Skip to comments.LDS bishop dresses as homeless man to teach lesson
Posted on 11/30/2013 6:11:33 AM PST by Morgana
TAYLORSVILLE, Utah -
Members of a Mormon congregation in a Salt Lake City suburb encountered someone they thought was a homeless man at church on Sunday. What they did not know was the man was a bishop for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
(Excerpt) Read more at myfoxdc.com ...
I would have said, “hi” to him because of the porkchop sideburns.
Teaching us what will become of all Christians and gun-owners in America within the next 3 years?
The first Christians held Mass in the catacombs in Rome. If they were caught they became a permanent resident with the rest of the dead.
But no I was referring to what Jesus said about clothing the naked, feeding the hungry, et cetera. Something about if you do this to the least of my brethren you do this to me. What this bishop did, posing as a homeless man, it's been tried before by other preachers. Each time got the same outcome. Some were kind, some indifferent, some hostile. Does not matter which church it happens in it is wrong wrong wrong behavior!
Maybe it’s different there in Salt Lake, but, I find I am accosted and confronted with “homeless” every day, who seem to be mentally ill, on drugs, or have some “issues” that I can’t solve. It does no good to give them money, make eye contact, or try to deal with them one on one as “civilized”. People on the streets are generally there because they have issues which are beyond our capacity as ordinary citizens to deal with.
This lesson is lost on me, sorry. Flame away. I see no benefit from shaming all of us to be kind to mentally ill people in this manner. And, to be further politically incorrect, some “homeless” are prone to violence. It’s not worth risk to your personal safety to act on this otherwise good message from Jesus. Not in today’s world, in my opinion.
Flame away, I know I just offended a number of people with being so judgemental.
Does not matter which church it happens in it is wrong wrong wrong behavior!
Any church, no church.
I think it is entirely relevant to compare what it means to be poor in our world to that of Christ.
In His time, the poor were by definition and necessity a large majority of the population. The economy was just not productive enough to support everybody at a decent level, especially once the elite had taken their cut off the top. And back then the elite definitely got their cut first.
There was also most definitely nothing even vaguely resembling a welfare state. With all its flaws the WS has eliminated a great deal of human suffering.
I’m not even entirely sure what “dressed like a homeless person” even means necessarily. I recently spent an hour at the local Salvation Army on Half-Off Wednesday. Got a very nice almost brand new business casual pants and shirt outfit, probably well over $100 new, for $5. Men’s shoes are harder to find, and I don’t buy socks or underwear there, but if you’re lucky you can be completely outfitted in entirely respectable clothing for well under $20.
As far as employment goes, any employer will tell you that the vast majority of entry-level employees remain such because they are one or more of: stupid, bad attitude, don’t show up, rude, not clean, etc.
An employee, regardless of the level he is hired at, who is hard-working, respectful, good attitude and honest will in my admittedly somewhat limited experience not remain entry level for more than a few weeks. In our society, people actually willing to work are too rare.
I say this as someone who started at 16 in what most people would consider the very bottom level dead-end job in our country and presently do quite well.
It seems to be that we can best apply Jesus’ lesson on helping the poor, etc. through organized programs and organizations, such as the Salvation Army or other charities. Not through one on one attempts to help people who probably have issues that you and I can’t deal with.
Flame away, I know I just offended a number of people with being so judgemental.
I don,t think they pose much danger in Church unless there are just women and children in the church.
But it is not about the obvious homeless, it is about any one who might need a helping hand or just a friend.
Why is this a news article?
Christian churches has done this for decades and never had news articles written about them.
It seems to be that we can best apply Jesus lesson on helping the poor, etc. through organized programs and organizations,
Like the story of the good Samaritan, we could drive fifty miles to the nearest town and tell the red cross that a man was freezing to death back down the road fifty miles.
But i believe Jesus would want us to at least take him in to town.
When I am approached, I am willing to do many things for beggars except hand them money (I will make an exception for the clearly handicapped). I have bought groceries or gasoline for some, arranged work for others. The “professional” beggars aren’t interested in anything but cash to feed their habits. But those who are truly “down on their luck” are thankful to be handed food or be given some chores to do for which I will pay them.
IMO, this is a biblical way to treat these situations.
Sadly, in today’s world, it’s hard to do what you suggest.
Would you really take a random stranger into your car, or your home, to help them?
If you would I commend your efforts. Personally, I would fear for my personal safety to do so in today’s world.
Bishop Diogenes of Salt Lake City, eh?
SO committing fraud on your parishioners is now a lesson? seriously?
The Roman Empire did, for a time at least, have the corn dole which became the grain dole. It was sort of like a welfare program - in a way.
Let’s be clear what the Roman Empire corn dole was and was not.
For one thing, it started long before the Empire, with the Republic providing free or reduced-price grain to citizens of Rome. It was not a poverty program, it was a perk of being a citizen.
It never applied to anybody outside Rome, or possibly one of the other capitals later in the Empire. It was more of a perk for a member of the elite than something to help the poor. (Citizens of Rome were memebers of the elite even if dirt-poor. BTW, what constituted being “poor” may have been a little distorted. Several late-Republic and early-Empire writers defined it as being unable to afford more than one or two slaves.)
Under the Republic the dole, which was often expanded beyond corn, was a way of bribing the voters, the Roman citizens, to vote for the politicians providing it. The pols then looted the state when in power to repay themselves. Under the Empire it was a means of preventing riots, which could and did bring down Emperors.
The poor of the rest of the Empire (95%+) thus largely paid for the dole which went in large extent to non-poor, sometime wealthy, residents of Rome.
BTW, most other really large cities of the classical world had similar programs. This was probably because the primitive long-distance transport of the period meant that importing sufficient food to feed the massive populations Rome, Constantinople or Alexandria could not be done on free-market principles. The cost per unit would have meant much of the population would have been unable to afford to eat, which meant they would move away and the city would lose population.
So the State took over the basic food supply. Not to “help the poor,” never a particularly high priority for ancient rulers, but to maintain the State’s population and prestige.
So my contention is that the Roman corn dole had almost nothing in common with today’s welfare state or food stamps.
I changed your post a bit...
“Maybe its different there in The District of Columbia, but, I find I am accosted and confronted with politicians every day, who seem to be mentally ill, on drugs, or have some issues that I cant solve. It does no good to give them money, make eye contact, or try to deal with them one on one as civilized. Politicians on Capital Hill are generally there because they have issues which are beyond our capacity as ordinary citizens to deal with.”
“This lesson is lost on me, sorry. Flame away. I see no benefit from shaming all of us to be kind to mentally ill politicians in this manner. And, to be further politically incorrect, some politicians are prone to violence. Its not worth risk to your personal safety to act on this otherwise good message from Jesus. Not in todays world, in my opinion.”
“Flame away, I know I just offended a number of people with being so judgemental.”
Hey, I like your version of what I said, but applied to politicians. I think the same reasoning applies to the politicos in Washington DC.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.