Does anyone have a "Right" to my money?

[OneAugustKnight]

During the homily yesterday, my priest said that people that have less than us have a “right” to our excesses. He said we need to give away our excess and not put it in the bank because it according to God it belongs to the poor, and I am being selfish if I keep it.

I thought that our only God-given “rights” were to life and the freedom to serve God and our families. Other than that I thought we were sinners who deserved Hell, and that all the good things we receive are blessings from God, not because we deserve them but because He loves us. They are signs of his infinite goodness and generosity.

But now the Church I love and thought I knew is talking about the “right to healthcare” and that “the poor are entitled to my excesses” and I am beginning to fear that I am exposing myself to Communist ideas.

Am I misinterpretting these homilies and news articles or is there something seriously wrong here?

 

[vern_humphrey]

We had a priest who had a thing about “big houses.” One day, I said to him, “Father, I have a big house. Do you think I should have given the money to the poor?”

He hemmed and hawed around and finally allowed it would have been better for me to give most of the money to the poor.

“But Father, that’s what I did. In fact, I gave all the money to some poor men – and in return they built a house for me. And I gave them the dignity of earning their money and not relying on charity or welfare.”

While he was digesting that, I went on, “One of the men who worked on the house thanked me – for giving him the opportunity to work with the two master builders I hired. He said he learned a lot on that job.”

 

[xformer7]

Fuel for thought from St. Thomas (Summa of Theology II-II, q.66, a. 7,c)

“According to the natural law founded by divine providence, material things are ordered to the alleviation of human needs…whatever a man has in superabundance is owed of natural right to the poor for their sustenance.”

“So Ambrose says…The bread that you withhold belongs to the hungry; the clothing to the naked; and the money you bury in the earth is the redemption and security of the penniless.”

Yes, there is “communist” thought here, but in this context, it is what God has ordered. It’s not the “communism” of Karl Marx, etc., so where God’s ideas overlap “communist ideas,” you need not “fear.”

 

[tom.wineman]

We had a priest who had a thing about “big houses.”
“But Father, that’s what I did. In fact, I gave all the money to some poor men – and in return they built a house for me. And I gave them the dignity of earning their money and not relying on charity or welfare.”

Amen !

Some Catholics have confused social justice with socialism.

 

[blessedtoo]

If I understand that everything I have belongs not to me, but to God, then I would not consider it “my money”. Everything is gift. Even if I have worked for it, the work itself is a gift. God provides the bounty we receive in compensation for this work. If my very existence is dependent of God’s love and life itself is a gift from Him, does it not follow that everything I own is also His? The poor do not have a “right” to our abundance. God does. And He has been very clear in His directions for how we should use that abundance.

I have often wondered, as I am sure many of us have, why some folks have so much and some folks so little. I heard a Catholic theologian discuss this and, basing his theology on Thomas Aquinas, he said that God gives some an abundance so that they may fulfill their natural human desire to give. We all have it, the need to do for our fellow man. I do not view this as Communist - just Christain.

 

[Proletarian]

During the homily yesterday, my priest said that people that have less than us have a “right” to our excesses. He said we need to give away our excess and not put it in the bank because it according to God it belongs to the poor, and I am being selfish if I keep it.

I thought that our only God-given “rights” were to life and the freedom to serve God and our families. Other than that I thought we were sinners who deserved Hell, and that all the good things we receive are blessings from God, not because we deserve them but because He loves us. They are signs of his infinite goodness and generosity.

But now the Church I love and thought I knew is talking about the “right to healthcare” and that “the poor are entitled to my excesses” and I am beginning to fear that I am exposing myself to Communist ideas.

Am I misinterpretting these homilies and news articles or is there something seriously wrong here?

Do you have any idea how selfish you sound?

 

[vern_humphrey]

If I understand that everything I have belongs not to me, but to God, then I would not consider it “my money”. Everything is gift. Even if I have worked for it, the work itself is a gift. God provides the bounty we receive in compensation for this work. If my very existence is dependent of God’s love and life itself is a gift from Him, does it not follow that everything I own is also His? The poor do not have a “right” to our abundance. God does. And He has been very clear in His directions for how we should use that abundance.

I have often wondered, as I am sure many of us have, why some folks have so much and some folks so little. I heard a Catholic theologian discuss this and, basing his theology on Thomas Aquinas, he said that God gives some an abundance so that they may fulfill their natural human desire to give. We all have it, the need to do for our fellow man. I do not view this as Communist - just Christain.

Jobs are created by economic activity. We do better when we start businesses or otherwise invest and provide jobs for our fellow man. If we fail to do this, then we – and all our neighbors – are condemned to generation after generation of poverty.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Do you have any idea how selfish you sound?

Try as I might, I cannot find any Christian charity in your post.

 

[b_justb]

Vern - I am glad you added to this thread. I really like your ideas on Catholic Social Teaching / Justice and you have a good way of putting them on paper, er umm I mean a pc monitor. When I read the OP I had all sorts of negative ideas, and then decided not to post them. These are far better and much more positive. Thanks.

We had a priest who had a thing about “big houses.” One day, I said to him, “Father, I have a big house. Do you think I should have given the money to the poor?”

He hemmed and hawed around and finally allowed it would have been better for me to give most of the money to the poor.

“But Father, that’s what I did. In fact, I gave all the money to some poor men – and in return they built a house for me. And I gave them the dignity of earning their money and not relying on charity or welfare.”

While he was digesting that, I went on, “One of the men who worked on the house thanked me – for giving him the opportunity to work with the two master builders I hired. He said he learned a lot on that job.”

and
vern humphrey:

Jobs are created by economic activity. We do better when we start businesses or otherwise invest and provide jobs for our fellow man. If we fail to do this, then we – and all our neighbors – are condemned to generation after generation of poverty

 

[jman507]

If you do have more, you do have an obligation to help more. You ought not get in the spirit of hording things just to horde them or just indulge in them with no regard to others. But how you help others, I would say is up to your prudential judgement. I don’t think you must give it all to the government.

One problem with the government is that they have no ability to make a prudential judgement from one person to the next. Certainly if you have one child that lazy and another that is disablabled, there is a difference with the aid you give them.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I like to follow what I call “Moral Pragmatism” – if we are morally obliged to do something, we are morally obliged to choose a course of action that has a high probability of success. And to monitor the results, and make changes as needed.

While straight charity is needed, we should always regard it as a stop-gap measure, taken to aid people until they can aid themselves. Our primary efforts ought to be focussed on educating the poor and providing jobs for them.

 

[vern_humphrey]

If you do have more, you do have an obligation to help more. You ought not get in the spirit of hording things just to horde them or just indulge in them with no regard to others. But how you help others, I would say is up to your prudential judgement. I don’t think you must give it all to the government.

One problem with the government is that they have no ability to make a prudential judgement from one person to the next. Certainly if you have one child that lazy and another that is disablabled, there is a difference with the aid you give them.

I agree. Indeed, when we expect the government to do it, we are doing what Saint Paul told us not to do. We are to do it, ourselves and as a Church.

 

[lizaanne]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Proletarian forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif
Do you have any idea how selfish you sound?

Try as I might, I cannot find any Christian charity in your post.

I totally agree. What’s with that? So - Proletarian, are you living under a bridge, working 40 hrs a week, and giving it all away? I think the OP is asking a very legitimate question here - I for one am interested in hearing the responses.

~Liza

 

[OneAugustKnight]

If I understand that everything I have belongs not to me, but to God, then I would not consider it “my money”. Everything is gift. Even if I have worked for it, the work itself is a gift. God provides the bounty we receive in compensation for this work. If my very existence is dependent of God’s love and life itself is a gift from Him, does it not follow that everything I own is also His? The poor do not have a “right” to our abundance. God does. And He has been very clear in His directions for how we should use that abundance.

Right that’s what I was talking about, my wealth is a gift from God that I am not entitled to, but I have the privilege of using while I am on Earth. If I don’t have a right to it, how does it follow that anyone else would have a right to it, regardless of condition?

I thought you give to the poor out of love for God and mankind, but the way the priest says it, I feel like if I ever spend money on something fun, or save for retirement, medical problems, or financial disasters, then I am robbing from the poor. Maybe I am just misunderstanding him?

 

[vern_humphrey]

Right that’s what I was talking about, my wealth is a gift from God that I am not entitled to, but I have the privilege of using while I am on Earth. If I don’t have a right to it, how does it follow that anyone else would have a right to it, regardless of condition?

I thought you give to the poor out of love for God and mankind, but the way the priest says it, I feel like if I ever spend money on something fun, or save for retirement, medical problems, or financial disasters, then I am robbing from the poor. Maybe I am just misunderstanding him?

Some people have a right to the fruits of your labor – your wife, children, parents and so on.

To other people, you have an obligation – but not to the extent of taking food off your family’s table.

And as I tried to say earlier, the best way to discharge your obligation is to help create jobs. That’s done through ecnomiic activty.

Beyond that, I think we discharge our obligation through what we do – not through supporting some new government program and letting others pay for it. I think we must give of ourselves.

 

[b_justb]

vern humphrey:

Our primary efforts ought to be focussed on educating the poor and providing jobs for them.

I think this is dead on, and I’ve seen you say it before. (seen you say ??? anyway …) How do I, Joe Pew Sitter and regular working stiff, do that? I mean I give to the poor box every week, that isn’t doing anything. I know it doesn’t do anything because I’ve given to that dang box on the wall every week for ever and it’s still there, it’s not going away. I do think this idea of getting the poor educated and gainfully employed is the ticket. But doesn’t that cross over into the political realm? Or only partially? We should seek political candidates that have education and jobs in their idea bag as well as do … do what?

 

[vern_humphrey]

I think this is dead on, and I’ve seen you say it before. (seen you say ??? anyway …) How do I, Joe Pew Sitter and regular working stiff, do that? I mean I give to the poor box every week, that isn’t doing anything. I know it doesn’t do anything because I’ve given to that dang box on the wall every week for ever and it’s still there, it’s not going away. I do think this idea of getting the poor educated and gainfully employed is the ticket. But doesn’t that cross over into the political realm? Or only partially? We should seek political candidates that have education and jobs in their idea bag as well as do … do what?

There are several things we can do – one of them is to expand our Catholic School system. We ought to have a special collection every month in every Catholic Church in the land for education – even in those parishes and communities that don’t have Catholic schools. Let them contribute to schools in other parishes.

We need “leadership from below” – we need to educate our bishops so they understand how Catholic schools are essential to both carrying out our mission to the poor, and for the general welfare of the Church. In many cases, we should regard schools as missionary efforts – set them up in poor, non-Catholic areas.

We should have an internet-delivered, computer-aided system, so any school, no matter how remote or small, can teach any subject.

Now to do all this, we need to get the Bishops energized – they have to make it a top priority. They have to explain to the laity why we need it, and how important it is. And they have to stay on top of us, reminding us we need to give more.

 

[b_justb]

The school that is associated with my parish is $4,500 per child per year and that’s with the home field discount (and they are K through 8 only). To just get that lowered or even eliminated would be a huge undertaking. And there needs to be a HS added.

That’s a fairly daunting task to me.

There are several things we can do – one of them is to expand our Catholic School system. We ought to have a special collection every month in every Catholic Church in the land for education – even in those parishes and communities that don’t have Catholic schools. Let them contribute to schools in other parishes.

We need “leadership from below” – we need to educate our bishops so they understand how Catholic schools are essential to both carrying out our mission to the poor, and for the general welfare of the Church. In many cases, we should regard schools as missionary efforts – set them up in poor, non-Catholic areas.

We should have an internet-delivered, computer-aided system, so any school, no matter how remote or small, can teach any subject.

Now to do all this, we need to get the Bishops energized – they have to make it a top priority. They have to explain to the laity why we need it, and how important it is. And they have to stay on top of us, reminding us we need to give more.

 

[OneAugustKnight]

The school that is associated with my parish is $4,500 per child per year and that’s with the home field discount (and they are K through 8 only). To just get that lowered or even eliminated would be a huge undertaking. And there needs to be a HS added.

That’s a fairly daunting task to me.

A voucher system would help.

I like the idea of making Catholic schools a missionary effort. But I don’t see how we can expand them when we don’t have enough sincere Catholic teachers to go around right now.

Is our first obligation (after our family) to the most destitute in the world, or is it an equal obligation to every person who has less than me?

 

[b_justb]

A voucher system would help.

I like the idea of making Catholic schools a missionary effort. But I don’t see how we can expand them when we don’t have enough sincere Catholic teachers to go around right now.

Is our first obligation (after our family) to the most destitute in the world, or is it an equal obligation to every person who has less than me?

I figure anyone we help is better than not helping at all. This is tough stuff.