Another member on stated this recently:
People who are well-meaning and good-hearted are more likely to be tricked, more likely to be deceived, and are more likely to be trusted inordinately when the fact of the matter is that nearly everyone, nice or not, is subject to temptations.
Its not important who stated it, I just wanted to discuss it more.
I completely disagree with this statement. Actually, I'll take it a step further, I don't only disagree, but I would argue that someone who is prone to a negative outlook in life and about people, would hold this type of view. Remember, simplicity does not equal stupidity; nor does innocence. This is a false teaching of the modern world. That one who is innocent is stupid and, therefore, more likely to be deceived.
I would say I'm passionate about this because I like to think that I'm a well-meaning and good hearted person. I know I'm not stupid, nor am I likely to be deceived more than the next person. If anything, my good-willed nature tends to fool others to thinking they can deceive me, when, in fact, I'm well aware of my situation and surroundings.
I can see where the poster is coming from, since in certain instances, such as a child following parents into sin out of simplicity, a well-meaning and simple person can definitely be led into sin. Then again, a so-called experienced and street-smart person who believes he is privy to the subtleties of others' schemes and implications, &c., can also be deceived by his own pride into assuming dishonesty or a lack of generosity in others (which is, in fact, merely a reflection of his own guile). Thus, when treating individual cases, the sword is double-sided. In general, however, if one is of upright heart and is simple, yet also courageous, one will be able to avoid most sin because of a certain immunity to its allure, especially if the allure is intellectual or in the grandeur of the imagination. People who are not simple are usually so because of ambition, which causes them to shield themselves from scrutiny such that they can nourish their self-image and impress it upon their surroundings and neighbours.
I therefore must agree with my friend s2srea, that simplicity is not, in itself, prone to deception. It is only prone to deception if, as is all too common nowadays, the simplicity comes only from a lack of experience and not from an insistent innocence proceeding from and upright heart and the gifts and fruits of the Holy Ghost. The Seraphic Patriarch, whose glorious Feast it is tomorrow, was incredibly simple, but he was not naive. When a brother was supposedly being visited by Our Lord in the night and was commanding him to break the rule or to pride (I can't remember exactly what the temptation was), Saint Francis knew that it could not be Our Lord, and instructed the brother to tell the apparition to stoop down a little lower so that he could "s### in his mouth" ! (This kind of vulgar speech was simply rough and uncouth; it was not considered vicious in the Middle Ages as it is now considered by many due to the influence of the middle classes and the idea of urbanity on Catholic manners.) The Little Flower was simple, too, as were most of the greatest saints. But theirs was a true simplicity that came from purity of intention and stoutness of heart; it was, like the name of the Italian opera, a rustic chivalry as opposed to some high-sounding theoretical kind of simplicity. In their benificent stubbornness, which was connected to their simplicity, they were able to avoid the complicated deceits and guiles thrown at them from the devil and his servants.
Nowadays, however, this kind of simplicity, I say, is exceedingly rare, and therefore it is difficult to make it the object of our observations, since we have little experience with it. Partly this comes from the decline of agrarian societies and the placement of everybody into social situations that are integrated into competition for social standing and pretense. I think that if we had truly Christian poor (not destitute or whatever people think when they hear this word, but poor) families, blessed with the poverty of those who lived simple lives in times and places wherein Our Lord publicly reigned, we would probably be able to observe it and appreciate it better. Of course, this is all just speculation based on my studies and my own experiences, observations, and faults, so please take it as it is.
If somebody thinks I have missed something in my analysis, I kindly ask him to donate his time to being an instrument of Our Lord's illumination of my mind and my understanding.
Topic: Does well-meaning and good-hearted Stupid? (Read 1659 times)