Christian materialism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bubba_Switzler
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The phase “christian materialism” is an oxymoron. It is a contradiction. If materialism is defined as: “In philosophy, the theory of materialism holds that the only thing that exists is matter; that all things are composed of material and all phenomena (including consciousness) are the result of material interactions. In other words, matter is the only substance”, this is in direct conflict of the presence of the spiritual. This spiritual presence, God in particular, is at the core of christianity. Any redefinition of the terms is confusing. Confusion is the ploy of the evil one.
If thatw were the meaning of "materialism that San Escriva was using you would be right but he did not use the word that way but merely to emphasise mater on a more equal level with spirit. So Christian Materialism means a Christianity more concerned with material (or worldly) subjects.
 
If thatw were the meaning of "materialism that San Escriva was using you would be right but he did not use the word that way but merely to emphasise mater on a more equal level with spirit. So Christian Materialism means a Christianity more concerned with material (or worldly) subjects.
Since San Escriva isn’t the magisterium I will still conclude his use of the term is confusing, which cannot be helpful in getting us to heaven.
 
Since San Escriva isn’t the magisterium I will still conclude his use of the term is confusing, which cannot be helpful in getting us to heaven.
The magesterium does not define that term and this is, generally, an area of opinion. He would not have been sainted if he were teaching something that was contrary to magesterium. (And note, further, that he was spanish and “christian materialism” is an english translation of whatever term he did use in his native tongue.
 
BUBBA SWITZLER WROTE:

“Christian Materialism goes further in asserting that experiencing and enjoying life is an important element of the Christian moral development. I am inclined to agree. In fact, the Church does teach that there is nothing wrong with enjoying material things (e.g. a luxury car) with certain provisions (e.g. you can afford it, it doesn’t come at the expense of more important things, e.g. family or charity). It is not a sin for a Catholic to drive a luxury car. (Or for the Pope to wear nice shoes.)”

– I have to say, this most certainly agrees with my own understanding of the Church. I cannot comprehend why anyone would believe otherwise. The theology of “trusting in God and not in material things” simply refers to not letting possessions rule your life.

But too many Catholics I know twist this simply teaching. They distort it to mean that owning many possessions IS ACTUALLY SINFUL - a belief that shows up nowhere in all of Catholic theology.

God has not placed any restrictions on what we can and cannot own. He has not placed any limits on how we can spend our money. Nowhere in the Bible, the Catechism, Canon Law or any papal publication or encyclical is there any statement to the effect that you can own only so much, or you have sinned. Such a thing it would be utterly ridiculous.

How much can you own before it is “too much?” How many possessions can you accumulate before you have “too many?” Such a thing is completely arbitrary. Totally relative. There is no progress possible in this area. You could think about this for the rest of your life, and you would never reach an objective, universally applicable answer. And the Church knows it.

You say that “the Church does teach that there is nothing wrong with enjoying material things (eg., a luxury car).”

– I believe I know what documentation you are referring to: Catholic Social Policy, which outlines the fundamental human right to own private property, to enjoy private property, and to amass wealth. Because, in the words of Pope John Paul II, if a person cannot accumulate wealth and private property, then there is no motivation for working hard at all.

But I would be grateful if you could identify your official source(s) for how you came by the same understanding of Church teaching as me. Are your sources different than mine? I am tired of seeing ascetics asserting their dry, sterile opinions about how “terrible” material possessions are. I am tired of hearing ascetics give the impression that owning things is some kind of a mortal sin – a heresy, in my understanding. I want to see some official Church sources that prove that wrong.

Please, please write back and post your official sources here. It would be very helpful in dealing with this heresy.
 
BUBBA SWITZLER WROTE:

“Christian Materialism goes further in asserting that experiencing and enjoying life is an important element of the Christian moral development. I am inclined to agree. In fact, the Church does teach that there is nothing wrong with enjoying material things (e.g. a luxury car) with certain provisions (e.g. you can afford it, it doesn’t come at the expense of more important things, e.g. family or charity). It is not a sin for a Catholic to drive a luxury car. (Or for the Pope to wear nice shoes.)”

– I have to say, this most certainly agrees with my own understanding of the Church. I cannot comprehend why anyone would believe otherwise. The theology of “trusting in God and not in material things” simply refers to not letting possessions rule your life.

But too many Catholics I know twist this simply teaching. They distort it to mean that owning many possessions IS ACTUALLY SINFUL - a belief that shows up nowhere in all of Catholic theology.

God has not placed any restrictions on what we can and cannot own. He has not placed any limits on how we can spend our money. Nowhere in the Bible, the Catechism, Canon Law or any papal publication or encyclical is there any statement to the effect that you can own only so much, or you have sinned. Such a thing it would be utterly ridiculous.

How much can you own before it is “too much?” How many possessions can you accumulate before you have “too many?” Such a thing is completely arbitrary. Totally relative. There is no progress possible in this area. You could think about this for the rest of your life, and you would never reach an objective, universally applicable answer. And the Church knows it.

You say that “the Church does teach that there is nothing wrong with enjoying material things (eg., a luxury car).”

– I believe I know what documentation you are referring to: Catholic Social Policy, which outlines the fundamental human right to own private property, to enjoy private property, and to amass wealth. Because, in the words of Pope John Paul II, if a person cannot accumulate wealth and private property, then there is no motivation for working hard at all.

But I would be grateful if you could identify your official source(s) for how you came by the same understanding of Church teaching as me. Are your sources different than mine? I am tired of seeing ascetics asserting their dry, sterile opinions about how “terrible” material possessions are. I am tired of hearing ascetics give the impression that owning things is some kind of a mortal sin – a heresy, in my understanding. I want to see some official Church sources that prove that wrong.

Please, please write back and post your official sources here. It would be very helpful in dealing with this heresy.
Here is how I think about it: the Bible, the Catechism, Canon Law, papal publications and encyclicals are, in fact, surprisingly neutral on this point. I say surprisingly because while Catholic dogma does not oppose wealth, Catholic culture, by which I mean the collective opinions of Catholics certainly does. I hesitate to call this heresy. I think it is more accurate to say that it is a point of legitimate debate within the Church. And this is not a new debate, you can find evidence of it going back to the time when wealthier Romans started joining the Church which had gotten its start among the poor and the slaves.

I think you will find what you are looking for here: www.acton.org. They have done the theological research that you are asking about. (Don’t be misled, although it is nominally non-denominational, it is actually very Catholic. It was founded by a Catholic priest and consistently quotes and comments on Catholic publications.)

How to reconcile this? I think the answer lies in distinguishing between income and wealth, on the one hand, and consumption on the other. The accumulation of wealth is morally neutral (assuming, of course, it was earned by moral means). Earning a dollar does not become more sinful on a progresive scale. It’s what you do with that dollar that really counts.
 
Thank you for your response. The link to Acton was very useful. I had to search a bit, but the information was there.

The article “On the Universal Destination of Material Goods” was excellent. Catholics can own whatever they want. Accumulation of wealth and possessions is NOT a sin, as many ascetics would have us believe. The Catholic Church teaches that such accumulation can be good for society and for individuals.

The full article can be viewed here: acton.org/pub/religion-liberty/volume-10-number-1/universal-destination-material-goods

QUOTE: “The Bible and the teachings of the church strongly support man’s natural right to private property. The Seventh Commandment, “Thou shalt not steal,” is emphatic that one wrongs a neighbor by taking what belongs to him.”

(continued) “The modern era of Roman Catholic social teaching can be said to have begun with Pope Leo XIII’s 1891 Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum, “Of the New Things.” …“Nature confers on man the right to possess things privately as his own” (no.10), Leo writes. Leo goes so far as to demand respect for the principle that “the right of private property … be regarded as sacred” (no.65).

(continued) “…Specialization and the alignment of costs and benefits lead to greater and more efficient production that, in turn, leads to a relatively large accumulation of wealth–wealth that can benefit all individuals better than if it were never created in the first place.”

QUOTE ENDS.

– So much for wealth accumulation being a “sin.”

Another useful article at Acton is The Entrepreneurial Vocation, by a Catholic priest:

acton.org/pub/religion-liberty/volume-1-number-5/entrepreneurial-vocation

“Property is the foundation and context of the rational relationship between man and nature. By the relationship of the human person to nature, we leave the imprint of our individuality upon nature by means of the time, effort, and ability we extend which in turn produces wealth and property.”

“…Many religious leaders spend a great deal of their lives confronting the wretchedness of poverty in close proximity…Unnecessary poverty angers us, and we want to put an end to it.”

“The problem results when this sentiment is combined with economic ignorance…When this happens the cry against poverty is easily converted into a rage against wealth, which, while understandable, is ill-informed and even deadly. It fails to see that the amelioration of poverty can only be achieved by the production of wealth. It seeks to kill the goose that will lay the golden egg: indeed, it will kill the goose that will hatch other golden-egg-laying geese!”

And a further Catholic article: “Is Consumerism Harmful?”

acton.org/pub/commentary/2007/11/07/consumerism-harmful

“It is not the desire for material prosperity itself that is wrong but rather the desire for having more in order to spend life in enjoyment as an end in itself. (- Meaning total, extreme greed, which is different from mere material wealth.) As Pope Leo XIII taught in Rerum Novarum, material prosperity can be the result of Christian morality adequately and completely practiced, “which merits the blessings of God who is the source of all blessings.”

A further Catholic article, “Tempted by Affluence?” reads:

acton.org/pub/religion-liberty/volume-11-number-2/tempted-affluence

“Christ warned the prosperous people of his time of the spiritual and morals dangers associated with prosperity. “A man’s life,” he said, “does not consist in the abundance of his possessions” (Luke 12:15). This, however, is accompanied by messages that encourage the proper management of resources, as evidenced by the parables of the talents, the pounds, and the unjust steward. Private property is simply taken for granted in these parables, and the resourcefulness of those who increase their wealth by honest means is applauded. Nowhere in the Gospels, in Acts, or in the Apostolic Letters is the material world derided or viewed as intrinsically evil. Instead, we see that material things do have a role to play in the salvation of humanity insofar as our use of them can reflect our acceptance or rejection of the Good News and its associated call to live in truth.

Essentially, the word consumerism can be employed two ways. One is to describe the process by which people make decisions to buy material goods. Such goods range from those that meet people’s most basic needs to those that reflect people’s capacity to choose which goods they wish to spend their income on, once basic needs have been met. Christians have nothing to fear from this type of consumerism; it simply reflects the material dimension of human existence.

The other definition of consumerism, however, is one that should concern Christians. It involves viewing the material dimension of life as the whole point of human existence.”

QUOTE ENDS.

If material wealth was a sin, we would know about it. The Catholic Church would specifically teach it. It would be a doctrine. It would be in the Catechism. It would be in Canon Law. Popes would publish encyclicals about it. But as can be seen, that doesn’t happen. The only encyclicals and papal publications specifically dealing with individual wealth DEFEND the right of the individual to accumulate wealth and private property. Claiming that owning luxury items and being wealthy are sinful would indeed be heresy, under these conditions. Such claims don’t make any sense. Morally, or logically.
 
Thank you for your response. The link to Acton was very useful.
I’m glad you liked it and I share your enthusiasm for Acton’s publications. But it’s important to bear in mind that Acton is not a Catholic authority, it is merely a well reasoned voice in legitimate Catholic debate. So arm yourself with their materials and go change some minds!
 
Thank you again for your response. I talked to my parish priest about this issue. He is the head of his Order in Canada, and a very busy man. But he made time to talk about this.

He said there is absolutely no law against wealth in all Catholic theology. No culture in the entire WORLD has ever made it a “sin” to own a lot of stuff or money. There is no sin whatsoever in possessing or acquiring luxurious things. The idea that being wealthy is a sin is ridiculous, from a theological AND from a moral point of view.

This priest said that people often get the idea that being rich is some kind of a “sin” from the Biblical story of the Rich Young Man. People hear Jesus’ statement that “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter Heaven” and they start to get nervous. They forget the other passages of the Bible that EXTOLL the virtues of riches.

For example, in Proverbs, it says: “A fortune gained quickly is quickly spent. But wealth, accumulated slowly, steadily grows.”

And also in the Parable of the Talents, God rewards the man who makes much money. He punishes the man who makes nothing.

If someone was to go to confession and confess “owning too much,” or “being too wealthy,” a priest would be forced to say that such things are not sins. They don’t even enter into the language of confession. Being GREEDY does. But it is possible to own massive amounts of wealth and possessions without EVER being guilty of greed. They are not synonymous. Anyone who worries about “owning too much” or “being too wealthy” is wasting God’s time, and their own. It is a useless worry, with absolutely no purpose or benefit.

The priest I talked to used the example of another priest he knows who accumulated enough money to found TWO Universities. And he used the example of the billionaire who invented the Segway, and numerous other inventions (Dean Kamen). Are such people to regard their material gains and fortunes as “bad” or “sinful?” Of course not. People who work hard for what they earn are working in the Provinvce of God.

The priest reiterated the Pope’s words that if people cannot gain wealth, then nobody would have any motivation for working hard. This is why the Church condemns Communism, Marxism and Socialism. Because nobody can own private property or accumulate wealth under such regimes.

Communist, Marxist and Socialist regimes defeat the purpose of working hard at all, because the benefits of any such hard work would merely be given to the collective, rather than to the individual. That is unjust indeed. A worker should be given a fair wage for a day’s work. Someone who works extra hard should, by justice, be allowed to accumulate his reward, no matter how vast that reward is. And that means wealth, power, luxury, whatever. It is sin to deny a worker a fair wage for a fair day’s work.

I identify with what you said about Catholics in general, in your previous post: There exists a “Catholic Culture” in the world, which consists of mostly average Catholics in general. On the other side of the equation, there exists the OFFICIAL TEACHINGS OF THE CHURCH. I have discovered the hard way that what Catholics in general believe, and what the Church itself actually TEACHES, are often two entirely different things.

Many Catholics hold beliefs about sin, wealth, theology, damnation, etc. which actually qualify as heresy. It’s just that almost nobody else identifies these beliefs as heresies – mostly because the majority of other Catholics in the world seem to believe roughly the same things. Most people do not bother discovering what the Church ITSELF actually says on these issues. They just listen to what everyone else is saying, and they usually go with it.

I don’t really care for “Catholic Culture” myself at all (I’m very sad to say). “Catholic Culture,” to me, is virtually no different than secular culture, and for the very same reasons. Many Catholics believe hurtful, irrational things about the God and the Church. They believe that certain things (like being wealthy) are sins when they are not. Catholics in general seem to be very confused about Church belief and morality. And such confusion does not originate from God at all.

Philosopher Bertrand Russell said something very useful in this area. Although an atheist, Russell pointed out that if we would simply listen to our experts, virtually all the problems of human society would simply disappear. I think he was absolutely right.

That is why I sought out a priest to talk to about this issue. I have seen so many lies, so much confusion about Church teaching, that I simply didn’t trust most Catholics anymore. I needed an expert. Someone who I respected intellectually. It couldn’t just be any priest, either. Because, sadly, a lot of priests believe many of the very same errors about Church teaching that a lot of regular Catholics believe. I had to choose my expert carefully so I wouldn’t just hear more of the same.

I have actually started a thread on some of the outrageous lies that Catholics believe about Church teaching and theology - lies that cause many Catholics pain and heartache on a daily basis. It can be reached here, if you are interested:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=8007110#post8007110

Thank you for all your help.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top