In my last two posts, I explored what I thought were the practical and ethical implications that come with wealth—how much happiness derives from possessing it (Aristotle), and how much time accumulating and maintaining wealth takes away from truly important things (Leonardo da Vinci). The problem of wealth goes beyond a matter of economics, and to permit the national discussion about how much to tax the wealthy to rest entirely with the economics of taxes excludes broader, equally important ethical questions about how we should live. In this third of what I’ve decided will end up being four posts on the problem of wealth (yup, one more is coming), I’ll offer a cursory look at how the Judeo-Christian tradition sees wealth. (I know too little about Islam’s attitude toward wealth, other than that one of its five pillars is to care for the needy, to comment on it.)
The wealthy are all over the Old Testament (Abraham, Solomon, David, et al—even Job, after God was through testing him), indicating wealth in itself isn’t a particular problem, but this is balanced by prophets (such as Amos) who condemn the many instances where wealth is unjust. The New Testament is loud and clear: Wealth is a problem. Jesus said that getting into heaven was mighty hard for the wealthy, and their best bet was to give away their wealth.
If we return to the pagan Aristotle, we recall that people are naturally greedy, which leads as straight as an L.A. freeway to the larger problem of social justice. Representatives of institutionalized religions often chime in with ideas about social justice. In one of those startling coincidences (irony here, in case you’re missing it), most opinions offered by most organized religions jibe nicely with bourgeois, capitalist values.
The history of both Judaism and Christianity includes centuries of clever hermeneutics that adeptly torture reasoning until they flip-flop on what, on the face of it, is the meaning of original texts. Fancy arguments have been made to justify all sorts of things that God supposedly meant in the sacred texts—among the more astonishing, that God actually meant to say he loves the wealthy as much if not more than the poor and that it’s hunky dory for the wealthy to not only keep their wealth, but use it and display it in any way they see fit. Hence the Pope wears Prada shoes, the Catholic Church owns billions of dollars worth of art, the Hassidic community in Brooklyn invests heavily in speculative real estate, and more than one powerful fundamentalist Christian preacher somehow requires a private jet.
God may have had problems with wealth, but only at the beginning. Now, centuries after the Maker first startled human beings by saying, “Hey, look, I’m here, and you should listen to me and worship my commandments,” man has persuaded God that even the wealthy deserve to be loved.
14 Responses to Rich and Religious? No Problem.
11313934 - September 28, 2010 at 9:00 am
Wikipedia says: “”The eye of a needle” is part of a phrase said by Jesus by the synoptic gospels:…I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell 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.The parallel versions appear in Matthew 19:23-24, Mark 10:24-25 and Luke 18:24-25.”I think the problem is: what is “rich”? In the current tax debate, it has been said that $500,000 a year is hardly enough to live on in Manhattan, and $1,000,000 a year certainly doesn’t qualify one as rich. I understand you can be comfortable on five million a year, but even that would depend on how thin you are spread. Once you add up alimony for the former wifes, kid private school fees, a ranch in Montana, a co-op in New York, a pied-a-terre in San Francisco and a cottage in Normandy, plus transportation to and fro, basic needs like clothing, staff, and sustenance to keep a body together, five million is chump change. Plus, people making five mil on salary are basically just working stiffs, slaving away for 60, 70 and 80 hours a week. You call that rich, hemorrhaging money on cheating ex-wives, ungrateful children, thieving gardeners, drunken cooks, and duplicitous advisors, all the while stuck in some office building trying to keep up with Hong Kong and London, and wishing you were in Normandy enjoying the old Calvados that that useless caretaker is pinching from the caves? Rich? That’s not rich: that’s slavery! I don’t think you can begin to be rich on less than fifty million a year. That is an entry level rich income. On fifty million you can at least stand there before the open eyelids of the dawn, and breath in the spicy air of the new day. On fifty million you can thank God you are alive. at least some days. And, on fifty million, you can at least begin to think of giving some away, and maybe even helping your worthless brother in law with his little shoe factory in China, because charity begins at home, you know. It is very, very hard to be rich.
cwinton - September 28, 2010 at 9:39 am
Well, after all, we have the biblical prescription that avarice is the root of all evil. It’s not so much an issue of wealth, but how one acquires and maintains it. We have devised all kinds of means of distancing ourselves from the sources of any wealth we acquire, and therein lies the problem for religion and the wealthy. If some of my wealth comes from facilitating evil behavior, although not engaging in that behavior myself, does the taint of that evil rub off on me? Take this question and think in terms of being a stockholder in a mutual fund that holds stocks in an enterprise that knowingly imports goods produced by slave labor and you see the conundrum.
mmensen08 - September 28, 2010 at 9:46 am
Cute article but you miss the point on wealth and God. If you understand the Bible, God doesn’t have a problem with wealth. He blessed Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as well as David and Solomon with much wealth. The problem has always been with the heart. If wealth takes the heart away from trusting in God, then it is bad. God never told people to give away all of their wealth because wealth is bad. It is unjust to have the means and to not help people in need. That was what the prophets spoke out against. Jesus spoke to the rich man and told him if if really wanted to follow Jesus he should give everything away and follow him. It was a test and the rich man failed because he didn’t want to give it all up. He would rather trust in wealth than trust in God.The money preachers don’t speak for God. What they preach is not Biblical and is based in greed. The Catholic Church is not Biblical at all. It values its wealth rather than the gospel. All these will be held accountable for their teachings and their acts. But again, the problem is not with wealth but it is with the heart. Are there ungodly rich people? Yes. Are there godly and giving rich people? Yes. Are there ungodly and uncharitable people at every level of income? Yes. Are there godly and charitable people at every level of income? Yes. There are people of low and moderate incomes who will not lift a finger, let alone give to, anyone else. They are just as selfish and uncaring as any “rich” person who acts the same way. I’ve seen them. They are there. While being ungiving is not of God, it is not the up to the government to take from one to give to another. People should give because they want to. If you look at the numbers, the ones calling for the government to take from the rich and give to the poor are the ones less likely to give to anyone themselves. That is just as bad.
22250655 - September 28, 2010 at 10:44 am
Once again, any stigma to beat a dogma. Religious groups have done more over the centuries to alleviate poverty and encourage charity (which is an obligation in Islam, by the way) than any right or left wing secular group. On the other hand, the wealthy and the powerful have certainly distorted religion and churches for their own uses. As for mmensen08, I would apply the last sentence particularly to current “evangelical Christianity,” which is so often neither. You don’t have to go outside the church building to find the poor in a Catholic church, something that is hardly true for the vast majority of white “Christian” churches. On the other hand, the NT is clear that wealth is not the problem but the desire for it and the fear of losing it that keeps us from concentrating on the essentials of love of God and neighbor. What are you doing to help the poor, Professor? If you are like me, not nearly enough.
libdmacc - September 28, 2010 at 10:48 am
mmesen08 has it. Exactly. The issue for God (and us) is the heart. Do we trust in God or do we trust in man. God does not have a problem with the rich. He has a problem with those whose hearts are hard. He created us to serve Him by serving others. He said ‘the first shall be last and the last shall be first.’ So,remember, you can fool some of the people all of the time, but you can’t fool God.
kffdn - September 28, 2010 at 11:00 am
What an idiotic article. Your understanding of wealth in the NT is sophomoric. No mention of the reminders (in both OT and NT) not to show partiality to the poor? Perhaps you should stick to painting and leave biblical exegesis to those who know a bit more.You also speak of justice and ethics. Is it just for the wealthy–most of whom deserve every dollar that their hard work has earned them, almost all of whom provide much-needed services to their fellow humans–to be stripped of that wealth because of a perverted concept of social justice? Again, stick to your subject.You may want to keep in mind that it is precisely because of those damned wealthy people that you have a job.
etenner - September 28, 2010 at 12:02 pm
Just an aside, Judaism also sees charity an obligation. As Maimonides wrote, “Even a poor person who lives entirely on tzedakah must also give tzedakah to another.” (Mishnah Torah Chapter 7, Line 5) The English word “charity” suggests benevolence and generosity, a magnanimous act by the wealthy and powerful for the benefit of the poor and needy. The word “tzedakah” is derived from the Hebrew root Tzadei-Dalet-Qof, meaning righteousness, justice or fairness. In Judaism, giving to the poor is not viewed as a generous, magnanimous act; it is simply an act of justice and righteousness, the performance of a duty, giving the poor their due.
dank48 - September 28, 2010 at 12:53 pm
Personally, I’m more impressed by the story in Mark 12:38-44 of the widow’s mite, the small but, to the giver, significant amount that goes in the collection plate, or the AA basket, or the Salvation Army bucket, than by the twelve million dollars the Gates Foundation is bestowing on four American cities. I don’t see Bill Gates, the personification of wealth acquired by questionable means, to be charitable, and sanatized later by judiciously publicized philanthropy, giving up “the best seats” and “the best places,” as Jesus so concretely put it. What, after all, is twelve million dollars to Bill “Microshaft” Gates? Probably about what twelve bucks is to me.Several times a week I see people drop coins into the basket that they may be ill able to afford, because they believe it’s the right thing to do. Jesus observed, “This poor widow has put in more than all those who have given to the treasury; for they all put in our of their abundance, but she out of her poverty put in all that she had, her whole livelihood.” Tell me, does anyone really believe the Gates twelve million will make everything all right? You want to see real giving, giving from the heart? Then go to an open-discussion AA meeting. You never know who you might run into there. Now and then, even an old atheist gets a glimpse of the Son of Man.
mmensen08 - September 28, 2010 at 1:41 pm
To 22250655. You have some good points, however you should be careful to generalize about “white” Christian churches. I would venture to say that there are very few “white” Christian churches anymore. Those that do exist are rare and don’t represent the vast majority of Christian churches. Even the one I attend has many non-whites and a number of people who suffer economically. We take care of those around us. The poor are not just in Catholic churches. You make the assumption that most Evangelical churches are these mega churches that teach wealth and prosperity. I would assert that those are a minority but they get all the media hype and notice so it appears like they are in great numbers. Even in larger mega churches, I am sure that there are many good, generous people who are open to helping others. Only God knows the hearts. Just because a church doesn’t give, it doesn’t mean that some members don’t give. Just like there may bechurches that give but it’s individual members could care less about the poor and needy.
22266017 - September 28, 2010 at 1:47 pm
Regarding the wealth of the Vatican, there are lot of misconceptions about this. I would highly encourage you to read the second Q&A on this page http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/quickquestions/keyword/prosperity . It is short and to the point, addressing how the Vatican came to have such property and what their operating budget is actually like.On the other hand, I am not a proponent of the “health and wealth gospel” as it has been dubbed by some. There needs to be a balance. A good article on this (again, from the Catholic perspective) is here: http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2009/0909btb.asp .Peace…
facultygovernance - September 28, 2010 at 3:24 pm
Don’t you mean ‘sarcasm,’ rather than ‘irony?’(Never mind. I’m just bemoaning the disappearance of that unappreciated and downtrodden but nevertheless vital professional; the copy editor.)
dank48 - September 28, 2010 at 5:16 pm
No disappearance, FacultyGovernance, gone just undercover.Lest you get too starry-eyed, it should be ‘irony’? not ‘irony?’professional, not professional;
snwiedmann - September 28, 2010 at 8:35 pm
And if we are truly wise as well as good, we recognize that the more material possessions we (supposedly) possess, the more we are possessed by them. Do you really want to work primarily for the sake of hanging on to all that stuff that you hardly have time to enjoy because you have to work so hard to hang on to it . . .?
dank48 - October 4, 2010 at 4:19 pm
And if we take the Bible seriously, then it’s not wealth that’s the problem, but the love of money that’s the root of all evil. (In Latin translation, “Radix Omnium Malorum Avaritia,” with ROMA as handy mnemonic acronym.)