This is wrong on many levels.
First, the museums hold treasure for all people who wish to see them. While they belong to the Vatican they really belong to me and you, just like any other museum piece. I’m not sure why the pieces (many of them priceless) being redistributed all over would be a good idea.
And when that money was gone, then what?
And what would Italy say? How much tourism money goes towards keeping Italy afloat?
I would assume that much of the income goes towards operating the Vatican itself. Unlike us, it doesn’t print its own money.
The Vatican donates a lot of money. Catholics donate a lot of money. And yes, non-Catholic Christians do too.
Our Catholic idea is that we give glory to God in beauty (ties back in a fashion to the interaction between Jesus and Judas about the perfume that could have been sold).
I don’t think you’re a bigot or an idiot but do think this proposition has *serious* limitations.
I’ve seen interpretations where the word ‘benefits’ has been used rather than redistribution of money. Is that such a bad thing? Perhaps not. I do share the concern that the UN and other orgs are treated as overly legitimate but...
As a devout Catholic it does get tiring that I have to defend / explain the Pope’s words constantly. I miss B16.
“As a devout Catholic it does get tiring that I have to defend / explain the Pope’s words constantly. I miss B16.”
It would help if the current pope didn’t have a propensity to sound off without totally engaging his cranial matter first. It tends to negatively affect that infallibility thing.
Your post is invalid. See my challenge in this thread, then either put up or shut up.