kolanuraven said:
It's no different than, for example, the man who might own the local feed store, whom you'd support with your purchases, owing his own herd of cattle.
Competition makes a healthly market!
I know...I know...you didn't ask ME!!!! :lol:
It is a public forum, so any input is encouraged. :wink:
To my way of thinking, any church's main calling is to feed people spiritual nourishment. The duty of their congregation is to pursue the day-to-day obligations of life, make an honest living, and with their tithes and offerings support the church.
Yes, sometimes it is necessary to feed peoples' bodies first, so that their hunger pangs aren't standing in the way of them receiving spiritual nourishment. This can be done with donations of food and money to buy food. It doesn't mean that the Church should have to own ranches, to raise calves, that become fat cattle, to be butchered and processed for meat, to have meat to feed spiritually hungry people.
A church owning ranches is akin to the government owning ranches. It almost becomes a communistic enterprise. It is as if the church (or the government) doesn't think individual ranching enterprises are smart enough to know how to run their own outfits.
With the church having so much money from so many resources, they are able to afford to buy ranches that ordinary hard-working private ranchers can't. It is a trend that I don't think is in the best interest of America.
I wouldn't want the Methodists, the Baptists, or the Catholics to own ranches, and I don't think the Mormons should feel the need to do so, either.