What was up with today's first reading? (communism)

  • Thread starter Thread starter SacredHeartBassist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The overall question here is how much of the new testament, particularly acts and the epistles, are we supposed to actually do in the modern world?

Remember, the apostles thought Jesus was coming back before they died.
 
I pay a ridiculous amount in property taxes every year so that the government can provide low cost housing. I do a substantial amount of probono work in legal aid every year. Anyone that tells me I should sell my property to give to those who don’t own property is dumb. Those are probably the same people who think that the vatican should close down just to feed the hungry
 
In modern terminology, the disciples in the earliest years of the Church liquidated their capital base. Decades later, they had nothing left, and they were living off the charity of churches all over the rest of the world.

D
 
OraLabora said:
The thing that struck me hearing the reading at Mass in a Benedictine monastery is that it was a pretty decent description of how… a Benedictine monastery works, including a prospective monk selling off his goods before entering.

No we are not expected to live that way. Unless we enter a Benedictine monastery (or Cistercian, or Carthusian or most other religious orders).
Click to expand...
We’re expected to be generous at the very least.

One of the most famous sayings of Jesus is also about greed… and is misunderstood without the Jewish context:

“The lamp of the body is the eye. If your eye is sound, your whole body will be filled with light; but if your eye is bad, your whole body will be in darkness. And if the light in you is darkness, how great will the darkness be.”

This is Jewish idiom. Not some spiritual/gnostic statement about “lighted eyes”. To have an eye of light means to be generous. And a dark one is to be stingy.

He that hasteth to be rich hath an evil eye, and considereth not that poverty shall come upon him. (Proverbs 28:22)


This is why that verse is immediately followed by: “No one can serve two masters. He will either hate one and love the other, or be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.”
 
This from the Catechism may be helpful:
I. THE UNIVERSAL DESTINATION AND THE PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OF GOODS

2402 In the beginning God entrusted the earth and its resources to the common stewardship of mankind to take care of them, master them by labor, and enjoy their fruits. The goods of creation are destined for the whole human race. However, the earth is divided up among men to assure the security of their lives, endangered by poverty and threatened by violence. The appropriation of property is legitimate for guaranteeing the freedom and dignity of persons and for helping each of them to meet his basic needs and the needs of those in his charge. It should allow for a natural solidarity to develop between men.

2403 The right to private property, acquired or received in a just way, does not do away with the original gift of the earth to the whole of mankind. The universal destination of goods remains primordial, even if the promotion of the common good requires respect for the right to private property and its exercise.

2404 “In his use of things man should regard the external goods he legitimately owns not merely as exclusive to himself but common to others also, in the sense that they can benefit others as well as himself.” The ownership of any property makes its holder a steward of Providence, with the task of making it fruitful and communicating its benefits to others, first of all his family.

2405 Goods of production - material or immaterial - such as land, factories, practical or artistic skills, oblige their possessors to employ them in ways that will benefit the greatest number. Those who hold goods for use and consumption should use them with moderation, reserving the better part for guests, for the sick and the poor.

2406 Political authority has the right and duty to regulate the legitimate exercise of the right to ownership for the sake of the common good.
Click to expand...
 
PaulinVA said:
The overall question here is how much of the new testament, particularly acts and the epistles, are we supposed to actually do in the modern world?

Remember, the apostles thought Jesus was coming back before they died.
Click to expand...
Nice rationalization. To keep up with the monetary imagery, Jesus also said he’d come back as a thief in the night. Heh. Right when we probably get lazy, storing up junk, and think he no longer applies.
 
Yes and as a Benedictine oblate, I know that, and that I am not to become attached to material things.

However we are dispersed among a secular world unlike the original Christian communities, so we need to provide for ourselves and our families which includes saving a reasonable amount for our retirement. Of course we should be generous and charitable, even to non-Catholics, especially those in material need.
 
That’s all I meant. I didn’t expect us to live in a commune or anything 🙂

Even honoring one’s parents and taking care of them is a lot. Especially nowadays, unfortunately. edit: Perhaps that’s not exactly generosity, but an obligation.
 
Last edited:
This is NOT Communism nor socialism. It’s distrubutionism, which is totally different
 
i think distributism allows for the ownership of personal and real property whereas the reading from acts everything was shared
 
SacredHeartBassist said:
i think distributism allows for the ownership of personal and real property whereas the reading from acts everything was shared
Click to expand...
Acts doesn’t imply no personal ownership.

What’s the more Christian thing to do?
  1. use community property?
    Or
  2. share your personal property with those who don’t have what you have?
The saintly thing to do is to share what you own. You cannot truly share what you do not own.

After all, most of use are not called to the Religious Life
 
Last edited:
Isn’t distributism a proposed system for all the world? I should read up probably.

Acts is in the context of the church. The remarkable support network people had for each other. Wouldn’t this be a good thing? We were just musing about this in the recent thread about Abortion. Being pro Life is great, but the Church needs to help other aspects of people’s lives too.
 
it’s also a good thing to own your own property. it’s not good to have everyone’s hands in the same pot. when’s the last time you treated something that was owned by the community with respect?
 
what are you talking about? do you know how many books end up never getting returned or getting destroyed?
 
I don’t know. It just seems to be a system that hasn’t imploded yet.
 
Distributionism respects the concepts of subsidiary and private ownership.

So it focuses on the local level.
 
it’s a crappy system. a lot of libraries have closed down and have had to double up on security because of the amount of homeless people who just stay there all day. not to mention how many people just use libraries for the free wifi. and the people who look at porn in public

i love libraries but i don’t agree that everything should be run like them
 
Last edited:
straykat said:
Libraries mostly work out OK.
Click to expand...
Libraries “work” because no one can privately host that many books. It’s not realistic.

However, when people do have a private library, their own personal books tend to be kept in better condition vs the library.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top