Easy to be Catholic, harder to be christian.

Amateurish

Hi y'all. I'm not pointing fingers here but ...at mass last week the priest asked us to think of those suffering famine. He didn't suggest that we empty our pockets and search the car for loose change. Wouldn't that be more appropriate when people are starving?
It's actually easy to be middle aged and Catholic here. It demands almost nothing of us. What are the big issues these days for the average RC Irish?
Divorce? Well I like being married so down with that sort of thing.
Abortion? I didnt need a priest to help me decide on that anyway.
Homosexuality? I'm not gay so again that was very easy to avoid wasn't it. (For the record I couldn't care less what happens between consenting adults, there are bigger issues for religion to worry about)
In any event I can't recall any of those ever being mentioned in a sermon so they are hardly issues are they?.
No priest ever asked me to try to prevent the killings in Palestine/Israel/Belfast/Iraq/.......
I've never been told to consider missing a meal so the beggar/junkie on the corner would eat. My local PP did whinge that his income was down several thousand on last years though....
My point? I dont really have one. I do think we've lost our way though. If the RCC leadership and priests led by example could they not become a real moral authority again? Would a couple of billion still follow them?

alex73

Well as a Catholic in Ireland day to day there is a lot that can be done.

Its good the priest has made you think.. You did start the thread. The worlds priorities a to put it bluntly Eucked up. We know poeple are dieing of hunger today, now and yet all eyes are on Money in Bonds and market sentiment, credit ratings. Who cares...


Lets not forget the Irish Society we live in today.. Each night in Dublin people sleep on the streets. In Ireland there is a shortage of foster parents. Thousands of children in Ireland today are abused in their own homes by their families.

My wife who is not Irish is often abused verbally by Irish (Immigrants... taking Irish Jobs) Not to her face, but you get people speaking over you, "is the manager about".

Many Catholics in Ireland don't even bother praying with their own kids.

Hundreds of Elderly people are neglected and not visited, Left to the care of the state, If every person from 20 to 50 spent 2 hours a week helping the Old it would mean a lot, Just the human contact.


As a Catholic, You should not expect the Priest to have tell you want to do. Your Faith should be calling you to action. And in Ireland today there are lots of Poor, either Materially or Mentally.

I worked for 8 years as a Catholic Volunteer.. No Pay. I hear about the Poor in Ireland and yes there are Poor, or people who are in circumstance and addictions that are hard to break,,, But outside Ireland in many countries there is real day to day poverty, with no food or hope of getting basic food.

Worst thing about Catholics in Ireland today is their tolerance of mediocrity. At the end of your life the only thing that really matters is what you did for others, for your family for humanity. Money, Career, how cares,

gimmebroadband

With adverts on radio and tv every 10 minutes about the plight of the starving, surely you didn't need the priest to repeat it again?? The priest was looking after the spiritually starved! Some churches have a box at the back of the church to collect money for the starving!!!

alex73

On people dying of Hungry in today's world, ultimately there is Gods Justice.

Imagine getting into heaven and there is queue.. Europeans Queue here, and as we queue we watch every person we abandoned on earth pass us into heaven, While we are left waiting.

What man does to fellow man is horrifying beyond belief. To be really hungry is torture, in Ireland there is no real hunger.. Food will be given if you are desperate. What is happening today in in Africa is a crime we are committing either by letting it happen or by no protesting against it.

Our humanity should guide us to know its torture to let a child die of hunger.

Its a nice work we live in where de-facto we spend today in Ireland more on feeding our pets than on feeding the poor of our own race.

alex73

Amateurish

Alex73, I genuinely admire volunteering of any kind, we badly need more of it. Again though I'm asking why does the church not lead by example? For a start open the churches at night time. So some of them will be vandalised. So what. Its far worse to have them locked while someone sleeps rough. It might open a few eyes to how real the problem is.
I dont expect the priest to tell me what to do. He's in no position to.
Gimmebroadband... Collection box at the back of the church? We are on a different wavelength. How about sell the parochial houses or the parish halls? Rather than telling us to think about the starving how about really doing something about it? It just might convince a few parishoners to follow the example then drop the rat race and do something worthwhile.
(I'm slow typing here just seen your recent posts Alex73)
I know there are real problems in the world. But where would Jesus be? In the oil heated church or among the poor. When has a priest challenged us to do something more substantial than rattle a euro in a box.

alex73

To be honest Church's are not great places at night. But I do know of Many priests in Ireland who do give their time and Money to the Poor, and there are many in Dublin.

Remember the Church is US, WE lead by Example. Many people go on about the wealth of the Vatican,,, How many people know there is also a Homeless Shelter there for the poor, Free accommodation, Food? (not the thing to report on in the news).

I know our Local parish priest has given a lot of his time to helping people, and his good nature has been abused by many heartless thugs looking for money for drugs, yet he tries to help everyone. And to be honest if anyone goes to a Priest looking for help most will help. Also there are many Nuns and Priests in the world who dedicate their whole life to working with the Poor, not an easy task.


Its a sad Ireland of 2011.. In the 80's we have a lot less money and we gave so much more.

Amateurish

Yes we are the Church but we dont lead by example. (Well maybe you and a few others do but the rest of us...not a chance) We are sheep who go to Church for a few minutes each week for guidance and leadership and I think its lacking. Every christian and every catholic home should be a homeless shelter but without some strong leadership this will never happen. Maybe thats why numbers are dropping, its about as challenging as going to the pub.

gimmebroadband

Amateurish wrote: »

Alex73, I genuinely admire volunteering of any kind, we badly need more of it. Again though I'm asking why does the church not lead by example? For a start open the churches at night time. So some of them will be vandalised. So what. Its far worse to have them locked while someone sleeps rough. It might open a few eyes to how real the problem is.
I dont expect the priest to tell me what to do. He's in no position to.
Gimmebroadband... Collection box at the back of the church? We are on a different wavelength. How about sell the parochial houses or the parish halls? Rather than telling us to think about the starving how about really doing something about it? It just might convince a few parishoners to follow the example then drop the rat race and do something worthwhile.
(I'm slow typing here just seen your recent posts Alex73)
I know there are real problems in the world. But where would Jesus be? In the oil heated church or among the poor. When has a priest challenged us to do something more substantial than rattle a euro in a box.

THE WORLD'S BIGGEST CHARITY is the Catholic Church.

http://www.zenit.org/article-22024?l=english

And a Bishop's field in Galway was donated to travelling families for a halting site, against the wishes of their affluent neighbours, who objected!!! These families had nowhere to go, and the Bishop stepped in to help!!

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-24923748.html
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-24925498.html

alex73

Ohhhh.... Charity to travellers in ireland is seen as a betrayal... And we wonder why they have no respect sometimes..

gimmebroadband

alex73 wrote: »

Ohhhh.... Charity to travellers in ireland is seen as a betrayal... And we wonder why they have no respect sometimes..

I have grown up with travellers all my life, and they are some of the most loyal and respectful people I have ever had the pleasure to meet. Their piety would put the rest of us to shame!!!

Amateurish

gimmebroadband wrote: »

THE WORLD'S BIGGEST CHARITY is the Catholic Church.

http://www.zenit.org/article-22024?l=english

And a Bishop's field in Galway was donated to travelling families for a halting site, against the wishes of their affluent neighbours, who objected!!! These families had nowhere to go, and the Bishop stepped in to help!!

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-24923748.html
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-24925498.html

I'm not here to be bashing the church, obviously I see the good it does or I wouldn't actively be RC. I dont think you're getting my point. At a much more personal level than those examples we aren't asked much. Yes I'm aware I could give more but nobody listens to me each Sunday. Imagine if the Pope took a vow of poverty and service to the poor, or if he called for real action on war, maybe visiting a warzone, with the local PP calling for us to do likewise - if only 0.1% of Catholics made real changes to their own lives as a result imagine what could be achieved.

robindch

Amateurish wrote: »

What are the big issues these days for the average RC Irish?

No offense, and no wish to topic-hop, but the one thing that I can't understand is -- given the self-inflicted problems over the last number of years -- why are people who call themselves catholics still going to mass?

Why is anybody still supporting that organization?

alex73

robindch wrote: »

No offense, and no wish to topic-hop, but the one thing that I can't understand is -- given the self-inflicted problems over the last number of years -- why are people who call themselves catholics still going to mass?

Why is anybody still supporting that organization?

Its not THAT organisation, its a church which WE are members of. Its OUR church.

Slav

robindch wrote: »

No offense, and no wish to topic-hop, but the one thing that I can't understand is -- given the self-inflicted problems over the last number of years -- why are people who call themselves catholics still going to mass?

Why is anybody still supporting that organization?

Perhaps they don't put the "=" sign between RCC and the given the self-inflicted problems. Do you think they don't have a point?

Manach

Because people like myself have made a conscience decision to look at the Catholic faith in total, judged that it is on balance good, and believe in it.
In response to OP, due to request from the pulpit, 10K was raised for the emergency in Africa. My own opinion is less aid, more foreign intervention is needed such as the USMC, but that is another thread.

Amateurish

robindch wrote: »

No offense, and no wish to topic-hop, but the one thing that I can't understand is -- given the self-inflicted problems over the last number of years -- why are people who call themselves catholics still going to mass?

Why is anybody still supporting that organization?

Can I refer you first to the Charter where it says "Christians should not have to defend their faith from overt or subtle attack."
Many here feel the Church is of itself holy so calling it an organisation is outright offensive. Of course being a mod you know that.
Now if you're done with the topic hopping and insults.. do you feel that if priests led by example with great acts of charity and kindness the rest would follow with similar acts?

Monty.

robindch wrote: »

why are people who call themselves catholics still going to mass?

Why would people who are Catholics not go to Mass ?

PDN

Amateurish wrote: »

Can I refer you first to the Charter where it says "Christians should not have to defend their faith from overt or subtle attack."
Many here feel the Church is of itself holy so calling it an organisation is outright offensive. Of course being a mod you know that.
Now if you're done with the topic hopping and insults.. do you feel that if priests led by example with great acts of charity and kindness the rest would follow with similar acts?

I suggest you let the mods do the modding here.

Amateurish

PDN wrote: »

I suggest you let the mods do the modding here.

Great idea. Are you going to?

PDN

Amateurish wrote: »

Great idea. Are you going to?

We are doing so. If you have a question about moderating please address it via PM rather than in thread. If you can try to avoid being a smartass then that would also be helpful.

Amateurish

PDN wrote: »

We are doing so. If you have a question about moderating please address it via PM rather than in thread. If you can try to avoid being a smartass then that would also be helpful.

PDN I'm not being a smartass anymore than you're being a dumbass. I'm stating fairly directly that you've ignored a post which was deliberately offensive. Apologies for doing this in thread but justice must be done and must be seen to be done....

twinQuins

PDN wrote: »

[...]try to avoid being a smartass[...]

Ho hum. I believe Matthew 7:5 is most appropriate here. Particularly the first two words.

Monty.

Fanny Cradock

Can we get back on track now folks?

Turtwig

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Can we get back on track now folks?

Asry

Amateurish wrote: »

It's actually easy to be middle aged and Catholic here. It demands almost nothing of us. What are the big issues these days for the average RC Irish?

I'm not middleaged but I think I know what you mean. Being a young Catholic in Ireland is treated as choosing some nonsensical, harmful way of life. Nobody can understand why. To be honest I myself have difficulty understanding why, sometimes.

Things that are the main issues for me as an average RCCer?

Divorce. I myself am against it, if I were ever to get married. As for other people though, every circumstance is different. If you were being abused by your spouse, would divorce not be allowed? What about if you found out your spouse was having an affair, or was a paedophile?

Child Abuse Scandals. This is a big one. How can you profess to try to follow Christ as well as you can, but align yourself with an organisation that tries to cover up what happened to such a large extent? I'm not saying that the RCC is an evil organisation because some priests abused children. Child abuse is rife in State care as well, or the boy scouts...or anywhere, really, that grown-up (messed up) people have free access to children and are trusted with caring for them.

Sex in general. As I've posted before, I was advised by my PP that he can't lecture me on sex as he's celibate and knows nothing of romantic relationships and their physical side...but so long as you're not screwing around and are in love with the person, how can the physical expression of love for that person be wrong in the eyes of God? I could go on and on about this. Maybe start a thread?

Abortion. As with divorce, I myself am anti-abortion, but I haven't been in that situation. Neither have the RCC hierarchy. How can they know what they'd do or not? How can they dictate to women? What if the woman was raped? What if she's a junkie? What if she's financially unable to care for the child and it would be born into a life of poverty and neglect? What if she's mentally ill and the fact of her pregnancy causes her distress unto suicidal ideation? What if, and this is another topic altogether, the child in the womb is discovered to have a severe, life-debilitating condition? Should the child be allowed to be born into a life of pain and suffering, and have no quality of life at all?

Homosexual relations As the OP said, if there are two consenting adults in a loving relationship, how can that be wrong? The lesbians and gay men I know are in stable, deeply committed relationships. They own houses. They're just normal people, really, expect they're the same sex. They're not raving sex-obsessed fornicators, as painted by some Church-driven propaganda. The men are aware of the risk of AIDS and take steps to prevent it...just as anyone else would.

the Rights of Women. The accusation that the Church is a sexist organisation has been levelled at them for years. Many of my female friends feel that it is. It only pertains to me because I cannot be a priest.


All I'm saying is that the RCC thinks in black and white, and the world and the humans and their relationships are made of shades of gray. Sometimes there are many answers. Sometimes there are none.

alex73

@ Asry, Many of the topics you list above, Personal Morality, Abortion, apostolic succession to priesthood are not beliefs that the Catholic Church invented they are beliefs that have always been in the Church and continue in the Church, Catholic, Orthodox and others.

Divorce is never straight forward. If you marry a person in good faith, for love and true commitment, its the church's teaching that this marriage is until death. If your spouse turns out to be an abusers.. You should talk to your bishop to get the married annuled as it was not enter into in good faith.

Problem today with Marriage and Divorce is that Sex is seen as a pastime, no commitment to each other.


As for Homosexual relations.. The Gay movement would have the world believe they are right, but the realities are even in countries where there are liberal Gay policies and marriage for every 1 committed couple there are 9 failed relationships, May Gay men go years trying to given the perfect partner going from one encounter to another. If 2 consenting men want to live together.. thats their choice. But don't believe the a liberal Gay movement is making Gay people any happier its not.

Churchs teaching on Homosexuality is teaching on ACTS,, its not condemning the person.

prinz

Asry wrote: »

All I'm saying is that the RCC thinks in black and white, and the world and the humans and their relationships are made of shades of gray. Sometimes there are many answers. Sometimes there are none.

No. Things are black and white, do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Black and White.

A lot of people like to make the argument that all is grey but that's the cop out in order to make themselves feel better. What you mentioned above may be the main issues for you, but that's not really good enough to expect the RCC to change it's central and core beliefs to make you (not personally, but you in the general sense) feel better. What's hard is sticking by your principles. On the one hand you have people arguing that being a Catholic is 'too easy' on the other hand you have people expecting the Church to change to rules to make being a Catholic even easier.

jophsie

If you're a TRUE Catholic, which means, completely obedient to Church Teaching, it is hard to be Catholic. But the Gate to Heaven is narrow and not easy to get thru.

I believe a TRUE Catholic will suffer much persecution and maybe even martyrdom in this life.

gimmebroadband

jophsie wrote: »

If you're a TRUE Catholic, which means, completely obedient to Church Teaching, it is hard to be Catholic. But the Gate to Heaven is narrow and not easy to get thru.

I believe a TRUE Catholic will suffer much persecution and maybe even martyrdom in this life.

Wide is the road to perdition and narrow the road to paradise!

Some thoughts on the few saved!

http://www.romancatholicism.org/jansenism/fathers-fewness.htm

Hannah2011

I see the problem today is that being a christian is hard, it's hard to put others in front of you, to give until it hurts, to put yourself out, to make yourself uncomfortable.
For so many, they 'excuse' themselves from being involved in any kind of organised religion because of what some other human has done. And I don't disagree that many people in the church who should have set an example have not done as they should.

Being a christian is the most important thing in my life, I am constantly thinking about what God wants for me in my life, what can I do to improve the circumstances of others. I don't do it in a big flashy way, I do what I can where I can.
I attended an alpha course recently and the leader said - if you follow the ways of being a christian - love, peace, patience, kindness etc, and you die and there is no heaven, well you've led a good life, if you die and there is a heaven, well then you will have eternal happiness. This really resonated with me.
Maybe people need to stop focussing in on the wrongs of others, and focus on themselves and what they want out of life. If it's not for you, then fine, it's not...big whoopie. Countless amazing men have given their lives to God to tirelessly work in the community, yes obviously several have done very wrong things and behaved appallingly, but I think it's sad that people let that tarnish the good ones.

Not sure that I am getting my point across very well here, but basically, I am happy out, doing what I can in my community, going to church and trying my best to apply what I have learnt on a day to day basis so that I can promote Gods love to others. I don't know that I have all the right answers, or even any of them, but I'm extremely happy.

There are lots of questions surrounding divorce, abortion, homosexuality in the church. for me, the fundamental thing in life is love. Jesus showed love to everyone when he was doing his life works. The woman at the well, tax collectors, he didn't discriminate, so why do we feel we have to??

muppeteer

gimmebroadband wrote: »

THE WORLD'S BIGGEST CHARITY is the Catholic Church.

http://www.zenit.org/article-22024?l=english

And a Bishop's field in Galway was donated to travelling families for a halting site, against the wishes of their affluent neighbours, who objected!!! These families had nowhere to go, and the Bishop stepped in to help!!

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-24923748.html
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-24925498.html

As far as i can make out the CC is not the worlds biggest charity. That would seem to be the Bill and Millenda Gates foundation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wealthiest_charitable_foundations
I tried googling the organisation mentioned in the zenit article http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/corunum/documents/rc_pc_corunum_pro_15101999_en.htmlbut it seems it doesn't have actual information on the scale of their activities. I'm guessing the CC should at least be somewhat of a large charitable organisation but I can't find the info. If you have a source for the claim that the CC is the largest charity I would appreciate a link.

gimmebroadband

muppeteer wrote: »

As far as i can make out the CC is not the worlds biggest charity. That would seem to be the Bill and Millenda Gates foundation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wealthiest_charitable_foundations
I tried googling the organisation mentioned in the zenit article http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/corunum/documents/rc_pc_corunum_pro_15101999_en.htmlbut it seems it doesn't have actual information on the scale of their activities. I'm guessing the CC should at least be somewhat of a large charitable organisation but I can't find the info. If you have a source for the claim that the CC is the largest charity I would appreciate a link.

It is virtually impossible to quantify in monetery terms, especially if you span it over 2000 years!

Zombrex

OT but the worlds largest charity in terms of money is the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation, who's two largest contributors, Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are non-religious.

So there

The catholic chuch would probably have a bit more to give if it wasn't for the billions it costs to simply maintain it's massive self, billions of charitable donations it raises simply go back to itself to support it's organisational structure. The RCC is actually one of the worlds largest beneficaries of charity, which makes you think.

chicken fingers

Its very easy to give money to Africa.
You might feel good after. That tenner will buy some food for those kids in the pics above, won't it?
Nice one.

Meanwhile your tenner buys a half a box of ammunition for their AK-47s.

gimmebroadband

Wicknight wrote: »

OT but the worlds largest charity in terms of money is the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation, who's two largest contributors, Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are non-religious.

So there

The catholic chuch would probably have a bit more to give if it wasn't for the billions it costs to simply maintain it's massive self, billions of charitable donations it raises simply go back to itself to support it's organisational structure. The RCC is actually one of the worlds largest beneficaries of charity, which makes you think.

Do you have links to back up your statement, or is it all speculation on your part?

gimmebroadband

chicken fingers wrote: »

Its very easy to give money to Africa.
You might feel good after. That tenner will buy some food for those kids in the pics above, won't it?
Nice one.

Meanwhile your tenner buys a half a box of ammunition for their AK-47s.

It wouldn't surprise me!!!

Zombrex

gimmebroadband wrote: »

Do you have links to back up your statement, or is it all speculation on your part?

Which bit?

If you are referring to the costs of running the RCC, at quick google shows in 1993 the cost of maintaining the churches in America along was approx 6 billion dollars. I imagine that cost hasn't gone down costing the book says that the costs had been rising.

http://books.google.ie/books?id=TC6XV1Io3-UC&lpg=PA127&ots=SQpKvdw3p8&dq=operating%20costs%20catholic%20church&pg=PA130#v=onepage&q=operating%20costs%20catholic%20church&f=false

Monty.

Wicknight wrote: »

Which bit?

If you are referring to the costs of running the RCC, at quick google shows in 1993 the cost of maintaining the churches in America along was approx 6 billion dollars. I imagine that cost hasn't gone down costing the book says that the costs had been rising.

http://books.google.ie/books?id=TC6XV1Io3-UC&lpg=PA127&ots=SQpKvdw3p8&dq=operating%20costs%20catholic%20church&pg=PA130#v=onepage&q=operating%20costs%20catholic%20church&f=false

How many local churches, parishes, graveyards, halls, clergy, parish workers, and accommodations etc. does that include ?
Why should Catholics not maintain them, and what figure should it be ?

PDN

Wicknight wrote: »

Which bit?

If you are referring to the costs of running the RCC, at quick google shows in 1993 the cost of maintaining the churches in America along was approx 6 billion dollars. I imagine that cost hasn't gone down costing the book says that the costs had been rising.

http://books.google.ie/books?id=TC6XV1Io3-UC&lpg=PA127&ots=SQpKvdw3p8&dq=operating%20costs%20catholic%20church&pg=PA130#v=onepage&q=operating%20costs%20catholic%20church&f=false

So the cost of maintaining their structures works out as less than $100 per US Catholic? That (paid from Catholics' own pockets btw) sounds like a very cost-efficient way of running what is the USA's largest private network of social service providers.

Don't forget that the average churchgoer in the US gives $2210 per year to charity, whereas the average non-churchgoer gives $642 per year. This disparity holds true for giving nonreligious charities too. Churchgoers give significantly more to secular charities than do non-churchgoers.

So what you're basically saying is, "Yeah, Catholics do more charitable work than the nonreligious, but I'm going to criticise them anyway because they spend a wee bit of their own money on churches." If they ever award Oscars for begrudgery, then I'll nominate Wicknight.

muppeteer

PDN wrote: »

So the cost of maintaining their structures works out as less than $100 per US Catholic? That (paid from Catholics' own pockets btw) sounds like a very cost-efficient way of running what is the USA's largest private network of social service providers.

Don't forget that the average churchgoer in the US gives $2210 per year to charity, whereas the average non-churchgoer gives $642 per year. This disparity holds true for giving nonreligious charities too. Churchgoers give significantly more to secular charities than do non-churchgoers.

So what you're basically saying is, "Yeah, Catholics do more charitable work than the nonreligious, but I'm going to criticise them anyway because they spend a wee bit of their own money on churches." If they ever award Oscars for begrudgery, then I'll nominate Wicknight.

The ballpark figure of 60,000,000 Catholics is the total number is it not? Do we know how many of that number are contributing church goers though?

PDN

muppeteer wrote: »

The ballpark figure of 60,000,000 Catholics is the total number is it not? Do we know how many of that number are contributing church goers though?

Well that's the whole point of using averages. Some contribute more, some contribute less.

muppeteer

PDN wrote: »

Well that's the whole point of using averages. Some contribute more, some contribute less.

I was thinking of perhaps a situation like Ireland where there are many many more paper Catholics than actually attend mass/contribute. So then the 100 dollar figure swells significantly to the actual average donation to the church upkeep.

Would donations for church upkeep even be counted as charity?

gimmebroadband

muppeteer wrote: »

I was thinking of perhaps a situation like Ireland where there are many many more paper Catholics than actually attend mass/contribute. So then the 100 dollar figure swells significantly to the actual average donation to the church upkeep.

Would donations for church upkeep even be counted as charity?

Tithes.

Generally defined as "the tenth part of the increase arising from the profits of land and stock, allotted to the clergy for their support or devoted to religious or charitable uses". A more radical definition is "the tenth part of all fruits and profits justly acquired, owed to God in recognition of his supreme dominion over man, and to be paid to the ministers of the church".

The custom of giving tithes reaches back into unknown antiquity. It is mentioned in Genesis 14, without anything to indicate that it was something newly instituted. Just as Abraham is there represented as offering tithes of the spoils of the enemy to the royal priest, Melchisedech, so in Genesis 28, Jacob is recorded as giving a tithe of all his possessions to the Lord. Under the Mosaic Law the payment of tithes was made obligatory.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14741b.htm

muppeteer

gimmebroadband wrote: »

Tithes.

allotted to the clergy for their support or devoted to religious or charitable uses".

I'm not sure why you quoted something about tithes really.
While I would not see support for the clergy or religious uses as charity I do not know if this is counted in PDN's averages. Does anybody know?

PDN wrote: »

Don't forget that the average churchgoer in the US gives $2210 per year to charity, whereas the average non-churchgoer gives $642 per year.

Zombrex

muppeteer wrote: »

I'm not sure why you quoted something about tithes really.
While I would not see support for the clergy or religious uses as charity I do not know if this is counted in PDN's averages. Does anybody know?

It is, this is the famous Arthur Brooks statistics from his book Who Really Cares which attempted to show that conservatives care more than liberals (which in America ties in with religious non-religious).

As far as I know (ie what I've read) when you remove the amount religious people give to their own church the figure drops to around the same for religious and non-religious. I haven't read the book so someone an correct me on this if that is wrong.

There is also the issue that religious people tend to lie more than non-religious about how active they are in charity and church going (example for years in America the church attendance figure was assumed to be about 40% based on what religious people themselves said until someone bothered to count this in the 90s and found that actually it was 20%, which meant a significant number of people were lying about going to church more than they were).

This calls into question statistics gathered voluntarily. I'm not sure how accurate this is but there was also a claim that Brooks lumped people who claim to be religious but who don't go to church in with the non-religious group, which dilutes the statistics for true atheists.

How much you count giving to your own church for things like maintenance of said church as "charity" is really up to the individual. I like you would consider that a lesser act than giving to those who are genuinely in trouble and need of help.

All this is some what beside the point though, the point was that the RCC take in an awful lot of money but they spend an awful lot of money on themselves. It is no surprise then that they don't come in the top of charities. Contrast this with other groups such as the Bill Gates foundation, and you can see the issue. Getting into a We give more than you penis swinging contest was not really the intention

Manach

muppeteer wrote: »

Would donations for church upkeep even be counted as charity?

There was a bill passed in 2009, the Charity Act, which should have given info about charities. But due to financial constraints, the reporting body has not yet been set-up.

muppeteer

Manach wrote: »

There was a bill passed in 2009, the Charity Act, which should have given info about charities. But due to financial constraints, the reporting body has not yet been set-up.

Thanks for that. Looking at the act sections 2 ans 3 deal with what is a charity, it seems half of these sections deal with get out clauses for religions. A regular charity must use all its money/efforts towards it's cause while a religious org can spend the money on itself.

A Charity is
(b) a body corporate or an unincorporated body of persons—
(i) that promotes a charitable purpose only,
(ii) that, under its constitution, is required to apply all of
its property (both real and personal) in furtherance
of that purpose, except for moneys expended—
(I) in the operation and maintenance of the body,
including moneys paid in remuneration and
superannuation of members of the staff of the
body, and
(II) in the case of a religious organisation or community,
on accommodation and care of
members of the organisation or community,

3.—(1) For the purposes of this Act each of the following shall,
subject to subsection (2), be a charitable purpose:
(a) the prevention or relief of poverty or economic hardship;
(b) the advancement of education;
(c) the advancement of religion;
(d) any other purpose that is of benefit to the community.

Again a bit of a let off there.

(4) It shall be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, that a gift
for the advancement of religion is of public benefit.

And it is presumed so until the Attorney General is convinced otherwise it would appear.

The only problem I can really see cropping up for the Religious Orgs would be refusing services based on the usual tender topics of homosexuals etc.

(7) In determining whether a gift is of public benefit or not,
account shall be taken of—
(a) any limitation imposed by the donor of the gift on the class
of persons who may benefit from the gift and whether
or not such limitation is justified and reasonable, having
regard to the nature of the purpose of the gift, and

I think all the tax exemption stuff is still the revenue commissioners area as this Act only sets out who can be a charity/penalties for not registering as such etc.

Table Top Joe

Hannah2011 wrote: »

I see the problem today is that being a christian is hard, it's hard to put others in front of you, to give until it hurts, to put yourself out, to make yourself uncomfortable.
For so many, they 'excuse' themselves from being involved in any kind of organised religion because of what some other human has done. And I don't disagree that many people in the church who should have set an example have not done as they should.

Being a christian is the most important thing in my life, I am constantly thinking about what God wants for me in my life, what can I do to improve the circumstances of others. I don't do it in a big flashy way, I do what I can where I can.
I attended an alpha course recently and the leader said - if you follow the ways of being a christian - love, peace, patience, kindness etc, and you die and there is no heaven, well you've led a good life, if you die and there is a heaven, well then you will have eternal happiness. This really resonated with me.
Maybe people need to stop focussing in on the wrongs of others, and focus on themselves and what they want out of life. If it's not for you, then fine, it's not...big whoopie. Countless amazing men have given their lives to God to tirelessly work in the community, yes obviously several have done very wrong things and behaved appallingly, but I think it's sad that people let that tarnish the good ones.

Not sure that I am getting my point across very well here, but basically, I am happy out, doing what I can in my community, going to church and trying my best to apply what I have learnt on a day to day basis so that I can promote Gods love to others. I don't know that I have all the right answers, or even any of them, but I'm extremely happy.

There are lots of questions surrounding divorce, abortion, homosexuality in the church. for me, the fundamental thing in life is love. Jesus showed love to everyone when he was doing his life works. The woman at the well, tax collectors, he didn't discriminate, so why do we feel we have to??

If most Christians were like you id probably still be one(i see your point about following Christ as opposed to other Christians but its too late for me;))

prinz

Table Top Joe wrote: »

If most Christians were like you id probably still be one(i see your point about following Christ as opposed to other Christians but its too late for me;))

Most are.

As for 'stopping focusing on the wrongs of others', that's a bit of a ridiculous statement seeing as much of Jesus' life was based around highlighting the wrongs of others, and championing the victims of those wrongs.