Stinking hypocracy of the Pope and the Vatican!

[The Grave]

Sorry, I meant to bring this up when it was more current. Good news is never old news, right?

When I first read about this hand written, beautifully presented bible; I nearly threw up with disgust! Now I'm just angry!


http://wcco.com/local/handwritten.bi....2.691979.html

Quote:-

"The "Wisdom Books," a limited edition reproduction of one of the Old Testament volumes of the 1,150 page-Bible -- measuring 2 feet tall and 3 feet wide when open -- was presented to the pope during a private audience. He will receive the remaining six volumes over the next four years.

"The pope's eyes lit up with joy and enthusiasm as he turned the pages," Cardinal Theodore McCormick, retired archbishop of Washington, D.C., told reporters after attending the presentation."

YES. Instead of the Pope having "joy and enthusiasm" for, oh, let's say giving these millions of dollars to help starving people across the globe.

NO. Instead the Pope is sitting, reading this vulgar bible, drinking tea (probably), while most of humanity sits around suffering...

Now don't get me wrong. I'm no hypocrite! I don't pretend to give to charity or help those that are suffering, either, but the point I am making is that the Pope BLOODY WELL does pretend to do these things AND I think he and his cronies could be spending this money on far more worthy causes than YET ANOTHER copy of the bible!

Well, now it's your turn. Tell us what you think.... Poll time!

Can anyone find out more about this? I keep getting the same story on all the news sheets I go to. It's as if 'this is the offical story' and the interseting parts are left out!

My memory tells me that the thing was about 50 lbs or 50 kg and may have cost £200,000. With a further 6, more expensive, volumes to come!

I think that if the Pope reads his 'beloved' bible from cover to cover (you'd think he already may have?) then I think he should pay particular attention to the following passage....

The Rich Young Man... (From - BibleGateway.com)

17(A) And as he was setting out on his journey, a man ran up and(B) knelt before him and asked him, "Good Teacher, what must I do to(C) inherit eternal life?" 18And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone. 19You know the commandmentsD) 'Do not murder, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and mother.'" 20And he said to him, "Teacher,(E) all these I have kept from my youth." 21And Jesus,(F) looking at him,(G) loved him, and said to him, "You lack one thing: go,(H) sell all that you have and give to the poor, and you will have(I) treasure in heaven; and come, follow me." 22(J) Disheartened by the saying, he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions.

23And Jesus(K) looked around and said to his disciples, (L) "How difficult it will be for those who have wealth to enter(M) the kingdom of God!"

24And the disciples(N) were amazed at his words. But Jesus said to them again, (O) "Children,(P) how difficult it is[a] to enter(Q) the kingdom of God!

25It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter(R) the kingdom of God."

{Read it and weep Pope!}

26And they were exceedingly astonished, and said to him,[b] "Then who can be saved?" 27Jesus(S) looked at them and said, (T) "With man it is impossible, but not with God. For all things are possible with God." 28Peter began to say to him, "See,(U) we have left everything and followed you." 29Jesus said, "Truly, I say to you,(V) there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or lands, for my sake and(W) for the gospel, 30who will not receive a hundredfold(X) now in this time, houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands,(Y) with persecutions, and in(Z) the age to come eternal life. 31But(AA) many who are first will be last, and the last first."

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...-30&version=47;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_a_needle

[The Grave]

You can vote more than one option. I voted top and bottom!

[Furi]

As long as it was a donation to the church in the same way that Brasillions of pounds a day makes it into the church every week, then I don't really care, if any public funds went into either its creation or the propping up of the business or writer that produced it then that is a different matter. and lighting up a pope in anyway must always be a giggle (seeing as my pope-on-a-rope was destroyed *pout*)

is the creator of the bible just trying to overtly justify his own faith, I thought such actions were frowned upon, but then like cathedrals I suppose the church needs large expensive gestures to feed their own power fetish.

[Rob Lister]

Originally Posted by The Grave

Sorry, I meant to bring this up when it was more current. Good news is never old news, right?

When I first read about this hand written, beautifully presented bible; I nearly threw up with disgust! Now I'm just angry!

...

YES. Instead of the Pope having "joy and enthusiasm" for, oh, let's say giving these millions of dollars to help starving people across the globe.

NO. Instead the Pope is sitting, reading this vulgar bible, drinking tea (probably), while most of humanity sits around suffering...

...

The Rich Young Man... (From - BibleGateway.com)
...

yada...quotes

You missed the most applicable verse
Matthew 26.6-13

Now, stop tilting at windmills.

[ceo_esq]

The complaint in the OP strikes me as a bit silly. The book in question is a work of art (or a very rare, high-quality reproduction of one), and it will almost certainly join the collection of the Vatican Library or some similar museum or library collection at the Holy See, which seems as appropriate a place as any for this sort of thing. That way it can be preserved and held in trust for the benefit of millions, as is fitting for a piece of of cultural patrimony - and which is most likely to maximize the donation's contribution to the public good over time. The donation should not be understood as contributing to the personal wealth of the papal officeholder, any more than when a valuable artwork is presented to another head of state in his/her official capacity, which is then transferred to a government library or museum somewhere.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Originally Posted by ceo_esq

The complaint in the OP strikes me as a bit silly. The book in question is a work of art (or a very rare, high-quality reproduction of one), and it will almost certainly join the collection of the Vatican Library or some similar museum or library collection at the Holy See, which seems as appropriate a place as any for this sort of thing. That way it can be preserved and held in trust for the benefit of millions, as is fitting for a piece of of cultural patrimony - and which is most likely to maximize the donation's contribution to the public good over time. The donation should not be understood as contributing to the personal wealth of the papal officeholder, any more than when a valuable artwork is presented to another head of state in his/her official capacity, which is then transferred to a government library or museum somewhere.

But he wears such nice shoes!

[Sherwood]

See threads like this really piss me off. Although i understand a little contempt for organised religion it is the bashing and outright lies that disgust me to no end. Does not matter what the religion is because i dont follow religion but i am working my way through college as a wedding photographer and have been for five years. The truth is these people are the nicest people you can ever meet.

Just last week in a church there was a sign on the wall over all those donation boxes that read:

"All donations go to victims of the earthquake in China" now here is this small church in this small town giving everything they earn to stay open for the entire weekend or perhaps longer to victims of a natural disaster in China. And what do you\we do to help? What have you ever done to help? Probably not a damn thing yet these people are going to the poorest countries and helping out and have been for decades.

But to answer the thread directly- Exactly what would you like for the Pope to do? Are you honestly so dim as to believe that the church can snap their fingers and solve world hunger whereas no one else seems to be doing a damn thing.

The hypocrisy is too much to stand. I am at my wits end with you people.

[Elizabeth I]

Originally Posted by Sherwood

Are you honestly so dim as to believe that the church can snap their fingers and solve world hunger whereas no one else seems to be doing a damn thing.

Gee golly whillikers, Slim, how much do you think the Church could do if it melted down all the gold and silver in every Catholic church in the world and exchanged it for food and medicine? If they sold that simply incredible, over-the-top art collection? If they quit maintaining that overdecorated circus arena in Rome, and all the administrative hierarchy it takes to keep it going, and plowed those funds back into the fight against world hunger? Or if they sold the Bible, and all its companions to come after it, and used that money to feed the poor, as The Grave asks in his post.

When there is no gold leaf trim, and no gold chalice, and no silver chaser for the host, in any Catholic church anywhere in the world, then you can scream about our lack of appreciation. In the meantime, the priesthood as a whole is sitting fat and sassy while people in the most Catholic countries in the world starve.

[Meadmaker]

Originally Posted by Sherwood

The hypocrisy is too much to stand. I am at my wits end with you people.

After only three posts?

But I agree with everything you said.

Take this Bible that is allegedly an example of Vatican hypocrisy. What does it really mean that it exists? It means that an artist, or maybe a group of artists, I'm not sure, were employed for a long time making this Bible. If they had not been so employed, would they have been plowing fields to feed hungry people? I suppose it's possible, but I can't really see an economic model where somehow choosing not to produce art results in less poverty, starvation, or misery.

I think the production of artwork is a worthwhile endeavor. Some people might not like the particular theme of this artwork, but can we really say that we ought to stop producing art because the money we spend employing artists would be better spent on food production? Would it really make that much difference?

[ceo_esq]

Originally Posted by Elizabeth I

Gee golly whillikers, Slim, how much do you think the Church could do if it melted down all the gold and silver in every Catholic church in the world and exchanged it for food and medicine? If they sold that simply incredible, over-the-top art collection? If they quit maintaining that overdecorated circus arena in Rome, and all the administrative hierarchy it takes to keep it going, and plowed those funds back into the fight against world hunger? Or if they sold the Bible, and all its companions to come after it, and used that money to feed the poor, as The Grave asks in his post.

One might ask you the same question, since you seem to have some vague notion in mind. Why on earth would you think that liquidating assets that are held in trust for the public benefit as part of humanity's historical and cultural patrimony would serve the long-term common good? All of Vatican City, as well as a large number of the most famous and impressive examples of Catholic architectural, historical and artistic treasures around the world, are designated by UNESCO as World Heritage Sites, for crying out loud. It would be like the United States selling off to collectors or private developers the Grand Canyon, the Smithsonian, the original Declaration of Independence and the Statue of Liberty in order to pay down the national debt or fund welfare programs. It might - assuming it were actually feasible - generate some short-term liquidity, but after that there would be no money and no patrimony, and all of humanity would almost certainly be worse off in the long run. Not to mention the fact that it's doubtful that a lot of the assets you seem to have in mind are even liquid. For example, it seems improbable that Italy would permit a lot of valuable Vatican cultural assets to be exported, even if their sale would not violate the Holy See's treaty obligations with Italy, and of course there is a strong argument that it would violate them.

Originally Posted by Elizabeth I

When there is no gold leaf trim, and no gold chalice, and no silver chaser for the host, in any Catholic church anywhere in the world, then you can scream about our lack of appreciation.

How many such things do you think are found in working Catholic churches apart from items of architectural, historical or artistic interest that, again, are held in trust?

Originally Posted by Elizabeth I

In the meantime, the priesthood as a whole is sitting fat and sassy ...

Please. Evidence?

[Herzblut]

Originally Posted by Sherwood

The truth is these people are the nicest people you can ever meet.

Just last week in a church there was a sign on the wall over all those donation boxes that read:

"All donations go to victims of the earthquake in China" now here is this small church in this small town giving everything they earn to stay open for the entire weekend or perhaps longer to victims of a natural disaster in China.

Those church activities envolve lightning-fast, in Europe, worldwide. Benny asks for donations, people donate.

From day one on, helpers from international Caritas organizations were onsite, strongly supported by Chinese catholics from "Jinde Charities".

Be aware, that helpers might be victims of the earthquake at the same time. Churches were damaged, infrastructure crushed out and many helpers suffer from injuries themselves.

Originally Posted by Sherwood

And what do you\we do to help? What have you ever done to help? Probably not a damn thing yet these people are going to the poorest countries and helping out and have been for decades.

Good question, Eliza and The Grave, what have YOU done?

[Herzblut]

Originally Posted by Elizabeth I

When there is no gold leaf trim, and no gold chalice, and no silver chaser for the host, in any Catholic church anywhere in the world, then you those you are suffering and dying can scream about our lack of appreciation.

I crossed-out a word and added a few in italic for clarification.

[Bob Blaylock]

Originally Posted by Sherwood

See threads like this really piss me off. Although i understand a little contempt for organised religion it is the bashing and outright lies that disgust me to no end. Does not matter what the religion is because i dont follow religion but i am working my way through college as a wedding photographer and have been for five years. The truth is these people are the nicest people you can ever meet.
·
·
·
But to answer the thread directly- Exactly what would you like for the Pope to do? Are you honestly so dim as to believe that the church can snap their fingers and solve world hunger whereas no one else seems to be doing a damn thing.

The hypocrisy is too much to stand. I am at my wits end with you people.

I've noticed this as well. It seems that some (I wouldn't say all, or even most) atheists are every bit as arrogant, bigoted, and hypocritical a they like to accuse religious people of being.


John 12:1-6:

1. Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead.
2. There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him.
3. Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment.
4. Then saith one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, which should betray him,
5. Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor?
6. This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein.

[Sherwood]

Originally Posted by Elizabeth I

Gee golly whillikers, Slim, how much do you think the Church could do if it melted down all the gold and silver in every Catholic church in the world and exchanged it for food and medicine? If they sold that simply incredible, over-the-top art collection? If they quit maintaining that overdecorated circus arena in Rome, and all the administrative hierarchy it takes to keep it going, and plowed those funds back into the fight against world hunger? Or if they sold the Bible, and all its companions to come after it, and used that money to feed the poor, as The Grave asks in his post.

When there is no gold leaf trim, and no gold chalice, and no silver chaser for the host, in any Catholic church anywhere in the world, then you can scream about our lack of appreciation. In the meantime, the priesthood as a whole is sitting fat and sassy while people in the most Catholic countries in the world starve.

You cannot seriously suggest parting with or even destroying (melting) the incredible artwork that belongs to our civilization\humanity as much as it does the church. It is not like they intend to sell it any time soon and run off with the money. And honestly some of it is kind of priceless anyway.

The truth is there are individuals who earn more and have more easily accessible wealth than the Catholic church does. And some corporation probably make more money in a year than the Catholic church has made in its entire history.

Then we can look at brutal dictators and governments who abuse and manipulate their own citizens and the poor. But for some reason they get a pass.

[Jon.]

Originally Posted by Sherwood

The truth is there are individuals who earn more and have more easily accessible wealth than the Catholic church does. And some corporation probably make more money in a year than the Catholic church has made in its entire history.

Evidence?

If you are talking about the centralized organization at the Vatican, you are probably right, at least in terms of accessible wealth (ie. liquid assets). However, if you include all the dioceses of the church worldwide, I very much doubt it. According to this, one American archdiocese (Chicago) has assets of $2 billion, including a $1 bn "endowment", which I take to be assets that are relatively liquid, or at least not being used currently for purposes that are directly church-related.

Add that up around the world, and I very much doubt that there is a corporation that has made "more money in a year than the Catholic church has made in its entire history." Even putting that down to hyperbole, it is quite clear that the church is fantastically wealthy.

Having said that, though, it is also true that a large part of the church's value to humanity (I would perhaps argue virtually its only value to humanity) is as a repository for some of the great works of human creativity. I would no sooner see the great golden altars and chalices melted down or even sold off than I would see the Mona Lisa burned for fuel. I think the recent acquisition by the Holy See is consistent with this role and I do not condemn the Catholic church for it, though I do condemn it for many, many other things.

[Bob Blaylock]

Originally Posted by Sherwood

You cannot seriously suggest parting with or even destroying (melting) the incredible artwork that belongs to our civilization\humanity as much as it does the church.

Originally Posted by Jon.

Having said that, though, it is also true that a large part of the church's value to humanity (I would perhaps argue virtually its only value to humanity) is as a repository for some of the great works of human creativity. I would no sooner see the great golden altars and chalices melted down or even sold off than I would see the Mona Lisa burned for fuel.

Hmmm… what was that I was saying about some atheists representing the very worst of that of which they like to accuse religious people? What makes the principles expressed at the start of this thread and at several points in the course of it — any better than those of the Taliban?

[Sherwood]

Quote:

Add that up around the world, and I very much doubt that there is a corporation that has made "more money in a year than the Catholic church has made in its entire history."

If you look into it you will see that it is most likely an accurate statement, and i am referring to total wealth AFA liquid assets and that would not include going into the CEOs homes and ripping their paintings off the walls and selling them.

Quote:

though I do condemn it for many, many other things.

Such as?

[ceo_esq]

Originally Posted by Jon.

If you are talking about the centralized organization at the Vatican, you are probably right, at least in terms of accessible wealth (ie. liquid assets). However, if you include all the dioceses of the church worldwide, I very much doubt it. According to this, one American archdiocese (Chicago) has assets of $2 billion, including a $1 bn "endowment", which I take to be assets that are relatively liquid, or at least not being used currently for purposes that are directly church-related.

Add that up around the world, and I very much doubt that there is a corporation that has made "more money in a year than the Catholic church has made in its entire history." Even putting that down to hyperbole, it is quite clear that the church is fantastically wealthy.

Remember, on the other hand, that while the Church's aggregate assets may be significant (though its liquid assets seem to be tremendously overestimated by many posters here), its income is relatively small. Take the Archdiocese of Chicago, which you used as an example above. It's the second-largest U.S. archdiocese and includes roughly 1/500 of the world's Catholics. In 2006, it had just under $225 million in gross revenue from all sources. I think it's reasonable to expect that the Chicago archdiocese's "income per Catholic" is at least several times higher than the median across the worldwide Church. That would suggest that the annual gross revenue of all parts of the Roman Catholic Church is only a small fraction of the annual gross revenue of Wal-Mart Stores Inc. or ExxonMobil ($379 and $373 billion, respectively, last year). If it were a for-profit entity, I doubt the Church would make the Fortune 100. And on a similar basis, I suspect that the Church's total liquid assets don't begin to approach those of the larger multinationals.

[Jon.]

Originally Posted by Sherwood

If you look into it you will see that it is most likely an accurate statement, and i am referring to total wealth AFA liquid assets and that would not include going into the CEOs homes and ripping their paintings off the walls and selling them.

You made the statement, you back it up. I had a quick look, and posted evidence that the Archdiocese of Chicago has about a billion dollars of relatively accessible assets. I could not find the aggregate numbers on the rest of the world.

Originally Posted by Sherwood

Such as?

I'm not going to go into all my beefs with organized religion in general, and the Catholic Church in particular, on this thread.

Originally Posted by ceo_esq

Remember, on the other hand, that while the Church's aggregate assets may be significant (though its liquid assets seem to be tremendously overestimated by many posters here), its income is relatively small. Take the Archdiocese of Chicago, which you used as an example above. It's the second-largest U.S. archdiocese and includes roughly 1/500 of the world's Catholics. In 2006, it had about $225 million in gross revenue from all sources. I think it's reasonable to expect that the Chicago archdiocese's "income per Catholic" is at least several times higher than the median across the worldwide Church. That would suggest that the annual gross revenue of all parts of the Roman Catholic Church is only a small fraction of the annual gross revenue of Wal-Mart Stores Inc. or ExxonMobil. If it were a for-profit entity, I doubt the Church would make the Fortune 100. And on a similar basis, I suspect that the Church's total liquid assets don't begin to approach those of the larger multinationals.

(my bold)

But it's not. And as such, its costs to achieve those revenues are far, far lower than Wal-Mart's (which operates on a notoriously slim profit margin) or even ExxonMobil's. Aside from which, the poster initially said that the church had brought in less in its entire history than some companies make in a year. Even allowing for some hyperbole, that has to be wrong by several orders of magnitude.

[Jon.]

Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock

Hmmm… what was that I was saying about some atheists representing the very worst of that of which they like to accuse religious people? What makes the principles expressed at the start of this thread and at several points in the course of it — any better than those of the Taliban?

Um, Bob? You did see that I was defending the church on this issue, didn't you?

[ceo_esq]

Originally Posted by Jon.

Aside from which, the poster initially said that the church had brought in less in its entire history than some companies make in a year. Even allowing for some hyperbole, that has to be wrong by several orders of magnitude.

I think it probably is. I wasn't contradicting you there.

[Sherwood]

Originally Posted by Jon.

You made the statement, you back it up. I had a quick look, and posted evidence that the Archdiocese of Chicago has about a billion dollars of relatively accessible assets. I could not find the aggregate numbers on the rest of the world.



I'm not going to go into all my beefs with organized religion in general, and the Catholic Church in particular, on this thread.




(my bold)

But it's not. And as such, its costs to achieve those revenues are far, far lower than Wal-Mart's (which operates on a notoriously slim profit margin) or even ExxonMobil's. Aside from which, the poster initially said that the church had brought in less in its entire history than some companies make in a year. Even allowing for some hyperbole, that has to be wrong by several orders of magnitude.

Dude, no offense but i think your talking out of your...

[Jon.]

Originally Posted by Sherwood

Dude, no offense but i think your talking out of your...

Thank you for your well-reasoned, well-supported argument.

[Sherwood]

Originally Posted by ceo_esq

I think it probably is. I wasn't contradicting you there.

The richest person is worth 60 Billion and that is one persons personal wealth. Jon mentions that the whole Chicago Diocese is worth 1-2billion and that is probably the wealthiest.

The fact is the wealth of the Catholic church does not come close to the largest corporations...Not even close.

wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil

[Sherwood]

Originally Posted by Jon.

Thank you for your well-reasoned, well-supported argument.

Well i just wanted to discuss it and since you mentioned it i thought you did too.

[Jon.]

Originally Posted by Sherwood

Well i just wanted to discuss it and since you mentioned it i thought you did too.

So you insult me and consider that a discussion do you?

[Foster Zygote]

As Stephen Colbert (a Roman Catholic) said, "The Vatican knows all about poverty. They have many priceless works of art depicting it."

[Sherwood]

Jon, I came here for debate. Do you have anything to add to this discussion or are you just playing games?

[Jon.]

Originally Posted by Sherwood

Jon, I came here for debate. Do you have anything to add to this discussion or are you just playing games?

I said what I have to say. You accused me of "talking out [my] ..." Who's playing games now?

[Sherwood]

Quote:

I said what I have to say.

Good.

[geni]

Originally Posted by Jon.

Evidence?

If you are talking about the centralized organization at the Vatican, you are probably right, at least in terms of accessible wealth (ie. liquid assets). However, if you include all the dioceses of the church worldwide, I very much doubt it. According to this, one American archdiocese (Chicago) has assets of $2 billion, including a $1 bn "endowment", which I take to be assets that are relatively liquid, or at least not being used currently for purposes that are directly church-related.

They are being used to generate income to cover costs. Get rid of them and well perhaps a few hospitals or schools close. Not critical but anoying.

Quote:

Add that up around the world,

What makes you think anywhere else comes even close.

Quote:

and I very much doubt that there is a corporation that has made "more money in a year than the Catholic church has made in its entire history." Even putting that down to hyperbole, it is quite clear that the church is fantastically wealthy.

Technicaly yes because it owns a lot of land. However most of that land is in used for well churches and the like which makes it hard to sell. Some land is being freed up as the number of monks and nuns falls but that is takeing time.

[Jon.]

Originally Posted by geni

They are being used to generate income to cover costs. Get rid of them and well perhaps a few hospitals or schools close. Not critical but anoying.

Well, I'm not a big fan of religious institutions being in the schooling or healing businesses anyway. And who was advocating getting rid of them? I only pointed it out to show the wealth at the church's disposal.

Originally Posted by geni

What makes you think anywhere else comes even close.

I was unable to find a systematic study of the world's Catholic dioceses and the degree of wealth at their disposal. Do you know of one? I suppose I should be asking Sherwood, as s/he is the one that made the claim about the relative wealth and income levels of the Catholic church and corporations, but he doesn't seem interested in anything other than insulting me.

Originally Posted by geni

Technicaly yes because it owns a lot of land. However most of that land is in used for well churches and the like which makes it hard to sell. Some land is being freed up as the number of monks and nuns falls but that is takeing time.

And this is different from a corporation how? Walmart owns huge amounts of land - all included in its statements of assets - on which it operates its stores. ExxonMobil owns drilling rights worth billions of dollars that, while they may not be so difficult to sell, are fairly integral to the company's operations.

[PBTree]

Hmm. I always thought that churches were presumed to be non-profit organisations and any profit(s) were supposed to be ploughed back into keeping themselves going and helping their followers. I also thought this was one of the reaons why they are given tax breaks by the government.

Must have been a mistake on my part.

Also remember reading an article a few years ago about the vatican bank and the mafia. From what I can remember, the vatican's investments were enormous, with very little of the amounts being made public.

A billion or so 'micks' in the world. Let's say 25cents each a week into the beggar tray = ~$13bil per annum. Not bad work if you can get it.

[skeptic of oz]

The Vatican have turned hypocrisy into an art form...

[Sherwood]

Originally Posted by PBTree

Also remember reading an article a few years ago about the vatican bank and the mafia. From what I can remember, the vatican's investments were enormous, with very little of the amounts being made public.

A billion or so 'micks' in the world. Let's say 25cents each a week into the beggar tray = ~$13bil per annum. Not bad work if you can get it.

I know where you read that from. Not an article but a web site that you are embarrassed to link to.

[Elizabeth I]

Fine. If the Vatican is part of humanity's "patrimony," let the church give it to some non-profit NGO to operate as a tourist attraction. They can charge admission and send the money to feed the hungry. The pope and cardinals and archbishops and bishops and priests can go live in modest housing, throughout the world, where they can "minister."

And nobody said the art had to be sold to private collectors, or destroyed. It could still be seen, and enjoyed, in museums.

I'm not saying the stuff has to be destroyed. I'm just saying a bunch of men who took vows of "poverty" might try abiding by them.

[Sherwood]

Quote:

I'm not saying the stuff has to be destroyed. I'm just saying a bunch of men who took vows of "poverty" might try abiding by them.

Well yes but everyone seems to treat poor people like **** and no one listens to them so the church would completely disappear leaving the real hard core fanatics and fundamentalists.

Organised religion can disappear tomorrow as far as i am concerned but the Catholic church is fairly liberal by most standards.

[Foster Zygote]

Originally Posted by Sherwood

Organised religion can disappear tomorrow as far as i am concerned but the Catholic church is fairly liberal by most standards.

As long as you aren't dying of AIDS in Africa.

[JoeTheJuggler]

Quote:

"The "Wisdom Books," a limited edition reproduction of one of the Old Testament volumes of the 1,150 page-Bible -- measuring 2 feet tall and 3 feet wide when open -- was presented to the pope during a private audience. He will receive the remaining six volumes over the next four years.

I saw that infomercial.

Every other month, Time-Life will send out the next installment for Benedict's inspection. He can return it with no obligation and no questions asked. If he decides to keep it, he just makes three easy payments of $19.95. . . .

You'll want the whole set for your family's enjoyment. . . .

[Foster Zygote]

Originally Posted by JoeTheJuggler

I saw that infomercial.

Every other month, Time-Life will send out the next installment for Benedict's inspection. He can return it with no obligation and no questions asked. If he decides to keep it, he just makes three easy payments of $19.95. . . .

You'll want the whole set for your family's enjoyment. . . .

"Harod was so mean he once shot a man just for snoring."