Doing It, Anyway

In political and belief-related discussion, people will often refuse to give charity to another person when, truly, the other person is not giving it to them. One can definitely feel hard done by if one is willing to play fair and the other person isn't.

Truth is, people on every side of every discussion I've ever seen have done the 'bad' thing and some the fair and charitable thing. There is capacity for chivalrous, honourable types on any side. This is, I think, to completely confound us as to whether our side is the Nobler side or not. It is very fair and right that God should put this stumblingblock before our pride and hubris.

But my real point is, we should not give up on doing the right thing (like washing the dishes) just because we can say, truthfully, that the other person didn't do it the last ten times and we did (o, what a martyr). And yes, if we do the honourable thing, people may, probably someone out there will, take advantage of that. And why on earth should that matter? In old Christian times, it would be considered a blessing to be taught what being a servant like Christ was, yet again. And it would be very worthwhile for us nowadays to discuss if that is a good thing, or if that is 'abuse.' (Didn't Christ turn everything on its head?)

When I was a child, there were times when someone would refuse to do a thing that would turn everything for the better because someone else, perhaps everyone else, was not doing it. Say, they wouldn't pick up their room because nobody else was. And thus, because nobody initiated the thing, it never happened because everyone was using that same justification for not doing the thing. When people who claimed this was 'logical' argued this way, I was mentally confounded because it doesn't make sense to use others' not doing the thing as reason not to do it oneself... what if they used the exact same argument! It seemed like a strange kind of loop-de-loop of insanity, like the world was imploding.

And the truth is, in ye olde timey ways of looking at things, if one is not willing to do the fair, right, and/or charitable thing themselves, it proves that one does not really care that it be done (and one cannot expect it to be done to oneself, in all fairness). The one true thing it shows is where one's own heart is. I wish we did take this seriously nowadays- if we wished enough for a thing, we would do it. But modern pop psychology teaches us constantly to defend our own 'honour' by claiming our intentions are always good and we never neglect doing the right thing except if we are forced.

This 'rule' of doing the thing even if others aren't applies in such deep, subtle ways. Deep in my secret heart, I am often softly neglecting it so that I can do what I want. It is extremely convenient because there is almost always someone who isn't doing the 'right thing.' And the trouble is, there is no way I can persuade anyone to do this based on 'it will go well with you' because there is absolutely no guarantee that evident good will come of it, especially in the short term. I personally believe that good does come, but it is not always something that appears to favour us, because 'good' is not always what we want it to be (a whole other lost concept, I think). And just because a part of me believes this does not mean I act on it.