CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!

Do we need a coronavirus thread?

(5710 posts)

No tags yet.


  1. SRD
    Moderator

    as a church going person, I completely fail to understand this. i don't understand people insisting that they can only worship in church? in a group? whatever. and i do not understand who a court can rule that faith is being impinged on.

    it is totally baffling and incoherent.

    ADMIN EDIT

    Relevant link bottom of previous page

    https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/covid-blanket-ban-on-church-worship-ruled-unlawful-3176715

    Posted 4 years ago #
  2. chdot
    Admin

    @ SRD

    Whether or not this should have been taken to court is one thing, I think a bigger issue is the status of faith/region in law(s).

    Posted 4 years ago #
  3. Morningsider
    Member

    @SRD - the ruling claims that your (or my) views on that are irrelevant. The petitioners believe that communal worship, involving communion, baptism etc. is a necessary part of "manifesting their religion". The result of this belief being that private or online worship is not actually worship at all. Ultimately, this means closing churches was a disproportionate interference in people's ability to exercise religious freedom. The Court agreed - although it noted that some restriction was possible during the pandemic, such as limiting numbers - as happened previously.

    Why people who are instructed to love their neighbour would go to court so they had the opportunity to infect them with a deadly virus is not dealt with.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  4. LaidBack
    Member

    @srd - we agree as a society that currently everything is impinged on. Once there are exceptions then that line hard to hold.

    Meanwhile was curious to see how Dublin has been getting on with vaccinations - 12% so far which is high in EU terms.
    Hardly ever see any planes here. Dublin airport though has been quite busy according to this Irish Times article.
    https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/r%C3%B3is%C3%ADn-ingle-i-decide-to-check-flights-arriving-and-departing-on-the-dublin-airport-site-1.4516994?mode=amp

    Posted 4 years ago #
  5. gembo
    Member

    Germans can go to Mallorca, quite low Covid there BUT cannot go to Cuxhaven on the Northern Coast of Germany. Riddle of the Sands. Erskine Childers. Father of the premier of Ireland in early 1970s??

    Posted 4 years ago #
  6. SRD
    Moderator

    I guess I will have to read the decision. I struggle to think of a robust theological defence of this principle.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  7. chdot
    Admin

    “I struggle to think of a robust theological defence of this principle.“

    Perhaps that’s because you are not a Wee Free(?)

    Posted 4 years ago #
  8. SRD
    Moderator

    No, based on a quick read it seems to be mainly about the sacraments? Ie mass and the idea that only priests can consecrate the host? (Both of which many Protestants would be less dogmatic about). So not about ‘faith’ but about how one particular sub-set of a faith interprets their obligations ?

    So why do we have church services on the radio (quaintly known as the service for shut-ins in my youth). The idea of using technology is not that new.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  9. Roibeard
    Member

    I struggle to think of a robust theological defence of this principle.

    Forgive me if I step through my understanding from a more basic level than you require - I don't think one can presume on knowing the full sequence outside of church goers.

    There is a transcendent (above, beyond, other) God, who created the universe. He chose to reveal himself, through creation, through words and, ultimately, through becoming human (Jesus), living and dying around 2,000 years ago. We know this because he ordained that his self-revelation be committed to writing - the Bible.

    As God's self-revelation, the Bible is viewed as having all that is required for "faith and practice", a Reformation phrase, but one recognisable both beyond and well before that. [1]

    On this basis, the church would seek to model herself on that of the first century church, following an example deemed to be binding to all cultures until Jesus returns.

    So, what did the early church look like? Individual believers bound themselves together in local groups - whilst faith was individual, that faith expressed itself corporately, in a way that perhaps isn't entirely understandable to our individualistic culture. The church is described as a family, a household, even a single body.

    The individuals welcomed each other into their homes, ate together, and were physically affectionate - all of which were commanded, and all of which caused Roman onlookers to think this new cult held incestuous, cannibalistic orgies.

    Whilst technology (writing) was used to communicate, this was described as a poor second to face-to-face communication. The primary rituals (communion and baptism) were physical. An early heresy was to spiritulise belief and downplay or denigrate the physical nature of people and faith.

    Worship consisted of believers gathering together, to share communion, pray and be taught. Corporate singing was integral and believers were warned not to give up meeting together.

    Every activity in a pandemic carries risk, the questions are "what is essential?" and "what is worth the risk?" Clearly society has agreed that healthcare, economic activity and education (all to some extent or other) are worth the risk.

    If one believes that God exists, has revealed himself and decreed appropriate worship, then one may consider following that decree is essential and worth the risk, even where society or government dictates otherwise (see martyrs through the ages, many of whom were killed for continuing to worship in the face of opposition).

    There are nuances to the above, for example, how this might be expressed whilst still respecting legal (God-ordained) authorities and demonstrating love within society.

    I'm sure this brief(!) summary will raise more questions and objections than it provides insights, which I'm happy to discuss offline - I suspect a theological discussion would end up being as unwelcome as our political discussions on a cycling forum...

    Robert

    [1] For a detailed, technical expression of this - https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/the-chicago-statement-on-biblical-inerrancy/

    Posted 4 years ago #
  10. SRD
    Moderator

    I’m not denying the profound importance of communal worship. I’m just saying that I think one can be a Christian and worship in seclusion.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  11. chdot
    Admin

    @ R

    Fascinating historical insight.

    The court judgement is interesting.

    Under the circumstances (restrictions being relaxed anyway) SG may choose not to appeal.

    If it does and loses, may be all sorts of consequences.

    From Scotsman article -

    But he said the government had “paid lip service” to Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which states: “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion… including the right to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.”

    Posted 4 years ago #
  12. gembo
    Member

    Even just Christianity has a very wide range. quakers sitting in silence through to the Rev Cleophus James of the Triple Rock Baptist Church Chicago circa 1980 I urge any believer or non believer to go there now and watch some of Cleophus’s footwork at The Old Landmark. This worked for Jake Blues.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  13. PS
    Member

    Thanks for that summary @Roibeard. I find this sort of thing really interesting. The changing social and cultural context of religions, and the reasons for/causes of their practices and the changes in them, throughout history is fascinating.

    Anyone know how the Court defines a religion and at what point we (society, the establishment, whoever is in charge) can say "nah, you're having a laugh" when someone is behaving in an unhelpful, unacceptable way but claims they are manifesting their belief?

    Posted 4 years ago #
  14. Morningsider
    Member

    @PS - Lord Toulson, in a Supreme Court judgement (in a 2013 case involving Scientology) defined religion as follows:

    I would describe religion in summary as a spiritual or non-secular belief system, held by a group of adherents, which claims to explain mankind’s place in the universe and relationship with the infinite, and to teach its adherents how they are to live their lives in conformity with the spiritual understanding associated with the belief system. By spiritual or non-secular I mean a belief system which goes beyond that which can be perceived by the senses or ascertained by the application of science. I prefer not to use the word “supernatural” to express this element, because it is a loaded word which can carry a variety of connotations. Such a belief system may or may not involve belief in a supreme being, but it does involve a belief that there is more to be understood about mankind’s nature and relationship to the universe than can be gained from the senses or from science. I emphasise that this is intended to be a description and not a definitive formula.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  15. Frenchy
    Member

    @PS - You may be interested in the varying successes of Pastafarian attempts to address that question. I'm don't know if any of them are in Scotland.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  16. steveo
    Member

    Thanks @roibeard interesting.

    I'm not a religious person so I'll not say much but it seems if your particular beliefs are very much rooted in a communal worship then it should be allowed, I know there is the issue around "the line" but there are enough exceptions in the rules that one more won't make much difference and add all the current restrictions, face masks, sanitisers then "church" shouldn't be any more dangerous than b&q which is barely essential.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  17. crowriver
    Member

    Anyone know if there's cycle parking handy for the EICC on Morrison Street? Trying to figure out if I can lock the bike up reasonably securely nearby when I go for the shot or if I should just walk. Had a look on Cyclestreets but couldn't figure out the symbols...

    Posted 4 years ago #
  18. gembo
    Member

    I can picture racks yes.

    When there lot of folk hanging about outside

    Posted 4 years ago #
  19. SRD
    Moderator

    i looked on the open source map before my visit,. there is one in front of the coop and one a little way past the main door.

    i was surprised that there weren't more.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  20. Frenchy
    Member

    @SRD- Have the five right outside been removed?

    Here

    Posted 4 years ago #
  21. crowriver
    Member

    Thanks folks. Yeah I see them on Streetview. Hopefully not too full when I rock up...

    Posted 4 years ago #
  22. Stickman
    Member

    There are also racks to the rear if the ones at the front are full, at the back of the office building with the Co-Op.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  23. PS
    Member

    There are also a number of racks round the back of Atria One, on the wee square down towards Exchange Crescent, that won't be being used by the office workers just now.

    [Edited to add that I think I'm referring to the same ones as Stickman]

    Posted 4 years ago #
  24. SRD
    Moderator

    @Frenchy - my laziness. I saw there was one in front of the scotmid and assumed they were the same. (does the map show 5?) Oddly I had looked on street view and didn't see them - must not have looked far enough down the street.

    I actually walked to my jab. very calming.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  25. Frenchy
    Member

    The standard OSM map says there are 5, but the marker is the same as if there was only one. If you choose the "CyclOSM" layer on the right (not the "Cycle map" layer, which isn't quite as helpful), it'll show the number of spaces. Direct link: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/55.94578/-3.20956&layers=Y

    Posted 4 years ago #
  26. gembo
    Member

    @SRD when I chummed Mrs Garto, the folk just standing about were obscuring the racks

    Posted 4 years ago #
  27. crowriver
    Member

    Okay, so we've managed to establish there's actually loads of cycle parking nearby. Good-oh!

    @SRD, it had crossed my mind that walking would be less stressful, especially in city centre, Lothian Road and Morrison Street. However it's a four mile round trip for me, hence why I thought maybe bike instead of Shank's pony. Keeping my options open at the moment...

    Posted 4 years ago #
  28. ejstubbs
    Member

    Edinburgh has now surged in to protection level 3 territory: 7 day rate jumped from 49 to 53 cases per 100,000 on the 23rd. Looks like most of the cases are in the Wester Hailes/Sighthill/Calders area.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  29. minus six
    Member

    Have we reached the point where all vulnerable groups have been offered vaccination ?

    The answer is no... but instead of publicising a specific risk to the clinically obese, we instead pursue a reckless drive toward mass vaccination of the entire population, rather than address a core taboo subject.

    The only stat I'm interested in now is the number of cases among those already vaccinated.

    But we won't see that, because everyone is too busy dreaming that "the vaccine" prevents viral transmission and confers immunity.

    The official narrative is disappointingly unsophisticated and will end badly.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  30. gembo
    Member

    Vaccine prevents hospitalization is the claim I hear.

    Posted 4 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin