1 posted on
08/04/2014 4:54:59 PM PDT by
NYer
To: Tax-chick; GregB; Berlin_Freeper; SumProVita; narses; bboop; SevenofNine; Ronaldus Magnus; tiki; ...
No mention of the palatial residences of some non-denominational ministers. Ping!
2 posted on
08/04/2014 4:56:02 PM PDT by
NYer
("You are a puff of smoke that appears briefly and then disappears." James 4:14)
To: NYer
"Jesus replied, "Foxes have dens and birds have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head."
Why do these religious leaders need opulent houses??
7 posted on
08/04/2014 6:41:26 PM PDT by
aMorePerfectUnion
( "I didn't leave the Central Oligarchy Party. It left me." - Ronaldus Maximus)
To: NYer
Some are rich, but how many are full of offices, dining areas and meeting rooms?
11 posted on
08/04/2014 7:42:39 PM PDT by
LadyDoc
(liberals only love politically correct poor people)
To: NYer
(By the way, did CNN snivel and whine like this when their own spiritual leader, B-stinking-O, moved into this very expensive mansion?)
14 posted on
08/04/2014 8:01:25 PM PDT by
Heart-Rest
("Our hearts are restless, Lord, until they rest in Thee." - St. Augustine)
To: NYer
Actually, the papal apartments still exist as they did, and the whole complex is still Tiara property, so to speak. Pope Francis simply chooses to live at the Casa Santa Marta instead. Which makes this whole story rather stupid from the standpoint of “Why can’t they be more like Pope Francis?” but whatever.
The residences are all very nice, to be sure. “Palatial” is stretching it, even for the larger ones. And the smaller ones...San Antonio in particular? That’s palatial? Seriously, CNN? Just stop right now.
15 posted on
08/04/2014 9:57:21 PM PDT by
RichInOC
("Catholic doctrine and discipline may be walls; but they are the walls of a playground."--GKC)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson