Priest Tells Poor To Shoplift

Father Tim Jones has said to hell with the 8th commandment and advised the poor in his church to shoplift if they can't afford to feed their families. He said, "My advice, as a Christian priest, is to shoplift. I do not offer such advice because I think that stealing is a good thing, or because I think it is harmless, for it is neither. I would ask that they do not steal from small family businesses but from large, national businesses, knowing that the costs are ultimately passed on to the rest of us in the form of higher prices. I would ask them not to take any more than they need, for any longer than they need.I offer the advice with a heavy heart and wish society would recognize that bureaucratic ineptitude and systematic delay has created an invitation and incentive to crime for people struggling to cope." Of course, church leaders, business owners, and the police strongly disagree with the father's moral relativism.

Comments

huh?

[nomadic]

I don't think that qualifies as moral relativism; the guy seems to be basically saying stealing is wrong, but not as wrong as letting your family starve. Of course slashdot is a very strongly capital L Libertarian viewpoint so I'm sure if anyone else responds to this story they'll be a lot more disapproving.

Re:huh?

[jellomizer]

Churches do as much as they can... However it isn't enough overall. A wealthy church normally brings in about $6,000 a week/ roughly about $300,000 a year.

About $100,000 a year goes to paying the mortgage on the church and the priest home (which they share with an other priest) and the office.

Roughly about $5,000 goes to utilities.

About $45,000 goes to underpaid staff.

That brings us to $150,000

The priests salary for 2 $50,000

Maintenance and upkeep $50,000

That leaves about $50,000 for charitable works. So say there are 100 people who are in need... that leaves $500.00 a year per family. To feed 1 person it would be $25 per week making that $1300.0 per person per year in need. Leaving a gap of $800 that the person still needs.

Plus there are more charities then just feeding people... Including health, and wellness, and social issues the church believes to be important.

That is for a wealthy church. A lot of others make due with a lot less.

Re:huh?

[Anonymous Coward]

And the nuns did what with it? Bought recliners and PS3s?

Or did it maybe feed and keep the missions running where the nuns were? The nuns who were, you know, helping the poor?

Money that supported the nuns indirectly supports the missions they're on. It's not like the administrative costs that eat 85% of your donation to the Red Cross.

Re:huh?

[Rob the Bold]

If "x is wrong, but isn't as wrong as y" doesn't qualify as moral relativism, I'm not sure what would, precisely.

I don't think that term means what you think it means. It's not saying that, morally speaking, X is "relatively" worse than Y. It's more along the lines of saying that there isn't an absolute morality. For instance, Person A might disagree with Person B as to whether action X is moral or not: it's not Person A's "relative" judgment about X vs. Y. There's a Wikipedia entry on Moral Relativism.