Is the Vatican hypocritical because its rich with palaces and Gold?

  • Thread starter Thread starter theCardinalbird
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

theCardinalbird

Guest
My friend told me the Vatican is hypocritical because its Cardinals and a lot of its Pope’s lived in luxury like the Pharisees or Saduccees.

We know Jesus preached to live a humble life. He even told someone to follow him but sell all of his property because he was rich.

What do I say about this? Are they hypocritical?
 
No they’re not hypocritical! After 2,000 years you tend to accumulate some stuff. Pope Francis lives pretty simple.
 
Judas criticised the use of expensive oils for Christ, but Christ told him to be quiet. Our churches are beautiful and elaborate because the Holy Eucharist, Christ incarnate, lives there. Look at the Levitivus and the way it talks about the Temple… similar- God inhabited the holy of holies there
 
Maybe some are. But, many are following the example of Christ. For example, St. Pope JPII was famous for traveling with one little briefcase that contained all his possessions. He lived like a pauper in the midst of luxury.

And, never mind Pope Francis, who has eschewed all luxury for a long time. I think he drives a little eco car.
 
Last edited:
Is your questioner talking about all of Church history?
Because it seems unreasonable to call this generation hypocrites because of things done in the year 1,000.

The Church freely admits there were in the past, corrupt or even wicked clergy. Does your friend claim that because some police officers have been found to be corrupt therefore every police department is corrupt as a whole?
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
I think you would have to first establish that the Church is rich, which it isn’t. The Vatican itself runs a deficit. Most parishes and dioceses run either very thin budgets or have to borrow money. My own parish brings in just about what it spends every year, a few large donations through people who have died make our capital fund-- we have an old church that requires regular repairs so we aren’t getting rich we are just able to provide for the faith life of the people and make some charitable donations such as to an orphanage in Peru, to a family who has fallen on hard times locally, etc.

Secondly, none of the things in the Vatican belong to the Pope or the Cardinals, they belong to the Church. They are made available for people to enjoy, via the Vatican Museum and Vatican archives and such. Just as most governments preserve national treasures so does the Vatican. Selling them to private collectors would be against Church law, as those things were given to the Church by the faithful, they must remain with the Church. That is Church law. If I gave a chalice to the Church for use in the Mass and the Church sold it-- I’d be really mad. (also, note that most Church vessels are plated, not solid gold, silver, etc, they aren’t really worth money-- some that may have been precious medal and jewels are in museums). The artworks the Church commissioned supported artists, architects, stone masons, entire families in their work. The Church provided jobs to people for centuries.

Context is everything, Jesus told the man to sell everything not because he was rich (he didn’t tell EVERYONE to do this, just this one man) but because the man was overly attached to his things (the man “went away sad”). Your friend basically doesn’t know what he is talking about.

You seem to have friends who only want to say things they really have no knowledge of. You are going to have to learn to ignore them. I think I’ve posted to you already that you have to stop taking the bait. These people don’t want to discuss or learn, they just want to make you doubt by making things up.
 
1ke said:
You seem to have friends who only want to say things they really have no knowledge of. You are going to have to learn to ignore them. I think I’ve posted to you already that you have to stop taking the bait. These people don’t want to discuss or learn, they just want to make you doubt by making things up.
Click to expand...
I guess your right
 
You might ask if your friends have the same concerns about the wealthy football, baseball, basketball or hockey owners, managers and players, and their “worshipers” who go to billion dollar stadiums or arenas to “worship” several times a week, spending hundreds of dollars each time on seats and paraphernalia. Granted, watching grown men chase each other around for a piece of pigskin, vinyl or rubber is undeniably an inherently meaningful activity (worthy of being housed in such prodigious structures,) unlike, say… trying to find real meaning in life, but it does seem that perspective tends to obscure underlying biases.
 
Last edited:
Joe1 said:
My friend told me the Vatican is hypocritical because its Cardinals and a lot of its Pope’s lived in luxury like the Pharisees or Saduccees.

We know Jesus preached to live a humble life. He even told someone to follow him but sell all of his property because he was rich.

What do I say about this? Are they hypocritical?
Click to expand...
It is necessary to separate out the places of worship, the Churches, from the places where the Cardinals and popes live. The Vatican Museum, for example, is not the pope’s personal treasure vault. It is the legacy of the entire Church and all the people who have lived within the living body of the Church before us.

The large cathedrals and basilicas are not the personal residences of bishops and cardinals. They are for all Catholics. Their proportioned value divided among the 1.2 billion Catholics in the world would be negligible.

Now, if the question being asked is whether a particular cardinal or bishop or pope lives too luxuriously or beyond the lifestyle they ought, it would have to be admitted that some have in the past and some still do. That, however, is a separate question from the supposed “wealth” of the entire Church and what ought to be done with it.
 
Yes, 1ke is right. There are a lot of people who like to sow seeds of doubt about things they don’t understand.

The accusation is more of an unreflective emotional response than anything. An outside sees a beautifully decorated church and then thinks, “Man, these priests are living large!” But, as 1ke said, the “riches of the Church” belong to the Church, not the pope and bishops. I know when I had the opportunity to go to Rome, I greatly appreciated being able to walk right into St. Peter’s Basilica and experience first hand the great beauty. And it didn’t cost me anything (at least, it didn’t cost me any money that went to the Church 😝).

As has been said, most priests and bishops live very simply. Even prior to Pope Francis, when the popes lived in the “Apostolic Palace”, that name is really a misnomer. It’s not as though the pope is kicking back on a million dollar recliner and feasting upon caviar and prime rib while watching movies on his state-of-the-art entertainment system. I think if we followed the pope or a bishop around for a day, we’d be surprised by the simplicity of it all, even if they may live (through historical accident) on prime real estate next to beautiful Churches.

If you look at the annual operating budget of the Vatican or any diocese, it pales in comparison to many other organizations, even other non-profits. It’s really remarkable considering the Church serves 1.4 billion Catholics—and honestly, serves a great many non-Catholics through outreach.
 
Joe1 said:
We know Jesus preached to live a humble life. He even told someone to follow him but sell all of his property because he was rich.

What do I say about this? Are they hypocritical?
Click to expand...
This is the most often cited phrase in debates between Catholics and outsiders. To the question of why the church doesn’t sell Vatican treasures, Pope Francis had answered this: Vatican treasures couldn’t be sold because they belong to the world civilization. But he didn’t or hasn’t answer the same question about other magnificent churches built recently.

Sadly, I would say, yes, perhaps we are hypocritical. We can build a more modest, simpler, not-so-grand churches and give the remaining money to the poor.

Have we prioritized the poor as so often instructed by our highest leader in the world, Pope Francis? Perhaps not. Poverty is in the center of the bible…

Pope Francis had showed his instruction through his example several months ago. He offered mass for Vatican employees in one simple, unadorned, unused store room in Vatican. He could have used the beautiful chapels, many are available there, in the Vatican. But no, he used this simple place. For those who believes that God has to be worshipped in beautiful earthly grandeur, Pope Francis could be said to have blasphemed God… But no, he doesn’t care for that accusation that may arise.

In his heart he may say, "my dear children, don’t become Pharisees. Every day I talk about poor people, asking you to serve them, and you don’t really care about them… "

I am sorry. This is a very sensitive topic and I know many don’t agree with Pope Francis. But I have to say this. Excuse me…(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Last edited:
ask your friend why they don’t sell all their possessions to serve the poor.
 
When Harvard makes more money than the Catholic Church…

Much of it is not stuff that we can sell. You don’t sell relics, and much of religious artwork is art, part of religious history.
Our temples are made extravagant and beautiful, because God deserves the best. Beauty turns our minds to the source of all beauty, the sublime.

I do believe most priests are under a vow of poverty.
 
This, especially since a great many Catholics do give up everything to follow Christ (every religious with a vow of poverty).

Anyway, the cultural and religious treasures owned by the Church are the collective property of us all, they are not owned by any particular Pope or Cardinal, etc. The Catholic Church gives tons to the poor and beautiful art and worship spaces no doubt inspire many to deepen their faith, including an increased zeal for giving to the poor.
 
PoorChurchForThePoor said:
Pope Francis had showed his instruction through his example several months ago. He offered mass for Vatican employees in one simple, unadorned, unused store room in Vatican. He could have used the beautiful chapels, many are available there, in the Vatican. But no, he used this simple place. For those who believes that God has to be worshipped in beautiful earthly grandeur, Pope Francis could be said to have blasphemed God… But no, he doesn’t care for that accusation that may arise.
Click to expand...
Canon Law:

Can. 932 §1. The eucharistic celebration is to be carried out in a sacred place unless in a particular case necessity requires otherwise; in such a case the celebration must be done in a decent place.

§2. The eucharistic sacrifice must be carried out on a dedicated or blessed altar; outside a sacred place a suitable table can be used, always with a cloth and a corporal.

It is not about decorations. It is about right worship of God, the Father Almighty.

“He could have used the beautiful chapels, many are available there, in the Vatican. But no, he used this simple place.” Precisely the problem.

“Pope Francis had showed his instruction through his example several months ago.” What is his instruction? He can violate Cannon Law to tell us that a workshop is suitable for the Sacred Sacrifice of the Mass?

There is no such thing as ostentatious humility.
 
Last edited:
Teek said:
“Pope Francis had showed his instruction through his example several months ago.” What is his instruction? He can violate Cannon Law to tell us that a workshop is suitable for the Sacred Sacrifice of the Mass?

There is no such thing as ostentatious humility.
Click to expand...
Sadly, with that example Pope Francis also says, more or less, don’t get too rigidly bound to the laws… Yes, Pope Francis don’t like many of the canon laws.
 
A lot of these people think the Catholic Church has just gone out and bought / built these palaces over the centuries, but that is not the case. Many of these were willed to the Catholic church by rich benefactors, knowing such things would not serve them well in the after life.

“Well then why doesn’t the Church just sell them and give the money to the poor?” people might ask. There was no Remax or Century21in the 1400s I’m afraid. There was not much of a market for palaces back then, or even now for that matter. It made much more sense to open such places up for emergency shelter, fundraisers, and entertaining wealthy benefactors.

Were there exceptions and abuses to that rule? Sure, but by and large the above was the rule I would imagine. Sadly, now days though, Dioceses are forced to sell off property, including lovely old churches as they drain resources in the form of upkeep when churches close to shrinking congregations. But when this type of thing happens, no one gets anything close to the worth of these old treasures.(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

**“Im afraid Sister Anna would find this a bit too roomy.” **
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top