Church offerings

Re: all good threads come to an end.

How much would you have to pay a solicitor or doctor for a day of their time on site (even with dinner thrown in)?
I would guess it would be more than the €150 or so that a priest is paid. I tend to agree with BlueBlaa on this and I think that's a first!
Click to expand...

Have you considered that the difference in price has something to do with demand? Perhaps €150 is as much as you can squeeze out of designer Catholics before they start shopping around.

It is an interesting question with people willing to pay the spiralling cost of Hotels, Cakes, Dresses, Food, Photographers etc. Just how much would a non church going couple be willing to pay for the use of the church?

If I were the church I'd allow regular church goers to hold their ceremony free of charge, and the rest I'd charge €3000.

If you don't care about the religion, but would like to use it to keep your parents happy, and have a pretty backdrop for your photo's, then fine, but pay for that privilage.

Let's see how many designer catholics there are then?

-Rd
 
Re: all good threads come to an end.

‘Final thought on the original topic - you can have my local church, I don't need it.’

Is that true Mr.Bond . Are you willing just to disregard the Church… just like that? The Catholic church has being sick for a very long time and it’s up to us, its’ members to rectify it. And understand where it went wrong.
One of the central themes of any religion is to stick by your Church in times of crisis and not jump ship at the first sign of trouble…. That is the moral cowards way out
 
Re: all good threads come to an end.

If I were the church I'd allow regular church goers to hold their ceremony free of charge, and the rest I'd charge €3000.

I never really understood how charging for the "use of the Church", including the relevant sacrament (e.g. of marriage in this case) isn't considered simony. Any Canon Law experts out there who can explain?
 
Re: all good threads come to an end.

One of the central themes of any religion is to stick by your Church in times of crisis and not jump ship at the first sign of trouble….

Aren't you mixing up the spiritual tenets of the underlying faith (e.g. in God, the Trinity etc.) with adherence/loyalty to the hierarchical institutional church which is, after all, a man-made creation?
 
Re: Church for sale

Are you willing just to disregard the Church… just like that? The Catholic church has being sick for a very long time and it’s up to us, its’ members to rectify it. And understand where it went wrong.
Click to expand...

Whenever someone says that they have no interest in the Catholic Church, they are met with a response like this. As if we are abandoning something in it's time of need. It suggests we don't have the sticking power of the good Catholics who stay involved.

The truth is I've turned my back on Catholicism for three reasons

1. I simply don't believe in it. I don't believe in any god, much less the one promoted by Catholicism, so it would be a sham for me to keep going to church bowing and begging forgiveness from something I don't believe exists. I have better things to do.

2. I don't believe in (for want of a better word) the policies. I don't believe in it's attitudes towards, Gays, women, contraception, and a host of other issues. And I won't allow myself to be considered a member of such a club since that membership would imply that I agree with those views, and live by that moral code.

3. I was fortunately brought up to question things rather than accept them blindly. I was able to recognise that being born catholic was an accident and all other religions and those with none were as likely to be right.

The scandals etc. Are not the reason I turned my back on the church. If I devoutly believed in the Church then I'd believe in it's ability to be redeemed.

If Catholics would stop looking down there noses at non-Catholics with a mix of pity and scorn I might have more time for them. Y'all ain't got so much to be proud of, and a bit of humility wouldn't go astray.

-Rd
 
Re: Church for sale

Ditto for me on why I don't believe DR but I still admire a lot of those involved and think that the central tenets of the RC church are a good moral code to live by, "Do onto others as you would wish to be done onto you." and "Love your neighbour as yourself".
 
Re: Church for sale

I have never ever came across a Catholic who would look down their noses at non-catholics… quite the opposite in fact, in that I have being meet with scorn, ridicule and sheer mockery by claiming that I was Catholic (albeit a very lukewarm sort of one!).
 
Re: Church for sale

Ditto for me on why I don't believe DR but I still admire a lot of those involved and think that the central tenets of the RC church are a good moral code to live by, "Do onto others as you would wish to be done onto you." and "Love your neighbour as yourself".

You're right - there's lots of there all right. However, what about all the other stuff like "an eye for an eye", hell/purgatory/limbo and so on? ;)
 
Re: Church for sale

I have never ever came across a Catholic who would look down their noses at non-catholics…

Does "looking down" include patronising because, if so, I have regularly come across that. Try reading Breda O'Brien in the Irish Times on a Saturday? She often makes a good stab at it.
 
Re: all good threads come to an end.

"Catholic" primary schools have no legal basis for refusing admission on the basis of religion.
Click to expand...
They don't refuse admission on the basis of religion - they prioritise admissions on the basis of religion (which means that those at the wrong end of the stick get refused in the end). It is all enshrined in the 1998 Education Act.
 
Re: all good threads come to an end.

ClubMan: Why is this "all very well"?
Its just a turn of phrase. Don't read too much into it. :lol

Daltonr: Actually the thread isn't about school collections, it's about the Church Envelope collection.
Oh?...then I refer you back to my first point...if you are offended by the RC church you are unlikely to be subjected to a church collection, are you?

Buy them some nice clothes and give them a bundle of unmarked non-sequential bills.
I presume you are joking. Who would subject their child to such a charade?

Purple:I don't fall into catagories 1,2,4 or 8 and 5,6, & 7 are open to debate.
G'wan...you're just being modest.

Clubman: I never really understood how charging for the "use of the Church", including the relevant sacrament (e.g. of marriage in this case) isn't considered simony.
Good point! I suppose if there was a 'price list' that would be blatant Simony (imho) - perhaps the request for a 'voluntary donation' is how thats got around!

However, what about all the other stuff like "an eye for an eye", hell/purgatory/limbo and so on?
The 'eye for an eye' mentality was finished by the teachings of This post will be deleted if not edited immediately Christ. He contradicted many such precepts of the Old Testament, which was why the Pharisees hated Him so much and plotted his crucifixion. This post will be deleted if not edited immediately said "Love thine enemy...Turn the other cheek", not an eye for an eye.
I believe the concepts of Limbo and Purgatory were 'phased out' around the Second Vatican Council in the mid sixties. Everyone got out on good behaviour. ;)
As to Hell and Heaven...just about every religion has some concept of these. The old ideas of a 'lake of fire' are less dogmatic nowadays.
Now that I've cleared that up for you, would you like to learn more about Christianity before you write it off through ignorance or prejudice?;)

Does "looking down" include patronising because, if so, I have regularly come across that. Try reading Breda O'Brien in the Irish Times on a Saturday? She often makes a good stab at it.
There is much ignorance in the followers of the RC religion in this country, BUT they are being unchristian in that kind of behaviour.

Rainyday:They don't refuse admission on the basis of religion - they prioritise admissions on the basis of religion (which means that those at the wrong end of the stick get refused in the end). It is all enshrined in the 1998 Education Act.
I'm all for the setting up of more non-denominational schools.
The collections will be a fair bit bigger and more frequent though I 'spose.
 
Do people have a preference for "non-denominational" schools as opposed to "multi-denominational" schools?

Marion :hat
 
but I still admire a lot of those involved and think that the central tenets of the RC church are a good moral code to live by, "Do onto others as you would wish to be done onto you." and "Love your neighbour as yourself".
Click to expand...

Actually both of those go back far beyond Catholicism and even beyond Christianity.

When you strip out the ancient golden rules that are common to virtually every religion on earth, you are left with the bits that most decent catholics don't like. I.e. Attitudes towards women, contraceptives, gays, divorce separation etc.

I'm not saying the church is wrong to hold these views. It's entitled to any views it wants. I'm just saying that most Catholics I meet tend not to believe in the very things that makes Catholicism different from other religions.

Do people have a preference for "non-denominational" schools as opposed to "multi-denominational" schools?
Click to expand...

Not really, if multi denominational means that all of the kids get to learn about all of the religions then that's fine. If they segregate the kids and only teach them their own religion then I'd have a problem.

-Rd
 
The 'eye for an eye' mentality was finished by the teachings of This post will be deleted if not edited immediately Christ.

Not quite true. This post will be deleted if not edited immediately was a Jew and his teachings represent a contiuous line from Judaic teaching as set out in the Old Testament and the Talmud. This post will be deleted if not edited immediately went out of his way to integrate the traditional Judaic teachings (e.g. 12 apostles - even though there were actually an unknown number - being symbolic of the 12 tribes of Israel, his 40 days and nights fasting in the desert being symbolic of the 40 years wandering of the Jews after the Exodus etc.) with his own in an attempt to bring Judaism around to his way of thinking. The Bible, being the main theological book of Christianity, contains both the Old and New Testaments so you can't really pick and choose the stuff that you like and disregard the rest.

He contradicted many such precepts of the Old Testament, which was why the Pharisees hated Him so much and plotted his crucifixion.

Actually it was arguably the Sanhedrin which comprised more than just Pharisees.

This post will be deleted if not edited immediately said "Love thine enemy...Turn the other cheek", not an eye for an eye.

He also said lots of other stuff some of which was mutually contradictory.

I believe the concepts of Limbo and Purgatory were 'phased out' around the Second Vatican Council in the mid sixties. Everyone got out on good behaviour. ;)

So much for constancy of belief so.

Now that I've cleared that up for you, would you like to learn more about Christianity before you write it off through ignorance or prejudice?

Actually that's precisely the sort of patronising attitude to which I referred earlier. As it happens I know quite a bit more about This post will be deleted if not edited immediately and the Bible than many practising Christians that I know, although that wouldn't be hard. I never "wrote off" Christianity just because I don't believe in it myself. On a personal level I certainly reject the divinity of This post will be deleted if not edited immediately (or anybody else) even if I am very interested in him from a historical point of view.
 
Actually it was arguably the Sanhedrin which comprised more than just Pharisees.
Click to expand...
The Sanhedrin consited of Pharisees and Saducees. So what? Do people reading this discussion need, or want, a practical lesson on Judaic history? Are you boasting, or trolling? Whats your point?
Its this kind of pettiness that ruins discussions and this one is now entering very dangerous ground.

The Bible, being the main theological book of Christianity, contains both the Old and New Testaments so you can't really pick and choose the stuff that you like and disregard the rest.
Click to expand...
As I see it, the Old Testament is part of a direct line in an evolving religion. This post will be deleted if not edited immediately often made reference to Old Testament passages, sometimes to reinforce it, sometimes to criticise it. There is good and bad in it. It is part of the history of the religion and forms its foundation.
The New Testament is built on the Old, but it is the New Testament which is pre-eminent.

You say I cannot pick and choose...but I do, I do! I favour the teachings of Christ in the New Testament. I have yet to meet a christian who personally cuts the throat of a live sheep to thank God for a pay rise.
Are you arguing they should because Moses did so?

Your disparaging comment about 'constancy of belief' being absent because the church dropped concepts such as Purgatory from the dogma...you see it as 'inconstant'.
I see it as willingness to change and evolve. Christianity is not, never has been - and never will be - a monolithic ideology locked in the 1st century middle east.

Christians have a free will and a free conscience. And unlike certain other religions...where I might have my head chopped off for disagreeing on certain minor details...I am free to use my conscience in my religion.
So are you.
In certain other faiths your apostasy and rebukes would be punishable by death!

He also said lots of other stuff some of which was mutually contradictory.
Click to expand...
Evidence please.
 
In certain other faiths your apostasy and rebukes would be punishable by death!
Click to expand...

Actually it's not the fact that he's rebuking Christian's that allows him to keep his head. Clubman lives in Ireland and as such he's free to criticise, rebuke, praise and discuss any religion he likes.

-Rd
 
The Sanhedrin consited of Pharisees and Saducees. So what? Do people reading this discussion need, or want, a practical lesson on Judaic history? Are you boasting, or trolling? Whats your point?

Er, I was responding to your lecturing of me above on issues of Christian teaching... :rolleyes

Its this kind of pettiness that ruins discussions and this one is now entering very dangerous ground.

My comments were not off topic.

Are you arguing they should because Moses did so?

Of course not - I'm just pointing out that the Bible and Christian teaching involves much that is mutually incompatible and contradictory.

Your disparaging comment about 'constancy of belief' ...

A disparaging comment based on fact.

Christians have a free will and a free conscience. And unlike certain other religions...where I might have my head chopped off for disagreeing on certain minor details...

Well, at least not these days anyway.

In certain other faiths your apostasy and rebukes would be punishable by death!

And this non sequitur is supposed to prove what exactly?

Evidence please.

Check out a comparison of the historical timelines and event sequences in the synoptic Gospels for other good examples.
 
Clubman lives in Ireland and as such he's free to criticise, rebuke, praise and discuss any religion he likes.
Click to expand...
Daltonr...Salman Rushdie lived (lives?) in the UK. A western democracy with fre speech, just like Ireland.
That didn't stop the Ayatollah from putting a Fatwa on his head for 'criticising' Islam. He had to go into hiding to avoid assasination.
Likewise Theo Van Gogh...lived in what is arguably one of the most free thinking countries in europe - The Netherlands. He was stabbed to death last month on an Amsterdam street, in broad daylight, for 'insulting' Islam.

Living in a country with free speech has absolutely no bearing on how much free speech you are allowed under certain religions.

Christianity is a far more tolerant religion than many paint it.
The Spanish Inquistion is not relevant to todays modern church, it was a product of its time - over 600 years ago.

Clubman:

You commented that This post will be deleted if not edited immediately contradicted himself. Your exact words were:
"HE also said lots of other stuff some of which was mutually contradictory."

Not a single one of your Google links points to a specific statement by This post will be deleted if not edited immediately that was contradictory.
Are you trying to mislead?

Incidentally, I note that the majority of your links (look at the first 3 alone) refer to Islamic websites full of anti Christian propaganda.

There's a whole industry of this stuff on the web.
Numerous websites have been set up in response to discredit the Korans validity by pointing out its contradictions. Try This Link. Its all tit-for-tat silliness.

Stick to your comments about Christs own words, and If you could find a source that was a little less biased...then you'd be more credible.
 
Incidentally, I note that the majority of your links (look at the first 3 alone) refer to Islamic websites full of anti Christian propaganda

They're not my links - they are ones that Google threw up.

Stick to your comments about Christs own words

John 5:31 - "If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true."

John 8:14 - "Even if I bear witness of myself, yet my witness is true"
Click to expand...

By the way - nobody can know This post will be deleted if not edited immediately' actual words for sure since the Gospels were all written (or actually collated from individual tracts into various proto Gospels only four of which were eventually selected as being "true") long after he was gone and no (historically) reliable written record of his teachings exists.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top