Facing hunger, pope demands an end to 'opulence and waste'

Anyone think it's weird for a pope to criticize OPULENCE?

Has the Pope mentioned this to Cardinal Rode and others, who seem to be so fond of the return of the silken magna cappas in formal photos???
1) from NCR itself, http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/cardinal-rod%C3%A9-photos-meditatio...
2) http://dappledphotos.blogspot.com/2005/09/cappa-magna.html

"Insisting that feeding hungry people is a moral imperative that “brooks neither delay nor compromise,” the pontiff pledged that “the Catholic Church will always be concerned for efforts to defeat hunger.”

Although Benedict is most correct here, this is certainly not true in Washington DC. Stopping any equality for gays is far more important than feeding the poor or sheltering the homeless. Cleaning up his own house might be a better use of his time than preaching to the UN.

"The pope also called for a change in lifestyles in rich countries, in the direction of greater simplicity, less conspicuous consumption, and more solidarity with the poor."

The Pope should tell the leaders of the Church to start setting an example of Christ for the rest of us. Otherwise, this is just more Pharisaic talk from the Pope and no Christian walk from the Pope.

Pope Benedict, tell the US Bishops to stop spending money for campaigns waged against civil rights for gay minorities and to give that money to the poor and hungry instead.

Pope Benedict, stop spending money to investigate US Sisters who have served God and the Church, and give that money to the poor and hungry instead.

Pope Benedict, stop spending money on new luxurious gowns for you and your Princes of the Church who live in mansions, and give that money to the poor and hungry instead.

Pope Benedict, stop being a hypocrite, and give money to the poor & hungry instead!!!

I hesitate to reply in the following: "Words, words, words, .... show me how." How about a truly christian example of the Vatican actually sharing its treasury of wealth with the poor.
JR

Let's see:

Benedict lives in a papal palace.

His cardinals and bishops live in mansions situated in the midst of urban poverty and homelessness. They do this while criticizing US health care reform from the safety of their paid-up-for-life medical insurance plans, and while informing impoverished couples that they are to continue to bring children into the world.

How is His Holiness' critique of 'opulence and waste' supposed to carry much weight in that context?

He may as well tell the poor "There'll be pie in the sky when you die" (that's a lie).

When will Pope Red Shoes lead by example?

It would be great to lead by example. I might suggest that we first eliminate the titles and robes of Royalty - "Your Grace, Your Eminence, etc., along with the palaces, gowns of purple lace, and other such itmes that smack of the middle ages and empire. Secondly, it would be good to give up limos and drives, servants, and other signs of power and wealth. It would possibly do all of us good to actually act and live like servants of the Gospel. It feed the world is more than simply food for the belly, it is also required that we feed the spirit - the soul.

How many of you who critcize the Pope are Catholic? how many know anything about the catholic Church? If you did,all your criticism would be silent. Also,how many of you are homosexual and resent the teaching of the Church. More money is spent in a mega cathedral in Texas in a month than the Vatican spends on itself in a year.
God loves us all.it is not the popes but our duty to take care of each other.

All of you commentators are pathetic and utterly predictable. You'll use any excuse to attack the Holy Father. You should all pray to be granted a tenth of his wisdom and sanctity. Shame on the deplorable NCR and its staff for giving you a forum to spread your hatred.

While no one can deny the validity of the Pope’s words, they must be cast in contrast to the huge land and property holdings of the Catholic Church throughout the world. It has been said, and rightly so, that in many dioceses, the Church is the largest landowner.

When hundreds of millions of people are starving throughout the world, why is the Church spending hundreds of millions of dollars to maintain enormous churches that are often less than half full for weekend liturgies and nearly empty through the week? What about the opulence of the Holy See? There are vast treasures hidden away from the public eye in Rome – for what purpose?

Consider also the construction of the new seminary in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. By the time the new seminary building and the theological college are finished, the bill will be well in excess of $60 million. Surely, adequate facilities could have been built for considerably less than half that amount. What lesson does it give to the future priests being trained there, except that they can and should expect a life of similar luxurious surroundings.

It’s easy for the pope to call the world to action on the hunger and poverty issue. First, he needs to call his church officials to more accountability. What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

Mr. Allen notes: "Speaking in French, Benedict XVI said . . ."

Mais bien sûr. Il n'y a qu'une seule langue que sert. . .

And continues, " . . .the underlying problem isn’t a lack of food, echoing a point frequently made by development experts and anti-hunger activists."

So, just overthrow the capitalist oppressors and their militarist partners, and we can all eat.

Ask for a glass of water in Gaza . . .
Or bread.

Go vegetarian, dudes.

I wonder if a mirror was available when he made this statement, or is reflection not a part of Papal duties?

This is the pope's second recent reference to opulence and the evils thereof. Has he copied the bishops? I get tired of seeing them in their purple and gold, sitting in their mansions, served by church minions, calling each other by medieval princely titles ... it should be stopped. They should have nice apartments in parish rectories, say Sunday Mass, mix with the people, and get some idea of what the real world is like.

The contrast between the substance of the Pope's message and the comments above left me dumb-stricken. Of course, nothing can be easier than to ignore the message by criticizing the messenger, something adolescents do extremely well as any parent knows too well. But apart from this technique beyond which one can easily sense a certain amount of callousness, there arises the question of bad will and crass ignorance. It becomes more and more evident that the secular establishment succeeded, by ingeniously reforming the entire education system, in creating the type of individuals that can indeed be easily manipulated with rhetoric and slogans as long as they get the banquet's crumbs: sufficient toys, endless entertainment and self-made morality.

When will anti-catholics and leftists keep telling us to dispose of and destroy our cultural and artistic heritage?

The Vatican costs pennies per catholic to run, and has an operating cost and budget smaller than that of a medium sized university.

When I read the title — "Facing hunger, pope demands an end to 'opulence and waste'" — for a fleeting moment I thought there was no food remaining in the Vatican pantry,   ...that the papal finery and good silver must be sold.

Oh,   the perils of English language and mangled grammar!

'Turns out that the pope and his bishops remain fine and well-fed...   and it is we lesser beings among the peasantry who must give up our "opulence" — assuming we can find it to give up.

Coming from a pope and his cohorts in the Vatican orbit who are continually increasing their wardrobe of 'opulent' regalia,   it sounds more like a mockery of the poverty and starvation occurring on planet earth.     I seem to remember a French queen who had similar problems with syntax and context...   or maybe it was just the reporting of the village gazette perhaps.

What about The VATICAN and the men in purple garbs? They should lead the way and surrender their palaces, Mercs etc holidays, condominiums etc and lavish meals and set the example to the whole world.

SammyTassie
17/11/09

And lets not forget the opulent churches being built, just so the starving and underfed can have a place to worship God! And let's remember the many US Sisters and nuns living in poverty-stricken neighborhoods in keeping with their vow of poverty and imitation of Christ. We shouldn't forget the examples set of the many religious men and women and priests who live and work in the many forgotten corners of the world, facing their own starvation as they try to obtain food for their communities. The top levels of the Church have turned their backs to all of these groups, and Benedict has led the way for them, with his penchant for all sorts of regal finery worthy of ancient kings and queens, and his attendents who are there to treat him as such, even removing his eyeglasses for him. How sad. I can easily recall several former bishops who gave up residences in mansions, and who moved into the local seminary as an act of simplicity. As with many, many other things, this Pope talks one thing and does another. He brings shame on our Church with stunts like this one.

And, we wonder why the credibility of the hierarchy is gone? This must be a joke. Is this Pope unable to see the hypocrisy in his statements---or is it, do as I say, not as I do. This might work for a few blind faith Catholics but I don't think the UN cares what he thinks.

This would be funny if it were not so blatantly hypocritical. I challenge one of the uber-conservatives on this blog to explain how Benedict XVI will possibly LEAD in this initiative. If the church has ever sought a place to regain its credibility, this is the moment. Please show us a sermon and don't just preach one!

Was this a story that originally appeared on The Onion?

If I close my eyes, cross my fingers, and wish really, really hard, maybe I'll get a pony for Christmas, too!

Brilliant so far!
Yes, please chisel out the Sistine Chapel into small squares and Ebay them. Also sell off all the art, and any other pieces of world heritage, that is currently available for all to see, so that it can go to private collectors and never be enjoyed by the public again. Also sell off the homes that you have already paid for and don't cost anything so you pay capital gains and have to fork out for a new home. Most of all, be sure to sell off the treasures that were gifts from other countries, world leaders, and people at large - it is not disrespectful at all to sell a gift you received, right? Like that Enzo Ferrari that the pope received as a gift that we always see him riding around in... oh wait.

Do this and hunger would be ended forever and always, right?

The only thing more ludicrous than these comments is me feeding the trolls.

Until Benedict practices what he PREACHES about OPULENCE and WASTE it is nothing more than hypocrisy. He can begin with discarding the riches he, his Cardinals and fellow bishops display when they appear in public. It's a sick joke to parade around in long watered silk dresses and jeweled pectoral crosses when millions of people are starving and sleeping on doorways. It's a scandal of such magnitude that they choose to live the high life as the world starves. They will NEVER change as long as we give them our money. We enable them. This is shameful. There is very little evidence that this Bishop of Rome understands how hypocritical it is for him to preach about hunger when he lives the life of an imperial monarch. Most, but not all of his cardinals, archbishops and bishops live as princes in mansions with cooks, maids and chauffeurs. Hardly Christ like.

Speaking of food, has anyone seen the dinners served in some rectories?
Steaks one night, veal chops another, lamb a third. What family can eat such expensive cuts of meat night after night? And, the fathers don't like leftovers, so if it's not eaten by lunch the next day, it gets thrown away. Heaven forbid that on Tuesday night they would have to eat the reheated remains of Monday night's dinner!

The Pope can't even enforce Ex Corde Ecclesiae in Catholic Schools. He can't enforce the most important of Catholic teachings among Catholics. So all this talk of his on world economic issues is just vapid verbage that will be ignored and forgotten. Pope Benedict needs to clean up his own Church before he tackles the world's eonomic problems.

How disappointing the responses so far to the Pope's insightful challenge! Instead of gratitude for the leadership he offers, it becomes an occasion for attacks that seem little more than ax-grinding.

This is truly ironic--Benedict criticizing opulence while he wears fur, Prada shoes and the most ornate vestments (all lace albs, brought down from the Vatican "attics") seen in the Vatican in a long time. Plus his Cardinals, eg Francis Rode, parade around in 17-foot scarlet silk trains.
As usual the Vatican just "doesn't get it".

On reading EVERY SINGLE ONE of the sad, sad comments for this article, one cannot help but be reminded of John Allen’s comments in his blog article immediately published before it.

“The blogosphere, [he] added, often seems populated by what Homer Simpson once described as “alcoholics, the unemployed, angry loners …”

“What [he] actually had in mind were instead those “comments” sections you often find at the end of blog entries, which are legendary for veering wildly off-topic, and which often seem to elicit a degree of rhetorical viciousness to which most people simply wouldn’t succumb in real-life conversation. That’s what I meant by blogs not representing the vox populi; I simply refuse to believe that most people, most of the time, are quite that angry.”

It is the last time I am ever reading any of the comments section again. Totally pathetic. God help you all.

If we demand the pope to take off everything symbolic of his office, we all better go out to the streets naked. Perhaps this will be a concrete expression of selflessness. Destroy all works of arts; many, if not all of those who commented above, view them as opulence. Destroy all monuments/structures of historical significance including churches, palaces and even the White House. Let them disappear so the poor will have no way to compare thier poverty to structures that convey affluence and power. Let us close our eyes from beauty and let us worship ugliness. Perhaps, these will satisfy our friends here.

Before I start I want to point out that you have two ways to receive my input: You can either filter it through the picture of the Vatican, the Pope, Cardinals and Bishops and the Church that apparently is predominant in your minds and thereby look at my words as irrelevant and as a direct order to oppose and talk back. Or you can read the text with an open mind and see it as an invitation to sit down and think for a few minutes. Since you seem to be engaged in trying to make the world a better place, I simply assume that you will be tolerant enough to deal with the text in the second way.

The suggestion that the Vatican should sell its treasures and give the money to the poor is - of course - not new. In today's world the first question that arises is: Who has enough money to actually buy what the Vatican has to offer? And if there should indeed be corporations or individuals that have enough superfluous money to buy art or buildings or other treasures from the Vatican, it begs the question: Why don't these corporations or individuals give the money to the poor directly? Why would they need to take a detour via the Vatican? Why would it be less scandalous for a wealthy private individual to own a piece of furniture, a vase or a painting from the Vatican than for the Vatican to use those things itself? Or better: Why would the Vatican need to mobilize money that is available by first selling its goods and then donating the money? Why not simply address every single person of good will (this is the practice of the Vatican right now) to do as much as they can to ease poverty and suffering in the world?

The intention to ease suffering is a noble one. So why do I find this noble intention constantly contradicted by comments that reveal pages like the NCR as just another playground for people who are prejudiced about the Vatican and who want to take some cheap shots ridiculing the wealth of the Pope or the Cardinals in a manner that is so convenient and polemic, that it takes the burden off people's shoulder to really think about the actual problem (hunger in Africa) and instead offers them a scapegoat (the Vatican) and thereby an excuse for lack of personal motivation ("I don’t have to do anything against world hunger, unless the Vatican does so first!"). You might want to answer that everybody who comments here donates money to Africa. If this is true - and I'd happily believe it is - then why do you seem to have such problems believing that the Vatican does its share, too?

I am sure that even somebody who apparently does not like the Vatican or the Pope will be aware of how much they are involved in worldwide activities against poverty and misery. Therefore the Vatican - concluding from its own practice and applying it to the rest of the world - has a tendency to assume that people will not have to be forced by polemics or witch-hunt strategies to donate money to the poor but will simply give, when it is needed. The Vatican would never say: "All these self-indulgent, self-flattering, self-righteous people commenting on NCR, who pretend that they actually care about the poor but instead only use the internet to insult an institution that has a 2000 year long history of charity, should sell their expensive computers and give the money to the poor. This would really make a difference. It is hard to see how the people in Africa are helped by polemics and name-calling". The Vatican would not say so because it would assume that you are good enough people to actually donate money and are not only about fostering prejudice and hatred against the Vatican. But since prejudice and hatred against the Vatican make up a large part of what I read here, it begs the question: What is wrong with you? Why do you stand up for the poor and assume that the Vatican does not? Why do you feel the need to claim the moral high-ground and ridicule the pope, the cardinals and bishops? Is it because you do not have enough fantasy to imagine that there really are international help-organizations funded by the Church? Or is it because you simply aren't familiar with the principle of giving, therefore are not able to apply it to others and instead think that accusing others already is enough to help?

The overall tone and look of these comments does not give the impression that there is genuine charity at work here. There is far too much name-calling, polemics, ridicule - if not outright hatred against the Vatican. This turns every cent that you should indeed donate to the poor into nothing more than blood-money, which is used to whitewash a conscience that is polluted by this kind of anger. If you only act because you want to be "holier", then your motivations are either hate or envy or pride. Hate would simply be the opposite of the charity you pretend to display. Envy is the feeling of misery that befalls you on account of the fortunate circumstances of another and is therefore one of the gravest deformations of the human soul (It is also highly hypocritical, because all you guys are better off than the poor in Africa and would therefore have to give everything you don't really need for survival to the poor or simply shut up). Finally, pride is the worst because all other sins manifest in bad deeds, but pride even ruins the good ones. Looking at your comments, one can easily be left with the feeling that this page is a melting pot for people who just need a quick and easy way to find a scapegoat (not least of all because of their own shortcomings) at which they can point the finger while feeling "good" or "human" or "right" about themselves.

Don't get me wrong: I am not accusing any of you individually of any of the above. I am just left with a general bad feeling about the way in which you try to make a difference. The whole of society - no: the whole world - would be much better off if people could learn to pool their resources and not try to look like the good guys by simply pretending that others are worse. Does it really make sense to drive a wedge between the Vatican and the people just because you think you are so much better? I live in Rome (right among the "mansions" of the cardinals - what a hogwash! These guys live in apartments, which - granted - are not exactly tiny. But "mansions"...?) and Vienna. Every day I see with my own eyes the Church-run institutions that give food and clothing to the poor. I see the nuns and monks that work on the streets and in the hospitals. Even in our religious house, every day I witness people being fed, clothed and cared for, sometimes also with money and with administrative tasks. I see the tens of thousands of Euros that the charity project of our monastery donates every year to street children in Romania, to give them a home and an education and eventually enable them to get a job and have a life. Don't you think that if we put stupid differences aside and together focus on bringing about a change, we could achieve much more?

Finally, let me try to illustrate that things could be much worse if the Church needed to exhibit "new humility" instead of continuing down the old and practical path:
One example from reality: In a German diocese, which shall remain unnamed, the newly installed bishop had a display vitrine in the diocesan museum with a couple of beautiful old pectoral crosses. He thought that they were to precious, because they were golden and had jewels on them. So the bishop ordered an artist to chop a piece of wood out of the frame of the door of the house in which he grew up in and had the wood carved it into a pectoral cross to show his "humility". The problem: This cost money. The pectoral crosses he had in the museum were free, of course. So the "humility" that this man exhibited (and which the people of course appreciated) cost the next best poor man a certain amount of money.
Some hypothetical thoughts: Even if you remove the curia from the Vatican and dress them in simple vestments: There still would be an enormous amount of costs, which nowadays can be avoided, because everything the pope and the curia needs is already there. And the argument that the Vatican needs expensive maintenance of buildings doesn't count, because this maintenance would be there, no matter if the Vatican belongs to the Church or an eccentric Japanese industrialist. So the money for maintenance would be lost for the poor anyways. It also would not make sense to simply tear down the Vatican to avoid these maintenance costs, because then you would have to spend money for the tearing down, for the rubble-removal and for the redesign of the area and for a new curia office, all of which would again not go to the poor. The current solution - using what has been acquired in a centuries long, organic development - simply is the cheapest, even if it might sound incredible at first sight.

And all these cheap ad-hominen shots at the cappa magna or the Pope's red shoes are nice but wont sell, because the cappa you see cardinals like Rode or Canizares wear at the Institute of Christ the King isn't even their's. It belongs to the institute and gets thrown over whichever prelate comes along to celebrate, provided the prelate says "okay". And since the Papal shoes are NOT Gucci, as some would prefer to believe, I really doubt that the color makes a difference here.

I don't know if you are Catholic and are genuinely concerned about your faith and the Church or if you are just an angry people who want to blow off steam. If you are Catholic, surely you cannot find honest satisfaction in the way you look down on other men, just because they wear vestments during mass and live in bigger rooms than you do. I know that I am only a lonely voice out there that calls for common sense and for a little bit of respect. I know that you guys probably laugh and disregard my words because they somehow get dangerously close in the way of the easy prejudices and comfortable moral superiority. But if you are open and tolerant and self-confident enough so that you can actually afford to think about what I said, I'd highly appreciate it.

Bottom-line: If the comments I read here said something like "Come on! Let's collect money to help the poor!" and not "Hey! Look at us! We are so righteous, good and holy because we accuse the evil, wealthy Vatican (who also gives to the poor in abundance, but we don't want to get caught up in annoying little details…)!" it would not only help the poor, but it would also help yourself, because you would not have to try and achieve your desired ends by fostering disrespect or even hate against others.

Thank you for your patience and time.

The Holy Father is correct and he is also wrong.

The Holy Father is right in that hunger is a scandal and a problem that must be dealt with. The Holy Father is correct when he says that we have an obligation to care for those who are less fortunate than we are. He is further correct in his assertion that caring for the poor and needy is primarily something that we, as individuals, should do. We should do so by making good choices, avoiding "conspicuous consumption" and greed (largely responsible for the current state of our economy!). He is right that population does not necessarily lead to hunger and that population control (contraception and murder of unborn children and sick elderly folks) does not solve the hunger problem.

He is wrong, however, in his support for the United Nations, an organization that seems to exist for the purposes of propping up dictators, spreading secular socialism, attacking all that which the Church defends and enshrining in "international law" anti-semitism. He is speaking to the wrong body entirely.

The Holy Father should address gatherings of farmers and entrepreneurs and business leaders. He should encourage them to continue to innovate in the area of food and clean water. He should challenge government leaders to get out of the way and unleash the power of the free market to address the problems of hunger and thirst. Governments don't solve problems and multi-national bodies solve even fewer problems. Entrepreneurs and inventors, innovators, farmers and the private sector solve problems.

The Holy Father should know this!

What a lot of vicious, unpleasant comments!
Let's hope those attending the meeting paid attention to the Pope's vital message and did not use it simply to attack the Catholic Church and promote their own personal agendas like these folks.
God bless you, commentators.

Opulence at point A if dissolved is not likely to turn into food for the hungry at point B. These kind of comparisons are rarely valid.

A case in point is Zimbabwe, the former Rhodesia. When Zimbabwe was a white ruled country as Rhodesia, it was a granary. Not only were the natives well fed but there was plenty of food for export from the white commercial farms. When Rhodesia eventually became completely black ruled as Zimbabwe (there was an interim period where the whites held 20% of the seats in Parliament), it eventually went bankrupt after expropriating the white farms and the people starved. I don't hear anyone calling for the return of white rule in Zimbabwe but white rule in Rhodesia meant no hunger in that country.