Question about the Rich Man Passage

[FollowChrist34]

You hit the nail on the head.

This is one of the big problems in the CC today, too many folks want the best of both worlds and want to be justified in doing so.

Ive always found it curious that so many biblical verses and stories can be ‘interpreted’ in numerous ways. Im skeptical when they tend to benefit a prosperous comfortable earthly life though.

Or the divorced and remarried et al. It is all about perspective.

 

[BobCatholic]

That’s not what He said. And that’s why the Catholic Church teaches otherwise-and honors the laity now more than ever. All were not meant to be clergy-or there’d be few to support the Church, and feed the poor, and cloth the naked. The laity are also more involved than ever now in various ministries, from teaching, prison visitation, Eucharistic ministry, lectors, etc.

I thought monks and nuns would be clothing the naked and serving the poor like they did throughout the centuries.

Yes, post V2 this is the case for laity that the Church honors the laity. But will God do the same? From what I see, lives of the saints is clear: Only monks, nuns and clergy seem to get into that heavenly palace.

Jesus was asking the rich young man if he was seeking perfection, and while there is a difference in perfection achieved in this life that’s related to our willingness to give up worldly “stuff”- wealth, possessions, glory- that perfection is still* relative*, and very few, clergy and laity alike, will achieve it in the here and now-and God knows that, and allows for it.

Clearly you forgot the part where he said to follow him.

Christ said “give up your possessions and follow me” - he made it a PREREQUISITE to following him.

No, he could not follow him with the $$$. Christ closed the doors on that. And if he could not, how can ordinary laity like me?

Can’t not follow Christ without giving up all the $$$ and go to heaven.

Laity are doomed.

And so the apostles asked ‘Who, then, could be saved’? And Jesus, said, “With man this is impossible but with God all things are possible.”

God CAN do everything. If he chooses to.

Otherwise, if he doesn’t choose it, game over, no hope.

In any case, God doesn’t punish us for being attached to worldly things; rather the attachment* is* our punishment, our source of sadness. And if we don’t let them own us, if we treat them as tools rather than ends in themselves, then we at least don’t need to suffer from their inadequacy to satisfy us.

Purgatory is God’s punishment for being attached for worldly things - that assumes one is able to die in a state of grace from being unable to follow Christ because they didn’t give up all their evil possessions.

 

[fhansen]

I thought monks and nuns would be clothing the naked and serving the poor like they did throughout the centuries.

More often than not they have to be funded from somewhere, along with the rest of the Church. It requires a lot of wealth to feed and cloth this world’s poor.

Yes, post V2 this is the case for laity that the Church honors the laity. But will God do the same? From what I see, lives of the saints is clear: Only monks, nuns and clergy seem to get into that heavenly palace.

The Church…simply knows; that’s what she’s commissioned to do, along with proclaiming what she knows. We’re not Protestants, we’re not a “religion of the Book” first of all as the catechism puts it, who need to depend on and debate Scripture endlessly. We can count on the* Church* to best understand the faith-and the need for and importance of the marriage/family vocation in this case. I don’t know where you get the idea that only monks, clergy, etc who’ve given up everything make it to heaven. Some married folks will presumably pass up purgatory while some clergy will see the rest of us there.

Clearly you forgot the part where he said to follow him.

Christ said “give up your possessions and follow me” - he made it a PREREQUISITE to following him.
No, He made it a prerequisite if the rich young man desired perfection* now*, the better path perhaps but not the only one to heaven.
No, he could not follow him with the $$$. Christ closed the doors on that. And if he could not, how can ordinary laity like me?

Can’t not follow Christ without giving up all the $$$ and go to heaven.

Laity are doomed.

Maybe, for certain Sola Scriptura adherents, wooden literalists insisting on a particular interpretation.

God CAN do everything. If he chooses to.

Otherwise, if he doesn’t choose it, game over, no hope.

Agreed

Purgatory is God’s punishment for being attached for worldly things - that assumes one is able to die in a state of grace from being unable to follow Christ because they didn’t give up all their evil possessions.

It’s not a punishment; it’s a merciful place of final purification for those who don’t yet quite “get it”, who haven’t totally learned the lesson here on earth, the lesson to love God first above all else, the very best thing for us.

 

[SnoopSword]

It is clearly not hyperbole.

If it was, he would not have let him interpret him literally and let him walk away thinking the literal way was the correct way when it was just hyperbole. After all, he loved him.

A good teacher NEVER leaves the student confused or walking away with the wrong idea. He makes sure it is clear to the student what is expected.

Jesus would not have let someone walk away with a false idea.

So clearly he meant it to be literal. Just like John 6, where he did the same thing - didn’t let people who took him literally, walk away because they rejected his literal teaching on the Eucharist.

Christ wants monks, nuns and clergy, who give 100% to him and gave up everything to follow him.

Laypeople are second class citizens (if lucky) in the kingdom of God. They can’t give up 100% so that’s why I’m useless to God. Not allowed to have money. Can’t serve both God and mammon.

Also keep in mind Jesus was adressing Job. He was also a rich young ruler. Read the last chapter of Job - does Christ really restify to it?

In my opinion, God uses the book of Job to teach us how we should interpret scripture. But the teachings can not be recognized by most people because they dont know how to aproach scripture in general. They dont know what ‘word of God’ means and how it relates to comprehension of scripture… Ever since looking into Job, I found a new respect for how dangerous scripture can be and why sola scriptura is such a bad idea.

Actually didnt Satan have an exchange with Christ regarding scripture? Wasnt Satan testing him to see if he was really the Son of God? I wonder why Satan was using scripture to see if the man infront of him was really the Son of God or not? And I wonder what deeper message this teaches us about scripture.

 

[BobCatholic]

More often than not they have to be funded from somewhere, along with the rest of the Church. It requires a lot of wealth to feed and cloth this world’s poor.

Well, if everyone else gave up every penny they had to the Church, no problem there. Remember, Christ did not want the rich young ruler to have a penny in his pocket. Christ hates money.

I don’t know where you get the idea that only monks, clergy, etc who’ve given up everything make it to heaven.

If Christ demanded the rich young ruler to give up everything to follow him, as a prerequisite to following him, that is a clear place where I got that idea from.

It’s not a punishment; it’s a merciful place of final purification for those who don’t yet quite “get it”, who haven’t totally learned the lesson here on earth, the lesson to love God first above all else, the very best thing for us.

Purgatory is painful. PAINFUL.

It is most definitely a punishment for being imperfect. God creates me imperfect, and lo and behold, I live imperfectly, so game over, purgatory is the best hope for me.

 

[BobCatholic]

Also keep in mind Jesus was adressing Job. He was also a rich young ruler. Read the last chapter of Job - does Christ really restify to it?

Let’s see.

Book of Job.

God is bragging to the devil about how awesome Job is. Christ didn’t do that about the rich young ruler.

And why was God bragging? Serious amount of self-esteem problem here.
God is awesome, he does not need to brag. But for some reason he felt the need to do so here in Job.

God took everything away from Job. In that manner, Christ’s demand that the rich young ruler give up everything is a testimony to Job. So my belief that only monks, nuns and clergy go to heaven because Jesus only wants them, rings true.

Then after a ton of blah-blah between Job and his buddies, God shows up and basically says “I’m God, I’m the boss, deal with it.” Job says “Yah sah, very good sah!”

Does this sound like a personal relationship? Sounds more like a bossy God who can do whatever he darn well pleases no matter how it hurts others.

And if Jesus is testifying to Job, then he’s not asking for a personal relationship. He’s Jesus, he’s the boss, I gotta deal with it.

“Yah sah, very good sah!”

Not a personal relationship.

 

[fhansen]

Well, if everyone else gave up every penny they had to the Church, no problem there. Remember, Christ did not want the rich young ruler to have a penny in his pocket. Christ hates money.

Nope, Christ hated what money does to people: the “deceitfulness of wealth” as He put it. It gives us a false sense of security and status, two things that support our pride while distancing us from God. For people who can overcome that deceit, that slavery to wealth, it’s effects will be completely different. Either way money isn’t evil, while the love of it is.

If Christ demanded the rich young ruler to give up everything to follow him, as a prerequisite to following him, that is a clear place where I got that idea from.

It was a prerequisite for being perfect*** right now.***

Purgatory is painful. PAINFUL.

It is most definitely a punishment for being imperfect. God creates me imperfect, and lo and behold, I live imperfectly, so game over, purgatory is the best hope for me.

Life is painful. Purgatory just finishes off what’s begun here: the bending of our wills towards God and away from material created things, if we still need it.

 

[BobCatholic]

Nope, Christ hated what money does to people: the “deceitfulness of wealth” as He put it. It gives us a false sense of security and status, two things that support our pride while distancing us from God. For people who can overcome that deceit, that slavery to wealth, it’s effects will be completely different. Either way money isn’t evil, while the love of it is.

I see it like this.

When I don’t have to worry about money, I can focus on actually doing what God wants. When I’m worried about money, the only thing I can think about is trying to get more money, since I do have responsibilities to carry - a wife, and kid with a mental disease.

This is why the laity are second class citizens in the kingdom of God and God only wants the monks, nuns and clergy to go to heaven. God does not want me because I have to depend on money to get the things I need for my family.

It was a prerequisite for being perfect*** right now.***

No, it was a prerequisite to following Christ.

Life is painful. Purgatory just finishes off what’s begun here: the bending of our wills towards God and away from material created things, if we still need it.

Then why does God do it this way instead of just fixing the bugs in the buggy software known as humanity? Why punish people for being imperfect when God created us imperfect?

 

[fhansen]

I see it like this.

When I don’t have to worry about money, I can focus on actually doing what God wants. When I’m worried about money, the only thing I can think about is trying to get more money, since I do have responsibilities to carry - a wife, and kid with a mental disease.

This is why the laity are second class citizens in the kingdom of God and God only wants the monks, nuns and clergy to go to heaven. God does not want me because I have to depend on money to get the things I need for my family.

Monks and nuns and clergy have problems too-disease, loss of loved ones, addictions. And not all clergy take vows of poverty BTW, while laity may also commit to the three evangelical counsels: chastity, poverty, and obedience, which are said to represent the full pursuit of that perfection Jesus refers to. It’s actually the perfection of charity in the end, which we’re all called to.

But, if you’re to follow the Church’s understanding, rather than your own, the rest of us can most certainly achieve heaven without giving up all possessions in the here and now. Again, if every Christian were to sell everything and give to the poor, who would be left to give to the poor after that? As well, the Church teaches that absolute perfection, with complete freedom from venial sin, is *unattainable *in this life, while we’re still in the body. We all still need God’s mercy in the end for final entrance into heaven. Anyway, as long as we’re trying to place Him first as best we can, God honors and graces that.

**1863 Venial sin weakens charity; it manifests a disordered affection for created goods; it impedes the soul’s progress in the exercise of the virtues and the practice of the moral good; it merits temporal punishment. Deliberate and unrepented venial sin disposes us little by little to commit mortal sin. However venial sin does not break the covenant with God. With God’s grace it is humanly reparable. “Venial sin does not deprive the sinner of sanctifying grace, friendship with God, charity, and consequently eternal happiness.”

While he is in the flesh, man cannot help but have at least some light sins. But do not despise these sins which we call “light”: if you take them for light when you weigh them, tremble when you count them. A number of light objects makes a great mass; a number of drops fills a river; a number of grains makes a heap. What then is our hope? Above all, confession.**

Then why does God do it this way instead of just fixing the bugs in the buggy software known as humanity? Why punish people for being imperfect when God created us imperfect?

Or we can go along with the program as it is and do what* He *desires of us: to strive for and contribute to our own perfecting, with the help of grace.

**1730 God created man a rational being, conferring on him the dignity of a person who can initiate and control his own actions. "God willed that man should be ‘left in the hand of his own counsel,’ so that he might of his own accord seek his Creator and freely attain his full and blessed perfection by cleaving to him."26

Man is rational and therefore like God; he is created with free will and is master over his acts.27**

 

[BobCatholic]

As well, the Church teaches that absolute perfection, with complete freedom from venial sin, is *unattainable *in this life, while we’re still in the body.

So Christ basically gave us a requirement that cannot be fulfilled. How unreasonable is that?

Purgatory is our only hope, heaven is not - until after the pains of purgatory.

While he is in the flesh, man cannot help but have at least some light sins.

Precisely.

We are created imperfect. As a result, people sinning is only a matter of time, guaranteed.

Free will is reduced or eliminated because of imperfections.

Or we can go along with the program as it is and do what* He *desires of us: to strive for and contribute to our own perfecting, with the help of grace.

So, in other words, God creates buggy software, and does not want to fix the bugs, and then forces us to live with his bad programming. We have to clean up after his mess.

God is not responsible for anything he does. God has all power, no responsibility.
We mere mortals, on the other hand, have no power, and all responsibility.

How is this just?

Man is rational and therefore like God; he is created with free will and is master over his acts.27

Free will is reduced or eliminated because of imperfections.

 

[fhansen]

So Christ basically gave us a requirement that cannot be fulfilled. How unreasonable is that?
In Matthew He said “if you* want* to be perfect”. Perfection is something we seek; we probably can’t achieve it absolutely in this life. Either way, IMO you’d be closer to the truth by not placing the clergy et al on such a high a pedestal.
Purgatory is our only hope, heaven is not - until after the pains of purgatory.

Purgatory’s fine. Can’t be any worse than here. And there we at least know our final destiny with certainty; we’re that much closer to He who satisfies completely.

So, in other words, God creates buggy software, and does not want to fix the bugs, and then forces us to live with his bad programming. We have to clean up after his mess.

God is not responsible for anything he does. God has all power, no responsibility.
We mere mortals, on the other hand, have no power, and all responsibility.

How is this just?

Free will is reduced or eliminated because of imperfections.

No, God just wants us to own our perfection, to whatever extent we can; that’s part of being “divinized”. It’s always been a matter of the will.

 

[BobCatholic]

Purgatory’s fine. Can’t be any worse than here. And there we at least know our final destiny with certainty; we’re that much closer to He who satisfies completely.

Purgatory is a horrific “junior hell” with tons of pain and suffering. It is NOT fine!

No, God just wants us to own our perfection, to whatever extent we can; that’s part of being “divinized”. It’s always been a matter of the will.

No.

I am nothing without God. Anything good in me is God. Anything evil about me is me. That’s how it works.

Jesus said to be perfect as the Heavenly Father is perfect. That contracts your assertion.

 

[fhansen]

Purgatory is a horrific “junior hell” with tons of pain and suffering. It is NOT fine!
It’s as fine-or as bad-as this life, probably “finer”. It’s meant for purification/formation, not punishment first and foremost, which is how the Eastern Church characterizes it as well. Other than that not so much is known.

No.

I am nothing without God. Anything good in me is God. Anything evil about me is me. That’s how it works.

Jesus said to be perfect as the Heavenly Father is perfect. That contracts your assertion.

Yes our justice or righteousness come from God alone, but not without our participation:

1732 As long as freedom has not bound itself definitively to its ultimate good which is God, there is the possibility of choosing between good and evil, and thus of growing in perfection or of failing and sinning. This freedom characterizes properly human acts. It is the basis of praise or blame, merit or reproach.

Paint it all as black as you prefer, Bob, but the Church’s view of God and His will for man seems a fair bit rosier and more merciful, to put it mildly

 

[BobCatholic]

Paint it all as black as you prefer, Bob, but the Church’s view of God and His will for man seems a fair bit rosier and more merciful, to put it mildly

Then why are we still held temporally responsible for the sins of our ancestors? That’s not merciful.

God is infinitely merciful on the spiritual side. Temporally…I can’t say the same.

 

[fhansen]

Then why are we still held temporally responsible for the sins of our ancestors? That’s not merciful.

God is infinitely merciful on the spiritual side. Temporally…I can’t say the same.

The way I see it is that no matter how we look at it the sin of Adam’s is ours, by preference, as it was for him, not because we’ve become some kind of “sin machines” by nature as some Protestant theologies teach.

IOW, “When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; but ***each person is tempted when they are dragged away by their own evil desire and enticed. ***Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.” James 1:13-15

So regardless of what Adam did and wanted, what do* we* really want? Do *we *really want God to be our God, or are we still looking for love, happiness, the promised land in all the wrong places? Do we still prefer ourselves to God as the catechism teaches that Adam did? Because He’ll certainly help us to overcome that misplaced preference to the extent that we want to cooperate with Him in the effort. I think we’re here to learn some hard and valuable lessons,something Adam didn’t quite grasp in Eden, of the vast difference between ourselves and God even as we’re made in His image, of our limitations as created beings, and of His enormous, boundless love for us.

398 In that sin man preferred himself to God and by that very act scorned him. He chose himself over and against God, against the requirements of his creaturely status and therefore against his own good. Constituted in a state of holiness, man was destined to be fully “divinized” by God in glory. Seduced by the devil, he wanted to “be like God”, but “without God, before God, and not in accordance with God”.

 

[BobCatholic]

The way I see it is that no matter how we look at it the sin of Adam’s is ours, by preference,

Not my preference! I’d prefer to be in a paradise garden with only one rule to follow. 10 trillion times better than what we have now.

So regardless of what Adam did and wanted, what do* we* really want? Do *we *really want God to be our God, or are we still looking for love, happiness, the promised land in all the wrong places?

I want to be with God. Unfortunately, he doesn’t want to be with me. I’ve tried many things to get closer to God, only to fail, over and over and over. God plays hard to get.

I think we’re here to learn some hard and valuable lessons,something Adam didn’t quite grasp in Eden,

Yes. Both Adam and Eve were ignorant, naive, stupid, prideful or fearful. They were created imperfect and had one or more of those defects in their code base. As a result, the software crashed. It was not a matter if if, but when.

Unfortunately, God, who has all power, has no responsibility for writing buggy code. But we, with no power, have all the responsibility for executing the buggy code. The Great Programmer, wrote buggy software, and when it crashed, threw the computer out of the garden.

Instead of saying “Oh, I should fix that buggy software.” he punished them instead.

 

[fhansen]

Not my preference! I’d prefer to be in a paradise garden with only one rule to follow. 10 trillion times better than what we have now.

I want to be with God. Unfortunately, he doesn’t want to be with me. I’ve tried many things to get closer to God, only to fail, over and over and over. God plays hard to get.

Yes. Both Adam and Eve were ignorant, naive, stupid, prideful or fearful. They were created imperfect and had one or more of those defects in their code base. As a result, the software crashed. It was not a matter if if, but when.

Unfortunately, God, who has all power, has no responsibility for writing buggy code. But we, with no power, have all the responsibility for executing the buggy code. The Great Programmer, wrote buggy software, and when it crashed, threw the computer out of the garden.

Instead of saying “Oh, I should fix that buggy software.” he punished them instead.

I think I might have a hard time honestly preferring God to myself if I thought God purposely “wrote buggy software, and when it crashed, threw the computer out of the garden.” The Church teaches that Adam & Eve did not *have *to sin; it was not inevitable-it was a choice. And God certainly did take some kind of responsibility for sin in any case by hanging Himself on a cross; it’s not as if He let Himself be unscathed by it; it’s not as if He abandoned man to it. Adam’s sin was to think he didn’t need God, to think he’d be better off apart from him, dismissing communion with Him for all practical purposes. God apparently thought it wise that we should all learn the foolishness and ugliness of that state, first hand, by experience. With His grace we still have the same choice Adam had: good or evil, life or death, God or no God.

 

[hu324b]

Hello, I’ve been struggling with this passage from the Bible Matthew 19:21 where the rich man is told to sell all of his possession give the money to the poor, and to go and follow Jesus in order to enter the Kingdom of God. This passage and His commandment seem clear and literal to me, so why do many people seem to treat it otherwise? Don’t we literally need to give up and sell everything that we have, give the money to the poor, and go and follow Jesus or we will end up like the rich man did? Didn’t Jesus say not to worry about what you will eat or what you will wear but to seek first the Kingdom of God?

Jesus did not condemn this man - he said if he sold all his belonging and followed him his reward would be great in heaven.Jesus loved this man as he loves all of us.

Jesus knew he could not do it showing him his attachment to his belongings. Where does it say he was condemned - most of us are exactly like this man. We are good Catholics but would find ourselves in the exact same position this man did - who here is going out to sell all his belonging after reading this passage - we are no better than this man - see your
self in this man.

 

[BobCatholic]

I think I might have a hard time honestly preferring God to myself

In my eyes, it is not God or me.

It is a choice between God who I can’t understand, can’t get close to, plays hard to get and probably doesn’t even want me,

versus

the Devil who hates me, wants to destroy me, and screws me up at every chance he gets. I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him! I hate him!

Oh did I forget to mention I hate him?

So, what is my choice again?

if I thought God purposely “wrote buggy software, and when it crashed, threw the computer out of the garden.”

Adam and Eve were not created perfect.

The Church teaches that Adam & Eve did not *have *to sin; it was not inevitable-it was a choice.

It was a choice based on buggy code. Which imperfection did they have?

They were ignorant so didn’t have all the data, so oops, they made the wrong choice.

They were naive and believed anything the snake told them.

They were stupid and believed a lie.

They were fearful (one theory is the snake was 50 feet tall and bullied them).

And God certainly did take some kind of responsibility for sin in any case by hanging Himself on a cross;

And how long past the Original Sin did this happen? Why did God wait so long?

And Christ’s cross only took care of the spiritual, not the temporal punishment for sin. You will notice we are not in the Garden of Eden.

Adam’s sin was to think he didn’t need God, to think he’d be better off apart from him, dismissing communion with Him for all practical purposes.

I need God. I want communion with him. I want to be with him, know him and love him.

I tried many things to get closer to God, all failed. God plays hard to get.

 

[BobCatholic]

Where does it say he was condemned - most of us are exactly like this man. .

Oh, so since he was not allowed to follow Christ because of his wealth, he was NOT condemned? Please tell me how that works.

“I don’t want you unless you give up all your money.” was the clear message. Christ did not say as he was walking away sad “c’mon, I was just being metaphorical here”

Are you saying that it is possible to be saved without following Christ?

Christ hated money. That’s why he wants monks, nuns or clergy. “We gave up everything for you” types.

I, a layman, am at best a second class citizen in the kingdom of God.