Splendor and glory of the Vatican and Church?

[Thorns]

So it is not the church anymore then…somebody has taken over helping the poor.

I’m not really sure I understand your statement or where you’re getting that from.

And what is the mission of the Church…to help those in this world or those out of this world?

Both.

And since the Church is in the world…would it make sense to help the poor today and those of in the future? Or only help those poor today, in your time, and not help in the future?

“But seek first His kingdom and His righteousness, and all these things will be added to you. So do not worry about tomorrow; for tomorrow will care for itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own” -Matthew 6:33-34

I also gave a solution for the people of the future: Everyone pools their money together to help the poor.

 

[Thorns]

I was talking about the upper class. From what I heard Pope Francis was talking about clergy owning nice cars. Which I support and it really depends on what you consider to be needless spending.

Yes you’re correct, he was referring to the clergy. Even still, doesn’t that fit the criteria you’ve laid out: spending on expensive (needless) things is okay so long as you’re also helping the poor?

 

[davidv]

It’s not in the parish hall and it isn’t free either. To my knowledge, anyone can walk onto the premises and purchase a coffee and walk away. That is a business.

What is wrong with fundraising?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Yes you’re correct, he was referring to the clergy. Even still, doesn’t that fit the criteria you’ve laid out: spending on expensive (needless) things is okay so long as you’re also helping the poor?

With respect, who made you and your personal opinion the arbiter of what is ‘needless’?

Please point to me the authoritative teaching of Jesus where He specifically said, "My commandment is this: That My Church is only to spend money on helping the poor, and that spending money on expensive, needless things according to Internet posters say-so is forbidden’.

Catholic teaching certainly supports ‘feeding the poor’. It is, in fact, one of the seven corporal works of mercy.

But Catholic teaching does not say that this is the ONLY, or even the MAJOR, role of the Christian, or that one must spend money ONLY to ‘feed the poor’.

You seem to think that any expenditure by anyone identifying as a Christian, especially a Catholic Christian, must be geared toward 'feeding the poor ABOVE ALL ELSE" and that ANYTHING spent on ANYTHING else should be the most minimal, spartan, spare, utilitarian items with apparently the idea that you’ll then have even MORE to spend ‘on the poor’.

Jesus never taught this. . .so why should we follow a teaching that isn’t His?

 

[pablope]

I’m not really sure I understand your statement or where you’re getting that from.

Let me restate, from your statement here:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorns View Post
Then as a community we pool our money together to help the poor, not build more glamour and cathedrals.

 

[pablope]

It’s not in the parish hall and it isn’t free either. To my knowledge, anyone can walk onto the premises and purchase a coffee and walk away. That is a business.

Does it have a business permit?

Are you forced to buy? Or it is optional to buy? or are you mistaking a donation, instead of a purchase?

 

[estesbob]

Why do we see such multimillion dollar cathedrals and wealth in the Church? I understand these things inspire awe and devotion and about “giving good gifts” (which is in far excess of just being “good”), but these things seem to be in direct opposition of Christ and His mission. Christ never cared to establish a material kingdom on earth, He chose to be born in a stable out of humility, spent His time with the low end of society, touched lepers, told the rich man to give up all he had to the poor, chose lowly fishmerment to be His apostles etc. How do you reconcile the two ideas?

The Church is the largest private charity in the world. Nobody else even comes close.They need make no apologies for the accumulation of art and property they have been entrusted with over the last 2,000 years.

 

[estesbob]

Then as a community we pool our money together to help the poor, not build more glamour and cathedrals.

Nobody is stopping you from doing that.The question should not be what can the Church do to help the poor.It should be what can I do to help the poor.

 

[JerryZ]

Why do we see such multimillion dollar cathedrals and wealth in the Church? I understand these things inspire awe and devotion and about “giving good gifts” (which is in far excess of just being “good”), but these things seem to be in direct opposition of Christ and His mission. Christ never cared to establish a material kingdom on earth, He chose to be born in a stable out of humility, spent His time with the low end of society, touched lepers, told the rich man to give up all he had to the poor, chose lowly fishmerment to be His apostles etc. How do you reconcile the two ideas?

So let’s go back to the time of the Apostles, Where did they worship GOD?

I’ll give you a hint. The Temple at Jerusalem. It was a magnificent structure originally built by King Solomon.
Did Solomon wasted resources to build the Temple instead of caring for his people?

Consider this, King David was pre-empted by GOD from building a Temple, He desperately wanted to build it. But he was told in no uncertain terms that he could not do it, because of the sins he had commited. He was forgiven but could not build GOD’s Temple.

Are the Cathedrals a waste of money?
I say to you they are the equivalent of the Temple at Jerusalem, except that now we can worship GOD practically everywhere no matter which continent.
I bet that in a few years there will be new beautiful Cathedrals in Africa and Asia where the Catholic Church is experiencing huge growth.
These NEW Cathedrals will reflect the love and devotion to GOD just as the old Cathedrals in Europe reflect the devotion of the people that pitched in to build them.
For in the end, YES the Church did built the Cathedrals, but it was the body of Christ that did it, it’s members.

Also reflect on the words of Jesus on Palm Sunday: the entire crowd of his disciples began to praise God joyfully, with a loud voice, over all the powerful works which they had seen, 38 saying: “Blessed is the king who has arrived in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory on high!” 39 And certain Pharisees within the crowd said to him, “Teacher, rebuke your disciples.” 40 And he said to them, “I tell you, that if these will keep silent, the stones themselves will cry out.”

Don’t the stones of the Cathedrals cry out the love of their people for GOD?
Aren’t you moved when you enter them? I AM!

---

 

[CB_Catholic]

The primary mission of the Church is not to feed the poor. It is to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ and to save souls. If that perspective is lost, Christianity just becomes another charitable institution. It will have lost it’s purpose.

There is absolutely no reason the Creator of the Universe cannot have the finest and the best we can give Him in order to worship Him. He does not have a problem with greed and selfishness that we do. When he tells us to care for the poor, he is giving us a remedy for our self-centeredness and materialism. He is showing us a way out of that. Jesus said we will always have the poor with us. He never said we would conquer that problem. Probably because if we did, we would just grow into more and more selfish beings unfit to enter heaven. But that is for US, not God.

 

[MarkInOregon]

If I gave up my “wealth” to be poor, I wouldn’t be able to help the poor!

The Church spent millions needlessly on a cathedral. Millions! Not spending millions on it wouldn’t have driven the Church into the groubd with poverty AND they’d be able to alleviate human suffering even more with all those EXCESS millions. See the difference?

There is more than enough wealth to do both–can’t you see that? We, in the wealthy countries, live extravagantly – even our poor – compared to much of, if not most of, the world. We waist so much food. We have so many possessions. You say you live simply–but by who’s standards? If all of us who profess to be Christian–were living as truly committed Christians–there would be no one who was without food, shelter and clothing – unless they chose to be.

Jesus dined in the homes of the well to do, was supported by well to do followers, he didn’t condemn the Temple–he worshiped there. He didn’t condemn the woman who poured all the ointment on him – that was his follower–and what did Jesus say to him? The apostles worshiped in the Temple too until they were no longer welcome.

Too often we give our best to ourselves, we give our left overs to the Church and we give a few scraps and crumbs to the poor–and then we lament the “wealth” of the Church. Didn’t you say earlier that if you gave up your wealth to be poor, you wouldn’t be able to help the poor, but yet you ask the Church to give up her “wealth”? You ask of the Church what you are not willing to do? You said “It is hard for me to reconcile the servants living in more comfort than the master”–who do you think the Master is–that our priests are living in greater comfort?

I guess I don’t think this is an either or choice. I think we could easily do both if we were truly committed followers of Christ. That is what keeps me up at night–not the fact that great cathedrals have been built to give glory to God. It is the fact that we don’t see Jesus in our downtrodden neighbor and give glory to God by helping him as we should.

The Peace of Christ,
Mark

 

[MarkInOregon]

Btw, the appearance of immodesty and richness actually turns a lot of people off (especially for the poor people because they feel “out of place”), and so the poor actually don’t wish to worship at all. This is counter productive.

What turns people off is how we treat them. If they found us loving and inviting and welcoming–they wouldn’t feel out of place. If we modeled Jesus to them they would feel welcome and very much at home. It is our attitudes and preconceived notices regarding people that is counter productive.

The peace of Christ,
Mark

 

[MarkInOregon]

It just doesn’t seem right or like the proper place for that. Church isn’t for socializing, it is for worshipping. The money changers thought the temple was a good place to talk to each other too and they felt the full table-flipping wrath of Jesus that day.

No–the money changers thought the Church was a good place to make money–they were not seeking fellowship with other Jews–they were seeking money. Can you truly worship God/Jesus – if you can’t see Jesus in your fellow parishioners? Mass is the community worship–not our own private worship service. Though I’ve never seen a coffee shop in any Catholic church I have ever been too–I doubt they are in the sanctuary–and that is the place where we worship. Outside the sanctuary is where we fellowship, where we gather to help and support one another in our faith journey. I would suggest Church is for both worship and fellowship.

The peace of Christ,
Mark

 

[Fr_of_Jazz]

Why would that be unconscionable? That would seem to give too much importance for that which is material. It was just as unconscionable for the rich man to give his things away.

Even though like you said, it’s not just like one individual owns it, but I feel IMO that it exceeds the boundaries of modesty and humility, which ironically the Church heavily promotes.

Even if such things do in fact inspire much awe and devotion, I feel that it is misplaced devotion, much like praying or doing good things for the rewards and good feelings of consolation. It sort of becomes a carnal pleasure.

Its hard for me to reconcile the servants living in more comfort than the Master.

(1) They give glory to God who created man with the talents He gave him. Are we to throw away (or bury, to use the gospel image from the Master) the gifts He gave us in order to praise Him?

(2) They are meant to be windows to the divine or holy objects they represent. We have bodies; and we perceive through them and participate in prayer and worship through them. Beautiful spaces, beautiful use of light, and beautiful visual and musical arts contribute to that process. The Sacred Liturgy itself uses these gifts.

(3) You seem selective in what you require one to directly imitate in Jesus. Why not say we must all practice the Evangelical Councils to be like the Master?

(4) So if we prayed in stripped down wooden churches in a community that suppresses human talents in so-called imitation of Jesus where we at best appear to be rustic bumpkins if not anti-human Manicheans, we are going to bring people of all strata into the Faith and light of the Gospel exactly how?

 

[Randy_Carson]

Why do we see such multimillion dollar cathedrals and wealth in the Church? I understand these things inspire awe and devotion and about “giving good gifts” (which is in far excess of just being “good”), but these things seem to be in direct opposition of Christ and His mission. Christ never cared to establish a material kingdom on earth, He chose to be born in a stable out of humility, spent His time with the low end of society, touched lepers, told the rich man to give up all he had to the poor, chose lowly fishmerment to be His apostles etc. How do you reconcile the two ideas?

The Church needs buildings in which to conduct its meetings and to run its day to day affairs. Protestants also have large churches (the National Cathedral (Episcopal) in Washington, DC is the sixth or seventh largest Church in the world), and Bob Jones University has a very large art collection. Why don’t they sell all their “stuff” as an example for us?

The fact is that the Catholic Church maintains these buildings in the same way that the US Government maintains national parks, monuments, and historic buildings. Should the government sell all of its land and property to pay off the national debt? Or is there some advantage in maintaining these treasures so that everyone can enjoy them? Similarly, the Church holds its property, art, libraries and archives as treasures open to all.

Sadly, there is little cash flow generated from these things relative to the cost of upkeep, so the Vatican routinely needs to request additional money just to break-even on an annual basis. This annual collection is called “Peter’s Pence.”

Finally, are some Protestants envious that people have donated their time and money to glorify God through works of art and fine architecture? Does the Church have the right to take what has been donated to God in past centuries and put it all on the auction block without regard for what the original donors desired?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

The Church needs buildings in which to conduct its meetings and to run its day to day affairs. Protestants also have large churches (the National Cathedral (Episcopal) in Washington, DC is the sixth or seventh largest Church in the world), and Bob Jones University has a very large art collection. Why don’t they sell all their “stuff” as an example for us?

,. . .lon is called “Peter’s Pence.”

Finally, are some Protestants envious that people have donated their time and money to glorify God through works of art and fine architecture? Does the Church have the right to take what has been donated to God in past centuries and put it all on the auction block without regard for what the original donors desired?

I think you’re on the right track, Randy.

Myself, I think that it’s a lack of balance on the part of some Catholics (Thorns says he is Catholic) that lead them to make an ‘image’ of God in place of the True God.

We all hear for example how ‘traditionalists’ supposedly only focus on the ‘smells and bells’ and focus all their attention on ‘God in heaven’ and don’t pay enough attention (supposedly) to "people on earth’. The balance that as Catholics we are supposed to achieve in being both ‘in this world and not of the world’ is not met.

I think Thorns has fallen onto the other extreme --he is focusing on the "Jesus the humble minister to the poor’ and has forgotten all about “Jesus who is CHRIST THE KING”. Jesus is not ‘just’ all about the poor and their material well-being; He is also the Ruler of the Universe who is to be worshiped and GLORIFIED.

it is kind of hard to ‘glorify’ somebody if you’re constantly giving Him not your best, but your ‘least’. If you are doing just one part of one thing He asks (feed the poor in body) but ignoring all the other things (do My Father’s Will, listen to the Holy Spirit who will lead you to all Truth, ‘I am the Lord thy God’, etc).

Catholicism is a paradoxical faith, and trying to take just ONE element anywhere is pretty much guaranteed to lead any person astray. Thorns, who probably grew up in the good old ‘founded by Puritans’ USA and was fed by the spirit of the 60s and the ‘false egalitarianism’ that was de riguer for the times, was ripe for the neopuritanism which holds up its hands (and turns up its nose) at the ‘opulence’ of Catholicism and its ‘needless and lavish overindulgence’.

 

[Thorns]

There is more than enough wealth to do both–can’t you see that? We, in the wealthy countries, live extravagantly – even our poor – compared to much of, if not most of, the world. We waist so much food. We have so many possessions. You say you live simply–but by who’s standards? If all of us who profess to be Christian–were living as truly committed Christians–there would be no one who was without food, shelter and clothing – unless they chose to be.

Jesus dined in the homes of the well to do, was supported by well to do followers, he didn’t condemn the Temple–he worshiped there. He didn’t condemn the woman who poured all the ointment on him – that was his follower–and what did Jesus say to him? The apostles worshiped in the Temple too until they were no longer welcome.

Too often we give our best to ourselves, we give our left overs to the Church and we give a few scraps and crumbs to the poor–and then we lament the “wealth” of the Church. Didn’t you say earlier that if you gave up your wealth to be poor, you wouldn’t be able to help the poor, but yet you ask the Church to give up her “wealth”? You ask of the Church what you are not willing to do? You said “It is hard for me to reconcile the servants living in more comfort than the master”–who do you think the Master is–that our priests are living in greater comfort?

I guess I don’t think this is an either or choice. I think we could easily do both if we were truly committed followers of Christ. That is what keeps me up at night–not the fact that great cathedrals have been built to give glory to God. It is the fact that we don’t see Jesus in our downtrodden neighbor and give glory to God by helping him as we should.

The Peace of Christ,
Mark

No, I ask the Church to give its surplus to the poor. If I had surplus, Id give it. I didn’t ask the Church to give up it’s essentials that it needs to run, just the surplus.

 

[Thorns]

t is kind of hard to ‘glorify’ somebody if you’re constantly giving Him not your best, but your ‘least’

. If you are doing just one part of one thing He asks (feed the poor in body) but ignoring all the other things (do My Father’s Will, listen to the Holy Spirit who will lead you to all Truth, ‘I am the Lord thy God’, etc).

Ah, but I’m afraid this misses the point of what “our best” actually is. Our best does not come in the form of materialistic riches or in fine art that looks great or how we dress up for mass. I argue that our best is how we treat one another and the good works in which we glorify God by the way we live our lives, not by our nice buildings that mean nothing to God.

 

[Thorns]

(1) They give glory to God who created man with the talents He gave him. Are we to throw away (or bury, to use the gospel image from the Master) the gifts He gave us in order to praise Him?

When those gifts costs millions and we elect to spend on that rather than alleviate human suffering, we’ve missed the point IMO just like those who ignored the dying, beaten man in the parable of the Good Samaritan, because had they touched him on the Sabbath, and a foreignore let alone, they’d become “unclean.” Misses the point of religion and God altogether.

(2) They are meant to be windows to the divine or holy objects they represent. We have bodies; and we perceive through them and participate in prayer and worship through them. Beautiful spaces, beautiful use of light, and beautiful visual and musical arts contribute to that process. The Sacred Liturgy itself uses these gifts.

There’s a lot of other things that are palatable to our senses, it does not make them essential, especially when they can serve as a distraction for people who both like them and don’t like them.

(
(3) You seem selective in what you require one to directly imitate in Jesus. Why not say we must all practice the Evangelical Councils to be like the Master?

How am I selective? We should all practice the way of living like the Master. Doesn’t He call us to do just that? We don’t have to subject ourselves to poverty, but if we have surplus to give we should surely give it, no?

(
(4) So if we prayed in stripped down wooden churches in a community that suppresses human talents in so-called imitation of Jesus where we at best appear to be rustic bumpkins if not anti-human Manicheans, we are going to bring people of all strata into the Faith and light of the Gospel exactly how?

So fine art and nice buildings is more of a politcal move in order to attract more members? What happened to having faith in the Holy Spirit to convert hearts and bring them to the fullness of truth?

 

[Thorns]

The fact is that the Catholic Church maintains these buildings in the same way that the US Government maintains national parks, monuments, and historic buildings. Should the government sell all of its land and property to pay off the national debt? Or is there some advantage in maintaining these treasures so that everyone can enjoy them? Similarly, the Church holds its property, art, libraries and archives as treasures open to all.

The US Gov doesn’t preach modesty and poverty, so what they do is irrelevant to how the Mystical Body of Christ should be run.

Btw, didn’t God grant King Solomon great wisdom and victories as long as he places his faith in God? As soon as Solomon mistrusted and began investing in earthly armies and took it upon himself, he lost everything.

Btw, even the little loaves and fishes that there were, didn’t God compound them to feed thousands?

Do we actually believe in these stories or not?

Finally, are some Protestants envious that people have donated their time and money to glorify God through works of art and fine architecture? Does the Church have the right to take what has been donated to God in past centuries and put it all on the auction block without regard for what the original donors desired?

Except none of it was donated to Our Lady of the Angels Cathedral in Downtoan LA, but rather costed 20 million dollars.