Posted on 04/11/2016 7:49:06 AM PDT by Salvation
The eradication of poverty is an oft-stated goal of the modern, liberal West. President Lyndon Baines Johnson’s pronouncement of a “war on poverty” so imprinted this notion in the Western mind that it has become almost axiomatic. It is now a fundamental pillar in the thinking of almost every person (and organization) in the Western world, from the religious pew-sitter concerned for the poor to the most secular humanist bent on a utopian vision. Poverty is a great enemy that must be stamped out!
The only problem is that this is contrary to the Gospel! It is no surprise, therefore, that even after decades of Western “do-goodism,” barely a dent has been made in the percentage of people living in poverty. In fact, some statistics show that the percentage in poverty has increased. But why should we expect great fruitfulness in something that opposes God?
I can see the look of shock on your face right now; you may even be embarrassed that I have written this. I’d like to share a quote with you from Robert Cardinal Sarah, which makes an important distinction that we need to recover. While what he says may also shock you, I encourage you to read it carefully and thoughtfully; the distinction he makes is critical. Not only does the Gospel depend on it, but cultures and individual lives do as well. For indeed, in the name of eradicating poverty some of the worst of Western arrogance has been displayed. It is an arrogance that does not even recognize that it can become willing to the destroy the poor themselves as well as what and whom they love all in the name of this “noble” goal.
Cardinal Robert Sarah is no neophyte in this discussion. He grew up in an impoverished region of Africa and later headed the Roman dicastery, Cor unum, a charitable arm of the Holy See. The extensive passage below is an abbreviated version of the Cardinal’s response to the following questions posed by his interviewer, Nicholas Diat:
How would you describe the nature of Cor unum, the dicastery to which you devoted several years of your life, in its fight against all sorts of poverty? Furthermore, why do you speak so often about the close relation between God and the poor?
In his reply, the Cardinal is reacting somewhat to Mr. Diat’s description of Cor unum’s work as “fight[ing] against all sorts of poverty.” The Cardinal’s response is nothing short of stunning. Please read it carefully and consider obtaining the book so as to able to read the unabridged remarks as well.
The Gospel is not a slogan. The same goes for our activity to relieve people’s suffering … [it is a matter] of working humbly and having a deep respect for the poor. For example, I remember being disgusted when I heard the advertising slogan of a Catholic charitable organization, which was almost insulting to the poor: “Let us fight for zero poverty” … Not one saint … ever dared to speak that way about poverty and poor people.
Jesus himself had no pretention of this sort. This slogan respects neither the Gospel nor Christ. Ever since the Old Testament, God has been with the poor; and Sacred Scripture unceasingly acclaims “the poor of Yahweh.” …
Poverty is a biblical value confirmed by Christ, who emphatically exclaims, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of heaven” (Mt 5:3). … The poor person is someone who knows that, by himself, he cannot live. He needs God and other people in order to be, flourish and grow. On the contrary, rich people expect nothing of anyone. They can provide for their needs without calling either on their neighbors or on God. In this sense wealth can lead to great sadness and true human loneliness or to terrible spiritual poverty. If in order to eat and care for himself, a man must turn to someone else, this necessarily results in a great enlargement of his heart. This is why the poor are closest to God and live in great solidarity with one another; they draw from this divine source the ability to be attentive to others.
The Church must not fight against poverty but, rather, wage a battle against destitution, especially material and spiritual destitution. … [so that all] might have the minimum they require in order to live. …
But we do not have the right to confuse destitution and poverty, because in so doing we would seriously be going against the Gospel. Recall what Christ told us: “The poor you will have always with you …” (Jn 12:8). Those who want to eradicate poverty make the Son of God a liar. …
[In his yearly Lenten message in 2014, Pope Francis] espoused what St. Francis [of Assisi] called “Lady Poverty.” … St. Francis of Assisi wanted to be poor because Christ chose poverty. If he calls poverty a royal virtue, it is because it shone brilliantly in the life of Jesus … and in the life of his mother, Mary of Nazareth. …
Similarly, I often think about the vow of poverty taken by religious … [they] do so in order to be as close as possible to Christ. The Son [of God] wanted us to be poor in order to show us the best path by which we can return to God. …
The Son of God loves the poor; others intend to eradicate them. What a lying, unrealistic, almost tyrannical utopia! I always marvel when Gaudium et Spes declares, “The spirit of poverty and charity is the glory and witness of the Church of Christ” (GS 88).
We must be precise in our choice of words. The language of the UN and its agencies, who want to suppress poverty, which they confuse with destitution, is not that of the Church of Christ. The Son of God did not come to speak to the poor in ideological slogans! The Church must banish these slogans from her language. For they have stupefied and destroyed peoples who were trying to remain free in conscience (Cardinal Sarah, God or Nothing: A Conversation in Faith with Nicholas Diat, pp. 140-142).
Perhaps stunned himself, Mr. Diat follows up with the following question: “Are you not afraid of being misunderstood in employing this sort of distinction?”
The Cardinal replies,
It is a lack of charity to shut one’s eyes. It is a lack of charity to remain silent in the face of confusing words and slogans! … If you read the Latin text of Gaudium et Spes carefully you will immediately notice this distinction (Ibid, p. 143).
This is a powerful insight and it reveals the deep flaw in Western “anti-poverty” programs. Christ asks us to love the poor and imitate the best of what they are, not eliminate them and disregard the simplicity and trust that they can often exemplify. But we in the West, imbued with our materialistic notions and mesmerized by the comfort and control that wealth can temporarily buy, denigrate what the Gospels praises and seek to eradicate it.
So unreflective are we in this matter that some will even justify the most awful things in the name of eradicating poverty. Many programs (U.S.-sponsored and U.N.-sponsored) with this goal advocate for contraception, abortion, and/or euthanasia. Some have even sought to compel these sorts of things as a precondition for receiving aid. Some seek to impose certain aspects of Western thinking, something that has been labeled an attempt at “ideological colonization.” Many of us in the “First World” often speak of the “Third World” in a way that at best is patronizing and at worst exhibits a thinly veiled contempt.
While it is true that certain economic and political systems best support Western lifestyles, there is more to life than material abundance. With our own culture, families, and common sense collapsing around us, it seems odd that we so easily consider our way of life superior; that we see our relationship to the poor and to poorer countries as one in which we have all the answers and they should just listen to us.
The word “arrogance” is derived from the Latin (a = not) + (rogare = to ask), which means “to not even bother asking.” We too easily assume, without even asking, that we know what is best; we presume that poor people in every part of the world want what we have (materially) and that they don’t perceive the awful price we have paid in order to get it.
We must recover a respect for the world’s poor, who have much to teach us. Even if they are not materially without troubles, they often possess many things we have lost: simplicity, family and tribal (communal) life, reciprocity, proper interdependence (as opposed to radical individualism), trust, a slower life, and a less-stressful life.
Further, we must not forget that the Lord counseled poverty (Lk 18:22), declared the poor blessed (Lk 6:20), lived simply Himself having “nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20), lived among the working poor, and warned of the pernicious quality of wealth (Lk 16:13). God hears the cry of the poor and Mother Mary taught us of a great reversal that is coming, when the mighty and powerful will be cast down and poor and lowly raised up (Lk 1:52). Jesus taught us that many who are now last will be first in the kingdom of Heaven (Mat 19:30). In this life, the poor will sometimes need us. In the next life, on Judgment Day, we are going to need them to welcome us into eternal dwellings (Luke 16:9).
I really cannot say it better than did the good Cardinal, so I will not attempt to do so. We must surely work to alleviate the destitution that often comes in times of famine, war, or natural disaster. But destitution and poverty are not the same thing. Overlooking this distinction can be deadly for the poor we claim to serve and for their cultures, and can result in the worst forms of ideological colonization and secular utopianism.
Monsignor Pope Ping!
Sweet!
One of his best.
The supply of aggregate wealth will always be less than the aggregate desire for wealth. To decrease poverty and increase wealth in the system as a whole requires increased economic progress, technological progress, capital accumulation, expanding division of labor, a rational political and economic system, more saving and investment and less consumption, private propery, and freedom.
Right on.
I sometimes observe that at no time under the Law did God ever tell a prophet, judge or king to institute a group of folks to go around with measuring rods and what not to make sure nobody in Israel reaped too far into the corners of their field/make sure nobody ever wend back to glean more/etc.
In Scripture it is clear that He wants His people to individually take care of those in need, but no where in actual Scripture is there a rigorous standard established by which that is measured.
IOW, He really does seem to want the people, on their own initiative and from their own means, to do this.
By contrast, given the attitudes of too many modern people about welfare from public funds, I often suspect that many today would be willing to honor old Ahab if only he’d taken Naboth’s inheritance for a vegetable garden to feed Samaria’s poor rather than his own belly.
.
“Recall what Christ told us: “The poor you will have always with you …” (Jn 12:8). Those who want to eradicate poverty make the Son of God a liar. …”
BINGO. No one can eradicate poverty much less war. It’s the balance of the universe. We cannot all be rich nor we can all be poor. We cant have all peace all the time and same with chaos/war. One must live with the other as a counterbalance. (probably why I detest these liberal hypocrites with a peace sign)
I know there is no way to say this without is seeming to sound like an attack. But it is a simple observation that the Church benefits from poverty. They love being the hope and comfort of desperate people. It is much tougher work to
minister to people who are comfortable in the temporal world.
The church announcing poverty was gone would be like Jesse Jackson saying that race was not a big issue.
While there are a few minor points he makes that are worthy, there is one glaring error. The message of not feeling a need to eradicate poverty, is coming from a minister of a fabulously wealthy church.
The Msgr. needs to get his Greek books out.
In 1:52 the word poor is not in the Greek.
The word for humble is tapeinós (an adjective) – properly, low; (figuratively) inner lowliness describing the person who depends on the Lord rather than self. HELPS Word Studies http://biblehub.com/greek/5011.htm
What the Msgr. has done is eisegesis which is reading something into the text that is not there vs exegesis which is bringing out of the text what is there.
We won't even discuss the false title of Mother Mary.
For liberals, eradicating poverty can mean eradicating poor people themselves— abortion, euthanasia.
For the Church, the challenge is to love and assist poor people using our own individual bodies and souls to assist their individual bodies and souls— not a faceless program or a mechanical vending machine dispensing food and supplies to a nameless horde.
I think that is how we help the poor as people but avoid the liberal focus on sterilely, modernly, eradicating a social problem.
False tile of Mary. You are so clueless on Catholic theology, that it is embarrassing even to those who are non-Catholics.
The title "mother mary" is found where in Scripture??
Keep making a fool of yourself.
The Catholic Church existed BEFORE Scripture. Before, the books in the Bible were assembled in AD 382 by the Council of Rome they were laboriously examined, cross-checked against the sacred oral tradition, and determined to be the authentic WRITTEN Word of God. The sacred oral tradition, rituals, and liturgy, and veneration continued from the earliest of times. Indeed, carvings of Mary have seen been unearthed that date back to the third century.
This is what typically occurs when fools rush in where angels fear to tread. Never mind the towering intellectual tradition of the Church, we have third rate Protestant self-taught “scholars” throwing around snippets of Scripture as if this the end and be all of it.
Your statement makes zero sense. We've had Scripture a long time. The roman catholic church came into existence around the 4th century
The ekklesia, that is the body of believers in Christ, predates the roman catholic church.
Before, the books in the Bible were assembled in AD 382 by the Council of Rome they were laboriously examined, cross-checked against the sacred oral tradition, and determined to be the authentic WRITTEN Word of God. The sacred oral tradition, rituals, and liturgy, and veneration continued from the earliest of times.
Yet we see so little of this "sacred tradition, rituals and liturgy" you speak of in the actual NT.
And you really need to do some research on the formation of the OT and NT.
Indeed, carvings of Mary have seen been unearthed that date back to the third century.
All that proves is Mary was worshipped in the third century.
This is what typically occurs when fools rush in where angels fear to tread. Never mind the towering intellectual tradition of the Church, we have third rate Protestant self-taught “scholars” throwing around snippets of Scripture as if this the end and be all of it.
Ha! That's funny. The Msgr. can't even get the right translation of the text in question.
Perhaps if catholics learned the Greek instead of Latin there wouldn't be so many problems in catholicism.
Sarah for Pope!
Bergoglio was a run-of-the-mill lefty South American bishop, whose diocese was and is a disintegrating shambles, with no vocations, hideous liturgies, about 10% of “couples” actually married (but Communion given to all—no questions asked). Those who knew him, upon hearing of his election, wrote things like, “the horror!”
Not another Bergoglio!
Upon what do you base that claim?
Psalms 109:8
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.