Vatican Using Charity for the Poor to Fund Vatican Admin

1,822 Views | 13 Replies | Last: 4 yr ago by jkag89
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/11/vatican-uses-donations-for-poor-to-fight-budget-deficit-report-says.html

So apparently the administrative budget for the Vatican is enormous and growing, and there's a huge deficit. So they are using Peter's Pence, which is apparently a special fund for the poor to cover the deficit. Seems pretty indefensible to me, but what do I know
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
diehard03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I love free articles about other articles that are behind a pay wall.

I'm not even mad about the budget shortfall usage. I am more annoyed that they have assets in this fund that exceed 10x the annual donation amount. This seems like the bigger issue to me (if they have actually told people that it will go directly to the poor)
swimmerbabe11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It sounds like people have stopped donating to the vatican, but still want to donate to vatican charities.

However, one can't live without the other.. so while support for the Pope and whatnot has diminished, people's Catholic duty hasn't and they are just redirecting their money? Yes? But now the Pope can't provide for his court without dipping into the Peter's Pence fund?
AgLiving06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hasn't it been accepted that the Vatican has been lying about its finances for years?
bmks270
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
So years ago I heard a sermon once that flipped
giving tithes on its head. The sermon argued that the church's push for tithes was theft from the church, theft from God as the people make up the church. It cited Malachi and the verses about "robbing God." But the preacher said that an institution may rob the church by demanding tithes (through guilt, prosperity gospel, etc.).

I thought it was a very profound teaching, that God's people may be robbed by corrupt church leaders.



diehard03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

I thought it was a very profound teaching

Sounds more like semantics games to be "fresh and edgy".
Frok
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Maybe the vatican admins are poor
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
swimmerbabe11 said:

It sounds like people have stopped donating to the vatican, but still want to donate to vatican charities.

However, one can't live without the other.. so while support for the Pope and whatnot has diminished, people's Catholic duty hasn't and they are just redirecting their money? Yes? But now the Pope can't provide for his court without dipping into the Peter's Pence fund?
That actually makes sense given the current state of the Catholic Church. You hear about things like this with really poorly run charities like the Red Cross, or with charites that are really just family and friend work programs like any professional athlete charity. It's pretty disturbing to hear this coming from the Catholic Church. After all, they are the largest single Christian organization in the world, and Christians are the most charitable people in the world. So it seems like an extra level of betrayal to take money from a Christian charity fund to cover administrative bloat
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
PigInABlanket
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Pope is an enemy of the kingdom and should be treated as such.
BrazosBendHorn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
There's trouble in River City ...

Quote:

The latest twist started to unravel in October when Pope Francis ordered Swiss Guard gendarmes to raid the Holy See's Financial Information Authority (AIF) office inside Vatican City, carrying out boxes of papers and computer hard drives. They tacked up what amounted to a "Wanted Dead or Alive" sign on the Vatican's fortified gates to keep out the administrators while they started sifting through reams of curious expenditures in the Vatican's financial books.

They came up with quite a few surprises about the way money donated for the poor was being used, including some dubious real estate interests, connections to an even more dubious Maltese financier, and investments in movies that, good or bad, don't exactly square with church doctrine.

One of the more peculiar items on the spreadsheet was property on Sloane Avenue in London. It included luxury apartments in a former Harrods warehouse. The Vatican press office said at the time further investigations would be "carried out over time."

Among the latest of those investigations is a tie to the Centurion Global Fund based in Malta, which has proven itself to be a hotbed of corruption. The Maltese prime minister is currently spending most of his time blockaded in his office in Valletta while angry protesters demand he resign over his alleged ties to the assassination of anti-corruption journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia two years ago.

At least two-thirds of the Centurion Global Fund's capital assets are fed by the Vatican Secretariat of State, under which the Vatican financial authority operated, according to documents seen by Corriere Della Sera newspaper in Italy. The fund is run by Enrico Crasso, a 71-year-old Italian with a Swiss fiscal address who also runs Sogenel Holding, referred to as a "reference point" for key financial transactions for the Vatican Bank.

Crasso's office walls are lined with personal letters signed by various Vatican secretaries of state and he has even been awarded a gold medal of merit from the pope. He alone decides how the Vatican moneyabout $78 millionentrusted to him through the Malta fund is spent to get the highest return.

The documents seen by Corriere Della Sera list his recent investments with the church's money. Among them are around $2.2 million in a company called Italian Independent, run by Fiat founder Gianni Agnelli's flamboyant grandson Lapo Elkann, who was arrested in New York in 2017 for faking his own kidnapping, allegedly to pay off a drug debt owed to a male escort.

Another $11 million went to an Italian businessman named Enrico Preziosi, who is an entrepreneur who owns the Genoa soccer team and who was caught up in a little legal trouble in the early 2000s for manipulating the price of soccer players to falsify accounting. He was fined around $15,000 and banned from soccer for four months.

But the most curious item on the report to come out so far is a $4.5 million expenditure recorded in February of this year related to finance for the 2019 films Men in Black: International and Elton John's rather steamy biopic Rocketman, which portrays the entertainer's drug problems and is the first studio movie to portray gay sex between men in an authentic way.

While investing in mainstream entertainment is hardly sinful, the great contradiction is that the Catholic Church preaches to the devout that homosexuality is a sin.

--//--

The Vatican press office has issued a statement that sheds very little light on the matter. "Investigations are in progress, and lines of enquiry which may help clarify the position of the Holy See with respect to the aforementioned funds and any others, are currently being examined by the Vatican judiciary, in collaboration with the competent authorities," the statement reads.

The money that feeds the Centurion Fund reportedly comes from investments made by the pope's "Peter's Pence" charity, which is fed by global dioceses that collect the money specifically for the poor on one given day of the year, often the last Sunday in June which is close to the feast days of saints Peter and Paul.

Peter's Pence is not part of a local church's Sunday collection basket, but a separate collection earmarked specifically for the papal fund. According to the charity's website, the money is supposed to be channeled directly to the poor.

"The Peter's Pence collection is a gesture of solidarity," the site states. "Through it, every member of the faithful can participate in the Pope's activity. It is an activity that supports the most needy and ecclesial communities in difficulty who approach the Apostolic See for help."

Wednesday, the Wall Street Journal reported that the fund, which brings in more than $55 million annually and is worth about $700 million to date, is also spent on filling the gaps in the Vatican's internal administrative budget. The paper alleges that just 10 percent is spent on charitable works, according to documentation it obtained.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-the-vaticans-charity-spent-millions-on-elton-johns-rocketman-biopic?ref=home
Win At Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
bmks270 said:

So years ago I heard a sermon once that flipped
giving tithes on its head. The sermon argued that the church's push for tithes was theft from the church, theft from God as the people make up the church. It cited Malachi and the verses about "robbing God." But the preacher said that an institution may rob the church by demanding tithes (through guilt, prosperity gospel, etc.).

I thought it was a very profound teaching, that God's people may be robbed by corrupt church leaders.

It's only profound, because that's what scripture says in totality. The only way a church can make God's tithe payable to themselves is to pick a few verses out of the context in which they are given and twist them to apply to their pockets. What is most "strange" about this is that it actually seem strange and profound to hear the truth of God's word. Below is a biblical defense of the tithe starting from the clearest verse on what to tithe and not tithe in Leviticus 27:

Leviticus 27:30-32 list all the things we should tithe.

"Thus all the tithe of the land of the seed of the land or of the fruit of the
tree, is (YHWH) the LORD'S; it is holy to (YHWH) the LORD. If,
therefore, a man wishes to redeem part of his tithe, he shall add to it onefifth
of it. For every tenth part of herd or flock, whatever passes under
the rod, the tenth one shall be holy to (YHWH) the LORD."

From this list you see it's only the produce from the land and the herds and flocks
from the land required for tithing. You will notice there is no requirement to tithe
fish. The tithe is one of many offerings listed in Deuteronomy 12:6-7.

"There you shall bring your burnt offerings, your sacrifices, your tithes,
the contribution of your hand, your votive offerings, your freewill offerings,
and the firstborn of your herd and of your flock. There also you and
your households shall eat before (YHWH) the LORD your God, and
rejoice in all your undertakings in which (YHWH) the LORD your God
has blessed you."

You will notice the tithe is only part of the offerings to be made, which includes
others such as freewill offerings, but also offerings from the works of your hands.
That is, works of your hands are offerings separate from the tithe. And indeed we
saw in the Leviticus passage above that works of your hands are not listed in the
items to be tithed. We are also told to eat the tithe before (YHWH) the LORD,
which was done during the pilgrimage feasts described in scripture.

But you didn't eat all your tithe yourself. A third of it was given to the Levites as
indicated in Deuteronomy 26:12.

"When you have finished paying all the tithe of your increase in the third
year, the year of tithing, then you shall give it to the Levite, to the
stranger, to the orphan and to the widow, that they may eat in your
towns and be satisfied."

This says "in the third year", but it was understood this was to be a 1/3rd portion
every year given to the Levites. Similarly a 1/3rd portion was given to the poor.
That left the remaining 1/3rd for you to eat yourself. You will notice none of the
tithe was called to be given to a synagogue or a rabbi. (or a church or a pasture)

These actually didn't even exist at the time the Torah was written, but developed later.
A further explanation is given as to why the Levites were given their portion of the tithe in Numbers
18:24.

"For the tithe of the sons of Israel, which they offer as an offering to
(YHWH) the LORD, I have given to the Levites for an inheritance;
therefore I have said concerning them, 'They shall have no inheritance
among the sons of Israel.'"

The Levites were given a few cities and surrounding land within the other tribes,
but when you look at maps of where the 12 tribes settled, you never see a portion
assigned to Levi. That is because it was done just as YHWH directed, and they
were not given an inheritance in the land of Israel. That is why YHWH gave them
a portion of the tithe. Many preachers today expect to receive a portion of the
tithe, but they are not prohibited from owning land, and many of them own the
land their house sits on, so the tithe doesn't really apply to them today. Plus,
preachers in churches today fill a similar role as rabbis in the synagogues, but we
see none of the tithe went to either the synagogue or the rabbi. The synagogue
and rabbi may have been supported with money, but that money was separate
from the tithe.

The common teaching on tithe exposes the hypocrisy of many religious leaders:
out of one side of their mouths they say "We do not have to keep the law, because
Messiah fulfilled all of the law"; while at the same time, out of the other side of
their mouths, many of them say "You rob God in your tithes and offerings" from
Malachi 3:8. Isn't this a Torah requirement; a requirement of the law? Either the
Torah has gone away, or it has not. (YHWH) the LORD says right there in
Malachi 3:6 "For, I, (YHWH) the LORD, do not change...", but many say
(YHWH) the LORD has changed His Torah Laws. Except they try to put the
Torah Law of tithing back on the people, and not only that, they pervert God's
Laws making works of their hands a tithe, and making that false tithe deliverable
to themselves instead of (YHWH) the LORD, and the poor as the Torah
instructs. They also choose not to read the rest of Malachi (4:4): "REMEMBER
the Law of Moses My servant, even the statutes and ordinances which I commanded
him" What hypocrisy!

But shouldn't the clergy be paid for their work? They have gone the way of Balaam
[2 Peter 2:15], who sold services of YHWH for profit, desiring wealth and
station. This was an issue long present in Israel, and YHWH hates it; read Ezekiel
chapter 34:1-31. This is lengthy, so I'll condense some key parts here:

"prophesy against the shepherds [the Hebrew word for "pastor"] of Israel
'Woe, shepherds of Israel who have been feeding themselves! Should not
the shepherds feed the flock? You eat the fat and clothe yourselves with
the wool, you slaughter the fat sheep without feeding the flock but with
force and with severity you have dominated them.' Therefore, you shepherds,
hear the word of (YHWH) the LORD. 'Behold, I am against the
shepherds.' Then I will set over them one shepherd, My servant David,
and he will feed them; he will feed them himself and be their shepherd.
'As for you, My sheep, the sheep of My pasture, you are men, and I am
your God,' declares (YHWH) the LORD God."
This did not go away in the Apostolic Scriptures either, but there were very
quickly men in the congregations who "preached the good news for monetary
gain";

2 Corinthians 2:17 "For we are not like many, peddling the word of
God"

Jude 1:11 "Woe to them! For they have gone the way of Cain, and for
pay they have rushed headlong into the error of Balaam."

Philippians 1:17 "the former proclaim Christ out of selfish ambition
rather than from pure motives"

In 1 Corinthians chapter 9, Paul argues for support to those proclaiming the
gospel, but this was for missionaries called away from their regular place of work.
He says in verse in 5 that they should be allowed to "take along" their wives. Take
them where? That is, take them along on their missionary journey. Those people
deserve to be supported financially, because they are taken away from their normal
place of making a living. Six days ye shall work. By the sweat of their brow
they shall earn their living.

So, it is fitting to support missionaries and the congregation of God monetarily;
but it is not fitting for there to be compulsion, nor the misuse and twisting of
scripture regarding the tithe in order for someone to live off the service of the
gospel, especially while members of the congregation are in need.
chimpanzee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If the check goes to Vatican Inc., and you know Vatican Inc. has administrative expenses, you know the funds are comingled, the real question is how, generally, is Vatican Inc. doing in parsing out the cash it gets from all sources to charitable causes, of which there are many well supported worthy recipients.
[url=http://www.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/vaticans-auditor-general-unexpectedly-resigns][/url]
The last guy that tried to answer that resigned.

Vatican finances have been shady forever. The might have stopped selling bishoprics for collateralized sin obligations, but they are no more transparent than they were in Tetzel's day.

It's a pretty cynical take, but Eric Hoffer's observation that every noble cause eventually degenerates into a racket could not be more clear than when you follow the money in the Vatican.

ETA: Transparency is not exactly rewarded either.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7574247/Popes-chief-bodyguard-quits-leak-memo-identifying-officials-suspended-130m-investment.html
PabloSerna
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Never gets old bashing Catholics eh?

was that a cnbc link? LOL

+Pablo

dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Agree. The way I see it, all I have is the Lord's to be used in the way the Spirit leads me.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
jkag89
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The Vatican's financial bait-and-switch
By Phil Lawler - Catholic Culture
Quote:

So for years the Vatican has asked the faithful to support the Pope's needs, emphasizing his charitable projectsand then invested the returns in London real estate, a shady Italian bank, a bankrupt hospital, and, yes, a film about Elton John.

That's the fundamental scandal behind the latest financial news from the Vatican.* It's not that these investments were often made without proper authorization (although they were). It's not just that the people making the investments fought fiercely to prevent disclosure (although they did). It's not that slick investors profited handsomely from the under-the-radar deal (although they did). It's that the Vatican raised money for one set of purposes, and used that money for another. It's a bait-and-switch.

<snip>

Yes, it's true that when you contribute money for the needs of the Roman Pontiff, it's his money, to use as he sees fit. If he wants to use most of those funds to wash some of the red ink out of the Vatican's operating budget, that's not unreasonable. If he wants to invest the money, hoping to increase the principal, that's a legitimate decision. (It's not clear to me why an institution with ample long-term assets, but a seriously unbalanced operating budget, would be investing current funds for future returns. But I've never claimed to be a financial expert.)

But when the Peter's Pence collection was taken up in your parish, were you told that most of your donation would be used to balance the Vatican budget? Or that some of the money would be invested for future returns? Not likely. In promotional literature for the collection, the US bishops' conference said:

The purpose of the Peter's Pence collection is to provide the Holy Father with the financial means to respond to those who are suffering as a result of war, oppression, natural disaster, and disease.

But in fact 95% of the collection was used for other purposes.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.