Sarah Silverman offerer her solution to the hunger crisis on last night’s Real Time with Bill Maher:
I would thoroughly enjoy eating my Vatican-bought pizza ![]()
Sarah Silverman offerer her solution to the hunger crisis on last night’s Real Time with Bill Maher:
I would thoroughly enjoy eating my Vatican-bought pizza ![]()
You may use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> .
ugh. I’ll have to take a pass on this one. I find Sarah Silverman to be extremely annoying.
It is a good idea, unfortunately it has been stated before. You might put “The Shoes of the Fisherman” on your Netflix queue. But Anthony Quinn stated the idea with a lot more class than Silverman.
Not a half-bad idea really. Catholicism does a LOT to serve and feed the poor worldwide already, but they do also have a lot of wealth tied up there in the Vatican as well that could be put to much better purposes.
Of course, the idea of “selling” it off makes me wonder though about the people who would buy it – i.e. the famous works of art, the countless religious relics, the buildings themselves. It would only be the super-rich (e.g. corporate moguls, dictators, oil-barons/sheiks, politicians, etc… i.e. the people who have built their wealth on the backs of the poor in the first place) who would even have the means to buy all this stuff. What if instead of giving all that money to the Church to buy more art and collectibles for themselves so that the Church can then turn around and give it out to the poor, what if they just gave it directly to help the poor themselves? Or better yet, what if they used their wealth and power to reform the unjust systems of oppression that they themselves benefit from, and that are a major factor in creating such extreme poverty in the first place? Instead of merely giving charity to treat the symptoms of poverty and injustice, what if they actually did something about the causes of it?
Okay, so I know it’s only a Sarah Silverman sketch and I’m so over-thinking it, but still… I’m just sayin’.
Usually I hate Sarah Silverman and her super duper annoying voice…but that was funny.
She does make a point. Millions and millions are starving and a small group of holy men live in the most valuable piece of real estate in the world.
While we’re at it. There’s some major wealth in the US that’s tied up in megachurches. Selling even one could feed lots of hungry people.
Ha, I’ve actually been saying this ever since I visited the Vatican when I was 12. It struck me how I just walked past so many priceless pieces or art or things plated with gold, and then outside there were homeless people. Couldn’t they just sell one painting for charity?
Yeah, but imagine how many more people would wind up in Hell because all the money to reach the lost had been squandered on trivial things like feeding people.
How about the money that we give to these overpaid, overvalued celebrities?
or football players? but, yes. sell the vatican too…
You can’t imagine how many italians would agree with this idea.
The belief that Catholicism help poor people is not so correct, especially if you consider how much this Church devolve to third world.
Look here for more info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight_per_thousand
I’d be glad to know if out of Italy, people know about how “Otto per mille” works.
Sell it don’t wait…POPE doesn’t make sense…Jesus lived simple like. Pope lives a rich man’s life and contradict Jesus’s message. It’s ridiculous how they treat a guy who barely 50% of the vote now is considered a way to haven. What is wrong with people. do we still live in the planet of the apes?
Me likes.
I love Sarah Silverman, and I love this idea. I’ve always thought that it made very little sense to have Catholics who preach charity, poverty, and humbleness, but then they build humungous cathedrals and stuff. Sell the Vatican, Feed the World!!!
Here’s my idea: How about if the church stopped taking money from the poor. How about if they drew a poverty line and said ‘anyone below this, never, EVER EVER give money to the church.’
Have you ever read James Randi’s account of seeing the giant money counting machines behind the scenes at Guadalupe, where the dirt poor and starving heave their humblest coins into the coffers of the church?
This is from Randi’s October 11 2002 commentary
http://www.randi.org/jr/101102.html
James Randi then wrote:
The whole idea that Jesus would recommend selling Churches and religious artifacts is highly questionable. There is no evidence of him telling the Jews of his day to sell the temples nor the religious implements in them…and I am sure that they were very costly. He did rail against the hypocrisy of the ruling elite, against their interpretation of religious law.
Jesus agreed to be baptized, his family paid the tax to the temple for his purification. He seemed to have led a very orthodox jewish life until his ministry.
There is no doubt, if the Gospels can be believed, that he intended starting a new religion. A new covenant is what he called it. With a new religion came new temples and new religious relics. The idea that Catholics are somehow wrong because they have temples is stupid…but what can you expect from someone who pees in a cup in order to entertain people.
Even as a teenager I wondered why I should drop a dollar or so into the basket every week when the Vatican has untold riches that it could use to feed the poor. But whether it’s the Vatican’s priceless treasures, the constant begging for money by TV preachers, or the money poured into a Baptist megachurch, it’s fairly obvious that very little that any Christian gives to any church actually goes to helping poor people. This is one reason I understand why some people are religious but distrust organized religion.