Was this rash judgenent or just precaution?

Yesterday me and my friend were chilling outside a MacDonald’s and down the road there is a zone known to be a place where you could be robbed (I live in Argentina, so almost everywhere is like this). So, we were chilling when we saw some “suspicious” (because of their appearence, skin color, clothes, I feel sorry now) guys walking from there and me and my friends decided to go nearer the MacDonald’s door just to be safe. You should know insecurity is a huge issue here. Was this a sin?

No. You have the perfect right to be safe and to feel safe. I’d have done the same thing–especially since I’m a woman. It’s best to avoid bad situations if you can–it’s called prudential judgment. There is no way the person you avoided could know why you did, not unless he can read minds, so don’t feel badly about offending him since he couldn’t have known your intentions or were you obligated to explain yourself to him. Be careful not be scrupulous about such things. It’s better to be careful about committing real sins. :wink: Satan loves to get Christians all tied up into knots over nothing so you’ll give into despair. Don’t let him. :nunchuk:

No. Sounds like you were acting to seek safety.

An example of Rash judgement would be - “Hey those persons are of that color - I know (without evidence) that they are criminals! I am certain of it!”

Yes, but even if one feels that or thinks that, unless you let the other person know you think it or tell others that that person must be bad because of outward appearances, no sin has been committed.

Such would not be a correct understanding here. One need not tell or act externally upon such. One can rashly judge some one in an entirely interior way.

But again note well what I noted above -and also that such is not about say first of the first thoughts or feelings that happen to one without one knowing and willing things…all sorts of thoughts and feelings can “happen” to one an there not be the smallest sin.

There certainly is a difference between dwelling on a feeling until it turns into cement and a momentary feeling, I agree. But to simply act for ones own safety (or anothers) from a gut intinct is not rash judgment nor a sin, which is what I believe the OP was concerned about. :slight_smile:

Yes I agreed up above.

My point later was that one can sin via rash judgment -in a purely interior way. One does not have to “tell anyone” etc.

Yes, by harboring such thoughts and then acting on them. This is why what we dwell on is so important–because eventually we act on what we believe true. :slight_smile:

While thoughts need to be consented to for sin (harboring or dwelling on with consent such thoughts is one way to sin in thought yes-but with any sin of thought that consent is needed)

No action is required.

One can judge rashly without any external action.

(But yes knowledge and consent is needed for sin)

Yes harboring such thoughts or dwelling on them is one way one can sin via thought sure…(not the only way but yes one). And yes acting on a rash judgment in thought can yes be sinful.


No action is required.

One can judge rashly without any external action.

(But yes knowledge and consent is needed for sin)

So, should I do it again as a precaution or it would be sinful?

God said if you think it, it counts if it’s a sinful thought. If it’s a sinful thought, then you are guilty of that sin. Besides you can’t judge a book by it’s cover, or color. Just added color. LOL

Give them the benefit of the doubt -but act in view of your safety.

Yes, but when assessing if someone is a threat we have to use our eyes and our brains. No sin was committed here. My point being that merely looking at a person who typifies danger and being wary of him/her is not the same thing as a sinful thought. We need to make such quick judgments sometimes for the sake of safety. I wouldn’t have stepped out and started a convesation with someone I thought might be a threat in a bad neighborhood merely to overcompensate for thinking they may be a bad person. It’s a case of prudential judgment, not rash judgment in this case. It’s better to avoid such situations, if possible, for everyone’s sake.

I hope you didn’t take what I said wrong. By all means avoid danger. This is why God gives us intuition.

No problem. I just wanted to keep us on topic. It’s so easy to get into other areas of moral law in such discussions. :slight_smile:

Under the same circumstances, yes. Your safety and that of your friend were the paramount concern. You were not obligated to make a friend out of a stranger whose intentions you felt might be bad. :slight_smile: You weren’t thinking, “This guy MUST be bad.” Rather it seems to me you had a gut feeling that you may be in danger. It’s an important distinction.

To sum up, what I sould do is not move away because they may not rob me and, if they do, give away my stuff to be safe, right? At least that’s what I got from this thread.

No, not at all. You don’t have to let anyone rob you merely because you don’t like someones looks. You have the right, and even the obligation, to keep safe, if possible.

I Know, when I wrote that I hadn’t read your previous repley. So I can do it as long as I don’t asume he’s bad but that he may be bad.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.