Augustine of Hippo on private property

[Eftsoon]

Compelling statement from the great Augustine. The idea that amassing wealth and property is somehow blblical and Christian has no basis imo. We are called to something that looks more anarchistic. The Early Church emphasised community. The modern obsession with individualism would have been alien and troubling to them. They saw themselves as part of a greater whole. They were not atomised independent agents with responsibility only for themselves.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

This is one topic that the Church needs to tread lightly on. Even this quote is kind of screwed up talking about "superfluidity" , "you possess what belongs to others". I doubt that can be said of some of the rich people of Faith in the Bible, but it does seem to reflect the attitude of Joseph's brothers before they sold him into slavery being jealous of him and his favored treatment, including the superfluitious coat of many colors.

 

[TheWhat?]

This is a direct contradiction to the "greed is good" ethos of Randian economics. Good reminder that the church precedes the socialist/capitalist debate.

 

[Eftsoon]

This is one topic that the Church needs to tread lightly on. Even this quote is kind of screwed up talking about "superfluidity" , "you possess what belongs to others". I doubt that can be said of some of the rich people of Faith in the Bible, but it does seem to reflect the attitude of Joseph's brothers before they sold him into slavery being jealous of him and his favored treatment, including the superfluitious coat of many colors.

I think it's closer to the ethic of the early church.

 

[public hermit]

Yep, it's a significant failure of modern Christianity that living simply is not considered a Christian virtue worth pursuing. If it is so considered, it's not exemplified very well among Christian leaders.

One thing I really liked about Pope Francis early on was the way he seemed to eschew some of the pomp and circumstance of the office.

I get that there have been many wealthy Christians that have done immense good with their wealth, as they should. But greed and selfishness are endemic in our society. It would be fantastic to see Christians show a different kind of freedom from things, a freedom from the desire for things. If this faith of ours is real, we should be seeing a radical way of life free from the trappings of stuff. Right?

 

[Eftsoon]

Yep, it's a significant failure of modern Christianity that living simply is not considered a Christian virtue worth pursuing. If it is so considered, it's not exemplified very well among Christian leaders.

One thing I really liked about Pope Francis early on was the way he seemed to eschew some of the pomp and circumstance of the office.

I get that there have been many wealthy Christians that have done immense good with their wealth, as they should. But greed and selfishness are endemic in our society. It would be fantastic to see Christians show a different kind of freedom from things, a freedom from the desire for things. If this faith of ours is real, we should be seeing a radical way of life free from the trappings of stuff. Right?

Absolutely. The church is so near to the centres of power that it is unable to conceive of alternative ways of living. Most of the church has come to believe that free market capitalism is holy. The acquisition of wealth and accountrements is seen as a vocation.
For most of our history, this has not been the case. It's a very recent phenomenon. I would suggest that it originates in the separation of church and state. Once that happened, the church entered into a relationship with state power. This made it possible for the state to coopt and influence Christian culture.

 

[Eftsoon]

This is a direct contradiction to the "greed is good" ethos of Randian economics. Good reminder that the church precedes the socialist/capitalist debate.

Yes! This is beyond socialism/capitalism. It's a false binary. Let the world run itself according to its own systems. As Christians, we have our model. It is laid out in scripture, and can be seen throughout the early church fathers.

 

[public hermit]

Absolutely. The church is so near to the centres of power that it is unable to conceive of alternative ways of living. Most of the church has come to believe that free market capitalism is holy. The acquisition of wealth and accountrements is seen as a vocation.
For most of our history, this has not been the case. It's a very recent phenomenon. I would suggest that it originates in the separation of church and state. Once that happened, the church entered into a relationship with state power. This made it possible for the state to coopt and influence Christian culture.

I was with you up until your claim that separation of church and state is part of the issue. I hadn't considered it that way and will have to think about that. Interesting.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Private property is supported by scripture. "Having all things in common" may be useful in certain situations but personal ownership of property is the best economic model for most.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

Private property is supported by scripture. "Having all things in common" may be useful in certain situations but personal ownership of property is the best economic model for most.

lol yeah every once in a while I got some skepticism on Augustine, because as Church Fathers go he gets very bullish on some topics where any kind of balance or dynamic tension goes out the window, and frankly it makes me think about his Manichean past... This is one such situation.

I mean it is and was certainly appropriate to take the rich to task when they are looking for favors and disrespecting the poor as Saint James does in his epistle because of their literal bad behavior in his church. And poverty and hard times certainly can help us spiritually, as far as helping to break the hold of mammon and hedonism from us. And the Church at different times has done things that are termed as "Socialism" by modern people. But you really can't go too deep on this stuff without impugning other parts of the Bible, Characters of the Bible etc. Because you do get a very Manichean / Gnostic outlook on things. The same God that brought Salvation, and the Incarnation also brought us all that stuff of the Old Testament as well. Including blessing important figures like Abraham and Solomon with wealth. And God is the same, yesterday, today and forever.


Would be nice to actually know the full context of this quote... It may not be as controversial and damning in context compared to the meme. I'll have to look into that later.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

lol yeah every once in a while I got some skepticism on Augustine, because as Church Fathers go he gets very bullish on some topics where any kind of balance or dynamic tension goes out the window, and frankly it makes me think about his Manichean past... This is one such situation.

I mean it is and was certainly appropriate to take the rich to task when they are looking for favors and disrespecting the poor as Saint James does in his epistle because of their literal bad behavior in his church. And poverty and hard times certainly can help us spiritually, as far as helping to break the hold of mammon and hedonism from us. And the Church at different times has done things that are termed as "Socialism" by modern people. But you really can't go too deep on this stuff without impugning other parts of the Bible, Characters of the Bible etc. Because you do get a very Manichean / Gnostic outlook on things. The same God that brought Salvation, and the Incarnation also brought us all that stuff of the Old Testament as well. Including blessing important figures like Abraham and Solomon with wealth. And God is the same, yesterday, today and forever.


Would be nice to actually know the full context of this quote... It may not be as controversial and damning in context compared to the meme. I'll have to look into that later.

We do too much conflating of the past cultures and economies with the modern Christian west, imo.

 

[Norbert L]

Compelling statement from the great Augustine. The idea that amassing wealth and property is somehow blblical and Christian has no basis imo. We are called to something that looks more anarchistic. The Early Church emphasised community. The modern obsession with individualism would have been alien and troubling to them. They saw themselves as part of a greater whole. They were not atomised independent agents with responsibility only for themselves.

Acts of the Apostles 5:1 NLT "The property was yours to sell or not sell, as you wished. And after selling it, the money was also yours to give away. How could you do a thing like this? You weren’t lying to us but to God!”"

Ananias was being held responsible for lying to the Holy Spirit. He was also responsible for owning wealth and lying about the amount. He was swindling God.

Peter states two things, that Ananias was the owner of wealth. Second that he lied about the amount to the Holy Spirit.

Can one be true and not the other?

 

[bèlla]

Simplicity and self-sufficiency go hand in hand. You can’t be thrifty if you’re dependent on others for everything. Convenience is the problem.

The necessity for discretionary income is greater today than ages past. Food and shelter were easier to secure and provisions were made for the needy. But they’re not enough now.

It takes money to spend less in the long run. Upfront costs can be daunting but the payoff is big. Buying a little at a time is more expensive than getting a lot at once.

 

[kidkaos2]

.

 

[kidkaos2]

This is a direct contradiction to the "greed is good" ethos of Randian economics. Good reminder that the church precedes the socialist/capitalist debate.

Why is that good? If I remind you the church precedes nuclear submarines, is that good? I'm just confused what the relationship is between Augustine and Rand and why it's good to get a reminder that the church was established prior to some economic systems (which it wasn't, by the way - both capitalism and socialism were in the Roman empire centuries prior to the church)

For example, the state owned the aqueduct system, but it contracted out maintenance on it to private citizens, thus displaying both socialist and capitalist elements.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Why is that good? If I remind you the church precedes nuclear submarines, is that good? I'm just confused what the relationship is between Augustine and Rand and why it's good to get a reminder that the church was established prior to some economic systems (which it wasn't, by the way - both capitalism and socialism were in the Roman empire centuries prior to the church)

For example, the state owned the aqueduct system, but it contracted out maintenance on it to private citizens, thus displaying both socialist and capitalist elements.

Elements of both economic models have existed for about as long as human beings have existed; but the economic systems themselves are entirely modern constructs.

The significance of the Church preceding both systems is that the Church's way and ethics are not chained to any philosophical, economic, or moral system that arises today--the Church is the Church, and that means the Church is neither capitalist nor socialist, but rather Christian. Or, at least, is supposed to be.

When the Church compromises herself with human systems she compromises her God-given mission in being the outpost of God's kingdom where Christ is King and Lord; the King and Lord who laid Himself down in the suffering, shame, humility, and death of the cross for the sake of sinful wretches and who identified Himself with the unwanted, the outcasts, and the least of these.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Simplicity and self-sufficiency go hand in hand. You can’t be thrifty if you’re dependent on others for everything. Convenience is the problem.

The necessity for discretionary income is greater today than ages past. Food and shelter were easier to secure and provisions were made for the needy. But they’re not enough now.

It takes money to spend less in the long run. Upfront costs can be daunting but the payoff is big. Buying a little at a time is more expensive than getting a lot at once.

True. The logical storehouse for needed goods should be one's home, as much as is reasonable, not a warehouse or supermarket miles away.

 

[FireDragon76]

lol yeah every once in a while I got some skepticism on Augustine, because as Church Fathers go he gets very bullish on some topics where any kind of balance or dynamic tension goes out the window, and frankly it makes me think about his Manichean past... This is one such situation.

I mean it is and was certainly appropriate to take the rich to task when they are looking for favors and disrespecting the poor as Saint James does in his epistle because of their literal bad behavior in his church. And poverty and hard times certainly can help us spiritually, as far as helping to break the hold of mammon and hedonism from us. And the Church at different times has done things that are termed as "Socialism" by modern people. But you really can't go too deep on this stuff without impugning other parts of the Bible, Characters of the Bible etc. Because you do get a very Manichean / Gnostic outlook on things. The same God that brought Salvation, and the Incarnation also brought us all that stuff of the Old Testament as well. Including blessing important figures like Abraham and Solomon with wealth. And God is the same, yesterday, today and forever.


Would be nice to actually know the full context of this quote... It may not be as controversial and damning in context compared to the meme. I'll have to look into that later.

What Augustine says here is mild compared to Basil or Jerome.

Augustine's attitude was typical for Christian leaders in the first few centuries.

 

[dwb001]

Compelling statement from the great Augustine. The idea that amassing wealth and property is somehow blblical and Christian has no basis imo. We are called to something that looks more anarchistic. The Early Church emphasised community. The modern obsession with individualism would have been alien and troubling to them. They saw themselves as part of a greater whole. They were not atomised independent agents with responsibility only for themselves.

Your statement stands in direct opposition to the Bible.
Not in doctrine or teaching, but in historical perspective.

Peter affirms private property and non-communal ownership in Acts 5.
It was troubling to Peter, not that persons had private property or kept things private, but that they lie about their generosity.
Don't try to elevate your self in the eyes of man (more so by lying) appears to be the lesson.


Acts 5:4 While it remained, did it not remain thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thy power? How is it that thou hast conceived this thing in thy heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.