Religious capitalism

[Creator]

I know this could be controversial, but I will delete it if it causes arguments...

If money is the root of all evil - Why does the Church keep asking us to give them more of it?

The Churches have become wealthy beyond belief since they started taking control over peoples minds, and by that their wallets. The leaders of Cristianity (and several other religions) are religious megalomaniacs making their organisation wealthy from the money they steal from the poor and naive who look to religion for help, as well as the donations from the rich who think they can buy themselves free from sin and death. Churches will support any lunatic, any dictator who is willing to invest large amounts of money in the Church. I find the religious vulgo-capitalism sickening. And this doesn't only apply to Cristianity. I am against any organisation that wants to control peoples minds and rob them of their livelyhood when there is no need to. The Church is already rich - Why take more?

It's different when someone helps people in a spiritual way and charge for the time they devote to it and the material needed to do the things that are necessary and if they make a living out of helping others. Then it is justified to charge reasonable amounts of money or take donations. But the rich churches certainly don't need ordinary people to finance them. And that goes for charlatans who make gullible people with no hope left pay thousands to be cured of cancer too. Spirituality, faith and help in time of need should be free for all.

[pablo]

I wholeheartedly agree. But this is not a recent phenomenon. The sale of indulgences so irritated Martin Luthor that it lead to teh European reformation. An indugence was some kind of get out of hell ticket as it would absolve a sinner of a sin.

THe whole scam was supposed to be the key to the later "mysterious" welath of Rennes-le -Chateau which then (much later) gave us Dan Brown.

Best wishes

Pablo

[Summer]

I totally agree with you both.

[Creator]

Another thing that disturbs me is the love affair between the catholic church and nazism. Why the hell does religion and politics have to mix?

[pablo]

Well that was bad.

Let me say this. Iam a lukumi and I would hate it if the state religion of any country became Lukumi. "Church" and state should never mix.Because the purity of religion is corrupted by the inherent corruption of politicians of all shades.

The genuine message of religion is esoteric and should not be distorted by which ever scoundrel is standing for office.

Pablo

[Thorn]

I think that clergy have the right to earn a living - what they offer the congregation is of value and they should be compensated. I also believe churches that maintain a physical location (church, synagogue, mosque, etc.) have a right to collect funds for it's upkeep.

The problem is that there's so much room for corruption. Especially in the case of faiths that believe it is your sacred duty to tithe. Now, theoretically, any extra tithes that aren't needed for a reasonable salary for the clergy and for church upkeep should go to charity, right? At least in my mind that's how it would work. But there are so many con-men out there that see it as a cash cow. And people who feel their souls are at stake aren't going to raise a fuss. There are only so many Martin Luthers.

Where church and state mix, it only gets worse. Again, in a democracy I see nothing wrong with a church encouraging it's parishoners to vote according to their religious beliefs. It's when they get into active campaigning and lobbying that raises big red flags!

I think we can all agree that Catholics + Nazis = WTF? I don't get that. But then, the Catholic church has a pretty spotty reputation when it messes with politics. I don't remember who, but someone once said that the Englishman who caused the most pain and suffering in Ireland wasn't a King or Lord or military man. It was St. Patrick.

[casilda]

thorn said:

I think that clergy have the right to earn a living - what they offer the congregation is of value and they should be compensated. I also believe churches that maintain a physical location (church, synagogue, mosque, etc.) have a right to collect funds for it's upkeep.

I wholeheartedly agree and don't have any problem with making a donation to any Church I attend for whatever reason, whether it is of Anglican denomination or otherwise. The last village we lived in had a beautiful Church, right opposite our house, and the tragedy was that on most Sundays there were only about 6 members of the congregation, I went when I could, and I gave regularly, but it was by choice. The upkeep of the older Churches must be a burden, especially in areas where congregations are low.
But I don't agree with any religion or faith that demands or expects a portion of income or such specified amounts of money etc.......
I don't think there's any black and white answer, but it makes you wonder when you see the extravagance of certain palaces and residences etc......