For the last couple of days I have been involved in an ongoing “discussion” on what some call compassion.
However, what some people see as compassion others I see as giving an eternal break. I vehemently oppose rather think it best to err on the side of caution when it comes to giving the practicing abuser (of anything, drugs, alcohol, people) chance after chance after chance to get their act together.
Well…. I suppose I would be more willing to give “multiple chances” if the abuser was an independent person. For example no spouse and especially no children involved. There comes a point where it is in the best interest of “third parties” to move on and too be cut free from such a poisonous life style.
I have see all to often persons SAY they will do such and such or even that they love their children but their actions don’t change. Still violant. Still abusing. I can HEAR what they are saying but they are SHOWING me something quite different. How many times is enough? How many months are enough? How many years are enough? I suppose that answer can only be answered by those dispensing “compassion” (aka, the enabler).
While I firmly believe that each person was created for a specific purpose I do not believe that if that same person decides, through repeated acts of their “free will” to live a self absorbed, self serving life style that they necessarily need to be “rescued” again and again. In fact in some circles that would be called “enabling”.
I believe that there comes a point where the (proverbial) line has to be drawn in the sand. If the abuser makes the choice to cross the (proverbial) line “the next time” then the abuser has made their choice. So called compassion in these cases are for naught.
There are only so many hours in any given week. There can be only so much money available. Each situation has to be evaluated too determine who gets the extra time and money. Will it be the “serial abuser” or will it be the innocent(s) tied to them?
I, for one, have determined that I will err on the side of the innocent(s).
This (whole saga) reminds me of a story in the Bible where Jesus the Christ (HIMSELF) sends his disciples on a journey. He tells them not to take anything with them. They will be cared for by those they tell of the Savior. Jesus ends His “dispatching orders” with some very condemning words for those who refuse to even listen to the messengers.
You can see the the story below. I’ve taken it from my PC program QuickVerse 6.0.
Additionally, I have put a link to Sanity’s blog if you care to look at “the battle.”
Those Who Reject the Message
Those who rejected the twelve and their message were rejecting Christ Himself. People today are faced with this choice. They accept or reject. Those not for Christ and open to His message are against Him. There are those who, rejecting the messenger, consider this not rejection of Christ but only rejection of a person. Christ told the twelve that to those who reject you (the messengers) “when you go out of that city, shake off the very dust from your feet as a testimony against them.” (verse 5). In Biblical times, the Jews, upon their return to Jewish soil, would shake the dust off their feet as they left Gentile soil as a symbol that they had broken all communion with Gentile people. Therefore, Christ’s instructions to the disciples to “shake off the very dust from your feet as a testimony against them” would be a solemn judgment on the people of the unresponsive town. In this instance, as well as in the parable of the “sower,” we learn that as messengers we have the responsibility to “proclaim,” not to determine whether one is going to be receptive or not.