|
Post by OpiateOfTheMasses on Mar 20, 2017 19:05:31 GMT
Looks like you're wrong: www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/nyregion/10indulgence.html?ref=usThey're not quite the same as they were in the middle ages, but they are Indulgences... And whilst the NHS spends money on health care it's goal is to try to spend as much as possible on healthcare. When religion spends money on healthcare, it's goal is to be seen to be doing good to encourage people to donate more money to them so they can continue to live well and not have to get proper jobs. So the "indulgences" in your article are not remotely the same thing. Your comment about the church spending on health is a crazy Tory Col Blimp piece of deliberate nonsense. So according to you, the RC Church runs hospitals, schools and rest homes so that the poor can be lazy? Incredible. Well I wouldn't describe the priesthood as poor. They certainly have enough money to pay off the kids they've sexually abused. Many of the schools / hospitals /etc are funded by volunteers raising the funds the themselves whilst the Vatican bank sits on billions and bishops and cardinals live in palaces surrounded by countless works of art. The concept of a vow of poverty is a complete joke.
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Mar 20, 2017 20:23:26 GMT
They do indeed exist. And the point is that the Church DOESN'T spend it's billions on the poor, as it should. Because you say so? What do you imagine that the church spends its money on? Are all the RC schools and rest homes in my city imaginary? All the missions medical and otherwise around the world don't exist? Or is your friend Opiate right snd they do exist but only to make the church "look good"? No, because they still exist. If you can't be arsed to check the validity of your argument don't blame me. And I'm not talking about what the Church spends. I'm talking about what it holds in assets. These are worth billions.
|
|
|
Post by awhina on Mar 21, 2017 1:39:47 GMT
So the "indulgences" in your article are not remotely the same thing. Your comment about the church spending on health is a crazy Tory Col Blimp piece of deliberate nonsense. So according to you, the RC Church runs hospitals, schools and rest homes so that the poor can be lazy? Incredible. Well I wouldn't describe the priesthood as poor. They certainly have enough money to pay off the kids they've sexually abused. Many of the schools / hospitals /etc are funded by volunteers raising the funds the themselves whilst the Vatican bank sits on billions and bishops and cardinals live in palaces surrounded by countless works of art. The concept of a vow of poverty is a complete joke. Utter nonsense. The church pays compensation to "abuse victims" - often in advance of any proof, and has been caught out by paying huge sums to accusers who were found to have been lying as was the case of one man who was prosecuted by the police and sentenced for fraud. Needless to say he didn't pay back the $1000000s in compensation he had been given. As for schools and hospitals funded by volunteers while the church "sits back" - you've been watching too many movies. Are there any actual churches in your town? Maybe you could go visit one some time.
|
|
|
Post by awhina on Mar 21, 2017 1:45:42 GMT
And I'm not talking about what the Church spends. I'm talking about what it holds in assets. These are worth billions. And this is not permitted why? A multi-national organisation serving billions, and staffed by millions isn't allowed to hold assets, why?
|
|
|
Post by progressiveelement on Mar 21, 2017 2:42:10 GMT
And I'm not talking about what the Church spends. I'm talking about what it holds in assets. These are worth billions. And this is not permitted why? A multi-national organisation serving billions, and staffed by millions isn't allowed to hold assets, why? Huh. Screw with their assets, bang! You're hanging dead from a bridge with bricks and a shitload of money stuffed in your pockets.
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Mar 21, 2017 3:58:59 GMT
And I'm not talking about what the Church spends. I'm talking about what it holds in assets. These are worth billions. And this is not permitted why? A multi-national organisation serving billions, and staffed by millions isn't allowed to hold assets, why? Who said they were not allowed to hold assets? I'm sure millions of dollars worth of art help the poor and save the souls of millions. OR they could not be massive hypocrites and use their wealth to help the starving. Just saying.
|
|
|
Post by awhina on Mar 21, 2017 7:04:04 GMT
And this is not permitted why? A multi-national organisation serving billions, and staffed by millions isn't allowed to hold assets, why? Who said they were not allowed to hold assets? I'm sure millions of dollars worth of art help the poor and save the souls of millions. OR they could not be massive hypocrites and use their wealth to help the starving. Just saying. You are lying. They already use the money to help the starving - who will if Christians don't? But you need to deny that, so I am not wasting my time on you any more.
|
|
|
Post by tickingmask on Mar 21, 2017 10:10:03 GMT
Who said they were not allowed to hold assets? You did, in one of your earlier statements: "the Catholic Church should not have wealth."
But maybe 'having wealth' and 'holding assets' are two entirely different things.
|
|
|
Post by progressiveelement on Mar 21, 2017 10:26:04 GMT
Who said they were not allowed to hold assets? I'm sure millions of dollars worth of art help the poor and save the souls of millions. OR they could not be massive hypocrites and use their wealth to help the starving. Just saying. You are lying. They already use the money to help the starving - who will if Christians don't? But you need to deny that, so I am not wasting my time on you any more. Throwing money you can afford to lose at poor people so you can say "WE CARE". What saints.
|
|
|
Post by OpiateOfTheMasses on Mar 21, 2017 22:46:38 GMT
Who said they were not allowed to hold assets? You did, in one of your earlier statements: "the Catholic Church should not have wealth."
But maybe 'having wealth' and 'holding assets' are two entirely different things.
They can be different things. An investment that pays regular dividends is an asset that earns you an income that you can spend. A valuable antique locked away somewhere that no-one can see it or a palace that just for the use of some senior member of the church is just "having wealth" because the only way to turn them into money you can spend is to sell them. You can even have assets that you don't entirely own. You can lease assets too. Examples of these might include agricultural machinery or industrial plants. But I think we're going on a bit of a tangent. Suffice to say "having wealth" and "holding assets" can definitely be different things.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 22, 2017 1:54:13 GMT
We should have a Catholics is rich thread!
|
|
|
Post by ProjectError on Mar 22, 2017 2:12:53 GMT
As far as I can tell the only difference is "respectability" or how established they are in society. I'm sure when Christianity started it would have been seen as a cult just like Scientology is still seen as a cult by many now. Or is it a religion? I genuinely don't know... So is there a hard and fast rule that I'm not aware of? I know "religion" sure sounds a lot better than "cult" so people aren't going to want to say they're in a cult, but other than that...? A cult is just a condescending term for religion. A member of a group would never identify their own group as a "cult." It's a pejorative term used by members outside of that group who disagree with it. A Baptist may say Catholicism is a cult. A Catholic wouldn't call Catholicism a cult. There's no right or wrong answer to that: it's subjective to the perceiver. Basically, a "cult" is a religion or belief system that a member of a different religion of belief system disagrees it may refer to it as.
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Mar 22, 2017 6:54:17 GMT
Who said they were not allowed to hold assets? I'm sure millions of dollars worth of art help the poor and save the souls of millions. OR they could not be massive hypocrites and use their wealth to help the starving. Just saying. You are lying. They already use the money to help the starving - who will if Christians don't? But you need to deny that, so I am not wasting my time on you any more. I'm not lying. The Catholic Church has billions of dollars worth of assets. Do you know what an asset is? They quite clearly don't spend assets on the poor, because if they did they wouldn't have assets.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2017 7:05:28 GMT
They do indeed exist. And the point is that the Church DOESN'T spend it's billions on the poor, as it should. Because you say so? What do you imagine that the church spends its money on?
|
|
|
Post by awhina on Mar 22, 2017 7:24:29 GMT
Because you say so? What do you imagine that the church spends its money on? Very childish
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Mar 22, 2017 8:05:51 GMT
What? A man in a dress wearing a fancy tea cosy as a hat, sitting on a golden throne, telling everyone how if they really love his imaginary friend they get to go to "heaven" for ever and ever and ever? Whats childish about that?
|
|
|
Post by awhina on Mar 22, 2017 8:10:05 GMT
What? A man in a dress wearing a fancy tea cosy as a hat, sitting on a golden throne, telling everyone how if they really love his imaginary friend they get to go to "heaven" for ever and ever and ever? Whats childish about that? I have already told you that I have no interest in further attempts to penetrate your wall of hatred and ignorance. Further trolling doesn't make you look any better.
|
|
|
Post by progressiveelement on Mar 22, 2017 13:09:15 GMT
What? A man in a dress wearing a fancy tea cosy as a hat, sitting on a golden throne, telling everyone how if they really love his imaginary friend they get to go to "heaven" for ever and ever and ever? Whats childish about that? I have already told you that I have no interest in further attempts to penetrate your wall of hatred and ignorance. Further trolling doesn't make you look any better. Do you approve of such extravagance? Do you think God moulded the chair for his representative?
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 22, 2017 13:25:56 GMT
I love the whole notion of the only good church is a broke church.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2017 13:33:37 GMT
I love the whole notion of the only good church is a broke church. Jesus said: "If you want to be perfect, go and sell what you own and give the money to the destitute, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come back and follow me." The churches seem to gloss over that bit, and live in gold palaces and opulence.
|
|