HMMmm chocolate Imam
As long as it's Galahxy.
“Never, NEVER criticise Muslims; only ONLY Christians, and Jews, a little bit”
Alan Partridge
I've always seen you as more of a Bloater, tbh.
As long as it’s Galahxy
Chocolate / religion pun thread!
Cadburys Moses
Zooroasted peanuts?
Crown of Thorntons?
Sunni Delight.
And before anyone gets upset, these aren't aimed at the religious, just as fish puns aren't meant to upset fish.
Talking of straw men, he was red headed, just ask Millais or Hunt and probably Spanish, there's loads of them there.
Well, IdleJon, I don’t know how old you are, but I’m not exactly young, and the number of times I have seen it on my facebook timeline today alone exceeds counting.
Wouldn’t know about Internet memes, it’s something I first read about donkeys years ago, I haven’t bothered with Fb, Twitter, or any other sort of social meeja except STW for nearly six months. There was a news item I read about the decisions involving Easter popped up on Flipboard the other day, but I can’t find it right now.
Netfilx- Cosmos
Like religion but with evidence.
We're gonna watch the Passion of Christ minute, just to be topical. Only seen it once before so can't really remember what happens, I hope the ending isn't bad.
Two points
1) Northwind is 100% right. When "Christians" stop trying to or succeeding in interfering in my life telling me what I can and cannot do then they will get a much easier time. Anglican bishops in parliamnet - WTF are they doing there and how dare they tell me I am a lessor person for having no faith. "christians" have blood on their hands. Roman catholic opposition to condoms has cost millions of lives as one example.
2) I have no time for any religion - but Christianity is the only one that does this. NO other religion has a voice in parliament or in the making of laws in this country.
“christians” have blood on their hands.
So, TJ, you blame all Christians for the actions of those people who have annoyed or upset you?
NO other religion has a voice in parliament or in the making of laws in this country.
Other religions do have voices in the government of other countries though.
Other religions do have voices in the government of other countries though.
they don't automatically have 26 seats in the house of lords though.
just as likely to happen
jca....Not yet I'm not.
they don’t automatically have 26 seats in the house of lords though.
No, sometimes they are the entire executive government. Not sure where you're going with this - is it just that you only care about the UK?
It would be interesting (and I might if I had the time) to go through the House of Lords records and see what the Lords Spiritual contribution actually is.
No, sometimes they are the entire executive government. Not sure where you’re going with this – is it just that you only care about the UK?
Other parts of government are voted in. Those 25 seats in the house of lords are there specifically for the church of England.
yip I do only actually care about the UK as I live here.
Don’t forget about the annual £25m contributed by the NHS to fund chaplains in hospitals.
25 million pounds? where have you got that figure from? if true that's disgusting.
I have no idea if the figure's true but chaplaincy services can be very worthwhile for people in hospitals and family. It could easily work out good value.
25 million pounds? where have you got that figure from? if true that’s disgusting.
From The Guardian last year, I think, although a quick search suggests that £25m is a conservative estimate.
I have no idea if the figure’s true but chaplaincy services can be very worthwhile for people in hospitals and family. It could easily work out good value.
And why can the church not fund this themselves? A tenner per regular church attendee should cover it.
(Btw, a friend’s mother died in an ambulance two weeks ago. Breathing difficulties in an elderly woman. It took four hours for an ambulance to reach her in her city centre house. Guess where I’d prefer that £25m to be spent. Her funeral is on Wednesday. I’ve no idea if she was a Christian but if her family want a priest or vicar or whatever they will have to pay for one to attend. What a great organisation.)
You'd be surprised how many people (including millions who do not go to church) ask to see a chaplain on their deathbeds. Why would you want to deprive people of that? It sounds very harsh.
Why would you want to deprive people of that?
I wouldn't, but the church should cover it rather than the NHS, If you want to see a chaplain that is really nothing to do with NHS or healthcare.
You’d be surprised how many people (including millions who do not go to church)
From what I can work out, just over 200,000 deaths in hospitals in England last recorded year. It seems that less than 10% of the general population attend church regularly. (With a peak of around 10% at Xmas, including absolute unbelievers who just like the music.) So we, the general public, provide funding for almost 1000 hospital chaplains to attend to around 20 of their dying flock per year per chaplain. And hold hands, and reassure the needy and administer calming words because the patient hasn’t seen a nurse in 12 hours.
Of course, the death rate doesn’t include those who don’t make it to hospital because of lack of funding.
If a preacher comes to my room uninvited I’ll be using my dying breath to tell them to **** off
I'd probably say "no thanks," but I share your sentiment.
So we, the general public, provide funding for almost 1000 hospital chaplains to attend to around 20 of their dying flock per year per chaplain.
And if your figures and the ones on the previous page are correct, that's £1250 per blessing.
I'm pretty sure the NHS is underfunded. I wonder how the assets and liabilities of the Church of England stack up.
If attendance at church is so low could they not just have the nearest priest, vicar etc just pop to the hospital. It’d save a fortune and keep them busy too. We all know what idle hands are after all.
<div class="bbp-reply-content">
"And why can the church not fund this themselves?"
</div>
No doubt they can, but does that really matter? £25 million doesn't buy you a huge amount of non-medical aftercare. Like I say, it could represent good value- supporting family, helping patients, this all supports the NHS. And it's not just for the religious, let alone just for their own particular faith.
We have a chaplain at the uni, he's a good lad, and he doesn't just do stuff for his own faith group- in fact most people who make use of the chaplaincy aren't any flavour of christian. And in doing so he takes work off the shoulders of other professional services- less strain on counsellors, on the student's union advice team, on the NHS practice on campus. Obviously that's not exactly the same situation but I think it's comparable in effect.
As for spending it on something else, £25m is an absolute drop in the bucket and robbing peter to pay paul is pretty much the exact same race to the bottom that the current government would like us all to play, and all makes the country that bit colder and starker. If we want better services in the NHS we get it by spending more money not by meanspirited cuts to services that we personally don't think are essential. Who knows when something you value will be next in line?
If a preacher comes to my room uninvited I’ll be using my dying breath to tell them to **** off
I’d probably say “no thanks,” but I share your sentiment.
Yeah we might all say that but if you're weak, lonely afraid etc then you might might be happy just to have someone close. This kind hints at a problem which doesn't really tie neatly into this thread but it's that the christian churches do the big life events very well. As the church becomes increasingly anachronistic and more people become atheists we need something to span the gap.
I'm not religious. I don't honestly think I could say I'm spiritual but I think a lot of people benefit from some kind of spirituality to help them cope with tragedy or profound events and it needn't be based on faith.
I know a hospital chaplain fairly well. They don't just turn up to give the last rites, they are often at the bedsides of people who are lonely/afraid, with no one to visit them.
I'm more than happy for there to be hospital chaplains and I'm happy that they are funded via the NHS. I can't think of anything more traumatic than a lonely person having no one to talk to and comfort them whilst they are dying. The church has limited funds and its better that the chaplaincy is centrally organised and funded, across denominations.
Yup.
My mum, a devout Catholic, spent some weeks in Crumpsall Hospital with terminal cancer.
The chaplaincy were amazing, all of them, regardless of denomination.
They work hard and even though they tell you it's a privilege to help, it must take it's toll.
I don't begrudge the cost, even though I'm a non-believer.
£25m is an absolute drop in the bucket
It is, but it all adds up. What else is the NHS spending money on which could be funded from elsewhere? I'm not denying the value of having priests in hospitals for reasons as discussed, but it seems odd to me that it's funded by the NHS rather than the Church.
What happens with other faiths? Presumably if there's a Muslim on their death bed they get a visit from the local Imam or some such, rather than have a Christian chaplain intervening? I guess that's supported by their local mosque?
So is the difference here one of church membership perhaps? Your average Muslim is likely to be a regular attendee, your average self-proclaimed Christian perhaps not so much. So for the devout who take it seriously, of whatever faith, they have a local place of worship who can take care of their flock; for the great unwashed who only attend church for weddings and funerals it's arguably a bit late for a last-minute conversion.
If we want better services in the NHS we get it by spending more money not by meanspirited cuts to services that we personally don’t think are essential.
I totally agree. But there's two ways of having more money - being given more, and wasting less. I don't know much about the NHS but I'm led to believe that it's not particularly smart in how it spends its funding (and I don't particularly mean that this particular expense isn't "smart," but rather things like paying over the odds for stuff they could get more cheaply).
Yeah we might all say that but if you’re weak, lonely afraid etc then you might might be happy just to have someone close.
That's a good point actually, and one I hadn't considered. Just having someone - anyone - to talk to could be a comfort.
Are there any charities providing this sort of service?
As I understand it the teams can consist of many faiths including none, and the point of having them as paid staff is that they are just that - staff who are a proper resource doing an accountable job at times that work for the NHS. Not just another add-on to patch things up. They are expected to be able to work with other faiths and they are also supported by a team of volunteers as there is more work than you would imagine
for example: http://www.leicestershospitals.nhs.uk/patients/patient-and-visitor-services/faith-and-chaplaincy/
Their range of staff is "The Chaplaincy team includes Christian, Hindu, Muslim and Sikh Chaplains as well as a non-religious Pastoral Carer. The wider team of volunteers also includes Baha'i, Buddhist, Jewish and Jain representatives."
Whether or not you think this sort of service is valuable might depend on whether you think pastoral care of any sort has value
On chaplaincy - now usually called spiritual care. Many of you here have no idea of their role and usefulness.
It an essential part of the NHS. By having these people directly employed we can be sure of their levels of training, commitment and skills. they do not just mumble a few religious words. Certainly in our area they are trained counsellors, family mediators as well and also are on call 24/7. A parish priest, Rabbi, Iman could not perform their role Not just for patients but for staff as well. Not just for the religious of a denomination but for all religious of any type and also non religious who need their support.
I have referred people to the service a fair amount over the years and consider them an essential part of holistic care. I have seen them give great comfort and provide peace. Without them a part of the service I am a part of would be missing.
Holistic care. They are an essential part of it
Jesus is a sausage roll - it’s true I saw it in an advert!
The lack of understanding of the function of hospital chaplains illustrates very well the complete misunderstanding of what most CofE priests do - their job isn't just to take a couple of midweek services and a few on Sunday, it is to provide a six day a week service to their local communities, they will be visting the homebound, community centres, care homes, schools etc etc in their parish throughout the week offering someone to talk to some members of their flock, other believers and any non-believers who want to take them up in their offer. Indeed I would argue that they probably have a bigger window on our society than any other members. This is the main reason why I personally think the Lords Spiritual still provide a valuable function as they are informed by a wide network of priests on our society (and indeed other societies in the world as each diocese supports an Anglican church elsewhere in the world so their networks extend abroad)
I quite like the idea of unelected people providing a different viewpoint on legislation. They aren't whoring themselves to the electorate for votes. And I think the idea of spiritual leaders being involved in such a role is not a bad one either. But it absolutely definitely should involve all major faiths, not just Christianity.
If I had my way the house of Lords would include representatives from a variety of professions and occupations, all across society. Religions included, but also scientists health professionals, teachers and many more.
That is partly the role of cross bench peers which include other faith leaders and other former leaders as well as other eminent people from their fields. The big difference between the Lords Spiritual and other Lords, they automatically leave when they retire as a Bishop (unless exceptionally they are granted a Life Peerage) so there is constant renewal, whereas everyone else is there for life unless they decide to give it up.
There is no place at all for religious figures in our legislature. anachronistic, undemocratic, reactionary.
Indeed I would argue that they probably have a bigger window on our society than any other members
Utter utter nonsense. This just shows how little you know. How can someone how world view is filtered thru dogma and superstition have any understanding of the issues facing the wider world. Compare them to social workers, policemen, healthcare workers etc - these people have a real understanding of the world. Priests / ministers Iman etc cannot because of their belief and faith.
It is completely abhorrent to me that these people are given positions of power in the secular world
.
And TJ is one person I'd definitely not have in my House of Lords!
