Catholic faith coming under attack, says Archbishop
Catholics in Scotland were yesterday warned that their faith was coming under attack from a rising tide of
secularism.
Mario Conti, the Archbishop of Glasgow, urged his flock to resist threats to their way of life from everything from same-sex civil partnerships to anti-sectarian campaigners critical of denominational schooling.
The archbishop did so in a special sermon to mark the quarter century since the first ever papal visit to Scotland, by John Paul II in 1982.
He said: "At a distance of 25 years, we need to reflect on the Holy Father's words: In so many areas of life the most fundamental principles of our Christian life are not only questioned, but ridiculed and threatened with sanction.'
"Individualism has come to predominate the growth of the quest for individual rights has taken precedence over what is right."
Archbishop Conti, speaking yesterday at Carfin Grotto in Lanarkshire, cited the "ever-increasing incidence of abortion and the creeping acceptance of euthanasia" and claimed that marriage was being downgraded by "equal rights being accorded to unmarried and same-sex unions".
He also spoke of "repeated attacks on our Catholic schools, unjustly accusing them of fostering sectarianism" and reinforced long-standing concerns among some Catholics that equality legislation would lead to faith-based adoption agencies being forced to place children in gay households.
The archbishop quoted at length in his sermon from John Paul's rallying cry to Catholics in Glasgow's Bellahouston Park on June 2, 1982.
Then the Pope said: "We find it harder to follow Christ today than appears to have been the case before. Witnessing to him in modern life means a daily contest.
"As believers we are constantly exposed to pressures by modern society, which would compel us to conform to the standards of this secular age, substitute new priorities, restrict our aspirations at the risk of compromising our Christian conscience.
"Things abhorred a generation ago are now inscribed in the statute books of society. These are issues of the utmost gravity to which a simple answer cannot be given; neither are they answered by being ignored.
"Matters of such magnitude demand the fullest attention of our Christian conscience."
Many of the hundreds of thousands who heard the Pope speak in 1982 were young.
John Paul II, in his sermon then, called them "the heirs to a sacred heritage. Your forefathers have handed on to you the only inheritance they really prized, our holy Catholic faith."
Now most are in their 40s and even 50s. Many are no longer part of the church, at least if recent figures are to be believed.
There were 296,000 church-going Catholics in Scotland in 1980. By 2005 that figure had dropped nearly 100,000, to 198,000, according to Christian Research.
The church remains, by attendance, the biggest in Scotland and those who did turn up for mass yesterday were given a pastoral letter from Scottish bishops commemorating Pope John Paul II's visit.
The church last week made an attempt to win back the young.
It launched a new learning pack designed to ensure that values taught in schools were credited to Christianity and called for Christian morals to be added to the new curriculum being planned in Scotland.
Secularists quickly retorted that the faith had no copyright on values.
Bishops in England yesterday also defended Catholic schools in a letter read out to congregations in all Catholic churches.
Earlier this year the NASUWT teaching union called for a blanket ban on any new state-funded single faith schools, saying they caused social divisions.
© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without
permission is prohibited.
Posted by: Watchman, Still in London on 11:10am Mon 3 Sep 07
Cant help feeling there is a growing sense of paranoia in the Catholic church.
I personally dont think religion should play any part in education, its a personal opinion, and I respect others who will disagree with it.
I dont agree with single faith schools at all on the principle that they are divisive, although if we are to have them then all faiths should be entitled to thier own schools funded by the government, not just Catholic schools.
No doubt this comment board is going to become very heated and the exchanges will rage, although I hope I will be proved wrong on this.
Cant help feeling there is a growing sense of paranoia in the Catholic church.
I personally dont think religion should play any part in education, its a personal opinion, and I respect others who will disagree with it.
I dont agree with single faith schools at all on the principle that they are divisive, although if we are to have them then all faiths should be entitled to thier own schools funded by the government, not just Catholic schools.
No doubt this comment board is going to become very heated and the exchanges will rage, although I hope I will be proved wrong on this.
Posted by: Neil, Switzerland on 11:11am Mon 3 Sep 07
At at time when we are asking immigrants into our country to integrate, it is appaling to think that we have children seperated in their education because of their faith.
Also, the teaching of religious dogma at school is plainly wrong anyway.
That goes for any denomination.
At at time when we are asking immigrants into our country to integrate, it is appaling to think that we have children seperated in their education because of their faith.
Also, the teaching of religious dogma at school is plainly wrong anyway.
That goes for any denomination.
Posted by: Graeme, legion on 11:13am Mon 3 Sep 07
Donations must be down!
Posted by: Joe Strummer, London on 11:14am Mon 3 Sep 07
End apartheid education now. It isn't difficult.!
End apartheid education now. It isn't difficult.!
Posted by: Watchman, London on 11:17am Mon 3 Sep 07
Why is the law allowing same sex marraige an attack on the Catholic church, no one is forcing anyone of that religion to marry someone of the same sex, it is about giving equal status to some members of society, surely by saying this is wrong the church leaves itself open to charges of discrimination and treating certain members of society as second class citizens ? I thought religion was meant to be inclusive ?
Why is the law allowing same sex marraige an attack on the Catholic church, no one is forcing anyone of that religion to marry someone of the same sex, it is about giving equal status to some members of society, surely by saying this is wrong the church leaves itself open to charges of discrimination and treating certain members of society as second class citizens ? I thought religion was meant to be inclusive ?
Posted by: C. Darwin, London on 11:24am Mon 3 Sep 07
It's absolutely ridiculous to label children 'Catholic', 'Protestant' or 'Muslim'. How can a child have the choice to freely decide upon their religion when their school is run by those with a vested interest?
Just like the children of criminals aren't criminals the children of Jews/Muslims/Protest
ants/Catholics aren't Jews/Muslims/Protest
ants/Catholics unless they're brainwashed. Why not teach a more humane policy of free thought?
Is forcing children to practice a religion using state funds not a form of child abuse? Learning, yes, religious dogma, not with my taxes please.
It's absolutely ridiculous to label children 'Catholic', 'Protestant' or 'Muslim'. How can a child have the choice to freely decide upon their religion when their school is run by those with a vested interest?
Just like the children of criminals aren't criminals the children of Jews/Muslims/Protest
ants/Catholics aren't Jews/Muslims/Protest
ants/Catholics unless they're brainwashed. Why not teach a more humane policy of free thought?
Is forcing children to practice a religion using state funds not a form of child abuse? Learning, yes, religious dogma, not with my taxes please.
Posted by: J Brown, Glasgow on 11:26am Mon 3 Sep 07
As I said in another thread before comments were mysteriously allowed on this article, why is this headline news? This man has been uttering the same old "we're persecuted and the rest of society is debauched" nonsense for donkeys'. If you want to hear him then go to his sermons and/or read Catholic publications or websites. Why does the Herald feel the need to act as his pulpit?
What did the heads of the CofS/Central mosque/Synagogue/Sco
tlands bowlers say yesterday? Who out with their circle cares? Similarly whatever he bold Archbishop says doesn't have any relevance to the 5 million plus Scots who don't abide by what this old, celibate man in funny clothes dictates.
As I said in another thread before comments were mysteriously allowed on this article, why is this headline news? This man has been uttering the same old "we're persecuted and the rest of society is debauched" nonsense for donkeys'. If you want to hear him then go to his sermons and/or read Catholic publications or websites. Why does the Herald feel the need to act as his pulpit?
What did the heads of the CofS/Central mosque/Synagogue/Sco
tlands bowlers say yesterday? Who out with their circle cares? Similarly whatever he bold Archbishop says doesn't have any relevance to the 5 million plus Scots who don't abide by what this old, celibate man in funny clothes dictates.
Posted by: S. Perate, glasgow on 11:46am Mon 3 Sep 07
I was brought us a strict catholic. I went to a Catholic school. I had no choice about these things just an accident of birth. I cannot recall the schools breeding any form of sectarianism. However I am completely against them now. The world has moved on. the Catholic church are too slow to recognise that. they will allow an epidemic in africa rather than accept a condom is a good idea. If we allow Catholic schools why we need to allow Hindu schools and muslim schools and then hippy schools and somewhere over the rainbow schools. We need to stop thinking defensivley about these things and take foreced religion out of the school system.
I was brought us a strict catholic. I went to a Catholic school. I had no choice about these things just an accident of birth. I cannot recall the schools breeding any form of sectarianism. However I am completely against them now. The world has moved on. the Catholic church are too slow to recognise that. they will allow an epidemic in africa rather than accept a condom is a good idea. If we allow Catholic schools why we need to allow Hindu schools and muslim schools and then hippy schools and somewhere over the rainbow schools. We need to stop thinking defensivley about these things and take foreced religion out of the school system.
Posted by: Martin McDonald, Cumbernauld on 12:29pm Mon 3 Sep 07
Glad to hear the Archbishop speak out for peace, freedom and diversity.
Sectarianism of the best known kind is dying out in Scotland year by year but another brand is very much on the rise. I'm talking about sectarianism directed at all religious people by the secular atheist.
I, as a Catholic have little interest in atheism, or how atheists choose to go about their business. They are entitled to their views just like anyone else. I certainly have no antipathy towards the secular-minded. I do object however when they think they can tell people like me what we can think, what we can say and even worse, how we must educate our children. It's really none of their business yet a rising number of fundamentalist atheists seem consumed by religion and their hatred for it.
I'd never dream of trying to force my religious ideals on anyone, yet many want to impose a culture of atheism on me. This position is intellectually bereft and morally bankrupt. Sharia law anyone? Their sole justification for their position is that they think they are right. It's almost narcissistic.
It would be nice if atheists could live and let live. To be fair, the overwhelming majority can, no problem. By live and let live I mean we all get a say but we all try our best to compromise and live and work together despite our differences. I'm happy to do it.
Sadly, our hardened atheists see this debate as a battlefield and there is no placating them beyond the complete desolation of religious life and religious influence on the world as well as the subjugation of religious people. They just don't want to tolerate those who believe in God. But that's ok, because they think they are right.
Glad to hear the Archbishop speak out for peace, freedom and diversity.
Sectarianism of the best known kind is dying out in Scotland year by year but another brand is very much on the rise. I'm talking about sectarianism directed at all religious people by the secular atheist.
I, as a Catholic have little interest in atheism, or how atheists choose to go about their business. They are entitled to their views just like anyone else. I certainly have no antipathy towards the secular-minded. I do object however when they think they can tell people like me what we can think, what we can say and even worse, how we must educate our children. It's really none of their business yet a rising number of fundamentalist atheists seem consumed by religion and their hatred for it.
I'd never dream of trying to force my religious ideals on anyone, yet many want to impose a culture of atheism on me. This position is intellectually bereft and morally bankrupt. Sharia law anyone? Their sole justification for their position is that they think they are right. It's almost narcissistic.
It would be nice if atheists could live and let live. To be fair, the overwhelming majority can, no problem. By live and let live I mean we all get a say but we all try our best to compromise and live and work together despite our differences. I'm happy to do it.
Sadly, our hardened atheists see this debate as a battlefield and there is no placating them beyond the complete desolation of religious life and religious influence on the world as well as the subjugation of religious people. They just don't want to tolerate those who believe in God. But that's ok, because they think they are right.
Posted by: TheGlaswegian, Edinburgh on 12:44pm Mon 3 Sep 07
Martin McDonald above, [quote]I'd never dream of trying to force my religious ideals on anyone[/quote]
I think you'll find that that is a lie. You will quite happily do it to your children. Instead of lettign your children grow up and make their own minds up, you'll allow your master s to indoctrinate them.
I was a catholic, my whole extended family are catholics. Only a hadnful of our family's free thinkers broke out and now condemn them. I feel it is my moral obligation to do so.
What type of religion asks mothers to send their young sons away to train as priests before the boys are anywhere near old enough to make such incredibly serious decisions? The catholic church is no more than a cult that exists only to create money and your leaders are simply a disgrace. By all means, worship a god if you like, get spiritual about the wonders of nature, show respect to all life etc but do not expect anyone who objects to this brainwashing off the innocent to simply let it go by without challenge. Like an earlier poster said- it is a form of child abuse. You will be famliiar with the term "grooming".
Martin McDonald above,
I'd never dream of trying to force my religious ideals on anyone
I think you'll find that that is a lie. You will quite happily do it to your children. Instead of lettign your children grow up and make their own minds up, you'll allow your master s to indoctrinate them.
I was a catholic, my whole extended family are catholics. Only a hadnful of our family's free thinkers broke out and now condemn them. I feel it is my moral obligation to do so.
What type of religion asks mothers to send their young sons away to train as priests before the boys are anywhere near old enough to make such incredibly serious decisions? The catholic church is no more than a cult that exists only to create money and your leaders are simply a disgrace. By all means, worship a god if you like, get spiritual about the wonders of nature, show respect to all life etc but do not expect anyone who objects to this brainwashing off the innocent to simply let it go by without challenge. Like an earlier poster said- it is a form of child abuse. You will be famliiar with the term "grooming".
Posted by: J Brown, Glasgow on 12:46pm Mon 3 Sep 07
@ Martin
"I'd never dream of trying to force my religious ideals on anyone, yet many want to impose a culture of atheism on me. This position is intellectually bereft and morally bankrupt. Sharia law anyone? Their sole justification for their position is that they think they are right. It's almost narcissistic."
Do you have children? Have you imposed your ideals on them? Bet you have. Your leader very much wants to impose his ideals on others. He targets non Catholic same sex couples who wish to marry and non Catholic women who want to abort an unwanted or unhealthy child to name just two of many. Crazy to use Sharia law as an analogy to show how bad secular culture is. We have already been subjected to the Catholic equivalent. It involved such ideals as the inquisition. Not nice and a good reason why links between state and religion should be severed.
You seem an all right sort. Touchingly naive but all right.
@ Martin
"I'd never dream of trying to force my religious ideals on anyone, yet many want to impose a culture of atheism on me. This position is intellectually bereft and morally bankrupt. Sharia law anyone? Their sole justification for their position is that they think they are right. It's almost narcissistic."
Do you have children? Have you imposed your ideals on them? Bet you have. Your leader very much wants to impose his ideals on others. He targets non Catholic same sex couples who wish to marry and non Catholic women who want to abort an unwanted or unhealthy child to name just two of many. Crazy to use Sharia law as an analogy to show how bad secular culture is. We have already been subjected to the Catholic equivalent. It involved such ideals as the inquisition. Not nice and a good reason why links between state and religion should be severed.
You seem an all right sort. Touchingly naive but all right.
Posted by: Jill, Airth on 12:48pm Mon 3 Sep 07
I find some relief in the Archbishopıs assessment of the climate in which he operates his organisation. Yes, the Catholic faith is indeed under attack from secularism, and rightly so. The Archbishopıs acknowledgement that it is the faith (or at least the current doctrine since I donıt think the bible says much about gay adoption etc.), and not Catholic people that are under attack is a refreshing change of rhetoric from the archbishop. His usual stance is that those who disagree with the Catholic faith theology or current practice equals an attack on Catholic people, and then the bigot card is played. People who object to state-funded faith-based schools are bigots, people who donıt want the church to stick their oar into the formation of legislation when no member of the church has stood for public office - theyıre bigots too, etc etc.
However I continue to be astonished that the Herald and other good quality newspapers give this kind of trash column inches. The Archbishopıs comments are nothing but a big petted lipped whine that fewer people are being brainwashed into joining his club and he doesnıt like it. Hardly news!
Finally, to MMcD of Cumbernauld. I think you've misunderstood what secularism is. It's not about imposing atheism on other people at all. It's about separating religion and religious life from public life - so no one theology has dominance in a multi-cultural, multi-faith (and non-faith) society. It means that those who set the policy for and run our public institutions are answerable to the electorate and not some other heirarchy or divinity. Many religious people are also secularist as they agree that no one theology should dominate any state forum.
I find some relief in the Archbishopıs assessment of the climate in which he operates his organisation. Yes, the Catholic faith is indeed under attack from secularism, and rightly so. The Archbishopıs acknowledgement that it is the faith (or at least the current doctrine since I donıt think the bible says much about gay adoption etc.), and not Catholic people that are under attack is a refreshing change of rhetoric from the archbishop. His usual stance is that those who disagree with the Catholic faith theology or current practice equals an attack on Catholic people, and then the bigot card is played. People who object to state-funded faith-based schools are bigots, people who donıt want the church to stick their oar into the formation of legislation when no member of the church has stood for public office - theyıre bigots too, etc etc.
However I continue to be astonished that the Herald and other good quality newspapers give this kind of trash column inches. The Archbishopıs comments are nothing but a big petted lipped whine that fewer people are being brainwashed into joining his club and he doesnıt like it. Hardly news!
Finally, to MMcD of Cumbernauld. I think you've misunderstood what secularism is. It's not about imposing atheism on other people at all. It's about separating religion and religious life from public life - so no one theology has dominance in a multi-cultural, multi-faith (and non-faith) society. It means that those who set the policy for and run our public institutions are answerable to the electorate and not some other heirarchy or divinity. Many religious people are also secularist as they agree that no one theology should dominate any state forum.
Posted by: Generalissimo Hernandez on 12:49pm Mon 3 Sep 07
Martin, Cumbernauld.
Excuse my ignorance, but isn't Sharia law all about basing your laws on the teachings in a holy book?
If Sharia law is bad, why will another religion be better?
Martin, Cumbernauld.
Excuse my ignorance, but isn't Sharia law all about basing your laws on the teachings in a holy book?
If Sharia law is bad, why will another religion be better?
Posted by: zeno, Glasgow on 12:57pm Mon 3 Sep 07
Martin
You need to separate out two things: atheism and secularism. Stop conflating them. Granted, some atheists do try to tell others what to think and do, but a secularist (who may well be religious) is someone who simply wants the state to take no sides in religion - this includes the education of children. It is the business of all of us who are funding religion through our taxes.
Of course, what the Catholic church wants is for everyone to abide by rules they set (abortion, euthanasia, etc). Most atheists do not want to see the subjugation of religionists as you imply: they simply want a level playing field where arguments are won on the merits of the evidence, not just because some religionists think their arguments are stronger for being religious.
It's a bit much to use pejorative phrases like 'hardened atheist' at the same time as talking about the Catholic hierarchy!
If some atheists or some secularists are challenging what the RC church say, then the church should counter it with facts and evidence and stop trying to win an argument by bleating persecution.
Martin
You need to separate out two things: atheism and secularism. Stop conflating them. Granted, some atheists do try to tell others what to think and do, but a secularist (who may well be religious) is someone who simply wants the state to take no sides in religion - this includes the education of children. It is the business of all of us who are funding religion through our taxes.
Of course, what the Catholic church wants is for everyone to abide by rules they set (abortion, euthanasia, etc). Most atheists do not want to see the subjugation of religionists as you imply: they simply want a level playing field where arguments are won on the merits of the evidence, not just because some religionists think their arguments are stronger for being religious.
It's a bit much to use pejorative phrases like 'hardened atheist' at the same time as talking about the Catholic hierarchy!
If some atheists or some secularists are challenging what the RC church say, then the church should counter it with facts and evidence and stop trying to win an argument by bleating persecution.
Posted by: Waitamin, Scotland on 1:04pm Mon 3 Sep 07
If only 100,000 catholics actually attend mass. Why do we keep hearing about Cardinal Keith O'Brien - "leader of Scotland's 800,000 Catholics"? I hope that they are not still counting me just because my head got dipped in a font before I had any say in the matter! Where do I apply to be 'struck-off?'
If only 100,000 catholics actually attend mass. Why do we keep hearing about Cardinal Keith O'Brien - "leader of Scotland's 800,000 Catholics"? I hope that they are not still counting me just because my head got dipped in a font before I had any say in the matter! Where do I apply to be 'struck-off?'
Posted by: Aodh, Ireland on 1:05pm Mon 3 Sep 07
May the peace of Christ be with you all!
May the peace of Christ be with you all!
Posted by: Martin McDonald, Cumbernauld on 1:24pm Mon 3 Sep 07
[quote][bold]TheGlaswegian[/bold] wrote:
Martin McDonald above, [quote]I'd never dream of trying to force my religious ideals on anyone[/quote] I think you'll find that that is a lie. You will quite happily do it to your children. Instead of lettign your children grow up and make their own minds up, you'll allow your master s to indoctrinate them. I was a catholic, my whole extended family are catholics. Only a hadnful of our family's free thinkers broke out and now condemn them. I feel it is my moral obligation to do so. What type of religion asks mothers to send their young sons away to train as priests before the boys are anywhere near old enough to make such incredibly serious decisions? The catholic church is no more than a cult that exists only to create money and your leaders are simply a disgrace. By all means, worship a god if you like, get spiritual about the wonders of nature, show respect to all life etc but do not expect anyone who objects to this brainwashing off the innocent to simply let it go by without challenge. Like an earlier poster said- it is a form of child abuse. You will be famliiar with the term "grooming".[/quote] So much hate. Further discussion would be a waste of time, wouldn't it Glaswegian?
TheGlaswegian wrote:
Martin McDonald above, I'd never dream of trying to force my religious ideals on anyone
I think you'll find that that is a lie. You will quite happily do it to your children. Instead of lettign your children grow up and make their own minds up, you'll allow your master s to indoctrinate them. I was a catholic, my whole extended family are catholics. Only a hadnful of our family's free thinkers broke out and now condemn them. I feel it is my moral obligation to do so. What type of religion asks mothers to send their young sons away to train as priests before the boys are anywhere near old enough to make such incredibly serious decisions? The catholic church is no more than a cult that exists only to create money and your leaders are simply a disgrace. By all means, worship a god if you like, get spiritual about the wonders of nature, show respect to all life etc but do not expect anyone who objects to this brainwashing off the innocent to simply let it go by without challenge. Like an earlier poster said- it is a form of child abuse. You will be famliiar with the term "grooming".
So much hate. Further discussion would be a waste of time, wouldn't it Glaswegian?
Posted by: Lucy on 1:26pm Mon 3 Sep 07
I think perhaps we need to start being realistic about what Catholic schools are actually like and what they do. Having attended two different Catholic schools over a period of 11 years and sat through nine years of religious education classes I feel I have a right to contribute to this. They do not impose Catholic dogma on children, insist on young boys being sent away from their mothers to seminary or indulge in compulsory conversion and brain washing. The Catholic view is presented as the one which the Church believes to be true and it is given a fair hearing but ultimately it is presented as one among many - no one forces children to believe it. They will often teach children about other denominations, other religions and secularist positions. It is not compulsory for anybody to attend Catholic schools: many people do in fact wish to do so because they often have high achievement rates. If this is the case then perhaps Catholic schools have something good about them after all.
I completely agree that rather than "bleat persecution" the Church should answer its critics with facs, evidence and reason as to its teachings and beliefs. However, this will not be achieved by taking away its forums for speaking. If we really want to know the Church's answers we should give them a chance to speak and ourselves a chance to listen.
I think perhaps we need to start being realistic about what Catholic schools are actually like and what they do. Having attended two different Catholic schools over a period of 11 years and sat through nine years of religious education classes I feel I have a right to contribute to this. They do not impose Catholic dogma on children, insist on young boys being sent away from their mothers to seminary or indulge in compulsory conversion and brain washing. The Catholic view is presented as the one which the Church believes to be true and it is given a fair hearing but ultimately it is presented as one among many - no one forces children to believe it. They will often teach children about other denominations, other religions and secularist positions. It is not compulsory for anybody to attend Catholic schools: many people do in fact wish to do so because they often have high achievement rates. If this is the case then perhaps Catholic schools have something good about them after all.
I completely agree that rather than "bleat persecution" the Church should answer its critics with facs, evidence and reason as to its teachings and beliefs. However, this will not be achieved by taking away its forums for speaking. If we really want to know the Church's answers we should give them a chance to speak and ourselves a chance to listen.
Posted by: TheGlaswegian, Edinburgh on 1:30pm Mon 3 Sep 07
Aodh , LOL. When the lions were chewing on your foreafthers heads, some must have said, "hold on, d'ye want some broon sauce wi that?"
Your fake humility is just another hook and only the downtrodden regard it is a virtue.
Aodh , LOL. When the lions were chewing on your foreafthers heads, some must have said, "hold on, d'ye want some broon sauce wi that?"
Your fake humility is just another hook and only the downtrodden regard it is a virtue.
Posted by: J Brown, Glasgow on 1:34pm Mon 3 Sep 07
Martin
What a tiresomely predictable response. Your post has been eloquently shredded by a number of posters yet you chose to respond to the one that gives you the opportunity to perceive the rebuttals as hateful and anti Catholic.
Why not answer Jill or Zeno?
Martin
What a tiresomely predictable response. Your post has been eloquently shredded by a number of posters yet you chose to respond to the one that gives you the opportunity to perceive the rebuttals as hateful and anti Catholic.
Why not answer Jill or Zeno?
Posted by: naepoperyhere, heaven on 1:34pm Mon 3 Sep 07
papist paranoia
Posted by: Martica Burns, Houston, Texas USA on 1:41pm Mon 3 Sep 07
God wants us to know love and serve him. This will lead to the fullness of truth in this world and the next. What parent would not want this for their children? I feel sad for all the venom spewed by "catholics" who deny the Church thet Jesus Christ established on earth to spread the Gospel message and to build the Kingdom of God...Say what you will about the weakness of humans in the Church but The gates of hell will not prevail against her .Two thousand years of church history have proven the accuracy of our Lord's prediction. He said gate is narrow. The evil one does not give up!
God wants us to know love and serve him. This will lead to the fullness of truth in this world and the next. What parent would not want this for their children? I feel sad for all the venom spewed by "catholics" who deny the Church thet Jesus Christ established on earth to spread the Gospel message and to build the Kingdom of God...Say what you will about the weakness of humans in the Church but The gates of hell will not prevail against her .Two thousand years of church history have proven the accuracy of our Lord's prediction. He said gate is narrow. The evil one does not give up!
Posted by: Watchman, God knows :-) on 1:42pm Mon 3 Sep 07
Martin, my faith in you is restored, I thought you wouldnt be joining the debate but am heartened by your presence.
My issue is the expectation of state funding for a religiously segregated school, I do not beleive anyone is trying to force a culture of aetheism on you or anyone else, there is no attack on the practice of your religion, I think all should be allowed to practice whatever they beleive so long as it doesnt brake the law of the land or harm individuals, however I dont see why we all should finance it.
If however we are to have state funded religion then wouldnt you agree it should be open to all, including Muslim schools where Sharia law is taught ?
You say you are not trying to force your beleifs on others and I accept you dont intend that, however did you not recently support on these very pages the Leader of the Catholic Church in Scotland who claimed that abortion in Scotland was the equivalent of a Dunblane massacre everyday and that MP's who beleived in the Catholic faith should vote accordingly ? Surely these MP's represent a wider community and therefore the Church was trying to influence the representatives of that wider community and therefore impose its will ?
Martin, my faith in you is restored, I thought you wouldnt be joining the debate but am heartened by your presence.
My issue is the expectation of state funding for a religiously segregated school, I do not beleive anyone is trying to force a culture of aetheism on you or anyone else, there is no attack on the practice of your religion, I think all should be allowed to practice whatever they beleive so long as it doesnt brake the law of the land or harm individuals, however I dont see why we all should finance it.
If however we are to have state funded religion then wouldnt you agree it should be open to all, including Muslim schools where Sharia law is taught ?
You say you are not trying to force your beleifs on others and I accept you dont intend that, however did you not recently support on these very pages the Leader of the Catholic Church in Scotland who claimed that abortion in Scotland was the equivalent of a Dunblane massacre everyday and that MP's who beleived in the Catholic faith should vote accordingly ? Surely these MP's represent a wider community and therefore the Church was trying to influence the representatives of that wider community and therefore impose its will ?
Posted by: Martin McDonald, Cumbernauld on 1:44pm Mon 3 Sep 07
[quote][bold]J Brown[/bold] wrote:
Martin What a tiresomely predictable response. Your post has been eloquently shredded by a number of posters yet you chose to respond to the one that gives you the opportunity to perceive the rebuttals as hateful and anti Catholic. Why not answer Jill or Zeno?[/quote] It's really none of your business but the truth of the matter is that I am quite busy at work right now. Hopefully I'll get the chance to respond to their erudite and interesting posts properly when I get home tonight.
J Brown wrote:
Martin What a tiresomely predictable response. Your post has been eloquently shredded by a number of posters yet you chose to respond to the one that gives you the opportunity to perceive the rebuttals as hateful and anti Catholic. Why not answer Jill or Zeno?
It's really none of your business but the truth of the matter is that I am quite busy at work right now. Hopefully I'll get the chance to respond to their erudite and interesting posts properly when I get home tonight.
Posted by: bill, Glasgow on 1:47pm Mon 3 Sep 07
Martin MacDonald,
At one point in your comment you say "I'd never dream of trying to force my religious ideals on anyone"
But here you are writing to defend the catholic church's use of public money to indoctrinate children with a belief system that has not one single shred of evidence to support it.
You cannot have your cake and eat it. Either there is freedom of conscience or there isn't. Do you want irrational superstitions imposed on children or not? If you still support sectarian schooling then surely you would support children being indoctrinated with every other major religion as well (unless you have concrete proof that catholisism is "right") so that, to be fair, all religions would need to be given equal weight. The (absurd) argument goes on....
Martin MacDonald,
At one point in your comment you say "I'd never dream of trying to force my religious ideals on anyone"
But here you are writing to defend the catholic church's use of public money to indoctrinate children with a belief system that has not one single shred of evidence to support it.
You cannot have your cake and eat it. Either there is freedom of conscience or there isn't. Do you want irrational superstitions imposed on children or not? If you still support sectarian schooling then surely you would support children being indoctrinated with every other major religion as well (unless you have concrete proof that catholisism is "right") so that, to be fair, all religions would need to be given equal weight. The (absurd) argument goes on....
Posted by: J Brown, Glasgow on 1:54pm Mon 3 Sep 07
[quote][bold]Martica Burns[/bold] wrote:
God wants us to know love and serve him. This will lead to the fullness of truth in this world and the next. What parent would not want this for their children? I feel sad for all the venom spewed by "catholics" who deny the Church thet Jesus Christ established on earth to spread the Gospel message and to build the Kingdom of God...Say what you will about the weakness of humans in the Church but The gates of hell will not prevail against her .Two thousand years of church history have proven the accuracy of our Lord's prediction. He said gate is narrow. The evil one does not give up![/quote] ??????????
Looks like your off to heaven and I'm damned to burn for all of eternity Martica. Along with the Muslims, Buddists, Jews, Sikhs and Hindus who choose not to follow the Gospel.
I should probably be a bit more worried.
Martica Burns wrote:
God wants us to know love and serve him. This will lead to the fullness of truth in this world and the next. What parent would not want this for their children? I feel sad for all the venom spewed by "catholics" who deny the Church thet Jesus Christ established on earth to spread the Gospel message and to build the Kingdom of God...Say what you will about the weakness of humans in the Church but The gates of hell will not prevail against her .Two thousand years of church history have proven the accuracy of our Lord's prediction. He said gate is narrow. The evil one does not give up!
??????????
Looks like your off to heaven and I'm damned to burn for all of eternity Martica. Along with the Muslims, Buddists, Jews, Sikhs and Hindus who choose not to follow the Gospel.
I should probably be a bit more worried.
Posted by: Joe Strummer, London on 1:59pm Mon 3 Sep 07
Institutionalised sectarian apartheid in our education system is the major contributor to religious bigotry. There should be a referendum to abolish this appalling anachronism and instigator of religious hatred.
The bigots that insist on this apartheid for their offspring will not be happy, but the future peace of Scotland is more important than their mindless hatred and bigotry.
Institutionalised sectarian apartheid in our education system is the major contributor to religious bigotry. There should be a referendum to abolish this appalling anachronism and instigator of religious hatred.
The bigots that insist on this apartheid for their offspring will not be happy, but the future peace of Scotland is more important than their mindless hatred and bigotry.
Posted by: Alastair, Aberdeen on 3:25pm Mon 3 Sep 07
Are all those carping on about "brainwashing of innocent children" seriously suggesting that parents have no right or duty to pass on their values and belief systems to their children? If so, the lunatics have truly taken over the asylum.
Are all those carping on about "brainwashing of innocent children" seriously suggesting that parents have no right or duty to pass on their values and belief systems to their children? If so, the lunatics have truly taken over the asylum.
Posted by: Mason Jahr on 3:41pm Mon 3 Sep 07
A litany of bigotry and ignorance. People standing up in the 5 cubic feet of the universe they inhabit shaking their tiny fists at God. Embarrassing and pitiful. What has happened to lovely Scotland?
A litany of bigotry and ignorance. People standing up in the 5 cubic feet of the universe they inhabit shaking their tiny fists at God. Embarrassing and pitiful. What has happened to lovely Scotland?
Posted by: Gie us Peace on 3:43pm Mon 3 Sep 07
Looks as though the Catholic Church is singing from the same hymn sheet as the American Evangelical Movement.
They are trying to paint themselves as the poor victims of an imaginary bogeyman they call "Secular Fundamentalism". Nothing galvanises the faithful more than their leaders telling them they are under attack from sources seeking to destroy them.
The Catholic Church is trying to recreate America's "Culture War" here in Scotland.
Gie us peace!
Looks as though the Catholic Church is singing from the same hymn sheet as the American Evangelical Movement.
They are trying to paint themselves as the poor victims of an imaginary bogeyman they call "Secular Fundamentalism". Nothing galvanises the faithful more than their leaders telling them they are under attack from sources seeking to destroy them.
The Catholic Church is trying to recreate America's "Culture War" here in Scotland.
Gie us peace!
Posted by: J Brown, Glasgow on 3:58pm Mon 3 Sep 07
[quote][bold]Alastair[/bold] wrote:
Are all those carping on about \"brainwashing of innocent children\" seriously suggesting that parents have no right or duty to pass on their values and belief systems to their children? If so, the lunatics have truly taken over the asylum. [/quote] Alastair:
I agree that phrase sounds rather dramatic and no reasonable person would deny parents the [bold]right[/bold] to pass on their belief system, however they do not have a [bold]duty[/bold] to do so (beyond religious dogma dictating they should in an effort to sustain itself)
In an ideal world children would be kept separate from religion until old enough to make a reasoned decision. It's unfair to tell them mere speculation is fact. That is not going to happen any time soon and atheists/secularists realise this but it is a fair and reasonable position to adopt in the debate.
Alastair wrote:
Are all those carping on about \"brainwashing of innocent children\" seriously suggesting that parents have no right or duty to pass on their values and belief systems to their children? If so, the lunatics have truly taken over the asylum.
Alastair:
I agree that phrase sounds rather dramatic and no reasonable person would deny parents the
right to pass on their belief system, however they do not have a
duty to do so (beyond religious dogma dictating they should in an effort to sustain itself)
In an ideal world children would be kept separate from religion until old enough to make a reasoned decision. It's unfair to tell them mere speculation is fact. That is not going to happen any time soon and atheists/secularists realise this but it is a fair and reasonable position to adopt in the debate.
Posted by: DanielC, South Carolina, USA on 4:10pm Mon 3 Sep 07
The comments on this page make the Archbishop's point. You will all value religious diversity, tolerance, and maybe even Christianity when you've had a good dose of Sharia Law. Oh, and please don't come begging for the U.S. to save you, we know you disdain our militant and puritanical attitudes also.
The comments on this page make the Archbishop's point. You will all value religious diversity, tolerance, and maybe even Christianity when you've had a good dose of Sharia Law. Oh, and please don't come begging for the U.S. to save you, we know you disdain our militant and puritanical attitudes also.
Posted by: Alastair, Aberdeen on 4:40pm Mon 3 Sep 07
J Brown:
I agree parents should always make clear the difference between speculation and fact to their children, and that ultimately, children will make their own decisions. However, if a parent does not try to influence a child's upbringing, and in so doing pass on a belief system that is central to that, what is left to pass on?
An example if I may: I buy as much Fair Trade coffee, tea etc. because I believe it is fundamentally wrong - objectively - that 3rd world workers should be paid a pittance. This poverty is something I consider a fundamental wrong in absolute terms. There can be no justification for it. So I will do what I can to counter it. Now, that is part of my value system. But what [italic]underpins[/italic] that is my Christian faith that all are equal in the eyes of God and that it is right to promote fundamental fairness - no strings attached, no asking what religion anyone is, or anything else. The two are inseparable. At the end of the day, it requires a leap of faith and faith is not a scientifically provable fact, but for me the overwhelming evidence is there.
J Brown:
I agree parents should always make clear the difference between speculation and fact to their children, and that ultimately, children will make their own decisions. However, if a parent does not try to influence a child's upbringing, and in so doing pass on a belief system that is central to that, what is left to pass on?
An example if I may: I buy as much Fair Trade coffee, tea etc. because I believe it is fundamentally wrong - objectively - that 3rd world workers should be paid a pittance. This poverty is something I consider a fundamental wrong in absolute terms. There can be no justification for it. So I will do what I can to counter it. Now, that is part of my value system. But what
underpins that is my Christian faith that all are equal in the eyes of God and that it is right to promote fundamental fairness - no strings attached, no asking what religion anyone is, or anything else. The two are inseparable. At the end of the day, it requires a leap of faith and faith is not a scientifically provable fact, but for me the overwhelming evidence is there.
Posted by: John Wilson on 4:45pm Mon 3 Sep 07
[quote]It would be nice if atheists could live and let live. To be fair, the overwhelming majority can, no problem. By live and let live I mean we all get a say but we all try our best to compromise and live and work together despite our differences. I'm happy to do it. [/quote]
But the fair bishop in the article, who you praised for speaking out on "out for peace, freedom and diversity", is complaining that same-sex marriages are undermining the catholic faith: it is the catholic church - of which you are confessedly a member - which is seeking to impose its values upon the rest of society.
You say that everyone should have a say, but the catholic church does not [italic]want[/italic] everyone to have a say; it is concerned only with the view of the catholic church, and that this view is enshrined in law. It was not the secularists and atheists saying that those opposed to the churches position on homosexuality should not be allowed to marry; it was the church. It was not the secularists and atheists saying that those secularists and humanists who are opposed to the churches position on contraception and abortion should be obliged to follow that churches teaching.
The people who want to live and let live are the secularists, the humanists, the atheists and - I hope - common members of the various churches who ought to be appalled at rhetoric coming from their various respective un-elected and un-representative leaders.
The secularist is not the one saying "I believe that their is nothing inherently immoral with homosexual behavior, [italic]therefore you [bold]must[/bold] have a homosexual relationship[/italic]", or "I believe that a woman's choice outweighs the alleged rights of a zygote [italic]therefore you [bold]must[/bold] have an abortion[/italic]". But the catholic church is saying that: it is saying "Our doctrine states - without good reason - that homosexuality is wrong, [italic]therefore the law [bold]must[/bold] state that homosexuals cannot marry", it is the church saying "Without reference to any biological facts, a Zygote and an early embryo are directly equivalent to a fully-formed functioning human being; [italic]therefore the law [bold]must[/bold] state that abortion should be illegal under all circumstances[/italic].
It would be nice if atheists could live and let live. To be fair, the overwhelming majority can, no problem. By live and let live I mean we all get a say but we all try our best to compromise and live and work together despite our differences. I'm happy to do it.
But the fair bishop in the article, who you praised for speaking out on "out for peace, freedom and diversity", is complaining that same-sex marriages are undermining the catholic faith: it is the catholic church - of which you are confessedly a member - which is seeking to impose its values upon the rest of society.
You say that everyone should have a say, but the catholic church does not want everyone to have a say; it is concerned only with the view of the catholic church, and that this view is enshrined in law. It was not the secularists and atheists saying that those opposed to the churches position on homosexuality should not be allowed to marry; it was the church. It was not the secularists and atheists saying that those secularists and humanists who are opposed to the churches position on contraception and abortion should be obliged to follow that churches teaching.
The people who want to live and let live are the secularists, the humanists, the atheists and - I hope - common members of the various churches who ought to be appalled at rhetoric coming from their various respective un-elected and un-representative leaders.
The secularist is not the one saying "I believe that their is nothing inherently immoral with homosexual behavior, therefore you
must have a homosexual relationship", or "I believe that a woman's choice outweighs the alleged rights of a zygote therefore you
must have an abortion". But the catholic church is saying that: it is saying "Our doctrine states - without good reason - that homosexuality is wrong, therefore the law
must state that homosexuals cannot marry", it is the church saying "Without reference to any biological facts, a Zygote and an early embryo are directly equivalent to a fully-formed functioning human being; therefore the law
must state that abortion should be illegal under all circumstances.
Posted by: andrew gray on 5:01pm Mon 3 Sep 07
If the Cathooic community wished to educate their children in the faith then surely they have a right to do so in a democracy? The idea that Catholic schools are the cause of bigotry in the wider community is fallacious. Other countries have Catholic schools bit no bigotry at all. Bigotry in Scotland is a sympton of a deeper malaise in our nation.
As someone who has attended and taught in catholic schools I have never heard of anyone disparaging those of other religions or of no religion.
The 1918 Education Act recognises the right of those parents who are the primary educators of their children to choose a Catholic school. Why should choice only be available to those who have the financuial resources to do so?
If the Cathooic community wished to educate their children in the faith then surely they have a right to do so in a democracy? The idea that Catholic schools are the cause of bigotry in the wider community is fallacious. Other countries have Catholic schools bit no bigotry at all. Bigotry in Scotland is a sympton of a deeper malaise in our nation.
As someone who has attended and taught in catholic schools I have never heard of anyone disparaging those of other religions or of no religion.
The 1918 Education Act recognises the right of those parents who are the primary educators of their children to choose a Catholic school. Why should choice only be available to those who have the financuial resources to do so?
Posted by: Martica, Houston, Texas USA on 6:08pm Mon 3 Sep 07
[quote][bold]J Brown[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Martica Burns[/bold] wrote: God wants us to know love and serve him. This will lead to the fullness of truth in this world and the next. What parent would not want this for their children? I feel sad for all the venom spewed by "catholics" who deny the Church thet Jesus Christ established on earth to spread the Gospel message and to build the Kingdom of God...Say what you will about the weakness of humans in the Church but The gates of hell will not prevail against her .Two thousand years of church history have proven the accuracy of our Lord's prediction. He said gate is narrow. The evil one does not give up![/quote] ?????????? Looks like your off to heaven and I'm damned to burn for all of eternity Martica. Along with the Muslims, Buddists, Jews, Sikhs and Hindus who choose not to follow the Gospel. I should probably be a bit more worried.[/quote] The Catholic Church may not be the only way to get to heaven but it is the surest way!
J Brown wrote:
Martica Burns wrote: God wants us to know love and serve him. This will lead to the fullness of truth in this world and the next. What parent would not want this for their children? I feel sad for all the venom spewed by "catholics" who deny the Church thet Jesus Christ established on earth to spread the Gospel message and to build the Kingdom of God...Say what you will about the weakness of humans in the Church but The gates of hell will not prevail against her .Two thousand years of church history have proven the accuracy of our Lord's prediction. He said gate is narrow. The evil one does not give up!
?????????? Looks like your off to heaven and I'm damned to burn for all of eternity Martica. Along with the Muslims, Buddists, Jews, Sikhs and Hindus who choose not to follow the Gospel. I should probably be a bit more worried.
The Catholic Church may not be the only way to get to heaven but it is the surest way!
Posted by: John Wilson on 6:33pm Mon 3 Sep 07
[quote][bold]andrew gray[/bold] If the Cathooic community wished to educate their children in the faith then surely they have a right to do so in a democracy?[/quote]
Sure. If they were happy to do it with their own money, then I strongly suspect that there would neither be a problem, nor enough money to run the number of schools the catholic church does with state subsidy. By state subsidy, of course, I'm not just referring to the money the state pays the catholic church directly to run state-funded schools, but also the unfair tax incentives given to the church through tax incentives.
[quote]The idea that Catholic schools are the cause of bigotry in the wider community is fallacious. Other countries have Catholic schools bit no bigotry at all. Bigotry in Scotland is a sympton of a deeper malaise in our nation. [/quote]
Sure. "Homosexuality is a sin". Granted that's not the type of bigotry you had in mind, but it is bigotry nevertheless, and the catholic church is insisting that it is its religious right to teach this bigotry with the taxpayers money. If you want sectarianism, then what about the "doctrinal" problems that separate each of the religions, and each of the schisms within each of those religions. Muslims are hell-bound, protestants are hell-bound, Buddhists and Hindus too. And, of course, lets not forget the Evil Atheist Conspiracy(tm) (Now a soley owned subsidiary of the Evil Secularist Conspiracy).
[quote]As someone who has attended and taught in catholic schools I have never heard of anyone disparaging those of other religions or of no religion.[/quote]
With all due respect, were you listening in the "hell and damnation", the "passion", and the "son of god" bits?
[quote]The 1918 Education Act recognises the right of those parents who are the primary educators of their children to choose a Catholic school. Why should choice only be available to those who have the financuial resources to do so?[/quote]
First: Why stop at catholic or other mainstream religious organisations? What limit should be imposed upon a religion before a religiously orientated school should not be paid for, either in part or in its entirety, with tax-payers money? The catholics - as well as protestants - appear to be able to supply sufficient "Sunday Schools" for the indoctrination of their children; if they must have "catholic" schools, why can't they pay for those out of the ample bank funds of the catholic church?
andrew gray If the Cathooic community wished to educate their children in the faith then surely they have a right to do so in a democracy?
Sure. If they were happy to do it with their own money, then I strongly suspect that there would neither be a problem, nor enough money to run the number of schools the catholic church does with state subsidy. By state subsidy, of course, I'm not just referring to the money the state pays the catholic church directly to run state-funded schools, but also the unfair tax incentives given to the church through tax incentives.
The idea that Catholic schools are the cause of bigotry in the wider community is fallacious. Other countries have Catholic schools bit no bigotry at all. Bigotry in Scotland is a sympton of a deeper malaise in our nation.
Sure. "Homosexuality is a sin". Granted that's not the type of bigotry you had in mind, but it is bigotry nevertheless, and the catholic church is insisting that it is its religious right to teach this bigotry with the taxpayers money. If you want sectarianism, then what about the "doctrinal" problems that separate each of the religions, and each of the schisms within each of those religions. Muslims are hell-bound, protestants are hell-bound, Buddhists and Hindus too. And, of course, lets not forget the Evil Atheist Conspiracy(tm) (Now a soley owned subsidiary of the Evil Secularist Conspiracy).
As someone who has attended and taught in catholic schools I have never heard of anyone disparaging those of other religions or of no religion.
With all due respect, were you listening in the "hell and damnation", the "passion", and the "son of god" bits?
The 1918 Education Act recognises the right of those parents who are the primary educators of their children to choose a Catholic school. Why should choice only be available to those who have the financuial resources to do so?
First: Why stop at catholic or other mainstream religious organisations? What limit should be imposed upon a religion before a religiously orientated school should not be paid for, either in part or in its entirety, with tax-payers money? The catholics - as well as protestants - appear to be able to supply sufficient "Sunday Schools" for the indoctrination of their children; if they must have "catholic" schools, why can't they pay for those out of the ample bank funds of the catholic church?
Posted by: J Brown, Glasgow on 7:22pm Mon 3 Sep 07
[quote][bold]Alastair[/bold] wrote:
J Brown: I agree parents should always make clear the difference between speculation and fact to their children, and that ultimately, children will make their own decisions. However, if a parent does not try to influence a child\'s upbringing, and in so doing pass on a belief system that is central to that, what is left to pass on? An example if I may: I buy as much Fair Trade coffee, tea etc. because I believe it is fundamentally wrong - objectively - that 3rd world workers should be paid a pittance. This poverty is something I consider a fundamental wrong in absolute terms. There can be no justification for it. So I will do what I can to counter it. Now, that is part of my value system. But what [italic]underpins[/italic] that is my Christian faith that all are equal in the eyes of God and that it is right to promote fundamental fairness - no strings attached, no asking what religion anyone is, or anything else. The two are inseparable. At the end of the day, it requires a leap of faith and faith is not a scientifically provable fact, but for me the overwhelming evidence is there. [/quote] Alistair
You are obviously a good chap though it's a shame you don't trust in your own decency to make the right decisions. I'm pretty certain you wo
News
INDEX
Comment | Read Comments (52)
