Sundays - back to the traditional?

[Bantamzen]

It would probably take decades to complete and to be fair Pope Francis has already taken a lot of steps to start the process of 'modernizing'.

No, they could do it tomorrow if they do wished. But they don't.

Also I think you have the wrong idea about faith; it is not and should not be based on evidence but rather on belief. "Happy are those who have not seen and yet believe."

Faith is one thing, but throwing a 13 year old out of a RE class for asking about evidence of a deity shows intolerance. And it is because of that I walked away from Christianity. And to be quite honest it was the best decision I made in my young life.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

It would probably take decades to complete and to be fair Pope Francis has already taken a lot of steps to start the process of 'modernizing'.

Also I think you have the wrong idea about faith; it is not and should not be based on evidence but rather on belief. "Happy are those who have not seen and yet believe."

So faith really is is the excuse people give for beliefs they can't back up with evidence.
There may well be some sort of god-character that started the universe and watches it from afar... however as this character doesn't appear to interact with the universe in any detectable way, he/she/it is functionally non-existent.

 

[43096]

Also I think you have the wrong idea about faith; it is not and should not be based on evidence but rather on belief. "Happy are those who have not seen and yet believe."

Riiiiiight. I’m intrigued that you can unquestionably believe in something you cannot evidence exists. It all rather smacks of the “imaginary friend” some kids have, the difference is they grow out of it.

I’m not seeing anything that makes me change my view that religion is the biggest scam ever perpetrated on humanity. No evidence god exists, but lots of people believe without question in it and give lots of money to organisations that support the scam.

 

[hst43102]

I don't see any positives to the "traditional" Sunday. Personally I think all days should be the same, but people should be able to choose two "rest days" a week - not necessarily on weekends, or aligned with faith/religious beliefs.
I'm a Christian, and I don't see any issue with shops / transport / work being normal on a Sunday. I wouldn't personally work on a Sunday, but to be honest I actually like the shops being open and busy as it means that it's less busy on the other days of the week!

 

[Philip]

No, they could do it tomorrow if they do wished. But they don't.


Faith is one thing, but throwing a 13 year old out of a RE class for asking about evidence of a deity shows intolerance. And it is because of that I walked away from Christianity. And to be quite honest it was the best decision I made in my young life.

It would be similar to the Royal Family abandoning some traditions, or the governments. It would have to go through numerous channels and would cause a lot of unrest and backlash amongst more conservative or traditional Catholics.

Jesus said to Thomas about the importance of believing without needing evidence.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

It would be similar to the Royal Family abandoning some traditions, or the governments. It would have to go through numerous channels and would cause a lot of unrest and backlash amongst more conservative or traditional Catholics.

Jesus said to Thomas about the importance of believing without needing evidence.

Again, in every other area of life, belief without evidence is not considered a virtue. For some reason religion gets a pass. Just because Jesus allegedly spoke some proverb doesn't make it true. Assuming he ever existed, if he considered belief without evidence "important" then he really isn't worth listening to.

I'm still waiting for the evidence that a more religious society is better than a secular one, which was the original premise of this thread.

 

[Bantamzen]

It would be similar to the Royal Family abandoning some traditions, or the governments. It would have to go through numerous channels and would cause a lot of unrest and backlash amongst more conservative or traditional Catholics.

So it is difficult to do, so best not do it eh?

Jesus said to Thomas about the importance of believing without needing evidence.

One can believe without evidence, but one should never be compelled to.

 

[43096]

Just because Jesus allegedly spoke some proverb doesn't make it true. Assuming he ever existed, if he considered belief without evidence "important" then he really isn't worth listening to.

There probably was some crackpot around at the time; a sort of historic David Icke-type figure. It’s just been enhanced for the big story book.

 

[ComUtoR]

Jesus said to Thomas about the importance of believing without needing evidence.

"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another"
- John 13:34

He didn't say "except homosexuals"

Maybe that's the "tradition" that needs to be followed.

 

[Philip]

Again, in every other area of life, belief without evidence is not considered a virtue. For some reason religion gets a pass. Just because Jesus allegedly spoke some proverb doesn't make it true. Assuming he ever existed, if he considered belief without evidence "important" then he really isn't worth listening to.

I'm still waiting for the evidence that a more religious society is better than a secular one, which was the original premise of this thread.

Well in reference to my earlier post about a possible reduction in crime; crime and anti-social behavior has gone up significantly since the 1950s which corresponds to a similar timeframe of people attending church less and the society becoming more secular.

"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another"
- John 13:34

He didn't say "except homosexuals"

Maybe that's the "tradition" that needs to be followed.

That is different from objecting to physical homosexual relationships. Love doesn't have to be physical relations.

 

[AlterEgo]

Well in reference to my earlier post about a possible reduction in crime; crime and anti-social behavior has gone up significantly since the 1950s which corresponds to a similar timeframe of people attending church less and the society becoming more secular.

Correlation isn’t causation. I bet overseas holidays went up in that time as well, does that cause crime?

 

[DerekC]

Well I've made my point and once again it is not an attack on LGBT; I am quite neutral in my own personal stance, but I will defend the Church for sticking to its principles. I have had LGBT-themed virtue signalling (in the form of bunting) in my face in certain situations and I don't like it. What's more interesting is that I know some homosexual people who absolutely detest it (flags and bunting specifically) - I understand why as it is patronising them really.

I am not a great lover of any sort of flag and bunting waving, although I didn't mind for the Jubilee! However I am interested in this concept of "virtue signalling". It has become a standard way of decrying any demonstration of alignment with sets of ideas that the speaker doesn't agree with and it seems to be based on their opinion that the person making the demonstration is insincere and therefore a hypocrite. How do you know the person displaying the bunting is insincere? The only way to tell, I think, is to know whether their practical actions in life match their public statements. .

 

[AlterEgo]

I am not a great lover of any sort of flag and bunting waving, although I didn't mind for the Jubilee! However I am interested in this concept of "virtue signalling". It has become a standard way of decrying any demonstration of alignment with sets of ideas that the speaker doesn't agree with and it seems to be based on their opinion that the person making the demonstration is insincere and therefore a hypocrite. How do you know the person displaying the bunting is insincere? The only way to tell, I think, is to know whether their practical actions in life match their public statements. .

In a healthy society, at least as far as corporations and government go, it’s good for people to be sceptical of these groups fixating on rights issues. Their actions should be considered first, before any signals of their apparent desire for equal rights.

The MoD has Pride flags above its HQ yet continues to maintain a legal strategy protecting men suspected of murdering civilians. Best to remain very detached and sceptical, in my view.

 

[Mike395]

I've only just seen this thread and had a chance to read through but there are, in my view, some real fallacies in your arguments unfortunately Phillip. For a bit of background to my below responses, I regard my beliefs as closely aligned with Christianity (protestant, but I wouldn't want to put myself into a sub-denomination of that such as CoE), though not an active church attendee. I'm also strongly pro-LGBT in the Church (and I'm not going to go into detail as to why for either of those last two points, so as not to drag this even more hopelessly off-topic - it's not important to my argument).

As others have said - even as people of faith, we have to be mindful of the real world around us, and we live in the 21st Century. Whilst I hold a belief, my own view is that even as a Christian we shouldn't be pushing our belief on others without their consent (by all means if they take an interest, but other than that...). I appreciate this is against the most common Church viewpoint (using the 'in the world, not of the world' argument), but I think it's fully in keeping with the Bible taken in the symbolic nature the writers meant, rather than the literal translation some people see it as.

Similarly, we have an obligation to be kind to people we meet. I'm in agreement with the concept of a day of rest, but again this means we shouldn't be imposing that on others, nor trying to alter viewpoints as to what that entails - deciding for someone else how they might want to spend what is often half of their free days in a week isn't any definition of 'kind' in my book. 'On the Seventh Day, God rested' does not mean 'On the Seventh Day, God requested that no-one should be allowed to do what they want to do' in the context of a 21st Century society.

So yes - let's not be trying to forcibly change our country to suit/align with faith - free will is so important, even in a Christian context, and gently trying to coax people into doing things that align with any single belief system is just silly.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Well in reference to my earlier post about a possible reduction in crime; crime and anti-social behavior has gone up significantly since the 1950s which corresponds to a similar timeframe of people attending church less and the society becoming more secular.


That is different from objecting to physical homosexual relationships. Love doesn't have to be physical relations.

On your first point, correlation does not mean causation. If it did, removal of Pacers led to lockdowns.

On your second, why is it your (or the church's) business what consenting adults do with their bodies. Why is one form of physical love acceptable but another isn't? Homosexuals are restricted to celibacy in your book, so you can't claim to be accepting.

 

[ComUtoR]

That is different from objecting to physical homosexual relationships. Love doesn't have to be physical relations.

I'm pretty sure, my scripture isn't as good as it used to be, that Jesus never once objected to any form of homosexual relationship.

I'm pretty sure at almost every single point Jesus advocated unity and togetherness. He continually supported and fought for those who were the weakest and often dennigrated in society he actively supported faith Vs any form of construct of man. Including, churches.

As I mentioned in a previous post. The faith and love of others and the strength of that towards god is based on YOU. Not the doctrine of others.

It's that selective choice of the various faiths that has caused a mass exodus from religion. It's the division that religion created that pulls faith away from God.

It isn't up to the Pope or the Archbishop to decide how people live their lives. God is the one who should be worshiped, not the Church of Man.

Well in reference to my earlier post about a possible reduction in crime; crime and anti-social behavior has gone up significantly since the 1950s

An increase of suicides and mental health issues has gone up significantly since historic abuse from the Catholic church was revealed. Therefore, the church is responsible for a significant number of deaths. (In recent years)

 

[AlterEgo]

I’m not sure religious lectures by atheists towards Christians about “what Jesus really said” is helpful or tolerant, or shows much understanding of how complex Christianity can be.

Ultimately, we live in a multi faith society, and I’m okay with people going to church and worshipping Jesus as long as I don’t need to make wholesale changes to accommodate it.

 

[dgl]

As for beliefs, my family on my mothers side have always been deeply religious, my Uncle was a vicar, my Auntie a nun ant one point in her life, my gran was a local preacher and my mum helped out with the sunday school at the local methodists yet I don't believe any of that crap.
In school I was taught that god was all knowing, all good and all powerful plus at the same time he created everything, now my brain immediatly saw something there didn't add up and that is the existance of evil in the world, how on earth can theer be evil in the world if the one person that supposedly created EVERYTHING is all good?, christians will claim it's the devil, free will or pandoras box, when as all those things would have been created by someone who is all good and as such evil cannot come from them.

Best just to stay out of religion and just try to live a good, honest life as much as possible, if a supposed deity cannot accept that as being good enough then it's not something that should be supported.

 

[Philip]

On your first point, correlation does not mean causation. If it did, removal of Pacers led to lockdowns.

On your second, why is it your (or the church's) business what consenting adults do with their bodies. Why is one form of physical love acceptable but another isn't? Homosexuals are restricted to celibacy in your book, so you can't claim to be accepting.

Correlation doesn't always mean causation, but sometimes it does and it is a fair possibility that our increasingly secular society has led to an increase in the 'I'm alright Jack' attitude, of which higher crime rates and antisocial behaviour stem from, along with less respect for others.

There are other positives about a more religious Britain though, one of them is the socialising aspect. Whilst not directly linked to theology, many church parishes nowadays are thriving with various different groups and events running, as well as tea and coffee served after Mass - all of which are chances to make and develop friendships, relationships and improve mental health.

In reference to homosexuality, I can't remember the exact scripture but I'm sure there is a Gospel passage somewhere where Jesus basically says that a man must either devote himself entirely to God (like a priest does), or to his wife and family (and vice versa). He also says in another text "Husbands, love your wives. Wives, love your husbands." He doesn't go on to make reference to gay couples. I know he isn't literally condemning homosexuality in these texts, but neither is he endorsing it. Homosexuality was considered a sin in those days and homosexual sex was still treated as a crime well into 20th century Britain. I would say these are a few reasons for the Catholic Church's stance, whether it is correct or incorrect is open to opinion.

On reflection of the responses in this thread, I would say my initial view was too extreme in terms of closing shops and hospitality and that these should remain as they are (6 hours for supermarkets). However, I stand by my view that there should be a government 'promotion' of Sunday being a day of rest and relaxation if possible, and also encouragement from the government for people to think about going to church, regardless of how strong or weak their faith is. Some people may develop or strengthen a faith by starting to attend Mass and other church services.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Correlation doesn't always mean causation, but sometimes it does and it is a fair possibility that our increasingly secular society has led to an increase in the 'I'm alright Jack' attitude, of which higher crime rates and antisocial behaviour stem from, along with less respect for others.

There are other positives about a more religious Britain though, one of them is the socialising aspect. Whilst not directly linked to theology, many church parishes nowadays are thriving with various different groups and events running, as well as tea and coffee served after Mass - all of which are chances to make and develop friendships, relationships and improve mental health.

In reference to homosexuality, I can't remember the exact scripture but I'm sure there is a Gospel passage somewhere where Jesus basically says that a man must either devote himself entirely to God (like a priest does), or to his wife and family (and vice versa). He also says in another text "Husbands, love your wives. Wives, love your husbands." He doesn't go on to make reference to gay couples. I know he isn't literally condemning homosexuality in these texts, but neither is he endorsing it. Homosexuality was considered a sin in those days and homosexual sex was still treated as a crime well into 20th century Britain. I would say these are a few reasons for the Catholic Church's stance, whether it is correct or incorrect is open to opinion.

On reflection of the responses in this thread, I would say my initial view was too extreme in terms of closing shops and hospitality and that these should remain as they are (6 hours for supermarkets). However, I stand by my view that there should be a government 'promotion' of Sunday being a day of rest and relaxation if possible, and also encouragement from the government for people to think about going to church, regardless of how strong or weak their faith is. Some people may develop or strengthen a faith by starting to attend Mass and other church services.

That's all well and good, but it isn't particularly convincing. Whilst churches may be the centre of a community they aren't overly open to diversity of opinion or lifestyle. The "I'm alright, Jack" attitude you allude to is something I've observed in Christians as much as I have in any other group, suggesting that it is simply an aspect of humanity.

As for what Jesus might have said, other than the bible there isn't all that much evidence to suggest that "Jesus" (assuming he ever existed) is an example we should follow. All reported teachings are at best anecdotal.

 

[43096]

On reflection of the responses in this thread, I would say my initial view was too extreme in terms of closing shops and hospitality and that these should remain as they are (6 hours for supermarkets). However, I stand by my view that there should be a government 'promotion' of Sunday being a day of rest and relaxation if possible, and also encouragement from the government for people to think about going to church, regardless of how strong or weak their faith is. Some people may develop or strengthen a faith by starting to attend Mass and other church services.

That would be an ecumenical matter.

 

[simonw]

Correlation doesn't always mean causation, but sometimes it does and it is a fair possibility that our increasingly secular society has led to an increase in the 'I'm alright Jack' attitude, of which higher crime rates and antisocial behaviour stem from, along with less respect for others.

There are other positives about a more religious Britain though, one of them is the socialising aspect. Whilst not directly linked to theology, many church parishes nowadays are thriving with various different groups and events running, as well as tea and coffee served after Mass - all of which are chances to make and develop friendships, relationships and improve mental health.

In reference to homosexuality, I can't remember the exact scripture but I'm sure there is a Gospel passage somewhere where Jesus basically says that a man must either devote himself entirely to God (like a priest does), or to his wife and family (and vice versa). He also says in another text "Husbands, love your wives. Wives, love your husbands." He doesn't go on to make reference to gay couples. I know he isn't literally condemning homosexuality in these texts, but neither is he endorsing it. Homosexuality was considered a sin in those days and homosexual sex was still treated as a crime well into 20th century Britain. I would say these are a few reasons for the Catholic Church's stance, whether it is correct or incorrect is open to opinion.

On reflection of the responses in this thread, I would say my initial view was too extreme in terms of closing shops and hospitality and that these should remain as they are (6 hours for supermarkets). However, I stand by my view that there should be a government 'promotion' of Sunday being a day of rest and relaxation if possible, and also encouragement from the government for people to think about going to church, regardless of how strong or weak their faith is. Some people may develop or strengthen a faith by starting to attend Mass and other church services.

I'm not sure why you started this thread on a railway forum. If it was to encourage people back into church then reading through it I would guess you haven't achieved that aim.

I'm reminded that it is easier to attract bees with honey than with vinegar, something you might want to reflect upon.

 

[Mike395]

On reflection of the responses in this thread, I would say my initial view was too extreme in terms of closing shops and hospitality and that these should remain as they are (6 hours for supermarkets). However, I stand by my view that there should be a government 'promotion' of Sunday being a day of rest and relaxation if possible, and also encouragement from the government for people to think about going to church, regardless of how strong or weak their faith is. Some people may develop or strengthen a faith by starting to attend Mass and other church services.

This is the part of your reply I take most issue with - 'encouragement from the government' for people to a) follow a particular faith or b) attend church if they do. There is absolutely no way it's the State's role to tell anybody which religion, if any, to follow, or how to conduct their faith.

 

[Philip]

This is the part of your reply I take most issue with - 'encouragement from the government' for people to a) follow a particular faith or b) attend church if they do. There is absolutely no way it's the State's role to tell anybody which religion, if any, to follow, or how to conduct their faith.

Why is not the State's role to encourage? The government encourages people to go to work, to learn to drive if possible, in recent times to get vaccinated. Whether faith is less or more important than those aspects of life I've just listed is a matter of opinion. However, encouragement is just that; people will still be free to make their own decisions, so no 'free country' laws are being broken. For the reasons I've gone into it may end up being of great benefit to many people - even if they don't think it would be at the present time.

 

[simonw]

Why is not the State's role to encourage? The government encourages people to go to work, to learn to drive if possible, in recent times to get vaccinated. Whether faith is less or more important than those aspects of life I've just listed is a matter of opinion. However, encouragement is just that; people will still be free to make their own decisions, so no 'free country' laws are being broken there. If the Church is built up then that is obviously good for the Church and individual churches, and for the reasons I've gone into it may end up being of great benefit to many people - even if they don't think it would be at the present time.

The state doesn't encourage people to learn to drive.

As to religion, in what way could or should the state 'encourage' people to adopt a religion, esp one that is not church of england?

 

[Philip]

The state doesn't encourage people to learn to drive.

As to religion, in what way could or should the state 'encourage' people to adopt a religion, esp one that is not church of england?

Not a specific religion, basically something which covers the three mainstream faiths in this country, without distinguishing. There are numerous ways the government could do it; an address given by the Queen or the PM (although perhaps not this PM), social media messaging, slogans even. Just something to try and grab people's attention.

 

[simonw]

Not a specific religion, basically something which covers the three mainstream faiths in this country, without distinguishing. There are numerous ways the government could do it; an address given by the Queen or the PM (although perhaps not this PM), social media messaging, slogans even. Just something to try and grab people's attention.

Why should they?

 

[swt_passenger]

Why should they?

They might as well tell us all to believe in the tooth fairy…

 

[Jimini]

They might as well tell us all to believe in the tooth fairy…

Wait....what?

 

[simonw]

They might as well tell us all to believe in the tooth fairy…

Perhaps they could combine it with an address from the Queen telling us to clean our teeth and close at least twice a,day.