e creates pain within us. Therefore, we always risk being hurt. Morgan Peck considers the risk as the central issue of vulnerability. We become more vulnerable as our fences and walls become lower. However, it not only gives the opportunity for people to hurt us, but also it gives an opportunity for others to see our own weaknesses. In the same time, the life always is the tensions between risk and trust. They are like twins who can never be separated.the same time, someone can ask, Are there any limits in our openness? Pohl argues that there are these limits. In the context of practicing of hospitality, she defines it as one of the most challenging theological and practical issues. Christians should take account of existence the strangers who intend to make harm to other families and communities. Therefore, Pohl suggests the ways how some risks can be reduced a bit. First of all, the practicing of hospitality should be more public. It does not imply the suggestion that hospitality should be less personal, but rather than welcome be initiated in a more public setting and sustained in less private places ... [because] welcoming total strangers is difficult when there is no community setting in which initial minimal relations can be established. important point can be best demonstrated by some Christian communities of hospitality. As Pohl witnesses, they created special house in which some families welcomed strangers and in ongoing, informal relations were able eventually to discern who among them might benefit from extended hospitality in their community s rural household, who can be invited in more intimate relationships. Pohl says that such bridges can be very helpful, because these families or persons understand more both the world of the stranger and the world of the welcoming community, and how they can be connected between each other. Vanier also points to another aspect of risks. He argues that revealing openness for others can become very hard task for some people who left their mother community with hurt feelings and vulnerable hearts. These frustrated Christians can have no freedom to commit themselves to the new faith community, because of fear to be hurt again. Therefore, they very often create limits of their openness toward others.considers that safety place of understanding and inner comfort can not be gained cheap. It sometimes is very costly. Nevertheless, faith communities reveal the need of belonging. All people are similar in this need. We all have wounded, vulnerable hearts. Each one of us needs to feel appreciated and understood; we all need help. Without dependence upon one another, we can not grow and develop the capacity for joy. We close up in fear. Love, however, opens us up. Love shows the sense of shared vulnerable experience. It implies to have inner sensitivity to see others who in need, and the ability to put ourselves in the situation of others. This attitude develops the mutuality in both to receive and to give love. argues that our openness and vulnerability touches the facet of our trust in God. Our willingness to trust in God connected closely with our willingness to trust in other people. If our faith in God is secure, we can act in a trusting way to those who are untrustworthy just as God loves us even though we are often untrustworthy. It could seem paradoxically, but there can be no community without vulnerability.
. 1.1 The issue of betrayalcommunity very often can become a dangerous adventure in lives of people who are the members of that community. It reveals a paradox of existence together, because the bonds of love and commitment that create and sustain our identities can also destroy us. It implies that openness, trust, and love bear the seeds of betrayal within itself. Ray Anderson discusses that the issue of betrayal has its roots at the very beginning of our time as human beings. He points to the Genesis story of the Fall. Anderson explains that as Adam as Eve tried to find excuse for themselves by blaming and betraying other. It implies that each person has the seeds of betrayal within himself or herself. The question is in the people s attitude to develop and grow them or not. In the same time, there is another way of protection from betrayal is never to trust and to love.I also would like to mention another loud example of a betrayer: Judas. At the beginning of the investigation of this personality, I would like to mention Anderson s suggestion of the special paraphrase of the biblical passage from the Gospel of John 3:16. For God so loved Judas that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. I think that this paraphrase can open a new understanding of who Judas was. It is a good reminder that Judas also was one of the Twelve. He was as an answer on Jesus prayer. Anderson evaluates Judas as a demonstration that everyone is po...
