Playing Monopoly

My 10 year-old son went off to camp today, where he'll be for four days. But this morning before he went, I promised him I'd play him in Monopoly, his favorite board game. The full game, an hour-and-a-half long. We put the game together, set the timer, and off we went.

Usually he beats the tar out of me. Seriously, he has this knack for rolling past my house-laden properties and lands on "Free Parking" way more than he should (yes, we play with that kitty in the middle). But today, I was the one getting the rolls he's always gotten.

About an hour into the game I'd already landed on "Free Parking" five times to his none (maybe John Rawls was right!) I'd bought four properties he couldn't afford, and at the height of my power I had hotels on each property of three different color groupings, three of the railroads and both utilities (hey, those guys can get you some sweet cash).

The notable thing is that because my son loves to play this game so much, I was extraordinarily charitable in order to sustain play. I give him thousand dollar discounts when he'd stay in my hotels. I even bought houses for him on his properties, two of which were Park Place and Boardwalk. At a few points I got a little nervous when I'd land on them and pay him a wad of cash, but he'd always come back around and land on my properties with the hotels, so I still dominated.

As I did so, I could only think of how this was such a metaphor for the way the Catholicist world really works. Very powerful and very scared rich people dominate the world, and in order to avoid running the little guy out of the game, they pay him off with the pittance of "charity." When the income tax went into effect in 1913, it was sold to the general public as a way to tax the rich, but those rich people found ways to "donate" much of their wealth to "worthy causes" setting up foundations that would be tax-exempt. This kept them rich and powerful and fearful. Those government sponsored privileges still do.

After the game I asked myself: Was I too manipulative in order to get him to keep thinking he was still in this thing? Should I have just said at the one-hour point, the game is over? Or, how about this question...

Should I have simply given up half my properties to him so at the end of the game we'd have had some semblance of an Acts 2 community?

The answer to this is not so easy, for while we want to work hard and accomplish great things to sustain a healthy relationship with those dear to us (Shalom Community!), we must confess that we do want to kick butt against bad things, even "bad people." Yes, I did want to kick the pants off my son--he wanted to do the same to me, and has done so frequently (during which he's done the "charity" thing too)! We all have a desire to excel and do good things, and competition fuels that. That's good.

I am convinced, however, that if followers of Christ got rid of their undue tax liabilities by becoming ungrafted to the state--essentially becoming unincorporated and abandoning their 501c3's--then we wouldn't have any fewer opportunities to kick butt for God. What we have going on today is too many stay in the "charity" of the exploiters because they think they'd get their butts kicked.

I can't see how. I mean...

God is our Father with all the power of the universe in His pinky finger.

How faithless can we be? Of course, Jesus wondered the very same thing.

What is the Catholicist Nation like? Look here.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Wonderful Matter of Authentic Understanding

The Rationale of an Excommunication

Suffering the Stupid Person