Mr Bates vs the Post Office

gordondaviesmoustache said:
Why are so many Christians such irredeemable cunts?
Click to expand...

When you say "so many" do you think it's a bigger percentage than the general population or is the "so many" relative to their professed values?

Their are clearly quite a few high profile Christians who it's hard to fathom how their actions align with their professed faith and definitely some people where I've thought it you're off to heaven then I'll take my chances with old nick thanks. However my experience of the congregations I've been involved in is. that whilst the vast majority of us often don't manage to live up to the pretty demanding tenets of our faith and sometimes fall quite badly short most of us are trying pretty hard not to be arseholes*. There's always a few people who you do wonder if they are practicing the same faith as you.

Maybe I'm being a deluded arsehole myself but I do feel your question has an element of caricature to it.

It is interesting that in the case of Vennells and Flowers they were both ordained ministers I think ? Obviously the Catholic church has a significant issue with Clericalism but those issues are probably similar in other Christian churches. Being ordained should create a sense of servant leadership but it clearly creates a sense of entitlement and superiority in some.

Not looking to derail the thread but the whole question of religiosity in evolutionary psychology is really interesting. The historical view is that religious societies out compete others but the reasons for that are complex and not necessarily spiritual. There's all sorts of interesting research often using game theory about the behaviours of people across the whole spectrum of religiousity.

*I'm differentiating here between fundamentalists and more generally religious people because there's research that shows though religious people will have a generosity bias towards their in-group they don't discriminate against out-groups whereas fundamentalists are actively less nice to pretty much anyone not within their in-group.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
Bizarre response. The question (which was expressly and unequivocally posed) was:



It’s a perfectly legitimate question. Some of the most ‘unchristian’ people I have encountered have been Christians. In fact the most selfish man I have ever met is a practising Catholic. Goes to mass every Sunday. He’s a ****, although quite entertaining company when he wants to be.

I find it both strange and noteworthy that people who actively promote and practise a particular belief system can live their lives in a way that is so incongruous with its widely stated values.

I think the point you have raised about it merely being a manifestation of the powerful exercising power over the weak is a gross simplification - it is far more complex than that and reveals a more nuanced, unappealing trait of human nature, rooted in a lack of self-awareness and hypocrisy, and goes some way to explain why we are basically fucked as a species.
Click to expand...

Responded to your question before I saw this. My mum used to physically prod the parish priest and say things like "you do know better people walk past than go in, don't you?" and she and you are indeed right.

Having bored even myself with my last response I don't want to bang on but you raise an interesting viewpoint which I think intersects with your thoughts on the Tory thread. Theocracies are pretty crap (hardly a newsflash) however amongst all the dross they exhibit a smaller set of useful prosocial characteristics that secular societies struggle to replicate. There's some really interesting (honestly!) evolutionary psychology research on this. If we could manage to reproduce these in a tolerant secular society we'd give ourselves a fighting chance. I still have hope that we can do this before we wipe ourselves out, but then I am a potentially deluded God botherer!

Finally, I would point out that you don't have to be religious to be a pontificating hypocrite and I'd site Lennon and his hideous song Imagine as Exhibit A !

Back on topic, power and decision rights have to come with real accountability and consequences. When you divorce the two you have no governance and things go to absolute rat shit. We increasingly live in a society where people actively seek to decouple the two things (and are viewed as 'smart' for being able to do so). A good start to reversing this trend would be to make an example of some of the people in this case, not out of vengeance but to start a reset of what it means to be in a position of power and responsibility in this country.
 
threespires said:
When you say "so many" do you think it's a bigger percentage than the general population or is the "so many" relative to their professed values?

Their are clearly quite a few high profile Christians who it's hard to fathom how their actions align with their professed faith and definitely some people where I've thought it you're off to heaven then I'll take my chances with old nick thanks. However my experience of the congregations I've been involved in is. that whilst the vast majority of us often don't manage to live up to the pretty demanding tenets of our faith and sometimes fall quite badly short most of us are trying pretty hard not to be arseholes*. There's always a few people who you do wonder if they are practicing the same faith as you.

Maybe I'm being a deluded arsehole myself but I do feel your question has an element of caricature to it.

It is interesting that in the case of Vennells and Flowers they were both ordained ministers I think ? Obviously the Catholic church has a significant issue with Clericalism but those issues are probably similar in other Christian churches. Being ordained should create a sense of servant leadership but it clearly creates a sense of entitlement and superiority in some.

Not looking to derail the thread but the whole question of religiosity in evolutionary psychology is really interesting. The historical view is that religious societies out compete others but the reasons for that are complex and not necessarily spiritual. There's all sorts of interesting research often using game theory about the behaviours of people across the whole spectrum of religiousity.

*I'm differentiating here between fundamentalists and more generally religious people because there's research that shows though religious people will have a generosity bias towards their in-group they don't discriminate against out-groups whereas fundamentalists are actively less nice to pretty much anyone not within their in-group.
Click to expand...
It think that’s fair comment and although my words ‘so many’ were conscious (as I deliberately didn’t deploy ‘most’) I think it wasn’t the best choice of words as know plenty of Christians who broadly practise what they preach.

‘A significant proportion’ would have been fairer.
 
Last edited:
threespires said:
When you say "so many" do you think it's a bigger percentage than the general population or is the "so many" relative to their professed values?

Their are clearly quite a few high profile Christians who it's hard to fathom how their actions align with their professed faith and definitely some people where I've thought it you're off to heaven then I'll take my chances with old nick thanks. However my experience of the congregations I've been involved in is. that whilst the vast majority of us often don't manage to live up to the pretty demanding tenets of our faith and sometimes fall quite badly short most of us are trying pretty hard not to be arseholes*. There's always a few people who you do wonder if they are practicing the same faith as you.

Maybe I'm being a deluded arsehole myself but I do feel your question has an element of caricature to it.

It is interesting that in the case of Vennells and Flowers they were both ordained ministers I think ? Obviously the Catholic church has a significant issue with Clericalism but those issues are probably similar in other Christian churches. Being ordained should create a sense of servant leadership but it clearly creates a sense of entitlement and superiority in some.

Not looking to derail the thread but the whole question of religiosity in evolutionary psychology is really interesting. The historical view is that religious societies out compete others but the reasons for that are complex and not necessarily spiritual. There's all sorts of interesting research often using game theory about the behaviours of people across the whole spectrum of religiousity.

*I'm differentiating here between fundamentalists and more generally religious people because there's research that shows though religious people will have a generosity bias towards their in-group they don't discriminate against out-groups whereas fundamentalists are actively less nice to pretty much anyone not within their in-group.
Click to expand...

My take on it is that religions provide convenient cover for the worst types of people to whitewash their reputations and “get away with” their inherently bad behaviour.

It’s what I’d call adverse selection, the religion doesn’t really so much as create these individuals, it attracts them through what it confers onto them. They join/stay with the church to have friends in high places who can absolve them of their worst traits. Those friends being both human and otherwise.

Look at the Clapham alkali attack bloke, and all of the myriad minister/priest abuse scandals. What came first, the **** or the religion? I’m inclined to say the ****. If they didn’t have Christianity they would find the next best thing.
 
threespires said:
When you say "so many" do you think it's a bigger percentage than the general population or is the "so many" relative to their professed values?
Click to expand...
I think religion to some extent creates an environment where the wellbeing of the philosophy and belief system is placed above the wellbeing of individual people in (or outside) that belief system. In many ways, that parallels the sort of corporate cover ups you often see, where the reputation of the organisation is more important than anything else. Certainly not unique to religions though.

I do think it's particularly shocking to come from a member of the clergy for the same reason it's shocking when a teacher abuses a kid or a police officer breaks the law. I also find it pretty shocking that someone can simultaneously be an ordained minister and a multimillionaire CEO. They just don't seem compatible. Not to mention the time involved in doing either job. But then that's the thing with these top ends of business, isn't it? We are often told how important they are, and yet somehow they're so important that they can dedicate only half of their workweek to it and somehow still do the job 'well' enough to get a massive bonus. I would have assumed that running a parish was a full time job.
 
SkyBlueFlux said:
My take on it is that religions provide convenient cover for the worst types of people to whitewash their reputations and “get away with” their inherently bad behaviour.
Click to expand...
See also: charity work.

Look at the Wikipedia entry of every billionaire and you'll see a 'philanthropy' section, but it's much rarer to see the corresponding 'tax dodging' section. And that's because just paying your taxes doesn't get you any praise.

Jimmy Savile was a prolific charity fundraiser ffs.
 
And here endeth today's lesson, now if we can all open our books to Hymn 528, 'Holy Be Thine God'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.