Providing for the needs of your Church?

  • Thread starter Thread starter edjlopez23
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

edjlopez23

Guest
For the fifth precept of the Catholic Church, we are required to provide for the needs of our Church. Are we required to tithe/support the parish we go to or can we tithe other parishes and religious communities (even if we don’t go to them) to fulfill the fifth precept.
 
Why would you prefer to tithe to a parish other than the one in which you are registered?
 
Last edited:
I don’t think my parish is that strong in faith, that’s my impression. For example, a deacon there wouldn’t let me receive communion in the tongue.
 
Last edited:
Okay, why not? Is this related to the Coronavirus break-out?
 
Yes, that would be it. But the faithful should be still allowed it. I think it’s a universal right, although I’m not a cannon law expert.
 
Last edited:
Yes, that would be it. But the faithful should be still allowed it. I think it’s a universal right, although I’m not a cannon law expert.
If the Bishop decided that you should be obedient. You are still receiving Christ.
 
It’s a matter of justice to support the parish that you receive spiritual assistance from habitually… even when there are some mixed up clergy. (And yes, violating universal law for at least dubiously grounded motivation counts as being mixed up… even if there is real pressure from the chancery and civil government.)
 
Last edited:
I think we should try to offer some support to the parish where we are registered/obligated. That doesn’t preclude us from also supporting others or sharing that support resource in the ratios we determine appropriate. (My family supports a neighboring parish we frequent and a couple of religious communities on equal or more substantial levels than our home parish, but we still try to give something to the home parish for fairness and appropriateness.)
even when there are some mixed up clergy.
And mixed up laity. Ignoring a reasonable directive from your bishop counts as mixed up laity, even if you don’t like it.
 
To support the church as you can, not mandating 10% of income (which is tithing).
 
I guess we just disagree (and fwiw, so do many canon law experts, from what I’ve read - since the bishop is the ultimate arbiter of law). But I’ll not belabor the point any further; I’m sure neither of us will walk away any differently convinced, not does it directly answer the OP.
 
Gotcha. How would you define “as you can”?
I, nor anyone else, can define as you can. You have obligations to care for yourself and your family, and any disposable income you have you can decide how much needs to go to support your parish…but some thought should be given…alms giving, whether to individuals, other organizations, or your parish should be a sacrifice…some people subscribe to the “first fruits” approach where they give one hour’s pay per week…and some nothing at all…but all can, however, donate time or talent to the parish.
 
Last edited:
Yes agreed. The Lord loves a joyful giver after all. I think the key word you mentioned is “sacrifice”. Sacrifice implies that we give up something in order to give. The parable of the Widow’s Mite comes to mind.

Tithing - giving 10% - has, over time come to be a “goal” number. The reality is that it was meant to be a minimum. (Relative to what the government requires for example, it’s a pittance.) There’s an argument to be made that our goal should be “reverse” tithing. Unfortunately, I have a long, long, long way to go to get there.

Interesting article here about Rick Warren - the “inventor” of reverse tithing:


Here’s a couple of quotes:

"Warren became a household name, and his book became the biggest blockbuster in American publishing history. Even though he began to “reverse tithe” — that is, to give away 90 percent of his income — he was still earning millions in royalties. More than that, he had cultural influence approaching that of the Rev. Billy Graham. But this success prompted him to do some soul searching. Warren realized that the American evangelicalism he had pioneered catered to the needs of the rich while ignoring the poor.

“I had to repent,” he told a group of religion writers in 2005. "I had to say ‘God, I’m sorry, I can’t think of the last time I thought of widows and orphans.’ "

As an interesting aside - on being pro-life:

"Warren, who had largely avoided politics, became a key figure in the 2008 presidential campaign when he invited Sens. Obama and John McCain to a televised forum on faith and world view.

Obama’s campaign thought Warren would stress international and social justice issues. It didn’t turn out that way.

Warren’s question — “At what point does a baby have human rights?” — prompted Obama’s nadir moment, in which he said those decisions are “above my pay grade.” As Obama stumbled through one the worst performances of his campaign, Warren peppered him with other litmus test questions: Have you ever voted to limit abortion? Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment? Do you favor stem cell research?"
 
Do you favor stem cell research?"
I do…one has got to be careful about throwing around the phrase “stem cell research” …not all stem cell research uses aborted fetuses…“stem cell research” when not properly bracketed is a catch phrase used for fear mongering rants against science.

Much stem cell research uses stem cells from donors (and not just aborted fetal tissue).

I worked for 25+ years in the biotech industry. I had to turn down jobs where the cell bank was from cells from elective fetal abortions. As against the use of these cells that most Catholics are, few know that dozens (if not hundreds) of biologic therapeutic drugs and treatment come from cell banks started decades ago from cells of fetuses killed by elective abortion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top