Above is a link that shows the multi million dollar homes of many bishops
Will be interested to see the replies here, so subscribing. I do feel pleased when a news agency says something good about Pope Francis, however short:
“Say what you will, but this Pope puts his preaching into practice.”
He is exactly what the church needs just now- God made a good choice!
I think we have to remember that the church militant is a human institution for sinners to work towards salvation. It attracts bad apples, for sure. I’m sure many bishops have large, expensive to-run homes, but we should be wary of being too judgemental on the figures, if the homes also accommodate a large administrative component.
Whatever ‘wealth’ a bishop has is not their own, and they should still observe the vow of poverty they expect their priests to uphold.
We should nevertheless guard against abuses and charitably address situations where a bishop’s soul is in jeopardy.
This is a valid point,and has been an issue for I guess hundreds of years,
People should lead by example ,
Bishops, unless of the orders, do not take a vow of poverty. I am not going to judge when I hold four properties myself. A man can be good and still have inherited a home occasioned by his position. A lot of these properties were the historical result of property acquisition that has been very profitable for the church around the world.
A man can live in poverty in a palace, if the poverty is in his heart.
I agree, our beloved pontiff is really living his vows, but he is an order priest.
If you think that’s bad, you should see their cathedrals.
Bill Donohue at the Catholic League neatly deflates this thinly disguised bit of anti-Catholicism, and I append his comments below.
The fact that the bishop’s residence is expensive and large does not mean that it is lavish or luxurious, nor does it speak to the personal living arrangements of the bishop.
For example, Pope Benedict lived in the papal residence but he himself lived in an apartment within the quarters in fairly austere and seemly manner.
The bishops residences are often offices, reception areas, and so on for the various diocesan functions, including fundraisers and the entertainment of visiting dignitaries. To attribute their entire cost and size to the personal living arrangements of the bishop is fallacious, and I believe CNN knew that going in.
From the standpoint of shepherding the resources of the diocese, it certainly less expensive for the diocese to own facilities than to rent them.
In order to avoid the appearance of luxury, some bishops have begun to emulate the Holy Father and obtain quarters elsewhere. This may not be less expensive since they need to maintain some premises for other than residential purposes, but it does remove the apparent traction of ill-founded articles like this one from CNN.
I see nothing wrong with public spaces being adorned just not private ones such as homes
I know that our bishop lives in a huge, expensive house, complete with these turret-looking things on top. Of course, it also houses about ten seminarians, a food pantry/distribution center, all of the Archdiocese offices, a place to stay for guests of the archdiocese, and meeting space for various local non-profits. So is his house big? Yes, but then again, it isn’t really his.
CNN doesn’t know what they’re talking about.
Firstly, Hotel Casa Santa Marta isn’t at all uncomfortable. It’s quite nice—I wouldn’t use the word luxurious, but it’s as good as any other hotel.
Pope Benedict lived in the Apostolic Palace, but his private rooms were small and unassuming (as a previous poster mentioned). The rest of the rooms in the Apostolic Palace were used for receiving and meeting space.
In the same way, Pope Francis lives in a room of the Casa Santa Marta, but an entire floor of the building is used for his reception and meeting space.
What everyone must also remember is that most media resources are leftist and use their influence over people to incite the “injustice” cry and to get people to harp on what THEIR (media) ideologies are.
i noticed in the article there was no mention of all the money used for charities and missions around the world. Why do they not mention this? because that would diminish their role to undermine God, the Church,** and control of American reaction-ism.
Thats right, they control your thoughts and feelings. when they keep tossing what they consider bad to the public, the public reacts in anger and becomes hostile, forgetting all the good that the Church does. This is how radicals work. The media controls what you see, hear, and now how you will react. this is Satan’s tool to destroy and control. Unfortunately, most Americans fall for this tactic and its destroying our country.
The Catholic Church - Largest Charitable Organisation on the Planet.
…I didn’t even know this until recently! (I’m ashamed to say!).