Skip to main content

a vow of poverty

 



I’ve taken to myself the resolve to live a life towards myself as one of poverty. I am not a monk, but have the desire to follow in the path of the monk to make vows of poverty. Of course, for me, a vow of poverty will not mean the same thing - not being Roman Catholic, nor a monk. What then is a vow of poverty like for a person who has neither taken formal vows nor part of a formal religious order? 


I mean by this vow: to live simply. 


The first way to appropriate this vow is to refrain from debt as debt is often a sign that one is living beyond one’s means. 


However, I must allow some room in this principle for living arrangements. If I were in a monastery as a monk I would surely have a place to live, how meager it may be, and thus I would have no housing expenses and so would be able to maintain a debt-free living situation. But I do not live in a monastery as a monk, and prudence would lead me to the conclusion that I must have housing for my family as I have a duty to provide for their basic needs, lest I be accused of not providing for my own. This significant actual difference and moral necessity allows me to justify securing a mortgage in regards to living arrangements, though this debt must be limited to what can be reasonably afforded in relationship to our income and a reasonable amount of time to repay the debt. 


Housing debt is often referred to as “secured” debt given that the house is, theoretically, as valuable as the maximum amount of the mortgage. If I were to come upon a situation where we were not able to make good on the mortgage’s demands, then we would likely be able to sell the house in order to pay the debt in full. However, once I make a payment on the mortgage, my share of equity increases and my liability decreases. This places me in a position of positive ownership and leads me to the conclusion that housing debt, reasonably secured, is permissible even living in a “debt free” manner. Eventually, after paying for the housing a significant expense will be released and would free us to live in a way that might benefit more people than we would normally be able to benefit. 


A reasonably afforded house is one where the housing liability is, at most, 30% of our annual living expenses. In addition, I believe that I ought to have at minimum 10% equity in the home from the very beginning of the mortgage agreement. In addition, I will pay the minimum amount of interest as possible by paying off the debt in fifteen years. By taking these steps to secure safe and modest living accommodations I will live the way of simplicity.


Living with a vow of poverty means living simply in such a way as to live unattached from the forces of commercial society so that my identity is neither found being wrapped up into commercial interests nor being peddled along by social approval and systems of social rank disingenuously determined by material possession. This principle of detachment from commercial and socially contrived economic interests means that I will maintain simple and frugal arrangements regarding clothing, transportation, hobbies, dining, vacationing, groceries, recreation, gadgets and technology, and gift giving. Here it makes little practical sense to ascribe monetary limits to these sorts of purchases and transactions; instead the spirit of the vow rests on an attitude of detachment and an attitude of gratitude. The monk who wears fine clothing, expensive jewelry, and drives luxurious automobiles seems to most, if not to all, to be a contradiction in vocation. One would expect a successful businessperson with wealth in excess to behave in a manner given to opulence, but certainly not one devoted to a life of simplicity and poverty. 


Will this mean that I always purchase the cheapest and most generic forms of clothing? This cannot be the most prudent solution given that things that are poorly made are generally less expensive, though not always the case. If a shirt costs $10, but will only last a couple of years due to lack of quality in fabric, then it would make sense to purchase the $25 shirt that will last five years for certain (under typical circumstances). In addition, luxurious brands whose products reflect the luxurious price scale will most certainly not be a judicious purchase given that there is no guarantee that the product will be able to see its full use for fear of ruin or blemish. The point here is that simply because it is the cheapest of the lot doesn’t guarantee that it is the most prudent purchase. Better to make informed decisions that include not only cost but also quality, customer opinion, and sturdy reputation.


To take a vow of poverty includes the simplicity of purchasing goods and services that fill real and necessary needs. In my life, I do not need much. I need housing, I need food and drink, I need safety, I need access to health care, I need transportation, I need recreation, I need clothing, I need, by prudence and law, various insurances, I need emergency "rainy day" funds, I need communication (phone, internet, computer), I need means of intellectual stimulation (books and other relevant media). 


Food and Drink

I need water. I want coffee. I want soda. I want beer. I want wine. I want liquor. I want flavored beverages. I will limit to water and one other option daily.




Popular posts from this blog

A response to my beloved mother: part 2

READ THIS POST FIRST MY MOTHER : "I'm a registered Conservative, but my vote counted since they endorsed McCain, so I guess it all depends on who the Libertarian's endorse, and even if it were someone difference, at least you would have had a part in voting for the "most" righteous candidate, and McCain was the one even though he's still not the Christian ideal! Remember, Bill Clinton was a "pro-choice" candidate as well as one who furthered the homosexual agenda, so it wasn't surprising to me that 9/11 happened after his term was up and it's not surprising that the economy is faltering so badly now, and it won't surprise me if Obama continues the downward spiral, even if it is into socialistic policies since that's how Europe has gone since they left off looking to God. It doesn't matter what the rest of the world is doing since the majority have been anti-God for so long and their nations have paid for that for centuries (Dark...

I don't have all the answers, but I do have two cents.

My friend and fellow recovering ex-fundamentalist , I greet you joyously knowing the freedom you have found in leaving fundamentalism, however I am saddened by your departure as a whole from our Lord. I indeed understand the hardship which you have faced is cause for questioning God’s existence, faithfulness, and love to his creation. I would like to respond to you because I feel like I understand your socio-religious background. Let me first tell you my goal is not to re-convert you, but rather to give you a second thought from one who grew up in similar roots, whose posture of faith remains bent toward the gospel. I also grew up in ultra-conservative fundamentalism. If names like Peter Ruckman, Jack Hyles, Arlin Horton, etc, mean anything to you than you will understand. I graduated from PCC. OMG. I cannot believe it, but it’s true. What a crazy place. Fear, guilt, shame, legalism were the name of the game! As long as you “caught the spirit” all of life would be good and God would b...

The Intolerance of Presbyterian Creeds

The bind between American political allegiance and Protestant evangelical conservatism is a key which unlocks the door of much early American civil history especially during the antebellum era through the early 20th century. To be conservative and American meant that you must regard a Protestant form of Christianity, namely the revivalistic, moral gospel which declared a morally conservative view of the socio-political system as king. In fact, not to be Protestant and politically conservative was in line with defaming the stars and stripes. Hart describes a situation in the early 20th century where the state of Utah elected and appointed a Mormon Apostle, Reed Smoot, to the U.S. Senate. Smoot underwent serious investigation from a Senate appointed committee to deliberate upon the ability of a Mormon to function in the place of a Senator given his religious views. The conservative Protestant ethos of the age was skeptical of any other religious conviction in its ability to be “American”...