Compassion: A 14-Day Journeyનમૂનો

Compassion for the Disabled
David's generosity to Jonathon's son doesn't really surprise us. But his action must have been radical in his own time: (1) Any survivor of an earlier regime would have been considered a lifelong threat. (2) The disabled Mephibosheth was a self-proclaimed "dead dog" (2Sa 9:8)--in his own culturally based estimation, he was less than worthless. The status of a live dog in Israelite society is clear from Ecclesiastes 9:4: "Anyone who is among the living has hope even a live dog is better than a dead lion".
Before we congratulate ourselves on our own enlightened civility, we do well to acknowledge that modern humans don't have an enviable track record either. There are, of course, many exceptions, and it may well be true that Christians are leading the way. John Nunes, pastor, theologian, and president of a denominational relief agency, points to Psalm 41:1 as a beatitude of brotherly love.

Blessed is he who has regard for the weak. In any society, there will be those who are too weak to make it, those who aren't strong or resilient enough, those who aren't skilled or tough-willed, and those who lack the right stuff or the right connections. Such individuals often are marginalized. We see, all too clearly, where they stand. The question is, Where do we stand? Do we stand with them?

This author points out elsewhere that how we live together and how we preserve the inherent holiness of human life is fundamental to our confession of faith. It is also a bottom-line principle of diversity, treating some people as ostensibly dispensable is contrary to the will of God.
The following are excerpts from evangelical leader Charles Colson on this issue:

Nearly every young couple having a baby today receives information about the potential health care needs of their unborn child. Ultrasounds, amniocentesis, and other tests are informing parents of a growing list of medical conditions, some 450 at this writing in their unborn children. Doctors are afraid not to perform such tests lest they face suits for not fully informing parents of an unborn child's medical problems while the unborn child may still be aborted.

That's really at the heart of the issue in the raging global debate over embryonic stem cell research. An embryo, after all, is a life. If we can take a life that isn't worth living, then why shouldn't we use those embryos to find cures for the most feared diseases Americans experience. But if it's okay to take the embryo, why should we not use the body parts of a disabled infant who would otherwise be killed? Why waste them? Wouldn't we be contributing to the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people, maximizing human pleasure by helping people to achieve a better quality of life? The logic is precisely the same.