www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Trusting People

Hello all,

Is it a sin not to trust everybody?

It's hard for me to trust everybody from my life experience.

Thanks

It's possible but unlikely.

There should be a presumption of trust unless that trust has been lessened by experience. If, for example, you make a new friend and agree to meet for a pizza on Friday night at 8 you should trust that he will show up and be on time. You'd probably wait for him in case he is late (rather than leave at 8:01). If a friendship develops and you learn that this person is always 15 minutes late for everything you plan accordingly (and "trust" that he will always be 15 minutes late for everything).

If you have a family member or close friend in whom you have trusted who has betrayed that trust you would do well to be guarded in when and with what you trust him with. You might learn that a spouse, brother, sister, cousin or friend can be trusted in for certain things (maybe to help in time of need) but be untrustworthy when it comes to discussing personal information. The amount of trust can be guided by experience.

In order for not trusting someone to be sinful, you would have to know definitely that the person is fully trustworthy in the area in which you are placing trust in him, and definitely and freely choose not to trust him. If you've been hurt by people who have not kept trust it would very likely that you would not be currently capable of freely trusting others. This is a topic for discussion with one's spiritual father or mother. In discussion he might seek to clarify the situation in which you were hurt, whether your placing of trust in that person was reasonable to begin with, and help you consider ways to more healthily evaluate who to trust, what is reasonable, and what is unreasonable. In the reasonableness category one might say that if you were on a first date it would be reasonable to "trust" your date with basic information about yourself (what you do, what you like to eat) but unreasonable to discuss information you would not want broadcast to the world (a mistake you might have made). With experience one learns what is appropriate. And as a relationship grows one learns the trustworthiness of the other person.

Also under the reasonableness category is that some people can be counted on to hurt you. I have a elderly family member who always greets anyone she has not seen in awhile with "Boy, did you get fat!" In a way one trusts her to be insulting. But one can also trust her to be there in a number of different situations.

I hope not!

There are different types of trust. Someone else can probably outline them better.

Worldly people certainly have a different expectation of trust. They can do terrible things that they view as honorable, because they don't hold our standards - so-called "business ethics" come to mind.

Now that I think of it, one one level, we can only trust in God. Off the top of my head, St. Faustina's Divine Mercy diary makes that point well.

Although you're likely asking about having a generally mistrusting disposition, which would be the other extreme.

It would seem that each relationship would speak to the kind and degree of trust that is appropriate.

Our esteemed administrator has offered excellent Christian advise.
My default position is to trust everybody on a personal basis (not on the internet.) If I find they lie to me then it is their responsibility to earn back my trust.

I've been asking similar quesions of my own spiritual father. I find your answers to be very insightful and helpful. I think that it is important to differentiate between a general mistrust of others, and perhaps cases of broken trust, which you did. In either case, I would recomend talking with your spiritual father or mother.


I'm new here so I'll wave hello to all. :)

When the bible refers to love always trust in Corinthians 1-13, is this related to our topic?

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

What is love always trust in the above quotation refers to?

Most translations of the Holy Scriptures don't use "trust" in 1 Cor 13:7. They use "believes".

"Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things." (RSV, ESV, NAB, etc.)

It looks to me like you might be using the NIV. It's a very readable translation, but not the most accurate.

In this context it means more like "love means being able to bear all things and keep on bearing all things, believing (trusting / keeping faith) in all things and continuing to keep believing / trusting / keeping faith, hoping in all things now and continuing into the future, enduring all things now and to keep on enduring all things (good and bad) from now on.

The Ancient Christian Commentary series has one paragraph summarizing the fathers on verses 4-7: "Love seeks the good of others (Chrysostom, Cassiodorus), hating what is unjust and rejoicing in what is good (Theodoret of Cyr), discerning its own limitations (Basil). The greater the love of God the saints share, the more they learn to endure all things (Gregory Nazianzen, Augustine)."

But whether one uses "believes" or "trust" in verse 7, one is trusting in love. Or, better, with love. St. Gregory Nanianzen teaches (and I'm paraphrasing) that "Love bears, hopes, believes (trusts), and endures all things - good and bad - pleasant and painful - since they all work together in working our salvation.

What is being described in verses 4-7 is not what we can do if we love, but that it is love that gives us the power to endure. What is being described is the nature of love, the qualities of love.

St. John Chrysostom teaches: "Out of long-suffering love bears all things, whether they are burdensome or grievous, whether insults, lashes or even death."

Love seeks only what is good. How does this apply to trusting others? It is quite possible that misplaced trust is not something good for either the person placing trust or the person receiving trust. Yet not willing to trust at all (to give others someone a chance to build trust after they have failed trust) is also what is not good. In the end, one learns through experience (and experience is often a painful teacher).

This can go back to the examples I posted earlier. One can trust that a new friend will keep and agreement to show up for pizza on Friday at 8. At worst, he does not show up and you eat pizza by yourself. You've not invested enough in the relationship to get hurt. At the other end, a wife may love her husband totally while enduring his faults. He may have a little fault (like not being able to be trusted to actually put out the garbage). He may have a big fault (maybe he is a gambler who can't be trusted with the checkbook to pay the bills - and loving him might be steering him away from trusting him with the checkbook). There are infinite possibilities. One must discern the appropriate level of trust to use based upon the other person's experience. The door to allowing that person to grow and earn trust should be kept open, but even this is to be guided by experience.

Thanks John, that clarifies things for me. The translation that I was using is King James version

That is the wording of the NIV and not the KJV:

NIV 1 Corinthians 13:7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

KJV 1 Corinthians 13:7 Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.

Some others:

NAB 1 Corinthians 13:7 It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

RSV 1 Corinthians 13:7 Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

NKJ 1 Corinthians 13:7 bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.


The Greek word translated believes is the inflected form of pisteuō, the quintessential expression of I believe as opposed to I trust which can suggest hope rather that belief.


This is an example too of how changes in grammatical forms in translating can give a different emphasis and interpretation. The Greek here is an iteration that it, love, all-things (panta; neuter accusative plural)-active verb-. That is:

(all-things) panta steyei (it bears), (all-things) panta pisteuei (it believes), (all-things) panta elpizei (it hopes), (all-things) panta hupomenei (it endures/remains).

The emphasis here on all-things is overwhelming and yet that is what the NIV changes from a direct object -- items -- to an adverb indicating duration, "always."