Vatican rips off the poor

[Lyndon]

Vatican raises millions of dollars for the poor and instead spends it on itself and its debt caused by child abuse

Vatican Uses Donations for the Poor to Plug Its Budget Deficit

 

[Vouthon]

Thank you for highlighting this allegation that only 10% of the Peters Pence fund is allocated to charity, while two-thirds is spent trying to plug a budget deficit.

Whether or not the claims are credible, there should be an immediate enquiry into the allocation of these funds. It would be extremely hypocritical and so this issue needs looked at pronto.

I hate to admit that I'm slightly skeptical because of the Wall Street Journal's right-wing stance. I noticed this morning that a lot of Catholic traditionalist websites are crowing about about this, as they are using it to question Francis's leadership and reforms. That always gives me pause.

Francis has made a lot of enemies - especially in the US church - and there have been claims before that have proven false or misleading, turning out to have come from angry Cardinals trying to undermine his papacy (such as Burke,).

Not saying this WSJ claim falls into that category, the unnamed sources may be spot on, but the record does lead me to desist from immediate judgement.

The WSJ cited unnamed sources. Let's see if the Vatican responds, if the WSJ buckles down or further elaborates.

Undoubtedly, this claim concerns me but I need to know more than just the paper citing unnamed sources.

 

[Vouthon]

I found this:

The Holy See Press Office in a statement said “investigations are in progress” over the Secretariat of State’s investments.

“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 said.​

 

[Estro Felino]

Also the 8 permil, the tax most Italians pay to the Vatican...that is 8€ per 1000 € of annual incomes in the annual fiscal declaration.

 

[Stevicus]

Vatican raises millions of dollars for the poor and instead spends it on itself and its debt caused by child abuse

Vatican Uses Donations for the Poor to Plug Its Budget Deficit

I was wondering about their budget deficit and saw this part in the article:

Meanwhile, about two-thirds of the money has been used to help cover the budget deficit at the Holy See, these people said. The Holy See consists of the central administration of the Catholic Church and the papal diplomatic network around the world. In 2018, the budget deficit reached roughly €70 million on total spending of about €300 million, reflecting chronic inefficiencies, rising wage costs and hits to investment income.

Donations to Peter’s Pence have dropped notably in recent years, to over €50 million in 2018 from over €60 million in 2017, these people said. Concern among ordinary Catholics over the church’s clerical sex-abuse crisis, as well as about the Vatican’s financial transparency, have weighed on donations, these people said. Another decline is expected for 2019.

"Chronic inefficiencies, rising wage costs, and hits to investment income."

And of course, the collection plate has gotten lighter. I guess they must really be strapped for cash.

I recall many years ago when our local diocese ran into financial trouble, mainly due to buying a TV station which was a cash drain. It got so bad that the archdiocese had to step in and take over their finances.

Well, it looks like they might have to come up with some creative ways to get more cash.

 

[Vouthon]

Well, it looks like they might have to come up with some creative ways to get more cash.

You don't say, looks like they might have found one such creative way judging by the OP article!

Cash-strapped or no, transparency is the key here. This is very untransparent funding if the unnamed sources are correct.

I want answers. Let's hope they come from the reported enquiry.

 

[Revoltingest]

I was wondering about their budget deficit and saw this part in the article:



"Chronic inefficiencies, rising wage costs, and hits to investment income."

And of course, the collection plate has gotten lighter. I guess they must really be strapped for cash.

I recall many years ago when our local diocese ran into financial trouble, mainly due to buying a TV station which was a cash drain. It got so bad that the archdiocese had to step in and take over their finances.

Well, it looks like they might have to come up with some creative ways to get more cash.

Looks like the Pope got a job as mascot for Red Bull.

 

[pearl]

I want answers. Let's hope they come from the reported enquiry.

You're kidding, right? Benedict XVI also sought answers and then resigned. It seems nothing or no one has much success when up against the apparently still powerful of the Roman Curia.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...620d06-7760-11e2-b102-948929030e64_story.html

 

[Vouthon]

You're kidding, right? Benedict XVI also sought answers and then resigned. It seems nothing or no one has much success when up against the apparently still powerful of the Roman Curia.

No, in relation to the Curia as a whole - the institution is an infamous cesspit of moral filth, rank unaccountability and administrative decay. No buts or maybes. Benedict XVI and and Francis have both called it a brood of vipers and Pharisees. There is some seriously dirty politics and people that have wormed there way in there and seem to be quite immovable when under threat.

Indeed, your totally right that Benedict XVI resigned because he tried and failed to reform its bloated, archaic bureaucracy - despite valiant efforts (like the current Pontiff, Francis).

I was speaking solely about the present (mis)allocation of funds of the Peter's Pence that is alleged by the WSJ. The wider culture is chronic and perhaps the actual institution needs to be disbanded and re-established from the ground up, but this specific allegation needs to be investigated to see if the evidence really stacks up to the severity of the claims from the anonymous sources in this particular case.

 

[Revoltingest]

Using religion to benefit oneself at the expense of others?
Barsh flimshaw !!
I find that very hard to believe.

 

[Vouthon]

Using religion to benefit oneself at the expense of others?
Barsh flimshaw !!
I find that very hard to believe.

Thank you for making a horrible (but important) topic more lighthearted.

 

[pearl]

I was speaking solely about the present (mis)allocation of funds of the Peter's Pence that is alleged by the WSJ.

I understand that, but is it also not appropriate to allocate funds to abuse victims?

 

[Vouthon]

I understand that, but is it also not appropriate to allocate funds to abuse victims?

With respect: are you implying that I, or any reasonable person, would dispute that?

It goes without saying that the church bureaucracy has absolutely failed the victims.

I concur with Pope Francis, however, that one of the main causes is the 'clericalism' and top-down nature of church governance (which lacks transparency) that has been allowed to rigidify for too long.

 

[Stevicus]

You don't say, looks like they might have found one such creative way judging by the OP article!

Cash-strapped or no, transparency is the key here. This is very untransparent funding if the unnamed sources are correct.

I want answers. Let's hope they come from the reported enquiry.

I suppose the question is whether it's just a case of incompetence or whether someone is dipping their hand into the cookie jar. Maybe a combination of both.

 

[Vouthon]

I suppose the question is whether it's just a case of incompetence or whether someone is dipping their hand into the cookie jar.

That is the question.

The Vatican State (it is a sovereign state, after all), as distinct from the purely religious side of the Papal Magisterium, is like something out of the Borgias or Henry VIII at times.

Its archaism is appalling, and so I can well believe that the administrative unworkability of its dilapidated structures and procedures might be at play, but equally the deficiency of the system means that it also attracts unsavoury characters who would like a cushie position in the 'temporal' side of things.

But it also means (as I've discovered through past experience) that we can trust very little any "leaks" that come from anonymous Vatican insiders. There's so much machiavellianism and skull-duggery at play that its difficult to know if someone is being an idealistic truth-teller or just trying to stir partisan acrimony against the current papacy, for political reasons (as happened with the spurious Cardinal Vigano claims, which turned out to be conservative bishops making political capital out of some very slim pickings to try and undermine Francis in the court of public opinion).

 

[Revoltingest]

I suppose the question is whether it's just a case of incompetence or whether someone is dipping their hand into the cookie jar. Maybe a combination of both.

I'll wager that people less capable than the Medici family control the purse strings.

 

[MikeDwight]

Meh its just like Social Security, you're paying for the 9th century's castle, today.

 

[Stevicus]

Looks like the Pope got a job as mascot for Red Bull.

Yeah, maybe some product placement and a few plugs inserted into the sermons.

"And at the Last Supper, Jesus said 'take this all of you and eat it, for this is delicious tacos from Jack in the Box for only 99¢.'"

 

[Revoltingest]

Yeah, maybe some product placement and a few plugs inserted into the sermons.

"And at the Last Supper, Jesus said 'take this all of you and eat it, for this is delicious tacos from Jack in the Box for only 99¢.'"

Or hawking Mrs Paul's Fish Sticks for Friday dinner.

 

[metis]

I wonder if it's because a legal suit involving payments trumps even charitable donations? IOW, if the courts mandate payments, that maybe must be met before other expenditures are allocated.

This is just a question, not an answer.