St John Chrysostom on Wealth and Poverty

[gzt]

St. John Chrysostom On Poverty and Wealth | MYSTAGOGY RESOURCE CENTER

A great essay from Fr Georges Florovsky on St John Chrysostom's views on wealth and poverty.

In Chrysostom's opinion there is danger not only in wealth which has been acquired by dishonest means but in all forms of personal property. These are not harmful in themselves but they may stimulate the will to desire things which are perishable and transient. "The love for wealth is an unnatural passion," Chrysostom writes. "The desire for wealth is neither natural nor necessary. It is superfluous." This movement of the will is dangerous and riches are a dangerous burden. "Wealth is harmful for you not because it arms thieves against you, nor because it completely darkens your mind but because it makes you the captives of soulless possessions and distracts you from the service of God."

Unfortunately Florovsky does not provide the exact citations, but we know he's good for them.

 

[archer75]

I was just reading St. Basil on these topics. He compares the desire for wealth to gluttony.

 

[ArmyMatt]

lots of Fathers do. greed (along with gluttony) is one of three sins that scout you out. once you fall to one of the three, the others descend like the open floodgates.

 

[archer75]

It seems to my eye that this gluttony for material wealth is the single most pervasive sin visible in my home culture. And it is rarely discussed or condemned.

 

[~Anastasia~]

lots of Fathers do. greed (along with gluttony) is one of three sins that scout you out. once you fall to one of the three, the others descend like the open floodgates.

Greed, gluttony, and ... what is the third?

Interesting because I've noticed a connection as well, between the things talked about so far.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Wow. You know there are a lot of good topics in that article.


Something I realized sharply when I first became Orthodox - I was living in pretty strait circumstances. I had a few dollars to meet all my needs outside of a roof and some basic food, and it didn't come close to covering what I needed, much less wanted. It was then that I became aware that yes, we tell the rich how having too much is bad for their souls, but being too poor can cause some to fall into certain patterns of thinking that are also sinful. I never realized that until after I was baptized. It's like a light switch was turned on. And it took some months of purposeful dealing with those thoughts and much help from God to put me in a better way of thinking. But there is also spiritual danger - for some at least - in being poor. I still envy a bit those poor folks who manage to be the most generous in spirit despite their need. But not all poor are so blessed. I've heard priests teach about this as well - how not only being rich but also being poor can create far too much focus on money to be good for the soul.



And another point - we talked about Ananias and Sapphira in our Bible study this week, so I've continued to puzzle over it a bit. I asked Father about their specific sin and he saw it more holistically (which is probably right!), but I'm also thinking because of what St. John Chrysostom was referenced as idealizing the early Church and all being held in common. Maybe their sin was also in not buying completely into that community dynamic after all, if it was so vital.




And another thing I think of. Sometimes (Protestants especially) are taught to think of rewards in heaven. I've gotten away from that since becoming Orthodox and just don't think of it anymore. But the article had me thinking ... I've never considered it before. But I thought a certain amount of things would be held in common in the life of the age to come. But it actually makes MORE sense that EVERYTHING in the life of the age to come will be held in common. We would each have our own theosis, but perhaps not our own anything else at all, or at least nothing maybe appreciably different from anyone else (if we are all clothed, for example). That never occurred to me. But it makes sense. Far from all the teaching about "mansions in heaven" (which I know is a misunderstanding) ... but what if nobody "owns" anything? It really does make more sense from a Christian point of view. That's a novel thought to me though. I just mostly haven't thought about "stuff" in the age to come. But I guess my imaginings have all tended to commonality after all. I need a few days to think about that more.

 

[tulc]

(snip)
Unfortunately Florovsky does not provide the exact citations, but we know he's good for them.

like this:
https://www.st-philip.net/files/Fitzgerald Patristic series/John-Chrysostom_wealth_and_virtue.pdf
tulc(thought this was interesting)

 

[ArmyMatt]

Greed, gluttony, and ... what is the third?

Interesting because I've noticed a connection as well, between the things talked about so far.

lust, I do believe. all three are rooted in pride.

 

[~Anastasia~]

lust, I do believe. all three are rooted in pride.

That makes sense that lust would be the third. They do all seem to act similarly on the human soul.

I can see it all being rooted in pride too. Ugh ... I think pride is the root of everything! And difficult to eradicate. So it seems temptations of one form or another continue through life on that basis. At least, that's the paradigm I see. And it's funny how what you think those words refer to is not at all their limit. There are some incredibly subtle hidden things in there too.

Thank you.


(I'm starting to wonder - just out of curiosity because it's not something I need to know - but I wonder if a priest-confessor needs intimate knowledge of the dynamics of such things to be able to better help people? And I DO find myself very interested in those dynamics.)

 

[FenderTL5]

Different Saint, same topic.



truncated version:

 

[ArmyMatt]

That makes sense that lust would be the third. They do all seem to act similarly on the human soul.

I can see it all being rooted in pride too. Ugh ... I think pride is the root of everything! And difficult to eradicate. So it seems temptations of one form or another continue through life on that basis. At least, that's the paradigm I see. And it's funny how what you think those words refer to is not at all their limit. There are some incredibly subtle hidden things in there too.

Thank you.


(I'm starting to wonder - just out of curiosity because it's not something I need to know - but I wonder if a priest-confessor needs intimate knowledge of the dynamics of such things to be able to better help people? And I DO find myself very interested in those dynamics.)

I don't think he needs intimate knowledge of such things, God can illumine him.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I don't think he needs intimate knowledge of such things, God can illumine him.

Glory to God.

Maybe just my leftover tendencies to want to know how everything works, and my tendency to want to categorize and understand the dynamics of things. (And again, of course, I'm in no position to NEED to know ... it might even present a dangerous temptation if I did know.)