Replies

In addition, the Lord God, creator of heaven and earth, deserves the best that we can give Him. These things show our love for Him, just as when you love your spouse or children, you want to give them presents. These things of beauty are our presents to Him, our gift of worship.

Really??? What's God going to do with all that junk???

Besides, you didn't give it to God...It's still in your church and owned by those people in Rome...

Millions upon millions upon millions of dollars worth of gold and jewels that were paid for by the people of your church...

I'm just guessing but I'd bet God would love for you to sell that junk and use the proceeds to 'feed His sheep'...

.It's still in your church and owned by those people in Rome...

We interrupt this fantasy to bring a little reality into the conversation. I note that my earlier query, to wit: WHAT jewelry, went unanswered.

Now I add that the most of the gold in our diocese is owned by the bishop as a "corporation sole", not y the Vatican, and I don't see the bishop handing it over just because the Vatican says it wants it. And some of the other property, either real or chattel, including gold or at least gold plate is owned by religious orders, which are notoriously protective of such autonomy as they have.

WHile the diocese legally has title to the diocesan churches and their chattels, in practice the diocese gets a percentage of the each church's income from whatever source, unless other arrangements have been made, as they often are.

The idea of a Pope who combines in himself plutocrat and autocrat is a fantasy, but ...

We now return you to your fantasy, already in progress.

I'm just guessing but I'd bet God would love for you to sell that junk and use the proceeds to 'feed His sheep'...

ON the contrary, "Worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness ..."

This is a conservative forum, and you don't get what's wrong with that thinking?

The money spent on chalices, organs, music, and vestments and the occasional statue employs organ makers, textile artists, workers in gold and silver, and other artists. IT rewards creativity and the manufacture of beautiful things and keeps certain arts and crafts alive.

If that same money and the beautiful things it provided were all converted to cash and given to the poor, it's not clear if that would be a real benefit to them. And in any case, despite their somewhat pinkish hue, I'd wager that the various Catholic relief organizations of various kinds have provided education, health, housing, and other sorts of welfare unmatched by any other NGO. While Protestants mock and disparage religious orders like the Vincentians and others, they have provided services when no one else would with religious brothers and sisters providing much of the human resource component at very low (comparatively) cost.

Throughout the past several hundred years, money spent on art by the Catholic Church and other Christian bodies has provided employment and opportunity for, I'd guess, thousands of artists, many of whom would have had a tough time without church related commissions.

No, it's not perfect. But to suggest that it would be significantly improved if Churches eschewed the use of beautiful things in their worship is silly.

It reminds me of one polemicist for the Protestant side who pooh-poohed my reaction the first time I heard the Salve Regina sung. She supposed that the whole thing was surrounded with incense and "flowing robes" and that that was what swept me away. Obviously she didn't get that in many religious orders the austerity extends to worship, and that not all RC worship is carried out with the full complement of gee-gaws and knick-knacks, but that when it is it can be very beautiful.