Author Topic: Extravagance compatible with Catholicism? (Read 4552 times)

Matthew · « **on:** May 14, 2014, 11:07:55 AM »

From another thread:

"You'd have to be pagan though, to enjoy it, don't you think?
How can a soul with a conscience truly enjoy a $250 (that's two-hundred-and -fifty-dollar) hamburger when there are other good Catholics struggling to survive?"

Matthew · « **Reply #1 on:** May 14, 2014, 11:10:18 AM »

Someone suggested that was Marxist.

WHAT?!

Have we become so American and capitalist that we've lost our Catholic, common sense minds?

I'm not saying that you can't eat at a restaurant as long as someone is struggling or going hungry. But a $250 hamburger? You're basically saying you don't know what to do with your money. You're admitting you have VAST amounts of wealth that God has entrusted you with, and you're treating it like you can spend it however you want.

(Yes, technically you can. But you can also technically decide to get a gun and shoot up a crowd. What God will think of it is another story!)

That's not Catholic. That might be extreme Capitalist, that might be American, but it's not Catholic.

God is going to ask for a strict account of ANY gifts He has given you -- that includes brains, talents, health, and WEALTH. Remember the parable of the Ten Talents.

We are stewards, not absolute masters.

Just because many Traditional Catholics are poor, and so many of us don't regularly distribute food to crowds doesn't mean we shouldn't do that if we became truly rich. Go read 150 different lives of the saints biographies, and we'll see if I'm wrong.

s2srea · « **Reply #2 on:** May 14, 2014, 11:11:29 AM »

Well said.

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #3 on:** May 14, 2014, 04:37:16 PM »

Buying a $250 hamburger is a form of inordo amoris

However, let's not get carried away here. It may just be a one time binge. A decision to see what was so special about it.

The Marxist wants to remove man's moral agency so that's a much worse sin.

You know what? A $250 burger is just really stupid!

Matto · « **Reply #4 on:** May 14, 2014, 04:54:21 PM »

I once went to a very expensive restaurant with my family for my mother's birthday. The bill was several hundred dollars. Was that gluttony?

Normally if we eat at home a meal for the four of us costs twenty dollars or less.

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #5 on:** May 14, 2014, 05:17:10 PM »

Quote from: Matto

I once went to a very expensive restaurant with my family for my mother's birthday. The bill was several hundred dollars. Was that gluttony?

Normally if we eat at home a meal for the four of us costs twenty dollars or less.

I would say no because it was for a special occasion.

Nadir · « **Reply #6 on:** May 14, 2014, 07:32:47 PM »

Quote from: Matto

I once went to a very expensive restaurant with my family for my mother's birthday. The bill was several hundred dollars. Was that gluttony?

Normally if we eat at home a meal for the four of us costs twenty dollars or less.

Gluttony is eating too much, so it would depend on how much you ate.

And a special meal for for a family is hardly commensurate with one hamburger .

I would say that paying $250 for a hamburger is not necessarily gluttony but it is insanity and very selfish. Certainly it is against the command that we are to render an account to God for the use of the talents He gave us.

ggreg · « **Reply #7 on:** May 14, 2014, 07:54:09 PM »

The 250 dollars goes somewhere though. It pays for the suppliers of caviar, beef and staff wages and taxes and a bunch of other stuff.

What is the difference between a 250 burger and Hermes/Brioni neck Tie or Rolex Watch or piece of art?

I never go to a restaurant of my own volition because I would prefer to buy a really nice steak for the cost of the starter and spend the main, course dessert and tip on something else. But I understand why people might want to spend their money like that.

MaterDominici · « **Reply #8 on:** May 14, 2014, 09:51:26 PM »

Quote from: Nadir

Gluttony is eating too much, so it would depend on how much you ate.

I know you've already seen it, but for the sake of those following along, here is the correction to this:
http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=31743&min=5&num=5

Tiffany · « **Reply #9 on:** May 14, 2014, 10:21:52 PM »

Most people up in arms about a $200 burger probably don't think twice about the expense in taking a vacation if they have the money. Even a less expensive vacation cost gas or airfare, motels or camp ground fees while we have our own beds to sleep in.
I've seen in the SSPX literature and FSSP literature teens begging for sponsors for a trip to a Catholic shrine. If they are from poor families like they say in the "ad" wouldn't that $2000 be better spend helping the family perhaps pay their heating and cooling cost or car insurances? To me a teen still in high school traveling to Europe extravagant.

Matthew · « **Reply #10 on:** May 14, 2014, 11:08:29 PM »

Quote from: ggreg

The 250 dollars goes somewhere though. It pays for the suppliers of caviar, beef and staff wages and taxes and a bunch of other stuff.

What is the difference between a 250 burger and Hermes/Brioni neck Tie or Rolex Watch or piece of art?

I think there's a big difference.

The $250 "burger" is digested and turned into 1/6 pound of humanure -- best case scenario. A complete waste of 98% of that money.

The Rolex, expensive tie, or work of art could always be sold later for some good purpose -- you still have an asset. So you have less waste of that money. In fact, in some cases the asset might GAIN in value, so you'd actually have a net gain rather than any kind of loss.

But most importantly, you're not a glutton if you buy luxury goods. If you buy exquisite, expensive foods on the other hand, you're a glutton under the heading laute.

It's hard to claim St. Paul wasn't talking about you in Philippians chapter 3 ("[19] Whose end is destruction; whose God is their belly; and whose glory is in their shame; who mind earthly things.") when you sacrifice $250 for a really good hamburger.

And seriously -- if a person can't enjoy a delicious (all beef, flame grilled and seasoned) sit-down-restaurant burger for $9 instead, but just HAS TO HAVE that $250 burger -- what does that say about their self-control and level of mortification? Are you telling me that person is going to be able to say no to an attractive woman they haven't "experienced" yet? We all know -- or should know -- the close link between gluttony and lust.

As I've said countless times before, this life isn't a game. There are no save points, reset buttons, or do-overs. We all get ONE SHOT at saving our souls.

And no matter what conclusion we come to here on CathInfo, I can only say: Good luck with that. We all have to face the same Judge. If you want to explain away that $250 burger (or anything else like that), be my guest. I can't stop anyone really and I'm not going to try.

poche · « **Reply #11 on:** May 15, 2014, 12:58:24 AM »

Quote from: Matthew

Someone suggested that was Marxist.

WHAT?!

Have we become so American and capitalist that we've lost our Catholic, common sense minds?

I'm not saying that you can't eat at a restaurant as long as someone is struggling or going hungry. But a $250 hamburger? You're basically saying you don't know what to do with your money. You're admitting you have VAST amounts of wealth that God has entrusted you with, and you're treating it like you can spend it however you want.

(Yes, technically you can. But you can also technically decide to get a gun and shoot up a crowd. What God will think of it is another story!)

That's not Catholic. That might be extreme Capitalist, that might be American, but it's not Catholic.

God is going to ask for a strict account of ANY gifts He has given you -- that includes brains, talents, health, and WEALTH. Remember the parable of the Ten Talents.

We are stewards, not absolute masters.

Just because many Traditional Catholics are poor, and so many of us don't regularly distribute food to crowds doesn't mean we shouldn't do that if we became truly rich. Go read 150 different lives of the saints biographies, and we'll see if I'm wrong.

This idea of accountability is exactly what pope Francis was talking about when he speaks against selfishness and the worship of money.

Nadir · « **Reply #12 on:** May 15, 2014, 03:44:24 AM »

Quote from: MaterDominici

Quote from: Nadir
Gluttony is eating too much, so it would depend on how much you ate.

I know you've already seen it, but for the sake of those following along, here is the correction to this:
http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=31743&min=5&num=5

Thanks Mater, I think it worthwhile to post not only the link but the definition of gluttony.

Quote

Eating expensive food is one of the 5 forms of Gluttony: "Laute" exquisite or expensive.

http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Extravagance-compatible-with-Catholicism

There is more than one way to be gluttonous. The most popular way is "nimis" or eating too much -- filling your face until you puke.

But there are 5 forms of gluttony, which go under the abbreviation PLANS

Praepropere - outside normal mealtimes, or grazing like a cow
Laute - expensive, luxuriously
Ardenter - eating too eagerly/fast
Nimis - eating too much
Studiose - being picky or fastidious about food, how it's prepared, etc.

ggreg · « **Reply #13 on:** May 15, 2014, 04:15:08 AM »

Some of us have gas guzzling cars because we prefer the comfort, luxury, speed they offer. They burn more petrol, substantially more. I am sure there are a few men here who deliberately bought a larger engined car than they strictly needed. All modern cars will easily travel at the speed limit and then some.

We buy such cars because we enjoy them.

Why is it less Catholic to waste $200 say once every five years on a luxury meal as opposed to owning a V12 Jaguar and taking it for long pleasure drives in the country. Both involve needless waste.

A Rolex does not tell the time as accurately as a radio controlled digital watch which can be purchased for 40 dollars. As for the $100million dollar price of art, that is clearly a product of a few people possessing more money than they know what to do with.

The judgement call on the value of the burger versus the value or art or a Rolex is just that. Stuff is worth what people are prepared to pay for it.

Judged by the utility of the money otherwise and the good it might do, there are LOTS of things that are a waste of money. Heck, some people make their own laundry detergent. I prefer the unbridled luxury of buying mine at the princely sum of $15 for 90 washes.

Let's be frank. Nobody is gorging themselves on 200 dollar hamburgers. They are a marketing device by the restaurant which they sell occasionally and probably it is more rich wannabes rather than the genuinely rich that are buying them.

I completely agree that NEITHER are in the spirit of self-sacrifice or following the advice of Our Lady of Fatima, so in that sense neither are virtuous, but why is the 6 litre Jaguar or the $10,000 Rolex "less sinful" than the expensive burger?

Stubborn · « **Reply #14 on:** May 15, 2014, 06:50:19 AM »

It's all relative.

Spending $250 for a burger one time for a special occasion or maybe just a special treat for yourself if you've got that type of money to blow, is no worse than blowing a few hundred bucks for food and drinks and supplies or whatever for a party that is every bit as unnecessary as eating that burger. Or spending a few hundred every other month on beer and cigs or whatever else is equally unnecessary or a costly non-necessity.

To elaborate on what gregg said..........

I wasn't even in sales and I bought my share of +$500 lunches and diners when I was taking customers out, and I can tell you if I knew of a place that sold $250 burgers back then - or even more expensive ones - I would have taken my customers there at least once, possibly more than once - and why not?

The company I worked for gave me the green light to spend the money - and I can tell that you those lunches and diners that seemed expensive were nothing of the sort because they helped bring in literally millions of dollars worth of business - we had so much engineering work that our 150 employee company grew to over 400 employees in about a year, everyone was working a schedule of unlimited hours with overtime, double time and even triple time + bonuses and we were still understaffed - we even sent work out to other engineering firms. In the scheme of things, what seems like insanely expensive meals was nothing of the sort. It's all relative.

How about alcohol? Ever had Remy Martin Louis XIII Cognac @ $200 per shot? Never have I ever had anything better to drink ever in my entire life and I'll never forget that stuff till the day I die, I thought it was that good - the stuff is beyond amazing in every aspect IMO, but is it worth $200 per shot? Not today, not for most and not for me at least, but back then it served a very worthwhile purpose and was certainly well worth it - even at $200 per shot. Was it gluttony? - I don't see how it was and comparatively speaking, it makes a $250 burger seem cheap.

I do not see how a $250 burger is gluttony unless perhaps you obsess over having to have it or something like that. Far as that goes, some people would think spending $9 for a burger is a sin or $80 for a steak or $50,000 for a new car or $300,000 for a house or etc. I think it's all relative - after all, you can't take it with you, so give away what you can, save and spend what you can on what you want, if that be the occasional $250 burger, I think you're nuts, but so be it. After all is said and done, it's only money.

I think anyone who spends $250 for a burger is either rich enough to afford it, has money to blow or has the company expense account and just wants to try it, or is just stupid - maybe all of the above, but I just cannot understand how for the majority of people, it could be a form of gluttony.