Holiness of the rich?

[mgoforth]

You ask a very good question that comes up here periodically.

There is no reason not to give away personal wealth, but giving it away may not be the best use of the gift given to you by God.

Money - when properly considered is a commodity and also a tool. As a tool it can be used to provide employment for others. So if the person who has the money invests it in a business, or in several businesses that employ multiple people, is he not also aiding the poor by providing jobs to those who need them? If being a good businessman happens to be his gift from God, should he not use the resources God provides along with the talent God gave him to aid his fellow man?
But note here that the person who does this will still show a substantial net worth. He will still have, as you but it, earthly wealth.

Jesus did say that it is highly difficult for a rich man to get into heaven which speaks strongly to the dangers of too much earthly wealth - of becoming attached to it and serving it instead of God. It is a very dangerous thing…But as mentioned above, it is possible to show “wealth” on a spreadsheet and still be poor of spirit, because you view the money, not for what it can get you, but for what good you can do with it…

Peace
James

Thanks James. I can accept that wealth invested in companies is not necessarily sinful…although I think there’s still the question of what one does with the dividends, capital gains, etc. It would be hard for me to say it wasn’t sinful or at least gravely wrong for someone to spend all the earnings on their own enjoyment.

What I’m really trying to discern from this thread is whether I’m giving enough. When we discuss it, my wife tells me that we do, and I don’t think she’s a particularly greedy person. But I’ve started to read this wonderful book called The 12 Steps to Holiness and Salvation, and I’m on the chapter now about the virtue of poverty.

So it’s really made me wonder…how detached am I really from things of the world? God has definitely allowed me to make some progress in this area since my conversion…but I’m just not sure. I’d like to be perfectly detached, but as buc_fan33 pointed out, I also want to respect the station in life that God has given me - as a husband and father of young children.

Thanks for all the answers so far, I hope I’ve clarified my question somewhat.

 

[mgoforth]

It sounds like you answered your original question to me. A rich person could respond with the answer you just gave.

Yes, but what about a person who was detached from their riches? If they said “I should be giving more” then they would easily do so right? And then they would no longer be rich…hence my question if they remain rich.

 

[mgoforth]

Perhaps the better rule of thumb would be how much to keep and for what purpose…
In other words, you make a budget that includes a bit of “saving for a rainy day” and also retirement…Doing this allows you to have a very good look at what you are really spending
and on what? It allows you to look for opportunities to reduce wasteful spending as well…And…in the case of a married couple both parties have (name removed by moderator)ut.

Then you have a very good idea how much you need and how much can be earmarked for charity.

Peace
James

Thank you, that makes sense.

 

[buc_fan33]

Yes, I do see what you’re saying. Can you suggest a general rule of thumb for how much one should give away? I have a family and I agree that it would be sinful for me to force them to be poor and to neglect their needs. But we have more than we really need. What is prudent to keep?

I would say this…live within your means, but give beyond your means. In other words, it should hurt a little bit. If you constantly have the newest “toys,” that’s probably an indication of a problem. In most cases, I think a tithe of 10% of your earnings is a good place to start. Some people may not be able to give ten percent. Then, they should compensate by giving more time to the Church and giving of their talents. Some people may be able to give more (I.e. Bill Gates). I would say, regardless of circumstances, that 10% for a billionaire would not be sufficient. Ten percent for someone on minimum wage with the consequence that one’s child would then be unable to attend a Catholic school, for instance, would probably be too much.

However, each of these decisions must be made in prayer and in consultation with one’s spouse (if married).

 

[mgoforth]

I would say this…live within your means, but give beyond your means. In other words, it should hurt a little bit. If you constantly have the newest “toys,” that’s probably an indication of a problem. In most cases, I think a tithe of 10% of your earnings is a good place to start. Some people may not be able to give ten percent. Then, they should compensate by giving more time to the Church and giving of their talents. Some people may be able to give more (I.e. Bill Gates). I would say, regardless of circumstances, that 10% for a billionaire would not be sufficient. Ten percent for someone on minimum wage with the consequence that one’s child would then be unable to attend a Catholic school, for instance, would probably be too much.

However, each of these decisions must be made in prayer and in consultation with one’s spouse (if married).

That sounds like very good advice. I can’t see anything I would disagree with. Thanks!

 

[JRKH]

Thanks James. I can accept that wealth invested in companies is not necessarily sinful…although I think there’s still the question of what one does with the dividends, capital gains, etc. It would be hard for me to say it wasn’t sinful or at least gravely wrong for someone to spend all the earnings on their own enjoyment.

Good question…The person who has a right attitude is going to view the capital gains as yet more “tools” to use for the glory of God. As such he might choose to reinvest the earnings, he might choose to give it directly to charity work, or he might spend it on his family in some enjoyable fashion - which, by the way, also provides employment for others.
In all likelihood the person will choose some combination of the above.

What I’m really trying to discern from this thread is whether I’m giving enough. When we discuss it, my wife tells me that we do, and I don’t think she’s a particularly greedy person.

In this case I think the budgeting approach really is a good one. It allows you and your wife to really understand where you are at and what you need. Then the two of you should pray together on the matter.

But I’ve started to read this wonderful book called The 12 Steps to Holiness and Salvation, and I’m on the chapter now about the virtue of poverty.

So it’s really made me wonder…how detached am I really from things of the world? God has definitely allowed me to make some progress in this area since my conversion…but I’m just not sure. I’d like to be perfectly detached, but as buc_fan33 pointed out, I also want to respect the station in life that God has given me - as a husband and father of young children.

Yes - read the book carefully and pray for guidance - but don’t do anything rash…

Thanks for all the answers so far, I hope I’ve clarified my question somewhat.

Glad to help.

Peace
James

 

[Ruthie_again]

Funny, I was thinking about this recently.

What first attracted me to Catholicism is how we treat the Bible - as a whole, not as a bunch of separate verses of which, when they “contradict” each other, we can pick the one we like, and ignore the others.

For me, when I think of the rich young man, I also think of the Centurion. It is his words we say before receiving the Eucharist: “I am not worthy that you should come under my roof; but only say the word…”

As he entered Capernaum, a centurion came forward to him, beseeching him and saying, “Lord, my servant is lying paralyzed at home, in terrible distress.” And he said to him, “I will come and heal him.” But the centurion answered him, “Lord, I am not worthy to have you come under my roof; but only say the word, and my servant will be healed. For I am a man under authority, with soldiers under me; and I say to one, Go,' and he goes, and to another, Come,’ and he comes, and to my slave, `Do this,’ and he does it.” When Jesus heard him, he marveled, and said to those who followed him, "Truly, I say to you, not even in Israel have I found such faith.
Matt 8:5-10 (RSV)

I doubt that the Centurion was poor - and I think we have the answer.

Faith.

He believed, and trusted Jesus so much that he knew Jesus could heal the servant without being there. He did not have to see the miracle to believe in it.

Thanks for asking the question - I needed to hear what I just said, if that makes any sense. G’night…

 

[Julia_Mae]

So back to the original question: How much is enough personal wealth for someone who is detached from personal wealth?.

25,000 people a day die of starvation. The money you spend on your cable bill every month can support* two families*. (Mercy Corp, Save the Children).

Figure out what you are really attached to. What you think you couldn’t possibly give up because it would be … too weird. Then ask yourself why someone is dying so you can have 150 channels. And when someone in this thread tells you there is no real relationship between their deaths and your favorite shows, ask Jesus what He thinks.

 

[George_Stegmeir]

Until any of you have traveled outside of Europe or North America, you cannot possibly speculate as to what a rich person should do with his money.
In North America (the US and Canada) the poorest person would be considered rich in many parts of Africa, Asia, and South America!
Until you have seen hungry children with swolen bellies from malnutrition first hand, like I have, you have no idea what poverty is.
In many parts of the world, the relatively rich are those who get the privilege of picking through the garbage of the tourist hotels that cater to Westerners from Europe, the US, or Canada! Their local equivalent of really rich people are those who have jobs in those resorts.
In such places, only someone like Mother Theresa and her nuns can do any good.
From all of the responses I have read in this thread, I realize that few of you have any knowledge of economics or business.
Just because someone is considered rich does not mean they can dispose of their assets. Many times their wealth is in non-disposable forms. Have any of you ever heard the adage:“Land rich but cash poor”?
What good would it do for someone to dispose of their hard assets and give the resulting cash to the poor in the street. It wouldn’t help, it would just be wasted. Even if it was donated to a legitimate charity, like Mother Theresa’s nuns, it would do little good for the long run. It is far more effective for a wealthy person to keep his assets and donate over the long haul. The totals would be much larger than if they did a one shot deal and became poor themselves.

 

[JRKH]

Until any of you have traveled outside of Europe or North America, you cannot possibly speculate as to what a rich person should do with his money.
In North America (the US and Canada) the poorest person would be considered rich in many parts of Africa, Asia, and South America!
Until you have seen hungry children with swolen bellies from malnutrition first hand, like I have, you have no idea what poverty is.
In many parts of the world, the relatively rich are those who get the privilege of picking through the garbage of the tourist hotels that cater to Westerners from Europe, the US, or Canada! Their local equivalent of really rich people are those who have jobs in those resorts.
In such places, only someone like Mother Theresa and her nuns can do any good.
From all of the responses I have read in this thread, I realize that few of you have any knowledge of economics or business.
Just because someone is considered rich does not mean they can dispose of their assets. Many times their wealth is in non-disposable forms. Have any of you ever heard the adage:“Land rich but cash poor”?
What good would it do for someone to dispose of their hard assets and give the resulting cash to the poor in the street. It wouldn’t help, it would just be wasted. Even if it was donated to a legitimate charity, like Mother Theresa’s nuns, it would do little good for the long run. It is far more effective for a wealthy person to keep his assets and donate over the long haul. The totals would be much larger than if they did a one shot deal and became poor themselves.

Good post…I’d like to address the last paragraph…
First, you ask what good would it do to give it all away…Well Jesus said then you would have treasure in heaven.
That said…I know what you mean and I basically agree…
There are two levels at which help is required. There is the immediate needs of people in acute distress, for which we have many wonderful charities. Then there is the longer term needs for people to get back on their feet…To have jobs and self respect etc.

Giving money to charities is great and we should all endeavor to do so. But giving over our wealth to God, while still managing it for His glory can also be a great thing.

The old adage of, “Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he east for a lifetime” jumps to mind. Give money to a charity and immediate needs can be satisfied. Invest money in job producing enterprises and greater needs can be satisfied…
But whatever path is chosen, Do it for the glory of God.

Peace
James

 

[Julia_Mae]

Thanks James. I can accept that wealth invested in companies is not necessarily sinful…although I think there’s still the question of what one does with the dividends, capital gains, etc.

Try Kiva:

Change a life for $25
Every day, Kiva connects thousands of people to borrowers and partner institutions around the world, working together to create opportunity and alleviate poverty. It only takes $25 to get started.

Really poor people need a couple goats for food and to sell kids and milk or cheese. Or a woman needs some cloth to make clothes she can wear and sell. These folks can hugely benefit from what would be a small amount of money, loaned to them, not given, that comes back with interest.

Then, you can re-invest the return in another person.

 

[mgoforth]

Thanks everyone for the advice and (name removed by moderator)ut!

 

[Newbie2]

As a principle of moral theology, we are not required to do all of the good we CAN do.

I’d be real careful in interpreting this statement. While true, it’s not an “out” for not doing what we SHOULD be doing.

Yes, I do see what you’re saying. Can you suggest a general rule of thumb for how much one should give away? I have a family and I agree that it would be sinful for me to force them to be poor and to neglect their needs. But we have more than we really need. What is prudent to keep?

Take what you feel you “really need” and do what you feel is right with the rest. However, that requires good planning.

This is a very good topic. Let’s take someone for example who is beyond question wealthy…Bill Gates. One could argue that he could keep…let’s just throw a number out there…100 million out of his estimated 60 billion or so and live like a king for the rest of his days. His foundation gives out plenty of money, but how much is “enough”?

Even if he gave away all but 100 million, it wouldn’t be a sacrifice for him. Yet the poor person who gives a dollar a week into the collections may be a huge sacrifice for them, even though their dollar won’t hardly buy a cup of coffee for another poor person.

So the question arises, is charity supposed to involve at least some degree of sacrifice? And is that sacrifice a matter of monitary resources only, or can/should it be a matter of time and talent as well? Or is there some sort of balance in all three? And if so, how does one determine that proper balance?

 

[PaulinVA]

One goal in our lives should be that we are never in a position to need help from others. What good is it that we give generously to the poor but then find ourselves among them, looking for help ourselves?

A retirement in these times requires, what, millions? With the life expectancy we have, and the fact that most people have 401(k)s and not pensions, is it not prudent to save for ourselves, so that we are not a financial burden on others in our later years?

I would think that we should give generously to the poor, but not to the point that we become them.

 

[JRKH]

I’d be real careful in interpreting this statement. While true, it’s not an “out” for not doing what we SHOULD be doing.

Take what you feel you “really need” and do what you feel is right with the rest. However, that requires good planning.

Beautifully expressed…
And - - - in considering, “what feels right”, one can begin to discern “there their treasure lies”…

This is a very good topic. Let’s take someone for example who is beyond question wealthy…Bill Gates. One could argue that he could keep…let’s just throw a number out there…100 million out of his estimated 60 billion or so and live like a king for the rest of his days. His foundation gives out plenty of money, but how much is “enough”?

Even if he gave away all but 100 million, it wouldn’t be a sacrifice for him. Yet the poor person who gives a dollar a week into the collections may be a huge sacrifice for them, even though their dollar won’t hardly buy a cup of coffee for another poor person.

So the question arises, is charity supposed to involve at least some degree of sacrifice? And is that sacrifice a matter of monitary resources only, or can/should it be a matter of time and talent as well? Or is there some sort of balance in all three? And if so, how does one determine that proper balance?

Great points…
Jesus covers part of this in the story of the “widow’s mite”.

Just thinking…I’m not sure if “sacrifice” is necessarily the ideal word to use since I think that “attitude” is what we are looking to develop in these matters. An attitude of giving - out of Love - which, if properly developed, reduces the sense of “sacrifice”.
Does that make sense??

Peace
James