J
JRKH
Guest
A strong suspicion is not knowledge…and a homeless person who “reeks” whether of alcohol or whatever - could do so simply because of where he has been.But isn’t giving money (instead of food or clothing) to a homeless person whom we strongly suspect to be a drug addict/alcoholic immoral on our part? For instance, if the person already reeks of alcohol.
The addiction is probably a big part of why that person is on the street in the first place.
Not saying that “Strong suspicions” aren’t valid…Just that they should be kept in check.
Note that in my post I said “If there is sin involved it is theirs”. Only God can judge culpability and the only culpability we can have any control over is our own.And if someone has become homeless as a result of chasing that high, he or she probably has little to no self control. In my mind, giving money to someone in that state is like handing a knife to a toddler…there’s very little chance of a good outcome. I’m not sure you can just say “well, if they make the wrong choice then it’s their sin” when it’s very easy to argue that person has a severely diminished capacity to make good choices with money.
It is impossible to generalize on these things…because each person - each case is unique. The only thing that we can do is to look at and consider the different perspectives, pray on the matter, and then follow out conscience as best we can.
I’m sorry, JRKH, but in all charity I think you’ve mis-applied that teaching from Christ. Let’s look at the full context:
“You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your coat also. Whoever forces you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to him who asks of you, and do not turn away from him who wants to borrow from you.”
No need to be sorry…I’m no expert and make no claim as such.Isn’t Jesus teaching us not to seek revenge for personal wrongs? If, as you claim, we have no responsibility to resist evil, then why does the CCC tell us that self-defense (on a personal or even a national level in the case of the Just War Doctrine) can be legitimate - and in fact, defense of others is required in certain cases?
This section of Matthew’s Gospel is jam packed with teaching. Chapters 5, 6, 7 are all a part of the “Sermon on the Mount” and there is a lot of material covered. I don’t know that we can necessarily draw a great deal of connection between the start and end of the quoted section. I’m not saying that it isn’t all interconnected, but I’m not so sure that it is in a “restricting” way. If anything the entire Chapter is intended to open up the mind to greater giving, greater forgiveness and greater grace.
I don’t think that Christ expects us to apply “common sense” to anything. That which is “common” is often times not especially Christian. If we look just a little further in the passage we find that God does not discriminate:Doesn’t Christ expect us to use our common sense when we apply the teaching you presented above?
43 "You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you salute only your brethren, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? 48 You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
He makes it rain on the Just and the unjust equally…and then Jesus tells us to exceed what “common sense” might tell us and to be “Perfect as your heavenly father is perfect”…
Not sure how we do that…But there is the goal and it can’t be reached by applying “common” sense.
Of course I know you mean something more than simple “worldly” common sense and in that you are right. But applying a more Christ like form of common sense is often seen as “foolishness” to those in the world. So we need to try to apply things as Christ would have us do…
None of this is easy to know…
Consider this totally unlikely hypothetical situation: Let’s say you were walking down the street past an abortion clinic, when a visibly pregnant woman with tears in her eyes stops you and asks to borrow $1000. Given the circumstances, shouldn’t we at least ask what she plans to do with that money? And if she can’t produce a convincing response that doesn’t involve killing her child, shouldn’t we refuse? If the teaching above really just means, “don’t resist evil, period”…does that mean we should help the woman even if she admits she wants an abortion? Surely not.
Well the simple answer is “I don’t have a $1000 so that takes care of that…Again, that’s kind of a ridiculous example…but sometimes looking at extreme cases helps to put normal cases in perspective.
I don’t necessarily mind ridiculous examples. I agree they can put some things into perspective.
In the example above though there is clearly an innocent third party involved which changes the dynamic considerably.
No offense is taken my friend…No offense intended to you, JRKH. Just trying to examine this teaching in more detail. :hug3:
Peace
James