Volume 6, Issue 8, April 1997

THE BANE AND BLESSING OF WEALTH

Like all the greatest spiritual religions of humankind, Christianity realizes a profound danger to the better self in the pursuit and accumulation of wealth. When a person lays up treasure, their heart almost inevitably is with their treasure.

Both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible are explicit about the fearful consequences of social injustice. The intolerable gap between the rich and the poor has long been one of the most demonic forces in the world. It is a cause of enmity between the haves and the have-nots. The padded rich do not wish to come into contact with what would disturb their sensibilities. Not infrequently rich people may be charitable in a distant and perfunctary way: sit at a directors' meeting of the United Way, send a cheque to a charitable organization at Christmas. But close contact with the actual poor is too uncomfortable. In fact, in our contemporary society a public dislike of "welfare" people is quite evident.

The spiritual force of Christianity should be turned against the materialism and mammonism of our economic order. When we sacrifice human dignity and self-respect to increase the wealth of the select and privileged, to swell the bank accounts of the rich, we are to that extent serving mammon and denying the sacredness of life. When we make property and money the end of success, while denying the same opportunity to our neighbour we are self-regarding and not good neighbours.

It is the function of religion to teach the individual to value their moral integrity more than their income. In the same way it is the function of religion to teach society to value human life more than property, and to value property only so far as it forms the material basis for the higher development of human life. When life and property are in apparent collision, life must take precedence. This is not only Christian but prudent.

This not to say that being poor is necessarily closer to sainthood than being wealthy. And where do many of us who are neither wealthy or poor by contemporary standards, we who may be described as "having some and wanting more," fit in?

Let it be noted that there is an "aura" or "ethos" about wealth. A rich person behaves differently, thinks differently, even seems to feel differently from those who are less affluent. You can tell people are rich without knowing anything about their possessions. Their wealth gives them a high degree of control over their environment. They often betray a sense of security, of savoir faire, even of authority, that is virtually impossible to duplicate gives them a high degree of control over their environment. They often show a sense of security, of savoir faire, even of authority, that is virtually impossible to duplicate by those with little wealth.

The poor on the other hand feel insecure, vulnerable, even desperate. They suffer from not having enough.

It is for this reason the realm of God views prosperity as a spiritual danger. For instance, the Old Testament book of Deuteronomy expresses great concern for the poor and their practical provisions for relief. (Read: Deuteronomy 15:1-15). Jesus quoted Deuteronomy and said: "You have the poor with you always and you can do good to them whenever you like." (St. Mark 14:7). The Old Testament ideal is that all share in the prosperity of the nation. Inequality is something to be opposed and eliminated.

Let us know that what we possess shapes our lives. In fact our possessions can possess us. Sharing with others with less and in need helps to overcome this happening.

Too much our contemporary society is showing dislike and criticism toward the poor, the unemployed, the single parents, the youth who have no paid work, and favouring the wealthy and the advantaged. This attitude is affecting our welfare programmes, public services, conservation, and public health. Affluence is a spiritual disease in a world in which many people suffer from not having enough.

I believe poverty should be eliminated in Canada, and this should be designated as a major national goal. We are one of the wealthiest nations in the world, and if we have aspirations to become a just society we must work towards this end.

I was unforgetably impressed while attending the famous World's Fair, Expo '67, in Montreal, of the vision then of how humankind could live in peace and prosperity, with justice, sharing the bounties of nature and human ingenuity.

Our age is the first since the dawn of history to realize it is practical to make the benefits of civilization available to the whole human race. Whether we think of political or social life, the problems of hunger, peace, juvenile delinquency, mental health, overpopulation or education, these have become areas in which we can effect changes and plan solutions, and consequently for which we have acquired moral responsibility. The so-called "puritan ethic" which inextricably bound work, income and human worth together is not suitable for humankind, or practical, in this era of abundance and rapid change. As well, nowadays where the need for workers will continue to decrease with the enlarging of technology, it is ludicrous to base the right to an income on an ability to find a job. Today in our country there is a concerted effort to make our social programmes to be ruled by economics, so that almost our entire personal and social life is permeated with a certain economic way of thinking. Traditional charity looks upon the recipient as an unfortunate victim. Such an attitude is criminal in this, one of the richest countries in the world. A decent living standard should be the right of every person here simply because he or she is a human being.

The doctrine of stewardship needs to be intensified and broadened by the democratic idea. Every person who has wealth and power is not only a steward of God, but a steward of the people. The wealth is derived from the people and held in trust for the people. If it is converted to ones own use, the people can justly call the person to account in the court of public opinion and in the courts of the law. If the law has given an absolute title to certain forms of prosperity and has neglected to insist on the ingredient of public property and rights involved in it, that does not settle the moral title in the least. Religion is important these days to point out the latent public rights and to quicken the conscience of stewards who have forgotten their stewardship.

In turn, the religious sense of stewardship would be reinforced by the increased sense of social obligation. Our laws and social institutions have so long taught that property is ones own and one can do as one wishes with their own, that religion has uphill work in teaching we are not owners, but administrators. Many have failed to develop a social consciousness.

As long as the principalities and powers do our sinning for us we can feel not responsible, but as individuals we must lend our influence to the corporate group and initiate changes. It belongs to the religious person, without waiting passively for orders and directives, to take initiative and to infuse the spirit of justice into the mentality, customs, laws, and structures of the community in which they live and the country of which they are a part.

Search Articles by Keyword

 


Back to Issue Summary || Issue Index || Home

"Religion NOW" is published in limited edition by the Rev. Ross E. Readhead, B.A., B.D., Certificate of Corrections, McMaster University, in the interest of furthering knowledge and participation in religion. Dialogue is invited and welcomed.