Easter parade on Fifth Avenue in front of St. Patrick’s Cathedral, 1904
Posted on 08/05/2014 11:54:37 AM PDT by NYer
CNN published an inflammatory and provocative piece of link-bait over the weekend criticizing the Catholic Church because some of the larger archdioceses happen to have “lavish homes” for their archbishops. In the process of concern-trolling for a religion he clearly despises, the writer, Daniel Burke, reveals how little he understands about the Catholic Church. Below are just seven ways he gets it wrong.
Easter parade on Fifth Avenue in front of St. Patrick’s Cathedral, 1904
1. They’re residences, not homes. The mansions included in this article are not the personal property of the bishops, but belong to the diocese. Every diocese in the world maintains a cathedral (sometimes multiple co-cathedrals), a chancery, and a residence for the bishop. In poorer countries, these are often the grandest buildings in the city. Typically these buildings are in close proximity to one another. Many of the cities included in this list happen to be some of the largest metropolitan areas in the country, also with the highest property values. Compounding this effect, the cathedral is usually located in a prominent location on a major street. Many of these residences were also built a century ago and the Church certainly doesn’t have to pay a mortgage for them.
2. The article compares the bishops to the idle rich, but in truth, the bishops are some of the most hard-working people in the world. In addition to attending to the administrative and judicial matters of their dioceses, bishops are also the leaders of multi-million-dollar charitable foundations and endowments and serve as the public face of the Catholic Church in the media. With all these duties, the bishop is still a priest and must say daily Mass, pray the liturgy of the hours, celebrate Eucharistic exposition and benediction, and according to Pope Francis, hear confessions. The bishops should live as close to their cathedrals as possible because every moment they spend driving around or in transit is time they could be using to care for their flock.
Highclere Castle, setting for PBS’s fictional “Downton Abbey”
3. The bishops’ residences are not exactly Downton Abbey. There are no armies of servants meticulously polishing the silver or rising at the crack of dawn to tend to massive fireplaces in every room. If the bishops have “lavish” furnishings and dinners, it is to raise money for the charities that the Church supports. Acquaintances of your humble writer who have been fortunate to attend one of these functions have attested that if anything, the dioceses spend too little on the maintenance and upkeep which befits the grandeur of these historic structures. Cardinal Dolan’s residence was once described as a “19th century funeral parlor.” According to the New York Times, Cardinal Dolan does allow himself the luxury of a chauffeur, for his Chrysler minivan. That’s not exactly the glitzy-ritzy image that the article would have you believe.
4. Perhaps CNN can run a hit-piece on the practice of many Protestant and secular charitable foundations which provide their leaders with multi-million dollar condominiums as a tax-free fringe benefit. Just this weekend, a Protestant charity purchased a Manhattan office building for $13 million. The same building also houses office for the NAACP and Big Brothers Big Sisters. Meanwhile, Trinity Episcopal Church–a mere parish, not even a diocese–owns real estate in Lower Manhattan estimated at around $2 billion, with a “B,” as in bling. Cardinal Dolan’s $30 million residence is chump change by comparison.
5. Pope Francis may have a small bedroom, but he still lives mere steps from the Basilica of St. Peter in the heart of Rome in a dormitory/hotel which cost roughly $20 million to build. If Pope Francis’s comments about frugality were an infallible dogma of the Church (which they are not), he would be equally guilty. It is exciting and wonderful to watch Pope Francis go out to minister to the people, but perhaps Daniel Burke forgets that basically every Pope has done this, whether they lived in a simple cell (albeit furnished with exquisite burled walnut and mahogany hardwoods) or the opulent Apostolic Palace. Indeed, Pope Francis is not the first to eschew the latter. Pope Julius II said, “I will not live in the same rooms as the Borgias lived!” The rooms remained disused and closed to public view until the pontificate of Pope Leo XIII several centuries later.
Martha and Mary Magdalene by Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio, c. 1598
6. Enemies of the Catholic Church feel free to quote scripture when it suits them, but by the same authority, Jesus told his disciples:
Now when Jesus was in Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, a woman came up to him with an alabaster jar of costly perfumed oil, and poured it on his head while he was reclining at table. When the disciples saw this, they were indignant and said, “Why this waste? It could have been sold for much, and the money given to the poor.” Since Jesus knew this, he said to them, “Why do you make trouble for the woman? She has done a good thing for me. The poor you will always have with you; but you will not always have me.
“[But] take care not to perform righteous deeds in order that people may see them; otherwise, you will have no recompense from your heavenly Father. When you give alms, do not blow a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets to win the praise of others. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right is doing, so that your almsgiving may be secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you.
Outward symbols of humility and charity are meaningless and empty show. What matters is what the bishops spend their time doing when they are awake, not where they sleep. Maybe CNN can do a piece showcasing a life in the day of an American cardinal. They do it for political candidates, corporate leaders, and entertainers. Why not also open a window on the tireless work of Cardinal Dolan or Cardinal George?
7. It’s easy to accuse the bishops of hypocrisy, but the same could be said of CNN. By Daniel Burke’s logic, the entire clergy–and perhaps the laity too–of the Catholic Church should abandon all worldly possessions and live as Jesus did. As long as a bishop has a warm bed and a homeless man is sleeping on a grate, one can foolishly argue that their positions should be reversed out of fairness. However, if it is morally wrong to live in a large house, shouldn’t Ted Turner (estimated net worth: $2.2 billion) sell all of his possessions and give the money to charity? If owning property is wrong, maybe the CNN media mogul could even follow the example of Saint Francis who was a rich man before giving up all his property and taking holy orders. Daniel Burke might want to run that argument by his boss before committing him to a life of poverty though.
In the long run, tearing apart these historic homes to make way for micro-apartments will not do very much. Tearing down the Church which has done so much good will ultimately only hurt the poor. The fact is, the Catholic Church has done more to help the poor than any other organization in the history of the world. Perhaps if CNN were interested in pursuing actual journalism, they could write an article about the top-ten Catholic charities that people can support, to, you know, actually help the poor.
Well whose guys are they? I say we lumber the Pentecostals with them and have done with it. I grew up in a Protestant minister's home and we never lived in any parsonages that were anywhere near opulent, a couple of them were complete crap. Now that I think of it though, the District Superintendents always had nice houses and cars...
How ironic that when it's Protestants, it's evil, but when it's Catholicism, it's OK or laudable because the priests don't really *own* the stuff.
They have it even better because they can live like kings at someone else's expense and don't have to worry about the bills and upkeep, or anything else.
I'd have to agree with you on that.....
Did Jesus wear religious vestments?
Seems to me that John the Baptist wore *unworldly* garments but I don't think camel's hair would thrill a lot of those already accustomed to the finer type.
The enemy's ?
"It was only after his death that his secretary, Macchi, would reveal that the Pope (Paul VI) often wore a hair shirt and a belt rough with knots that dug into his skin, to mortify the flesh."
"There was the Angelus at the window. I didn’t want to appear on the third floor, where Pope Pius and John had appeared. I would have perhaps dropped this unique dialogue with St. Peter’s Square, but it was full of people, faithful elderly folk, who waited - an immense and moving spectacle. But what is this great need to see a Man? We have become a spectacle!’ It is a sign, a symbol. ‘No, not for us, Lord!"
I understand that Pope St. JPII also was known to wear a hair shirt during his healthier days.
So who’s the pot and who’s the lid? It just means that two things (or people) that go together find each other.
Journalists who hate the Catholic Church (and most of them do) can do remarkably creative things!
The Catholic Church takes the words of Jesus Christ in the 6th Book of John, literally. "This is my Body. This is my Blood". Perhaps your faith denomination does not interpret scripture literally.
Given that a priest (or bishop or cardinal or pope) is in the presence of Jesus Christ during the consecration of the Eucharist, attire, appropriate to the reverence that should be shown to our Lord, is the dictate. For this, we turn once again to scripture for an explanation and justification.
For your brother Aaron you will make sacred vestments to give dignity and magnificence. You will instruct all the skilled men, whom I have endowed with skill, to make Aaron's vestments for his consecration to my priesthood. These are the vestments which they must make: a pectoral, an ephod, a robe, an embroidered tunic, a turban, and a belt. They must make sacred vestments for your brother Aaron and his sons, for them to be priests in my service. They will use gold and violet material, red-purple and crimson, and finely woven linen.
Exodus 28:2
The rest of the chapter gives details on each garment.
Nothing in the New Testament requires abolition of priestly vestments. Our Lord attacked the Jewish leaders for a number of sins, but he never condemned their priestly garb. It's true the early Church didn't use the Old Testament vestments, but this is because Christians didn't want to identify their leaders with the Jewish priesthood.
“Given that a priest (or bishop or cardinal or pope) is in the presence of Jesus Christ during the consecration of the Eucharist, attire, appropriate to the reverence that should be shown to our Lord, is the dictate. For this, we turn once again to scripture for an explanation and justification.”
This is of course a false argument. Not required at the Last Supper. Not taught in the New Testament Scriptures - anywhere.
“For your brother Aaron you will make sacred vestments to give dignity and magnificence. You will instruct all the skilled men, whom I have endowed with skill, to make Aaron’s vestments for his consecration to my priesthood. These are the vestments which they must make: a pectoral, an ephod, a robe, an embroidered tunic, a turban, and a belt. They must make sacred vestments for your brother Aaron and his sons, for them to be priests in my service. They will use gold and violet material, red-purple and crimson, and finely woven linen. Exodus 28:2”
This is telling. The only passage seized upon to justify wearing costumes in the church is a passage related entirely to Israel - that God laid out in detail. And yet no such instruction from God exists in Holy Writ for the church. You are left with a pagan wish and reading backwards into scriptures about Israel.
“Nothing in the New Testament requires abolition of priestly vestments.”
This is another false argument that makes silence a justification for action - and this used to justify doing things as the pagans did and still do.
“Our Lord attacked the Jewish leaders for a number of sins, but he never condemned their priestly garb.”
Why would he? Again, using an argument that has nothing to do with the church to justify imitating religions.
“It’s true the early Church didn’t use the Old Testament vestments, but this is because Christians didn’t want to identify their leaders with the Jewish priesthood.”
This is simply an opinion without grounding.
That CNN article actually makes me even more sympathetic to the bishops. If those are the worst CNN can come up with (and I suspect they’d have posted more impressive piles in lieu of San Antonio, Cincinnati and even Hartford if there were any), this is a smaller problem than they’d like anyone to think. If bishops need to sell residences to make diocesan finances work, fine. If they want to, if they believe they’re called to, great. (Cardinal O’Malley and Archbishop Chaput, as Capuchins, for example, most likely did it for both reasons.) Just because some CNN reporter wants to sit there in judgment and do the Colbert finger-wag at them? Absolutely not.
Hasn’t Osteen recently been seen in the company of Pope Francis?
Perhaps in the context of this article they are comparing notes.
In the OT, the priest served in the presence of God. The same is true for Catholic and Orthodox priests.
If you were invited to sit on the dais with an important dignitary in the company of other personages of great notoriety, how would you dress? Would it be your finest suit or sweats?
I either missed that or deleted it from my memory. I know he met with Copeland and Robison but I didn't know about Osteen. Great, I need another klonopin.
” In the OT, the priest served in the presence of God. The same is true for Catholic and Orthodox priests.”
Nah. In the OT, the presence of God was confined to the Holy of Holies. Today, God Himself is resident in every single believer. We are the temple of God.
“If you were invited to sit on the dais with an important dignitary in the company of other personages of great notoriety, how would you dress? Would it be your finest suit or sweats? “
Guess you better go buy a vestment for daily wear, if God now indwells you! Anything less wouldn’t be sufficient according to your argument...
Which gets back to the lack of Biblical support for any such practice in the New Testament scriptures. It is made up outta thin air.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.