As "Christians" we are followers of Christ, are to be Christ-like, He was -- Catholic Friends Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 05:50:27 04/12/08 Sat
Author: Catie
Author Host/IP: h95.236.140.67.ip.alltel.net / 67.140.236.95
Subject: As "Christians" we are followers of Christ, are to be Christ-like, He was
In reply to: Neysa 's message, "Re: Should churches have rich stuff?" on 16:19:00 04/11/08 Fri

the example we were to follow. He said to his disciples(paraphrasing) "Even the fowls of the air have their nests, but the Son of God has no place to lay his head" Also when the rich man came to Christ, asked what he must do to be his follower Christ told him to sell all of his wealth, and to follow him. The rich man went away sad. (Theologians vary on opinion if this was a real story or a parable) Either way the message is the same.

When the majority of folks were looking for a saviour they didn't expect a king to arrive in swaddling clothes, to be laid in a cow's trough, to be so humble, without finery, etc. But Christ came to teach us we are to lay up our treasures in heaven, because one day these temporary things will pass away as well as the old earth with them.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> [> Re: Should churches have rich stuff? -- Joan, 13:53:42 04/12/08 Sat [1] (ip68-0-253-131.ri.ri.cox.net/68.0.253.131)

I don't have a problem with rich stuff in churches, so long as it's used for the people. Having a gold chalice, which I believe is always donated by someone (I think the priest's family or maybe a close friend) is great. The fancy stuff on walls (statues, stations of the cross, etc) are there to promote thinking. IMO, having those things is important. You can strip the walls bare, or put up junky abstract "art", but representative art does more to promote worship, devotion, and understanding.

If the rich stuff is paid for through the collection and is for the exclusive use of the clergy (as with the Bakers), it's a sin.

As far as I know, everything in my church building was donated by parish members. I know the things that have to be replaced, like candles and altar wine, are paid for through donations. People donate money to buy those things, usually in memory of a family member or friend.

The statues were also donated.

I suppose those people could have donated money to a charity instead, but these things are important, too. Beautiful art, to me anyway, is more inspiring than junk. If I were to donate art, it would be something that would inspire people, not make them scratch their heads, or think how junky or ugly it is. :)

The poor also benefit from these items--and equally, which is unusual. Usually, donations like these are seen only by the rich.

A beautiful stained glass window. Good. A 2008 Lexus for the minister? Not good. :)

Joan

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]