We're all going to Hell

[villaneweva]

according to matt 25

In Matthew 25, Jesus says that we have a moral obligation to help those who are hungry, thirsty, and sick.

Then the King will say to those at his right hand, ‘Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; 35. for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36. I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ 37. Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see thee hungry and feed thee, or thirsty and give thee drink? 38. And when did we see thee a stranger and welcome thee, or naked and clothe thee? 39. And when did we see thee sick or in prison and visit thee?’ 40. And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.’ 41. Then he will say to those at his left hand, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; 42. for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, 43. I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ 44. Then they also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see thee hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to thee?’ 45. Then he will answer them, 'Truly, I say to you, as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me.

In this passage, Jesus says that the men who did not alleviate the sufferring of the needy are going to Hell. How can any Christian who lives comfortably enough to have a home (much less a computer with internet) call himself a follower of Christ is not destined to eternal suffering?

Along the same lines, why doesn’t the Church do more to feed the hungry when it owns beautiful cathedrals and treasures?

thanks
villaneweva

 

[dumspirospero]

First off…I recommend volunteering time with the needy, as I try to do…help with the homeless, visit the infirmed and imprisoned, etc…Just because you live with luxuries that others do not have does not condemn you to hell…it is indifference that will do that. Secondly, The Church, along with excellent groups such as the KofC do things for needy people all the time…we can not cure every ailment…or fix every problem…but we sure try. You have to realize there is no magic cure-all solution…

villaneweva:

according to matt 25

In Matthew 25, Jesus says that we have a moral obligation to help those who are hungry, thirsty, and sick.

In this passage, Jesus says that the men who did not alleviate the sufferring of the needy are going to Hell. How can any Christian who lives comfortably enough to have a home (much less a computer with internet) call himself a follower of Christ is not destined to eternal suffering?

Along the same lines, why doesn’t the Church do more to feed the hungry when it owns beautiful cathedrals and treasures?

thanks
villaneweva

 

[villaneweva]

heydumspirospero, thanks for the response

ust because you live with luxuries that others do not have does not condemn you to hell…

so are you saying it’s okay for me to indulge in a 80 dollar dinner when I know that much money will save 5 lives?

Secondly, The Church, along with excellent groups such as the KofC do things for needy people all the time…we can not cure every ailment…or fix every problem…but we sure try.

I do know that the Church along with groups such as the knights of columbus do great things, but don’t you think they can do more? I know that the Church is the ownder of many great riches, such as jewels and cathedrals. Why must Jesus’ institution bathe itself in luxery when that wealth can be used to alleviate a lot of suffering in the world?

I guess what I’m trying to say is that although the Chruch is dead-on in moral matters, it is (along with many of her members) very hypocritical in the financial sphere. Matthew 25 says quite clearly that ignoring the needs of the poor is like ignoring Jesus himself. Would you deny your Savior proper clothes, food, and shelter?

I don’t think so. A Christian living a “comfortable” life is very similar to saying that his lifestyle is more important than the lives of his brothers and sisters.

thanks,

villaneweva

 

[LittleDeb]

I used to think this way and it bothered me too. Then I started reading Scripture with a new understanding.

I don’t want to quote so I will paraphrase. Scripture talks about all of us being totally dependent on God. Why do we have to toil in the sun? Because we do not rely enough on God. Basically it talks about the birds of the air being cared for so we humans who were created in His image are cared for even more.

It is because of the Church’s full reliance on God that we have such beauty represented while still having enough left over to help the needy. The fact that there are hungry people in the world has a whole lot to do with political parties starving people for power. There is enough food for us all. What is lacking is the authority to distribute.

I learned about it while studying NFP. The arguments were “how dare you bring another mouth to feed into this already suffering world!” More people actually means more prosperity not less. “Many hands make light work” applies well here.

 

[ElizabethJoy]

If you believe that your best use of the resources under your control would be to sell them and give the proceeds to the poor, then you should certainly do that. I know that I have been called to give much more since my first conversion a few months ago.

Personally, I don’t believe in a scarcity mentality. I do not believe that someone is going hungry because I live in a comfortable home. I believe, instead, that it has paid a lot of people to build the house and to manufacture the goods that are in it.

I don’t believe that the Church owning vast treasures deprives the poor of anything, either. The Catholic church does more for the world than any other group, secular or religious.

If the church were to sell everything that it owned and give the proceeds to the poor, there would still be more poor than we can ever take care of.

Only a tiny fraction of the poor of the world would be fed for a few days, and the Church would no longer have the treasures and antiquities in trust for all to see and appreciate. The Church has been the best possible steward of these treasures. Why should they end up in private collections, where only the bazillionaires who own them could see them and study them?

This is a very old accusation against the Church. But, didn’t Jesus himself rebuke his disciples for a similar accusation?

Matthew 26:6 And when Jesus was in Bethania, in the house of Simon the leper, 7 There came to him a woman having an alabaster box of precious ointment, and poured it on his head as he was at table. 8 And the disciples seeing it, had indignation, saying: To what purpose is this waste? 9 For this might have been sold for much, and given to the poor. 10 And Jesus knowing it, said to them: Why do you trouble this woman? for she hath wrought a good work upon me.
11 For the poor you have always with you: but me you have not always. 12 For she in pouring this ointment upon my body, hath done it for my burial. 13 Amen I say to you, wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, that also which she hath done, shall be told for a memory of her. 14 Then went one of the twelve, who was called Judas Iscariot, to the chief priests, 15 And said to them: What will you give me, and I will deliver him unto you? But they appointed him thirty pieces of silver.

16 And from thenceforth he sought opportunity to betray him.

 

[Pentecost2005]

villaneweva:

I do know that the Church along with groups such as the knights of columbus do great things, but don’t you think they can do more?

If that’s the way you feel, then get offline, quit your cushy job, and go work in a soup kitchen, or something.

 

[Jennifer123]

The treasures that the Church owns are rarely purchased outright, they are usually donated by the artists, etc., driven to create them out of love and inspiration by Our Lord.
If they are purchased, it is due to it being a fitting devotion to the Lord who sustains us. It is an act of love. Jesus himself admonished those who criticized Lazarus’s sister Mary for pouring expensive oil on Jesus’s head. She did it out of love and gratitude - Jesus took it as such. He knew her gift was one fitting a king, and he accepted it.

Wealth is not to be scorned, for it is not in the Bible. It is a way to minister to the needy, it is a calling, a gift of the Lord like any other. It carries great responsibility, but it is a state not to be condemned. “In the house of the wise are stores of choice food and oil, but a foolish man devours all he has (Proverbs 21:20)”

 

[tom.wineman]

Not another one of these post
This must be the ump teenth time
It should be a rule that you can only
post this question after you have read
all the previous post that have been made
on this subject and then also only if
you have sold all that you have and given
it to the poor youself.

 

[byzmelkite]

Exactly Tom. My response to the original poster, in agreement with what others have said is to ask this:

What have you done lately for the poor? Take the beam out of your own eye and then you can see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.

 

[villaneweva]

believe me, mr wineman, that I have searched these forums for threads such as mine. please help an ignorant member and post the links?

additionally, i have posted 2 topics similar to the one you read here in the APOLOGETICS forum and both have been delted. the apologetics forum contains no threads such as mine.

thanks for the responses, folks, but i hope i didn’t come off hostile enough to be rewarded the harsh responses from wineman and penetcost

however i still wonder how we can indulge in luxery even though we know quite well that our 80$ meal can serve others much more. If Jesus were hungry on the street, would you not welcome Him into your house and give Him the best dinner you could afford? How can we call ourselves Christians when we fail to help the needy in the world not out of ignorance but out of choice?

for example, a Elizabeth Joy said that she found her purchase of a comfortable home good because it supported the life of the workers who built it. That is good, but by doing so comfortable homeowners have placed their desire for a nice house in front of the lives of hundereds of starving children.

I don’t mean to attack any of the posters here. I realize that almost all the poverty in the world is caused by corrupt institutions, but does that mean we put our concerns of the poor on the backburner in favor of our own life?

thanks you so much,
villaneweva

 

[villaneweva]

What have you done lately for the poor? Take the beam out of your own eye and then you can see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.

okay, let me clarify so this doesn’t become a problem. I did not intend for this post to be an attack on Catholics or the Catholic Churhc. I guess it’s the way I ask questions.

To answer your question, Mike, I have started this thread because I am considering a life of missionary medical work as opposed to a normal family life.

 

[byzmelkite]

villaneweva:

okay, let me clarify so this doesn’t become a problem. I did not intend for this post to be an attack on Catholics or the Catholic Churhc. I guess it’s the way I ask questions.

To answer your question, Mike, I have started this thread because I am considering a life of missionary medical work as opposed to a normal family life.

Instead of asking accusatory questions of the Church, why don’t you ask for prayer and support from the Church in your work? After all, if you are going to be a medical missionary, isn’t it something that God has called you to do through the Church?

 

[villaneweva]

Instead of asking accusatory questions of the Church, why don’t you ask for prayer and support from the Church in your work? After all, if you are going to be a medical missionary, isn’t it something that God has called you to do through the Church?

definitely. tahnks to the thoughtful responses of some of the posters, i feel a little guilty about accusing the Church. However, I still have questions concerning a Christian’s financial matters (3 posts up)

thanks,
villaneweva

 

[wcknight]

We do what we can. That is the best that anyone can do. I too am a member of the KC and charity is the first thing that we think about, not the last.

There is a huge disparity in the way we live. Americas do have a much more lucrative life than most others, AND we do have a greater responsibility to respond to help others. How we convince everyone to help their poorer neighbors is a huge challenge.

At the same time though, a lot of folks do help others, we do volunteer work, we give to charities etc. And we have to juggle that with our responsibilities to support ourselves and our families.

It is a balancing act that we have to be concerned with. I don’t buy fancy cars and I’m not overly extravagant. Although in this day and age, any home is so overpriced that even a modest home can cost a fortune.

When I bought my house I paid 150K for it, houses in my neighborhood sell for 7 digits now. IF I sell my home where do I move to, every place else is really expensive also.

My expenses far exceeds my income but I still give to charity. When my expenses diminishes in a year or two, I expect to give more as I used to. And I plan to increase my volunteer work when I retire. For now we do what we can for others. I don’t feel a calling as you do, to do much more for now. It’s good that you feel concern for the poor, many of us do also.

I know I have been blessed many times over, I show gratitude for that by giving to the poor. I know everything I have I owe to the Lord, but I feel I have done the best I can with the talents given me.

As far as the Church goes, it is by far the most charitable organization in the world. The so called riches and real estate that folks always refers to belongs to the people, usually the parishioners of the local churches.

The Church property that each parish resides on is titled to the local pastor or bishop but in fact is owned by the parishioners. They can not actually sell any of that property. Besides IF they did where would folks attend mass and receive the sacraments ?

The treasures, art works, and relics, all belong to the Church as an entire people. They need to be on display for everyone to appreciate and have access to, not hidden away in some rich persons private collection.

I suppose if we were all saints, we would sell everything we owned and go begging in the streets as some of the other saints did.

I don’t think that is what Jesus asks us to do. I believe I can give a whole lot more to the poor by working as I already do, in a fairly lucrative job, and in a fairly expensive neighborhood. And I do take a vacation now and then and I do play golf at a cheap golf course every other weekend. There’s a limit to just how much I can give for the poor
wc

 

[fix]

villaneweva:

according to matt 25

In Matthew 25, Jesus says that we have a moral obligation to help those who are hungry, thirsty, and sick.

In this passage, Jesus says that the men who did not alleviate the sufferring of the needy are going to Hell. How can any Christian who lives comfortably enough to have a home (much less a computer with internet) call himself a follower of Christ is not destined to eternal suffering?

Along the same lines, why doesn’t the Church do more to feed the hungry when it owns beautiful cathedrals and treasures?

thanks
villaneweva

How do you define poor or rich?

 

[mozier]

One can look at it this way:

If I buy a home, I put people to work. Stone masons, foundation specialists, the concrete suppliers, the carpenters, the electricians, the dry-wallers, the roofers, and others. This in turn allows these men and women to make money and feed their families and buy things for themselves. The more I spend, the more everyone benefits! It is good for everyone involved.

Now what if I do not buy a home? Well, not only am I out of a house, but now all of those good people who would have built my house are not out of work! This means no money, no food, no clothing, and no shelter for them!

Note that Jesus had a good friend named Lazarus who was quite well off! Yet Jesus never asked Lazarus to give away his home or possessions. I believe that Lazarus was a good steward of what God had blessed him with, and so Jesus had no problem with that. As for that rich man whom Jesus asked to sell all that he had and then follow him, I believe it was because Jesus saw just how attached the man was to his possessions, so he needed to break free of them.

In the end, it all comes down to what you do with the money and possessions that God has blessed you with ownership. Remember, when you buy things and use them, then you keep others employed and in good stead!

 

[villaneweva]

thank you so much everyone for the replies. you have done so much more than the apologetists in the special forum ( who have yet to answer my question! )

As for answering my question, although I feel much progress has been made, I know it requires much more prayer and discussion to be solved.

The thing that troubles me is that whenever I indulge in a luxery (simple or not), I am effectively allowing multiple children to starve. What do you guys say about this?

God bless!

villaneweva

 

[fix]

villaneweva:

The thing that troubles me is that whenever I indulge in a luxery (simple or not), I am effectively allowing multiple children to starve. What do you guys say about this?

God bless!

villaneweva

Sounds like scrupulosity. Was it Woody Allen who said he cannot ever enjoy himself if he knows there is one person suffering anywhere in the world? Surely, that is not a Catholic teaching or attitude.

 

[Seeks_God]

villaneweva -

Upon reading your posts I had to also question what your intentions were - an attack on the Church or an attack on materialism?

As to buying an $80.00 meal - obviously an attack on materialism. Do you or do you not want the Church regulating what you give to collection? Do you want the Church to see your finances and make sure you tithe? Tithing is really a good idea - it’s like a flat income tax that is used solely for the poor - something God commanded. But I think the Church recognizes it cannot force people to obey God. People have to find God - or God find them, whatever your acceptance of finding God is - on their own and cannot be forced by an authoritarian society. But this speaks to a little social issue and I don’t beleive any government should dictate what my income should support. It is truly between you and God who/how you support. I think it behooves everyone to hear that they can do more to support the poor and needy. It never hurts to remind people what they should/shouldn’t do when it’s commanded by God.

As to blaming the Church for its riches? I think the example of the woman with the alabastar jar is an excellent explanation of the Church’s riches. Besides, it is truly just a human expression of humanity’s love of God. It’s true God can care less of human materialism, but it is without a doubt human expression at its best. Of course helping the poor is another form of that expression.

SG

 

[villaneweva]

Sounds like scrupulosity. Was it Woody Allen who said he cannot ever enjoy himself if he knows there is one person suffering anywhere in the world? Surely, that is not a Catholic teaching or attitude.

is placing my ability to live comfortably in front of another’s ability to survive scrupulosity? indulging in luxery is effectively choosing your desires over another’s life.

thanks,
villaneweva