing claptrap? Where do you draw the line in that instance? Is it only the mass suicide, kool-aid drinkers who have crossed it? Should we respect them until they reach that point? Is scientology and their harassment and litigious stranglehold on their members respectable?

[omaghjoe]

Catholicism usurped the Early Christianity in Ireland, through imposition of doctrine and Canon law, which had earlier usurped the Celtic polytheism through clever adoption of patronage, important religious dates and feast days

I'm sure Aethisim or Humanism will sowly take over from the other isms that have dominated culture over the past few thousand years on the island

You do also realise that most of the stuff in the new testament was written down maybe 200/300 years (at least) after the event?
I can't even write an account of what i did last weekend

Even the most ardent prominent proponents of atheism/anti-theism dont forsee that happening, thats because theism/faith is part of our inherent makeup and your aforementioned paradigms simply teach us to suppress it.

Course education is hailed as the rise of said paradigms and the downfall of religion, but the irony is that its down to a partial education. A more fuller more rounded education would give a better understanding of thought, logic and the fallacy of using empiricism as dogma are the reason for their rise.
So actually as education improves further we may well see a rebound in theism, also our inherent makeup isnt going anywhere either so if your still suppressing yours you'll have to just get used to all the people that arent.

[Eamonnca1]

A more fuller more rounded education would give a better understanding of thought, logic and the fallacy of using empiricism as dogma are the reason for their rise.

Teaching critical thinking has never been more important. They talk about the "information age," but it has also brought what I call the "misinformation age." So much rubbish out there and it's alarming how bad people are at spotting how fake it is.

[manfromdelmonte]

A more fuller more rounded education would give a better understanding of thought, logic and the fallacy of using empiricism as dogma are the reason for their rise.

Teaching critical thinking has never been more important. They talk about the "information age," but it has also brought what I call the "misinformation age." So much rubbish out there and it's alarming how bad people are at spotting how fake it is.

Wait, now you're criticising the people who believe in fake news?
I'm confused

[manfromdelmonte]

Catholicism usurped the Early Christianity in Ireland, through imposition of doctrine and Canon law, which had earlier usurped the Celtic polytheism through clever adoption of patronage, important religious dates and feast days

I'm sure Aethisim or Humanism will sowly take over from the other isms that have dominated culture over the past few thousand years on the island

You do also realise that most of the stuff in the new testament was written down maybe 200/300 years (at least) after the event?
I can't even write an account of what i did last weekend

Even the most ardent prominent proponents of atheism/anti-theism dont forsee that happening, thats because theism/faith is part of our inherent makeup and your aforementioned paradigms simply teach us to suppress it.

Course education is hailed as the rise of said paradigms and the downfall of religion, but the irony is that its down to a partial education. A more fuller more rounded education would give a better understanding of thought, logic and the fallacy of using empiricism as dogma are the reason for their rise.
So actually as education improves further we may well see a rebound in theism, also our inherent makeup isnt going anywhere either so if your still suppressing yours you'll have to just get used to all the people that arent.

Faith isn't really part of our make up
It's just that we have the intelligence to be able to conjure it and buy into it unlike all other known creatures
And society conditions us to find an ism that conforms to our education and rationale

I'm a bit meh when it comes to isms.