Politics and religion
One’s OK. The other not so much
If you want to annoy some folks, poke fun at a religious figure for what I thought was lavish excess.
And that’s not to disparage the good things the church does.
Update: Wolfwood says Know Your Allies. Ya know, I’m not all anti-religious or anything. And as I’ve said before, I got no issues with God thing. Just an note on my part, as a casual outside observer.
December 26th, 2008 at 11:21 am
I think your statements were quite valid. Even if the church does more good than harm, or is one of the more charitable organizations in the world, such facts don’t necessarily justify the church’s wealth and use of that wealth to buy gold-covered objects.
December 26th, 2008 at 11:46 am
I am not a Catholic, but your statement is still quite offensive.
Wealth does not have to be justified, nor does use of wealth. Durable goods and commodities, especially precious metals, are wise investments, particularly when your intent is to preserve wealth across centuries of regime change.
Please note the section of your history books where the exact same class-warfare diatribes (specifically accusations of gold hoarding) were directed at people of Jewish ancestry, shortly before they were shipped off to gold-tooth factories and their assets were seized by the Government Of The People.
December 26th, 2008 at 11:48 am
I didn’t ask for wealth justification. And no class warfare. Just noted that going on about selfishness is probably not the best from someone displaying excess.
December 26th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
I, for one, am with you here. And it’s far from unique to the Catholics. Look at any of the megachurch dudes on the Tee-Vee on Sunday mornings, and you’ll get a pretty good idea of how skewed the priorities of the church (just about any church) are.
I still remember, when I was a teenager, coming to the realization that my Sunday donations weren’t going to help the poor, or any such thing — they were going to maintain the building and to pay the guy who lectured me once a week. Not exactly what the Big J.C. had in mind, as far as I’m concerned.
December 26th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
“hypnagogue” — are you serious? You’re going to come around here and complain about “class warfare diatribes” against one of the all-time great class-warriors: the Catholic Church?
That’s just laughable. Do you understand? That’s comical. You need a red rubber ball on your nose to complete the effect.
You want the “history”? Let me know, and I’ll bury you in it.
December 26th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
I have fundamentalist Christian beliefs, and I’m always offended by any glittery megachurchery.
December 26th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Tgirsch,
I am a Pastor. Are you saying that my kids don’t need food? Were you planning on starving your own kids to feed the poor?
Have you fed many poor this year? I’ll assume the answer is yes, so let’s compare notes — it was a tough year and next year is looking to be worse.
Were you ever afraid? How did you feel when you saw the open sores and rotting teeth of meth addicts? Did you expect to be robbed? Did you carry a gun? Did you give them food money anyway, for their kids? Did you worry that a Walmart card would only go to buy more drugs? Did you get to a point where you said “no more”? How did they respond?
Did you bail them out when they called from jail? For possession? Armed robbery? Attempted murder? Or did you thank God that they were in jail?
Did they call you when they got out? Do you worry that they come for your family? Do you pray for protection?
SayUncle,
Your response is heard, but my comments were directed at LearnAboutGuns.
December 26th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Billy Beck,
I assume you have plenty of history to prove whatever you like. Hatred is still evil.
December 26th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Accusing an organization of hypocrisy does not imply hatred, nor does it weaken the good that organization has done in the past, nor does it indicate objection with the good that has been done. Neither does it demand justification for whatever it is that organization is doing… it just points out the hypocrisy. And neither does it indicate that the organization should immediately render itself and its members destitute.
There are an awful lot of strawmen being thrown about here.
The Roman Catholic Church can do as it pleases with its money and its materiels – if its members are in agreement over it (or at least a plurality of them are), then who is anyone else to tell them otherwise? And, given that the RCC keeps doing what it is doing, I am going to go ahead and assume that its members are ok with that.
That said, those who do disagree with what the RCC does are also fully capable, entitled, and probably willing to point out just how … flawed … it can appear when an organization goes and asks for more money when it appears as though they are positively swimming in it at the moment. Sure, a lot of that money goes to a lot of good things… but obviously some of it could have gone to better things. Pomp and circumstance is one thing, and great for politicians, but religions simply do not need it… or, at least, should not.
December 26th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
I’m with Uncle. Matthew 6:19-21 seems very appropriate here, in fact the whole chapter is. The church is not called to make “wise investments” “to preserve wealth across centuries of regime change” but to proclaim the gospel of the Kingdom of God (cf. the Great Commission).
December 26th, 2008 at 3:18 pm
Mark 14:3-5
December 26th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
Cheers to hypnagogue, for fighting the lonely fight.
Anyway, people or organizations with material wealth do not bother me. What they have given to humanity, from charity, hope to be closer to God, as well as their leadership in the development of philosophy throughout the years have outweighed any other organization’s in history.
Besides, the material wealth of the Church is a paucity compared to the riches God offers in heaven. Besides, at least they are not begging at the trough like the auto companies with their corrupt, greedy, antagonistic union.
December 26th, 2008 at 9:20 pm
say uncle calls the RC hypocritical. Absolutely, his comments were fine. In context, he post sides with the socialists. We have a party coming into power in the US that believes hypocrisy on the part of others is adequate justification to illegally access records, protest funerals, commit perjury, etc.
How would you feel if somebody made a snide remark about your last ammunition purchase – you don’t need to hunt, or practice. Much more selfish than items used in a public ceremony.
You know what’s coming – abolition of your right to buy guns, buy ammunition, transport, repair. And one argument will be that you’re selfish – you selfishly want to spend money on yourself that should be given to the government, and you selfishly want to protect your life when thugs come to rob you.
December 26th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
Note carefully that no one has issued a fatwa for your death for implying that the pope was a hypocrite. The church has come a long way since the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition.
December 26th, 2008 at 11:11 pm
Am i out there flaunting my ammo while telling you to be more charitable?
December 26th, 2008 at 11:21 pm
I feel obliged to point out that it took two posts and about 37 comments before somebody mentioned the Spanish Inquisition….
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!
December 27th, 2008 at 8:40 am
“hypnagogue” — “I assume you have plenty of history to prove whatever you like.”
History is a list of facts. If you have a problem with that, then you’re the one with the problem. In no case, however, could the facts ever be put to more facile use than citations from the Bible, which is not second even to American case law in its ability to serve the arbitrarily aggrieved.
“Hatred is still evil.”
Listen, you: I am an atheist long in the record against those who savage religion. You don’t know what you’re talking about and you are dismissed.
December 27th, 2008 at 11:01 am
The now obsolete, lavish trappings of the Catholic Church have yet to catch up with their new-found Marxist views. They haven’t been able to make the adjustments to “get down with their people” yet. Those changes will take time.
December 27th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
God, particularly in the form of Allah or the Pope, has been one of the leading causes of death on this world through the ages. Pointing out the hypocritical excesses of those who espouse charity to the poor, whatever their affiliation, is justified.
Uncle’s observations are more than valid. If you have a problem with that, then perhaps those observations hit a little too close to home.
December 27th, 2008 at 11:45 pm
Um, hypnagogue, continue in Mark 14:6-7
(6) But Jesus said, “Let her alone; why do you bother her? She has done a good deed to Me. (7) For you always have the poor with you, and whenever you wish you can do good to them; but you do not always have Me.”
The Pope (or a Protestant church) dressing up in fancy robes and decking himself with gold ain’t the same as anointing the Messiah for his burial. Cf. Matt 9:13, Hosea 6:6, Matt 12:33.
BTW hypnagogue, I found it amusing that when I, being lazy, googled Mark 14:3-5 to look it up, it came up with Mark 13:5-13. v6 “Many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am he,’ and will deceive many.”
December 28th, 2008 at 12:02 am
“Pomp and circumstance is one thing, and great for politicians, but religions simply do not need it… or, at least, should not.”
Politicians shouldn’t need it either. They’re supposed to serve us, not the other way around.
December 29th, 2008 at 12:52 am
I like this place better when everyone talks about guns.
In the immortal words of Rodney King, “Can’t we all just get along?”
December 29th, 2008 at 10:06 am
I do wish the Pope would drop the robes and gold and put on a suit and go about his business. The overdone ceremony of his public appearances detracts from the important work the Catholic Church does in the world.