The Lavish Homes of American Archbishops

[Sallyforth]

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2014/08/us/american-archbishops-lavish-homes/?hpt=hp_t1

[MzT]

Wow this was mentioned during the WT study for today but I hadn't seen the article.  It's sad to see the reactions of those making donations and thinking it's going to help the poor only to find it's funding the multi-million dollar homes.

[CHecker]

Wow. Disgusting. 

 

Exactly my thoughts too Tammi. Just got home from meeting and the WT fresh in my mind. 

[Julsey]

I notice the Pope hasn't put a 'for sale' sign in front of the Vatican, or put out a few pieces of artwork to raise money for the poor...

[Dustparticle]

 The problem is that there is nothing wrong living in these houses. Yet, who live in them is the problem. I wonder are theses house are tax free? If not, where do they get their money to pay the taxes, etc? The add on by John Myers is totally sickening. I rather see pigs living in there instead of him.

Edited August 5, 2014 by Dustparticle

[MzT]

Glenn

 

In our area, there have been problems with Jews claiming that their PERSONAL homes contains a temple and therefore are valid, tax-free properties.  This has been burdensome on some friends (and the citizens of those towns) as their homes have been required to "absorb" the differences in the property taxes.  :-(

 

So, I wouldn't be surprised at all, if the legal arm of the representing churches also take advantage of the laws to claim each as a tax-free property.  What's more distressing is the fact that it's used as their PERSONAL homes.

 

I can't post the link, however, there is a very interesting article about the German bishop dubbed bishop of bling and how the German government allows the church to collect taxes (from tax payers) along with how it receives a subsidy from the German government as well.  Hence, one of the reasons for the outcry over his abuse of the funds on his PERSONAL home.

 

I discussed this with my dad last night who pointed out that in the US - any charity is allowed to collect funds on behalf of a cause and send just a small percentage of the funds towards the actual cause as long as it was disclosed in accordance with the law.  For example, there were a number of distressing scams where people were collecting money presumable for 9/11 charities when in fact over 80-90% of the funds were actually going into "administrative" fees with less than 10% actually going towards the cause.   This is important when we keep in mind that many think their donations, even in churches, are going towards say, the poor, when in fact as long as the charity discloses annually how the money is spent, the church/charity can use very small percentages toward the cause.  The "administrative" fees can be used as the charity sees fit - whether it pays a salary or supports the lifestyle of the administrator(s).

 

It's always startling to compare this to the way that the FDS uses our donations.  We can visit the branches around the world to see it in action for ourselves without the smoke and mirrors found in and around many of Christendom's churches.

[Dustparticle]

Glenn

 

In our area, there have been problems with Jews claiming that their PERSONAL homes contains a temple and therefore are valid, tax-free properties.  This has been burdensome on some friends (and the citizens of those towns) as their homes have been required to "absorb" the differences in the property taxes.  :-(

 

So, I wouldn't be surprised at all, if the legal arm of the representing churches also take advantage of the laws to claim each as a tax-free property.  What's more distressing is the fact that it's used as their PERSONAL homes.

 

I can't post the link, however, there is a very interesting article about the German bishop dubbed bishop of bling and how the German government allows the church to collect taxes (from tax payers) along with how it receives a subsidy from the German government as well.  Hence, one of the reasons for the outcry over his abuse of the funds on his PERSONAL home.

 

I discussed this with my dad last night who pointed out that in the US - any charity is allowed to collect funds on behalf of a cause and send just a small percentage of the funds towards the actual cause as long as it was disclosed in accordance with the law.  For example, there were a number of distressing scams where people were collecting money presumable for 9/11 charities when in fact over 80-90% of the funds were actually going into "administrative" fees with less than 10% actually going towards the cause.   This is important when we keep in mind that many think their donations, even in churches, are going towards say, the poor, when in fact as long as the charity discloses annually how the money is spent, the church/charity can use very small percentages toward the cause.  The "administrative" fees can be used as the charity sees fit - whether it pays a salary or supports the lifestyle of the administrator(s).

 

It's always startling to compare this to the way that the FDS uses our donations.  We can visit the branches around the world to see it in action for ourselves without the smoke and mirrors found in and around many of Christendom's churches.

 

Tammi

 

I agree with you 100 percent.