Foxes have dens and birds have nests, but the Archbishop of Melbourne, Philip Freier, has a $25M mansion, Bishopscourt, featuring 18 rooms and a couple of acres of luxurious gardens.
His opulent surroundings have in no way dampened his enthusiasm for excoriating everyone else’s tendency to make an idol out of the economy, the economy to which he owes his lavish residence.
From here:
There is a great danger that the economy has become an idol and Christians must ask questions about where we place our confidence, the Anglican Archbishop of Melbourne Dr Philip Leslie Freier told The Justice Conference on 18 April.
[…..]
“Idols are not founded in reality, but founded in a corrupted imagination. We are deceived when we give life to an idol, when we construct an idol with our own hands.”
This was followed by the customary vilification of economic “inequality”.
Here is a tour of Philip Freier’s humble dwelling – he does occupy just a one bedroom apartment in it, I should add; that’s what makes it “equal” and non-idolatrous:
Do as I say, not as I do. The very definition of hypocrite. And our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ never had any patience for them.
Don’t worry, the Archbishop will lose his mansion when he retires.
Depends on what he rest of the house and grounds are used for. If they are mostly vacant, then the place should be sold and the proceeds put to good use to further the Gospel. If, as I suspect, the building is used to hold meetings or other forms of Christian work, than where’s the need to condemn the Archbishop. After all, as Michael Li mentions, the house “goes with the job”, and it’s really up to the Archbishop and the Diocese to ensure that it is put to the best possible use.
Yes, I suspect it does go with the job and I don’t see too much wrong with that, even if he has the run of the whole place.
What rubs me up the wrong way is an archbishop living somewhere that is beyond the means of those he is lecturing on the evils of economic idolatry and inequality. If he kept quiet about his crypto-Marxist version of social justice and just preached the Gospel, I would have no quarrel with him.
Alternately, if he simply must prattle on about injustice, do a St. Francis: discard his finery and move in with the poor he would like us to believe he is trying to help.
You have misrepresented the article, David. Economic inequality is referenced, but I would hardly call the man’s views crypto Marxist.