Pope Francis amends "Idolatry"

Pope Francis does not like "money" to be idolized. On deeper analysis however , it turns out that he was referring to "greed" in money being constitutive of idolatry. But. is the use of word "idolatry" appropriate for "greed'?  

Before we discuss this questionable use of word "greed" in "idolatry", let us first quote the report in www.rawstory.com.

 "Speaking at daily Mass on Monday, Pope Francis condemned the worship of money."

 "Though money itself was not inherently evil, Francis said the attachment to money lead to destruction of families, friends, and the self".

“It leads you to idolatry, it destroys your relationship with others,” he said, according to Radio Vatican. “It’s not money, but the attitude, what we call greed. Then too this greed makes you sick, because it makes you think of everything in terms of money. It destroys you, it makes you sick.”


“And in the end – this is the most important thing – greed is an instrument of idolatry because it goes along a way contrary to what God has done for us,” Francis added. “Saint Paul tells us that Jesus Christ, who was rich, made Himself poor to enrich us. That is the path of God: humility, to lower oneself in order to serve. Greed, on the other hand, takes us on a contrary path: You, who are a poor human, make yourself God for vanity’s sake. It is idolatry!”

First premise: "Pope Francis condemned the worship of money". What? Worship of money? Just like when somebody is making the "sign of the cross" while kneeling before and after praying using "The Name" of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, by saying "In the Name of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Spirit...Amen"? In such circumstances, who is the "god" that is being idolized? is it not the "cross"? And whose "Name" were just used to attract believers? On the other hand, have you seen somebody, making a "sign of the money" at the same time, kneeling, praying, using and saying "In the "Name" of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Spirit...Amen" to it?

Second premise: "Money is not inherently evil but its attachment leads to destruction". With all due respect, what kind of logic is this? If money is not evil, how will it destroy? Besides, thinking about "money" is just ordinary to normal persons. And assuming that somebody exceeds his normal "thinking about money", which is greed, we have already human laws, e.g, anti-money laundering laws, that could properly address this greed. But how about the "idolatry" on the wooden or heavenly "Cross"? No human being had ever checked on this, as there is no law that was passed, but such "idolatry" on "images" is squarely stated in the Ten Commandments. Reverence on the Cross through "sign of the cross" is therefore inherently evil that, for so many centuries, had led, presently causing and will lead to ultimate destruction.

Third premise: "Money allegedly leads to idolatry but later "withdrawing the premise" and changing it to "greed" which causes "sickness" to think everything about "money", which money destroys and makes you sick". Tsk...tsk...tsk. No comment.

Fourth premise: "In the end, greed is an instrument of idolatry". So, it is not, after all, the "money" but "greed". But is there any idolatry in "greed'? I don't think so because you don't make a "sign of the greed" to pray and kneel, use and say "In the The Name of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Spirit...Amen" to it. 

In fine, there may be greed in money but there is no idolatry in money and/or greed.

For detailed discussions, click to Religious Deception eBook at WORDatTheNet.