Some
people are easier to love than others. Our family and friends are
easy, usually. The elderly, children, the disabled maybe less so, but
not by much (if at all). You know the "Ouch!"
is coming ... wait for it ...
Jesus
didn't say to love most
of our neighbors, or
that certain people are exceptions to His command. If Jesus died for
a person - and we know He did, regardless of the person - we are to
love that person. There's no escape hatch. That command includes
people in the custody of the justice system. That command includes
people who are destroying themselves - drugs, drinking and more. That
command includes the "monsters" of our time (seriously, if
Paul had a chance to preach to Nero, do you think he would said, "No!
You aren't worthy!").
Obviously,
some of that is hypothetical. How many Christians are likely to come
face to face with Bashir Assad of Syria or Kim III of Korea? But it
means that we should bring practical love to “unlovable” people
with whom we do have contact and opportunity. And it means that we
should pray for the monstrous, that their destructiveness would be
overcome, of course, but also that God would change their hearts.
Along those latter lines, God's had some “kids” whose BC lives
were pretty monstrous.
Loving
at a distance is relatively easy (though not necessarily without
value) – good feelings, maybe a contribution to a relevant charity.
It's when the “unlovable” person(s) are nearby or friends/family
where it gets tough. Then it means giving time. It can mean giving
money or things to that person. It can mean rubbing elbows with that
person, when they are being self-destructive or ungrateful or just
generally abrasive and sharp-elbowed. It means loving intelligently,
a 5-gallon bucket of worms. Does intelligent love mean bailing some
one out of a problem? Or might intelligent love mean letting that
person experience the consequences of self-destructiveness, and
“being there” for them as they walk through it? To ask is to
answer … yes, and we will always be making those choices with our
limited understanding.
No comments:
Post a Comment