I'm not arguing from a religious point of view, as I am not member of any church, I am speaking as someone who studies history.

It is never about just feeding a hungry person then throwing money at them, who do you think got to build the cathedral for often several generations living in worker's quarters and being fed by the religious orders? the aristocracy? no the poor and homeless. If it all worked through simple donations we wouldn't be building schools in Africa we would be sending dollar bills and Cheetos.

You mentioned you "travelled the world" that has always been a major income of the church, the ones who aren't needy can travel to diverse religious points of interest (pilgrimages) and spend along the way, creating more jobs a more stable economy and promoting trade. If you build small huts and then gave all the money off to give everyone a stew the money would dry up in a couple of generations.

If the Vatican sold off all its goods and treasures millions if not billions would be lost as they won't be able to charge X and Y tourists $20 to see a 16th century masterpiece. It's not just the money they have, it's the constant influx of money directly related by people wanting to see the treasures.

It's like the English Monarchy who make more money and generate more jobs and income, simply by existing, through tourism and land ownership that they cost the country in flamboyant weddings and Corgi dogs.