How much Money should a Christian have?

[JRKH]

All of this is, of course, subjective and I am not trying to pass judgement on anyone.

I would say that to a certain extent it does depend on a person’s state in life. After all, Saint Edward was a king. I’m sure as a king, he had more money then the average person in England at the time. However, the proper management of that money was his Catholic duty. He used it to the betterment of his kingdom. He was rich, and became a Saint. So it is possible.

In my origional post I asked about individuals and not “institutions”. The King, while certainly having control of the money, really tends to fall into the institution catagory I think.
Your point about how hes used the money is spot on though.

For those of us living in the United States, we have more money (on average) then about 99% of the rest of the people in the world. If we bought ourselves down to average for the world net worth, we wouldn’t be able to live here.

I don’t know that you can say buying a base model car rather then one with options is a more Christian thing, too. If you really wanted to save money, you’d buy a used car, not a new one. Also, some options are good for safety reasons. Power doors in a minivan might seem like an excess to some, but not having to put a toddler down to open the door while your hands are full of bags really helps prevent them from running off. Also, if a Christian works hard, supports the poor, and doesn’t spend a lot of money on other things, I don’t see him as sinning if he gets a sunroof.

Also, I think it’s hard to say money is the root of all evil. I don’t think there was a financial benefit to Adam or Eve eating of the apple, and I don’t think Satan sinned for money.

I will say that money creates more temptations for Christians, however.

Just my opinion,

Andy

Your points are well taken.

Your example of the car with remote locks and a sunroof is a good one. Certainly the remote locks are a safety feature for small children. (Though certainly my parents never had such a thing on any of their cars.) The sunroof, on the other hand is more of a “want” feature which, while nice, only serves to increase the cost of the car and decrease the amount of money available for other use. (kids shoes maybe)

As we have been discussing the topic, I guess the better way to frame the question might be this:

At what point does our spending exceed our needs and start to fulfill our wants (greed)?

Obviously money, in and of itself, is not evil but the Love of money is. That love can also extend to the love of the “things money can buy” for these since become ones of lust, greed and coveting.

Certainly everyone has a different set of curcumstances; Children to be cared for, retirement to plan for, elderly parents etc.

So how should we choose what to spend and where to spend it?
How much of the wealth that God has provided to us do we, as Christians, allow our “wants” and “comforts” to consume?
How much do we allot for our needs, our comfort, and the needs of the community?
How much do we “Worry about tomorrow” instead of trusting in the Lord?

Peace
James

 

[nsper7]

JRKH, I believe we are deriving different lessons from the story of the Rich Young Ruler. I used to wonder if this meant that all Christians should be poor or something, but looking at the context, it seems to me that it is pointing to the fallacy of Salvation through works. Like a good Pharisaic Jew of his time, the young man thought he could work his way to righteousness (What good thing can I do?) and that wealth was a sign of God’s blessing (and thus his own Salvation). No other person approaches Jesus in this way (esp. wondering what he can do to inherit eternal life) and Jesus responds to no one else in this way (cf. to Nicodemus, Zaccheus and Jospeh of Arimathea…all wealthy/influential).

At what point does our spending exceed our needs and start to fulfill our wants (greed)?

But is necessarily fulfilling our ‘wants’ wrong? How austere are we supposed to be? Obviously, we see some who are led towards religious orders (i.e. Franciscans, Dominicans, etc. and the Anglican Communion actually has such orders). As long as we are not spending on illegal things or sinful things (i.e. prostitutes, drinking alcohol to excess, hiring assassins, etc.), where exactly is the sin in fulfilling your wants?

According to Dictionary.com (Unabridged, v1.1), ‘greed’ is defined as:

excessive or rapacious desire, esp. for wealth or possessions.

According to Princeton University’s WorldNet Dictionary, greed is defined as:

excessive desire to acquire or possess more (especially more material wealth) than one needs or deserves

The key word seems to be ‘excessive’. Desiring more than you need is not necessarily greed, so what makes it separates non-sinful/non-greedy desire from an excessive one?

I would daresay to guess that probably everyone in this discussion owns things they don’t really need. Please correct me if I’m wrong. I’ll be the first to admit that I own stuff that I don’t need.

 

[rlg94086]

The key word seems to be ‘excessive’. Desiring more than you need is not necessarily greed, so** what makes it separates non-sinful/non-greedy desire from an excessive one?**

I would daresay to guess that probably everyone in this discussion owns things they don’t really need. Please correct me if I’m wrong. I’ll be the first to admit that I own stuff that I don’t need.

Right. So, now that you understand the original question, how do we draw the line for ourselves? That’s all we are talking about. No one, I don’t think, is saying that we can’t have anything beyond basic needs. (side note…my parish priest has a collection of glow-in-the-dark religious statues…probably not a need. ). The question is how much is too much?

 

[JRKH]

JRKH, I believe we are deriving different lessons from the story of the Rich Young Ruler. I used to wonder if this meant that all Christians should be poor or something, but looking at the context, it seems to me that it is pointing to the fallacy of Salvation through works. Like a good Pharisaic Jew of his time, the young man thought he could work his way to righteousness (What good thing can I do?) and that wealth was a sign of God’s blessing (and thus his own Salvation). No other person approaches Jesus in this way (esp. wondering what he can do to inherit eternal life) and Jesus responds to no one else in this way (cf. to Nicodemus, Zaccheus and Jospeh of Arimathea…all wealthy/influential).

Yep. As I said in my previous post.
I also use to wonder about “should we be poor” question. Eventually I came to the conclusion that was not what Jesus had in mind.
We should recognize though that Jesus spoke several times about people giving up everything to follow Him. Simon Peter gave up his fishing business, Matthew walked away from his tax collecting job etc. These were special cases indeed, and in most of our cases it is obvious that our obligations prevent us from just giving up our jobs and going out evangelizing.
Jesus always wanted to get his followers to do more, to loose their connections to this world. To live more spiritually. Certainly this idea is also present in the story.
As far as this being the only time this type of question is asked and answered in this way, we must remember that much of what Jesus said and did is not recorded. Jesus was with us for 3 years. We have precious little recorded data from those three years.

But is necessarily fulfilling our ‘wants’ wrong? How austere are we supposed to be? Obviously, we see some who are led towards religious orders (i.e. Franciscans, Dominicans, etc. and the Anglican Communion actually has such orders). As long as we are not spending on illegal things or sinful things (i.e. prostitutes, drinking alcohol to excess, hiring assassins, etc.), where exactly is the sin in fulfilling your wants?

Let me pose a specific scnerio.
If one were on the way to purchase a new video game and came upon a beggar in the street, should we give to the beggar, and not buy the video game, or get the video game?

According to Dictionary.com (Unabridged, v1.1), ‘greed’ is defined as:

According to Princeton University’s WorldNet Dictionary, greed is defined as:

The key word seems to be ‘excessive’. Desiring more than you need is not necessarily greed, so what makes it separates non-sinful/non-greedy desire from an excessive one?

Since this is a catholic website and I asked about catholic “wealth”, I checked New Advent and found this:

Avarice (from Latin avarus, “greedy”; “to crave”) is the inordinate love for riches. Its special malice, broadly speaking, **lies in that it makes the getting and keeping of money, possessions, and the like, a purpose in itself to live for. It does not see that these things are valuable only as instruments for the conduct of a rational and harmonious life, due regard being paid of course to the special social condition in which one is placed. **

It is called a capital vice because it has as its object that for the gaining or holding of which many other sins are committed.

**It is more to be dreaded in that it often cloaks itself as a virtue, or insinuates itself under the pretext of making a decent provision for the future. **

In so far as avarice is an incentive to injustice in acquiring and retaining of wealth, it is frequently a grievous sin.
In itself, however, and in so far as it implies simply an excessive desire of, or pleasure in, riches, it is commonly not a mortal sin.

I broke the difinition up into it’s components so that each point can be seen.
Obviously this definition clarifies a lot of what we have been discussing here

I would daresay to guess that probably everyone in this discussion owns things they don’t really need. Please correct me if I’m wrong. I’ll be the first to admit that I own stuff that I don’t need.

Me too. - My computer for instance

Peace
James

 

[alitaptap]

How much is too much. I realize that we can’t declare some “sum” or dollar amount, but what constitutes too much money in ones possesion.
Here I am refering to individuals and not institutions, and not Churches. That would get into an entirely different discussion.

For individuals, How much money is too much? How much constitutes “laying up treasures on Earth? $50,000 - $100,000 per anum?

How about measuring wealth not just by how much money you have but how much of that money is controlled by love? A way of life where you can be open to money and wealth yet our soul is free from greed and materialism.

 

[JRKH]

How about measuring wealth not just by how much money you have but how much of that money is controlled by love? A way of life where you can be open to money and wealth yet our soul is free from greed and materialism.

That was really the point of my question.

A soul that is free from greed and is guided by Love will view money in an entirely different fashion. It will see money as a tool, and not as a goal.
Tools are never our goal they are only means by which we achieve some goal or other.
If our Goal is in line with Godly Love then we will use our talents for the Glory of God and the building up of His kingdom.
If our gifts lie in the realm of “business” we may be able to aquire goodly amounts of cash and/or investments which we then, by grace of God’s Love, are able to use to further His Kingdom.
What we do not do is to “build up opurselves” with large houses, and expensive cars and outher “toys” that we don’t need. We live modestly and reserve more of our earnings for charitable works.
If we do this, then God, seeing that we are properly using our gifts, may reward us with even more success in our ventures so that we may even further glorify His name through charitable works.

Just some thoughts.

Peace
James

 

[MadameButterfly]

JRKH,

Have you ever read “Happy Are You Poor,” by Fr. Thomas Dubay? Fr. Dubay does an excellent job of explaining why all Christians - religious/priests, single, married - should embrace “gospel poverty.” It’s very radical, but yet very practical.

It’s been awhile since I read the book, but here’s a review:

“What is his hypothesis? That all Christians, without exception, are called to a life of “gospel poverty”. Can one think of anything more radical in today’s materialistic age? What does Fr. Dubay mean by “gospel poverty”? He is very careful to define the term, because he knows that it can be easily misunderstood. He spends an entire chapter explaining what it is not - for example, it is not destitution, laziness, or miserliness. Ultimately, gospel poverty is “emptiness and radical readiness”. It involves an entire attitude and way of living in which the things of this world do not encumber us, but instead we are free to serve the Lord completely. But Fr. Dubay is careful not to reduce this to meaningless platitudes - he shows that this gospel poverty must have concrete applications. He spends an entire chapter on the “levels of radicality”, explaining exactly how one can increasingly, and concretely, live a life of gospel poverty. He is also careful to emphasize how one’s state of life affects the application of this lifestyle - for example, a married father with 5 children would not live in the exact same manner as a missionary friar in the third-world. But both are called to true gospel poverty.”

amazon.com/Happy-Are-You-Poor-Spiritual/dp/0898709210

Our family has always been frugal (by necessity), but after reading “Happy Are You Poor,” I realized that I was too attached to certain things (books) and that I had too much stuff (how many shoes/clothes/knickknacks did I really need?). Unfortunately, I continue to struggle with the idea of “gospel poverty” in the married state, since I do like buying nice things, especially for my kids. But then I realize that if we “downsize” our lifestyle and live more simply, we’ll have more time & money to devote to holy pursuits. Easier said than done, right?

Hmmm, I think I’ll re-read “Happy Are You Poor” this Lent.

MadameButterfly

 

[JRKH]

JRKH,

Have you ever read “Happy Are You Poor,” by Fr. Thomas Dubay? Fr. Dubay does an excellent job of explaining why all Christians - religious/priests, single, married - should embrace “gospel poverty.” It’s very radical, but yet very practical.

It’s been awhile since I read the book, but here’s a review:

“What is his hypothesis? That all Christians, without exception, are called to a life of “gospel poverty”. Can one think of anything more radical in today’s materialistic age? What does Fr. Dubay mean by “gospel poverty”? He is very careful to define the term, because he knows that it can be easily misunderstood. He spends an entire chapter explaining what it is not - for example, it is not destitution, laziness, or miserliness. Ultimately, gospel poverty is “emptiness and radical readiness”. It involves an entire attitude and way of living in which the things of this world do not encumber us, but instead we are free to serve the Lord completely. But Fr. Dubay is careful not to reduce this to meaningless platitudes - he shows that this gospel poverty must have concrete applications. He spends an entire chapter on the “levels of radicality”, explaining exactly how one can increasingly, and concretely, live a life of gospel poverty. He is also careful to emphasize how one’s state of life affects the application of this lifestyle - for example, a married father with 5 children would not live in the exact same manner as a missionary friar in the third-world. But both are called to true gospel poverty.”

amazon.com/Happy-Are-You-Poor-Spiritual/dp/0898709210

Our family has always been frugal (by necessity), but after reading “Happy Are You Poor,” I realized that I was too attached to certain things (books) and that I had too much stuff (how many shoes/clothes/knickknacks did I really need?). Unfortunately, I continue to struggle with the idea of “gospel poverty” in the married state, since I do like buying nice things, especially for my kids. But then I realize that if we “downsize” our lifestyle and live more simply, we’ll have more time & money to devote to holy pursuits. Easier said than done, right?

Hmmm, I think I’ll re-read “Happy Are You Poor” this Lent.

MadameButterfly

Thanks for the book recommendation.
Yes, I think we all struggle with this - how much is enough - too much. Where do we draw the line, and so forth.
I really think it has more to do with our “world view” than with any tangible amount or whatever. For instance I see big fancy cars, SUV’s etc at Church. I immediately think (though I should not) about how “selfish” such vehicle is. Yet I recognize this and stop my judging for I do not know if this car is a necessity (soemone who transports boy scouts or whatever), or perhaps it was a gift from someone else (who bought another vehicle) and so forth.

Peace
James

 

[nsper7]

What does the Church say? My understanding is that a person only has to contribute a portion of their disposable income (which is money not needed for basic needs OR to maintain one’s social status–i.e. a person who is a real estate broker or a politician might need to drive a better car or live a certain lifestyle because it is part of their status).

According to the Church, the Evangelical Counsels (i.e. Jesus’ words to the rich young man to sell all he has, etc.) are NOT required for Salvation. Obviously, if one make a vow of poverty, they must adhere to any vows/promises they make, but the issue at that point is not one of wealth, but of honesty and obedience.

I really think it has more to do with our “world view” than with any tangible amount or whatever. For instance I see big fancy cars, SUV’s etc at Church. I immediately think (though I should not) about how “selfish” such vehicle is. Yet I recognize this and stop my judging for I do not know if this car is a necessity (soemone who transports boy scouts or whatever), or perhaps it was a gift from someone else (who bought another vehicle) and so forth.

Is there a mortal (or even venial) sin in owning an expensive car as long as you can afford it (one could argue that living beyond one’s means or unnecessarily going into debt or being a burden to others maybe sinful)? If not, then who cares?

 

[JRKH]

What does the Church say? My understanding is that a person only has to contribute a portion of their disposable income (which is money not needed for basic needs OR to maintain one’s social status–i.e. a person who is a real estate broker or a politician might need to drive a better car or live a certain lifestyle because it is part of their status).

Please note that I am not pointing fingers here. I have no room to consider the “splinter in another’s eye”, as I have plenty of planks in my own.
I highlighted the one section above because I think that the story of the rich young man (referenced below) speaks to this very issue. He HAD done all that was “required” to do. He had done all that the Church said that, “a person only has to”. Yet he felt (as we all should) that maybe there is more. Jesus responded with a challenge to do just that.

You also mention “Basic Needs”. What does “basic needs” mean. A new 52 inch plasma screen TV - or any TV for that matter considering what is mostly on the darn thing. Would such an expense be justified when your parish is struggling to pay the expenses of it’s ministry or trying to help other poorer parishes in the diocese with theirs?

And who says we must have money to “keep up our status” or maintain a certain 'Lifestyle". Just what should be the “lifestyle” of a Christian?
I would venture to day that if a politician lived in a modest house, in a regular neighborhood and drove an older and “common” car he would garner a great many votes and more importantly respect. Mind you I’m not saying some don’t but just responding to the point.
Again - I’m not pointing fingers - only the individual can know.

According to the Church, the Evangelical Counsels (i.e. Jesus’ words to the rich young man to sell all he has, etc.) are NOT required for Salvation. Obviously, if one make a vow of poverty, they must adhere to any vows/promises they make, but the issue at that point is not one of wealth, but of honesty and obedience.

I never said they were required for salvation. There are however issues of honesty and obedience that we are all called to by our faith by our call to holiness. Things like not trying to serve two masters - Money and God. Like not being attached to material things, or storing up treasure that rots. By seeking first the Kingdom of God. By Loving our neighbors as ourselves.

Is there a mortal (or even venial) sin in owning an expensive car as long as you can afford it (one could argue that living beyond one’s means or unnecessarily going into debt or being a burden to others maybe sinful)? If not, then who cares?

It always disturbs me when I read such things as “it’s all a person has to”, or “it’s not a sin to…so who cares…” It seems to show a very legalisitc and OT attitude instead of the All embracing and Godly Love attitude that Christ taught.

The question in my mind is not whether owning such a car is “sinful” so long as you can “afford” it. The question should be put a different way. Can you truly “afford” an expensive car when so many others need your help? Do you really want to place part of your treasure" into this “thing” or wopuld you rather keep that treasure in heaven.

If Jesus were to lay before you three brochures - on the left a brochure for a Lexus and on the right a brochure for a comparable Chevy that would cost 50/month less along with a brochure from a catholic ministry asking for 40/month from you, which do you think Jesus is hoping you will choose? Do you think He would want you to choose the Lexus in order to “maintain your status”?

This is all I am saying really. When choices are placed before us, do we ask Jesus what he wants us to do? I’m sure He is not going to say, “don’t provide for your family”, just as I am sure He is not going to say, “Buy the Lexus”.

Peace
James

 

[nsper7]

Please note that I am not pointing fingers here. I have no room to consider the “splinter in another’s eye”, as I have plenty of planks in my own.
I highlighted the one section above because I think that the story of the rich young man (referenced below) speaks to this very issue. He HAD done all that was “required” to do. He had done all that the Church said that, “a person only has to”. Yet he felt (as we all should) that maybe there is more. Jesus responded with a challenge to do just that.

You also mention “Basic Needs”. What does “basic needs” mean. A new 52 inch plasma screen TV - or any TV for that matter considering what is mostly on the darn thing. Would such an expense be justified when your parish is struggling to pay the expenses of it’s ministry or trying to help other poorer parishes in the diocese with theirs?

And who says we must have money to “keep up our status” or maintain a certain 'Lifestyle". Just what should be the “lifestyle” of a Christian?
I would venture to day that if a politician lived in a modest house, in a regular neighborhood and drove an older and “common” car he would garner a great many votes and more importantly respect. Mind you I’m not saying some don’t but just responding to the point.
Again - I’m not pointing fingers - only the individual can know.

Use of Wealth (Catholic Encyclopedia article)
Use of Wealth:

In attempting in general to define the validity and quantity of this obligation theologians have recourse to many distinctions. They separate carefully the various degrees of distress to be relieved, and put stress upon the actual financial standing of those who are to afford the succour. Thus the differences are noted between extreme, grave, and ordinarynecessity. Likewise, in the condition of those whose duty to give aid is to be ascertained discrimination is made between: those who have only what is barely required to maintain themselves and family; those who over and above the mere necessaries of life are provided with what is needed to keep their present social status but nothing more: those who have a real surplus. The wealthy may be deemed to belong to this third class. It is a pagan and selfish view that all of a rich man’s income or holdings is demanded for the upkeep or betterment of his social position and that thus he cannot be said to ever have anything beyond his needs. The accepted Catholic teaching is that those who have a real superfluity of goods (as many other than multi-millionaires have) are bound to help those in want, whatever be their grade of misery.

If you read the entire article (very short), there is a lack of consensus except in extreme cases (i.e. the Lazarus and rich man parable) which I would think makes the full-knowledge requirement for mortal sin a little difficult to ascertain.

It always disturbs me when I read such things as “it’s all a person has to”, or “it’s not a sin to…so who cares…” It seems to show a very legalisitc and OT attitude instead of the All embracing and Godly Love attitude that Christ taught.

The same Godly love that will condemn us to Hell for all eternity, but that is a different argument for a different thread. Suffice it to say, my primary concern is often avoidance of Hell.

The question in my mind is not whether owning such a car is “sinful” so long as you can “afford” it. The question should be put a different way. Can you truly “afford” an expensive car when so many others need your help? Do you really want to place part of your treasure" into this “thing” or wopuld you rather keep that treasure in heaven.

It depends on the circumstance. Read that article on “Use of Wealth”.

If Jesus were to lay before you three brochures - on the left a brochure for a Lexus and on the right a brochure for a comparable Chevy that would cost 50/month less along with a brochure from a catholic ministry asking for 40/month from you, which do you think Jesus is hoping you will choose? Do you think He would want you to choose the Lexus in order to “maintain your status”?

This is all I am saying really. When choices are placed before us, do we ask Jesus what he wants us to do? I’m sure He is not going to say, “don’t provide for your family”, just as I am sure He is not going to say, “Buy the Lexus”.

That situation would depend on multiple things:

1. From a political standpoint (I am actually running for local office), I would have to look at whether a Lexus projects the right image: on the one hand, people might like a “man of the people” who lives an average existence, on the other hand, they might prefer someone who has the accoutrements that show they are successful and thus worthy of trust with responsibility.
2. How much money do I have to spend?
3. How badly does the parish ministry need the money and how much do they need?
4. Is it a sin in this case to buy the Lexus? Obviously, if Jesus were right there, I would ask Him.

BTW- I’d probably buy the Chevy. I am not one to spend extravagantly usually.

 

[nsper7]

BTW- If I had a lot of money, I would probably use it to promote the construction of shrines (i.e. Our Mother and many of the Saints). An interesting idea that just crossed my mind was a Shrine to the Litany of Saints. It would be a giant construction divided sort of like the litany: you would the main nave and whatnot and then areas dedicated to each section of Saints (i.e. Holy Angels and Archangels, Holy Patriarchs and Prophets, Holy Apostles and Evangelists) and then off of each section would be the various Saints (i.e. St. Michael, St. Gabriel and St. Raphael would be three sub-sections off of the Holy Angels and Archangels).

It would be giant, but I think pretty amazing.

EDIT: I would be even more amazing if each Saint ‘chapel’ would have a 1st or 2nd class relic from said Saint in there. I don’t know, it would be interesting.

 

[JRKH]

Use of Wealth (Catholic Encyclopedia article)

If you read the entire article (very short), there is a lack of consensus except in extreme cases (i.e. the Lazarus and rich man parable) which I would think makes the full-knowledge requirement for mortal sin a little difficult to ascertain.

Thanks for the link.
I must say again that I am not accusing anyone, merely pursuing a line of thought for my consideration and that of others.

The same Godly love that will condemn us to Hell for all eternity, but that is a different argument for a different thread. Suffice it to say, my primary concern is often avoidance of Hell.

Yes much of this is worth another thread. Though, If you are truly interested in answering that issue I can do no better than to suggest you read the book I recommend in my signature. It changed my Life and my view.

As related to the bolded section though (and summarized from that book) -
According to the great mystic Doctors of the Church, the spiritual journey toward God is comprised of three basic stages (though St. Teresa of Avila desribes seven). Catherine of Sienna describes them as:

1. “Slavish fear” - fear based turning to God. Repentance;
2. “Mercenary Love” - Service of God motivated by reward. Avoidance of punishment, Growing in Prayer Virtues;
3. “Filial Love” - Love for the sake of the other. Love of a dear Friend or Spouse.

Thus we should stirve to Love God and Do His will, not out of fear of punishment but out of Love for He who made us. This leads into all areas including the right use of money.

That situation would depend on multiple things:

1. From a political standpoint (I am actually running for local office), I would have to look at whether a Lexus projects the right image: on the one hand, people might like a “man of the people” who lives an average existence, on the other hand, they might prefer someone who has the accoutrements that show they are successful and thus worthy of trust with responsibility.

This is just my personal belief, but I think that in such a situation the candidate should not try to project an image at all except that which he already is. If said candidate professes to be a Chrisitan then he/she should project the Christian Ideals of Love - Love of God and Love of neighbor (Mt 22:36-40)- Service to others (he who would be greatest must the servant (Mt 20:26-27)).
There is no greater “accoutrement” than the humility of Christ. There is not greater “image” to be projected than the word of your neighbors that you are truly a trustworthy person. There is no greater support than the Love of neighbor for the Love of God, and there is no greater defense against the temptations of of office than prayer.

1. How much money do I have to spend?

And how best to spend it, on luxury when others are in want?

1. How badly does the parish ministry need the money and how much do they need?

How much can you give and how much good could they do with it??

1. Is it a sin in this case to buy the Lexus? Obviously, if Jesus were right there, I would ask Him.

I trust that you will ask him.
Only you and He can say for sure.

BTW- I’d probably buy the Chevy. I am not one to spend extravagantly usually.

Me too

By the way - Please know - anywone who reads this that I am struggling mightily with this question only to try and get a handle on it myself.

I recall reading, and witnessing, parishes - even poor ones - making great sacrifices in order to accomplish things like building a new Church, or Hospital or School. Pennies and Dimes (Dollars in todays money) would be set aside out of the little people had so that their children and the children of others could have something better.
In many cases we are the Children and grandchildren of these people and are the benficiaries of that sacrifice. Do we not owe it to the succeeding generations to make similar sacrifice so that our children and grandchildren can have a catholic education catholic healthcare, basic necessities etc.?

I dunno - I’m just rambling – - - - -

Peace
James

 

[Greg27]

I don’t think wealth or being wealthy are themselves intrinsically evil. The Bible seems to warn constantly though on the evils of loving or desiring wealth too much, especially if it leads to injustice and neglect of the poor. The Prophets in the Bible and the history of Christianity rightly condemn the wealthy who accumulate obscene wealth while leaving the needy person, like Lazarus, begging and starving at the gate. I also think that is what Jesus had in mind in the parable of the sheep and goats. I think it is what you did with your wealth, and the morality of how you obtained it, that will demand an account before the Throne of God.

 

[alitaptap]

JRKH,

Have you ever read “Happy Are You Poor,” by Fr. Thomas Dubay? Fr. Dubay does an excellent job of explaining why all Christians - religious/priests, single, married - should embrace “gospel poverty.” It’s very radical, but yet very practical.

It’s been awhile since I read the book, but here’s a review:

“What is his hypothesis? That all Christians, without exception, are called to a life of “gospel poverty”. Can one think of anything more radical in today’s materialistic age? What does Fr. Dubay mean by “gospel poverty”? He is very careful to define the term, because he knows that it can be easily misunderstood. He spends an entire chapter explaining what it is not - for example, it is not destitution, laziness, or miserliness. Ultimately, gospel poverty is “emptiness and radical readiness”. It involves an entire attitude and way of living in which the things of this world do not encumber us, but instead we are free to serve the Lord completely. But Fr. Dubay is careful not to reduce this to meaningless platitudes - he shows that this gospel poverty must have concrete applications. He spends an entire chapter on the “levels of radicality”, explaining exactly how one can increasingly, and concretely, live a life of gospel poverty. He is also careful to emphasize how one’s state of life affects the application of this lifestyle - for example, a married father with 5 children would not live in the exact same manner as a missionary friar in the third-world. But both are called to true gospel poverty.”

amazon.com/Happy-Are-You-Poor-Spiritual/dp/0898709210

Our family has always been frugal (by necessity), but after reading “Happy Are You Poor,” I realized that I was too attached to certain things (books) and that I had too much stuff (how many shoes/clothes/knickknacks did I really need?). Unfortunately, I continue to struggle with the idea of “gospel poverty” in the married state, since I do like buying nice things, especially for my kids. But then I realize that if we “downsize” our lifestyle and live more simply, we’ll have more time & money to devote to holy pursuits. Easier said than done, right?

Hmmm, I think I’ll re-read “Happy Are You Poor” this Lent.

MadameButterfly

I wish MadameButterfly and JRKH can write “Happy Are You Rich”, a personal finance book that will help people get out of debt, solve their financial problems, and gain more financial blessings to help more people. If not, teach the people about right theology and psychology towards money. Because many good Catholic families are in debt trouble. They find it hard to sleep at night. There is no financial peace of mind. Many good Catholic husbands and wives quarrel a lot and even separate due to money problems. Many good Catholic will be retiring without any savings or investments -and will grow older and poorer as the years go by. Many good Catholic are living in poverty, and their children are suffering from poor health and poor education.

 

[JRKH]

I wish MadameButterfly and JRKH can write “Happy Are You Rich”, a personal finance book that will help people get out of debt, solve their financial problems, and gain more financial blessings to help more people. If not, teach the people about right theology and psychology towards money. Because many good Catholic families are in debt trouble. They find it hard to sleep at night. There is no financial peace of mind. Many good Catholic husbands and wives quarrel a lot and even separate due to money problems. Many good Catholic will be retiring without any savings or investments -and will grow older and poorer as the years go by. Many good Catholic are living in poverty, and their children are suffering from poor health and poor education.

Truly this is a sad and difficult situation. I am sorry that I cannot be of much help to those in the Philipines where you are. Our situations are so different.

Many people here are also in “debt trouble” but in many cases it is the result of wanting to many unnecessary things. I would imagine it is quite different in your country so I will not make any comments.

All I can say is that “Good Catholics”, those who Love God and try hard to follow in His ways will have great reward in heaven - regardless of their state on earth.

Peace
James

 

[alitaptap]

All I can say is that “Good Catholics”, those who Love God and try hard to follow in His ways will have great reward in heaven - regardless of their state on earth.

 

[JRKH]

I don’t think wealth or being wealthy are themselves intrinsically evil. The Bible seems to warn constantly though on the evils of loving or desiring wealth too much, especially if it leads to injustice and neglect of the poor. The Prophets in the Bible and the history of Christianity rightly condemn the wealthy who accumulate obscene wealth while leaving the needy person, like Lazarus, begging and starving at the gate. I also think that is what Jesus had in mind in the parable of the sheep and goats. I think it is what you did with your wealth, and the morality of how you obtained it, that will demand an account before the Throne of God.

Yes - Paul speaks specifically of the “Love of Money” as a root of evil (1 Tim 6:10)

To look at a couple of terms you use -

• I don’t think wealth or being wealthy are themselves intrinsically evil…*
  It might depend on what you mean by “wealth”. Wealthy in the treasures of the earth? Or wealthy in the treasures of God?
  Can a man can be wealthy in the Eyes of God if his eyes are turned toward the accumulation of wealth of this world?
  Can a man be “wealthy” in the eyes of the world if his eyes are turned toward God with the intent of using his talents and his goods for the Glory of God’s Kingdom?

*…the history of Christianity rightly condemn the wealthy who accumulate obscene wealth… *
So who is to define “obsene wealth”…
A person who makes $100,000/yr may not see $150,000 as an obsene increase, but the person making $25,000/yr may have an entirely different view, and the person who is unemployed will have a different view altogether.

We will all be called to account, as you say, for the little or the great we have been given. Frankly looking back on my life causes me fear and shame.

Peace
James

 

[Schn]

Use the Pope as a guide. Anything you earn up until you can get the same standard of living is fine. So basically infinite.

 

[JRKH]

Use the Pope as a guide. Anything you earn up until you can get the same standard of living is fine. So basically infinite.

Agreed. Since the Pope owns nothing we should strive to do the same.

Peace
James