Extreme poverty needs to be eradicated from the face of the planet!

[hazcompat]

‘He has shown you, O man, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly, to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.’ (Micah 6:8)

‘This is what the Lord Almighty says ‘Administer true justice; show mercy and compassion to one another. Do not oppress the widow or the fatherless, the alien or the poor. In your hearts do not think evil of each other’ (Zechariah 7:9).

‘For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’ (Matthew 25: 35,36)

peace

 

[Jozefo]

It’s a simple, true fact that we don’t own our money. It says so right on the paper money, and we know it’s so when we get charged every April 15th for using it. In fact, prosperous America is completely insolvent and poverty stricken, and the day of reckoning is soon upon it.

 

[Abu]

As long as Sock’s feelings are mired in rejecting St Paul’s mandate: “If any one will not work, let him not eat” (2 Thess 3:10), there is no hope until fidelity to Christ, good sense and reason prevail, such as Fr James V Schall, S.J. reiterates.

Do Christians Love Poverty?
August 16, 2013
Insisting that the only thing the poor need is bread consigns them to a world without signs of transcendence.
James V. Schall, S.J.
Extract:
‘Whenever someone, religious or secular, tells us that he wants to “identify” with the poor, especially someone who has little clue about the causes of wealth and poverty, we can suspect that the poor are being used as a cloak to justify a political or personal agenda that needs careful examination.

‘In the course of history, two kinds of poverty, as it were, have been distinguished. In part, this distinction had to with the meaning of what we now call works of “charity.” That is, some people are poor because of natural or accidental defects in intelligence or health, whereby it was impossible for them to care for themselves and their own interests. Someone else had to care for them at least in part. This group was really what Aristotle meant by “slaves,” people by nature or accident who were unable to care for themselves.

‘The other group contained those who could care for themselves if they had an opportunity to do so. Ideally, they would be able to get themselves out of poverty if they lived in a place or in a system that allowed or encouraged them to do so. Not every economic or political system can or will do this.

‘Much of world poverty has in fact been reduced or alleviated, as a recent essay in *The Economist *has shown. Christians often seem not to know that this change has happened or why it happened.
[Towards the end of poverty | The Economist]](Towards the end of poverty | The Economist])

‘Many seem to think that, by claiming to be on the side of the poor, the poor will be grateful and will reconnect with Christianity. I for one doubt this result. How one is perceived does make a difference, no doubt. The poor, however, usually see where such sympathies lead, to political and ideological control in the name of poverty alleviation. In this area, we have little room for deluding ourselves.

‘Salvation comes into the world whether the world is perfect or not. Christianity holds that the poor qua poor have as good a chance of reaching beatitude as the rich qua rich, probably a better one. Unless this end is understood, no amount of discussion of wealth and poverty in this world will make much difference. But when the question of the poor does arise, as it should, the main question should not be identification with it, but what really alleviates their condition.’ [My emphasis].
catholicworldreport.com/Item/2503/do_christians_love_poverty.aspx

So, beware of the wolves in sheep’s clothing, who distort Christ’s teaching, and that of St Paul: “If any one will not work, let him not eat” (2 Thess 3:10).

 

[St_Francis]

I’m experiencing deep depression knowing there are people living in extreme poverty. I want to die and escape from this miserable and corrupt world!

But I have a deep outward LOVE towards God, first, and my neighbor, second. This LOVE is my treasure!

Robert,
I think you have hit the nail on the head–you are depressed by the thought of others in poverty.

The way to fix this problem you have is *not *by dreaming about an impossible solution to poverty and railing against all those who seem to stand in your way.

The way to deal with your problem, your cross, is by praying to God about it. Prayer and mortifications to help those in poverty are good, but I think that you *also *need to find trust in God about these people.

What I mean is that sometimes we find ourselves in difficult circumstances and we feel awful about it and it shakes our faith in God. But other times, we are upset because of the situation of others. This is not a bad thing–it shows we have compassion and empathy!–but if our faith in God is shaken, if we begin to search for human solutions rather than relying on God, then our reaction is too strong.

Robert, I am concerned about you as I fear you are being tempted to the sin of despair. I hope you will be able to discuss this with a good priest and learn to deal with this.

 

[Robert_Sock]

The Art of Dying Well
by St. Robert Bellarmine

CHAPTER V. THE FIFTH PRECEPT, IN WHICH THE DECEITFUL ERROR OF THE RICH OF THIS WORLD IS EXPOSED.
IN addition to what has been already said, I must add the refutation of a certain error very prevalent among the rich of this world, and which greatly hinders them from living well and dying well. The error consists in this: the rich suppose that the wealth they possess is absolutely their own property, if justly acquired; and that therefore they may lawfully spend, give away, or squander their money, and that no one can say to them, “Why do you do so? Why dress so richly? Why feast so sumptuously? Why so prodigal in supporting your dogs and hawks? Why do you spend so much money in gaming, or other such-like pleasures?” They will answer: “What is it to you? Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with my own?” Now, this error is doubtless most grievous and pernicious: for, granting that the “rich” are the masters of their own property with relation to other men; yet, with regard to God, they are not masters, but only administrators or stewards.
This truth can be proved by many arguments. Hear the royal prophet: “The earth is the Lord’s, and the fullness thereof: the world and all they that dwell therein.” (Psalm xxiii.) And again: " For all the beasts of the wood are mine: the cattle on the hills, and the oxen. If I should be hungry, I would not tell thee: for the world is mine, and the fullness thereof." (Psalm xlix.) …
I shall add two more testimonies from the words of Christ, in the New Testament: " There was a certain rich man who had a steward: and the same was accused unto him, that he had wasted his goods. And he called him, and said to him: How is it I hear this of thee? Give an account of thy stewardship: for now thou canst be steward no longer." (St. Luke xvi.) By the “rich man” is here meant God, who, as we have just said, crieth out by the prophet Aggæus: “Mine is silver, and mine is gold.” By the “steward” is to be understood a rich man, as the holy Fathers teach, St. Chrysostom, St. Augustine, St. Ambrose, Venerable Bede, besides Theophylact, and Euthymius, and others on this passage.
If the Gospel, then, is to be credited, every rich man of this world must acknowledge that the riches he possesses, whether justly or unjustly acquired, are not his: that if they be justly acquired, he is only the steward of them; if unjustly, that he is nothing but a thief and a robber. And since the rich man is not the master of the wealth he possesses, it follows that, when accused of injustice before God, God removes him from his stewardship, either by death or by want: such do the words signify, “Give an account of thy stewardship, for now thou canst be steward no longer.”
…There is another passage in the same Gospel of St. Luke, which may be considered as a kind of commentary on the unjust steward: “There was a certain rich man, who was clothed in purple and fine linen, and feasted sumptuously every day. And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, who lay at his gate, full of sores. Desiring to be filled with the crumbs that fell from the rich man’s table, and no one did give him; moreover, the dogs came and licked his sores. And it came to pass that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom. And the rich man also died: and he was buried in hell.” This Dives was certainly one of those who supposed he was master of his own money, and not a steward under God; and therefore he imagined not that he offended against God, when he was clothed in purple and linen, and feasted sumptuously every day, and had his dogs, and his buffoons, & c. For he perhaps said within himself: " I spend my own money, I do no injury to any one, I violate not the laws of God, I do not blaspheme nor swear, I observe the sabbath, I honour my parents, I do not kill, nor commit adultery, nor steal, nor bear false witness, nor do I covet my neighbour’s wife, or anything else." But if such was the case, why was he buried in hell? why tormented in the fire? We must then acknowledge that all those are deceived who suppose they are the “absolute” masters of their money; for if Dives had any more grievous sins to answer for, the Holy Scripture would certainly have mentioned them.
But since nothing more has been added, we are given to understand that the superfluous adornment of his body with costly garments, and his daily magnificent banquets, and the multitude of his servants and dogs, whilst he had no compassion for the poor, was a sufficient cause of his condemnation to eternal torments. Let it, therefore, be a fixed rule for living well and dying well, often to consider and seriously to ponder on the account that must be given to God of our luxury in palaces, in gardens, in chariots, in the multitude of servants, in the splendor of dress, in banquets, in hoarding up riches, in unnecessary expenses, which injure a great multitude of the poor and sick, who stand in need of our superfluities; and who now cry to God, and in the day of judgment will not cease crying out until we, together with the rich man, shall be condemned.

peace

This perspective is sorely needed in this discussion. Abu, listen up.

 

[Robert_Sock]

As long as Sock’s feelings are mired in rejecting St Paul’s mandate: “If any one will not work, let him not eat” (2 Thess 3:10), there is no hope until fidelity to Christ, good sense and reason prevail, such as Fr James V Schall, S.J. reiterates.

Do Christians Love Poverty?
August 16, 2013
Insisting that the only thing the poor need is bread consigns them to a world without signs of transcendence.
James V. Schall, S.J.
Extract:
‘Whenever someone, religious or secular, tells us that he wants to “identify” with the poor, especially someone who has little clue about the causes of wealth and poverty, we can suspect that the poor are being used as a cloak to justify a political or personal agenda that needs careful examination.

‘In the course of history, two kinds of poverty, as it were, have been distinguished. In part, this distinction had to with the meaning of what we now call works of “charity.” That is, some people are poor because of natural or accidental defects in intelligence or health, whereby it was impossible for them to care for themselves and their own interests. Someone else had to care for them at least in part. This group was really what Aristotle meant by “slaves,” people by nature or accident who were unable to care for themselves.

‘The other group contained those who could care for themselves if they had an opportunity to do so. Ideally, they would be able to get themselves out of poverty if they lived in a place or in a system that allowed or encouraged them to do so. Not every economic or political system can or will do this.

‘Much of world poverty has in fact been reduced or alleviated, as a recent essay in *The Economist *has shown. Christians often seem not to know that this change has happened or why it happened.
[Towards the end of poverty | The Economist]](Towards the end of poverty | The Economist])

‘Many seem to think that, by claiming to be on the side of the poor, the poor will be grateful and will reconnect with Christianity. I for one doubt this result. How one is perceived does make a difference, no doubt. The poor, however, usually see where such sympathies lead, to political and ideological control in the name of poverty alleviation. In this area, we have little room for deluding ourselves.

‘Salvation comes into the world whether the world is perfect or not. Christianity holds that the poor qua poor have as good a chance of reaching beatitude as the rich qua rich, probably a better one. Unless this end is understood, no amount of discussion of wealth and poverty in this world will make much difference. But when the question of the poor does arise, as it should, the main question should not be identification with it, but what really alleviates their condition.’ [My emphasis].
catholicworldreport.com/Item/2503/do_christians_love_poverty.aspx

So, beware of the wolves in sheep’s clothing, who distort Christ’s teaching, and that of St Paul: “If any one will not work, let him not eat” (2 Thess 3:10).

“LOVE your neighbor as yourself.” This is the second great commandment of Christ, and it is to be taken above and beyond the teachings of great saints. How can you possible write it off as being trivial to the discussion at hand? Please don’t water-down Christ’s real message to humanity.

 

[dshix]

That’s perfect, thank you Robert.

“Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us. For you yourselves know how you ought to imitate us; we were not idle when we were with you, we did not eat any one’s bread without paying, but with toil and labor we worked night and day, that we might not burden any of you. It was not because we have not that right, but to give you in our conduct and example to imitate. ** For even when we were with you, we gave you this command: If any one will not work, let him not eat.** For we hear that some of you are walking in idleness,** mere busybodies, not doing any work. **Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to do their work in quietness and to earn their own living.” - 2 Thessalonians 3:1-12

To give the lazy, who **choose **not to earn their own living, food, houses, and property through welfare is to encourage, not discourage their laziness.

This is not to say charity should not give to the hungry and the poor. But if an able-bodied man in his early twenties refuses work when offered to him, so that he can continue to beg, (true story) that means he is just lazy, and should not be given anything until he rights his life.

 

[fnr]

To give the lazy, who **choose **not to earn their own living, food, houses, and property through welfare is to encourage, not discourage their laziness.

But who are we to judge who is lazy? And on what basis do we make that judgment? We are not to make such judgments without looking through the lenses of our own preconceptions.

This is not to say charity should not give to the hungry and the poor. But if an able-bodied man in his early twenties refuses work when offered to him, so that he can continue to beg, (true story) that means he is just lazy, and should not be given anything until he rights his life.

I don’t know, dshix. That seems to fly in the face of the parable of the Prodigal Son (where the father went running long before the son apologized, and the son never really did show contrition, but self-interest). It also seems to fly in the face of the parable of the workers in the vineyard (where all who were hired were paid the same regardless of when they started working; this is also an analogy of Israel and the Gentiles). In both these parables, Christ tells us that the Kingdom of God (in which we are now living) is radically unjust because it doesn’t ask for people to right their ways, but takes them as they are.

That doesn’t mean welfare, at the hands of the government, that means the mission of the church (which is done in charity but is not all of charity).

 

[Robert_Sock]

That’s perfect, thank you Robert.

“Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us. For you yourselves know how you ought to imitate us; we were not idle when we were with you, we did not eat any one’s bread without paying, but with toil and labor we worked night and day, that we might not burden any of you. It was not because we have not that right, but to give you in our conduct and example to imitate. ** For even when we were with you, we gave you this command: If any one will not work, let him not eat.** For we hear that some of you are walking in idleness,** mere busybodies, not doing any work. **Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to do their work in quietness and to earn their own living.” - 2 Thessalonians 3:1-12

To give the lazy, who **choose **not to earn their own living, food, houses, and property through welfare is to encourage, not discourage their laziness.

This is not to say charity should not give to the hungry and the poor. But if an able-bodied man in his early twenties refuses work when offered to him, so that he can continue to beg, (true story) that means he is just lazy, and should not be given anything until he rights his life.

When the economic system does not properly motivate a person to work, there is something wrong with the system. All I’m saying is that such a person deserves a roof over their head and food. In a civilized society, nobody should be allowed to go hungry. Even hardened criminals have their basic needs cared for; how much more so ought to law abiding citizens?

 

[Jozefo]

I’ve been following the thread closely, and it seems to me that the real bone of contention underneath the debate is what role the secular government plays in society when dealing with the poor.

I think some people might feel a bit abused, seeing welfare programs being funded by government, appearing to coddle otherwise able bodied people. It fuels the frustration having to do with taxation and societal decay, which is understandable.

It leads me to redefine the question to: what role should secular government play in alleviating poverty?

 

[Robert_Sock]

I’ve been following the thread closely, and it seems to me that the real bone of contention underneath the debate is what role the secular government plays in society when dealing with the poor.

I think some people might feel a bit abused, seeing welfare programs being funded by government, appearing to coddle otherwise able bodied people. It fuels the frustration having to do with taxation and societal decay, which is understandable.

It leads me to redefine the question to: what role should secular government play in alleviating poverty?

If you’ve been following this thread closely, you would have seen me state several times that I’m not advocating a welfare state. Yes, there would be some subsidies, but less than today. People would be encouraged to work at a decent paying job, which is in line with free enterprise. People would be much better educated, especially with self-help skills. The economy would boon as a result.

 

[Abbagail]

I’m experiencing deep depression knowing there are people living in extreme poverty. I want to die and escape from this miserable and corrupt world!

But I have a deep outward LOVE towards God, first, and my neighbor, second. This LOVE is my treasure!

Having lived in third world countires I understand this sadness. Don’t give up! Giving money is not going to solve every problem, we know that the poor also suffer spiritual poverty. I would highly encourage you to sell everything you have and join a community dedicated to helping the poor.

 

[tabycat]

What is a ‘decent wage’? A decent wage in China is not the same thing, IMO, as a decent wage in Washington, DC.

What is poor? Most, if not all, on this board would be considered poor if what we have is compaired with Bill Gates.

 

[Robert_Sock]

What is a ‘decent wage’? A decent wage in China is not the same thing, IMO, as a decent wage in Washington, DC.

What is poor? Most, if not all, on this board would be considered poor if what we have is compaired with Bill Gates.

A decent wage would be appx. $15 per hour, as it is in Australia. Poor are those living below the poverty level.

 

[Abu]

fnr #125
But who are we to judge who is lazy? And on what basis do we make that judgment?

If you can’t judge that “People refusing to work” (Sock) should be denied provided food (St Paul), then yet another teaching is rubbished, for Christ commanded us to:
“Stop judging by appearances, but judge justly.” (Jn 7:24).
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but underneath are ravenous wolves. By their fruits you will know them” (Mt 7:15, 16).
“Every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. So by their fruits you will know them.” (Mt 7:19-20).

“The spiritual person, however, can judge everything but is not subject to judgment by anyone.” (1 Cor 2:15).

That is precisely why we judge actions, speech, writing against true teaching as to what is good and what is evil, and we know what is good and what is evil only by following the teaching of His Church – not by our opinions, desires, prejudices, feelings, wants – selfism.

But what we are commanded also is not to judge the guilt of anyone before God.

Christ and His Church do not teach anything concerning the question of acquiring “excessive wealth”, but they do teach on how one should make use of, or assist others, when they acquire riches. The very term “excessive” is dependant on the feeling, prejudice, of the user.

On the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, a preoccupation with wealth obscures the real sins – pride and selfishness are the culprits. St Augustine effectively says “It was not Lazarus’ poverty that saved him, but his humility. Nor was it wealth that kept the rich man from bliss, but his pride and selfishness (Sermon 24,3).

Mt 19:16-21 refers finally to **the rich young man **becoming an Apostle, “come follow Me”. Nowhere does Christ require mankind to give up all their possessions either to be good followers or to be able to enter heaven. If all were poor, how could anyone be helped?

“Catholic tradition has always had a balanced view of the responsibilities, temptations and opportunities of wealth, and it has never sought to canonize the poor or to demonize the rich. Catholic social doctrine, rather, calls all people to responsibility, generosity and holiness.” Inside The Vatican, June 1997].

 

[Jozefo]

If you’ve been following this thread closely, you would have seen me state several times that I’m not advocating a welfare state. Yes, there would be some subsidies, but less than today. People would be encouraged to work at a decent paying job, which is in line with free enterprise. People would be much better educated, especially with self-help skills. The economy would boon as a result.

Yes, I saw your remarks, but I was commenting about other people’s remarks. I was merely saying this sense of frustration that I see people exhibiting, I think comes from from feeling like they’ve been abused by government. I see that, because I used to feel that way. Maybe I’m projecting, but that’s how it appears to me.

 

[Abu]

fnr #125
Quote:dshix
This is not to say charity should not give to the hungry and the poor. But if an able-bodied man in his early twenties refuses work when offered to him, so that he can continue to beg, (true story) that means he is just lazy, and should not be given anything until he rights his life.

That seems to fly in the face of the parable of the Prodigal Son (where the father went running long before the son apologized, and the son never really did show contrition, but self-interest).

No.

The parable of the prodigal Son illustrates “the very heart of God in order to inspire the sinner with confidence to approach Him….the true basis of penance or repentance is a sincere admission of sinfulness with a determination to destroy sin by returning to God….against the loving enthusiasm of the father, the unfeeling coldness of the other son.” A Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture, ed Dom Bernard Orchard, General Editor, Thomas Nelson, 1953, p 958].

 

[Abu]

The progress in eradicating poverty proceeds without the lunacy of those who would provide for those who refuse to work.

The world’s next great leap forward
Towards the end of poverty
Nearly 1 billion people have been taken out of extreme poverty in 20 years. The world should aim to do the same again
Jun 1st 2013
“….the world has lately been making extraordinary progress in lifting people out of extreme poverty. Between 1990 and 2010, their number fell by half as a share of the total population in developing countries, from 43% to 21%—a reduction of almost 1 billion people.”
tinyurl.com/ldjt6go

Apart from the developing demographic winter with below replacement birthrates virtually worldwide, the sensible solution to poverty is Christianity which “holds that the poor qua poor have as good a chance of reaching beatitude as the rich qua rich, probably a better one. Unless this end is understood, no amount of discussion of wealth and poverty in this world will make much difference. But when the question of the poor does arise, as it should, the main question should not be identification with it, but what really alleviates their condition.” [Fr James A Schall, S.J.]
catholicworldreport.com/Item/2503/do_christians_love_poverty.aspx

 

[Jozefo]

If you’ve been following this thread closely, you would have seen me state several times that I’m not advocating a welfare state. Yes, there would be some subsidies, but less than today. People would be encouraged to work at a decent paying job, which is in line with free enterprise. People would be much better educated, especially with self-help skills. The economy would boon as a result.

The progress in eradicating poverty proceeds without the lunacy of those who would provide for those who refuse to work.

The world’s next great leap forward
Towards the end of poverty
Nearly 1 billion people have been taken out of extreme poverty in 20 years. The world should aim to do the same again
Jun 1st 2013
“….the world has lately been making extraordinary progress in lifting people out of extreme poverty. Between 1990 and 2010, their number fell by half as a share of the total population in developing countries, from 43% to 21%—a reduction of almost 1 billion people.”
tinyurl.com/ldjt6go

Apart from the developing demographic winter with below replacement birthrates virtually worldwide, the sensible solution to poverty is Christianity which “holds that the poor qua poor have as good a chance of reaching beatitude as the rich qua rich, probably a better one. Unless this end is understood, no amount of discussion of wealth and poverty in this world will make much difference. But when the question of the poor does arise, as it should, the main question should not be identification with it, but what really alleviates their condition.” [Fr James A Schall, S.J.]
catholicworldreport.com/Item/2503/do_christians_love_poverty.aspx

Oh my! It looks great until one takes into account it’s all done on borrowed money.

 

[dshix]

But who are we to judge who is lazy? And on what basis do we make that judgment? We are not to make such judgments without looking through the lenses of our own preconceptions.

We can judge as lazy those who, when offered a job which will provide them for their needs, refuse it, and then claim that they are suffering and the government needs to help them. I know many people like this personally, and see them on the street all the time.

I don’t know, dshix. That seems to fly in the face of the parable of the Prodigal Son (where the father went running long before the son apologized, and the son never really did show contrition, but self-interest). It also seems to fly in the face of the parable of the workers in the vineyard (where all who were hired were paid the same regardless of when they started working; this is also an analogy of Israel and the Gentiles). In both these parables, Christ tells us that the Kingdom of God (in which we are now living) is radically unjust because it doesn’t ask for people to right their ways, but takes them as they are.

That doesn’t mean welfare, at the hands of the government, that means the mission of the church (which is done in charity but is not all of charity).

In the parable of the prodigal son, the son was repentant. He came to his father to beg for mercy and forgiveness, and only asked that he live as one of his father’s servants. His father graciously forgave him, and reinstated him.

People like those I have mentioned do not repent. They **can **live and **do **live on welfare alone, and are perfectly happy to live their lives doing nothing of value to the society while the government fattens them up and gets their votes.

If you’ve been following this thread closely, you would have seen me state several times that I’m not advocating a welfare state. Yes, there would be some subsidies, but less than today. People would be encouraged to work at a decent paying job, which is in line with free enterprise. People would be much better educated, especially with self-help skills. The economy would boon as a result.

Such a civilization which has a good running economy in which jobs are in plenty no longer exists in the US today. The government has destroyed small business with massive tax increases and increases in regulation. There is now so much risk in starting new businesses and making new jobs and entrepreneurs are reluctant to do so… and many do not at all.

Where would these “decent paying job” you speak of come from, Robert? Government? Heh. As if the government could “create” jobs without destroying countless others.

It’s happened again and again. If regulations, taxes, and subsidies are not massively eliminated, we will never see prosperity in America again.

It has been quite a few years since I’ve said, “This is a free country!” either in a serious conversation or in jest. I do not expect to say it again.