50 total posts
(Page 1 of 2)
push'em back, push'em back, way back!
Sounds like a football chant, lol. So, now Catholics wait to see if they will drop the ball, or will it all go up in smoke? Oh the puns..........
It's the news media who seem to be the more anxious
They've probably got plenty of stories in the can already. Nothing much will change in a hurry regardless of who is chosen. You can bank on that.
speaking of religious things I had....
....a most interesting occurrence last Sunday. We are coming down the street back from church and I see Jehovah Witness walking door to door. I was a bit surprised since that seems to be on almost any other day of the week, particularly a Saturday. I sat in my van, talking on phone a bit, while the wife and daughter went on into the house. My van windows are tinted so 2 come walking past the van up our drive without seeing me. They go up to the door and I watch them open the screen door, but just stand there. They close the screen door carefully and still stand there. Meanwhile the rest of their group is knocking on 3 other houses in pairs. Since we live on dead end road, as the others began to come back up the road, the two at my house walked back up the drive, not seeing me in the van and joined the others walking back up the road.
I finish my call, get out, go in the house. I asked my wife why she'd not answered the door. She says, "Because nobody came to the door and knocked". I told her they'd come to the door. She'd not heard a thing. It was then I realized I'd never seen them knock on the door either. Hah, they were playing religious hooky of a sort, LOL! They wanted the others in the group to think they'd knocked on the door and not gotten an answer. I wish I'd have noticed it sooner, I could have had some fun exposing their subterfuge to their "shepherd".
They were probably newbies and had been told
scary stories of the bogeyman at that address!
My wife and I have enjoyed the nightly broadcasts
and all the speculative comments by these news guys who just have no clue whatsoever. They've no idea who the pope is and what is his job description. We also noted that not one broadcast since this began has gone to completion without some reference to the US priest scandals. This has been a wonderful opportunity for dredging while nothing much else is going on.
ah, the US scandals
Might there be some other causes or reasons for these current "dredgings"? Consider such dredgings would temporarily serve the purposes of some Cardinals who are gathered there if US priests and associations are considered too tainted through this process. It would serve the Euro centric groups within the Catholic church. The Catholic church began with Constantine in the 3rd century to combine religion along with political intrigue to suit their own purpose.
There was nothing happening in the US Catholic churches
that wasn't happening in Catholic and non-Catholic churches world wide, the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, public schools, orphanages and asylums anywhere, etc. It should not happen at all and especially among those whose job is to be protectors of the innocent. There are certainly many who would want to take the Catholic Church down to the ground for what happened but they'd still have plenty of work to do if they wanted to rub out these atrocities and not just one high profile entity. BTW, your last sentence is completely false if not bizarre but I see no good purpose in taking that on here.
All those other groups
aren't involved in an election right now, whose voters are worldwide.
and none ever were or will be
At least "Frank" is strong against homosexuality
Fought against homosexual incursions into the politics of Argentina.
Here's an idea for the cardinals
Maybe they should close up shop and start clothing and feeding the poor and hungry with with the zillions of dollars they'd get for all that art and gold that encrusts Vatican City, never mind the huge cash reserves they have. My personal opinion is that Jesus would be appalled at the disgusting, gold-laden spectacle that is the Vatican.
Think about that
So who do you sell this stuff to. You can melt down the precious metals I suppose or you can try to auction off the artwork, metalworks et al. So you sell them to the rich folks where they'll disappear and never be viewed again by common people who might just like to see them? Think again about how the church views the material world. The church doesn't teach us to look at treasures as if they carry a price tag other than that of the love and effort that went into making them? I suspect this is just smoke in the wind as I doubt you've the capacity to understand that kind of value system.
Or they could sell them to rich folks.....
.....on condition that those rich folks donate them, so they can be seen by a lot more people than can see them now. My point is simply that they have the means to provide a lot of help to the poor they claim to care so much about, and yet all those riches remain primarily for their own enjoyment.
There's nothing keeping you from seeing them if you want to
The are protected, yes, but accessible to the public. Frankly, your idea of offering to sell them to the rich if they'd be donated sounds rather bizarre to me. It would be the same just asking for substantial donations of money. They'll already accept those. The church also has people who die and leave property and such for its disposal. As far as helping those in need, that work is carried out at mission level. Catholic charities do more work with less financial overhead than any government entity offering the same or similar services. It's probably not in your interest to know so I could expect you'll remain ignorant of most of what the church does and has done other than what you read in the daily rags.
Yes, they'd collect a ton of money....
......which they could then use for good works. I know they do a lot now but imaging how much more they could do with the proceeds from selling off all those riches and keeping just what they need to keep the church operating. Sorry but I find it extremely hypocritical that they preach poverty and charity while living in luxury in their own private country and while sitting on such a vast fortune.
You'd you to try and understand something
that you might find difficult to do and I'll find difficult to explain...but here goes
The church does not teach that it is good to accumulate earthly goods. It teaches just the opposite. Selling off treasured items to the wealthy would be a hypocrisy to that teaching. They'd be assisting those wealthy people in accumulating earthly goods...the same thing they preach against. Let's just say that such practice is considered to be a distraction from more important things and the church cannot aid and abet such practice.
I hope I said that right.
You said it right
I understand the predicament, but if you condition the sale on the buyer donating the item purchased to a museum and the church putting the proceeds to good works, that buyer won't possess the earthly goods for very long and both sides can do something good with them. Right now the church itself owns all those earthly goods it says people shouldn't accumulate.
Should we also no consider the desires of the donor?
But again, the church doesn't look at art, metalwork and such as having a price tag or exchange value. People do that and, to be honest, I've often felt as you've expressed. It was a long time learning and discerning process to change that way of thinking...to learn and prioritize the difference between the intrinsic and extrinsic.
You believe that the Vatican should rid itself of all its wealth and worldly goods to help the poor......have you considered that not only are many of the artifacts within the Vatican City donated, but they are also 'found' relics over time from various archaelogical 'digs' and are literally priceless pieces of history of the church? Do you feel the same way about Egypt's wealth regarding their historical finds over time? Think of the wealth they would have selling off King Tut's 'goodies' and how much good they could do for their own people? What about all the Iranian treasures, Pakistan's treasures, India's treasures, Saudi Arabia's treasures, etc.? Their 'leaders' all live high on the hog while their people starve. At least the Catholics DO something about that issue, even if it's not up to your standards.
As far as I know.....
......Egypt, Iran and Saudi Arabia don't preach the blessedness of poverty. And the Catholic church is a religion, not a country, though technically they own one since the Vatican is considered an independent nation and not part of Italy.
All of those countries
use their religions and fanaticism to control their people, don't they? They are rich beyond belief and allow their own exploited people to starve. Why not tell them to dispose of their historical treasures to take care of THEIR poor?
the one that always gets me
with it's crass obviousness of untruthfulness is when foreign archaeologists end up complaining about the "grave robbers" in some country they've gone to excavate. So many of those places are the very children of the ancient people's who placed the treasures there in the first place.
Mostly I've been silent on this
but I'm curious how you feel Josh concerning the temple from the days of Solomon through the days of Christ? Eventually the riches of the temple were scattered, but not among the ones who contributed and gathered them. Between Moses and Solomon there was the tabernacle which had fairly limited items of value, but those were directly used as part of the worship service.
I consider the synagogue an improvement on that system, and I myself as a Christian am a what could be called a Congregationalist.
Jesus went ballistic on those temples, didn't he?
Got really mad and told them what he thought of all the money they were taking in and keeping.
Orthodox Jews live pretty simply. Even their coffins are plain and designed not to draw attention to themselves.
There's also no hierarchy in Judaism. There's you, there's your rabbi, and there's God. That's pretty much it. Hasidic rebbes are more like wise elders and community leaders. They're not considered any more god-like than anyone else.
I stand by my opinion that Jesus would not be pleased to see the splendor in which the leaders of the Catholic Church live and work.
Jesus would be a great Republican
by your example you give........he was angry with the politicians of the times taxing and keeping the money for themselves and their cronies, and acting as typical Democrats of today, taking from the poor to line the pockets of politicians, not that the 'rich' were being accused of taking from the poor. Back then, the only 'rich' WERE the politicians and leaders of the countries......everybody else was poor and kept that way BY the politicians just as the Democrats have done and continue to do today.
Jesus would be considered a socialist...
.....by most of today's Republicans.
A little light reading:
Republican Jesus™ is very different than the Jesus you and I are familiar with. First off, he is White. Not just white, but White. Republican Jesus™ has a special place in his heart for America. Specifically, White America. Do you doubt this? Ask yourself why anyone who believes in a colorblind Jesus would even conceive of praying for the death of Obama? No, only those who follow Republican Jesus™ would even think that such a prayer could, or should, be answered. If you are currently thinking that racism has nothing to do with the unprecedented hatred of Obama, go away, I'm talking to the grownups.
Republican Jesus™, by the way, is a big supporter of the Confederacy. Why he let them lose the War of Northern Aggression is a mystery. But all "real" Americans know that the South will rise again and Republican Jesus™ will lead the way back to glory. Or something like that. How the Northern and Mid-western Red states fit into this Southern revival is also a mystery.
Republican Jesus™ loves guns. Loves them! Never mind all that silly talk of beating swords into plowshares! Every good member of the church of Republican Jesus™ should have, at minimum, enough armament to hold off an invasion by those commie Nazi liberal hordes that are coming any day now. Or the ATF, whichever shows up first. Or maybe just enough to wipe out a schoolroom filled with kids when their excellent parenting skills manifest themselves in the next Columbine tragedy.
What a crock
Only you, JP, and Ziks would believe what that says.
Jesus would be neither Rep nor Dem
nor socialist, Marxist or whatever. There was only asking and no forcing of people to comply with anything. We were born and remain of free will. Jesus would never support a law requiring anyone to give "alms for the poor" or buy healthcare insurance for those who couldn't afford it. Anyone who thinks otherwise is dead wrong. We are judged by what we do on our own accord as individuals and not what we do under threat of retribution.
Steve, re not requiring alms
I see your point.
But you don't think society can have an obligation as a group?
That all help should be strictly one on one or from a volunteer organization (a church is a volunteer organization in that sense)?
There should be no SS, medicare, medicaid, worker's comp, unemployment..?
Should doctors and hospitals refuse to help without pay up front?
These can be viewed as extreme views of the point of aid should freely given by individuals, but they don't fit in if the government shouldn't be in the aid business.
Do we as a society want to force totally self reliance? go back (in that respect) a century or more?
Roger, I'm not saying that at all
What I'm saying is that citing the teachings of the Bible and Jesus as reason to implement mandatory secular code doesn't always work. Surely we all have obligations to one another but you can't arbitrarily bring biblical teaching into the conversation when it comes to making something mandatory for everyone being they Christian or not. I also know there is dispute among the various Christian beliefs about just how much free will we exercise so that adds only confusion to the argument. But if I understand correctly, it's my obligation to share what I have with others but not my right to take from others to share as well. We can leave that to secular law but shouldn't cite the teachings of Jesus as justification for it.