What is OmniNerd?

Welcome! OmniNerd's content is generated by you, the reader. Through voting and moderation we strive to highlight the nerdiest of what's around and provide content that's a little more thought provoking than other sites.

Submit New Content

Voting Booth

Given only these non-healthy options, which single serving drink is healthiest?

70 votes, 16 comments
2
Nerd-Its
+ -

RE: Obscenely Wealthy

Comment comment by PowerPointSamurai on 14 March 2008

Scott, that argument pretty misplaced. Ok, so arguably the Pope has control over the holdings of the Catholic Church around the world. So what? For one, he also has the liabilities--you are only looking at one side of the ledger. What do you suppose it costs the Church to keep all those churches around the world open and the upkeep?

Secondly, it is trivially simple to prove the charity work that the Church does with that money. Everyone likes to bash the Catholic Church, but if you look at the history of, say, Nicaragua, as well as several other neighboring Central American countries and the Philippines, it was the Catholic Clergy that were the Catholic Church that was in the lead for social justice.

That second part is important, because do you really believe the Pope can just arbitrarily spend that money as he choses? He can't just liquidate a few chapels and go buy himself a Benz. He is not obscenely wealthy at all. If he is the titular head of some massive empire, then he sure is getting the shaft out of the deal, because he cannot use any of it himself. This obviates the "obscenely" and makes them just wealthy. That said, I think the opulent and grandiose aura the Catholic Church presents brings it this kind of attention.

Star This to Save in Your Profile Favorite
Thread parent sort order:
Highest Voted : Lowest Voted : Oldest : Newest
Thread verbosity:
Expand All : Minimize Replies to Comments
1 Nerd-It - +
RE: Obscenely Wealthy by scottb :: NR7

The question isn't whether they do good works with their money. It's whether they're doing enough, proportional to what they have. Thats' what the sin of being "obscenely wealthy" is supposed to mean.

If Bill Gates' were to decide that putting $10 in the collection basket on Sunday was enough, you might accuse him of some sort of "sin of obscene wealth". (He's funded one of the largest charities in the world, so that's clearly not the case.)

The World Health Organization estimates that it would cost $13 billion to ensure everyone in the world had adequate sanitation and food. The RCC easily has that in assets. Seems like the charity you're trying to credit them with is really just the minimum they can get away with in order to have a presence in those areas to justify proselytizing.

I still say the head of the RCC commenting on "obscene wealth" is the pot condemning the kettle.