Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

What should be the Churches response to Covid19 See Mod Warning in post 1

Options
1356

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,722 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    I gotta say that prioritising "trying to stop a global recession" is precisely assigning a paramount value to wealth.

    Also - more an economic point than a theological one - a sell-off of property, shares and business interests is pretty much the opposite of what you do if you're trying to stop a recession.

    I'm guessing the idea is for a more equitable distribution of wealth which in turn enables a more robust and healthy society. While I'm no big fan of the church, I can think of many far denser concentrations of wealth than the church that I'd be aiming to disperse first were I to possess omnipotence. Looking at the numbers of publicly accessible hospital beds, doctors and nurses per head of population in different countries you might think it correlates with national wealth but this clearly isn't the case. In my opinion this is a clear indicator of some deeply inequitable societies which need to change if to be able deal with these types of stresses.


  • Options
    #63
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    Gerry T wrote: »
    In 2009 it was estimated there were approx 9,000 additional deaths in suicide due to the recession. That doesn't include the deaths in poor areas that rely on charity donations, something that will be hit with a recession. It's bad enough people are dying from c19, we need to try control that, we also need to try control economies, its not a one or the other choice, we need to do both.
    Deaths due to a global recession are certainly a factor, perhaps some can be attributed to lifestlye factors: smoking, drinking, junk food an so on.

    Another consideration in the bigger picture of things when comparing numbers is this:
    Global deaths (so far) in 2020 due to COVID19: 50,000 circa.
    Global abortions (so far) in 2020: 10,000,000 circa. With a steady annual figure of between 42-56million, roughly 125,000 per day.

    Some medically neccessary yes, or very complex reasons, but also many as a result of career aspirations and/or lifestyle factors, and also as a result of acts void of any personal responsibility.


  • Options
    #64
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,722 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    Ayleen Plain Storehouse wrote: »
    Deaths due to a global recession are certainly a factor, perhaps some can be attributed to lifestlye factors: smoking, drinking, junk food an so on.

    Another consideration in the bigger picture of things when comparing numbers is this:
    Global deaths (so far) in 2020 due to COVID19: 50,000 circa.
    Global abortions (so far) in 2020: 10,000,000 circa. With a steady annual figure of between 42-56million, roughly 125,000 per day.

    Some medically neccessary yes, or very complex reasons, but also many as a result of career aspirations and/or lifestyle factors, and also as a result of acts void of any personal responsibility.

    I think your wildly off topic here and introduction of number of abortions carried out per year has no bearing whatsoever on discussion taking place. If you wanted to discuss the relative damage done by the Corona virus compared to that done by economic reasons, you might do better to have a look at the effects of poverty; https://www.dosomething.org/us/facts/11-facts-about-global-poverty. For example, assuming your interest in abortion stems from a genuine concern for the welfare of babies, it is worth noting that 'preventable diseases like diarrhea and pneumonia take the lives of 2 million children a year who are too poor to afford proper treatment'. That said, I strongly doubt that many who throw abortion into discussions such as this care about anything much beyond their own right-wing agenda.


  • Options
    #65
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    smacl wrote: »
    I think your wildly off topic here and introduction of number of abortions carried out per year has no bearing whatsoever on discussion taking place. If you wanted to discuss the relative damage done by the Corona virus compared to that done by economic reasons, you might do better to have a look at the effects of poverty; https://www.dosomething.org/us/facts/11-facts-about-global-poverty. For example, assuming your interest in abortion stems from a genuine concern for the welfare of babies, it is worth noting that 'preventable diseases like diarrhea and pneumonia take the lives of 2 million children a year who are too poor to afford proper treatment'. That said, I strongly doubt that many who throw abortion into discussions such as this care about anything much beyond their own right-wing agenda.

    Interesting you should jump to assuming simple comparisions, are due some wild far off agenda, actually that says more about you in terms of paranoia. Perhaps you have some far and hard left wing agenda, you wish to share?

    There is no harm in comparing the 10million babies dead already this year, in comparison to COVID19, both are somewhat preventable (to a percent), due to behavioural choices.
    By all means compare other things too, wars, pollution, smoking, and so on.

    Rightly so, also to address economics.

    And assuming your interest in this aspect is in any way genuine, or you have any real actual interest, you could start with highlighting the fact that 1% of the population control 40-50% of global private wealth. Also tax loopholes, IHT avoidance, double dutch fiscal sweet deal sandwiches and so on are all the rage.

    Extreme poverty levels are actually falling, take a look at India. But with little thanks to the 1%, who continue to increase the net wealth divide.


  • Options
    #66
    Gerry T
    Registered Users Posts: 1,419 ✭✭✭Gerry T


    Ayleen Plain Storehouse wrote: »
    Interesting you should jump to assuming simple comparisions, are due some wild far off agenda, actually that says more about you in terms of paranoia. Perhaps you have some far and hard left wing agenda, you wish to share?

    There is no harm in comparing the 10million babies dead already this year, in comparison to COVID19, both are somewhat preventable (to a percent), due to behavioural choices.
    By all means compare other things too, wars, pollution, smoking, and so on.

    Rightly so, also to address economics.

    And assuming your interest in this aspect is in any way genuine, or you have any real actual interest, you could start with highlighting the fact that 1% of the population control 40-50% of global private wealth. Also tax loopholes, IHT avoidance, double dutch fiscal sweet deal sandwiches and so on are all the rage.

    Extreme poverty levels are actually falling, take a look at India. But with little thanks to the 1%, who continue to increase the net wealth divide.

    Would you stop with the nonsense. C19 or Poverty is not a choice, abortion is. Why are you talking about wealthy people, what have they to do with C19 ?

    The general discussion is C19 and religion, what should the Church do in response.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    Gerry T wrote: »
    In 2009 it was estimated there were approx 9,000 additional deaths in suicide due to the recession. That doesn't include the deaths in poor areas that rely on charity donations, something that will be hit with a recession. It's bad enough people are dying from c19, we need to try control that, we also need to try control economies, its not a one or the other choice, we need to do both.
    .

    The general discussion is C19 and religion, what should the Church do in response. Not about preventing suicide and stopping recessions (which would be govermental and public policy led factors anyway) i.e. nonsense.

    Now, in terms of what the Church(es) can do.
    Well, not a lot actually.

    For what may be the 1st time in known or recorded history pretty much every church (or other meeting place, of any other religion) has a closed-door policy in place.

    Normal procedures and practices of many religions are simply on hold, any thing that creates a crowd of 3 or more, isn't feasable currently, even on a practical logisitcal or perhaps legal basis.

    The real question is not what can the Church(es) do.
    But what do you expect them (which church) to do under the circumstances, and this in regards to what specifically, practice wise.


  • Options
    #68
    John Hutton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭John Hutton


    I expect the Church to pray. Priests to offer mass and bring the sacraments to the dying. To use social media to bring as much comfort as possible.

    This is what the Church is doing.

    They are doing it well.

    The church were well ahead of the curve in closing down, particularly in the North.


  • Options
    #69
    Gerry T
    Registered Users Posts: 1,419 ✭✭✭Gerry T


    Ayleen Plain Storehouse wrote:
    The general discussion is C19 and religion, what should the Church do in response. Not about preventing suicide and stopping recessions (which would be govermental and public policy led factors anyway) i.e. nonsense.

    I said the church (RCC) could sell off priceless art/buildings and give the money away. Give to people in need, the fact that amount of money (billions) would be put into circulation would also help curtail a recession and might lead as an example to very wealthy individuals or other religions to follow suit. It could start with the 1.5b of italian stocks. It doesnt pay any tax on its income, maybe it could start with that.


  • Options
    #70
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    Gerry T wrote: »
    I said the church (RCC) could sell off priceless art/buildings and give the money away. Give to people in need, the fact that amount of money (billions) would be put into circulation would also help curtail a recession and might lead as an example to very wealthy individuals or other religions to follow suit. It could start with the 1.5b of italian stocks. It doesnt pay any tax on its income, maybe it could start with that.
    What you describe sounds exactly like wealth distribution.

    Yes everyone, and every organisation, and commercial coroporation, and every single person classified as super rich should attempt this.

    But sure I have already mentioned this not long ago. But it was quickly disapproved of.
    Seems only holy money directly from Rome is good enough to fix all of the world's ills.


  • Options
    #71
    Gerry T
    Registered Users Posts: 1,419 ✭✭✭Gerry T


    Ayleen Plain Storehouse wrote: »
    What you describe sounds exactly like wealth distribution.

    Yes everyone, and every organisation, and commercial coroporation, and every single person classified as super rich should attempt this.

    But sure I have already mentioned this not long ago. But it was quickly disapproved of.
    Seems only holy money directly from Rome is good enough to fix all of the world's ills.
    Exactly, the church's money is first and central. As an organisation built on not gaining wealth but spreading the word of god and non profiteering they should dispense of the billions they accumulated, what are they doing with all that wealth anyway. No one else has the obligation to do anything of the sort, why would they, its their money ?
    Bill Gates, Alibaba founder Jack Ma, former hedge fund manager George Soros, and Li Ka-Shing have collectively pledged over $100 billion to corona virus so it's not like the rich are doing nothing. Whats the Church doing, in real terms, not prayers and best wishes.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    Gerry T wrote: »
    Exactly,
    So I was right as before: wealth distribution is actually the soloution.
    No need to aplogise.
    Gerry T wrote: »
    the church's money is first and central.
    Whoa there, holy money is better than all the other money in the world?

    This is a new theory.
    Is it blessed and with hidden powers of wealth creations, are the coins and notes supernatural, by their own esteem, and like a magic money tree that can be shaken?
    Gerry T wrote: »
    As an organisation built on not gaining wealth but spreading the word of god and non profiteering they should dispense of the billions they accumulated, what are they doing with all that wealth anyway. No one else has the obligation to do anything of the sort, why would they, its their money ?
    So you are correct, they can't create wealth by themselves, (unlike Alibaba or those other Hedge Fund gamblers). They have to rely upon donations to keep the lights on, repair buildings, as face the growing attacks from Asia and Africa, and so on.
    Gerry T wrote: »
    Bill Gates, Alibaba founder Jack Ma, former hedge fund manager George Soros, and Li Ka-Shing have collectively pledged over $100 billion to corona virus so it's not like the rich are doing nothing.
    100bn does sound like a 'pulled from the sky figure'.

    This typical 2,000 or so small group of global billionaires are likely worth as much as the RCC or any other church, including all of its billion or so members, who are also 'of the church' and might want somewhere to sit (not in the dark), whenever the doors reopen.

    Billy Gates is also upto his eyes in investments on the back of COVID, but this is with a (long term) view to profit from these type of situations. And as for Soros, well just ask the typical Joe on the street their views on this creature, he is widely hated in his native Hungary, a shady charachter to hold to any light.

    Actually surprised you didn't include billionaire 'Greene' the topshop sloth is only after asking the uk taxpayers to pay 80% wages for his employees, of the company he does not pay uk dividen tax on (Monaco). This as he ponders over which of 3 yachts sail about in the Med and puts another freeze on the Arcadia pension scheme.


  • Options
    #73
    Gerry T
    Registered Users Posts: 1,419 ✭✭✭Gerry T


    Ayleen Plain Storehouse wrote: »
    So I was right as before: wealth distribution is actually the soloution.
    No need to aplogise.


    Whoa there, holy money is better than all the other money in the world?

    This is a new theory.
    Is it blessed and with hidden powers of wealth creations, are the coins and notes supernatural, by their own esteem, and like a magic money tree that can be shaken?


    So you are correct, they can't create wealth by themselves, (unlike Alibaba or those other Hedge Fund gamblers). They have to rely upon donations to keep the lights on, repair buildings, as face the growing attacks from Asia and Africa, and so on.


    100bn does sound like a 'pulled from the sky figure'.

    This typical 2,000 or so small group of global billionaires are likely worth as much as the RCC or any other church, including all of its billion or so members, who are also 'of the church' and might want somewhere to sit (not in the dark), whenever the doors reopen.

    Billy Gates is also upto his eyes in investments on the back of COVID, but this is with a (long term) view to profit from these type of situations. And as for Soros, well just ask the typical Joe on the street their views on this creature, he is widely hated in his native Hungary, a shady charachter to hold to any light.

    Actually surprised you didn't include billionaire 'Greene' the topshop sloth is only after asking the uk taxpayers to pay 80% wages for his employees, of the company he does not pay uk dividen tax on (Monaco). This as he ponders over which of 3 yachts sail about in the Med and puts another freeze on the Arcadia pension scheme.
    There's a difference between an individual and the church, the church is not about collecting wealth, it's supposed to be about supporting people, forgiveness, compassion, . Your confusing two separate issues, one the wealth individuals have and how you would like them to share that and the other is the question at hand, what should the church do re c19.

    As for wealthy individuals they have zero responsibility to do anymore than you or I do. You come across as being bitter that these people don't do more, when the fact is they are doing more than you or I could in a dozen life times.

    But the Church has for a very weird reason accumulated billions in property, art and business investments. The World now faces a serious issue and the Church because of what it stands for / preaches, has an obligation to do more that pray. It's time to sell off it's gathered wealth. In fact if the RCC did this it would gather more followers, but we both know it will never dowhat I suggest. I don't think Jesus would like what the church has become, do you ?


  • Options
    #74
    mdebets
    Registered Users Posts: 1,747 ✭✭✭mdebets


    Gerry T wrote: »
    I said the church (RCC) could sell off priceless art/buildings and give the money away. Give to people in need, the fact that amount of money (billions) would be put into circulation would also help curtail a recession and might lead as an example to very wealthy individuals or other religions to follow suit. It could start with the 1.5b of italian stocks. It doesnt pay any tax on its income, maybe it could start with that.
    That'ts not a well thought out solution.
    Who do you think would buy the art and buildings foor example. Most of them would be unsellale due to the high price and number or for the practicallity of it. Who do you think for example would buy St. Peter's Basilika and do what with it? Even if there were nough people to be able to buy these pieces of art, the flooding of the market would imediately collapse the market, making them mostly worthless.
    If they were all sold, it would only last for a little while until all is spend and then the church would not have a source of income.
    So it's better, that they keep teham all, generating income for the church that can then be used to spend on charity.
    And that's before ypu even think about the fact that these pieces of art should be accessible by the public, rather than being kept behind closed doors of a rich colector.


  • Options
    #75
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    Gerry T wrote: »
    There's a difference between an individual and the church, the church is not about collecting wealth, it's supposed to be about supporting people, forgiveness, compassion, .
    Which it largely does.

    Why have you left out commercial corporations, and all other groups do they not have money also? Don't they avoid taxes, seek only to profit, to fiscally gain while the sell their products and services.

    Plenty of people, groups, organistations and indeed hugh corporates all have money, what you claimed is only the Church (presume you also mean the RCC?) has to be the 1st of all thse, to give away all it's money.
    Rather odd.
    Sounds like you have some beef with them, a debt owed to you?
    Gerry T wrote: »
    Your confusing two separate issues, one the wealth individuals have and how you would like them to share that and the other is the question at hand, what should the church do re c19.
    Your distorting, AND confusing the issue.
    Your saying either individuals should give money, or it should (only) be the church that does it, not any other entity, or collective entity.

    You could say (any) church, or for that matter any religion of any sort, offers the single best emotional soloution to COVID19.
    The single largest emotive risk due to the pandemic is that of 'fear'. An Italian AI search bot today backs this theory.

    The most religious folks in the world, offer and have 'no fear' whatsoever of death.
    Sure it's a fairly minor or even significant inconvience. You could even say the have 'total dominion' over the very concept of an earthly death.

    Elsewhere powerful chaps such as HH or Saddam went out in a dark shaking sweat of fear, even without any illness to speak of.
    Gerry T wrote: »
    As for wealthy individuals they have zero responsibility to do anymore than you or I do.
    Your bitter selfish hedonistic view is interesting one, and not one that cannot agree with.
    Gerry T wrote: »
    You come across as being bitter that these people don't do more, when the fact is they are doing more than you or I could in a dozen life times.
    You think the 1% that own 40% of global net worth, shoudn't do more.
    This is again interesting, maybe you were an only child, or came from poor beginings, where the concept of sharing didn't exist.

    Gates himself later said he wished (with regret) that he didn't may more tax, and he paid the minimium he could over the majority of his career, but was able and should have done more.
    Even today he has vested interests in investements in a twisted mix of tracking technology meets rockerfella financed vaccines, under the guise of for the greater good. This is somewhat debatable in regards to the longer term.
    Gerry T wrote: »
    But the Church has for a very weird reason accumulated billions in property, art and business investments....
    Yada yada, the largest church (of 1bn people) again has less collective wealth (including it's members) than approx the top 10,000 individuals on the planet. Maybe even less that the top 10 companies of the world, also certainly not of 1bn members.

    Also is money the only soloution to all and every woe?


  • Options
    #76
    Gerry T
    Registered Users Posts: 1,419 ✭✭✭Gerry T


    mdebets wrote: »
    That'ts not a well thought out solution.
    Who do you think would buy the art and buildings foor example. Most of them would be unsellale due to the high price and number or for the practicallity of it. Who do you think for example would buy St. Peter's Basilika and do what with it?
    I did look and it's very hard to figure out the value of the centralised RCC buildings/art, but a number of searches would estimate it at about 15billion. The worlds richest man could buy that ten times over if he wanted, so yes there are people out there with money sitting in banks that could easily afford to buy the RCC assetts and also other churches. But the RCC would be in the premier league of wealth. Who ever bought it could easily open it up as a museum for all to see, as in see far more than what people can see today.
    mdebets wrote: »
    Even if there were nough people to be able to buy these pieces of art, the flooding of the market would imediately collapse the market, making them mostly worthless.
    If they were all sold, it would only last for a little while until all is spend and then the church would not have a source of income.[/QUOTE] Flooding of the market ? these are all one off pieces, it's not like they would be pumpint 500 of the same piece. No these pieces wouldn't flood any market, they would open up a new market and there would be incredible demand
    mdebets wrote: »
    So it's better, that they keep teham all, generating income for the church that can then be used to spend on charity.
    And that's before ypu even think about the fact that these pieces of art should be accessible by the public, rather than being kept behind closed doors of a rich colector.
    No it's better that they sell them.
    Might be better if your a greedy church lover to want to hoard all this art/buildings.
    How much of the church income in cash is spent on charity ? good luck in finding that figure as they guard it really well, I wonder why ?
    Your making up an narrative to suit your stance to say these pieces would be hidden away, the type of person that would buy these would most likely donate them to museums and have their name immortalised.

    I do sound like I'm having a go at the church, personally I find it a disgusting profit making business. As for religion people are free to believe there's a god and who am I to disagree. Everything we see and touch came from somewhere and if a god was true I really wouldn't be shocked. If people find peace and reassurance in religion then that's a great thing. For me people need to separate the church from religion, their not the same thing.


  • Options
    #77
    Gerry T
    Registered Users Posts: 1,419 ✭✭✭Gerry T


    Ayleen Plain Storehouse wrote: »
    Which it largely does.
    That's why it hides and supports criminals within it's officers. If it cared it would hand these over to authorities, but it refuses to.
    Ayleen Plain Storehouse wrote: »
    Why have you left out commercial corporations, and all other groups do they not have money also? Don't they avoid taxes, seek only to profit, to fiscally gain while the sell their products and services.
    BEacuse the purpose of a commercial corporation is to make profit. The church is about giving to others, how many examples in the bible demonstrates this, the church needs to start practising what it preaches. And what's wrong with avoiding taxes, we all do that, tax evasion, now that's a different thing. The only reason for a business is to make profit but in doing so people earn a living. Without people that start companies there would be no workers earning money. They go hand in hand. Why you think a business should do what a church does is beyond me.

    Ayleen Plain Storehouse wrote: »
    Plenty of people, groups, organistations and indeed hugh corporates all have money, what you claimed is only the Church (presume you also mean the RCC?) has to be the 1st of all thse, to give away all it's money.
    Rather odd.
    Sounds like you have some beef with them, a debt owed to you?
    I actually don't think they should be first. I don't expect business to give anything at all. If they do fair play but I've no expectation on them. The church preaches alot, time to stop that and start some action to back up what it says. Was it not Jesus that destroyed temples with false gods, don't you thin billions worth of builds &art fall into that category.
    Nothing owed to me at all, I just call it as I see it

    Ayleen Plain Storehouse wrote: »
    Your distorting, AND confusing the issue.
    Your saying either individuals should give money, or it should (only) be the church that does it, not any other entity, or collective entity.
    The church, individuals may give money but thats up to them. The church should and if it doesn't it's just an empty shell.
    Ayleen Plain Storehouse wrote: »
    You could say (any) church, or for that matter any religion of any sort, offers the single best emotional soloution to COVID19.
    The single largest emotive risk due to the pandemic is that of 'fear'. An Italian AI search bot today backs this theory.

    The most religious folks in the world, offer and have 'no fear' whatsoever of death.
    Sure it's a fairly minor or even significant inconvience. You could even say the have 'total dominion' over the very concept of an earthly death.

    Elsewhere powerful chaps such as HH or Saddam went out in a dark shaking sweat of fear, even without any illness to speak of.
    That's your opinion, but I'm not debating that, maybe the church does offer the best emotional support, for some I'm sure it does. But it's not a solution as you put it to c19. Being emotionally supported won't stop you dying.

    Ayleen Plain Storehouse wrote: »
    Your bitter selfish hedonistic view is interesting one, and not one that cannot agree with.
    Thanks you do realise you said you agree with my point of view !

    Ayleen Plain Storehouse wrote: »
    You think the 1% that own 40% of global net worth, shoudn't do more.
    This is again interesting, maybe you were an only child, or came from poor beginings, where the concept of sharing didn't exist.
    yes humble beginnings family of 6 but a loving family and grew up luckily with no family problems. Never in 20yrs that I was there saw my parents argue, not once. I wouldn't expect people with money to give it away, but would welcome if they did. But I've zero sense of enitlement so don't expect it
    Ayleen Plain Storehouse wrote: »
    Gates himself later said he wished (with regret) that he didn't may more tax, and he paid the minimium he could over the majority of his career, but was able and should have done more.
    Even today he has vested interests in investements in a twisted mix of tracking technology meets rockerfella financed vaccines, under the guise of for the greater good. This is somewhat debatable in regards to the longer term.
    He's paid over 10billion in taxes. How much tax has the church paid on it's billions...let me guess, would zero be about right.

    Ayleen Plain Storehouse wrote: »
    Yada yada, the largest church (of 1bn people) again has less collective wealth (including it's members) than approx the top 10,000 individuals on the planet. Maybe even less that the top 10 companies of the world, also certainly not of 1bn members.

    Also is money the only soloution to all and every woe?

    NO but money is needed for c19. The bible is full of stories depicting how people should give their money. The disciples had to walk away from their families, something I found strange as their loved ones back then would probably have starved. If that's your belief fine, but don't expect everyone else to do the same, I think if gates has paid 10b in axes he's done his bit for society. When you've done the same then you can criticise him and his kind.


  • Options
    #78
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    Gerry T wrote: »
    That's why it hides and supports criminals within it's officers. If it cared it would hand these over to authorities, but it refuses to.
    It can certainly do more, so can plenty of others.

    e.g. Scientology looks very nasty, Holywood is a septic tank of creeps, even the Royals (supposed role models) are withholding Handy Andy from talking to US authorities over his actions. Then there's the Scouts (never out of the news in this regard), then there are other religions than promote child marrige, and actual mutilation of it's own youth.
    Gerry T wrote: »
    BEacuse the purpose of a commercial corporation is to make profit. The church is about giving to others...
    So a commercial corporation will generate and have far more money. Any church does not aim to help others with just cold hard cash alone. Your focus is on money, money and money. Not the solution to every ill, a sad POV.
    Gerry T wrote: »
    I don't expect business to give anything at all.
    Of course you don't, your hero's are HedgeFund Managers and the like.
    All the while, you want an art-raid on age old institutions, the guy with the small moustache was a big fan of this idea also.
    Gerry T wrote: »
    That's your opinion, but I'm not debating that, maybe the church does offer the best emotional support, for some I'm sure it does. But it's not a solution as you put it to c19. Being emotionally supported won't stop you dying.
    Not just my opinion, but a research fact published this week.
    6sgtPVX.png

    It's a very decent soloution to COVID19, likely only found as a constant via church and charity.
    The opposite to fear is hope. Barry Obarma made posters with 'hope' in it, but it never arrived.

    You could phone up your hero's such as GoldmanSucks or Mr. Soros and express your Pandemic concerns to them. But will be met with a __ ____ off response, and that dial tone, won't stop you from dying. Being rich doesn't make you invincible.
    Gerry T wrote: »
    Thanks you do realise you said you agree with my point of view !
    Nope, you said you agree with my point of view: that there should be more (universal) wealth distribution (from every source). That's all we agree upon.
    The planet's 40% of net wealth is owned by the 1%.
    Gerry T wrote: »
    He's paid over 10billion in taxes. How much tax has the church paid on it's billions...let me guess, would zero be about right.
    That would equate to exactly 10% taxation. Seems a bit tight. No wonder he said he wished he had paid more, windows Vista was a load of rubbish also.

    How much tax has any charity, church or not for profit group paid?
    Very little if any. Don't like it, campaign to change the law.
    Gerry T wrote: »
    NO but money is needed for c19.
    Your soloution to everything is cold cash, a very sad mindframe.

    Since the start of time, there has been people who step in when every other intervention fails, for no fiscal charge, and offer some comfort to those on their way out from wars, plagues and famines. Everything does not boil down to how much cash you have in your pocket.

    Also, have you contacted Saudi Arabia in regards to giving more cash?

    They take their own religion very seriously. Yet promote slave labour, their traffic cops have Lamborghinis, women need a chaperone, and their yoof enjoy supercar trips to old London town to empty Harrods, and collect parking tickets for kicks. Wealth beyond what little old Rome has to offer.


  • Options
    #79
    Leroy42
    Registered Users Posts: 15,495 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Accumulator, that is all very fine words but unfortunately the church ticks nearly every box.

    Tuam, the abuse scandals, mother and baby homes etc etc, the church has shown again and again that protection of itself and its assets is far more important than the truth, victims, or the way of Jesus.

    The church believes itself to be more important that all of that, that the church is itself something to exist rather than the ideals of Jesus.

    Under no interpretation of the words of Jesus can the church be considered right on its richness. It has literally vaults, which lock away history and art and money!

    It has vast temples, filled with expensive items, rather than use that money to ease suffering.

    So if believe all that you said that you should be aghast at the church.

    And since the church claims to be the direct link to Jesus and has the ability to decide on the morals of nations, shouldn't it look to leas rather than simply compare itself to others?

    You are 100% right that it is not all about money. Its about compassion, empathy, caring, love, understanding, helping out in times of need, standing up to power. The church should be a source of love and truth but it lost itself to it's own importance, thinking it was more important than the very ideals it claimed to follow.


  • Options
    #80
    McGiver
    Registered Users Posts: 4,426 ✭✭✭McGiver


    What should be the Church response to Covid?

    Close the churches, give away all Church property to the poor, and dissolve. Make religion a private personal business as it should be.


  • Options
    #81
    lawred2
    Registered Users Posts: 24,293 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    Reid Repulsive Gristle wrote: »
    It surprised me that the Christians have had nothing to say about Covid 19.

    What's going on?

    I've been reading, praying, meeting with the Saints and we've been seeking the mind of God in this matter.

    We met together this morning, albeit in reduced numbers. We kept the kids at home and as a result some of the adults.
    We streamed the meeting to include those who are part of us worldwide in what God was saying. We need to be sensible in these things.

    It seems Gods been speaking to a number of us individually that this is from His Hand and is His judgement on the nation's.
    Those who've dismissed God, saying He doesn't exist or if He does, we'll ignore His statutes anyway.

    This is an opportunity for people to repent and turn back to God. Some will, many won't and will pass up this opportunity. We'll probably get a vaccine and claim how wonderful mankind is but God won't be mocked.
    This is His kindness and His opportunity for repentance and a turning back to Him.

    People are in fear and people are fearing other people's fear (Isaiah 8) but we who know Him need to return to Him, allow God be God in our lives and trust Him. We have a message of hope to a world that has lost control and fearing death.

    Psalm 31 refers to us being in a city under siege but yet God extends His loving kindness

    He says " O love the LORD, all ye his saints: for the LORD preserveth the faithful, and plentifully rewardeth the proud doer.
    Be of good courage, and he shall strengthen your heart, all ye that hope in the LORD"

    This thread is not a debate with those who don't believe in God. His existence isn't up for debate. You're response however is. But it's primarily for those who love the Lord and serve Him.
    It's not a theological debate.

    What's God saying in the the Church of the Redeemed Ones? To those who love Him and His appearing.
    If He's not saying anything to you, then maybe you need to re-evaluate your relationship with God.
    I speak to my children, God is no different, if we have ears.

    I'm encouraged. God's hand is in this. He has allowed it. It wouldn't have happened if He hadn't. He's still sitting on His throne. He's still in control.

    Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right. Will He find any righteous?

    So you hear voices in your head then?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Shefwedfan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,958 ✭✭✭✭Shefwedfan


    McGiver wrote: »
    What should be the Church response to Covid?

    Close the churches, give away all Church property to the poor, and dissolve. Make religion a private personal business as it should be.

    Religion can be whatever you want it to be....if you want it to be personal that your choice

    Not sure why closing all churches would do, especially to the people who use them?


  • Options
    #83
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,722 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    lawred2 wrote: »
    So you hear voices in your head then?

    Mod: Carded for trolling. This is not a forum where you are allowed to arbitrarily attack someone for the religious beliefs. Please read the charter before posting again. Thanks for your attention.


  • Options
    #84
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,722 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    McGiver wrote: »
    What should be the Church response to Covid?

    Close the churches, give away all Church property to the poor, and dissolve. Make religion a private personal business as it should be.

    I agree that churches should be closed in the short term as part of social distancing but beyond that it is worth remembering that Christian practice is as social and communal as it is personal for many. Whether the church should donate some of their accumulated wealth to help alleviate the current crisis is another question. I'm not sure that lack of funding is that biggest concern at this point in the crisis, though it could well become one soon enough.


  • Options
    #85
    lawred2
    Registered Users Posts: 24,293 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    Apologies for the one liner. Maybe it is just me, but I found the claim that God has informed the OP that this virus is his work as a form of retribution to be of both breathtaking arrogance and hatred. I would have thought that bait posting was against the charter as much as trolling but maybe not. What about the billion or more other Christians not hearing this message of culpability?

    As a form of retribution it's a bit self defeating anyway as it seems to be focusing its efforts on the likely most devout cohorts of Christian societies.

    It's also about to rip through the developing world. What's God got against those poor souls?


  • Options
    #86
    growleaves
    Registered Users Posts: 7,720 ✭✭✭growleaves


    This is what we need and it is how I would like to see all church leaders responding to Covid-19:

    A Pandemic warning from Cardinals Sarah, Müller, Zen, Abp. Viganò
    In this time of great crisis, we Pastors of the Catholic Church, by virtue of our mandate, consider it our sacred duty to make an Appeal to our Brothers in the Episcopate, to the Clergy, to Religious, to the holy People of God and to all men and women of good will. This Appeal has also been undersigned by intellectuals, doctors, lawyers, journalists and professionals who agree with its content, and may be undersigned by those who wish to make it their own.

    The facts have shown that, under the pretext of the Covid-19 epidemic, the inalienable rights of citizens have in many cases been violated and their fundamental freedoms, including the exercise of freedom of worship, expression and movement, have been disproportionately and unjustifiably restricted. Public health must not, and cannot, become an alibi for infringing on the rights of millions of people around the world, let alone for depriving the civil authority of its duty to act wisely for the common good. This is particularly true as growing doubts emerge from several quarters about the actual contagiousness, danger and resistance of the virus. Many authoritative voices in the world of science and medicine confirm that the media’s alarmism about Covid-19 appears to be absolutely unjustified.

    We have reason to believe, on the basis of official data on the incidence of the epidemic as related to the number of deaths, that there are powers interested in creating panic among the world’s population with the sole aim of permanently imposing unacceptable forms of restriction on freedoms, of controlling people and of tracking their movements. The imposition of these illiberal measures is a disturbing prelude to the realization of a world government beyond all control.

    We also believe that in some situations the containment measures that were adopted, including the closure of shops and businesses, have precipitated a crisis that has brought down entire sectors of the economy. This encourages interference by foreign powers and has serious social and political repercussions. Those with governmental responsibility must stop these forms of social engineering, by taking measures to protect their citizens whom they represent, and in whose interests they have a serious obligation to act. Likewise, let them help the family, the cell of society, by not unreasonably penalizing the weak and elderly, forcing them into a painful separation from their loved ones. The criminalization of personal and social relationships must likewise be judged as an unacceptable part of the plan of those who advocate isolating individuals in order to better manipulate and control them.


  • Options
    #87
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,722 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    growleaves wrote: »
    This is what we need and it is how I would like to see all church leaders responding to Covid-19:

    A Pandemic warning from Cardinals Sarah, Müller, Zen, Abp. Viganò

    Seems somewhere between grossly irresponsible and wide-eyed conspiracy theory from where I'm sitting. I see Cardinal Robert Sarah has denied ever signing the above; https://cruxnow.com/vatican/2020/05/vatican-cardinal-in-new-row-over-virus-pretext-petition/


  • Options
    #88
    Leroy42
    Registered Users Posts: 15,495 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    I particularly liked the last bit "The criminalization of personal and social relationships must likewise be judged as an unacceptable part of the plan of those who advocate isolating individuals in order to better manipulate and control them."

    The hypocrisy of it. Some neck on them to be fair.


  • Options
    #89
    Gerry T
    Registered Users Posts: 1,419 ✭✭✭Gerry T


    growleaves wrote: »
    This is what we need and it is how I would like to see all church leaders responding to Covid-19:

    A Pandemic warning from Cardinals Sarah, Müller, Zen, Abp. Viganò

    Is that you Gemma ?


  • Options
    #90
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 34,060 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    growleaves wrote: »
    This is what we need and it is how I would like to see all church leaders responding to Covid-19:

    A Pandemic warning from Cardinals Sarah, Müller, Zen, Abp. Viganò

    What absolute garbage.

    Fingal County Council are certainly not competent to be making decisions about the most important piece of infrastructure on the island. They need to stick to badly designed cycle lanes and deciding on whether Mrs Murphy can have her kitchen extension.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    paddythere
    Registered Users Posts: 439 ✭✭paddythere


    To start paying tax since the economy is gonna be ****ed


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement