We’ve had a couple and their baby living with us since last December, helping them out until they can get established on their own–which appears, at this point, still a long way away. Tonight, Allen and I sat out on the porch talking for a couple of hours. I didn’t manage to work any great spiritual insights into our conversation, and I feel a silly guilt about that. But I think he appreciated talking.

People at church and work continually warn me about being “enablers.” I understand what they’re talking about. But at the same time, I’ve been questioning the whole concept, at least as it applies in this situation. Because I’m not sure how much “enablement” is part of God’s vocabulary. God, after all, is the one who said to forgive your brother 70 times 7 times. How much more enabling is that? Shouldn’t you give a person a few chances to get it right, and then give up? Why is God so naive?

I’ve decided that “enabling” is very much an American concept that fits with our values of rugged individualism, self-responsibility, etc. I’m not so sure it fits the spirit of Jesus. Should we kick our guests out, because we’re just enabling them (making life easy for them)? Should we declare that not enough progress has been shown in self-responsiblility, accept that we’re just throwing pearls before swine, and send them on their way? Is that what Jesus would do?

I don’t think so. Stuff like this–the issues I wrestle with, the frustrations that lead to insights into what I perceive as the mind of God–show me that their presence in our home is as much for my benefit as for theirs. God has shown me things about himself and about my own stupid paradigms that would never have come apart from taking in this couple who had no place to go, and showing them love which occasionally borders on “unconditional.”