To the article’s point. There is something inherently ironic about the Shopping Mall which in of itself is essentially an icon of American style Capitalism being built during the papacy of Francis. A noted critic of both Capitalism and the U.S
The mall isn’t in St. Peter’s or a religious institution. You could argue though it violates the principle of the story by being essentially right next door to St.Peters.
The issue with the money changers wasn’t so much they were doing what they were doing. Though undoubtedly he frowned on it. It was that they were doing it inside the Temple. Which was his fathers house.
Mass can be held anywhere, that doesn't permanently consecrate the ground and make it a church. If it did, they'd be pushing in-person mass just to claim territory...
To the article’s point. There is something inherently ironic about the Shopping Mall which in of itself is essentially an icon of American style Capitalism being built during the papacy of Francis. A noted critic of both Capitalism and the U.S
Question? How would Jesus feel about this mall? He overturned the moneychangers in the temple and they were only selling passover related items.
The mall isn’t in St. Peter’s or a religious institution. You could argue though it violates the principle of the story by being essentially right next door to St.Peters.
The issue with the money changers wasn’t so much they were doing what they were doing. Though undoubtedly he frowned on it. It was that they were doing it inside the Temple. Which was his fathers house.
It is in the Vatican which can be considered a temple all by itself given that mass has been held outside of St. Peter's.
Mass can be held anywhere, that doesn't permanently consecrate the ground and make it a church. If it did, they'd be pushing in-person mass just to claim territory...