 "Photo: Illustration by Ginger Pugh")
 "Photo: N/A")
More than three billion people live on less than $2.50 a day, according to a 2008 World Bank report, and about 25,000 children die every day due to poverty, according to UNICEF.
Hunger, disease, economic exploitation and lack of access to basic resources plague billions who do not have the political or financial means to escape their endemic poverty.
Jesus taught us to help those in need, that we should live simply so others may simply live. He and his apostles shunned worldly possessions in favor of the spiritual wealth that comes with sacrificing for others. It is difficult to deny one of Jesus's central lessons was to live humbly.
Despite this, the Catholic Church is one of the richest institutions on the planet. There are two aspects of Vatican wealth: its material possessions and its financial holdings.
Full disclosure: I was raised Catholic — 12 years of Catholic schooling, Mass every Sunday, the works. I no longer identify with Catholicism for a myriad of reasons I need not discuss here.
St. Peter's Basilica is full of art treasures worth millions of dollars — the lavish costumes, chalices and papal accessories run into the thousands, and even local churches, like mine in Olathe, Kan., spend tens of thousands of dollars on religious art.
Pope Benedict XVI recently commissioned a set of 30 new vestments modeled after Pope Leo X, one of the most corrupt and lavish popes in Church history. Some of these include capes so expansive they require two cope bearers to hold them out to either side.
Jesus would have been disgusted by these exorbitant displays of wealth and pageantry, just as he was with the money-changers in the temple. The truly consistent pope would wear simple garments, while his people celebrate Mass in simple buildings. Isn't it the teachings that matter rather than the stained glass?
One notable, but often ignored, exception to the extravagance is the thousands of nuns and monks who live modestly and without unnecessary indulgence. Mother Teresa is a prime example. The Church would do well to emulate her.
Many point to the limited annual budget of the Catholic Church, as well as its history of operating in the deficit, as an indication of its limited resources. This is misleading, however, as it ignores the Church's vast holdings.
Avro Manhattan said in his book "The Vatican Billions," "The Catholic Church is the biggest financial power, wealth accumulator and property owner in existence." He cites the U.N. World magazine as estimating the store of Vatican solid gold alone exceeds several billions of dollars.
The Church's investments are spread out among banks all over the world and include vast tracts of land and investments in some of the world's largest corporations. Yet millions starve.
Even if I'm wrong, and the Vatican is not the major financial powerhouse it seems to be, the hypocrisy of many local churches is undeniable.
Marble statues, stained glass, seasonal ornamentation and ornate tabernacles adorn my former church and many of those I have visited. While these expenditures beautify the church, just as the lavish Vatican does, this is little comfort to a person desperately in need of basic resources.
How can the Church possibly justify spending thousands, if not millions of dollars on such extravagances when people are dying from preventable plagues?
The best thing Catholics can do to cease the hypocrisy is demand financial transparency from their churches and question unnecessary expenditures. While in my years of Catholic education, it was repeatedly stressed to me that the Catholic Church is not a democracy. That doesn't mean priorities can't be changed as a response to the clarion calls of thousands of parishioners. These demands for change, however, will not be heeded if no one makes them.
If you're a Catholic, demand accountability from the institution that represents you.
-Beth Mendenhall is a senior in political science and philosophy. Please send comments to opinion@spub.ksu.edu.
is a member of the 
55 comments
it's selfish of you to be at college.
WASHINGTON– The Catholic church has warned it will stop joint aid projects with Washington's authorities if the city passes a proposed law to legalize gay marriage.The US capital's Catholic authorities had asked to be exempted from part of a proposed same-sex marriage law that would also ban discrimination against gay men and lesbians.In a statement, the city's archdiocese said the rules "could prevent social service providers such as Catholic Charities from continuing their long-term partnerships with the District government to provide critical social services for thousands of the city's most vulnerable residents."Programs at risk include adoption and foster care services and could affect 68,000 people who use the services each year, the church said."Religious organizations and individuals are at risk of legal action for refusing to promote and support same-sex marriages in a host of settings where it would compromise their religious beliefs.""The teachings of the Catholic Church, including those of the Archdiocese of Washington, hold that all individuals have equal dignity and deserve equal respect. However, marriage by its very nature must be between a man and a woman."The bill is expected to be voted on next month.-thechurchreport.com
I thought the thrust of this article by Beth was that the Catholic Church was too rich, and you tell me to google "bankrupt catholic diocese"? So are you saying that Beth is wrong? Or are you saying that even though they are going bankrupt, they are still too rich? I'm confused.If we are playing the google game, google "protestant pedophiles" and you get 541,000 entries. Does that mean I win? No. In fact, pulling numbers from google (i.e., out of your @$$) is a childish way to argue a point.I never said I defended pedophilia; I think it is disgusting. I never said I defended bishops that covered it up, either. But I do object to you painting all priests, all bishops and the entire Catholic hierarchy with such a broad brush. Less than 2% of priests have been accused of being pedophiles, yet you bandy around the term "pedophile priest" as if it is the de facto state. You are proud to be prejudiced against all Catholics because 2% (of clergy, not members) are bad?
; yet it does not have the utterly ruthless, exploitative character of child molestation. In almost all cases too, with the older teen-agers, there is an element of consent.Also, the definition of "childhood" varies enormously between different societies. If an act of this sort occurred in most European countries, it would probably be legal, since the age of consent for boys is usually around 15. To take a specific example, when newspapers review recent cases of "pedophile priests," they commonly cite a case that occurred in California´s Orange County, when a priest was charged with having consensual sex with a 17-year-old boy. Whatever the moral quality of such an act, most of us would not apply the term "child abuse" or "pedophilia." For this reason alone, we need to be cautious when we read about scores of priests being "accused of child abuse."The age of the young person involved is also so important because different kinds of sexual misconduct respond differently to treatment, and church authorities need to respond differently. If a diocese knows a man is a pedophile, and ever again places him in a position where he has access to more children, that decision is simply wrong, and probably amounts to criminal neglect. But a priest who has a relationship with an older teen-ager is much more likely to respond to treatment, and it would be more understandable if some day the church placed him in a new parish, under careful supervision.The fact that Cardinal Law´s regime in Boston seems to have blundered time and again does not mean that this is standard practice for all Catholic dioceses, still less that the church is engaged in some kind of conspiracy of silence to hide dangerous perverts.I am in no sense soft on the issue of child abuse. Recently, I published an expose of the trade in electronic child pornography, one of the absolute worst forms of exploitation, and my argument was that the police and FBI need to be pressured to act more strictly against this awful thing.My concern over the "pedophile priest" issue is not to defend evil clergy, or a sinful church (I cannot be called a Catholic apologist, since I am not even a Catholic). But I am worried that justified anger over a few awful cases might be turned into ill-focused attacks against innocent clergy.The story of clerical misconduct is bad enough without turning into an unjustifiable outbreak of religious bigotry against the Catholic Church.