Why the fuck does a church have a $2,000,000 solid gold tacky box anyway?
Pretty cool to decapitate the statue too. I like their style. Go big or go home.
Nothing is sacred when it's paedophiles claiming the moral high ground. If a single Catholic church has to exist, it should be as a museum to the atrocities of the church.
If the eucharist really is the body of Christ, maybe he left on his own free will because he doesn't want to be associated with them. The holy ghost shows that poltergeists are canon.
Is nothing sacred anymore?
this has been excessively answered even in the Manifesto
$seven figure bread box
I like the idea of some catholic drug kingpin having this atrocity stolen just to eucharist in style
decapitated angel
if I know my catholics this martyr'd sculpture will become a hub for idolatry. Inside job?
...do they still put the faces of donors on statues?
Will it still be worth 2 mil after they've melted it down? At least I assume they are melting it. Hard to shift, otherwise.
Also yeah, a bit sus having a religion that talks about saving the poor and stuff that also decorates its churches with things worth millions of dollars.
AKA: Disgusting church hoards gold while their followers suffer in the street.
Not sure why you'd hang around to decapitate a statue if your goal was just to steal something. You'd get in and out quickly and wouldn't hang around once you're done just to do some vandalism.
Was this a political attack? Abortion related perhaps?
-
Why was this reported for sectarianism
-
Removed for advocating doing this IRL and not on roblox.
reason: Advocating for violence.
:thinking-about-it:
property damage isnt violent
You should probably ask the mod who did it instead of rhetorically posting on the comment itself. I kinda get the sectarianism angle, liberation theology is a thing and represented on this site, so that comment does pretty cleanly meet sectarianism.
But again, why complain publicly in-thread about people's reports that you disagree with or are incredulous about, as well as other mods' choices?
-
Remember all those times when people on the left talked about how fierce anti-religious sentiment has historically limited the appeal of leftism and turned workers who are religious away from leftism?
I have no sympathy with the Catholic church and its many crimes. I don't approve of the horrible exploitation that enabled some ghouls to pay for this on the first place. But I respect other people's religion and hate to see a place of worship violated, just as I hate to see a publicly available work of art destroyed to the benefit a few organised criminals.
If gold should be used for anything beyond technical applications it's stuff like this: Works of art that are available to the public. Melting the tabernacle down will not bring justice to the people who were victimised to enrich the guys who paid for it and it will not alleviate the suffering of those currently being exploited.
I appreciate what you're saying - I have Christian friends, and would hate for them to be discriminated against for their faith - but I'm not sure I can agree with you.
The tabernacle is not just a work of art; it has a religious function. It contains the eucharist. It doesn't need to be made of solid gold to have that function. In that sense, the Puritans were on to something (although the Buddhists probably did it better).
In some senses it's no different than any other piece of art, except that you have to be Catholic to appreciate it. That hardly makes it very democratic, though; if it were a museum piece, or a public statue or piece of architecture, I'd agree more with you.
Churches and the art within them are in most cases open to the public, many times free of charge unlike museums. Nobody will give you a hard time for entering one to look at art or architecture, or just to sit down and relax in one of the few public spaces left where nobody demands you buy something.
I disagree that you have to belong to a religion to appreciate the art associated with it. If you couldn't, then nobody would care for Egyptian pyramids or Roman temples today. People in Asia are moved by Bach's religious music, people in the west admire the calm and beauty of Japanese zen Buddhist gardens.
All true, but only half-way. Anyone can go into a church, but I can't imagine many Hindus, Sikhs, Muslims, or even (especially?) other Christian denominations frequented it, being a Catholic Church.
Additionally, comparing this to people visiting the pyramids isn't quite the same, because we only appreciate them for their size and construction. Their original meaning cannot be understood by us, because we have grown up in a world so incredibly different from theirs. Similarly, I can appreciate the work that went into the Taj Mahal, but I will never understand its significance in the same way that a modern Indian Muslim would, and certainly not in the same way that a subject of the Mughal empire would have.
The same is true of Bach's music too. Even modern Christians cannot really understand what Bach was getting at, because the world was such a different place when he was composing; he was a Lutheran from the 17th century. I still listen to his work and marvel at it, but in an incredibly different context. I cannot appreciate it as someone from the same time period would have.
This isn't to say that there's not something universally impressive about all of these things, but it is to say that not being a Catholic will significantly change your perception of this incident. Only when removed from its place of ritual can it really be admired on its own terms, equally and by everyone.
I hear what you're saying about the lack of public spaces though, and I agree with you in that regard.
All true, but only half-way. Anyone can go into a church, but I can’t imagine many Hindus, Sikhs, Muslims, or even (especially?) other Christian denominations frequented it, being a Catholic Church.
I really don't think that's true. People who are not Catholic go to Notre Dame or St. Peter's. People who are not Christian go to the church of the holy Sepulcher
nah you don't and shouldn't respect people holding on to identity and culture that did all that stuff. You don't respect pat-socs don't respect fucking catholics who stay catholic while knowing full well what that organization is.
Every organized religion has caused , as institutions and historical movements, huge insane amounts of suffering and corruption. Billions of people are still religious and have interactions with those instutions as an avenue for their faith in our current hellworld (or hold close to the idols and formalities of those organized religions)
Its insane to think that socialists who try to build a mass movement and still far from existing in a revolutionary society should come from a place of "not respecting X relgious person who is still X despite what X did or does as an institution or historicaly" and from a place of rhetoricaly celebrating and promoting the destruction of their idols and places of worship .
Push for liberation theology, promote healthy communal and personal expressions of religion, point out to the corruption of organized religions and their horrible history. But disrespecting the religious and celebrating the destruction of churches and temples before any of this has taken hold is deeply dumb,edgy and cruel
People really are like "let's just repeat our past mistakes without learning anything" here.
The topic of someone desecrating a big Orthodox church comes up to Lenin before the revolution when trying to win people over. Next day's Bolshevik propaganda and papers:
"LMAO GET OWNED PEASANTS THIS IS EPIC!! DEATH TO THE CHURCH!! WE WILL BRING EVERY ONE OF THEM DOWN"
this isn't 1950, everybody knows about the abuse and the coverup. if you won't do a schism over that shit then fuck you.
The mistakes the soviet union made especially in central asia. They were stupid and did only harm. I do not know about the Orthodox Church, but the efforts concerning islam did not help anyone, help built socialism or prevent reactionairy thought.
Not to say there weren't problems with the way religion was organized in those areas, but the effort to completly destroy it only backfired.
no. they should schism over it at a minimum. they've schismed for less.
They have schismed for less and still, what kind of religious movements and institutions were created by that?
Catholics do a schism and then what. Another institutionalized faction of Christianity is created under capitalism with some dozen million followers with its own churches , regressive paradigms and rhetoric, corruption,scandals, idols etc. Whould you now respect those religious people or wouldnt celebrate the destruction of some statue in their church? Is the point to continue that outlook and rhetoric until people arive at liberation theology by schisms
i'd ignore their baseline fruitcakery until they start abusing people and covering it up again and then i'd resume saying anyone who knowingly remains a member of an org is complicit.
if we improve material conditions people will leave religion on their own, we don't need to suck up to their magical beliefs or pretend we give a fuck about "holiness" or the sanctity of 2 million dollar breadboxes.
it's not repeating the mistake of systematically oppressing religious beliefs to criticize them for maintaining association with international child rapists and their accomplices.
What a wild take, calling a religion with hundreds of millions of followers pure evil and calling all of these followers reactionairy for following it. Go touch some grass
:brainworms: is why. [specific :LIB: podcast guy that i haven't listened to in years] is mid but he's right that if Denny's the restaurant chain did what the church did it would be illegal to take your kid to a Denny's assuming they didn't go out of business entirely.
When an organization splits over an internal disagreement. Christianity has has various schisms over the centuries: the split between Catholicism and the Eastern Orthodox church, the split between Protestantism and Catholicism, Protestants fracturing into various sects, etc.
"Vandals" is doing a lot of work for a 2 million dollar jewel heist.
Why would this get reported? If you're gonna report a comment at least leave a reason why
Probably because I insinuated destruction on one of the world's symbols of major religion
FIFY: Probably because I insinuated destruction on one of the world’s symbols of major
religionPedophilia Rings
Every organized religion (catholic church evem more so) has caused , as institutions and historical movements, huge insane amounts of suffering and was and is riddled with corruption. Billions of people are still religious and have strong ties with those institutions as an avenue for their faith in our current hellworld (or hold close to the idols and formalities of those organized religions)
Socialists who try to build a mass movement and still are far from existing in a revolutionary society were all of this can be radicaly reformed shouldnt be openly celebrating and promoting the destruction of people idols and places of worship no matter how bourgeois or luxurious. Most people's religious lifes or beliefs are still held at that level due to eons of insititutions, propaganda and oppression weighting down on them. Sucks yeah but thats reality . Where and how should we meet the people on this subject? By saying and thinking its epic ?
Push for liberation theology, promote healthy communal and personal expressions of religion, point out to the corruption of organized religions and their horrible history. But disrespecting the religious and celebrating the destruction of churches and temples before any of this work has taken hold is deeply dumb,edgy and most of all counterproductive
The kind of Catholic who is amenable to socialism is likely also against church wealth
Also it's objectively pretty epic
Most catholics are probably against church wealth accumulation in various degrees and open to that convo and so "amenable to socialism" . At the same time the very same people and almost all of catholics are strongly against the decapitation of statues or destruction of a catholic church and would have strong negative reactions to it. So you are back again to what i descibed
some religious institutions like the catholic church are actively malignant, child abusing, wealth-siphoning, hives, and looting luxury items bought with money scammed from their flock is cool and good
Yeah like i said Catholic church is worse than most historicaly and contemporarily(and also closer to people in this sub culturaly) but these issues and descriptions apply very much so for most of the big religious institutions across the globe to such degrees that saying "In the catholic church's case its different" doesnt hold much water imo.
Accumulation of luxury items from poor people's donations or exploitation by the isntitution itself (or even by conquest based on religious grounds) is again something all big religious institutions share historicaly. Im not saying to feel bad about this happening, just that imo the rhetoric and public position of socialists shouldnt be "This is good get owned lol" considering where the general religious public is and how far behind the left is regarding being able to influence and push towards helthier alternatives of religious expression and regarding breaking the connection between organized religious institutions and the masses.
Look, I'm not someone who thinks a church or a tabernacle have to be bare-bones....but 2 million is excessive.
