How rich is "too rich"?

[stina]

Hello everyone! I have a quick/general question for you all.
In the Bible, there are several passages that imply that if you are wealthy, you can never go to heaven.
I’m from Canada, from quite a wealthy family. I go to church every week, I go to confession and I pray. I have had quite a bit of suffering being a Catholic teenager and I feel I am quite strong in my faith. I try to help out at charities fundraisers and donate money to those in need.
However, I am still probably found in the richest 3% of the world and I’m worried that I am too greedy in the eyes of God. Does anyone know what the Church and/or Bible says about how to know if you are too greedy/wealthy for heaven?
Thanks!
~Stina~

 

[TemplarKnight]

I don’t believe that you have to be dirt poor to enter into heaven. I believe Jesus said you cannot serve two masters and if maintaining your wealth is your number one priority, then you can’t very well dedicate your life to Christ.

Trying to “help out at charities fundraisers and donate money to those in need.” when you claim to be one of the “richest 3% in the world” is-to be honest-a little patronizing and shameful. If you can measure yourself among the top 3% in the world, then you have to obligation as a Catholic to help out thousands of people in numerous and countless ways. You have to power to positively affect the lives of thousands of poor throughout the world. You can start foundations and agencies that can literally change the world. In Canada, the U.S., Africa, where ever. “Giving” isn’t what’s needed. You need to provide the works on how it is given, why it is given, driven in a Christian manner, to the betterment of your fellow man.

I would be interested in how much you are really willing to “help” because in your position, the options are endless.

 

[stina]

Well, I can only do so much right now being a 18 year old high school student having to pay for college. I’m not completely sure if I’m in the top 3%, I just heard that anyone in middle-class North America is within the top 5% most wealthy of the world. Does anyone know maybe a percent of your wealth you are supposed to give according to the Church? Or a quote from the Pope?

 

[bengal_fan]

if you have a spare change jar in your home, you are in the top 5% in wealth in the world.

that was taken from a gallup pole i believe… i will look for the reference.

here is what i think on the issue though:

if you have a house with empty rooms while there are people who have no home, you have too much.

if you have lots of clothes while people dress in rags, you have too much.

if you have so much food in your refrigerator that you say, “ooohhh, i forgot we had that,” while people go hungry, you have too much.

if you have to have more than one refrigerator to hold all your food while people don’t eat, you have too much.

if you have more than 1 car while people are still walking miles and miles to get to work/school/food/water, you have too much (and, in fact, if you have a car and people near you are doing those things, you aren’t even using the car in a proper way).

if you have two coats while some one else is cold, you have too much.

if you have money in savings that isn’t for a specific plan while others have no money, you have too much.

if your specific plans for your savings are for non-essentials while others don’t have the basic necessities for life, you have too much.

if you pay for plastic surgery (and haven’t been in a traumatic accident) while others can’t get the medicine they need to live, you have too much.

i could go on
and on
and on

 

[Tom]

Hello everyone! I have a quick/general question for you all.
In the Bible, there are several passages that imply that if you are wealthy, you can never go to heaven.
I’m from Canada, from quite a wealthy family. I go to church every week, I go to confession and I pray. I have had quite a bit of suffering being a Catholic teenager and I feel I am quite strong in my faith. I try to help out at charities fundraisers and donate money to those in need.
However, I am still probably found in the richest 3% of the world and I’m worried that I am too greedy in the eyes of God. Does anyone know what the Church and/or Bible says about how to know if you are too greedy/wealthy for heaven?
Thanks!
~Stina~

Keep in mind to the one that much is given much is expected. The answer isn’t giving away your wealth , the answer is using your wealth properly. God has given you wealth, He demands you use it well. Don’t bury your wealth, use it, for His purposes. If you give a man $1,000 dollars and he uses it for sinful purposes have YOU done the will of God? No. So giving away your wealth isn’t the answer. You might get some direction from Matthew chapter 5.

 

[ribozyme]

Hello everyone! I have a quick/general question for you all.
In the Bible, there are several passages that imply that if you are wealthy, you can never go to heaven.
I’m from Canada, from quite a wealthy family. I go to church every week, I go to confession and I pray. I have had quite a bit of suffering being a Catholic teenager and I feel I am quite strong in my faith. I try to help out at charities fundraisers and donate money to those in need.
However, I am still probably found in the richest 3% of the world and I’m worried that I am too greedy in the eyes of God. Does anyone know what the Church and/or Bible says about how to know if you are too greedy/wealthy for heaven?
Thanks!
~Stina~

I do not see anything wrong with being wealthy in and of itself. However, I wish I was wealthy.

I do not have the means to conduct significant charitable activities so my attitude is characterized by diffidence. If I have the means to conduct such activities my own diffidence would disappear. My own lack of resources to conduct charitable activities disappoints me as I cannot imitate the work of George Soros - a person whom I deeply respect.

 

[bengal_fan]

If you give a man $1,000 dollars and he uses it for sinful purposes have YOU done the will of God? No.

not that i disagree with your logic but i want to ask a question about this statement.

where does Jesus say this? He talks a lot about giving to the poor, giving clothes to the naked, visiting those in prison, etc, but i don’t see Him giving the caveat that these people have to use your gifts in a proper way. if some one asks me for money for food/gas/clothes/etc, and i give it to him and then he uses it to buy drugs… i have still done the will of God because i was willing to part with possessions for the sake of another. now, will i give to that man again, maybe but i will think twice and talk to him more about the gift.

now if i purposely give people money for drugs or alcohol or cigarettes, i would say that i am not doing the will of God.

it is not about giving your wealth away, it is about giving it up. it is not ours to begin with. i would even say, that as Christians, our possessions no longer belong to just us but to everyone.

 

[bengal_fan]

I do not have the means to conduct significant charitable activities so my attitude is characterized by diffidence.

do you have breath in your lungs? then you have the means.

mother teresa was not wealthy by any means. in fact, the people who do the most charity work tend to be poorer.

 

[GreenLantern]

Don’t forget that Joseph of Aramethia had quite some wealth

 

[stinkcat_14]

The problem with being rich, is that it can very easily distract you from the things of God. After all, none of us, never seems to be rich enough. That is just as true for people who have $1 million as it is for those who have very little. The problem for the rich, is that it is very easy to think that your rich is mainly the result of your virtue, and give little attention to the fact that God is the creator of all that we have.

 

[ribozyme]

The problem with being rich, is that it can very easily distract you from the things of God. After all, none of us, never seems to be rich enough. That is just as true for people who have $1 million as it is for those who have very little. The problem for the rich, is that it is very easy to think that your rich is mainly the result of your virtue, and give little attention to the fact that God is the creator of all that we have.

Well, you are certainly correct. Even George Soros admitted that he could not have too much money (you do need plenty of money to engage in the projects Soros does). However, he did admit that he has everything he wants (well, he is a billionaire) although the main blessing he attributes to his fortune is not a comfortable lifestyle, but the fact that his ideas are heard. I read about George Soros, but I do not see him being consumed by avarice. I do not covet anything Soros possesses but I do want his ability to engage in charity.

 

[LilyM]

There’s no set amount that makes you too wealthy - firstly because we all have different needs, secondly because if you have a lot but give a lot it balances it out to a great extent - a la Bill and Melinda Gates, but perhaps not to all the same causes that he does.

The OT sets the standard of 10% to be given regardless of the wealth of the person. With modern-day hindsight we recognise the difficulty of someone who isn’t making ends meet giving that percentage of their earnings (although hopefully they give of other resources where possible - time, skills, prayers if they can’t give anything else).

But I would think, while giving more than 10% may be admirable and desirable for those who can afford it, it’s hardly a strict necessity.

 

[ribozyme]

The OT sets the standard of 10% to be given regardless of the wealth of the person. With modern-day hindsight we recognise the difficulty of someone who isn’t making ends meet giving that percentage of their earnings (although hopefully they give of other resources where possible - time, skills, prayers if they can’t give anything else).

I think George Soros certainly exceeded the 10% mark too. When I read about Soros’ work, it is makes me feel disappointed in myself because I could not imitate him.

 

[bengal_fan]

But I would think, while giving more than 10% may be admirable and desirable for those who can afford it, it’s hardly a strict necessity.

i think you mean command rather than necessity, but i still disagree with you.

when people are going hungry, without proper food and clothing and shelter, not getting the medicine they need, or even clean drinking water, and there are Christians who eat 3 meals a day and take vacations and have extra clothes and shoes and cars and rooms… then i would say giving more than 10% (especially those who can do it and not fall into the categories of those listed above… WHICH IS JUST ABOUT EVERY CHRISTIAN IN EVERY WESTERN COUNTRY) is an absolute necessity.

people us the charitable giving of bill and melinda gates as being this awe-inspiring thing. it actually disgusts me in many ways.

when i see them realize that they can live on (here in the US) $30-$50,000 (depending on where you live… maybe it’s a bit more but not much) a year and give the rest away, then i will say they get it.

our goal should not be a set percentage to give or a set amount. it should be to really figure out what we NEED and then give the rest away so that others can have what they NEED as well. when everyone gets what they NEED, then we can start having some fun and getting what we WANT.

 

[nsper7]

I think we had this same discussion (or at least I had it with JRKH) in another thread. Anyway, I’ll re-copy a commentary I wrote (originally refuting the theology of one Tim Spiess, but it is applicable here).

Now, Spiess uses the story of the rich young ruler to try and point to how Jesus required a person to forsake everything (to his credit, Spiess is willing to admit this was a specific command to a specific individual, but he still draws a connection between forsaking everything and Salvation) in order to be Saved, but, on closer reading of the verses, it will become apparent that this is a misinterpretation.

Now behold, one came and said to Him, “Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?” So He said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.” He said to Him, “Which ones?” Jesus said, “‘You shall not murder,’ ‘You shall not commit adultery,’ ‘You shall not steal,’ ‘You shall not bear false witness,’ ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’” The young man said to Him, “All these things I have kept from my youth. What do I still lack?” Jesus said to him, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.” But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions. Then Jesus said to His disciples, “Assuredly, I say to you that it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” When His disciples heard it, they were greatly astonished, saying, “Who then can be saved?” But Jesus looked at them and said to them, “With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” Then Peter answered and said to Him, “See, we have left all and followed You. Therefore what shall we have?” So Jesus said to them, "Assuredly I say to you, that in the regeneration, when the Son of Man sits on the throne of His glory, you who have followed Me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or lands, for My name’s sake, shall receive a hundredfold, and inherit eternal life. But many who are first will be last, and the last first.”

When the young man approaches Jesus, he asks Him what ‘good thing’ he may do to have eternal life. It might seem like a minor linguistic issue, but the man is not asking how to be Saved or even asking Jesus to Save him, but is instead wanting to Save himself. Further, in calling Jesus ‘good’ (agathos in the Greek) and then asking what good (agathos) thing he can do to earn eternal life, it almost looks like he is asking how he can be like Jesus (God the Son), since, as Jesus points out, only God is ‘good’ (also note, this is not Jesus denying that He is God and good, but Him pointing out to the young man that, in calling Him [Jesus] ‘good’, he must know exactly what this means). Then, when Jesus asks the young man if he has obeyed the commandments (notice that Jesus uses the commandments from the Old Testament), the young man responds that he has ‘kept them from his youth’. This seems to show self-righteousness on the part of the young man, especially when one takes into account Jesus’ interpretation of the commandments ‘Thou shalt not murder’ and ‘Thou shalt not commit adultery’ in Matthew 5:22, 28. Some commentators, including myself, question whether the young man really obeyed the commandment as God had intended them (as opposed to how Pharisaic Judaism re/misinterpreted them).

When the young man asks Jesus what he lacks, Jesus begins His response by saying, ‘If you want to be perfect…’. Notice, it is not addressing eternal life/Salvation at this point, except to setup a dichotomy. This young man wishes to do a ‘good thing’ to be Saved. The only way to be ‘good’ is to be like God and, thus, perfect. In Jesus’ response, ‘treasure in Heaven’, not eternal life/Salvation, is equated with selling possessions and giving to the poor.

((CONT’D))

 

[nsper7]

CONT'D:

In Jesus’ response about it being difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God/Heaven, it should be understood that wealth was considered a sign of God’s favor/blessing; thus, someone who was wealthy (i.e. the Pharisees or this young man) would have thought they had no need for Salvation (if you look at this young man or the Pharisees when they challenge Jesus, they assume they either already are Saved or that they can earn their Salvation through good works). The Disciple’s astonishment at Jesus’ words is especially understandable in light of the then commonly-held view that wealth was deemed a sign of God’s blessings.

Jesus’ answer to the question about who can be Saved seems to be the main point of this story/lesson: man cannot Save himself. In order to Save oneself, one would have to be ‘perfect’ and ‘good’ as God is and one’s righteousness would have to exceed that of the Scribes and Pharisees (Matthew 5:20). Only God, through Jesus Christ, can Save us. The rich man never asked Jesus to Save him, he never threw himself onto the mercy and compassion of God. No, the man wanted to Save himself (‘what good thing can I do?’) and Jesus told the man how to do that: be perfect. The dichotomy of the passage is this: either Save yourself by being ‘perfect’ and ‘good’, which is impossible, or turn to God, through belief in Christ, for Salvation.

In the last part of the passage, Peter asks what they (the original Apostles) will get for their sacrifice. Notice that Jesus gives a two-part answer. The first part is specifically addressing the reward for the ‘original 12’, while the second part is addressing all who have given up things and people on account of Jesus. Now, there are two ways to interpret this second part of the promise. One way, as Spiess appears to do, is to view inheriting eternal life as a part of the reward for giving things up for Jesus’ sake, thus drawing a connection between the requirements of discipleship and the end-result of Salvation. The second option is to read the second part as saying that, besides inheriting eternal life (which they received through their belief in Jesus Christ), they will, as a reward for their personal sacrifices, receive a ‘hundredfold’ reward/repayment (notice that no mention is given of whether that repayment will be in our present life on earth or in our ‘afterlife’).

The problem with the first interpretation is that it contradicts Jesus’ own statements elsewhere. Throughout the rest of the Gospels, belief (pisteuo) is connected with receiving eternal life. Jesus never tells anyone else to give up anything in order to receive eternal life (note that the rich man in the preceding verses did not ask how to be Saved, he asked what ‘good thing’ he could do to be Saved and, after the man claimed that he followed the commandments, Jesus explained to the man how to be ‘perfect’). Thus, only the second interpretation fits with the other sayings of Jesus on how to receive eternal life (furthermore, the idea of their being different levels of reward for those who are Saved is repeated by Jesus in the Parable of the Talents in Matthew 25:14-30 and echoed by Paul in 1 Corinthians 3:11-15). On a side note, at least one person in the Gospels, Joseph of Arimathea, is described as wealthy and socially important, but also called a disciple of Jesus’ (Matthew 27:57, Mark 15:43, John 19:38).

I hope this is helpful. Although perhaps it might be the ideal for Christians to give up all their material wealth, turning it into sin issue leads to legalism and fear.

Also, here is the link to the original thread where I first copied-and-pasted this commentary: How much Money should a Christian have?

 

[bengal_fan]

I hope this is helpful. Although perhaps it might be the ideal for Christians to give up all their material wealth, turning it into sin issue leads to legalism and fear.

so how do you explain ananias and sapphira? how do you explain the earliest church sharing absolutely everything?

i am not saying that we give up everything to the point that we don’t have the basic necessities of life. even Jesus was provided for in that regard (by wealthy people willing to give up their stuff to take care of Jesus and His followers… probably cost lazarus a pretty penny every time Jesus rolled into town with His 12 buddies!).
i am saying we think we NEED things we don’t really need. paul says that if we have food and clothes we have “more than enough”. notice he doesn’t even say shelter!?

you are right in that it is not about legalism. it is about loving your neighbor so much that you want them to have the things they need. and you cannot even think of keeping things you don’t need when your neighbor is suffering.

 

[nsper7]

so how do you explain ananias and sapphira? how do you explain the earliest church sharing absolutely everything?

Read the story of Ananias and Sapphira again. Their sin was not that they didn’t give all the proceeds of the sale of property to the Early Church, their sin was that they lied and claimed they had given all the proceeds when in fact they hadn’t and it is implied they did all this in order to put on airs of righteousness. St. Peter even tells them that, prior to selling it, the property was theirs to do with as they pleased and that, after selling it, the proceeds were theirs to do with as they pleased. Their sin was lying to the Holy Spirit.

i am not saying that we give up everything to the point that we don’t have the basic necessities of life. even Jesus was provided for in that regard (by wealthy people willing to give up their stuff to take care of Jesus and His followers… probably cost lazarus a pretty penny every time Jesus rolled into town with His 12 buddies!).

Notice that Jesus never told Lazarus to give up all his wealth either. To Zaccheus (a wealthy tax collector) all Jesus tells him is not to cheat people. Joseph of Arimathea’s wealth is never judged and he is explicitly called a disciple of Jesus (even though he is secretive and member of a high-level council).

i am saying we think we NEED things we don’t really need. paul says that if we have food and clothes we have “more than enough”. notice he doesn’t even say shelter!?

I agree we sometimes think we need things that we don’t need (self-delusion), but is it okay to want things that we don’t need?

 

[LilyM]

so how do you explain ananias and sapphira? how do you explain the earliest church sharing absolutely everything?

i am not saying that we give up everything to the point that we don’t have the basic necessities of life. even Jesus was provided for in that regard (by wealthy people willing to give up their stuff to take care of Jesus and His followers… probably cost lazarus a pretty penny every time Jesus rolled into town with His 12 buddies!).
i am saying we think we NEED things we don’t really need. paul says that if we have food and clothes we have “more than enough”. notice he doesn’t even say shelter!?

you are right in that it is not about legalism. it is about loving your neighbor so much that you want them to have the things they need. and you cannot even think of keeping things you don’t need when your neighbor is suffering.

The only problem with Ananias and Sapphira was that they lied and claimed they’d given all their wealth (presumably to earn greater brownie points) as opposed to just some.

Jesus was satisfied with the woman who gave him an expensive jar of ointment - it was expensive, sure, but there’s no indication that it was all that she possessed - maybe she had ten more at home.

And as He Himself said, we’re never going to be able to give enough to provide for all the needs of our neighbours - ‘the poor you will always have with you’.

Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t give what we can, but neither should we work ourselves up into knots and try to feed every hungry mouth in the world - because we simply can’t do it.

I believe it might’ve been Mother Teresa who talked about ‘give a man a fish and he’ll eat for a day, teach him to fish he’ll eat forever’.

We need to consider the fact that people do good by putting money into their own businesses so that they can give more people more employment, and even, indirectly, by buying goods and services, even the frivolous ones, since this contributes to the employment of the people who make, sell and repair those goods and provide those services.

Even if you keep it all in a bank it’s providing work for those tellers and bank managers. I’m sure most people would prefer, and get more good from, a secure job than a one-time handout, even a large one, no?

 

[stinkcat_14]

We need to consider the fact that people do good by putting money into their own businesses so that they can give more people more employment, and even, indirectly, by buying goods and services, even the frivolous ones, since this contributes to the employment of the people who make, sell and repair those goods and provide those services.

Even if you keep it all in a bank it’s providing work for those tellers and bank managers. I’m sure most people would prefer, and get more good from, a secure job than a one-time handout, even a large one, no?

While there is nothing necessarily wrong with saving and investing, I don’t think that we can equate it with charity. When I save and invest, I am doing it for one primary reason, to benefit myself. While others may benefit as well, the question we need to ask ourselves is: who is benefiting? Is it the least in society? I think it is fair to say, that our capitalist society is not necessarily set up to benefit the least of us. That means that we as Christians need to orient our market activities in ways that benefit the least of us. If I just invest in such a way that maximizes my portfolio value, what merit is there in that? Don’t the pagans do as much?