Mutatis mutandis, if the Zurich legislation were active today, people who were poor because they were lazy, alcoholics, drug abusers, and the like would be left in their condition because it was self elected. On the other hand, if someone lost their house or job because of medical problems, disasters, etc., such would be permitted the reception of aid.
In the words of a famous song, “oh for the good old days…”
This is cold and heartless at best. In sweeping generalizations, it sounds like is electing himself God and judging very unrighteously, thereby excusing himself from action in behalf of the poor. I'm not having fun anymore. Years ago I wrote an article for the New Life Zoa Free Paper in which I suggested that churches were defacto accusing many people of having commited the sin against the Holy Spirit simply by virtue of their being 'societal losers' ("lazy, alcoholics, drug abusers, and the like"). This is why Bill W. of AA had to stop meeting with the Oxford Group and instead form AA. Forget that Jesus ever said "The son of man came to seek and save that which was lost." Clearly (to some folks' way of thinking) he meant lost souls with a disposition toward being the elect. I'll never stop believing that Jesus is for losers, and in God's ability to change the people we'd least expect. Maybe even self-righteous church folk who don't need a suffering Servant!
([11/1/06] I did some editing to this post. I like Jim and keep frequenting his blog. I agree with Richard that this was (hopefully) tongue in cheek.)
Tags:
No comments:
Post a Comment