|
|
Dalton
Roberts |
|
|
We do so much injustice to the word love. We use it in ways that weaken it and take away its power. I was reminded of this twice lately while doing my meditation-time reading. One way I like to meditate is to take a single statement of truth and just roll it around in my mind like a tasty morsel on my tongue. The first statement was by James Decker: “Take love out of the emotional category and make it an active force.” Just the other day I heard a daughter palavering emotionally to her mother, saying several times, “I love you.” I have known them for years and have never once seen her do anything for her mother. She is always taking, never giving. She needs to take love out of the emotional category. Such palavering helps no one. Her mother would be a lot better off if this daughter would sit down just once a week and ask herself, “What can I do to lovingly help mother in some way?” This would make her love an active force rather than meaningless babble. One good deed a week would mean more to her mother than a year of palavering. Another way to make love an active force is to nevcr say it robotically. I hear people closing phone conversations with a flat sounding “I love you.” Such robotic, knee-jerk uses of the word diminish its power and meaning. One person who does this told me, “I want the last thing I say to someone to be ‘I love you’ in case I never see him or her again.” Is it good to close a conversation with such a morbid thought? The very morbidity of the thought will enter the feeling content of the words and taint the “juice” you transmit to the person. The solution for me is to never say the words without being fully aware of what I am saying -- to say it from the heart, not just a machine-like muttering from the mouth. And to make it “an active force” as Decker urges, why not close those conversations with, “Is there anything you need me for, anything I can do for you, because I like to show you that I love you.” There have been times I have tried to express love for someone over and over while they did very little for me “as an active force.” This creates an imbalance in a relationship, no matter how pure your intentions may be. It makes the person take you for granted, allowing them to treat you any way they please so long as they tag a phone conversation or blithely and monotonously mutter, “I love you.” They will end up hurting you simply because you have trained them to think you are the only one in the relationship who needs to make love an active force. The most concise definition of God in writings considered holy is the simple statement, “God is love.” Realizing that definition, it gavc a brand new meaning to one of my favorite verses, “I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.” The way God works is in us. He leads us to the strength we need for whatever task we face. Love does not do things for you so much as it teaches you where and how to find the strength you need. I have found in my own life that Christ doesn’t impart strength directly as often as He helps me find my own strength by leading me to truths that set me free. It is an “inside job.” When we want to express love for someone, we can call upon Christ, the “love within,” to reveal to us the best way to make love an active force in the situation we face. I think it is less important to as, “What would Jesus do?” than to ask, “What would Love have me do?” Order your own first edition copy of LONG JOHN CARDINAL & The Best of Dalton Roberts at http://www.ipspress.com/publishing.htm.
|
