The funeral of the murdered Police Officer Stephen Carroll takes place tomorrow Thursday at 12 noon after Requiem Mass in Banbridge. The big question is can the local Westminster MP and other senior unionists go against the grain and their Orange Order diktat,and enter a catholic church to honour this man?
Breaking news: ketttle in hopeless case of confused identity with pot.
bollix, I am not a public representative in the so called "Mother of Parlaiments"
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2009, 08:58:07 AM
The funeral of the murdered Police Officer Stephen Carroll takes place tomorrow Thursday at 12 noon after Requiem Mass in Banbridge. The big question is can the local Westminster MP and other senior unionists go against the grain and their Orange Order diktat,and enter a catholic church to honour this man?
Entirely up to themselves but I know of at least two Orange Order members who were happy to attend my wedding in a Catholic church and that wasn't yesterday or last week. My view is to let the Carroll family and friends grieve in peace and not make a federal case out of who does or doesn't go to the funeral.
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2009, 08:58:07 AM
The funeral of the murdered Police Officer Stephen Carroll takes place tomorrow Thursday at 12 noon after Requiem Mass in Banbridge. The big question is can the local Westminster MP and other senior unionists go against the grain and their Orange Order diktat,and enter a catholic church to honour this man?
You've reached a new low - and for you that's saying something.
Cheap point scoring exercise :-\
Its not a cheap point scoring exercise. It is about the fact that in 2009 unionists cannot bring themselves to attend the funeral of a murdered member of a British Police Force and the British Conservative Party has now formally linked up with a branch of unionism, whoch means that unionists could conceivably be in the British Cabinet.
Entirely valid point and surely this will cause more hurt and insult to the Carroll family.
Imagine is a black person was murdered in London and the sitting MP could not attend his funeral. Image the outcry of racism etc
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2009, 10:12:54 AM
Its not a cheap point scoring exercise. It is about the fact that in 2009 unionists cannot bring themselves to attend the funeral of a murdered member of a British Police Force and the British Conservative Party has now formally linked up with a branch of unionism, whoch means that unionists could conceivably be in the British Cabinet.
Entirely valid point and surely this will cause more hurt and insult to the Carroll family.
Imagine is a black person was murdered in London and the sitting MP could not attend his funeral. Image the outcry of racism etc
I would say the last thing on any of the Carroll's minds is who does or does not attend the funeral.
Bollix Tony,
there will be plenty there, you can be sure of that.
Im sure the carrolls would be touched by your consideration for them Tony.
Your sympathy for them is obviously the main factor in this.
Quote from: A Quinn Martin Production on March 11, 2009, 09:31:21 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2009, 08:58:07 AM
The funeral of the murdered Police Officer Stephen Carroll takes place tomorrow Thursday at 12 noon after Requiem Mass in Banbridge. The big question is can the local Westminster MP and other senior unionists go against the grain and their Orange Order diktat,and enter a catholic church to honour this man?
Entirely up to themselves but I know of at least two Orange Order members who were happy to attend my wedding in a Catholic church and that wasn't yesterday or last week. My view is to let the Carroll family and friends grieve in peace and not make a federal case out of who does or doesn't go to the funeral.
Isnt it true that they have to request permission from the grand master wizard or whatever?
No doubt they will be there Tony, you should know better.
Quote from: Orior on March 11, 2009, 10:20:59 AM
Quote from: A Quinn Martin Production on March 11, 2009, 09:31:21 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2009, 08:58:07 AM
The funeral of the murdered Police Officer Stephen Carroll takes place tomorrow Thursday at 12 noon after Requiem Mass in Banbridge. The big question is can the local Westminster MP and other senior unionists go against the grain and their Orange Order diktat,and enter a catholic church to honour this man?
Entirely up to themselves but I know of at least two Orange Order members who were happy to attend my wedding in a Catholic church and that wasn't yesterday or last week. My view is to let the Carroll family and friends grieve in peace and not make a federal case out of who does or doesn't go to the funeral.
Isnt it true that they have to request permission from the grand master wizard or whatever?
Not exactly sure Orior, the rules of the OO are more complex than those of rugby! Maybe since they were from Belfast and I got married in Co Cavan, they felt it was far enough away to take the chance??
Quote from: Orior on March 11, 2009, 10:20:59 AM
Quote from: A Quinn Martin Production on March 11, 2009, 09:31:21 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2009, 08:58:07 AM
The funeral of the murdered Police Officer Stephen Carroll takes place tomorrow Thursday at 12 noon after Requiem Mass in Banbridge. The big question is can the local Westminster MP and other senior unionists go against the grain and their Orange Order diktat,and enter a catholic church to honour this man?
Entirely up to themselves but I know of at least two Orange Order members who were happy to attend my wedding in a Catholic church and that wasn't yesterday or last week. My view is to let the Carroll family and friends grieve in peace and not make a federal case out of who does or doesn't go to the funeral.
Isnt it true that they have to request permission from the grand master wizard or whatever?
At least Fearon has you for company in the gutter. Your attitudes are disgusting.
Quote from: A Quinn Martin Production on March 11, 2009, 10:33:56 AM
Quote from: Orior on March 11, 2009, 10:20:59 AM
Quote from: A Quinn Martin Production on March 11, 2009, 09:31:21 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2009, 08:58:07 AM
The funeral of the murdered Police Officer Stephen Carroll takes place tomorrow Thursday at 12 noon after Requiem Mass in Banbridge. The big question is can the local Westminster MP and other senior unionists go against the grain and their Orange Order diktat,and enter a catholic church to honour this man?
Entirely up to themselves but I know of at least two Orange Order members who were happy to attend my wedding in a Catholic church and that wasn't yesterday or last week. My view is to let the Carroll family and friends grieve in peace and not make a federal case out of who does or doesn't go to the funeral.
Isnt it true that they have to request permission from the grand master wizard or whatever?
Not exactly sure Orior, the rules of the OO are more complex than those of rugby! Maybe since they were from Belfast and I got married in Co Cavan, they felt it was far enough away to take the chance??
Their skin didn't burn when they entered the chapel, did it?
Quote from: GweylTah on March 11, 2009, 10:44:27 AM
Quote from: Orior on March 11, 2009, 10:20:59 AM
Quote from: A Quinn Martin Production on March 11, 2009, 09:31:21 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2009, 08:58:07 AM
The funeral of the murdered Police Officer Stephen Carroll takes place tomorrow Thursday at 12 noon after Requiem Mass in Banbridge. The big question is can the local Westminster MP and other senior unionists go against the grain and their Orange Order diktat,and enter a catholic church to honour this man?
Entirely up to themselves but I know of at least two Orange Order members who were happy to attend my wedding in a Catholic church and that wasn't yesterday or last week. My view is to let the Carroll family and friends grieve in peace and not make a federal case out of who does or doesn't go to the funeral.
Isnt it true that they have to request permission from the grand master wizard or whatever?
At least Fearon has you for company in the gutter. Your attitudes are disgusting.
Why? It's fact, innit?
Quote from: GweylTah on March 11, 2009, 10:44:27 AM
Quote from: Orior on March 11, 2009, 10:20:59 AM
Quote from: A Quinn Martin Production on March 11, 2009, 09:31:21 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2009, 08:58:07 AM
The funeral of the murdered Police Officer Stephen Carroll takes place tomorrow Thursday at 12 noon after Requiem Mass in Banbridge. The big question is can the local Westminster MP and other senior unionists go against the grain and their Orange Order diktat,and enter a catholic church to honour this man?
Entirely up to themselves but I know of at least two Orange Order members who were happy to attend my wedding in a Catholic church and that wasn't yesterday or last week. My view is to let the Carroll family and friends grieve in peace and not make a federal case out of who does or doesn't go to the funeral.
Isnt it true that they have to request permission from the grand master wizard or whatever?
At least Fearon has you for company in the gutter. Your attitudes are disgusting.
Sorry?
Tony did you not say once you wouldnt go to a presby church?
Cult etc etc.
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on March 11, 2009, 10:46:12 AM
Quote from: A Quinn Martin Production on March 11, 2009, 10:33:56 AM
Quote from: Orior on March 11, 2009, 10:20:59 AM
Quote from: A Quinn Martin Production on March 11, 2009, 09:31:21 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2009, 08:58:07 AM
The funeral of the murdered Police Officer Stephen Carroll takes place tomorrow Thursday at 12 noon after Requiem Mass in Banbridge. The big question is can the local Westminster MP and other senior unionists go against the grain and their Orange Order diktat,and enter a catholic church to honour this man?
Entirely up to themselves but I know of at least two Orange Order members who were happy to attend my wedding in a Catholic church and that wasn't yesterday or last week. My view is to let the Carroll family and friends grieve in peace and not make a federal case out of who does or doesn't go to the funeral.
Isnt it true that they have to request permission from the grand master wizard or whatever?
Not exactly sure Orior, the rules of the OO are more complex than those of rugby! Maybe since they were from Belfast and I got married in Co Cavan, they felt it was far enough away to take the chance??
Their skin didn't burn when they entered the chapel, did it?
No, twas the brollies on a sunny day that were the give away!
nifan, as I've said previously on this thread, I am not a Public Representative.
Britain considers itselt to be the epitome of tolerance
Unionists consider themselves to be British
The acid test will be the attendance of senior Unionists at the requiem mass at this policeman's funeral and I don't mean joining the cortege after it leaves the church.
a terrible time to be trying to score points, hang that head of yours.
your trying to turn the funeral of a loved one into a bigotry acid test when you are the most bigoted of them all.
shame on you.
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2009, 11:22:39 AM
The acid test will be the attendance....................
The acid test for who?
A man has been killed & you are more interested pointing fingers at people who may/may not attend
Do you really think the family give a fcuk?
Their feelings might be slightly more important than your 'acid test' at this time
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2009, 11:22:39 AM
nifan, as I've said previously on this thread, I am not a Public Representative.
So you wouldn't go to a presby church for "religious reasons", but if you where a public representative you would?
Politicians attending the funeral is like kissing a baby to a certain degree. If it was me I would rather none attended if it is to be poured over by the likes of you.
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2009, 11:22:39 AM
nifan, as I've said previously on this thread, I am not a Public Representative.
Britain considers itselt to be the epitome of tolerance
Unionists consider themselves to be British
The acid test will be the attendance of senior Unionists at the requiem mass at this policeman's funeral and I don't mean joining the cortege after it leaves the church.
Translation: I'm a sick bigot, but because I'm also a fool and a buffoon, I reserve the right to accuse others of bigotry, simply in anticipation of an act of bigotry that I speculate may happen in the future.
Tony asks a valid question-no worse than the point scoring that the Unionist politicans and the media have. Nobody as far as I know on this board has condemned the politicans and the brit Media for the line of Questioning they have put to SF regarding brits back on our street and thier emotions towards the killing of the troops. What did they expect Gerry and Martin to cry!!
Quoteno worse than the point scoring that the Unionist politicans
if they are point scoring then tony is absolved in his? tit for tat point scoring should be the order of the day, maybe less has changed than we thought.
Quote from: Boolerhead Mel on March 11, 2009, 12:03:51 PM
Tony asks a valid question-no worse than the point scoring that the Unionist politicans and the media have.
Exactly
What do people think of politicians that resort to point scoring when a man is killed?
I think it is a disgrace & says a lot about that person
Didn't you know, Tony's the acceptable face of bigotry here.
Shame on you Tony, once again you show your true spots . You've a cheek calling any one a bigot.
What is bigotted here about me? Previously unionists politicians have boycotted remembrance services due to the inclusion of catholic priests?
As an analogy, how would freestaters react or think if for example Brian Cowen refused to attend the funeral of lets say David Norris, simply because he happened to be of a different religious persuasion? Would you consider Cowen to be fit for public office?
Lets look at the facts the OO does not allow its members to take part in "PApish worship" Trimble was nearly hauled over the coals about attending the funerals of the Omagh dead. Maybe Tony should have asked the question is membership of the OO compatable with being a public rep-after all in may entail attending a Catholic service. Lets not forget a TUV member left a school service and dragged his child of stage as soon as a Catholic priest took part in a Christmas service.
Unionism and Orangism needs to end its ambivalence towards the Catholic faith-now is the chance!
Mel I am glad to see someone on this thread has the intelligence to see my very legitimate and non bigotted point.
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2009, 12:56:30 PM
Mel I am glad to see someone on this thread has the intelligence to see my very legitimate and non bigotted point.
The fact that you come on here and try and score points in your own wee crusade against the OO says alot about the type of person you are and what your real interets. Absolutely vile.
Intelligence - you have to be joking
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2009, 12:52:45 PM
What is bigotted here about me? Previously unionists politicians have boycotted remembrance services due to the inclusion of catholic priests?
As an analogy, how would freestaters react or think if for example Brian Cowen refused to attend the funeral of lets say David Norris, simply because he happened to be of a different religious persuasion? Would you consider Cowen to be fit for public office?
If the Unionist politicians don't attend then you can act all righteous until them your just shit stirring .
Quote from: Hardy on March 11, 2009, 09:16:22 AM
Breaking news: ketttle in hopeless case of confused identity with pot.
That's a classic, Hardy! ;D
It's also very apt.
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2009, 12:56:30 PM
Mel I am glad to see someone on this thread has the intelligence to see my very legitimate and non bigotted point.
Yes, the intelligence - but the level required to see your point...
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2009, 12:56:30 PM
Mel I am glad to see someone on this thread has the intelligence to see my very legitimate and non bigotted point.
Im glad to see that many more have the intelligence to see the irony -
A man who would not go to a church of another religion complaining about individuals, who (potentially) might not go to the church of another religion.
The only difference is the public office. So your happy to say your equally as bigoted but at least you aren't in public office?
Boolerhead, you use the term "papish worship" to highlight the bigoted thoughts - I take it you are aware of tonys usual comments on protetantism, presbyterianism etc.
NIFAN
I follow no religion they are all the same nonsense. I used the word as it is how the OO describe those of the Catholic faith.
I again raise the point is a compatible to carry out your civil function as an elected rep if you are a member of a society that hates the religion of at least 40% of the population?
and this quite simply is the point I am making as well.
Mel - nobody has claimed that the inability of some (and we dont yet know if they will go to the funeral) to attend a catholic church for something like this is not ridiculous. And as someone who follows no religion also i find it a little more so.
Given the fact that tony has espoused similar views about attending a presby church before it comes across a little rich, and a lot like point scoring.
As for politician who hate certain sections of the popualtion, you wont have to look hard to find them.
a new low - even for you Tone
I think the only problem with Tony's question is the timing. The policemans family do not need this debate happening right now. In a few weeks or months it would be relevant. I have no idea if Unionist politicians would not attend a funeral in a catholic church or not. If they didn't attend a catholic funeral due to religious bigotry then I think that is something that should be exposed. I can also say from past experience that I have seen OO members from the republic at funerals in catholic churches in Co Cavan.
great guy on tv now brainless lynch talking shit
Quote from: mylestheslasher on March 11, 2009, 09:44:52 PM
I think the only problem with Tony's question is the timing. The policemans family do not need this debate happening right now. In a few weeks or months it would be relevant. I have no idea if Unionist politicians would not attend a funeral in a catholic church or not. If they didn't attend a catholic funeral due to religious bigotry then I think that is something that should be exposed. I can also say from past experience that I have seen OO members from the republic at funerals in catholic churches in Co Cavan.
agree. I think it is a fair enough question - just the timing. i invited a work colleague to my wedding who also happened to be a free presbyterian. he took his invitation home with him but came in the next day and said that he wasnt allowed to go.
Our erstwhile First Minister (who is constantly lauded and given an easy ride by the likes of Pat Kenny etc) used to join the funeral corteges of murderered catholic RUC officers only when the cortege was well away from the church, after mass had ended.
I'm sorry but this is a very relevant point and its begs the question about fitness for public office and more importantly for the British Conservative Party (now in an official alignment with a major Unionist Party here). This party could well be in government in Britain in the not too distant future.
If of course I am wrong and I started this thread with an allusion to unionism's big opportunity, I will humbly acknowledge this
We all know what they're like, we don't need reminded. In essense (Wish I could spell) we agree, however this is politicial point scoring at best.
Quote from: ziggysego on March 12, 2009, 09:12:21 AM
We all know what they're like, we don't need reminded. In essense (Wish I could spell) we agree, however this is politicial point scoring at best.
If someone has a religious belief does that make them automatically a bigot?
This is a nonsense thread started to cheaply make irrelevant religious observations and deflect from the real issue of the tragedy of the last week.
Rubbish, it is about the fitness of sectarian bigots to hold office and is whooly relevant to the future prospects of everyone on this island. In the past (both short and long term) unionists have been responsible for the following acts of contempt
1. Blocking a Papal Visit to the six counties
2. Insulting the Dali Lama during his visit.
3. Failing to accord official recognition to Sean Brady on his elevation to Cardinal Status.
Tony, you have said several times you are not a bigot.
You have also said you would not go to a presby church.
If refusing to go to a church of the other religion does not make you a bigot, what difference does the being a public servant make to it?
Quote from: nifan on March 12, 2009, 10:55:45 AM
Tony, you have said several times you are not a bigot.
You have also said you would not go to a presby church.
If refusing to go to a church of the other religion does not make you a bigot, what difference does the being a public servant make to it?
As a private individual, anyone belonging to a particular faith has the prerogative to decide what church they will or will not enter.
This does not make the individual a bigot
Unless you want to argue the equation of contemporary religious belief with bigotry.
The question is (if it is a question) does a public representative have that right not to attend a particular religious service because of their religious belief, that being a religious service attendance which would fall under their brief.
Many politicians religious belief drive their opinion on a number of matters.
Abortion, contraception, religious education, homosexual acts etc etc etc.
I disagree with religious views being used in any such matters, but if a member of one religion who is in public office doesnt attend a funeral I find it sad, pathetic even, but not really any more ridiculous than preventing gay people having the same rights as me based on religious beliefs of the men in charge.
Quote from: T Fearon on March 12, 2009, 10:51:24 AM
Rubbish, it is about the fitness of sectarian bigots to hold office and is whooly relevant to the future prospects of everyone on this island.
It is not the "big question" in the whole tragic situation as you suggest. It is not a question I have heard anyone ask. It is a cheapshot and irrelevant nonsense.
Will the Orange Order expel any of its members ,especially those well known by virtue of their high office,who attend the "banned Popish ceremonies" ?
This is an interesting question however it is always going to stir up plenty of emotion.
whoever said that the only thing that if off with this thread is the timing is nearly right, it is also tasteless given that a family has just lost a love one and here we sit arguing over the feckin OO and the fact that some idiot bigot rips his son from a stage due to the presence of a Priest.
I would walk in to any Church, Protestant or Catholic, I even attended a wedding of a mate of mine who married a Free Presbyterian, people need to put their prejudices aside at appropriate times, this would appear to be one of those times. I will look in on this thread with interest to see what these politicians do and how they handle this funeral, I hope they attend in full and show proper respect to this young man and his suffering family.
Quote from: T Fearon on March 12, 2009, 10:51:24 AM
Rubbish, it is about the fitness of sectarian bigots to hold office and is whooly relevant to the future prospects of everyone on this island. In the past (both short and long term) unionists have been responsible for the following acts of contempt
1. Blocking a Papal Visit to the six counties
2. Insulting the Dali Lama during his visit.
3. Failing to accord official recognition to Sean Brady on his elevation to Cardinal Status.
When you stop referring to other churches as "cults" then you might look less like a rock-throwing greenhouse dweller...
religion???? how many on this board are religious? do me a favour. red f*cking herring.
religion is an accident of birth fearon, would it be fair to say had you been born in a prod estate then you would dislike catholics?
get over it. boring stuff
Quote from: milltown row on March 12, 2009, 11:11:23 PM
religion???? how many on this board are religious? do me a favour. red f*cking herring.
religion is an accident of birth fearon, would it be fair to say had you been born in a prod estate then you would dislike catholics?
get over it. boring stuff
I am a practicing Catholic. It's what I believe in as my faith in God. What other people believe is none of my business. I don't seek to preach my beliefs to anyone.
Tone - the Vatican (and Cathal Daly) took the decision to exclude the North in 1979 in the aftermath of Warrenpoint and Mountbatten...
A couple of points
I do not hate anyone, I disagree fundamentally with protestantism and its nonsensical cherry picking of the Bible and the fact that many adherents declare themselves saved due to faith in Jesus alone, which is rubbish.
This is a very relevant point and needs to be raised at this time. Surely the family would be even more hurt if some leading politicians failed to respect the deceased by attending this funeral.
Quote from: T Fearon on March 13, 2009, 09:56:05 AM
A couple of points
I do not hate anyone, I disagree fundamentally with protestantism and its nonsensical cherry picking of the Bible and the fact that many adherents declare themselves saved due to faith in Jesus alone, which is rubbish.
This is a very relevant point and needs to be raised at this time. Surely the family would be even more hurt if some leading politicians failed to respect the deceased by attending this funeral.
And i suppose you consider Adam and Eve fact? Don't eat shellfish, would stone the misuses to death if she cheated.?
No, I'm a catholic and don't interpret the Bible, or certain sections of it literally. Its the difference between protestantism and catholicism
Quote from: T Fearon on March 13, 2009, 10:15:09 AM
No, I'm a catholic and don't interpret the Bible, or certain sections of it literally. Its the difference between protestantism and catholicism
But it's OK for you when the Church and the Pope cherry pick what's literal and what's not?
Quotenonsensical cherry picking
Irony alert. ;D
Quote from: T Fearon on March 13, 2009, 09:56:05 AM
A couple of points
I do not hate anyone, I disagree fundamentally with protestantism and its nonsensical cherry picking of the Bible and the fact that many adherents declare themselves saved due to faith in Jesus alone, which is rubbish.
This is a very relevant point and needs to be raised at this time. Surely the family would be even more hurt if some leading politicians failed to respect the deceased by attending this funeral.
Is John 6:47 one of the parts of the bible the church told you to ignore?
Quote from: milltown row on March 12, 2009, 11:11:23 PM
religion???? how many on this board are religious? do me a favour. red f*cking herring.
religion is an accident of birth fearon, would it be fair to say had you been born in a prod estate then you would dislike catholics?
get over it. boring stuff
Im religous, Im just not sure which one to choose; The Flying Spaghetti Monster (http://www.venganza.org/) , The Church of Satan (http://www.churchofsatan.com/) or the The Church of Spongebob (http://churchofspongebob.tripod.com/).
All good churches Im sure you agree, They all make good cases for the meaning of life and well a bit more believable than a bloke who came back from the dead, could walk on water and make a basket of fish and bread turn into millions. Or that nutter out in the desert.
Quote from: T Fearon on March 13, 2009, 09:56:05 AM
I do not hate anyone, I disagree fundamentally with protestantism and its nonsensical cherry picking of the Bible and the fact that many adherents declare themselves saved due to faith in Jesus alone, which is rubbish.
But if someone else fundamentally disagrees with catholicism you claim they are a bigot and hate all catholics.
As for questioning the sense of religion, well we are told often that religion doesnt conform to "sense" or science, but faith is all that is important. Beliveng one set of faith based policies, while ridiculing others is ridiculous.
Quote from: T Fearon on March 13, 2009, 09:56:05 AM
This is a very relevant point and needs to be raised at this time. Surely the family would be even more hurt if some leading politicians failed to respect the deceased by attending this funeral.
So if a Protestant turns up he disrespects the deceased?? You started this by saying it was Unionist's big opportunity to shed its religious bigotry but Unionism is not a religion and has no ideological conflict with the Roman Catholic Church. However, what you are really trying to have a pop at (whilst trampling over the grief and bereavement of the issue to try to score petty sectarian points) is that some Protestants believe it is incompatible with their religious belief to attend the RC mass. These Protestants may still want to support and extend condolences to the family and it is not for someone like you to pass judgement on them. You might like to ask if a Protestant turns up at Requiem Mass are they allowed to partake or would the RC Church exclude them? My understanding is that Prods are excluded. My personal opinion is to respect people's religious beliefs, whether Catholic or Protestant, and I'm sure at a time like this right thinking people won't be asking this "big" question or seeing this as a "big opportunity" for anything other than support for a family that has been ripped apart by a horrendous crime.
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on March 12, 2009, 11:15:52 PM
Quote from: milltown row on March 12, 2009, 11:11:23 PM
religion???? how many on this board are religious? do me a favour. red f*cking herring.
religion is an accident of birth fearon, would it be fair to say had you been born in a prod estate then you would dislike catholics?
get over it. boring stuff
I am a practicing Catholic. It's what I believe in as my faith in God. What other people believe is none of my business. I don't seek to preach my beliefs to anyone.
one! good man ardmhachaabu, no meat today
The whole meat thing has gone out the window now milltown.
Quote from: Roger on March 13, 2009, 11:25:21 AM
So if a Protestant turns up he disrespects the deceased?? You started this by saying it was Unionist's big opportunity to shed its religious bigotry but Unionism is not a religion and has no ideological conflict with the Roman Catholic Church. However, what you are really trying to have a pop at (whilst trampling over the grief and bereavement of the issue to try to score petty sectarian points) is that some Protestants believe it is incompatible with their religious belief to attend the RC mass. These Protestants may still want to support and extend condolences to the family and it is not for someone like you to pass judgement on them. You might like to ask if a Protestant turns up at Requiem Mass are they allowed to partake or would the RC Church exclude them? My understanding is that Prods are excluded. My personal opinion is to respect people's religious beliefs, whether Catholic or Protestant, and I'm sure at a time like this right thinking people won't be asking this "big" question or seeing this as a "big opportunity" for anything other than support for a family that has been ripped apart by a horrendous crime.
All persons who are not in good standing with the Church should not take Communion whether they be Catholic or not. However all are welcome to the Mass and may receive a blessing instead of Communion. But it must asked why a non-Catholic would want to take Communion in the first place? If you are a vegetarian, then you wouldn't eat meat, likewise if you don't believe in transubstantiation then you wouldn't take Communion in a Catholic chapel.
Also can you refrain from the
Roman Catholic phrasing. Some here find it offensive.
Quote from: Donagh on March 13, 2009, 03:16:40 PM
All persons who are not in good standing with the Church should not take Communion whether they be Catholic or not. However all are welcome to the Mass and may receive a blessing instead of Communion. But it must asked why a non-Catholic would want to take Communion in the first place? If you are a vegetarian, then you wouldn't eat meat, likewise if you don't believe in transubstantiation then you wouldn't take Communion in a Catholic chapel.
Why attend if you are not a Catholic then? I think in this instance it's probably irrelevant but there are theological difference which are important to some people and should be respected. The main thing here is that people of all religions and none will have wanted to show their support for the bereaved family and it isn't for anyone on here to make judgements or use it to make cheap sectarian points.
QuoteAlso can you refrain from the Roman Catholic phrasing. Some here find it offensive.
Why??? How can it be offensive for people who are members of it? It might not be common parlance but in this instance it is necessary as many Protestants attending a funeral, wedding etc in a chapel will see themselves as part of the Catholic Church and regularly proclaim their membership in the words of the Apostles Creed. The difference being that they do not see themselves as part of the Church of Rome. No? I'm not expert on these things but I'd be fairly certain that that is the difference. It might sound a bit Free-P but seems to be the accepted terminology when making distinction between these faiths.
I see from reports that the funeral was attended by multiple representatives of the DUP (including the aforementioned local MP) along with SF, UUP and SDLP and Fine Gael.
Quote from: Roger on March 13, 2009, 04:06:43 PM
Why attend if you are not a Catholic then? I think in this instance it's probably irrelevant but there are theological difference which are important to some people and should be respected. The main thing here is that people of all religions and none will have wanted to show their support for the bereaved family and it isn't for anyone on here to make judgements or use it to make cheap sectarian points.
Why??? How can it be offensive for people who are members of it? It might not be common parlance but in this instance it is necessary as many Protestants attending a funeral, wedding etc in a chapel will see themselves as part of the Catholic Church and regularly proclaim their membership in the words of the Apostles Creed. The difference being that they do not see themselves as part of the Church of Rome. No? I'm not expert on these things but I'd be fairly certain that that is the difference. It might sound a bit Free-P but seems to be the accepted terminology when making distinction between these faiths.
Why attend? I dunno, maybe a funeral or simply to worship. I agree with you when you say "there are theological difference which are important to some people and should be respected" and as such Catholics would be offended if someone took Communion while not believing in transubstantiation.
Why does it offend? For a number of reasons: (i) it is not the official name of the Church, (ii) it smacks of other derogatory terms Protestants had for Catholics such as "papish" (iii) it actually means something very different from the way in which you mean it e.g. my wife if Catholic but she is not Roman Catholic in that she doesn't practise the 'Roman Rite'. There are many more Churches and Dioceses to the Catholic Church than the 'Church of Rome' or the 'Diocese of Rome'.
Quote from: milltown row on March 13, 2009, 03:02:03 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on March 12, 2009, 11:15:52 PM
Quote from: milltown row on March 12, 2009, 11:11:23 PM
religion???? how many on this board are religious? do me a favour. red f*cking herring.
religion is an accident of birth fearon, would it be fair to say had you been born in a prod estate then you would dislike catholics?
get over it. boring stuff
I am a practicing Catholic. It's what I believe in as my faith in God. What other people believe is none of my business. I don't seek to preach my beliefs to anyone.
one! good man ardmhachaabu, no meat today
along with self abuse? ;) ok here's a question how many go to confession? and how many tell lies?
I find the word "Roman" put before Catholic offensive too.
I know loads of Protestants who go to Catholic Churches especially for Funerals -except one in law of mine who sits outside in his car while his Catholic Wife and Kids go in. I wonder is he a member of the ::) O O?
I and all other Catholics I know have gone to Protestant Churches for Funeral Services and will continue to do so.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 13, 2009, 06:46:34 PM
I find the word "Roman" put before Catholic offensive too.
Old Paisley used that quite a lot, probably to make reference to the Pope.
The Pope in his eyes was an evil dictator, the head of this mock religion and who made up his own crazy laws to keep people under him in fear and continue to finance his operation.
Quote from: T Fearon link=I disagree fundamentally with protestantism and its nonsensical cherry picking of the Bible
Quote from: T Fearon on March 13, 2009, 10:15:09 AM
No, I'm a catholic and don't interpret the Bible, or certain sections of it literally. Its the difference between protestantism and catholicism
Brilliant Tony. Absolute classic, even for you ;D
Quote from: carribbear on March 13, 2009, 06:55:34 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 13, 2009, 06:46:34 PM
I find the word "Roman" put before Catholic offensive too.
Old Paisley used that quite a lot, probably to make reference to the Pope.
The Pope in his eyes was an evil dictator, the head of this mock religion and so made up his own crazy laws to keep people under him in fear and continue to finance his operation.
What a crazy thought ;)
Quote from: Tony Baloney on March 13, 2009, 08:08:20 PM
Quote from: carribbear on March 13, 2009, 06:55:34 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 13, 2009, 06:46:34 PM
I find the word "Roman" put before Catholic offensive too.
Old Paisley used that quite a lot, probably to make reference to the Pope.
The Pope in his eyes was an evil dictator, the head of this mock religion and so made up his own crazy laws to keep people under him in fear and continue to finance his operation.
What a crazy thought ;)
Exactly. Thank the lord Dr. Paisley saw to rectify this ;D
Quote from: carribbear on March 13, 2009, 06:55:34 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 13, 2009, 06:46:34 PM
I find the word "Roman" put before Catholic offensive too.
Old Paisley used that quite a lot, probably to make reference to the Pope.
The Pope in his eyes was an evil dictator, the head of this mock religion and who made up his own crazy laws to keep people under him in fear and continue to finance his operation.
To be fair, Paisley probably saw him behaving exactly like that in one of his films... ;)
(http://www.ptank.com/bucket/catsynth_images/palp.jpg)
Quote from: MW on March 13, 2009, 08:47:01 PM
To be fair, Paisley probably saw him behaving exactly like that in one of his films... ;)
(http://www.ptank.com/bucket/catsynth_images/palp.jpg)
;D ;D
Quote from: nifan on March 13, 2009, 10:34:07 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 13, 2009, 09:56:05 AM
I do not hate anyone, I disagree fundamentally with protestantism and its nonsensical cherry picking of the Bible and the fact that many adherents declare themselves saved due to faith in Jesus alone, which is rubbish.
But if someone else fundamentally disagrees with catholicism you claim they are a bigot and hate all catholics.
As for questioning the sense of religion, well we are told often that religion doesnt conform to "sense" or science, but faith is all that is important. Beliveng one set of faith based policies, while ridiculing others is ridiculous.
I think the issue is not fundamentally disagreeing with Catholicism, which is everyone's right to do--but fundamentally disagreeing with the existence of Catholicism to the point where you
are being bigoted. I have plenty of friends who don't believe in Catholicism who have went to funerals without any sort of comment or fuss.
Quote from: nifan on March 13, 2009, 04:11:15 PM
I see from reports that the funeral was attended by multiple representatives of the DUP (including the aforementioned local MP) along with SF, UUP and SDLP and Fine Gael.
Good, it's as it should be. We are making progress then.
I am glad they went.
Quote from: stew on March 14, 2009, 01:25:25 AM
Quote from: nifan on March 13, 2009, 04:11:15 PM
I see from reports that the funeral was attended by multiple representatives of the DUP (including the aforementioned local MP) along with SF, UUP and SDLP and Fine Gael.
Good, it's as it should be. We are making progress then.
I am glad they went.
But surely this can't be. Surely the
facts are that these evil huns will never, ever dare set foot inside the home of the great satan. ::)
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2009, 10:12:54 AM
Its not a cheap point scoring exercise. It is about the fact that in 2009 unionists cannot bring themselves to attend the funeral of a murdered member of a British Police Force and the British Conservative Party has now formally linked up with a branch of unionism, whoch means that unionists could conceivably be in the British Cabinet.
Entirely valid point and surely this will cause more hurt and insult to the Carroll family.
Imagine is a black person was murdered in London and the sitting MP could not attend his funeral. Image the outcry of racism etc
Maybe I'm just being over-critical of Tony's view on the situation.... But maybe he's betraying his non-too-thinly veiled hatred of everything to do with anything remotely British / Protestant/ Loyalist/ Unionist.
But then again... maybe I'm wrong.
I just hope that the praise for the said MP is as glowing as his comdemnation of his 'pre-supposed' absence is equally vociferous.
I wont hold my breath.
Over to you Tony....
Quote from: Tony Baloney on March 13, 2009, 08:08:20 PM
Quote from: carribbear on March 13, 2009, 06:55:34 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 13, 2009, 06:46:34 PM
I find the word "Roman" put before Catholic offensive too.
Old Paisley used that quite a lot, probably to make reference to the Pope.
The Pope in his eyes was an evil dictator, the head of this mock religion and so made up his own crazy laws to keep people under him in fear and continue to finance his operation.
What a crazy thought ;)
The good doctor (certification subject to debate) saw a gap in the market to become a sith - how else could you explain his offspring? Rhonda is the spit of Darth Maul.
Quote from: A Quinn Martin Production on March 11, 2009, 10:49:25 AM
Quote from: GweylTah on March 11, 2009, 10:44:27 AM
Quote from: Orior on March 11, 2009, 10:20:59 AM
Quote from: A Quinn Martin Production on March 11, 2009, 09:31:21 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2009, 08:58:07 AM
The funeral of the murdered Police Officer Stephen Carroll takes place tomorrow Thursday at 12 noon after Requiem Mass in Banbridge. The big question is can the local Westminster MP and other senior unionists go against the grain and their Orange Order diktat,and enter a catholic church to honour this man?
Entirely up to themselves but I know of at least two Orange Order members who were happy to attend my wedding in a Catholic church and that wasn't yesterday or last week. My view is to let the Carroll family and friends grieve in peace and not make a federal case out of who does or doesn't go to the funeral.
Isnt it true that they have to request permission from the grand master wizard or whatever?
At least Fearon has you for company in the gutter. Your attitudes are disgusting.
Sorry?
Sorry indeed - what did poor Quinn Martin say to justify you putting him in the gutter with Fearon?
PS: Welcome back - I've a book open on how long it will take you to get caught out and run away again.
Quote from: Donagh on March 13, 2009, 03:16:40 PM
Also can you refrain from the Roman Catholic phrasing. Some here find it offensive.
Do they really ??? How in the hell is someone supposed to make the distiction then between the Roman (sorry ???) catholic church and any other catholic church for instance the anglian church who also refer to themselves as the holy catholic church!!
The word catholic simply means broad or whole? Killer whales are said to have a catholic diet that doesn't mean though that people have to run the gauntlet in fear of being killed and eaten by killer cetans on their way to mass though :D
Quote from: delboy on March 14, 2009, 12:55:25 PM
Do they really ??? How in the hell is someone supposed to make the distiction then between the Roman (sorry ???) catholic church and any other catholic church for instance the anglian church who also refer to themselves as the holy catholic church!!
The word catholic simply means broad or whole? Killer whales are said to have a catholic diet that doesn't mean though that people have to run the gauntlet in fear of being killed and eaten by killer cetans on their way to mass though :D
Erm you call them by their proper names, the first is the
Catholic (capital 'C') Church or if you are referring to the latter you could say Church of England/Ireland etc or simply 'Anglican' (there being no such thing as the 'Anglican Church').
You are being facetious with your second point.
Quote from: Donagh on March 14, 2009, 01:17:54 PM
Quote from: delboy on March 14, 2009, 12:55:25 PM
Do they really ??? How in the hell is someone supposed to make the distiction then between the Roman (sorry ???) catholic church and any other catholic church for instance the anglian church who also refer to themselves as the holy catholic church!!
The word catholic simply means broad or whole? Killer whales are said to have a catholic diet that doesn't mean though that people have to run the gauntlet in fear of being killed and eaten by killer cetans on their way to mass though :D
Erm you call them by their proper names, the first is the Catholic (capital 'C') Church or if you are referring to the later you could say Church of England/Ireland etc or simply 'Anglican' (there being no such thing as the 'Anglican Church').
You are being facetious with your second point.
So the anglican church doesn't exist ??? has anyone told them :D
Or instead of the above suggestions i could just call them what they call themselves the holy catholic church.
Quote from: delboy on March 14, 2009, 01:24:17 PM
So the anglican church doesn't exist ??? has anyone told them :D
Or instead of the above suggestions i could just call them what they call themselves the holy catholic church.
delboy, you asked a question about Catholics finding the prefix 'Roman' offensive. I've explained that many do so and I've given some of the reasons why they find it so. Now you know as well as I do that by simply referring to Catholics or the Catholic Church, everyone will know who or what you are talking about. I would have expected a man who runs to a public forum to proclaim his intelligence with the ownership of a Phd would be able to debate a point without the need for the facetious comments or over-indulgence in the ridiculous use of similies.
You raised the issue and I've explained, though I suspect you already know that some Catholics find it offensive. So by continuing to use the term on a forum whereby you have a fair idea most of the posters would be from a Catholic background, one can only assume that you set out to offend - not a particularly courteous thing to do as a guest over here.
Quote from: Donagh on March 14, 2009, 01:33:53 PM
Quote from: delboy on March 14, 2009, 01:24:17 PM
So the anglican church doesn't exist ??? has anyone told them :D
Or instead of the above suggestions i could just call them what they call themselves the holy catholic church.
delboy, you asked a question about Catholics finding the prefix 'Roman' offensive. I've explained that many do so and I've given some of the reasons why they find it so. Now you know as well as I do that by simply referring to Catholics or the Catholic Church, everyone will know who or what you are talking about. I would have expected a man who runs to a public forum to proclaim his intelligence with the ownership of a Phd would be able to debate a point without the need for the facetious comments or over-indulgence in the ridiculous use of similies.
You raised the issue and I've explained, though I suspect you already know that some Catholics find it offensive. So by continuing to use the term on a forum whereby you have a fair idea most of the posters would be from a Catholic background, one can only assume that you set out to offend - not a particularly courteous thing to do as a guest over here.
WTF is all that about, running to a public forum to proclaim my intelligence ??? ohh you mean replying under a pseudonym to a thread on a public discussion forum on the topic of education and carrying out the henious act of disclosing to a bunch of other people also posting uder pseudonyms that I hold a PhD. Yeah you are 100 % right thats what really gets my dick hard, boasting about my acheivements to a lot of I people i don't know from a hole in the hedge. BTW did I also mention that Im an olympic gold medal winner,married to a supermodel and fabously wealthy beyonds the dreams of avarice.
To be honest it says a lot more about you and what every hang ups you have, for the record I work in a field were a PhD is a minimum anything less would have you washing bottles. And I don't think its any mark of intelligence it is what it is, a qulification saying that I have studied and received training on a particular aspect. I don't look on it as much different than any other qualification such as one that a plumber or electrician might have to aquire.
BTW its a bit rich of you to lecture my on causing offence especially since you very quickly resorted to making personal comments, speaks volumes really.
[/quote]
I would have expected a man who runs to a public forum to proclaim his intelligence with the ownership of a Phd would be able to debate a point without the need for the facetious comments or over-indulgence in the ridiculous use of similies.
[/quote]
Completely unfair Donagh, delboy has never boasted about having a PHD, he replied to a thread started by me about what educational qualifications board members have.
Quote from: delboy on March 14, 2009, 02:00:24 PM
WTF is all that about, running to a public forum to proclaim my intelligence ??? ohh you mean replying under a pseudonym to a thread on a public discussion forum on the topic of education and carrying out the henious act of disclosing to a bunch of other people also posting uder pseudonyms that I hold a PhD. Yeah you are 100 % right thats what really gets my dick hard, boasting about my acheivements to a lot of I people i don't know from a hole in the hedge. BTW did I also mention that Im an olympic gold medal winner,married to a supermodel and fabously wealthy beyonds the dreams of avarice.
To be honest it says a lot more about you and what every hang ups you have, for the record I work in a field were a PhD is a minimum anything less would have you washing bottles. And I don't think its any mark of intelligence it is what it is, a qulification saying that I have studied and received training on a particular aspect. I don't look on it as much different than any other qualification such as one that a plumber or electrician might have to aquire.
BTW its a bit rich of you to lecture my on causing offence especially since you very quickly resorted to making personal comments, speaks volumes really.
Oh dear, scratch the surface and look at what we see. I would have thought that someone who gets so easily offended by a few lines posted to his pseudonym on a discussion forum would have found it very easy understand why others may take offence to certain comments you have posted. If I offended you, I apologise, or should that be "
(sorry ???) ". ;)
Quote from: BallyhaiseMan on March 14, 2009, 02:07:44 PM
Completely unfair Donagh, delboy has never boasted about having a PHD, he replied to a thread started by me about what educational qualifications board members have.
Only messing BH, I'm sure delboy knows I was only being facetious. No offence intended.
None taken i just don't like being misrepresented. Im happy to stick to the issues.
I have to say though that i thought in light of the statements made about the R prefix being offensive that it might be pertinent to mention that other global churches also regard themselves and refer to themselves as catholics.
To be fair if the R word is genuinely causing offence (you learn something new everyday) then i will cease and desist all use of it from here on in (not that i use it anyway TBH), im not in the business of setting out to purposefully cause offence.
To be honest, as someone who was raised a Catholic, i never understood the offence at the 'Roman' prefix. Then again, i never really understood he offence at someone being called a 'free stater'.
I think some people just really like to be offended.
Quote from: Maguire01 on March 14, 2009, 04:00:18 PM
To be honest, as someone who was raised a Catholic, i never understood the offence at the 'Roman' prefix. Then again, i never really understood he offence at someone being called a 'free stater'.
I think some people just really like to be offended.
Do you refer to yourself as roman?
Quote from: Roger on March 13, 2009, 04:06:43 PM
Quote from: Donagh on March 13, 2009, 03:16:40 PM
All persons who are not in good standing with the Church should not take Communion whether they be Catholic or not. However all are welcome to the Mass and may receive a blessing instead of Communion. But it must asked why a non-Catholic would want to take Communion in the first place? If you are a vegetarian, then you wouldn't eat meat, likewise if you don't believe in transubstantiation then you wouldn't take Communion in a Catholic chapel.
Why attend if you are not a Catholic then? I think in this instance it's probably irrelevant but there are theological difference which are important to some people and should be respected. The main thing here is that people of all religions and none will have wanted to show their support for the bereaved family and it isn't for anyone on here to make judgements or use it to make cheap sectarian points.
QuoteAlso can you refrain from the Roman Catholic phrasing. Some here find it offensive.
Why??? How can it be offensive for people who are members of it? It might not be common parlance but in this instance it is necessary as many Protestants attending a funeral, wedding etc in a chapel will see themselves as part of the Catholic Church and regularly proclaim their membership in the words of the Apostles Creed. The difference being that they do not see themselves as part of the Church of Rome. No? I'm not expert on these things but I'd be fairly certain that that is the difference. It might sound a bit Free-P but seems to be the accepted terminology when making distinction between these faiths.
while unionism is not a 'religion' I think you will find that it def does have its agenda against , if not an ideological conflict with the Catholic church
anyhow my point here is that you have reminded me of a few stories that I have heard (one witnessed by a close relative who I would trust)
of unionist/loyalists from north county Derry being spotted AT Catholic mass and in three seperate instances, taking holy communion !
Dont know about others who might be 'outraged' at this, I suppose I merely feel bemused ! Obv they were just wondering what it was like !
Quote from: carribbear on March 14, 2009, 04:02:21 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on March 14, 2009, 04:00:18 PM
To be honest, as someone who was raised a Catholic, i never understood the offence at the 'Roman' prefix. Then again, i never really understood he offence at someone being called a 'free stater'.
I think some people just really like to be offended.
Do you refer to yourself as roman?
I don't even refer to myself as Catholic.
Quote from: Maguire01 on March 14, 2009, 06:56:20 PM
Quote from: carribbear on March 14, 2009, 04:02:21 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on March 14, 2009, 04:00:18 PM
To be honest, as someone who was raised a Catholic, i never understood the offence at the 'Roman' prefix. Then again, i never really understood he offence at someone being called a 'free stater'.
I think some people just really like to be offended.
Do you refer to yourself as roman?
I don't even refer to myself as Catholic.
Then you are hardly likely to fully appreciate why the 'Roman' bit might be offensive.
Quote from: Donagh on March 14, 2009, 07:00:30 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on March 14, 2009, 06:56:20 PM
Quote from: carribbear on March 14, 2009, 04:02:21 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on March 14, 2009, 04:00:18 PM
To be honest, as someone who was raised a Catholic, i never understood the offence at the 'Roman' prefix. Then again, i never really understood he offence at someone being called a 'free stater'.
I think some people just really like to be offended.
Do you refer to yourself as roman?
I don't even refer to myself as Catholic.
Then you are hardly likely to fully appreciate why the 'Roman' bit might be offensive.
I thought you didn't either? Maybe i'm confusing you with another poster.
Quote from: Maguire01 on March 14, 2009, 07:06:52 PM
I thought you didn't either? Maybe i'm confusing you with another poster.
I don't refer to myself as Catholic but I'm married to someone, an ex-frequent poster on this Board, who very much does describe herself as Catholic, but not
Roman Catholic. I never met a Catholic who describes themselves as Roman Catholic - have you?
Quote from: Donagh on March 14, 2009, 07:20:51 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on March 14, 2009, 07:06:52 PM
I thought you didn't either? Maybe i'm confusing you with another poster.
I don't refer to myself as Catholic but I'm married to someone, an ex-frequent poster on this Board, who very much does describe herself as Catholic, but not Roman Catholic. I never met a Catholic who describes themselves as Roman Catholic - have you?
I have never been a fan of yours Donagh but fair play to you for sticking up for Catholics
Quote from: Donagh on March 14, 2009, 07:20:51 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on March 14, 2009, 07:06:52 PM
I thought you didn't either? Maybe i'm confusing you with another poster.
I don't refer to myself as Catholic but I'm married to someone, an ex-frequent poster on this Board, who very much does describe herself as Catholic, but not Roman Catholic. I never met a Catholic who describes themselves as Roman Catholic - have you?
I don't know too many people who describe themselves on the basis of their religion full stop.
But you said that i was hardly likely to appreciate any offence, when i'm pretty much in the same boat as you in sofar as don't identify myself as a Catholic, but my partner is.
So if i can't appreciate it, it would stand to reason that you couldn't either.
Quote from: Maguire01 on March 14, 2009, 08:12:48 PM
Quote from: Donagh on March 14, 2009, 07:20:51 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on March 14, 2009, 07:06:52 PM
I thought you didn't either? Maybe i'm confusing you with another poster.
I don't refer to myself as Catholic but I'm married to someone, an ex-frequent poster on this Board, who very much does describe herself as Catholic, but not Roman Catholic. I never met a Catholic who describes themselves as Roman Catholic - have you?
I don't know too many people who describe themselves on the basis of their religion full stop.
But you said that i was hardly likely to appreciate any offence, when i'm pretty much in the same boat as you in sofar as don't identify myself as a Catholic, but my partner is.
So if i can't appreciate it, it would stand to reason that you couldn't either.
You're a bit tetchy tonight Maguire. Does your partner identify herself as a Catholic or Roman Catholic? If you read back you'll see I didn't say you "can't appreciate it", but what I meant is that if that you don't have a personal devotion or appreicate what it means to those that do, then you are "hardly likely to fully appreciate" how it may cause offence.
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on March 14, 2009, 10:50:44 PM
"Roman" Catholic I believe in general terms is used to differentiate from other Catholic churches including Greek, Byzantine, Oriental etc. In Western society anyone who describes themselves as "Catholic" is very likely to be a Roman Catholic though some other Catholic churches do appear in places.
In an Irish context, the term "Roman Catholic" is subjective. It can in some ways be fine in context, in other situations, alongside the phrase "Church of Rome", its use could be to try and discredit the patriotism of the followers by implying that their loyalty goes first and foremost to a foreign person/head of state and not the head of state of their own country, hence they are subservient to the country or society they live in. I'm sure everyone here has different opinions on it
Fionntamhnach, leaving aside the pejorative use of 'Roman' by the Free-Ps and others, 'Roman Catholic' is also used in reference to those who practise in the Roman Rite within the Catholic Church and those who don't e.g. my sister-in-law is an Ethiopian Catholic in full communion with the Catholic Church but she does not practise in any of the Roman Rites (there are a few).
Among those who do practise within the Roman Rite in communion with the Catholic Church the term has been confused since the Second Vatican Council and the introduction of the "novus Ordo Missae" i.e. there is a tendency to associate the term '
Roman Catholic' only with those who practise the 'Novus Ordo' or modern Mass (and not those who go to the Tridentine Mass).
But as you say, the context can be everything.
Quote from: Donagh on March 14, 2009, 09:03:24 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on March 14, 2009, 08:12:48 PM
Quote from: Donagh on March 14, 2009, 07:20:51 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on March 14, 2009, 07:06:52 PM
I thought you didn't either? Maybe i'm confusing you with another poster.
I don't refer to myself as Catholic but I'm married to someone, an ex-frequent poster on this Board, who very much does describe herself as Catholic, but not Roman Catholic. I never met a Catholic who describes themselves as Roman Catholic - have you?
I don't know too many people who describe themselves on the basis of their religion full stop.
But you said that i was hardly likely to appreciate any offence, when i'm pretty much in the same boat as you in sofar as don't identify myself as a Catholic, but my partner is.
So if i can't appreciate it, it would stand to reason that you couldn't either.
You're a bit tetchy tonight Maguire. Does your partner identify herself as a Catholic or Roman Catholic? If you read back you'll see I didn't say you "can't appreciate it", but what I meant is that if that you don't have a personal devotion or appreicate what it means to those that do, then you are "hardly likely to fully appreciate" how it may cause offence.
And all i was saying was that if i am "hardly likely to fully appreciate it", then neither are you.
But anyway, i asked my partner if she would say she was a 'Catholic' or 'Roman Catholic' - she said she would say she was a 'Catholic' but that if someone asked her if she was a Roman Catholic, she would say yes. She didn't see any issue with it.
Quote from: Maguire01 on March 15, 2009, 01:14:44 AM
And all i was saying was that if i am "hardly likely to fully appreciate it", then neither are you.
But anyway, i asked my partner if she would say she was a 'Catholic' or 'Roman Catholic' - she said she would say she was a 'Catholic' but that if someone asked her if she was a Roman Catholic, she would say yes. She didn't see any issue with it.
Well that's fair enough. I live with someone who does take offence to being called a
Roman Catholic so maybe I'm a little more sensitised to it than you may be. I'm also guessing that as it's used pejoratively by certain non-Catholic groupings that others may also take offence I think one or two may have acknowledged that on this thread. Anyway, it's not something I'd fall out with someone over as I know that most Catholics wouldn't raise an objection as they would think it uncharitable to assume someone was being deliberately offensive, but in this day and age I believe it is at the very least discourteous not to be aware of such things. In the context of everyday speech in this part of the world, I think we all know what is meant by saying Catholic when talking about religion (unless you are High Anglican - in which case even they will describe themselves as Anglican unless actually discussing their particular ritual practices).
Quote from: Donagh on March 15, 2009, 01:47:27 AM
Well that's fair enough. I live with someone who does take offence to being called a Roman Catholic so maybe I'm a little more sensitised to it than you may be. I'm also guessing that as it's used pejoratively by certain non-Catholic groupings that others may also take offence I think one or two may have acknowledged that on this thread. Anyway, it's not something I'd fall out with someone over as I know that most Catholics wouldn't raise an objection as they would think it uncharitable to assume someone was being deliberately offensive, but in this day and age I believe it is at the very least discourteous not to be aware of such things. In the context of everyday speech in this part of the world, I think we all know what is meant by saying Catholic when talking about religion (unless you are High Anglican - in which case even they will describe themselves as Anglican unless actually discussing their particular ritual practices).
I'm not offended by it but I just like to correct things as I go along.
I'll have to remind myself from now on to refer to anglicans/church of ireland as Catholic-Lite and Presbyterians as deviants. :D
When distinguishing between the Christian churches the Catholic Church often is described as Roman Catholic and is fairly common place around the world to do so, and is accepted as such. It is not meant as a derogatory description and many Catholics do so themselves too. By taking offense at it just seems to be silly and it could be argued that not to do so would offend others.
So we're offending people by not getting offended? Whatever you reckon.
Quote from: ziggysego on March 16, 2009, 10:36:22 AM
So we're offending people by not getting offended? Whatever you reckon.
I meant that it could be argued that by not describing the Catholic Church as Roman Catholic, it could offend other people too.
The Roman doesn't offends me. Niggles at me, but doesn't offend.
Quote from: Roger on March 16, 2009, 09:24:12 AM
When distinguishing between the Christian churches the Catholic Church often is described as Roman Catholic and is fairly common place around the world to do so, and is accepted as such. It is not meant as a derogatory description and many Catholics do so themselves too. By taking offense at it just seems to be silly and it could be argued that not to do so would offend others.
You were almost on track until the last sentence - especially the last part.
Quote from: Roger on March 16, 2009, 09:24:12 AM
When distinguishing between the Christian churches the Catholic Church often is described as Roman Catholic and is fairly common place around the world to do so, and is accepted as such. It is not meant as a derogatory description and many Catholics do so themselves too. By taking offense at it just seems to be silly and it could be argued that not to do so would offend others.
not amongst any Catholics in any countries I know
plus the greeks and russians call themselves othadox not catholics - well the ones I have met at least...would expect that they are indicative of the rest ..
Quote from: lynchbhoy on March 16, 2009, 12:56:03 PM
Quote from: Roger on March 16, 2009, 09:24:12 AM
When distinguishing between the Christian churches the Catholic Church often is described as Roman Catholic and is fairly common place around the world to do so, and is accepted as such. It is not meant as a derogatory description and many Catholics do so themselves too. By taking offense at it just seems to be silly and it could be argued that not to do so would offend others.
not amongst any Catholics in any countries I know
plus the greeks and russians call themselves othadox not catholics - well the ones I have met at least...would expect that they are indicative of the rest ..
Do a quick google on the three words in question. You'll readily find a number of Catholic organisations describing themselves as Roman Catholic.
Very true. Even the Irish Church uses it on their own websites.
QuotePRESS RELEASE
10 March 2009
Joint Statement from the Bishops of Dromore on the Murder of a Police Officer in Craigavon
From:
- Right Revd Harold Miller, Church of Ireland Bishop of Down and Dromore
- Most Revd John McAreavey, Roman Catholic Bishop of Dromore
The cold-blooded murder of a policeman who has served the community for twenty years, while doing his duty in Craigavon last night, was a morally bankrupt act.....
http://www.catholicbishops.ie/media-centre/press-release-archive/64-press-release-archive-2009/1271-46-2009
That site in particular is littered with referenced to 'Roman Catholic' - i've copied just one recent (and very relevant) example.
Quote from: Maguire01 on March 16, 2009, 01:36:07 PM
Very true. Even the Irish Church uses it on their own websites.
QuotePRESS RELEASE
10 March 2009
Joint Statement from the Bishops of Dromore on the Murder of a Police Officer in Craigavon
From:
- Right Revd Harold Miller, Church of Ireland Bishop of Down and Dromore
- Most Revd John McAreavey, Roman Catholic Bishop of Dromore
The cold-blooded murder of a policeman who has served the community for twenty years, while doing his duty in Craigavon last night, was a morally bankrupt act.....
http://www.catholicbishops.ie/media-centre/press-release-archive/64-press-release-archive-2009/1271-46-2009
That site in particular is littered with referenced to 'Roman Catholic' - i've copied just one recent (and very relevant) example.
Offending themselves then? Must be Unionists, sectarian, coat trailing apartheid-esque, West Brit sort of Catholics ::)
Since we've moved into the realms of poetry on other threads, I thought I'd add a song to this one.
All together now.
Roamin in the Gloamin with a shamrock in my hand.
Roamin in the Gloamin with St Patrick's fenian band.
And when the music stops, f**k King Billy and John Knox
Oh it's great to be a Roman Catholic!
Quote from: Roger on March 16, 2009, 09:24:12 AM
When distinguishing between the Christian churches the Catholic Church often is described as Roman Catholic and is fairly common place around the world to do so, and is accepted as such. It is not meant as a derogatory description and many Catholics do so themselves too. By taking offense at it just seems to be silly and it could be argued that not to do so would offend others.
It is not a common thing to do but even if it was, it wouldn't make it any less offensive.
Quote from: Roger on March 16, 2009, 01:06:33 PM
Do a quick google on the three words in question. You'll readily find a number of Catholic organisations describing themselves as Roman Catholic.
Do a Google for Catholic on it's own and you'll see many more hit without the Roman prefix.
Quote from: Donagh on March 16, 2009, 03:33:30 PM
Quote from: Roger on March 16, 2009, 01:06:33 PM
Do a quick google on the three words in question. You'll readily find a number of Catholic organisations describing themselves as Roman Catholic.
Do a Google for Catholic on it's own and you'll see many more hit without the Roman prefix.
Oh right. Are they offended ones or the proper Catholics? ::)
My suggestion was to Lynchboy who didn't know that "Roman Catholic" was fairly common around the world but he had never heard of any Catholics in any countries do this. If you google it you will see that even Catholics describe themselves as Roman Catholics and whilst the Church is officially the "Catholic Church". FFS even priests / bishops in Ireland describe themselves as this.
So give it a rest with your over sensitive nonsense and setting yourself up as a board policeman for those that might possibly be offended by this oh so big bad Unionist. It's pathetic.
Quote from: Roger on March 16, 2009, 01:06:33 PM
Quote from: lynchbhoy on March 16, 2009, 12:56:03 PM
Quote from: Roger on March 16, 2009, 09:24:12 AM
When distinguishing between the Christian churches the Catholic Church often is described as Roman Catholic and is fairly common place around the world to do so, and is accepted as such. It is not meant as a derogatory description and many Catholics do so themselves too. By taking offense at it just seems to be silly and it could be argued that not to do so would offend others.
not amongst any Catholics in any countries I know
plus the greeks and russians call themselves othadox not catholics - well the ones I have met at least...would expect that they are indicative of the rest ..
Do a quick google on the three words in question. You'll readily find a number of Catholic organisations describing themselves as Roman Catholic.
jeez man, google all ya like,
its reality that most of us are looking at not cyber land ! :o
Quote from: Roger on March 16, 2009, 03:48:51 PM
My suggestion was to Lynchboy who didn't know that "Roman Catholic" was fairly common around the world but he had never heard of any Catholics in any countries do this. If you google it you will see that even Catholics describe themselves as Roman Catholics and whilst the Church is officially the "Catholic Church". FFS even priests / bishops in Ireland describe themselves as this.
So give it a rest with your over sensitive nonsense and setting yourself up as a board policeman for those that might possibly be offended by this oh so big bad Unionist. It's pathetic.
Roger I've explained elsewhere on this thread why it is both factually incorrect and offensive to some. Are you saying this is untrue i.e. that Roman Catholic is the correct name of the Church and/or some people don't find it offensive? If so you had better point it other, otherwise as I mentioned to delboy if you continue to use the term on this Board when you know it offends some people, then we can only assume you are doing it deliberately. As you have no interest in the GAA, we might then wonder why you spend so much time on a GAA discussion forum using language which may offend many of the readers of this Board i.e. if you are going to post over here at least have a few manners about yourself.
Quote from: Roger on March 16, 2009, 03:48:51 PM
Quote from: Donagh on March 16, 2009, 03:33:30 PM
Quote from: Roger on March 16, 2009, 01:06:33 PM
Do a quick google on the three words in question. You'll readily find a number of Catholic organisations describing themselves as Roman Catholic.
Do a Google for Catholic on it's own and you'll see many more hit without the Roman prefix.
Oh right. Are they offended ones or the proper Catholics? ::)
My suggestion was to Lynchboy who didn't know that "Roman Catholic" was fairly common around the world but he had never heard of any Catholics in any countries do this. If you google it you will see that even Catholics describe themselves as Roman Catholics and whilst the Church is officially the "Catholic Church". FFS even priests / bishops in Ireland describe themselves as this.
So give it a rest with your over sensitive nonsense and setting yourself up as a board policeman for those that might possibly be offended by this oh so big bad Unionist. It's pathetic.
no roger, this is the real world, catholics dont use that prefix in real life, nor do greek/russian orthodox either.
Maybe go look up what donagh suggests, you might learn something,
maybe catholics might know a bit more about normal every day catholocism than yourself (obv !)
::)
Quote from: lynchbhoy on March 16, 2009, 04:05:25 PM
jeez man, google all ya like,
its reality that most of us are looking at not cyber land ! :o
Reality is that Catholics themselves and Catholic organisations themselves use the term in Ireland and many other countries. Just because you believe your reality is the only reality on this earth and everyone else is wrong, doesn't mean it is.
Quote from: Donagh on March 16, 2009, 04:06:14 PM
Quote from: Roger on March 16, 2009, 03:48:51 PM
My suggestion was to Lynchboy who didn't know that "Roman Catholic" was fairly common around the world but he had never heard of any Catholics in any countries do this. If you google it you will see that even Catholics describe themselves as Roman Catholics and whilst the Church is officially the "Catholic Church". FFS even priests / bishops in Ireland describe themselves as this.
So give it a rest with your over sensitive nonsense and setting yourself up as a board policeman for those that might possibly be offended by this oh so big bad Unionist. It's pathetic.
Roger I've explained elsewhere on this thread why it is both factually incorrect and offensive to some. Are you saying this is untrue i.e. that Roman Catholic is the correct name of the Church and/or some people don't find it offensive? If so you had better point it other, otherwise as I mentioned to delboy if you continue to use the term on this Board when you know it offends some people, then we can only assume you are doing it deliberately. As you have no interest in the GAA, we might then wonder why you spend so much time on a GAA discussion forum using language which may offend many of the readers of this Board i.e. if you are going to post over here at least have a few manners about yourself.
Read my posts. I do not disrespect anyone's religion. I have explained my usage of the term "Roman Catholic" and in what context I used this. I am well aware that the official title of the Catholic Church is the "Catholic Church". If people get offended then by all means report me or whatever sanction you want, but you are being ridiculous Donagh with your offense at my posts.
Quote from: lynchbhoy on March 16, 2009, 04:08:39 PM
no roger, this is the real world, catholics dont use that prefix in real life, nor do greek/russian orthodox either.
Maybe go look up what donagh suggests, you might learn something,
maybe catholics might know a bit more about normal every day catholocism than yourself (obv !)
::)
You are wholly inaccurate and at least one example of a Catholic bishop using the prefix has already been given to you. You might think donagh is some boy, but you and he are both being ridiculous with this.
Quote from: Roger on March 16, 2009, 04:20:23 PM
Read my posts. I do not disrespect anyone's religion. I have explained my usage of the term "Roman Catholic" and in what context I used this. I am well aware that the official title of the Catholic Church is the "Catholic Church". If people get offended then by all means report me or whatever sanction you want, but you are being ridiculous Donagh with your offense at my posts.
Where did I say I was offended? I have explained to you why it is extremely discourteous to use that term on this Board unless using in the contexts I have already referred to on this thread. Indeed I think a few posters have agreed that they find it offensive, so by continuing to use the term you are deliberately setting out to offend - again we have to wonder why you would do that on a GAA discussion forum. Why would you do that Roger?
Quote from: Donagh on March 16, 2009, 04:26:10 PM
Quote from: Roger on March 16, 2009, 04:20:23 PM
Read my posts. I do not disrespect anyone's religion. I have explained my usage of the term "Roman Catholic" and in what context I used this. I am well aware that the official title of the Catholic Church is the "Catholic Church". If people get offended then by all means report me or whatever sanction you want, but you are being ridiculous Donagh with your offense at my posts.
Where did I say I was offended? I have explained to you why it is extremely discourteous to use that term on this Board unless using in the contexts I have already referred to on this thread. Indeed I think a few posters have agreed that they find it offensive, so by continuing to use the term you are deliberately setting out to offend - again we have to wonder why you would do that on a GAA discussion forum. Why would you do that Roger?
FFS Donagh grow up.
Quote from: Roger on March 16, 2009, 04:28:58 PM
Quote from: Donagh on March 16, 2009, 04:26:10 PM
Quote from: Roger on March 16, 2009, 04:20:23 PM
Read my posts. I do not disrespect anyone's religion. I have explained my usage of the term "Roman Catholic" and in what context I used this. I am well aware that the official title of the Catholic Church is the "Catholic Church". If people get offended then by all means report me or whatever sanction you want, but you are being ridiculous Donagh with your offense at my posts.
Where did I say I was offended? I have explained to you why it is extremely discourteous to use that term on this Board unless using in the contexts I have already referred to on this thread. Indeed I think a few posters have agreed that they find it offensive, so by continuing to use the term you are deliberately setting out to offend - again we have to wonder why you would do that on a GAA discussion forum. Why would you do that Roger?
FFS Donagh grow up.
Erm, I think it might be you who's having the difficulty maintaining an adult discussion.
Quote from: Donagh on March 16, 2009, 03:33:30 PM
Quote from: Roger on March 16, 2009, 01:06:33 PM
Do a quick google on the three words in question. You'll readily find a number of Catholic organisations describing themselves as Roman Catholic.
Do a Google for Catholic on it's own and you'll see many more hit without the Roman prefix.
Not going to get involved in this debate and TBH didn't know the "Roman" bit was offensive. ???
Anyway - surely there are more hits for "Catholic" than "Roman Catholic" because "Catholic" will bring up all the times that "Catholic" comes up, even with the prefix...
Quote from: Tonto on March 16, 2009, 04:55:52 PM
Quote from: Donagh on March 16, 2009, 03:33:30 PM
Quote from: Roger on March 16, 2009, 01:06:33 PM
Do a quick google on the three words in question. You'll readily find a number of Catholic organisations describing themselves as Roman Catholic.
Do a Google for Catholic on it's own and you'll see many more hit without the Roman prefix.
Not going to get involved in this debate and TBH didn't know the "Roman" bit was offensive. ???
Anyway - surely there are more hits for "Catholic" than "Roman Catholic" because "Catholic" will bring up all the times that "Catholic" comes up, even with the prefix...
cant say I find it 'offensive' myself but pedantically have to say that its not used by anyone I know or have known in the Catholic church/mass goers etc.....and I most certainly dont use it.
Only people I ever hear using the phrase would have been unionist/loyalists on the telly !
Thats all I am saying - but it seems that roger the dominican is taking it badly that his assertions are not quite correct for the majority of the Catholic religion !
:D
Quote from: Tonto on March 16, 2009, 04:55:52 PM
Not going to get involved in this debate and TBH didn't know the "Roman" bit was offensive. ???
Many non-Catholics aren't aware that some Catholics find it offensive Tonto, which is why I mentioned it in the first place. I didn't predict or expect some posters to get so indignant about my mentioning it. Doesn't annoy me, but I know many who are bothered and as such I would never use it.
Quote from: lynchbhoy on March 16, 2009, 05:02:56 PM
Only people I ever hear using the phrase would have been unionist/loyalists on the telly !
Therefore it is bad and must be opposed ::)
Quote from: Roger on March 16, 2009, 05:09:28 PM
Quote from: lynchbhoy on March 16, 2009, 05:02:56 PM
Only people I ever hear using the phrase would have been unionist/loyalists on the telly !
Therefore it is bad and must be opposed ::)
no ya headcase (its not all about you!)
catholics just dont say/use that ? its just incorrect what you are saying !
what was that you were saying on another thread about 'bloody obvious' etc !
:D
Just something that came to mind - and not wanting to labour the point - i acknowledge that some people obviously find the term offensive, even if i don't fully appreciate why, but another place i've seen the 'R.C.' used a lot is on signposts, north and south in Ireland. I hadn't really thought anything of it previously.
(http://irishfamilyhistory.ie/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/080218.jpg)
That isn't a traditional sign. It's probably been put there so Poles and new irish don't accidentally turn up at a bible-thumping.
A traditional sign? You mean an old one? That's just one i found on google - Churches have been signed like that for as long as i can recall.
Anyway, that's missing the point. Surely 'Catholic' Church would be all that would be required for the Poles? At least that's what has been argued on this thread.
Quote from: Maguire01 on March 16, 2009, 05:46:50 PM
A traditional sign? You mean an old one? That's just one i found on google - Churches have been signed like that for as long as i can recall.
Anyway, that's missing the point. Surely 'Catholic' Church would be all that would be required for the Poles? At least that's what has been argued on this thread.
Those signs are actually very expensive so in order to make them descriptive enough they probably added the 'R'
I know a guy in Rennicks signmakers who told me before that the small "welcome to XXXXXX" signs can cost over 100k due to the weatherproofing :o
Yes, i'm sure the price of letters was the reason.
The "Roman" prefix was previously only used by English speaking Prods.
Nowadays the PC idiots in RTE and by extension other clowns of the type who ban cribs from hospitals are big into the "Roman" bit.
And there you have it.
It's those pesky Brits' fault again. Who'd have thunk it?! ::)
Well the Yanks never put "Roman" before Catholic and we dont so ......
Quote from: Rossfan on March 16, 2009, 06:32:04 PM
The "Roman" prefix was previously only used by English speaking Prods.
Nowadays the PC idiots in RTE and by extension other clowns of the type who ban cribs from hospitals are big into the "Roman" bit.
So is 'Roman Catholic' is the Politically Correct version then?
Quote from: Rossfan on March 17, 2009, 10:24:56 AM
Well the Yanks never put "Roman" before Catholic and we dont so ......
The Yanks spell with a Z instead of an S and don't put a U in Colour - i wouldn't necessarily use them as a point of reference for spelling or use of the English language.
I think the main reason that Nationalists find the "Roman" tag offensive is that it was widely used by Papa Doc and his Free Presbies back in the days when the big fella began to make headlines. It was definitely used in the pejorative sense.
I guess that most on here are too young to have lived through the early days of the Troubles, the late 60s and the early 70s. Believe me, the times were scary back then. Whole communities, from both sides, I might add, lived in fear of being burnt out of their homes.
Paisley was very prominent back then and he certainly was a far different character to the chubby, avuncular old man who appeared on the Late Later Show in recent months. He bawled and roared throughout the province and in London, using terms from a bygone age in the John Knox tradition.
I am deliberately simplifying matters here as I think those days are best left in the past and we should concentrate on the present and future but Paisley was hated and feared in equal measure by nationalists everywhere.
He did have a particular hatred of Rome and all things Roman and terms like 'whore' and 'harlot' were two a penny with him. He also made the bizarre claim at one stage that the Pope had communist leanings because he wore red socks.
Later, I recall him being interviewed on a British TV program, where he laughed off this remark but at the time it was uttered it did serve to stir up the feelings of his volatile followers.
People from both sides of the divide in the North, with whom I have discussed the matter, agree on this point: to the Free Presbies, the term "Roman" was one of contempt. Probably still is.
Quote from: Maguire01 on March 17, 2009, 12:21:24 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 16, 2009, 06:32:04 PM
The "Roman" prefix was previously only used by English speaking Prods.
Nowadays the PC idiots in RTE and by extension other clowns of the type who ban cribs from hospitals are big into the "Roman" bit.
So is 'Roman Catholic' is the Politically Correct version then?
It is among the RTE/Dublin 4/Chattering classes as they feel that by simply saying Catholic they might offend someone somewhere sometime somehow...so better to irk 95% than to upset 0.004%.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 17, 2009, 01:50:31 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on March 17, 2009, 12:21:24 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 16, 2009, 06:32:04 PM
The "Roman" prefix was previously only used by English speaking Prods.
Nowadays the PC idiots in RTE and by extension other clowns of the type who ban cribs from hospitals are big into the "Roman" bit.
So is 'Roman Catholic' is the Politically Correct version then?
It is among the RTE/Dublin 4/Chattering classes as they feel that by simply saying Catholic they might offend someone somewhere sometime somehow...so better to irk 95% than to upset 0.004%.
You really think it irks 95% of the population? Really? I'd say the vast majority wouldn't even notice.
The only negative connotation seems to be the use of the term by Paisley and the FPs.
Brought up a Catholic (now lapsed!) and have never, ever heard of anyone being offended by the term RC. Maybe where I'm from people don't go out of their way to be offended by trivia. Having said that I rarely hear people referring to themselves as RC - it's generally just Catholic.
If a "prod" is asked what their religion is do they say "Protestant" or "Prebyterian/CoI/Methodist" etc? Genuine question.
I see Tony has avoided this thread like the plague
Fearon or me?
Quote from: Maguire01 on March 17, 2009, 12:23:23 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 17, 2009, 10:24:56 AM
Well the Yanks never put "Roman" before Catholic and we dont so ......
The Yanks spell with a Z instead of an S and don't put a U in Colour - i wouldn't necessarily use them as a point of reference for spelling or use of the English language.
The way they spell makes more sense that the way we do. Olde worlde spelling is what we use.
I have lived here in the states for 16 years, I much prefer the way the yanks spell, our way is outdated.
I never knew that offense was taken here, nor did any of the catholics that I have asked, though most of them would tend to use the term catholic only.
I did notice from a quick search the the vatican.va (the holy see website) does use the term a number (249 times)
first response from there is "ADDRESS OF JOHN PAUL II TO THE MEMBERS OF THE ANGLICAN – ROMAN CATHOLIC WORKING GROUP"
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/speeches/2001/november/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_20011124_anglican-catholic_en.html (http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/speeches/2001/november/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_20011124_anglican-catholic_en.html)
Blinkered people who dwell in a world where their own community is always right, justified to do anything, and who's paranoia knows no bounds believe that if Paisley ever said it, it is automatically offensive. Afterall them Unionists and Prods are all out to attack and offend people like that.
FFS, in their wee world the Catholic Church must be Paisleyites too!!! :D
You couldn't make it up.
Quote from: Roger on March 18, 2009, 11:42:25 AM
Blinkered people who dwell in a world where their own community is always right, justified to do anything, and who's paranoia knows no bounds believe that if Paisley ever said it, it is automatically offensive. Afterall them Unionists and Prods are all out to attack and offend people like that.
FFS, in their wee world the Catholic Church must be Paisleyites too!!! :D
You couldn't make it up.
Wodger away and take your big wooden spoon back to OWC. ::)
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on March 18, 2009, 11:52:54 AM
Quote from: Roger on March 18, 2009, 11:42:25 AM
Blinkered people who dwell in a world where their own community is always right, justified to do anything, and who's paranoia knows no bounds believe that if Paisley ever said it, it is automatically offensive. Afterall them Unionists and Prods are all out to attack and offend people like that.
FFS, in their wee world the Catholic Church must be Paisleyites too!!! :D
You couldn't make it up.
Wodger away and take your big wooden spoon back to OWC. ::)
I wasn't on here stirring. My comments came from being inaccurately accused of being offensive based on what I see from subsequent posts is insular outlook, paranoia and plain ingnorance.
I'm not avoiding it. As far as I could see only Empey and Hermon (UUP) were in the chapel and indeed yesterday an anonymous unionist from Portadown (I swear I did not write this letter either) demanded details of DUP attendees if any, in a letter printed in the Irish News
Quote from: Roger on March 18, 2009, 12:43:17 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on March 18, 2009, 11:52:54 AM
Quote from: Roger on March 18, 2009, 11:42:25 AM
Blinkered people who dwell in a world where their own community is always right, justified to do anything, and who's paranoia knows no bounds believe that if Paisley ever said it, it is automatically offensive. Afterall them Unionists and Prods are all out to attack and offend people like that.
FFS, in their wee world the Catholic Church must be Paisleyites too!!! :D
You couldn't make it up.
Wodger away and take your big wooden spoon back to OWC. ::)
I wasn't on here stirring. My comments came from being inaccurately accused of being offensive based on what I see from subsequent posts is insular outlook, paranoia and plain ingnorance.
Actually I would agree pretty much with Lar Naparka's post:
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 17, 2009, 12:40:45 PM
I think the main reason that Nationalists find the “Roman” tag offensive is that it was widely used by Papa Doc and his Free Presbies back in the days when the big fella began to make headlines. It was definitely used in the pejorative sense.
I guess that most on here are too young to have lived through the early days of the Troubles, the late 60s and the early 70s. Believe me, the times were scary back then. Whole communities, from both sides, I might add, lived in fear of being burnt out of their homes.
Paisley was very prominent back then and he certainly was a far different character to the chubby, avuncular old man who appeared on the Late Later Show in recent months. He bawled and roared throughout the province and in London, using terms from a bygone age in the John Knox tradition.
I am deliberately simplifying matters here as I think those days are best left in the past and we should concentrate on the present and future but Paisley was hated and feared in equal measure by nationalists everywhere.
He did have a particular hatred of Rome and all things Roman and terms like 'whore' and 'harlot' were two a penny with him. He also made the bizarre claim at one stage that the Pope had communist leanings because he wore red socks.
Later, I recall him being interviewed on a British TV program, where he laughed off this remark but at the time it was uttered it did serve to stir up the feelings of his volatile followers.
People from both sides of the divide in the North, with whom I have discussed the matter, agree on this point: to the Free Presbies, the term “Roman” was one of contempt. Probably still is.
Whilst I don't particularily like the RC tag, I would say it's more of an annoyance then an offence, although I do think that many "people" do use the "Roman" bit to offend - alá papa doc.
Quote from: T Fearon on March 18, 2009, 12:54:04 PM
I'm not avoiding it. As far as I could see only Empey and Hermon (UUP) were in the chapel and indeed yesterday an anonymous unionist from Portadown (I swear I did not write this letter either) demanded details of DUP attendees if any, in a letter printed in the Irish News
Simpson was definitely there, and the reports i saw mentioned DUP members plural.
Also there where more UUP than you mentioned Michael McGimpsey was certainly there, and i think some others.
Quote from: Roger on March 18, 2009, 12:43:17 PM
I wasn't on here stirring. My comments came from being inaccurately accused of being offensive based on what I see from subsequent posts is insular outlook, paranoia and plain ingnorance.
Who accused you of being offensive?
Quote from: Roger on March 18, 2009, 12:43:17 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on March 18, 2009, 11:52:54 AM
Quote from: Roger on March 18, 2009, 11:42:25 AM
Blinkered people who dwell in a world where their own community is always right, justified to do anything, and who's paranoia knows no bounds believe that if Paisley ever said it, it is automatically offensive. Afterall them Unionists and Prods are all out to attack and offend people like that.
FFS, in their wee world the Catholic Church must be Paisleyites too!!! :D
You couldn't make it up.
Wodger away and take your big wooden spoon back to OWC. ::)
I wasn't on here stirring. My comments came from being inaccurately accused of being offensive based on what I see from subsequent posts is insular outlook, paranoia and plain ingnorance.
Mr Pot, meet mr kettle :D
Simpson was definitely there, and the reports i saw mentioned DUP members plural.
Not according to the papers-he was at a different funeral-Jimmy Spratt was there -MLA for South Belfast former RUC man and general half wit. I think he is on the poilcing board-certainly none of thier big names attended
Quote from: lynchbhoy on March 18, 2009, 01:47:23 PM
Quote from: Roger on March 18, 2009, 12:43:17 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on March 18, 2009, 11:52:54 AM
Quote from: Roger on March 18, 2009, 11:42:25 AM
Blinkered people who dwell in a world where their own community is always right, justified to do anything, and who's paranoia knows no bounds believe that if Paisley ever said it, it is automatically offensive. Afterall them Unionists and Prods are all out to attack and offend people like that.
FFS, in their wee world the Catholic Church must be Paisleyites too!!! :D
You couldn't make it up.
Wodger away and take your big wooden spoon back to OWC. ::)
I wasn't on here stirring. My comments came from being inaccurately accused of being offensive based on what I see from subsequent posts is insular outlook, paranoia and plain ingnorance.
Mr Pot, meet mr kettle :D
Read post #67 which started this again. Don't see anything insular, paranoid or ignorant about that. Subsequent posts by many on this site have simply highlighted the insular, paranoid and ignorance of the response by those arguing with that post.
Quote from: Roger on March 18, 2009, 01:55:01 PM
Read post #67 which started this again. Don't see anything insular, paranoid or ignorant about that. Subsequent posts by many on this site have simply highlighted the insular, paranoid and ignorance of the response by those arguing with that post.
What you mean like imaginary attacks on you?
QuoteNot according to the papers-he was at a different funeral-Jimmy Spratt was there -MLA for South Belfast former RUC man and general half wit. I think he is on the poilcing board-certainly none of thier big names attended
The independant:
QuoteThe Sinn Fein trio, as well as other rank-and-file members, were present alongside DUP representatives, including the MP for the area, David Simpson,
Hes also mentioned in the Irish Times as being there.
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on March 11, 2009, 10:46:12 AM
Their skin didn't burn when they entered the chapel, did it?
If you think they believed it would, it says more about you.
Quote from: Roger on March 18, 2009, 02:00:45 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on March 11, 2009, 10:46:12 AM
Their skin didn't burn when they entered the chapel, did it?
If you think they believed it would, it says more about you.
Away and fcuk off roger, that quote was made to another poster in jest about a couple of protestants attending his wedding, you now are just mixing - clampet.
Quote from: Roger on March 18, 2009, 11:42:25 AM
Blinkered people who dwell in a world where their own community is always right, justified to do anything, and who's paranoia knows no bounds believe that if Paisley ever said it, it is automatically offensive. Afterall them Unionists and Prods are all out to attack and offend people like that.
FFS, in their wee world the Catholic Church must be Paisleyites too!!! :D
You couldn't make it up.
Roger, on the chance that you found my last post offensive in any way or that you include me amongst those who inaccurately accuse you of being offensive or who uses insular outlook, paranoia and plain ignorance to establish a point, I'd like to clarify matters somewhat.
To begin with, I do read all threads of a quasi-political nature but really don't bother getting involved in giving opinions or in any sort of coat trailing. There are enough already here who are ready, willing and able to re-fight the Battle of the Boyne over and over again.
However, I did contribute to this topic because it is, I feel, a matter of record that many Nationalists were both frightened and offended at the tenor of Paisley's remarks back in the early 70s and possibly the late 60s. There were many dark and fearful days, for members of both communities, back then and while they are best left behind they cannot be airbrushed out of history.
If I had to state an opinion on the matter, I'd say that Paisley deserves great credit for the part he has played in moving his followers to the middle ground where an accommodation could be reached with their traditional arch-enemies.
By the same token, Gerry and Marty had to swallow a lot of dearly held principles to go down the road of peace as well.
Leaders on all sides had to change their mindsets and those of their followers along the way from then till now. I say that very few of us can honestly say that they never make mistakes or have seen the need ever to alter tack. It takes arrogance and incompetence in equal measure for an individual to maintain that he or she won't entertain the possibility of accepting change.
I would never feel, for instance, that my paranoia is such that I'd feel whatever Paisley said is automatically offensive. But my memory and my access to resources do tell me that a lot of what he did say at one time was both offensive and intimidating to large numbers of people in the Six Counties.
To maintain otherwise, would certainly indicate a degree of paranoia in its own right!
Like I say, I've no problem giving him credit but that doesn't alter the fact that many Catholics in the North have regarded the term "Roman Catholic" coming from him or his supporters as both demeaning and offensive.
End of sermon... ;)
QuoteLike I say, I've no problem giving him credit but that doesn't alter the fact that many Catholics in the North have regarded the term "Roman Catholic" coming from him or his supporters as both demeaning and offensive.
Of course. But ive heard the likes of that practically spit out the term catholic - without the Roman prefix - as if it was a derogatory term as well.
Context is key.
Quote from: nifan on March 18, 2009, 02:38:43 PM
QuoteLike I say, I've no problem giving him credit but that doesn't alter the fact that many Catholics in the North have regarded the term "Roman Catholic" coming from him or his supporters as both demeaning and offensive.
Of course. But ive heard the likes of that practically spit out the term catholic - without the Roman prefix - as if it was a derogatory term as well.
Context is key.
You're dead right, nifan.
Context is everything and btw I do accept that there may well be terms that many Unionists would also regard as offensive, given their context.
NIfan
I stand corrected-I had read that he had not attended the mass as he was at another funeral in the Irisn News.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 18, 2009, 02:33:43 PM
Quote from: Roger on March 18, 2009, 11:42:25 AM
Blinkered people who dwell in a world where their own community is always right, justified to do anything, and who's paranoia knows no bounds believe that if Paisley ever said it, it is automatically offensive. Afterall them Unionists and Prods are all out to attack and offend people like that.
FFS, in their wee world the Catholic Church must be Paisleyites too!!! :D
You couldn't make it up.
Roger, on the chance that you found my last post offensive in any way or that you include me amongst those who inaccurately accuse you of being offensive or who uses insular outlook, paranoia and plain ignorance to establish a point, I'd like to clarify matters somewhat.
To begin with, I do read all threads of a quasi-political nature but really don't bother getting involved in giving opinions or in any sort of coat trailing. There are enough already here who are ready, willing and able to re-fight the Battle of the Boyne over and over again.
However, I did contribute to this topic because it is, I feel, a matter of record that many Nationalists were both frightened and offended at the tenor of Paisley's remarks back in the early 70s and possibly the late 60s. There were many dark and fearful days, for members of both communities, back then and while they are best left behind they cannot be airbrushed out of history.
If I had to state an opinion on the matter, I'd say that Paisley deserves great credit for the part he has played in moving his followers to the middle ground where an accommodation could be reached with their traditional arch-enemies.
By the same token, Gerry and Marty had to swallow a lot of dearly held principles to go down the road of peace as well.
Leaders on all sides had to change their mindsets and those of their followers along the way from then till now. I say that very few of us can honestly say that they never make mistakes or have seen the need ever to alter tack. It takes arrogance and incompetence in equal measure for an individual to maintain that he or she won't entertain the possibility of accepting change.
I would never feel, for instance, that my paranoia is such that I'd feel whatever Paisley said is automatically offensive. But my memory and my access to resources do tell me that a lot of what he did say at one time was both offensive and intimidating to large numbers of people in the Six Counties.
To maintain otherwise, would certainly indicate a degree of paranoia in its own right!
Like I say, I've no problem giving him credit but that doesn't alter the fact that many Catholics in the North have regarded the term "Roman Catholic" coming from him or his supporters as both demeaning and offensive.
End of sermon... ;)
I have not been offended by anyone on this thread at all, nor have I said so.
If people find something someone said 40 odd years ago then fine. My respect for all religions equally has been stated. But if people use the views of someone else to generalise ridiculously and feel offended by what I have said then I find the whole thing laughable and pathetic.