Promotional video for the the Conference of Catholic Families, organised by the Lumen Fidei Institute whomever they may be, which opens tomorrow in the Ballsbridge Hotel, Dublin 4.

A less tolerant rival to the World Meeting of Families.

Good times.

Lumen Fidei Institute

Thanks Daisy Chainsaw

Sponsored Link

89 thoughts on “Alternatively

  1. Ben Redmond

    Am I supposed to get emotional about ultra groups like this? There are groups within the Catholic world (and a big worldwide world it is, embracing many cultures and ethnic groups) who believe that Papa Francisco is a heretic who has been watering down and ignoring traditional theological understanding of several topics. Ultra beliefs are found within the religion domain. They are also found within the political domain, on the right and the left. Ultra tendencies often drift into cultism, in which by intense psychological bombardment a dominant leader ‘persuades’ devotees that they are the Elect or the True Believers, and that everybody else is outside the Circle of Truth. In times of economic and ideological uncertainty, the prospects for religious, political and psychological cultism are enhanced. The guarded response to the rise of ultra groups is not to belittle and ridicule them, but to read the signs of the times and situate the devotees within family, social and ideological context.

          1. Alan mc gee

            it’s entirely relevant to your question. if you were a Christian you’d know if empathy was mutually exclusive of being one.

          2. millie st murderlark

            It really, really isn’t.

            I fail to see how having empathy – something most humans are capable of – is in any way linked to being a Christian. Being a Christian is not something inherently human, having the ability to empathise with your fellow man absolutely is.

          3. Janet, I ate my avatar

            what a load of bull,
            empathy is a human sentiment not a christian one, actually I have seen more so called christians deeply lacking in it,
            and I’m an atheist.

          4. Listrade

            “it’s entirely relevant to your question. if you were a Christian you’d know if empathy was mutually exclusive of being one.”

            I’ll admit, it’s a long time since I stepped foot in any form of church, but when I did I may have missed the sections that were reserved for the all the Christian cetacea and other primates. Given that we have shown evidence that animals that form social groups must form empathy in order to survive and flourish as a social group, I would expect that all those dolphins, whales, apes and chimpanzees are also regulars at mass if it turns out it was Christianity all along.

            Might be worth considering including them to bulk up the numbers attending mass.

          5. Alan McGee

            I​ asked a ​simple question – are you christian?
            ​Millie, Janet & Listrade you have all conflated a simple question with a dissection on empathy​.

            This has nothing to do with the question I posed but with Millies conversation with herself “Are empathy and being a Christian mutually exclusive?”. She goes on – “I fail to see how having empathy – something most humans are capable of – is in any way linked to being a Christian”. and on – “having the ability to empathise with your fellow man absolutely is.”

            Enter Janet who was asked the same simple question, Are you christian?
            To wit she offers: “empathy is a human sentiment not a christian one”.

            Finally @listrade with the science “we have shown evidence that animals that form social groups must form empathy in order to survive and flourish as a social group.

            And so, If you all have such profound empathy as humans why does that empathy only extend to the victim and not the culprit?

          6. millie st murderlark

            Well Alan, if you can show where I expressly said my empathy extends only to the victims, feel free to point it out. Otherwise, you’re just putting words in my mouth. And, again, the religious beliefs of those posting remain none of your business and wholly irrelevant to this discussion.

          7. Alan mc gee

            do you empathise with the perpetrator Millie?
            you can remind me as often as you please that a person’s religious beliefs are personal but when discussing something of religious import I think it a little silly to be backward about ones beliefs.

          8. millie st murderlark

            I just fail to see how my personal beliefs are relevant. You seem determined to make it an issue. I’ve had plenty of conversations about religion with any number of people without knowing anything of their religious beliefs. Because it’s none of my business and it doesn’t affect me. I don’t mean that selfishly. The same applies to everyone. Your religious beliefs are your own. Mine are mine, and I’ve really said more than enough of the subject. Goodnight.

          9. Nigel

            I empathise with culprits all the time. Doesn’t mean I have to give them an inch when it comes to stopping them inflicting damage on other people

          10. Starina

            alan mcgee, it’s none of your beeswax what religion your fellow commentors are and I fail to see how it’s in any way relevant to the conversation.

          11. Alan mc gee

            @starina because you’re commenting on a post about extreme Catholic views so let’s not fanny about

          12. Listrade

            @ Alan

            “And so, If you all have such profound empathy as humans why does that empathy only extend to the victim and not the culprit?”

            Well we’d first need to agree on a definition of empathy, then which form of empathy. But the very generalised view would be that empathy is naturally focused on victims. So as part of early social groups we started looking after the sick and elderly instead of leaving them to die. We can only empathise where we can understand the emotion or thinking behind an action.

            Same with animals, like when dolphins have saved humans from shark attacks and protected them (ask Dick Van Dyke). Their empathy is with the victims and for no obvious benefit to them. They do it to be nice. Thankfully for all of us who appreciate the complete body of work of DvD, the dolphins didn’t sit back and debate ethical philosophy and whether or not they had given equal weight to the feelings and motivations of the shark.

            Anyway, we do give empathy to the culprit, but it is limited. We do have empathy for criminals, but we tend to stop when the crime is within the grey sphere of what society considers reprehensible. We’ll empathise with the kid who steals bread to feed his family over the “victim” baker. But we’ll condemn a pedophile and those who assist them and empathise with the victim.

            Because we can imagine being hungry enough to steal (that is empathy). Dolphins can empathise with being under attack by a shark. But we can’t readily empathise with wanting to and continually sexually abusing children.

            It isn’t all or nothing.

        1. Alan McGee

          You should read CAREFULLY what Ben Redmond writes above @nigel. Rather than parroting the words of ‘our man in Stockholm’. It makes you look foolish and incapable of your own thoughts.

          Are you a Christian Nigel?

          1. Alan McGee

            because Nigel you gave the asinine Philip O’Connor anti freedom of speech repost almost verbatim. While in the post from Ben Redmond he eloquently espouses listening rather than stonewalling.
            ….to be or not to be
            Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, Or to take arms against a sea of troubles, And by opposing end them?’

          2. Listrade

            @ Alan. Out of curiosity, do we apply the rule of listening to all fringe groups? Because to be honest, we’ve given that a go and it hasn’t worked because all we do is we listen to them and let them have a platform.

            And as Ben says, this has and is happening on the left and the right. And they all piss and moan about freedom of speech, forgetting that it is two-way and we have given in to them. We listen to them and give them a platform but never challenge their views. When they are challenged, that’s when they cry about freedom of speech forgetting that they’ve just had days of media coverage unchallenged.

            Nobody is stopping them having this conference, so their speech isn’t restricted, don’t try and restrict the same freedoms for debating and scrutinising their views.

            But we aren’t consistent. I address this to others, not you directly. We’ll call these a fringe group and not representative of a whole faith, but only the faith we align to spiritually or culturally, we won’t give the same regard to other faiths. So ISIS represent all Muslims. Extreme muslim voices represent all muslims and moderate muslims don’t do enough to publically denounce and distance themselves from those voices. But hey, if it’s a bunch of odious Catholics on the fringe…let’s hear them out..unchallenged, because.

            Oh let’s hear out all the far right nationalist voices, they’re only a fringe anyway. All antifa are terrorist scum though. All black lives matter campaigners are reverse racists. Couldn’t possibly be a few extreme members on the fringe, nah it’s all of them.

            Let’s be consistent. Fringe is fringe, no views should go unchallenged. If you want to state it publicly, then have the gonads to defend it publicly. They’re having their conference, they’re having their say. This is just the response. Hear them, hear us. reply.

            It’s pretty simple.

          3. Nigel

            So I did read it carefully you just don’t like a response which suggests their targets deserve empathy while they deserve to be opposed.

          4. Papi

            Something suggests that Alan made that video….I don’t know, maybe it’s the sniff of fundamentalist off him.
            Are you a Christian, Alan?

          5. Alan McGee

            @Nigel why don’t ‘THEY” deserve empathy too? Does your humanity have a limit to it’s compassion? What is that limit?

          6. Nigel

            Empathise with them all you want but if you don’t stand up to them, oppose them, stand with their victims and targets then you are just enabling and supporting them.

          7. Alan mc gee

            I don’t empathise with them Nigel. I’d execute them. summary justice style in an arena with a baying crowd

          8. Nigel

            Yeah? Not a fan of hunting them for sport through a maze of fiendish puzzles and terrifying death traps? To each their own.

          1. Alan McGee


            Millie: Are empathy and being a Christian mutually exclusive?
            me: are you a christian Millie?
            millie : That’s irrelevant to my question, and really, none of your concern.
            me : it’s entirely relevant to your question. if you were a Christian you’d know if empathy was mutually exclusive of being one.

            You see Nigel I’m asking Millie to answer her own question.
            Let a = empathy. b = a christian.
            Therefore –
            Millie: Are (a) and (b) mutually exclusive?
            me: are you (b)?
            millie : That’s irrelevant to my question, and really, none of your concern.
            me : it’s entirely relevant to your question. if you were (b) you’d know if (a) was mutually exclusive of being one.

            Perhaps a small error in syntax. Should it read ‘to being one.’ rather than ‘of being one.’?? A grammatical determinative error, I’m not sure?
            Does that help you?

          2. Listrade

            @Alan. are heads and tails mutually exclusive?

            I am neither a head or a tail so I am unable to answer.

          3. Alan McGee


            so you can’t answer that’s fine.

            the granfalloon of ‘mutual exclusivity’ was introduced by another commenter not me.

            This thread has become derailed by this notion erroneously introduced about the mutual exclusivity of empathy and being a christian?!?

            You say Listrade there is a sliding scale of empathy depending on the severity of the abuse (which I don’t disagree with) but there is no scale of forgiveness. You either forgive or you don’t. It is all or nothing.

          4. :-Joe

            @Alan McGee

            …but at what point does repeated forgiveness turn to the moment of having to take action in the face of the same problems repeatedly destroying people’s lives with the exact same cause and effect?


          5. Listrade


            As a pretty avid Vonnegut fan, I’m not sure that’s a correct use of granfalloon. However, debating that really would derail the comments. But, just to clarify, Janet raised the issue of empathy in relation to this group. You asked Janet if she was a Christian, which expanded it beyond this group and onto the whole of Christianity. Mildred then asked if Empathy and Christianity was mutually exclusive.

            Whether Mildred was being literal or figurative isn’t known. Could have been a decent discussion, but you were the first to expand empathy to the whole of Christianity and beyond discussing a fringe group who clearly hold some extreme views.

            But what do I know as an atheist? I mean sure, we’ve seen behaviour .that would indicate a lack of empathy. Not much empathy displayed for rape babies, illegitimate children, “fallen women” for example. But that was in the past, all the way back to the mid 90s when the last laundry was closed. Not much empathy to those who had children adopted. Not much empathy to those who were abused. Not much empathy to gay rights. Not much empathy in the abortion referendum.

            I’m sensing a pattern.

            But then you could make reasonable conclusions on empathy from the bible itself. I mean child birth is painful because of Eve. Serves them, right all women must suffer because of her.

            At best it is morally inconsistent. But for every nice thing about the meek, there’s the death penalty for homosexuals or working on the sabbath or slavery or beating slaves or raping women in war or ethnic cleansing. The New Testament is only a bit better, but still little empathy for children who are not baptised, they’re punished not their parents. Not much empathy for the divorced, even if the marriage was forced or is abusive (that was a close referendum too) .

            But based on a general statement by Mildred that you took literally, we can’t mention empathy unless we are a member of a particular religion. Good gate keeping.

            And I never said there wasn’t a scale for forgiveness, I never mentioned forgiveness at all. So that isn’t a fair conclusion. I didn’t say the scale slided with the abuse, empathy is based on what we can imagine either emotionally or cognitively. I can understand theft in certain circumstances, hence when we have those circumstances I can empathise with the perpetrator. I cannot understand the circumstances or thoughts that prompt child abuse so I cannot empathise with the perpetrator.

          6. :-Joe

            @ Listrade

            It’s possible to empathise with abusers on the basis that they themselves often were abused, have lived, grown up, learned and developed in a culture of abuse not being dealt with or prosecuted properly.

            In the case of non-offending hebo / paedo -philes, they often have a monumental struggle trying to cope without any serious support services to treat their condition or help manage and monitor their compulsions.

            I can find it easy to empathise or even to sympathise with the non-offenders for sure.. but with the offenders, it’s obviously far more difficult but not completely impossible based on certain circumstances and recycling them through the justice system does not stop them re-offending.


          7. Listrade

            @joe maybe, but that’s why I only spoke for myself and stated I couldn’t empathise. I might understand particular patterns and circumstances, but to say I empathise with their behaviour and thinking i cannot do.

          8. :-Joe

            @Alan McGee
            You’re replys are a bit like the child who automatically responds to every question and answer with “but why?” just to keep talking.

            It was a part rhetorical and a part direct question about forgiveness but as far as action goes, it’s obviously whatever is necessary in stopping the repeated damaging behaviour in the best way possible.


          9. :-Joe

            Yeah I understand what you’re saying. I didn’t specifically mean to empathise with the behaviour and thinking of an offender.

            To be fair though, if you imagine your sexual desires or compulsions however normal, abnormal or natural, unnatural it seems to you, is actually outright illegal under morality and criminal law and in direct opposition to the will of society then maybe it can be understood better when looking at it from another angle.

            My argument is that we know this is going on all over the place, we know it’s a condition or a compulsion or whatever the root causes etc etc., So where are all the non-offenders talking about the problems dealing with this openly and why is the health system and government services not facilitating this so we can learn more in how to deal with it?

            If we want to help fix the problem, not doing the obvious makes the least amount of sense to me…

            Anyway, it’s a tough challenge to deal with on any level.


  2. Birneybau2

    Fair play for giving Conchita Wurst a prominent role in the video (which I didn’t watch but how and ever).

    Or is it a bearded Melania Trump?

  3. Alan McGee

    I’d imagine all the real catholics feel the same way and indeed would have views unprintable on this website. I’ve been party to conversation within an extreme catholic group that would make your head spin.
    The moderate or pedestrian catholic does needs a huge wake up call as I’m not sure why they attend mass, arrange funerals, christenings etc.They claim to be Christians but have lost all sight of what that teaches. That extends far past the parishioners and practicers of that faith to the clergy and church itself.
    Mass on Sunday is where you go to show off your new car and get the papers at the gates on the way home.

    1. Martco


      I have a solution to your pedestrian catholic conundrum there, it’s called separation of church & state.

      Simply remove yerselves from schools, hospitals & aob relating to the infrastructure of this state, then you won’t have to worry about people faking being catholic so they can get their children enrolled to schools for example. a bit of reparation wouldn’t go amiss either.

        1. dylad

          Will you stop asking people that question, it’s none of your business. For the record, I’m not baptised a christian.

    2. :-Joe

      The non extremists and non believers frequenting the churches are are mostly made up of lonely people, bored people, nosey people, people who know too many fellow church-goers, peoplw who are ignorant or afraid of an alternative, people easily led to begin with, people ignorant of what it all means, people willfully ignorant of what it all means, people who live in fear of being exluded or ostracised, people who have been coerced, manipulated and/or convinced enough in some small way that it’s the right thing to do…

      You could add people with a low sense of exerting critical thinking but you could also add the willfull ignorance of that for other reasons too…

      I’m sure you can think of more.of your own… but the local church hijacking rational thought on a sunday is not really a big problem or the daft followers that go there.

      It’s the intentional use of all the nonsense that they are being told by self appointed religiolous spiritual leaders to prop up their destructive institution.

      It’s all bull-poopy and it’s bad for ya.


  4. Scundered

    The world meeting of families, which is focused on old men who aren’t allowed to procreate and make families.

    The mind boggles.

  5. newsjustin

    The Catholic church is a broad church. That’s what some of its critics, within and without, fail to grasp…or don’t want to grasp.

    1. I Janet, I ate my Avatar

      Justin broad is not a good enough excuse
      why are you wasting your obvious humanity on such a corrupt bunch

    2. millie st murderlark

      I have to ask the same. It is one thing to believe in god, in the. teachings of the bible, to have faith. It’s another to support and defend the Church and what it represents. Historically, at it’s core, the Church is historically self-serving.

      People have done great things in the name of god. Not in the name of the Church. It’s not so difficult to separate them.

      1. newsjustin

        The church is Christ’s body on earth. It is not, in my opinion, possible to separate the two.

        I love the church. I love it’s core message, I love that it’s a means of redemption and salvation. I love that it has, against all odds, stuck around for 2,000 years. I love it’s sacraments, I love it’s saints, I love the stories of those, many Irish among them, who have given their lives in service and in martyrdom for the faith the church professes. I love the church’s social teaching, I love it’s liturgy, I love it’s service to the poor and sick and marginalised. I love it’s rich history, it’s art, it’s architecture, it’s music. I love that at every hour of every day there are Catholics gathered in prayer in every corner of the world. I love that a man who grew up in a hut made of straw can become a cardinal and a man who toiled in a freezing polish quarry can become Pope.

        I hate those who have used the cover of the church to commit their vile deeds and the cowards and incompetents who failed to root them out and destroy their foothold in the church.

        1. Sister Groovey

          There was a band in the 70s called Blind Faith.
          Anyone could get a record contract back then.

        2. Cian

          @newsjustin In fairness – you are conditioned that way.
          “The church is Christ’s body on earth” so says the church. Most of the Anglican churches, and the Eastern orthodox churches, and various others can (and do) claim the same historical link to Jesus (via Peter) in an unbroken line of bishops.
          Apart from the sacraments (which are human constructs), the protestant churches cover all the items you mention above.

          By staying in the RC you are enabling the hierarchy to continue to hide child abusers.

  6. €30m, seriously.

    My teenage daughter called me last night, distressed…
    Her Mother is dragging her along on Sunday, against her will.
    They have tickets, from by a third party.

    I tried to console her.

    I call it child-abuse lite…
    But there’s no such thing, is there?

    You just get someone to say sorry, decades later.

    The Pope fixes everything…
    He loves kids

    Viva el Papa!

    1. Cupofteaanyone

      It costs the state 30m and if the 500,000 go to see the pope that is €60 per head.

      I think there will be more than that involved but its not a bad deal to see a celebrity

    2. :-Joe


      What’ll you do if she”finds God”!!!.
      – in amongst all that insanity worship somehow?


  7. Father Lovely

    @The Ballsbridge Hotel…

    I promise to ostracise any person who ever sets foot in your place from my life.
    I don’t mean this week… I mean FOREVER.

    – Congratulations Hotel-manager type person.

    You’ll get the last laugh, when you get into Heaven, won’t you?
    (or were you just thinking of the money?)

  8. Sister Groovey

    Trust me.
    There was a band called ‘Blind Faith.

    You don’t have to suffer listening to them to believe me.

  9. Sister Groovey

    Who am I to judge, but, eh…
    They weren’t very good.

    You probably know better…

  10. I wasted on this site.

    I have a brilliant idea…

    Let’s all start believing in leprechauns.
    We could get a ‘normal bloke’ to pretend he was a leprechaun, but taller.

    Forget the massively rupsulsive amount of wealth.
    Forget the massively rupsulsive rhetoric.
    Forget the massively rupsulsive CC.
    Forget everything, please…

    There’s a pot of gold for everyone in the audience

    LEPRECHAUNS are just like Jesus, except for all that rainbow stuff.
    (and the pot of gold, which is an euphemism for ‘Heaven’)

  11. One too many Popes, innit?

    Relax everyone…
    You’re getting worked up over nothing… apparently…

    According to our leader (on page 5 of the ‘Independent’) there will be between 600 or 700 thousand people in the Pheonix Park on Sunday.
    That works out at about €428.57 per person.
    We pay. Not them.

    Why are WE so lucky? Why us?

    Excuse me…
    I feel a bit sick…

    1. Cian

      what are you talking about? we pay, not them? are you suggesting that the 500,000+ people don’t pay any taxes?

    2. cupofteaanyone

      I think your math might be a little off?
      30m divided between 700,000 people is €42.86 per person

      That’s not so bad. If ticketmaster were selling the tickets it would cost that in fees

  12. SOQ

    Not one woman speaking at this event. Looks like it’s not just ‘da gays’ they have a problem with so.

    1. :-Joe

      …they also have a problem with babies before they become women or gay too…

      Wait a minute… does the catholic fantasy even stand for anything anymore..
      ..something that stands up to real scrutiny?

      Please enlighten me….


  13. :-Joe

    Haha… hilarious… and what the hell is a magesterium?…
    -It sounds like a fantasy political court from a sci-fi novel?

    Nobody expects the extreme fundamentalist, fundamentalist extremists ….

    The operative phrases being “mental” and “fun” to watch bouncing around spewing nonsense…

    Ahh.. It’s as mad as a planet full of religiolousness….


Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link