Priest wondering if Jesus approves of the Church

[byHisGrace]

Penny Plain:

My point exactly.

So we can draw the lesson from the story of the perfume that her behaviour was fitting while Jesus was alive on earth. Once He left, not so much.

Penny,
Sometimes I think you put these posts out just to play with people’s blood pressure…“once He left, not so much”??? You’ve got to be kidding, right? Did Jesus leave your Catholic Church? Seems to me, everytime I walk through the Church doors there He is…REAL and SUBSTANTIALLY present! Must be why when people walk in there they fall to one knee!

Perhaps he’s just there symbolically to you…or perhaps you believe that Christ today can ONLY be found in the poor. I thank God we have beautiful places to worship,places that aid us in recognizing God’s presence so we can find the graces to give ourselves to others for Christ.
May God bless you.

 

[tjmiller]

Jesus approves of His Church, because Jesus IS His Church.
It is indefectibly His Mystical Body.

 

[Penny_Plain]

byHisGrace:

Penny,
Sometimes I think you put these posts out just to play with people’s blood pressure…“once He left, not so much”??? You’ve got to be kidding, right? Did Jesus leave your Catholic Church? Seems to me, everytime I walk through the Church doors there He is…REAL and SUBSTANTIALLY present!

Yes, I get a commission from the AMA.

Would you please read what I wrote in the context of the discussion?

Jesus HIMSELF said, “The poor you will always have with you; but you will not always have Me.” Matthew 26:11. What did He mean by that? Well, if you read it in context, he was talking about how He was around, in the flesh at the time, but later he wouldn’t be.

Of course Jesus is present. If you read my other posts on the thread, you’d see that even an archheretic like me admits that. However, He is indisuputably NOT present in the same way He was present in the house of Simon the leper. Hence, his statement.

Hence, my position that the story of the perfume is not license for the Church to accumulate vast wealth allegedly for the greater glory of God.

That’s all. Take two of the blue ones and call me in the morning.

 

[InnocentIII]

Penny Plain:

I believe that people are more important than things, even if the people are people I don’t know. I just don’t like the logical conclusion that leads me to.

And yet you constantly speak of the poor not as people but as objects. Objects of your charity, objects of your concern … do you even know any poor people. I mean really know them … spend time with them … share with them … experience their life? Most people in the west, including our poor live far better than the poor in third world countries. Why? Because we have an economic system that creates wealth … so our poor are defined by how much less they have … this is pure envy. In the third world poverty is defined by whether you eat or don’t. This is a matter of life and death. At the school I taught at they introduced “ethical buying” to boycott companies that had clothes made at “sweatshops” in poor countries. They demanded the same wages for these workers as in Australia. Result - less work for the third world and more starvation. I lived in East Africa for five years and saw companies which supposedly exploited third world workers by paying them a $100 a month … but that was twice the average wage in that country. Now 20 years later the average wage is $2500 a month and workers in the export process zone are among the highest paid. Nothing makes me angrier than well-off middle class people demanding more for the poor while protesting the one thing that made us wealthy and will make others wealthy. It is the continued arrogance of the West that we alone can save all the poor. The poor are people too … individuals good and bad, lazy and industrious, charitable and greedy. Spare them your charity and condecension and give them your help and your respect instead.

 

[InnocentIII]

Penny Plain:

Hence, my position that the story of the perfume is not license for the Church to accumulate vast wealth allegedly for the greater glory of God.

How does the Church accumulate wealth? There is beauty in Her churches, much of it donated by the faithful - yes - but She does not accumulate wealth like a financier, she dispenses wealth through Her charitable works, Her works of mercy and so on. If we are only to have what is needful then we would none of us be here posting because a computer and an internet account are luxuries. Meat is a luxury. Most of our clothes are luxuries. I think an apposite saying of Our Lord is that we should remove the speck from our own eyes before we remove the beam from others. The saddest thing about modern “social justice” is that it usually involves robbing Peter to pay Paul rather than giving of ourselves. Our Lord said “inasmuch as you do this to the least” he did not say “inasmuch as you protested and demanded that others do this for the least”. He told the rich young man to give away all he had not to go and give away all that everyone else had. Just stop and imagine for a moment two things

1. How much work could a poor Church do for the poor?
2. How far would even $500k go when spread among the poor?

What I get from all these posts is its all about feelings. I feel bad that I am well off and others aren’t. How can I help? Gee how about I demand the Church and the government give all its money away. This is hypocrisy. Give away all you have … or go sorrowing away.

 

[Mike_Dye]

Penny Plain:

Yes, I get a commission from the AMA.

Would you please read what I wrote in the context of the discussion?

Jesus HIMSELF said, “The poor you will always have with you; but you will not always have Me.” Matthew 26:11. What did He mean by that? Well, if you read it in context, he was talking about how He was around, in the flesh at the time, but later he wouldn’t be.

Of course Jesus is present. If you read my other posts on the thread, you’d see that even an archheretic like me admits that. However, He is indisuputably NOT present in the same way He was present in the house of Simon the leper. Hence, his statement.

Hence, my position that the story of the perfume is not license for the Church to accumulate vast wealth allegedly for the greater glory of God.

That’s all. Take two of the blue ones and call me in the morning.

Plain Penny You seem to have no trouble slamming the church for spending money that could be better spent serving the poor…(The same argument Judas used by the way). Let’s just suppose you are right…If the Church dosen’t live up to your expectations in these matters why don’t you serve as an example for the Church…St. Francis did it and you could too. Why not take the 100 to 250 or more a year you spend on an Internet provider give that money to the poor,and why not sell your computer and give the proceeds to the poor? Doing so would provide two fold benifits…First the poor would benifit from your contribution. and Second many others would benifit by you not having access to the web…A win, win situation from my view.

 

[Penny_Plain]

InnocentIII:

And yet you constantly speak of the poor not as people but as objects. Objects of your charity, objects of your concern … do you even know any poor people. I mean really know them … spend time with them … share with them … experience their life?

Huh? Where’s this coming from? You want me to name them all?

InnocentIII:

In the third world poverty is defined by whether you eat or don’t. This is a matter of life and death.

I am aware of that, yes. I was born in Africa. My youngest son was born in Mongolia. I am extremely familiar with third-world poverty and, in fact, you’ll note that most of the examples I used were third world examples.

InnocentIII:

The poor are people too … individuals good and bad, lazy and industrious, charitable and greedy. Spare them your charity and condecension and give them your help and your respect instead.

I do. I guess I don’t understand where all the bitterness and personal attacks are coming from, here. I thought charity was a good thing.

InnocentIII:

Meat is a luxury. Most of our clothes are luxuries.

Sort of my point, actually.

InnocentIII:

1. How much work could a poor Church do for the poor? 2) How far would even $500k go when spread among the poor?

At last, some interesting questions. (1) depends on the way in which the Church was poor. Take an example of, I don’t know, a nursing home for the elderly. Needs land, buildings, and money to pay staff, obviously. I think it’s good to have those resources, maybe not so much to have the resources sitting in useless forms like golden vessels and Caravaggios. (2) depends on what you mean by “spread among the poor.” You seem to have this vision of me selling off everything our Church owns, then heading into Soweto with sacks full of $100 bills to fling out, willy-nilly. That’s not what I’m talking about doing. I’m talking about using it to fund things like orphanages and childhood vaccination programs.
Mike Dye:

You seem to have no trouble slamming the church for spending money that could be better spent serving the poor…(The same argument Judas used by the way).

No problem at all.
Mike Dye:

Why not take the 100 to 250 or more a year you spend on an Internet provider give that money to the poor,and why not sell your computer and give the proceeds to the poor?

What an excellent question, Mike, even if you ask it to imply that I’m a big ol’ hypocrite. You don’t know, for example, whether I even own a computer or pay for internet service. The fact is – I don’t. I’m itinerant. I haven’t got a computer. I mooch off my employer and places like public libraries.

I mean, there’s plenty of examples available for you; you just missed on this one. Feel free to try again. I do have a very expensive hat; can you make some hay out of that one?
Mike Dye:

Second many others would benifit by you not having access to the web

Mike, you poor dear. Am I making you … uncomfortable? Do my ideas bother you? Are you scared this mean ol’ mom is going to raise disturbing ideas in that big brain of yours?

Relax, darling. It’s okay. You’ll note that I’ve been talking about what the Church should do, not what individual Catholics such as yourself. If I ever get a chance to implement my Plan of Worldwide Socialism, I’ll make sure that you’re exempted.

In the meantime, if my posts bother you so much, here’s two suggestions: (1) stop reading them; and (2) take two of the blue ones and call me in the morning.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Penny, really, I have to wonder about your iconoclassicism

All this fuss about gold chalices and Caraveggios. Now, just who “owns”, say, those Raphaels and Bottecellis? The church? No, the people of the church–you and me and everybody else.

Suppose, for example, that every single person on earth said, “to heck with paintings, sell them all”. So okay, we have Bill Gates buying a thousand or so, other art collectors etc. Finally, we have come to an end of all the paintings. Let’s pick a sum of money–let’s pick, we get 1 billion dollars. (Which is, you know, quite a lot of money).

Now, let’s cut out all the ‘wealthy’ people. Let’s make a nice cut off- an income of less than $14K (U.S.) for a family of four. Well, so we probably have, on the planet, maybe 5 billion people who make less than that.

And we have $1 billion dollars. So. . .each person gets what, 20 cents?

And now, we have a few people with irreplaceable treasures which were made for the glory of God. Can the average person see them now? Does the average person own them?

No, but the poor people got 20 cents each. And the --not poor, but certainly not rich–got nothing. And a few people got a lot.

Now, I suppose, you’d want to open up the cathedrals (let the Donald turn them into hotels or casinos), the relics (who wants to give me $5 for a finger bone of St. Margaret?), and last but not least those pesky gold chalices. Melt down those babies. We might get all of a couple of thousand dollars apiece for the usual ones at the average church. Well, heck, that’s at least a couple of bucks per person!

I don’t know what “vast amount of wealth” you think that the Church is somehow hoarding, but unless you think that it is some astronomical figure in the trillions of dollars, I can’t see that there is any way the Church can somehow justify the sale of works that IT does not even own, because for sure it can’t make the poor “un poor” by doing so.

BTW–how does a painting, or a chalice, become “useless”–by YOUR say-so? It has been pointed out by others that art, especially that made specifically to honor and glorify God–is not useless.

There are things which enrich us. . .and those things are not limited to MONEY. Maybe you’ve become a little too focused on ONE aspect of Christianity–that of simplicity and frugality–and are too busy focused on what you think is bad behavior on the CHURCH’s part, while ignoring your own responsibilities?

If you think your diocese just isn’t being a good enough steward of wealth, you COULD volunteer to help out.

Start collecting money at your parish church for the poor in Africa. Start a shawl ministry. Save money for adopting a child, sending out food and work animals, funds for schools and educations. Have “rice bowl” competitions, sponsor “fast nights”, have devotions, offer prayers.

You get the picture (no pun intended). . .

 

[Penny_Plain]

Tantum ergo:

No, but the poor people got 20 cents each. And the --not poor, but certainly not rich–got nothing. And a few people got a lot.

I see where we disagree. I thought I was going to Soweto with a bag of $100 bills. You think I’m going with a bag full of dimes. Already my back hurts.

My point is not that we should redistribute the wealth. I can keep saying that, but somehow I feel like I’m not getting through. It is a very interesting (and very American) perspective that the only thing one can do with money is to give it to other people. Once can also use it to buy things like medicine and food, for example.
Tantum ergo:

I don’t know what “vast amount of wealth” you think that the Church is somehow hoarding, but unless you think that it is some astronomical figure in the trillions of dollars, I can’t see that there is any way the Church can somehow justify the sale of works that IT does not even own, because for sure it can’t make the poor “un poor” by doing so.

“Mother Theresa, you can’t make the poor un-poor by caring for the dying or teaching the orphaned. Might as well quit now.”
Tantum ergo:

Maybe you’ve become a little too focused on ONE aspect of Christianity–that of simplicity and frugality–and are too busy focused on what you think is bad behavior on the CHURCH’s part, while ignoring your own responsibilities?

Maybe, maybe not. Since (as far as I’m aware, anyway) you and I have never met and you know nothing about me except what I post on these forums, you have no idea of the approach I take to my responsibilities.

You’re guessing. I could, of course, speculate on why you feel the need to turn the focus of the debate on my personal life, but what’s the point, really?

 

[John_Kearns]

Penny Plain:

Jesus HIMSELF said, “The poor you will always have with you; but you will not always have Me.” Matthew 26:11. What did He mean by that?

What He meant by that is that nothing humanity can ever do is going to end poverty, or hunger, or any of the other evils of a fallen world. So keep your priorities straight, remember that honoring me, God, is always the most important work that we can do.

 

[InnocentIII]

Penny Plain:

Am I making you … uncomfortable? Do my ideas bother you? Are you scared this mean ol’ mom is going to raise disturbing ideas in that big brain of yours?

Penny, please don’t give yourself airs. Your ideas never bother me. I am too old and have spent too much time studying history to buy into your ideas. I ma secure in my understanding of the way the world works and I don’t suffer guilt pangs that I have what others don’t and that others have what I don’t. The point is you should be talking to individual Catholics about what they should do instead of getting wrapped in the whole institutional kick and saying what the Church should do. Christ called for individual conversion not intitutional conversion.

 

[Penny_Plain]

InnocentIII:

I am secure in my understanding of the way the world works and I don’t suffer guilt pangs that I have what others don’t and that others have what I don’t. The point is you should be talking to individual Catholics about what they should do instead of getting wrapped in the whole institutional kick and saying what the Church should do. Christ called for individual conversion not intitutional conversion.

Oh, I’ve no doubt you’re secure in your view of how the world works. I’m curious to know, though, why you’re telling me to spare the poor “my charity.”

Is charity bad?

 

[Penny_Plain]

John Kearns:

What He meant by that is that nothing humanity can ever do is going to end poverty, or hunger, or any of the other evils of a fallen world.

I think you are probably right about that.

What are the implications? Does that mean we shouldn’t try?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Penny, I fail to understand why in one breath you castigate me and others for not really “knowing” you, and speculating about you, yet you turn right around and do the same thing to us.

Pot, meet kettle.

Please go back and reread my posts. (after all, I read all of YOURS). I specifically referenced wealth as not solely MONEY–yet, reading your response to me, you imply that am just talking solely about money. That is an attempted redirection that does nothing to advance any kind of dialog or bring about any kind of understanding

Why don’t you respond to the FACT that I proposed many non-“money” things I asked you to do for others–you know, like the EDUCATION, the FOOD, the CLOTHING, et. al? Here, I’ll post it again:

Start collecting money at your parish church for the poor in Africa. Start a shawl ministry. Save money for adopting a child, sending out food and work animals, funds for schools and educations. Have “rice bowl” competitions, sponsor “fast nights”, have devotions, offer prayers.

Because, if you did so, it would show that people ARE addressing your concerns?

Because it would mean climbing off your soapbox wherein you are singlehandedly defending “the poor” from all the rest of us do-nothings?

Because instead of sending one-liner put-downs, you might actually want to consider somebody else’s ideas as equally valid and worthwhile?

God bless you, Penny, I’m sure you’re a nice person, and I wish you all the best. Maybe you just aren’t at a point where you’re ready to share ideas rather than impart only your own. Lord knows I’m not perfect and I’ve probably been much, much worse than you in my life, and my posts. In all charity–I mean it–may the Love of God be with you always.

 

[Penny_Plain]

Tantum ergo:

Pot, meet kettle.

Head, meet wall.:banghead:
Tantum ergo:

Why don’t you respond to the FACT that I proposed many non-“money” things I asked you to do for others–you know, like the EDUCATION, the FOOD, the CLOTHING, et. al?

That’s a FACT, no question about it. You did ask me that.
Tantum ergo:

Because, if you did so, it would show that people ARE addressing your concerns?

Except what we are talking about (well, most of us, anyway) is the role of the institutional Church in addressing the needs of the poor.
Tantum ergo:

Because it would mean climbing off your soapbox wherein you are singlehandedly defending “the poor” from all the rest of us do-nothings?

Who accuse you of anything, TE? If you read all my posts, (a) you should get a medal for perservering through my blather and (b) you’ll notice that I never said a word about the rest of you. I talked about two sets of what I perceive to be failings – those of the institutional Church and my own.

Didn’t mention you; still haven’t. I have no idea of what you do for “the poor,” whom we now put in quotes for a reason that I hope you will explain to me. I suspect, from the passion with which you write about the subject, that you do a great deal. Good.

 

[aurora77]

I’ve read through the posts and I’m stunned. People feel like the Church doesn’t do enough to help people? Maybe everyone else’s parishes are full of self-centered brats, that can’t possibly be true can it? My church uses gold chalices, has some nice art, nothing fancy, but the church is beautiful. We also run the food pantry for our side of the county, work with the local pregnancy care center, work with local homeless shelter, work with a local thrift shop that raises money to help people in our area. We put our money where our mouth is. Every other parish I’ve been to has done the same thing. The area I live in now is very poor (nothing like Third World poverty, but people are hurting none the less). We are out there feeding Jesus’ sheep, as He commanded. To say that the Church doesn’t do enough to help people just means that the person saying it hasn’t bothered to find out what the Church is doing.

 

[InnocentIII]

aurora77:

I’ve read through the posts and I’m stunned. People feel like the Church doesn’t do enough to help people? Maybe everyone else’s parishes are full of self-centered brats, that can’t possibly be true can it? My church uses gold chalices, has some nice art, nothing fancy, but the church is beautiful. We also run the food pantry for our side of the county, work with the local pregnancy care center, work with local homeless shelter, work with a local thrift shop that raises money to help people in our area. We put our money where our mouth is. Every other parish I’ve been to has done the same thing. The area I live in now is very poor (nothing like Third World poverty, but people are hurting none the less). We are out there feeding Jesus’ sheep, as He commanded. To say that the Church doesn’t do enough to help people just means that the person saying it hasn’t bothered to find out what the Church is doing.

Well said Aurora. My argument with College Kid and Penny is that it is always about what the Church can do and not about what individual parishes and Catholics can do. We are called to acts of mercy as Christians. But it is so much easier to mount a soapbox and DEMAND that the CHURCH do something about this. The Church has been doing it for centuries through the goodness of individual Catholics who have established schools, hospitals, orphanages, and gone to Third World countries to provide medical and educational facilities. If Penny and College Kid want to do something for the poor then they could start a soup kitchen, go to Africa as a volunteer to work in the hospitals or schools there. This “insitutional Church has to do it” is just like the demands that First World Governments do it. Yet anyone who has worked in Africa knows that voluntary groups like Medecin Sans Frontieres get more done at half the cost of “institutional” programs. Institutions are very bad at doing social work. What they can do is encourage volunteers. Demanding the Church gives up its wealth (by the way who would buy it? Certainly not the poor. So apparently we have to have the rich or we wouldn’t be able to sell all our treasures to earn money for the poor.) is just an easy cop-out. A way of feeling viruous oneself without actually having to do anything. Give me a break!

 

[Actress101]

In my personal opinion, I wouldn’t think so. Sometimes I think the church isn’t ALWAYS right. I follow the teachings of Jesus, not what people from the church say to follow.

 

[Brendan]

Penny Plain:

I wonder about that, too.

He slept on the ground. He ate and drank out of clay vessels. Wouldn’t He find a better use for gold than chalices?

Christ, as God, also commanded that the Ark of the Covenant be adorned with Gold… Not only that, but even the very tent in which the Ark resided was made with rare woods, gold plating and even the footings for the tent posts God commanded to be made of silver.

All that for something that was just held manna, only a symbol of the Eucharist. How much more is the actual Eucharist worthy of gold and silver.

He commanded each Israelite Tribe to donate a certain amount of gold and silver to be used in this way? Why? Couldn’t God think up a better use of gold and silver than to ordain symbols of His Messiah?

Why did God Himself command the Temple Sanctuary to contain Gold inlaid statues?

All that for a place where lambs and pigeon were sacrificed.

How much more is gold appriate for for Sanctuaries of our Churches, where the Sacrifice of the True Lamb is offered?

 

[tjmiller]

The Catholic Church is always right, because Jesus Christ is always right. The Church is His Mystical Body.