Vatican adds 7 new mortal sins

[mchale]

how is being filthy rich sinful, much less a mortal one?

Being “filthy” rich is not in and of itself sinful, however it is a huge temptation to sin. Many who are very rich tend to continue their efforts to acquire money as an end in and of itself (being that their material needs have long since been met). People like that kind of meet the definition of greedy.

That being said, there are those amongst the rich who recognize that their wealth (no matter how hard they worked for it) is a gift and that with that gift comes a major obligation to others.

lets look at Bill Gates for example. why should he go to hell?

That Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have both decided to donate the bulk of their fortunes to those less fortunate is laudable. Unfortunately not all of the programs that they are supporting are ones that are consistent with Catholic teaching.

Remember, while Bill Gates has put the bulk of his fortune in the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, he still retains control over it. I of course pray that he will really use it to benefit the poor and not perhaps use it to try to remake the world in his image.

Of course as a Christian, we should always be careful of how we give our gifts. The question that Bill gates has to ask himself is; did I do this truely for the world, or so that I might be remembered as a philanthropist; if the latter, he has received his reward on Earth.

As for why he should go to hell… I bet there are plenty in the computer industry who can answer that question better than I .

–
Bill

 

[AgnosTheist]

Being “filthy” rich is not in and of itself sinful, however it is a huge temptation to sin. Many who are very rich tend to continue their efforts to acquire money as an end in and of itself (being that their material needs have long since been met). People like that kind of meet the definition of greedy.

I think the only rich people that deserves hell are those who despite being already rich, are still cheating other people in order to gain more money. corporate criminals.

 

[mchale]

I think the only rich people that deserves hell are those who despite being already rich, are still cheating other people in order to gain more money. corporate criminals.

I am not going to decide who is and who is not deserving of hell. What I would say is this; if you have already made more money than you can reasonably spend in one life, then what are you still working for? I can understand, sometimes people are working to build a company that will leave a legacy, but for some, it is only so they can make more money. Someone who is working for money as an end in itself long after they have more than enough for themselves and/or their families to me suggests a type of obsessive-compulsive disorder; not a healthy attitude regarding either work or money.

–
Bill

 

[AgnosTheist]

What I would say is this; if you have already made more money than you can reasonably spend in one life, then what are you still working for?

for the insurance of your heirs & family members. its all about survivability and the gene pool.

 

[MarcoPolo]

I don’t see how what that article says adds up to “Vatican adds 7 new mortal sins.”

I didn’t see that either. Nor do I see a mention of being “filthy rich.”

 

[lukewarm]

for the insurance of your heirs & family members. its all about survivability and the gene pool.

There’s plenty of evidence over history that shows leaving your children with wealth they did not earn can retard their ability to be a productive member of society.

 

[AgnosTheist]

There’s plenty of evidence over history that shows leaving your children with wealth they did not earn can retard their ability to be a productive member of society.

i think you are just cherry picking from history. the elites/wealthy have always been the ones that led the society. i was born & raised in poverty, but I can appreciate the necessities of the wealthy. the arts, sciences, most of these were the creative contributions of those who have more than enough money to let their creativity fly.

 

[mchale]

for the insurance of your heirs & family members. its all about survivability and the gene pool.

And yet, I would bet that many who are extremely wealthy are not the best parents in the world. They tend to work extremely long hours and travel so extensively that they rarely see said heirs and family members. In any case, I would say that a father who feels he needs to provide each of his children a trust fund worth 10s of millions of dollars still is not exhibiting healthy behaviors.

–
Bill

 

[lukewarm]

i think you are just cherry picking from history. the elites/wealthy have always been the ones that led the society. i was born & raised in poverty, but I can appreciate the necessities of the wealthy.

I don’t think I’m cherry picking most wealthy families in power can only trace their wealth back a couple generations, the families fall and fall hard, look at all the robber barrons families or the Astors in Manhattan. They’re a complete shell of thier former selves.

Most first generational earned wealth isn’t a bad thing if earned hoenstly, but second and third generations it starts to seriously go down hill.

The rich that stay that way typically make their children earn their own money which isn’t a bad thing, but passing on enormous unearned wealth doesn’t seem to do children very much good.

 

[mchale]

i think you are just cherry picking from history. the elites/wealthy have always been the ones that led the society. i was born & raised in poverty, but I can appreciate the necessities of the wealthy. the arts, sciences, most of these were the creative contributions of those who have more than enough money to let their creativity fly.

Actually, that is the reason the NEA and the NSF were founded in this country; so that science and the arts would not simply be beholden upon what the wealthy were willing to fund. Unfortunately, both of their budgets have been slashed by representatives of same said elite who believe that it should not be government’s job to do that.

I would point out however, that the wealthy and the elite who tend to be the most productive, are not the ones born into wealth. Compare Bill Ford with Bill Gates. Who started out wealthy? Who did the most?

–
Bill

 

[RebeccaJ]

how is being filthy rich sinful, much less a mortal one?

lets look at Bill Gates for example. why should he go to hell?

Gates is a poor example for “rich and not doing good for others”. He is filthy rich, but he has spent billions on helping the poor. Years ago I read an interview with him where he stated that his father told him that it would be immoral for him to die and leave so much money to heirs, that he had better be giving it away to humanitarian causes and leave very little to heirs to squander.

You can read in this Fortune 500 article:

“Bill and Melinda have said that almost all their fortune will go to charity, and right now they still have an estimated net worth of $50 billion.”

I don’t know if you have noticed, but every time I turn around I find Gate’s foundations giving away money and doing work for the poor. They are responsible for providing child vaccinations to millions of children who otherwise wouldn’t have them.

Warren Buffet, another billionaire, donated billions to the Gate’s foundation. He is another example of what the Vatican is saying the rich SHOULD be doing.

The sin is found in those who have extreme wealth, while so much suffering exists in the world in the form of chronic poverty. When these outlandishly rich people do nothing for those in extreme need, they are indeed sinning.

Based on the teaching of JPII, I believe much of this is squarely aimed at CORPORATIONS, and the individuals who lead them.

I also recommend reading this address to the United Nations, regarding global climate change.

 

[Mickey]

Is this teaching Ex-cathedra?

Good question.

Anybody?

 

[AgnosTheist]

And yet, I would bet that many who are extremely wealthy are not the best parents in the world.

yeah. but you bet that many who are poor & middle class are not the best parents in the world either. dont cherry pick.

They tend to work extremely long hours and travel so extensively that they rarely see said heirs and family members.

and the rest of us tend to watch sports/soaps, get drunk or play video games on extremely long hours that we rarely see our heirs and family members. to each his own.

 

[Lee44]

When are they going to add chewing gum in class as a mortal sin?

 

[reteeks21]

When are they going to add chewing gum in class as a mortal sin?

Give it time.

 

[1234]

how can you tell when the rich begins to classify as ‘filthy rich’?

That means that Bill Gates is a SINNER!!!

I, a Mac user, have long suspected this…

 

[AgnosTheist]

I would point out however, that the wealthy and the elite who tend to be the most productive, are not the ones born into wealth. Compare Bill Ford with Bill Gates. Who started out wealthy? Who did the most?

Both were great people. Bill did the most, but he is just one of the few of his class. I can name a lot more rags-to-riches guys who became corrupt.

 

[mchale]

yeah. but you bet that many who are poor & middle class are not the best parents in the world either. dont cherry pick.

The topic at hand is the temptation of wealth to sin. So I am not really cherry picking, I am simply addressing the topic at hand.

and the rest of us tend to watch sports/soaps, get drunk or play video games on extremely long hours that we rarely see our heirs and family members. to each his own.

And I never denied that people who sacrifice parental and familial duties for any unnecessary reason is sinning. Note all of the above are temptations that exist for rich and poor alike. The risks of extreme wealth exist only for the rich and that is why we are examining them.

–
Bill

 

[AgnosTheist]

Gates is a poor example for “rich and not doing good for others”.

Actually I named Gates exactly for those reasons.

He is filthy rich, but he has spent billions on helping the poor.

and yet he is still #3 on the rich list. he hasnt exactly given away his hoard just yet. he is still filthy rich and you bet that its gonna remain that way for many more years to come.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Actually I named Gates exactly for those reasons.

and yet he is still #3 on the rich list. he hasnt exactly given away his hoard just yet. he is still filthy rich and you bet that its gonna remain that way for many more years to come.

Yeah, it takes a while to prudently give away $50 billion dollars. And it is sooo hard to do when you own a company that just pumps cash into your bank account at the rate of billions a year. (Poor Bill.) He did get knocked down a couple of notches in the latest Fortune 500 list.