Our Father's house a marketplace?

[fide]

Ah, then one is compelled to ask: is selling candles at 50 cents a pop considered “love of money”? I assume your answer would be no because the church isn’t even making a profit - but it’s still “commerce operating in a holy place”, so what then?

I suggest looking intently through the signs of the times, as through a window, through the examples small or large, to see where we are heading.

 

[Bithynian]

the tradition of buying masses

Or religious publishers, who are essentially the pre-digital incarnation of websites such as Catholic Answers. I can’t imagine that many of them would be enthralled by the idea of ‘if your spiritual publication imparts to me graces in the form of financial blessings, then I’ll think about contributing to your expenses’.

Even the Son of God, the Sancitifer, had a day job when he dwelled in the house of Joseph.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

the tradition of buying masses,

We do NOT “buy Masses”. We are asked to donate a stipend for a Mass, which is meant for the upkeep of the priest, and there are rules on his receipt of them. However, if someone does not have the money and needs a Mass, the priest will say one for the person without requiring a donation.

“Buying Masses” is absolutely wrong terminology. Masses are not for sale.

(We have had a number of people in the past refer to “paying for Masses” or “buying Masses” and they are always corrected on here.)

How much does a funeral Mass cost? Nothing, actually – Catholic Philly

Canon Law section on this:

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_P3D.HTM

 

[fide]

I don’t find the advertising intrusive at all (I’m used to ‘mentally’ filtering it out), except on mobile browsers where the ads block the ‘Reply’ button. Ideally, there would be no advertising, but as @Tis_Bearself and others wrote, Catholic Answers doubtless has a modicum of expenses.

I don’t know why the use of advertising revenue is being characterised as ‘serving Mammon’. Moreover, Catholic Answers is a lay apostolate, and the Holy See’s understanding of such ministries is outlined in Apostolicam Actuositatem . The decree places no expectation on the laity that their evangelising and sanctifying activity must be conducted gratis (that is, without expectation of monetary compensation) nor that it must be shorn from from the world. In fact, the decree states that:

[The laity’s] apostolic formation is specially characterized by the distinctively secular and particular quality of the lay state and by its own form of the spiritual life.

Each person has to find his own way to exist in the world and serve - and live in - the Lord during this one lifetime we have here, temporary that it is. I like St. Paul’s way here:

Act 18:1 After this he left Athens and went to Corinth.
Act 18:2 And he found a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, lately come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had commanded all the Jews to leave Rome. And he went to see them;
Act 18:3 and because he was of the same trade he stayed with them, and they worked, for by trade they were tentmakers.
Act 18:4 And he argued in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded Jews and Greeks.

That is, he worked at his trade to earn money, and served God on the sabbath. I’m sure his tent-making was good and honorable in the eyes of all, that his character was notable and blameless, above reproach - as expected of a Christian. But when he was preaching and teaching the things of God, he did not take “commercial breaks” to sell people on his tent making skills. He did not mix God and Mammon. He did not demean holy things of God, by mixing them in secular matters and concerns.

 

[ReaderT]

We do NOT “buy Masses”. We are asked to donate a stipend for a Mass, which is meant for the upkeep of the priest, and there are rules on his receipt of them. However, if someone does not have the money and needs a Mass, the priest will say one for the person without requiring a donation.

“Buying Masses” is absolutely wrong terminology. Masses are not for sale.

Is that protocol always in place, in real life? I remember being a 21-year old college student and going to the town parish to have a mass said for someone, because I thought it would be a nice gesture. I don’t remember the secretary explaining it was “free with suggested donation” - she just told me “It’s ten dollars.” But apparently she was wrong, and so I’ll delete my post.

 

[MNathaniel]

I’m sorry to hear you’re considering cutting yourself off from this online community of fellow Catholics.

You’re free to make any choice you prefer, of course. (Just please don’t suggest that anyone else should similarly isolate themselves from the Catholic community they find here, just because you do!)

I’ll just chime in with everybody else: CAF is not ‘Our Father’s house’. It’s a web forum.

Maybe you’ll like my proposed solution though:

Why don’t you set up your own Catholic web forum ministry? You can cover the costs of the web development, maintenance, hosting, etc. Provide the technical support. Pay staff to moderate (or continually recruit and manage (and potentially discipline or fire) a team of volunteers!). Then you can come back and invite all of us to enjoy the service you provide for free.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Yes, that’s what church secretaries do. The vast majority of people who go into the office to put a Mass on the calendar do so intending to donate the stipend. If the person said he didn’t have the ten dollars then she should have made some other arrangement; if she wouldn’t do that then one should speak directly to the priest.

It’s not a matter of you “taking my word for it”, it is what the Church teaches. You can read the sources I posted if you don’t believe me.

“Buying a Mass” is simony; it’s a serious sin. It is disrespectful to claim the Church commits such sin.

 

[MNathaniel]

It’s not a matter of you “taking my word for it”, it is what the Church teaches. You can read the sources I posted if you don’t believe me.

“Buying a Mass” is simony; it’s a serious sin. It is disrespectful to claim the Church commits such sin.

In fairness, there’s a difference between teaching and practice.

I’ve been told to my face not to light a candle unless I can ‘pay’ for it. Rather than have it suggested to me to put money in the slot as a ‘donation’ for lighting a candle.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

You’re paying for the physical candle. A wax candle costs X cents, you’re supposed to cover the cost.

Also, that has nothing to do with Mass stipends, which are regulated by Canon law. I posted the whole canon law section about them.
There’s no canon law to my knowledge about candles, and a candle is not required to pray; it’s also not considered the highest form of prayer with infinite benefits, like a Mass is.

 

[ReaderT]

Yes, that’s what church secretaries do. The vast majority of people who go into the office to put a Mass on the calendar do so intending to donate the stipend. If the person said he didn’t have the ten dollars then she should have made some other arrangement; if she wouldn’t do that then one should speak directly to the prist.

It’s not a matter of you “taking my word for it”, it is what the Church teaches. You can read the sources I posted if you don’t believe me.

I see what you’re saying. Though I’m skeptical this is the way it always plays out in real life (which may be due to uninformed office staff), I understand it’s the way it should be and I withdraw my point.

 

[fide]

We do NOT “buy Masses”. We are asked to donate a stipend for a Mass, which is meant for the upkeep of the priest, and there are rules on his receipt of them. However, if someone does not have the money and needs a Mass, the priest will say one for the person without requiring a donation.

“Buying Masses” is absolutely wrong terminology. Masses are not for sale.

(We have had a number of people in the past refer to “paying for Masses” or “buying Masses” and they are always corrected on here.)

The very fact that this terminology needs continuing “correction” is telling us something. When a transfer of money is expected, the expected transfer of money from the one requesting a remembrance in a celebration of Holy Mass, to the front Office of the Parish “for the priest”, it looks like a payment. So it “looks like a duck, it walks like a duck, it quacks like a duck” – but no, no, it is not to be called a duck. It is a contribution, not a charge; it is a stipend, not a fee. It is not “for” the priest, it is for “his upkeep.”

When the Front Office is staffed by “employees”, the church begins to look and feel and sound very much like a business. This is a very sad development; another sign of our failure to catechize and to form the laity. The buck of this responsibility goes to, stops at, the Pastor – to form the laity rightly and fully.

 

[TheLittleLady]

Does your pastor go and beg downtown to buy his food and pay his light bill and put gas in his car?

 

[Tis_Bearself]

If a Catholic does not like this practice, he is free to simply attend Mass and offer his personal Mass and Holy Communion for his intention. That should also provide the benefits of the Mass.

The main point of the practice historically was to support the priest who often had no other means of support. In olden times, the diocese was not sending each priest a paycheck. If you asked the priest to say Mass you would give him something, either a stipend or some food from your farm or whatever, These days when I “Have a Mass Said” I usually send the donation to some mission country in remote Africa or Asia where the priest likely needs the donation to eat and keep a roof over his head.

 

[MNathaniel]

You’re paying for the physical candle.

Also, that has nothing to do with Mass stipends, which are regulated by Canon law. I posted the whole canon law section about them.
There’s no canon law to my knowledge about candles, and a candle is not required to pray; it’s also not considered the highest form of prayer with infinite benefits, like a Mass is.

Fair enough, I’m not familiar with the ins and outs of where money interacts with faith practices, when it’s supposed to and when it’s not supposed to.

I’ll just say though coming from even my secularized Protestant background (where certain things would only be provided if free, and great care would be provided to ensure everybody knows there’s no pressure to donate, donations must be purely voluntary and are unconnected from receiving whatever service), I can understand how Catholic practices often disturb non-Catholics.

Granted, at my sister’s Protestant church, everybody tithes. So maybe that’s how they approach it. Understanding that members tithe so they have a reliable pool of money to draw from to provide free religious services to those who might be too poor to otherwise approach for them.

Not making a theological point, I suppose. Just a psychological one.

And not connecting it to this web forum context, in which (as I mentioned in a previous comment) I think advertising is entirely legitimate.

 

[fide]

The early Franciscans did, following Francis. Later, of course, the Order got “more realistic”. The vow of poverty got redefined to mean “availability,” I was told.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I can see where this “Catholic culture” stuff would be confusing to non-Catholics. At the same time, Catholics don’t tithe, and there are a huge number of Catholics who come to Mass and never donate a dime and nobody makes them do so. The Church is therefore in a bind of wanting to welcome those who are genuinely poor while at the same time trying to encourage those who can support the Church to do so, in order to pay the bills and cover the costs.

 

[TheLittleLady]

Not asking about orders in the past. Your Diocesan Priest, how does he buy his shirts and oil changes?

 

[fide]

All that I am told is that a certain percentage (the % number I don’t remember) of the total annual budget of the parish is allotted to clergy. How it is divided among priests’ “salaries” (as it is called here), car/mileage/travel allowances, housing allowance, discretionary expenses, etc. etc., I have no idea. Why do you ask?

 

[TheLittleLady]

The priest receives a salary and other benefits. He is paid.

Same goes for the people (depending on the size of the parish) who are necessary to do the administrative work or who play the organ or who mow the grass or who put a new roof on the building.

 

[TMC]

Well, first of all, the issue with the temple was that ordinary people, many of them very poor, could not gain access to God (in their view) without paying for the proper sacrificial animals (and doing so with the proper money). So the moneychangers and others were effectively standing between God and the masses and requiring payment for ordinary people to access the temple rituals. (At least that is my understanding). CAF is not in that position - no one needs CAF to perform their religious rituals or to access God.

Second, I have been posting here a long time and I have never given CAF a penny. Don’t think I ever will. I give them my eyeballs, and they are free to monetize my advertising impressions. I think that is a fair trade.