Catholic Church silence dissent within the ranks.

[Cormac]

There are no rules of the game. I made a claim. It happens to be true. If you dispute it, feel free to demonstrate that I'm incorrect. Otherwise you can just fuck off.

Seth, I like you. I'm only mucking around.

But you can't expect to be dismissive of others without getting some of the same back.

And in fairness, generally, if someone presents a statistic as evidence, generally, they point to a source.

Do you really dispute that there are a billion Catholics worldwide? I don't think so, I think you're just avoiding the issue, which is that the Catholic church isn't going away any time soon, even from Ireland. And being a private club, if you don't like the dogma, you have little choice but to fuck off somewhere else, so criticizing the church for "silencing dissent" by a member of the Catholic clergy, who has sworn obedience to the church and the Pope, sounds like a tempest in a teapot to me. Flannery is a malcontent and should be defrocked and if he wants to start his own religion, why, he can do so. Same with the liberal nuns who support birth control and abortion. They can hold any opinion they want, but they can't be Catholics if their opinions conflict with church precepts. It's just that simple.

And I do dispute that claim that 1 billion people are Catholics.

I dispute it on several grounds.

1. I suspect that it is produced based on the number of people who have been baptised. I was baptised. I'm not a catholic. (They refuse to adjust their records, and they have shut down any mechanism of formal exit from the Church).

2. The Pope himself re-affirmed the fact that a person automatically excommunicates him or herself from the Church when they reject Church doctrine. Excommunication doesn't necessarily mean they aren't Catholic per se. But what do you call someone who declares themselves Catholic, but sees no problem with contraception, marital equality for gay people, sex outside marriage, and so on? They can't truly be said to be Catholic - at most, one could say they may be some sort of Anglican Christian.

Given the popularity of contraception in so-called Catholic countries, and the fact that many Western countries are providing for equal marital rights for Gay people, and that even in undeveloped countries where religiosity is extreme - people will tend to engage in a good dollop of sex outside marriage - and not even for procreation.

We can safely say that there is no chance that the chance that there are 1 billion actual Catholics in the world is miniscule.

[klr]

There are no rules of the game. I made a claim. It happens to be true. If you dispute it, feel free to demonstrate that I'm incorrect. Otherwise you can just fuck off.

Seth, I like you. I'm only mucking around.

But you can't expect to be dismissive of others without getting some of the same back.

And in fairness, generally, if someone presents a statistic as evidence, generally, they point to a source.

Do you really dispute that there are a billion Catholics worldwide? I don't think so, I think you're just avoiding the issue, which is that the Catholic church isn't going away any time soon, even from Ireland. And being a private club, if you don't like the dogma, you have little choice but to fuck off somewhere else, so criticizing the church for "silencing dissent" by a member of the Catholic clergy, who has sworn obedience to the church and the Pope, sounds like a tempest in a teapot to me. Flannery is a malcontent and should be defrocked and if he wants to start his own religion, why, he can do so. Same with the liberal nuns who support birth control and abortion. They can hold any opinion they want, but they can't be Catholics if their opinions conflict with church precepts. It's just that simple.

And I do dispute that claim that 1 billion people are Catholics.

I dispute it on several grounds.

1. I suspect that it is produced based on the number of people who have been baptised. I was baptised. I'm not a catholic. (They refuse to adjust their records, and they have shut down any mechanism of formal exit from the Church).

2. The Pope himself re-affirmed the fact that a person automatically excommunicates him or herself from the Church when they reject Church doctrine. Excommunication doesn't necessarily mean they aren't Catholic per se. But what do you call someone who declares themselves Catholic, but sees no problem with contraception, marital equality for gay people, sex outside marriage, and so on? They can't truly be said to be Catholic - at most, one could say they may be some sort of Anglican Christian.

Given the popularity of contraception in so-called Catholic countries, and the fact that many Western countries are providing for equal marital rights for Gay people, and that even in undeveloped countries where religiosity is extreme - people will tend to engage in a good dollop of sex outside marriage - and not even for procreation.

We can safely say that there is no chance that the chance that there are 1 billion actual Catholics in the world is miniscule.

... and many of the countries that do have large "Catholic" populations are in the developing world or emerging economies. Think Brazil. When population growth slows down in those countries (as is already happening) and people get wealthier and better educated (and they already are), the number of "Catholics" will gradually fall back again, even if the Vatican claims otherwise.

[JimC]

Catholics will go the way of commas!

[Seth]

You understand that I am not a member of that private club.

I do have a problem with the rules of that private club, when that club and its leadership (who happen to be the leadership of a foreign, undemocratic statelet), reach out and commit conspiracy to pervert the course of justice in my country.

I agree. And if you can prove such a conspiracy, then I encourage you to bring it to the attention of the authorities. Unfortunately, most of the evidence points towards corruption and cover-ups by Irishmen, not the Vatican.

I have a problem with the rules of that club, when they conspire to cover up the rape of children.

Nowhere in Catholic doctrine is there any rule that supports or condones the rape of children. All those acts were criminal acts perpetrated by particular individuals and suborned by other particular individuals in direct disobedience and flaunting of every single precept of the Catholic church.

I have a problem with it when it conspires to usurp this state - which it has since the foundation of this state.

Hm. Since it is the Irish themselves, through the democratic process, that have accepted the Catholic church as a major influence in politics, that sounds like sour grapes and finger pointing rather than a rational argument. If the Irish are tired of Catholicism being a major influence in their culture, all they have to do is elect non-Catholics. But the fact that they don't indicates that you are in the democratic minority and that the majority of Irish DO want Catholicism influencing politics. What that means is, in a democratic society, you are just fucked.

When this happens, I take an interest, and I consider it my right to challenge their assertions, and my right to argue and lobby for the removal of any special rights that they enjoy - including the right to automatic charitable status, the right (therefore) not to have to submit public accounts, their abuse of diplomatic immunity, the indemnification of church bodies from financial liability for their crimes against children - and the limitation of their exposure to a relatively small amount of money (while the state shoulders the rest, I've a problem when the church then fails to hand over any appreciable portion of that money despite liquidating valuable property assets.

Sounds like your objection is with Irish law, not the Catholic church. The reason church bodies are indemnified is because Irish law, like most civilized laws, doesn't impose vicarious liability on innocent people and organizations for the criminal acts of individuals who have abused their positions and power. I'm all for locking up priests who bugger children, and Bishops who knowingly cover up such crimes, but the people who comprise the church, and who paid for the infrastructure and real estate so that they will have a place to worship are NOT guilty of the crimes and therefore ought not be punished.

I take an interest when my hard earned money, paid in taxes, is paid over to the church to finance public schools that my children cannot attend without being indoctrinated. (I am one of the lucky few though - I have a non-denominational school about 8 miles from our house. There are two catholic national (public) schools between here and the non-denom school - that I contribute to out of my taxes - and yet they are allowed to exclude my children because they are not Catholic.

Again, that sounds like anti-democratic whinging to me. You have every right to complain, but just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's inherently wrong. Your fellow Irishmen and women have voted to make these laws, so you are stuck with the results until you can convince the majority of the rightness of your opinion.

In short - their internal rules have real-world effects far beyond the fetid four walls of their churches, and I have every right to comment on, argue against, lobby against, and seek legislation against their internal rules.

Of course you can. Best of luck with that and all. I don't expect you'll live long enough to see the end of Catholicism, although you might live long enough to see the end of it's overt political influence and favoritism, which, by the way, I happen to favor. You might start by having the Irish people institute a Constitution similar to ours that forbids the government from either advancing or inhibiting the free exercise of religion. It works pretty well over here in keeping such overt influences and favoritism out of government.

As far as I am concerned, the Bishops are the representatives and agents of a foreign and hostile state.

Sounds very much like I feel about Marxists in the United States. But then again, they are Irishmen born and bred, so they are citizens and just as entitled as you to hold their opinions, both religious and political, and advance them through government intervention if they can convince the majority.

Keep in mind that you can always emigrate to some country that is more amenable to your social and political aspirations too.