I always noticed in some of the smallest, most impoverished villages in Mexico, had the most gilded lavish Catholic churches!!
Talk about completely missing the point of Christ to the rich young ruler, to "sell everything he had and give to the poor." The rich young ruler proved that his "god" was not God but his wealth and comfort.
Maybe the same could be said for the Vatican.
I’ve never quite understood this point.
Who do “the most gilded lavish Catholic churches” in “the smallest, most impoverished villages in Mexico” belong to?
It seems to me they are, at least in practical terms, the property of the villages and their people. It’s not like the priest or bishop is going to sell off the decor to live a more riotous life or pay off his own debts. That was a legitimate criticism back during the Renaissance, but not, AFAIK today.
And I’m neither Catholic nor a huge fan of the Church.
“.... the smallest, most impoverished villages in Mexico had the most gilded, lavish Catholc Churches!!”
What? God’s temple should look like a protestant gymnasium?
A peruse through Leviticus 25 might concern you. God was unduly fussy? And, given the travails of the age God should command such riches for the temple?
You mean like the one in Honduras that my parish has visited an aided over the years ... that doesn't have indoor plumbing, doors, A/C, electricity, etc.?