NOT TAKING RESPONSIBILITY

In our day and age, people say that they take responsibility for their actions when in fact, they have done nothing of the sort. This is the norm, not the exception. Listen to what people say. It tells you exactly what they were thinking and why they did what they did. People seek to mask their motives, but their words will betray them every time. The Lord Jesus said in Matthew 12:34, "O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh." Whatever is in someone’s heart, it will eventually be expressed out of his mouth. This is an immutable principle.

From the high government offices to the man in the street, we hear the same refrain, I made a mistake. Noah Webster’s 1828 Dictionary defines mistake as, "To take wrong; to conceive or understand erroneously; to misunderstand or misapprehend." To be mistaken on an issue means that one has misunderstood some point that leads to an erroneous conclusion. A mistake lacks a necessary element of culpability, namely wilfulness. Someone who makes a mistake is not doing so willfully. The results may be tragic from making a mistake, such as someone dying in a car accident, but there was no intention to do wrong.

When someone knows what they are doing is wrong and they do so wilfully, then it is not a mistake. It is sin. Webster renders sin as, "The voluntary departure of a moral agent from a known rule of rectitude or duty, prescribed by God; any voluntary transgression of the divine law, or violation of divine command; a wicked act; iniquity..." Voluntary signifies wilfulness. Sin is a willful violation of law. It is the opposite of a mistake.

An example is provided by Henry Reid, formerly the chief of UCLA’s cadaver program. He sold donated body parts to medical, drug and research companies for financial gain. He pled guilty in Los Angles County Superior Court for conspiracy to commit grand theft. Reid pled guilty in a plea bargain. Reid knew that these donated body parts did not belong to him, but were donated to the university. They were not his property, but the school’s. Therefore, he profited from these sales of university property. This is a clear case of theft.

Reid’s attorney, Melvyn Sacks, tells you that his client claims to take responsibility for his action without actually taking responsibility. The newspaper article quotes Sacks as saying, "My client accepted responsibility for the mistake he made concerning his activities as director of the Willed Body Program at UCLA and is extremely remorseful about the situation. He deeply regrets the outcome of his actions."

If Reid made a mistake, this means that he did not know that what he had done was wrong, he just had some bad information for which he made a bad decision. He did not know what he was doing was wrong. There was no wilful intent on his part to commit grand theft and yet he pleads guilty to conspiracy to commit grand theft. Reid’s actions were wilful and intentional. His scheme gained about one million dollars. He was selling body parts that did not belong to him. He knew it was wrong and his actions demonstrate his wilfulness and therefore, he did not make a mistake, but committed sin.

Only if Reid had said that he committed sin would he be able to claim that he takes responsibility for his actions. It is obvious that Reid is a liar and is seeking to shirk his guiltiness. He is not alone in this regard, merely representative. He deeply regrets the outcome of his actions? No. He deeply regrets that he got caught and that he has to be sentenced for his actions. He has no remorse. He feels sorry, not for what he has done, but for himself. This is typical of our day and age.