Skip to main content

Abandoning Treasure

Having lived all my life in a wealthy European country, but also spent time among people who live at subsistence level and have very little, the injustice of inequality is a constant provocation to me. Jesus had a lot of things to say about that, which are challenging but well worth hearing. 

One of them was his response to the wealthy young law-keeper in Matthew 19: “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” 

Not surprisingly, the young man went away sad. Well, you would, wouldn't you?

That may have been an extreme case of someone who was particularly materialistic and in thrall to his possessions, and there may have been a degree of hyperbole in Jesus' response - there's no suggestion he asked the same of everyone. But the general idea of abandoning ‘treasure’ and sharing responsibility for the poor is completely in keeping with his teaching and lifestyle. On one occasion he described himself as homeless - having “nowhere to lay his head”. On another he said: “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven.”

Those words raise important questions, particularly in times when many are under financial stress. What do I actually need, and what simply constitutes ‘treasure’? How much is appropriate to keep for myself, and how much should I give to those who have less? How much should I set aside for my own future needs, so as not to be a burden to anyone else? How much should I contribute to the present needs of others? What about those who have made bad choices or take no responsibility for themselves?

Jesus was always careful not to lay down the law and put guilt on people - there were plenty around him doing that. He didn't provide a ‘one fits all’ answer, and he left the detail to conscience. But he also didn't swerve the challenge. And he called out those who were asking, “how little can I give” rather than “how much.” Such as the Pharisees who nominally devoted all their possessions to God to avoid taking responsibility for their ageing parents! 

So there isn't a simplistic answer to the question. But at risk of simply targeting the minimum, there is one easily identifiable set of ‘treasure’: all the stuff that sits in our cupboards unused for months or even years on end. At least one person I know goes through their wardrobe annually and clears out anything they haven't worn that year. Another did the same thing with their bank account. However we interpret it, it seems like a good principle, and I'm trying to apply it to all my own ‘stuff’.

It's not all I do, but it's something. It's a bit of a pain and a faff , and some of the stuff has little value and  ends up in charity shops. But it has more worth there than in my cupboard. And as Augustine said - “The bellies of the poor are much safer storehouses than barns.”

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Robbing The Poor To Feed The Rich?

Now that cuts in spending seem to be on the agenda of all the main political parties, the big questions still to be answered are: how much? And where will the axe fall? According to a recent poll by Ipsos MORI, published by the BBC ( http://bit.ly/d168R ), the most popular candidate with most people is overseas aid. That’s not really surprising. It’s understandable that during severe financial crisis most people want our government to look after our own affairs first. Charity, as the saying goes, begins at home. But is it really right for the poorest nations of the world to be penalised for a crisis that was brought on by the rich? The developing world already spends $1.3 on debt repayment for every $1 it receives in grants (Source: World Centric, http://bit.ly/b5C7f ). Every day at least $100 million flows from the poor of the world into the pockets of the rich. Existing problems like drought and famine will not go away just because there is a worldwide recession, and the poor are mo...

A God Who Reaches Out

Years ago I was guest speaker at a conference of a group of churches in a remote part of SW Uganda. One of the delegates I met there had walked for a couple of days to attend, sleeping out in the bush under the stars, and drinking water from whatever muddy pool he came across. I've been back several times since, but I've never forgotten the remarkable dedication of that one individual. It's been widely acknowledged, and I've written here previously, that the universe seems to speak to us of an architect - a creator of everything we see around us. If that's true, it would require similar dedication on their part for us to have any chance of knowing and understanding them. The innumerable religions and concepts of God that we find around the world today, not to mention throughout history, and the many other theories of origins, are testimony to this. Left to ourselves we are incapable of figuring out definitively, to everyone's agreement and satisfaction, who or w...

God the Omnipotent and Stupid?

One of the questions you will often hear raised about God goes along the lines, "If there is an omnipotent God why doesn't he do X?", where X may be anything from stopping wars or preventing earthquakes to curing cancer. Often there is a deeply personal reason behind the question, which makes a purely rational answer wholly unsatisfying. All the same, it's a rational question and some kind of rational answer is deserved. But two things make it a complex question to which no simple answer is possible. One is the extraordinary diversity of the things that 'X' may represent, all of them having different causes with different and completely unrelated solutions. The other is the sole focus on God's omnipotence. Because God, if he exists, must be so much more than just that. There is an old philosophical conundrum on the same subject, of the kind that philosphers love to pose and to ponder. If God is omnipotent, can he create an object so massive that he himself...