Regarding your question about accepting charity from a disreputable Jew I found the following discussion:
http://www.jlaw.com/Commentary/marcrichpardon.html1. Accepting Charity from Disreputable Figures
It is clear that stolen items cannot be used for ritual purposes, or accepted by charities as gifts. The prophet Isaiah (61:8) writes "for I the Lord love justice, and hate robbery with burnt offerings". The Talmud (Sukkah 30a) states that sacrifices and other ritual objects such as Lulav and Etrog are disqualified if they are stolen.
In addition, the Torah makes it clear that objects acquired in a disreputable fashion (such as an object bartered for relations with a prostitute) carry a taint that makes them unacceptable for sacred use, such as writing a Torah (Deuteronomy 23:19; Shulchan Aruch OH 153:21). However, cash or any fungible asset that is earned from such disreputable activities could be used to acquire ritual objects.
These rules relate to specific objects acquired in disreputable ways, and whether they can be used as sacred objects. However, there is a second issue: accepting money from a "mumar", a habitual sinner. The Talmud states that we do not accept sacrifices from a "mumar" (Hullin 5b). (The definition of a "mumar" in this context is complex. Some say it refers to fundamentally immoral people who reject any sort of moral authority, while others say it includes any habitual sinner. See Yabiah Omer 1:YD 11) It may be that the "mumar" is excluded from giving a sacrifice because we assume he is doing this for ulterior motives (see Orchot Chaim II page 442) or because we view the money of a "mumar" to be tainted (see Sefer Chasidim no. 938; cf. no. 687) Some apply this rule to include all types of charity, and say that we must always refuse the money of a "mumar" (Rama, OH 154:1; YD 254:2). Others distinguish between ritual objects, such as items used in a synagogue, which because of their inherent holiness cannot be donated by a "mumar", and charity that is distributed to the poor, which can be donated by a "mumar"(see Chatam Sofer, comment to Magen Avraham OH 154:18). Others limit this rule to sacrifices, and allow a "mumar" to give any type of charity (Shach YD 254:5; Magen Avraham OH 154:18). Indeed, some argue that charity should be accepted from all types of people, because it is important to encourage sinners to do good deeds (see Yabiah Omer 7: OH 22).
This debate has important implications for who should be accepted as a donor. A majority view would accept charity from disreputable characters. They do so with the hope that the very act of charity may be the donor.s first step in improving his behavior, and because of the practical value the charity will have. An important minority rejects charity from disreputable characters, because the donation is tainted.
There is another element in receiving charity from disreputable characters, and that is the desecration of God.s name (Chillul Hashem). Any action that will diminish the reputation of a religious institution, and as a consequence, desecrate God.s name, is absolutely forbidden (see Rambam Yesodei Hatorah 5:11). I would suggest, that because of this concern, disreputable characters should be barred from giving "naming gifts", where a specific room or lecture is named after a donor. In this instance, the taint of the donor.s name would diminish the reputation of the charity, and result in a Chillul Hashem.
Topic: The penalty for Jews taking charity money from Gentiles (Read 17559 times)