Alright, it's no secret by now that the church has a lot of money. The church is simply filthy rich. The massive spending of the Church is second only to government. And why? Because churches tax their people too. Every week, in church, there is communion, and then it's an unwritten rule that as they pass around the golden trays, you put money in them. And where does that money go? For some churches, it all goes straight into the organization. For some, almost all of it goes straight into the organization, and maybe a small amount into a charity. The point is, that all the money of the congregation goes right into the pockets of the people running the church, to do whatever they want with. For example, they could buy themselves a nice new car, a sprawling estate, and so on. And many of them do just that. A lot of mega-churches have even turned into businesses, opening stores in their church to earn even more dough. The Vatican is rolling in billions. Religion is a profitable line of work, because people feel obligated to give money to the organization that's helping them to heaven.

But, as we know.. Christianity boasts that it is a "new testament" religion. That they follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. One thing that's inconvenient about that for the churches, is that Jesus simply doesn't like rich people.

Let's take an example, where Jesus deals with a man much like a modern mega-church manager:


Or in Mark 25, where Jesus says:


How about Matthew 6:28 where he says that Christians should not concern themselves with what they have?


It would seem that Christians don't trust their lord to provide for them.

So, why is it that in a modern world, big Christian and Catholic leaders are so rich? It's because Christians cannot and do not want to live to the standard the Bible sets for them. Some people will say "Well, everybody sins. Jesus forgives our sins!", but, that proves that deeply religious people truly do use that as their "blank check", so they don't have to be "righteous" or follow their own rules.

Regardless of what any biblical reference you refer to i do not believe you speak for god. You have a good point but with so many different religions in this world it would be difficult for me to accept your judgement as the gospel truth.

I'm not trying to speak the gospel truth, I'm pointing out what a religious text says and how its followers don't even want to abide by it, or, they don't "practice what they preach".

neither you or me are judge,jury, or executioner. Religious text can be interpruted several different ways. Survivalism we all have debts and the overhead in churches is pretty costly. Its the few bad apples that spoil the bunch. It is better to pick through to find the good ones rather than throwing them all away. It would be a good topic." priest saves hundreds of starving children" now thatwould be nice to hear wouldn't it.

Religious texts say what they say, people interpret them differently because they don't want to read the simple meaning. They are written to be read and understood, not understood only after years of careful study.

If you actually read the stories, and look at the context you see that Jesus was pointing out that these people, the rich people he spoke with and about were more concerned with their physical wealth than with their spiritual wellbeing. It's not difficult for a rich man to enter Heaven because God doesn't like him, it's because the rich man is too concerned with amassing physical wealth and not with growing spiritually.

There are poor people who will fail to get into Heaven for the same reason, they spent their life attempting to get out of their physical poverty and never bothered to do anything about their spiritual poverty, to seek God's grace.

see somebody's own interpratation of the gospel. Mine differs and who is to say either one of us is right or wrong. Freedom is a beautiful thing isnt it. Thank god we are not radicals wanting to kill eachother because we believe differently.

There's a Television minister named Robert Tilton, that garnered the attention of an investigative news crew some years ago. Talk about living large! Rolls Royce's, mansions, seaside estates, thousands of dollar suits, you name it he's got it. He can't preach worth a damn, instead, what he does is he has his bible marked, every broadcast of his "service" where there is no congregation, just a TV studio of staff and himself. And he reads scripture that he follows up with asking viewers to send in money! Which he calls, "vows".

He once said, if you want got to hear you prayers you have to send money. Because god doesn't work for free! You show your commitment, and god will show his!

The tax exempt status for religious organizations helps quite a lot as well. Though when they have politicians speak in their services, or they address political topics and tell their congregation to vote a certain way, something dead Jerry Falwell was notorious for, it's a violation of the codes in that 501c3 tax exempt status. And as such one can petition to have that revoked, so that the church pays taxes. But it never happens. And meanwhile congregants and those in the surrounding parish, are hungry and desperate, and the church is rich and not helping that condition at all. But when you can sell people on the need of the church, to go to heaven, they'll buy anything you say. But that's the last you'll see of your money, if you first believe god needs the cash.

I knew a woman that knew a woman who went to Catholic charities for help. Her husband had been carrying on a long term affair, booted her out of the family home with their three kids, and said "See ya!" And closed the door in their faces. She went to CC that day. First question out of the mouth of the woman that served her was, and when was the date of your last confession?! The poor woman never thought to lie. "Three years!" Sorry, we can't help you.

Pathetic. Jesus would weep.

hey look some bad apples, in all actuality let he who is free from sin cast the first stone. lol

Clear indication that only Jesus was perfect and everyone else is human and will, to different degrees, express that imperfect status.

It would be nice to hear, unfortunately all it takes is one "preacher" wearing Armani and a Rolex to overshadow all the good work of a single "man of God". That's the nature of our media unfortunately. As a matter of fact, I just got an interesting idea for yet another thread!

that is true you hit the nail on the head.

With all respect, I don't see how bad apples or stones, can pardon a charity letting to suffer a homeless mother and three children, simply because she didn't attend confession in three years. She didn't tell a priest her sins, and seek his pardon as intermediary between herself and the all power of creation and created. So she's worthy of leaving catholic charities, shamed for that, by the woman that made her feel it was now her fault she was going to remain homeless and her children go hungry. Religious euphemism is worthless, to a hungry belly and a homeless family. But that woman, that was happy to turn them away, couldn't say she, as a bad apple, would face the same fate at the end of her shift, now could she!?

I knew a person that went to Catholic charities for help, and got that help free of charge (other than legal fees) despite the fact that he was NOT even a Catholic! Seemed like the "Christian" thing to do I guess...

my point is that cc is going to live with the reprocussions of that decision if any. I on the other hand would of helped representing no organization.

As would I. It's just a horrific testament to the debasement of "charity" and "compassion" , that a catholic woman and her babies would be refused, for something so trivial as what is clearly considered a major offense to the faith. She should have gone to another CC office and lied! When was the date of your last confession. "Yesterday!" "Now feed us, in the name of a catholic god of love. Ok!? " Tragic.

I always wondered how her husband was received, after having done that to his wife and children, being an adulterer in the eyes of the faith. That's why evil is born of deviant minds. No outside influence takes part, just the choice to be without conscience, is enough to evoke the characteristics in one's self. And her husband, was clearly evil. Can you imagine the mistress?! Hey honey, what happened to the wife and kiddies, didn't they use to live here!? Yes, but I kicked them out so we could be together. Ewww what's not to love?! She shouldn't have called herself his new woman, she should have nicknamed herself for the destiny that awaited his whim: "Next".

It is tragic. There a thousands of single moms on wellfare trying to raise their babies, i allways get frustrated when they are labeled wellfare bums. For the husbands sake i dont call it sin i call it a lack of self control or the evil within. You cant kick four mouths to the curb because you want to. You have an obligation especially if she has never worked a day in her life. its not like she can walk ino an awesome job with full benefits and an apartment. The transition should of been more proffesional. in my opinion

I understand that context. Is that not what these people are doing? And the bible is all-together just against wealthy people. Such as one of the descriptions of the horrible latter days is "people will horde gold", etc. And when Jesus is saying "do not worry about providing for yourself, God will provide".. there's not a single Christian on the earth who would do that. Because their God would not provide for them, they'd live in poverty, and they'd die.

I knew a priest, a very close family friend, that simply stopped taking a salary. He only took what he needed--if he needed some clothes, he would ask for just enough to cover that expense. If he needed some gas--he would just take that. He drove an old car and never asked for another. His needs were very little, and he saved our parish a great deal of money. They, in turn, were able to use this surplus to provide for families in our community needing the help. We started our own "Help Office" and never discriminated against those who weren't Catholic or who didn't believe at all. We even began sponsoring families from communist countries who wished to come to America and had no means. We would buy them a home and give them enough money to get established. Not all were Catholic, and a good part of them were athiests. I know all this because my sister worked at the parish.

He also stopped asking for tuition for children to attend the Catholic school in our parish. He did ask that families tithe--if they could not give money, they were asked to give of themselves in time. If they couldn't do that--they were asked to pray for the benefit of the community.

This lovely man, who had a heart of gold, died from cancer in his early 50's. We had to have his funeral service at the cathedral because so many people wished to be there to share in this occasion. It was standing-room-only in this huge church. There were rich people, but there were more poor people there--those whose lives he touched on a personal level.

This beautiful man touched more lives that Robert Tilton, I think. But we don't hear about him until one of us who loved him takes the time to share.

How many more of these men are out there, quietly living his life for God? Probably more than we think. And all we hear about are the Robert Tiltons and Jimmy Swaggarts. All we hear about are the child molesters. Only the negatives are brought to light--so few hear about the good that is being done. It's very old cliche'--please--get a new one.

Sounds like a wonderful person. I only wish there truly were more. The cliche exists not because we want to hear what's bad about priests, it exists because it's happening over and over again. What's sadly much more rare is stories like yours. And they should be quite common if people would abide by what they claim to be their own moral fiber.

You know, not all churches horde money from their congregation, and the money that those churches DO get doesn't all go to the pastors and church administrators.



Not against the wealthy, but against those who would rather have money than die. Who is to say that by having a job and getting money God is not providing for you? God is against the greedy and against those who would rather live happily in wealth regardless of their spiritual status. Those with money who truly love God, share it.

That was my own quote. Yes, there are those who squander money in God's name. We know this. I get upset when I see people building huge, extravagant churches that are unnecessary.

But no one talks about those that give every day of their lives for the good of others. They only want to point out the abusers. Why? Because it is more visible--usually on a bigger scale, and it proves their point--and in this thread, the point is that all priests are "hated" by God.

Again, generalizations and stereotypes like this have been used since the beginning of time to promote hate agendas. That's why I'm tired of it.

could you point them out. People have there own reasons for being angry, dont say you never have.

Heh--funny.


Ya' know--I hate hypocrisy. I hate it when I see priests misbehaving and becoming the "Sadducces and Pharisees" of our modern times.

Yes, Jesus hated that some used their religious influence for political or personal gain, as we all should.

But to condemn them all because there are a few--maybe more that we want--misusing their stewardship is sort-sighted and unfair.

I've known 6 priests in my lifetime, and only one of those men was not living as he should. Not great odds--but not all that bad.

We don't hear about the good guys unless they do something major. We don't hear about the visits to the elderly, the sick, the imprisioned. Our pastor recently saw us through a very difficult time when my mother almost died. He was a blessing to us.

I think we should be sure to point out hypocrisy but not make generalizations like this thread suggests.

Could we all do better? Of course. But instead of b*tching about those that aren't, why don't we do something more constructive--like join Habitat for Humanity or some worthwhile organization ourselves?

No wonder why they call it Organized Crime,,, oohhhh I am sorry I meant Organized religion. Look at the freaking Pope he has more Bling Bling then 50 cent. If I was to list religions and their misuse of power and money here goes:

1. Catholics (Sex with boys, extravagant churches, burning of people,Looking other way during Holocaust)
2. Islam Sunni/sh**e ( Just check out CNN or any other News or just pick up history book)
3. Other Christians (Quakers: No beer in groceries, Mormons: Thought blacks as inferior, also confuse game hunting with shooting a small roach (Mitt Romney), Black Churches ( Gave us Al SHarpton),
4. Hindus: Have a freaking caste system.
4. Jews not that bad since they dont try to convert anybody, all I can blame them for is poor fashion taste.
5. Buddist: Actually pretty cool religion gives you reincarnation, peace love and all that good stuff also gave us Kung Fu.

God hates Christians and loves Atheists

Im glad for once that god agrees with me. i hate priests also. lol.

Any one else notice the irony here? Or did I just eat a bad egg-roll?

Removed a few off-topic posts from this thread from a certain individual as well as the responses to them.

Apologies for the disruption.

lmfao i think its irony

What was the irony exaclty?

I kinda agree. The church i go too doesent ask for money, of course evey now and then I support them, and donate. But theyre very free going and tell us were the money is going usually its to a outreach trip or to go help somewhere in the world. Nevertheless i dont even go to church that much, i dont think church means jack. If you actually believe in god you should be able to speak to him anywhere or anytime. So really church isnt even needed, but it is nice to go some times.

This was a hot debate topic in the 20s and 30s-- that is, the 1320s and 1330s. Franciscans were touting the poverty of Christ and the Apostles and saying that by extension the Church should not own any material things, much less the lavish things it did own. This was declared a heresy. I believe it was mainly the Dominicans arguing the other side. The prospect of two mendicant orders fighting it out over gold crosses and such seems pretty funny to me. Anyway, there are texts that survive from that period, and they exhaust the debate in mind-numbing detail.

While I understand the logic behind removing the posts in question, I think you could easily equate them with the bias and prejudice being addressed in this very topic.

After all, "God hates Priests" is the Topic title, and the statements that you deleted, could easily have included God hates Priests in them.



The above quote actually fits in with this very topic, "God hates Priests".

Now, lets really examine this. What priests? Catholic priests? And why would someone presume to tell us who god hates? Lets leave that to the bigots and fear-mongers of the world. Blanket statements are dangerous, and not really thought provoking. Rather they inspire hate. It's the tool of groups like the old Black Panthers, the KKK and other white supremacy groups, the anti-Chinese movement in the age of the early US railroads, to name but a few.

If God hates priests, so be it. Leave it to the divine. We mortals have laws that should be used to take care of the mortal aspect of criminal priests as well as other citizens of our planet. God should have nothing to do with our earthly laws.

When you call us Hate mongers arent you also guilty of a blanket statement?

Excellent points, EQ.

Of course--this won't fly well with the opposition, because it makes sense.

I don't think EQ was calling you a hate monger, Oxy--his statement was: He was actually calling people who presume to tell us to who god hates a bigot and fear-monger. I don't understand why you would put yourself in that group--are you also telling us who God hates?

They didn't, they contained statements such as "I'm bored" which have nothing to do with this topic at all and which is why they were removed.

I tend to agree with this, in fact I really can't see much good coming from a topic with a title that starts with "god hates".

Already this topic has generated several reports, post deletions and a couple of complaints within it's first two pages worth of responses; under the circumstances I think it's best that we put this one to bed.