P
ProVobis
Guest
Good point. No bank can break even by lending at 0% interest, expecially with money which potentially will never be paid back.
- Status
C
Corki
Guest
Please everybody, go back and re-read the link in post #5.
The assetts of the Vatican Bank do not belong to the Holy See. Disolving the VB does not free up money to invest elsewhere.
The Vatican bank creates income for the Church. If the VB is closed, the accountholders can simply move their assetts to other institutions. However the Vatican budget would lose about $60M in income (about 1/5 of its total income). There would of course, be offsetting savings from not having the adminstrative and salary expenses of running a bank. Is that savings going to be enough to off-set the loss of $60M? If not, what activities of the Church might be curtailed? Remember the Vatican already runs in the red most years.
This is a complicated issue - a lot more so that it might first appear.
The assetts of the Vatican Bank do not belong to the Holy See. Disolving the VB does not free up money to invest elsewhere.
The Vatican bank creates income for the Church. If the VB is closed, the accountholders can simply move their assetts to other institutions. However the Vatican budget would lose about $60M in income (about 1/5 of its total income). There would of course, be offsetting savings from not having the adminstrative and salary expenses of running a bank. Is that savings going to be enough to off-set the loss of $60M? If not, what activities of the Church might be curtailed? Remember the Vatican already runs in the red most years.
This is a complicated issue - a lot more so that it might first appear.
B
BigBlueCane
Guest
I dont want to be alarmist and I love everything he is doing including possibly looking at closing the vatican bank…but man I hope his bodyguards are on their toes here. He’s doing some serious change which some people might not like.
C
chaunceygardner
Guest
What you are saying is that the Vatican Bank makes millions from the accounts they hold and manage. Then I would have a question about ethics and purpose here. Why should the Church be involved in a profit-oriented financial institution? This seems totally contrary to the Gospels. To me that would be another reason to make changes.
C
Crescentinus
Guest
It is plausible given the speculation.
F
Filii_Dei
Guest
I’m sure this may be a bit unpopular here, but I believe the Church should retain the Vatican Bank for the sake of financial sustainability. The Vatican Bank generates a great deal of income that enables the Holy See to continue functioning and fund other works of great charity without having to worry about whether they can balance the books this financial year. It allows her to focus on her core job of leading God’s Church and spreading God’s word without having to depend solely on donations.
I know many of you would contend with this, especially if you believe that the money could be used to empower the poor, but I think it’s just the reality of keeping the Church functioning in a world where money is the currency of all transactions. Even if the Church somehow sold all their assets and disbursed all the money to the poor, what can she do after that? What will keep the Church running when the economy turns sour? Is it going to be made up by the collection plate? I don’t think so. Her charitable activities will crumble under a lack of financial sustainability.
Evidently, the problem everyone has here is with the alleged corruption in the Vatican Bank. Like you, I deplore corruption in all its forms, and I commend you for your spirited rejection of corruption. but closing the Vatican Bank isn’t a good solution. We may eliminate the corruption, but the institution we were supposed to clean of corruption would be gone, so what was the point of getting rid of said corruption? We would be cutting off the nose to spite the face. There has to be a better way.
However, whatever the Pope chooses, it will be right one.
I know many of you would contend with this, especially if you believe that the money could be used to empower the poor, but I think it’s just the reality of keeping the Church functioning in a world where money is the currency of all transactions. Even if the Church somehow sold all their assets and disbursed all the money to the poor, what can she do after that? What will keep the Church running when the economy turns sour? Is it going to be made up by the collection plate? I don’t think so. Her charitable activities will crumble under a lack of financial sustainability.
Evidently, the problem everyone has here is with the alleged corruption in the Vatican Bank. Like you, I deplore corruption in all its forms, and I commend you for your spirited rejection of corruption. but closing the Vatican Bank isn’t a good solution. We may eliminate the corruption, but the institution we were supposed to clean of corruption would be gone, so what was the point of getting rid of said corruption? We would be cutting off the nose to spite the face. There has to be a better way.
However, whatever the Pope chooses, it will be right one.
C
Crescentinus
Guest
I agree with you.I’m sure this may be a bit unpopular here, but I believe the Church should retain the Vatican Bank for the sake of financial sustainability. The Vatican Bank generates a great deal of income that enables the Holy See to continue functioning and fund other works of great charity without having to worry about whether they can balance the books this financial year. It allows her to focus on her core job of leading God’s Church and spreading God’s word without having to depend solely on donations.
I know it’s unpopular with some of you, especially if you believe that the money could be used to empower the poor, but I think it’s just the reality of keeping the Church functioning in a world where money is the currency of all transactions. Even if the Church somehow sold all their assets and disbursed all the money to the poor, what can she do after that?What will keep the Church running when the economy turns sour? Is it going to be made up by the collection plate? I don’t think so. Her charitable activities will crumble under a lack of financial sustainability.
Evidently, the problem everyone has here is with the alleged corruption in the Vatican Bank. Like you, I deplore corruption in all its forms, but closing the Vatican Bank isn’t a good solution. So we may have eliminated the corruption, but the institution we were supposed to clean of corruption is gone now, so what was the point of getting rid of said corruption? We would be cutting off the nose to spite the face. There has to be a better way.
However, whatever the Pope chooses, it will be right one.
In any case, it would be best if the corruption is investigated so that the corrupt can be rooted out of the bank itself.
P
ProVobis
Guest
I wonder, though, if it is any more corrupt than the Fed or other central banks which basically counterfeit money.
C
chero23
Guest
I do believe that closing of the bank would be best for the church in today’s media. If the pope shuts it down, yes their might be a short period of turmoil, but in the long run it will be in the best interest, especially those who work in the Vatican
C
Corki
Guest
Pope Benedict had already begun an investigation and put in place a plan to have the bank recognized as a compliant financial institution by other world banks. Pope Francis will be deciding whether to continue with that plan, institute a different plan or get rid of the bank altogether.
C
Corki
Guest
While I understand what you are saying, doing something so it is “best for the Church in today’s media” is not a good reason. The media should not be a consideration when making a Church decision.
A
Arizona_Mike
Guest
The ATMs in Vatican City offer a Latin language option, so I’d hate to see it close.
T
Tampa_Dave
Guest
Totally agree.
C
Capuchinfan1337
Guest
Someone will start a new conspiracy theory about this, mark my words 
C
chaunceygardner
Guest
The ATM’s could remain and could still offer the Latin option. Even if they weren’t connected with the Vatican Bank, they could provide service income to the Church. Every time a tourist, visitor or employee used a machine the Vatican could receive a part of the fee income.
Possibly, but there are plenty of old stories still around that go back 30 years or so. And they have often been ignored or pushed aside, rather than be addressed.
I think one problem that is slowly being recognized is that the Church, especially the Vatican, does not and cannot operate in its own world any longer. Matters that used to receive little attention are now broadcast around the world. It isn’t just the media but individual Catholics as well. They too are concerned with the image that the leaders of their church present to them and to everyone. The Church may not be “of” the world but it is certainly “in” the world and intimately involved with the world. Even in the Church, there are some who will take personal advantage of the power and wealth they manage and use it for their own gain. That story is as old as the Church itself (see Acts and some of the Epistles for examples). Some steps have been taken, and perhaps Pope Francis will take further initiative and have the Vatican Bank (in whatever form it may take) operate in the light of day and of the Spirit, rather than in a dark and hidden corner.
S
Slaney
Guest
The Bible doesn’t say money is the root of all evil, it’s says the love of money is the root of all evil …
- Status