Pope condemns "Cult of Money"

[Agit8r]

"Ethics – naturally, not the ethics of ideology – makes it possible, in my view, to create a balanced social order that is more humane. In this sense, I encourage the financial experts and the political leaders of your countries to consider the words of Saint John Chrysostom: 'Not to share one’s goods with the poor is to rob them and to deprive them of life. It is not our goods that we possess, but theirs' (Homily on Lazarus, 1:6 – PG 48, 992D)."

Address to the New Non-Resident Ambassadors to the Holy See: Kyrgyzstan, Antigua and Barbuda, Luxembourg and Botswana (16 May 2013)

I look forward to hearing the opinions of John Boehner, Paul Ryan, etc, on this

 

[editec]

The cult of money (AKA Mammonism) has always been an alternative religion.

Remember the GOLDEN CALF?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Coming from someone who lives in utter and complete luxury and ease, this means squat.

 

[martybegan]

Coming from someone who lives in utter and complete luxury and ease, this means squat.

You know this pope is not using all the Papal perks, right?

Pope Francis living in 'simple' Vatican residence - RTÉ News

Jesuits are a different breed than mainline catholics. Not as poverty conscious as franciscans or capuchins, but close.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The Poop should divest all the church's assets and give them all to the needy.

 

[turzovka]

The Poop should divest all the church's assets and give them all to the needy.

The Catholic Church has done far more over the centuries to give to the needy and care for the needy than all its critics.

But don't let that trouble you when you pass into the next life.

 

[PratchettFan]

The Poop should divest all the church's assets and give them all to the needy.

The Catholic Church has done far more over the centuries to give to the needy and care for the needy than all its critics.

But don't let that trouble you when you pass into the next life.

Actually, I would agree with you on that. Despite the rather opulent trappings of the church, they have created hospitals, charities, schools, etc and done many great works.

But I am interested in your reaction to what the Pope was saying, rather than the other responses. How would you say that would fit into the concept of national health care, social safety nets, and the other trappings of government which are considered socialist in nature?

 

[martybegan]

The Poop should divest all the church's assets and give them all to the needy.

The Catholic Church has done far more over the centuries to give to the needy and care for the needy than all its critics.

But don't let that trouble you when you pass into the next life.

Actually, I would agree with you on that. Despite the rather opulent trappings of the church, they have created hospitals, charities, schools, etc and done many great works.

But I am interested in your reaction to what the Pope was saying, rather than the other responses. How would you say that would fit into the concept of national health care, social safety nets, and the other trappings of government which are considered socialist in nature?

The Church has been leaning towards a more social welfare state stance for decades. I have no issue with it, although I do disagree with it. They have not, however made it one of thier cardinal teachings, so it does not have the weight as thier opposition to abortion, the death penalty, euthenasia, etc.

 

[t_polkow]

The Poop should divest all the church's assets and give them all to the needy.

The Catholic Church has done far more over the centuries to give to the needy and care for the needy than all its critics.

But don't let that trouble you when you pass into the next life.

The catholic church is nothing more then a criminal cabal of pedophiles,that outfit should have been dismantled a long time ago or at least outlawed in this country

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpuYoK6wv_Y]Priest Off - YouTube[/ame]

 

[turzovka]

The Catholic Church has done far more over the centuries to give to the needy and care for the needy than all its critics.

But don't let that trouble you when you pass into the next life.

Actually, I would agree with you on that. Despite the rather opulent trappings of the church, they have created hospitals, charities, schools, etc and done many great works.

But I am interested in your reaction to what the Pope was saying, rather than the other responses. How would you say that would fit into the concept of national health care, social safety nets, and the other trappings of government which are considered socialist in nature?

The Church has been leaning towards a more social welfare state stance for decades. I have no issue with it, although I do disagree with it. They have not, however made it one of thier cardinal teachings, so it does not have the weight as thier opposition to abortion, the death penalty, euthenasia, etc.

I very much agree with you, at least especially with your second sentence. As to the former, I sometimes disagree with how the Catholic Church goes about in defense of some underprivileged. For example --- they are quick to come to the aid of the 12 million illegal immigrants of this nation, but not so opinionated on the money it takes to care for them, and silent on what we should do with our open borders. That makes the solutions not so easy when you have to address all components.

 

[turzovka]

The Poop should divest all the church's assets and give them all to the needy.

The Catholic Church has done far more over the centuries to give to the needy and care for the needy than all its critics.

But don't let that trouble you when you pass into the next life.

Actually, I would agree with you on that. Despite the rather opulent trappings of the church, they have created hospitals, charities, schools, etc and done many great works.

But I am interested in your reaction to what the Pope was saying, rather than the other responses. How would you say that would fit into the concept of national health care, social safety nets, and the other trappings of government which are considered socialist in nature?

I like the words of the pope, we can all take them to heart. I do not agree with the OP that this can be turned into a difference of political policies between dems and repubs. Giving money endlessly to the poor and consequently putting oneself further into debt are both bad practices. The former can create apathy and lethargy, the latter can kill the goose that lays the eggs.

Pope Francis (via St. John Chrysostom) is simply reminding us that every single one of us has an obligation to care for our neighbor, especially the poor. He is telling us that those things that we spend money upon ourselves are in most cases luxuries not necessities. And the money we spend for luxury items (like opulent vacations and expensive cars), we are taking money and needs away from the poor – directly. It is our excess that is really the poors’ money, not ours. I agree.

As far as your comment about the Catholic Church and its “opulent trappings,” well, I do not agree at all. The Church’s art holdings cannot be sold, they are the beauty for all of God’s creation to enjoy and glean lessons from. The beautiful cathedrals around the world also serve a purpose beyond what some may cynically deem to be a show of wealth or accomplishment. They are, in my opinion, one, to glorify God and two, for all to share in freely. Consider this passage:

Matthew 26
Now when Jesus was in Bethany, at the home of Simon the leper, a woman came to Him with an alabaster vial of very costly perfume, and she poured it on His head as He reclined at the table. But the disciples were indignant when they saw this, and said, “Why this waste? For this perfume might have been sold for a high price and the money given to the poor.” But Jesus, aware of this, said to them, “Why do you bother the woman? For she has done a good deed to Me. For you always have the poor with you; but you do not always have Me.


In some ways, I believe Jesus is telling us that there are other important matters we need to attend to besides assisting the poor --- which in most cases is paramount. The other being, honoring God and not being ashamed to show it in some tangible way. It is not always a bad use of resources to glorify our God with beauty. I am fine with this.


Finally, individual clergy, far, far and away, live very spartan lifestyles, they are paid little. I do not think any of them entered the priesthood with the intention of having an easy or pampered life.

 

[Agit8r]

Pope Francis (via St. John Chrysostom) is simply reminding us that every single one of us has an obligation to care for our neighbor, especially the poor. He is telling us that those things that we spend money upon ourselves are in most cases luxuries not necessities. And the money we spend for luxury items (like opulent vacations and expensive cars), we are taking money and needs away from the poor – directly. It is our excess that is really the poors’ money, not ours.

One can rationalize it all one wants, but there was much more to the message than that, for instance:

"The worldwide financial and economic crisis seems to highlight their distortions and above all the gravely deficient human perspective, which reduces man to one of his needs alone, namely, consumption. Worse yet, human beings themselves are nowadays considered as consumer goods which can be used and thrown away. We have started a throw-away culture. This tendency is seen on the level of individuals and whole societies; and it is being promoted! In circumstances like these, solidarity, which is the treasure of the poor, is often considered counterproductive, opposed to the logic of finance and the economy. While the income of a minority is increasing exponentially, that of the majority is crumbling. This imbalance results from ideologies which uphold the absolute autonomy of markets and financial speculation, and thus deny the right of control to States, which are themselves charged with providing for the common good. A new, invisible and at times virtual, tyranny is established, one which unilaterally and irremediably imposes its own laws and rules."

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/f...francesco_20130516_nuovi-ambasciatori_en.html

 

[Mad Scientist]

Thanks goodness The Pope never mentioned Bankers!

 

[PratchettFan]

The Catholic Church has done far more over the centuries to give to the needy and care for the needy than all its critics.

But don't let that trouble you when you pass into the next life.

Actually, I would agree with you on that. Despite the rather opulent trappings of the church, they have created hospitals, charities, schools, etc and done many great works.

But I am interested in your reaction to what the Pope was saying, rather than the other responses. How would you say that would fit into the concept of national health care, social safety nets, and the other trappings of government which are considered socialist in nature?

I like the words of the pope, we can all take them to heart. I do not agree with the OP that this can be turned into a difference of political policies between dems and repubs. Giving money endlessly to the poor and consequently putting oneself further into debt are both bad practices. The former can create apathy and lethargy, the latter can kill the goose that lays the eggs.

Pope Francis (via St. John Chrysostom) is simply reminding us that every single one of us has an obligation to care for our neighbor, especially the poor. He is telling us that those things that we spend money upon ourselves are in most cases luxuries not necessities. And the money we spend for luxury items (like opulent vacations and expensive cars), we are taking money and needs away from the poor – directly. It is our excess that is really the poors’ money, not ours. I agree.

As far as your comment about the Catholic Church and its “opulent trappings,” well, I do not agree at all. The Church’s art holdings cannot be sold, they are the beauty for all of God’s creation to enjoy and glean lessons from. The beautiful cathedrals around the world also serve a purpose beyond what some may cynically deem to be a show of wealth or accomplishment. They are, in my opinion, one, to glorify God and two, for all to share in freely. Consider this passage:

Matthew 26
Now when Jesus was in Bethany, at the home of Simon the leper, a woman came to Him with an alabaster vial of very costly perfume, and she poured it on His head as He reclined at the table. But the disciples were indignant when they saw this, and said, “Why this waste? For this perfume might have been sold for a high price and the money given to the poor.” But Jesus, aware of this, said to them, “Why do you bother the woman? For she has done a good deed to Me. For you always have the poor with you; but you do not always have Me.


In some ways, I believe Jesus is telling us that there are other important matters we need to attend to besides assisting the poor --- which in most cases is paramount. The other being, honoring God and not being ashamed to show it in some tangible way. It is not always a bad use of resources to glorify our God with beauty. I am fine with this.


Finally, individual clergy, far, far and away, live very spartan lifestyles, they are paid little. I do not think any of them entered the priesthood with the intention of having an easy or pampered life.

My understanding of the teachings of Jesus is that the way to glorify God is to assist the poor. I was not criticizing the church of opulence. I would agree that beauty is important and I have no problem with it. Nonetheless, there is opulence. While I do tend to disagree with the church on any number of issues, I do not argue they don't do a great deal to help others.

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

The Poop should divest all the church's assets and give them all to the needy.

The Catholic Church has done far more over the centuries to give to the needy and care for the needy than all its critics.

But don't let that trouble you when you pass into the next life.

One imagines the late yaqui tribe and the Jews of Spain are especially grateful.