Lust and Greed
Now that I have your attention, read this very interesting essay in the Tablet. (HT Wolcott) Here’s a taste:
Instead of men kneeling in confessionals admitting to lust, maybe they should be encouraged to regard greed, which was bottom of the male list, as a more devastating and destructive sin. In this respect, it is interesting to note that Pope Benedict has recently suggested that there is a close connection between original sin and the greed that has created the current economic crisis. It is also notable that the credit crunch has been created by a profession that is almost exclusively male. In the line-up of failed bankers, not a single woman’s name has appeared. Male greed has proven to be a murderous sin, destroying the livelihoods of millions, bringing down economies and social institutions and threatening starvation to the most vulnerable people on earth. Recent research at Cambridge University has revealed a connection between men’s behaviour on the trading floors and their testosterone levels. Men with high testosterone levels are more willing to take financial risks, and that risk-taking boosts their testosterone levels even higher. The global economic crisis may be the result of a testosterone tornado sweeping through the banking world. There is also mounting evidence that business productivity and efficiency increase when women are involved in management and decision-making, and it has long been recognised by aid agencies that women invest money more responsibly, implement development projects more effectively and are more likely to yield a return on the investment than men. Many surveys have also shown that women in all societies tend to work longer hours than men, which is perhaps why “sloth” is not high on the list of women’s sins.
And, apropos of my post on FOCA from a while back, I also liked this line:
Although the Catholic Church has since the Second Vatican Council been pragmatically pacifist in its consistent refusal to endorse war as a solution to conflict, the Church is still far more widely known for its moral absolutism on sexual issues than for its opposition to violence. That is partly because of distorted media reporting, but it is also because of the frequency with which the hierarchy pronounces on issues of sex and reproduction. Yet as we all know, Catholic social teaching has much more to offer. It offers a rich resource for condemning unjust social and economic structures and creating a more life-giving vision of society.
Catholics have a lot to offer on issues other than abortion, homosexuality, and stem cells. If we can’t all see eye to eye on these issues, can’t we at least agree to walk and chew gum at the same time?
See Eduardo Porter on bankers’ bonuses in today’s NYT:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/09/opinion/09mon4.html?ref=todayspaper
He likens them to bull elephant seals who put on more and more flesh for competitive reasons, and while that may work with the female of the species, it puts them at a decided disadvantage when the great white shark appears.
Nature imitates art, or is it the other way round?
Greed is at far down men’s lists, because they do not have enough awareness of it (“maybe they should be encouraged to regard greed as a more devastating sin”), while sloth is far down women’s lists, because they do not suffer much from sloth (“women tend to work longer hours than men, which is perhaps why “sloth” is not high on the list of women’s sins”).
Do I sense a biased interpretation?
“A recent study revealed that when men are shown pictures of scantily dressed women the same part of their brain is triggered into action as when they are preparing to use power tools.”
Sorry, this is just too hilarious to let pass without notice. Of course, judging by the calendars that have been hanging on shop floors for decades, the manufacturers of power tools have long been aware of this connection …
When I was still working, I preferred doing business with women. Some of the reasons were that women filter less than men and women bring less emotional baggage with them to work than men do. It makes negotiating with them quicker, clearer and more effective.
All of the deadly sins seem to fit under a shade of pride except for sloth. I have heard sloth
called the zombie sin. It refuses to accept responsibility.
What follows is not an attempt to whitewash financial greedheads. I’m the first to stipulate that (literally) unregulated greed is at least partly responsible for the current economic collapse.
In lists of the seven deadly sins, “greed” is sometimes listed as “averice” or “covetousness”. In some ways I prefer the latter two words because they convey (to my mind, anyway) the notion of excessive acquiring and then hoarding.
Not having thought about the seven deadly sins for quite some time, I recalled that each sin is often paired with a corresponding virtue, but I was a little rusty on which went with which. The essay seems to suggest that unbalanced male tendencies and urges were responsible for the economy cratering, so I speculated that perhaps moderation/temperance would be paired with greed. i.e. if only unbalanced, out-of-control men had kept their rampant desires in check, we wouldn’t be in this mess. (One could see the discredited mortgage banker grasping at this straw: “it wasn’t my fault! Aftrer I made the first ten million, I got this tremendous adrenaline rush, and my male hormones took control!”)
But it turns out that the virtue that traditionally corresponds to greed is charity/generosity. Taking a moment to ponder this, it seems that this traditional wisdom suggests quite a different dynamic than the essayist seems to have in mind. I would synthesize it like this: it is not (necessarily) a sin to grow wealthy. In fact, in the modern economy, it is possible for a virtuous person to acquire wealth without trampling the poor. Surely this is a reason that top medical schools always have long lists of applicants. Indeed, a due application of one’s talents and industriousness can lead to quite a comfortable, or even comfier-than-comfortable, standard of living. And for some lucky few who are in the right place at the right time, it may even result in the generation of prodigous amounts of personal wealth. But then, it seems that what financially blessed people do with their wealth is the critical test. The Gospel couldn’t be plainer that they should give it to the poor.
The seven deadly sins/greed/men v. women story has been making the rounds. Didn’t I read somewhere that in Iceland (or one of the Scandinavian countries) male bankers had been replaced with females b/c people perceived them to be less personally greedy.
I dunno.
I’ve known a lot of greedy women. I’ve known a lot of slothful women. One of them may be sitting here wasting a good part of her spring break making only marginally interesting comments on Internet blogs.
Jim’s point re greed v. charity is an interesting one. My conservative friends believe that disposing of wealth by creating jobs with livable wages is indeed a charitable thing to do. Ditto those who amass wealth and use the bulk of it to endow a good cause when they die.
The Seven Virtues, I believe, are:
Courage
Purity
Humility
Honesty
Diligence
Charity
Fidelity
The monastic tradition lists eight destructive thoughts or preoccupations that can lead to destructive behavior. They are: food (gluttony), sex, things (including money), anger, dejection, acedia, vainglory and pride. In the 6th century Pope Gregory the Great turned this tradition of eight destructive thoughts into the seven deadly sins. He combined vainglory and pride. There are also corresponding virtues. I think it was unfortunate that Gregory did this because the dynamic of temptation is no longer understood or considered. Now people often feel guilty even before they have consented to sin. We are not responsible for the thoughts we have. We are responsible for dwelling on them. Mary Margaret Funk, OSB gives a very good outline of how thoughts and temptation work together by listing the steps of temptation in John Climacus’ “The Ladder of Divine Assent”.
“The proper object of revelation of thoughts is the first stage of this process of temptation: the suggestion. I must crush the serpent’s head as soon as it rises. The entire strategy includes: vigilance, watchfulness of thoughts, guarding the mind, prayer, especially the invocation of the name of Jesus, and so forth.
“John Climacus in his famous ‘The Ladder of Divine Assent’ reports the distinctions that were already hallowed long before his time (579-649).
“The progression of thoughts is as follows:
“1. Provocation – thoughts rising, simply rising
“2. Coupling with dialogue – an interactive phase
“3. Assent – moving along the possibility
“4. Captivity – fascination with the idea of doing it
“5. Struggle – and finally, perhaps, consent
“6. Passion – the full pattern linked into the yoke of evil.”
There’s lots of list of virtues. My favorite seven are prudence, fortitude, temperance, and justice (these known by Aristotle and developed by the pagans) and faith, hope and charity (brought to us through divine revelation). Aside from thousands of years of good commentary on how they relate to the good life, they have an additional characteristic in that also have to be unified. No points given for financial types who follow everything but justice, which is the virtue that I think is actually most relevant to this thread.
The virtues are also transcendent in their unity; they apply at all times. There is none of this nonsense of bracketing out economic life and constructing a special virtue of “justice” around it which is one the the main ways that capitalism hides power relationships. In our system, the just reward for the bank executive comes from a combination of what the “market” says coupled with the executive’s own self appraisal of his financial value. If these two things look too weak an unstable to support a theory of greed, you are correct.
Yet we talk as though the difference between a greedy person and a righteous person in business can be measured in terms of how many inches one’s snout is actually in the trough.
Moral theologians talk about gravity of matter with reference to mortal or venial sins. Sexual sins are the only ones that are always grave in this line of thought. Yet Jesus spoke of greed many times more than of adultery. And when he spoke of it he noted that women were treated more unfairly than men for that sin. Something the “Fathers of the Church” seemed to ignore.
With greed we speak of whether one is detached or not. With sex the very thought can catapult one into hell. David, of course, was nasty when he placed the husband of his lover on the front line to be killed. But, otherwise, greed has dominated as the cause of human misery. Which makes your point all the more ad rem, Eduardo.
How about a hundred more on the topic. That will at least approach you know what.
Unlike sins related to sexuality, isn’t it simply easier to rationalize avarice or greed away?
Where is the bright line morally?
A few thoughts:
-”avarice” is a much softer word than greed.(And even as Gordon G. pronounced, “greed is good.”)
-if the point of morality is to reconnect us to a spirituality grounded in virtuous life, then U.”s seven virtues requitre special attention for us to focus on and walk together toward.
-male/female stereotyping may be catchy, but it really misses the heart of the discussion.
If greed is good, would that make avarice awesome?