The creeping sense of hypocrisy derives from a misunderstanding, that is, that the cathedral is intended as an embodiment of the teaching and spirit of Jesus of Nazareth.
Clearly, such a magnificent display of wealth and power is dedicated to the worship of another, more worldly spirit. Otherwise, its like building a weapons grade antrax facility as a temple to Mahatma Ghandi. A massive, almost cosmic, oxymoron.
Further, if it did so embody J of N, wouldn’t it be crawling with hookers, beggers, lepers and tax collectors? Not to mention Pharisees (which I gather is Ahramaic for “lawyer”). No zoning commission in the country would approve. Local civic betterment leagues would not permit it to go forward.
The creeping sense of hypocrisy derives from a misunderstanding, that is, that the cathedral is intended as an embodiment of the teaching and spirit of Jesus of Nazareth.
Clearly, such a magnificent display of wealth and power is dedicated to the worship of another, more worldly spirit. Otherwise, its like building a weapons grade antrax facility as a temple to Mahatma Ghandi. A massive, almost cosmic, oxymoron.
Further, if it did so embody J of N, wouldn’t it be crawling with hookers, beggers, lepers and tax collectors? Not to mention Pharisees (which I gather is Ahramaic for “lawyer”). No zoning commission in the country would approve. Local civic betterment leagues would not permit it to go forward.
You (or anyone else) can’t honestly tell me that “god” would be thrilled at how the Catholic Church chose to spend 30 million on art rather than on a charity that the catholic church agrees with? I’m not saying that someone can’t spend their money how they choose, I’m just saying that, perhaps, there are more honorable ways to spend it.
Again, I’ll ask: Where in the article does it say that the church recently spent $30 million on artwork, instead of just having $30 million in artwork?
The Catholic Church has been around for a long time, and has accumulated a good deal of art and furnishings. It is not unreasonable to assume that a good portion of that amount is in previously acquired items.
…strolling back in the door…seeing that some clarifications are necessary… Eonwe, I agree with you that a company (or church, whatever) shouldn’t run itself completely out of funds before asking for more. That was kind of hyperbolic statement, you see.
Jimbrowski, I had not considered the Catholic Church’s population in comparison to the world’s. It’s a nice point; however, mine still remains: the Catholic Church has an immense amount of money available to it, either as outright cash or as stored artwork (and investments, etc). Yet the church heirarchy (and I stated preachers/rabbis/ministers specifically to point out that I was not targeting one specific faith, but generalizing all faiths) will go to its congregations first, before touching their treasuries.
Rickjay, what you are talking about (as pertains to my topic) would be the same as me sitting on a savings account with $100,000 in it and asking YOU for the $100 so I can help the poor. This is just wrong.
And BTW…I gave a total of $2500 cash last year to various charities (my salary is roughly $30K), not including the time I donated. You?
And the same applies to Scratch1300’s thought experiment. I could care less if the Catholic Church (or ANY church/synagogue/mosque/whatever) spends $10 BILLION on artwork…as long as they have done all they can to help the poor (such a demeaning phrase) first.
Just don’t ask your members for money while you have lots of it yourself.
Yeah, I thought my post of this went through yesterday but sadly it disappeared.
"While He was in Bethany at the home of Simon the leper, and reclining at the table, there came a woman with an alabaster vial of very costly perfume of pure nard; and she broke the vial and poured it over His head. But some were indignantly remarking to one another, "Why has this perfume been wasted? “For this perfume might have been sold for over three hundred denarii, and the money given to the poor.” And they were scolding her. But Jesus said, "Let her alone; why do you bother her? She has done a good deed to Me. "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. "She has done what she could; she has anointed My body beforehand for the burial. “Truly I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what this woman has done will also be spoken of in memory of her.” Mark 14:3-9
According to this, Catholic Relief Services has spent $650 million worldwide in 2000-01. Catholic Charities USA spent over $2 billion in 1999.
elucidator, people are always bringing up how Jesus hung out with hookers and tax collectors, but He also told them to “go and sin no more”. It’s not like it was just fine that they continue on an immoral path. I know that Jesus was humble about Himself and did not want His apostles to build Him structures, etc., but I don’t see how a beautiful building full of images that uplift the spirit in His presence is for an earthly entity??
Well, I’m not sure who would be best qualified to tell you the hypothetical motivations of a mythical being. But purely as an intellectual exercise…Who’s to say He wouldn’t be pleased? Such a magnificent place of worship to uplift the souls of his children? It’s inspirational, I tell you! (I’m probably going to get into trouble for this.)
I guess I’m just being terribly naive, but that sounds good to me.
For a project like this, there is a usually a targeted appeal for donations, so I don’t think it’s like the diocese raided money meant for another purpose in building the cathedral. Donors chose to put money toward this project and those who didn’t think it was a good cause gave their money elsewhere. Now, whether the motives of donors were to glorify themselves or their Church rather than God, I don’t know. The Church is made up of her members so these projects will only get as far as they are supported by them.
I am making this distinction because the tone of the discussion seems to be that the “hierarchy” of church leaders are doing their own thing with money they have collected regardless of the wishes of some duped set of church-goers.
No, I don’t think the Diocese raided money meant for another purpose. I guess I could expand my complaint to apply to 2 parties:
the church that asked for money to build this cathedral, instead of asking for money to help the poor, and
the people that donated to said church instead of slapping their church leaders upside the head.
My parents are very active in their church; my father teaches Adult Bible Study, for example. But when the church started making noises about building a new place of worship, Dad basically asked what was wrong with the old place…not over 15 years old, up to code, not close to being filled on Sunday…
Put the money where it is needed FIRST…THEN build your multi-million dollar edifices.
(I wonder if there is a dress code there…)
This, almost exactly, did cross my mind while I was typing the above post last night and I can’t say that I disagree with you. But, 30 Million could do a lot of good in so many other areas is my point.
That is certainly a valid point. If this is the case, I’ve got no problem whatsoever.
Quoting the Bible to gain moral authority is only justified if the orator (or poster, in this case) has any moral authority to begin with. This raises the question, Homebrew, how much moral authority do you have over anyone? If I can quote the Bhagavad-Gita until I’m blue in the face, can I then lecture Hindus on how well they are practicing their religion?
I submit that Homebrew (against whom I have no personal beef) and anyone else who quotes the Bible in a religion thread to use it as a tool to condemn another person’s actions is vastly overstepping the bounds of reasonable discourse in a forum such as this. Unless we all have met the person in question and know him/her well, their Bible-quoting is meaningless and without context.
Lizard, I see your point to some extent, but how do we judge moral authority? And if we don’t, isn’t the logical extension not to make any judgment at all, or for judgment to be rendered meaningless? Is it reasonable to post interpretations by other scholars or theologians about passages, or discuss their “accepted” meaning?
This comes back to discussions which have taken place regarding what makes “real” Catholic, or other religious person. Even if someone is behaving in ways that go against the teachings of Christ and by extension the Church as the interpreter thereof, the final judgment is up to God, not to mention the person has rationalized their behavior to themselves in some sense. Are these discussions then moot because God is the highest moral authority?
Well, I see where tis thread is becoming a discussion of theology and its fine points, instead of discussing using a congregations money for a building vs actually helping some needy people.
Well, I see where tis thread is becoming a discussion of theology and its fine points, instead of discussing using a congregations money for a building vs actually helping some needy people.
So the diocese builds a cathedral and furnishes it. They only people who can have a say on whether the money was well spent or not are the people who donated and support the diocese. Why anybody else would feel entitled to complain I do not know.
Now, the NEA spends more than that funding the arts and it is tax money taken from all Americans who pay taxes. The same reasoning can be applied to that money except taxpayers would be entitled to say it would be better spent feeding the poor or whatever.
Why do you have to pick on a private group? I hate it when you make me, an atheist, have to come in defense of people’s freedom to do whatever they want with their money. Go criticise the NEA for a while.
Certainly, this has some merits. However, it does have some flaws, namely, that I would consider it unreasonable and impractical to suggest that the Catholic Church liquidate itself of centuries-old artifacts and relics. These items are most likely the vast majority of the church’s “treasuries” and have a price labelled on them for insurance reasons, but how, exactly, do you find a marketplace for those things?
It’s like asking the military to liquidate itself of all of their stealth bombers and atomic weapons in order to fund public schools. A B-1 is worth millions of dollars, but selling it would be foolhardy.
