Month: February 2018

Is Love Really Enough?

Is Love Really Enough?

Versión español

“All you need is love!”

So declare Paul McCartney, Ringo Starr, George Harrison and John Lennon, otherwise known as the Beatles. It’s a catchy little song that sticks in your head – sometimes for way too long. And it seems like it is the slogan of our age.

It takes very little time or energy to discover this message. Wonder Woman highlighted it. At the end, (spoiler alert for the few of you who haven’t seen it…) despite very accurately summarizing the evil present in humanity, she declares that she believes in humanity. Why? Because of love. I could come up with an entire list of movies, songs and books that espouse our need to love, and that we should be people of love. It is all over the popular culture – if only we would love each other more, accept them for who they are, work together, then life would be great. We are all one people, and should love one another.

Now of course, I totally agree with this. We should love each other more. We are all equal. We ought to accept people (although accept and agree with are not necessarily the same). Love is the most powerful force in the universe and it could totally change the world. In some sense, it is all we need.

Unfortunately, we are terrible at love.

Now, I don’t want to paint too unfair of a picture or deny reality. Of course people are capable of love. And there are tons of different examples of love. We are (generally) good at loving our families. We are (generally) good at loving our kids. We are (generally) good at being polite and respectful in everyday interactions with people. We are (generally) good at loving people from a distance, people who agree with us, people who treat us well and people who align with our own beliefs and causes. And we can be especially good at dramatic gestures of love for our loved ones or in moments of crisis. So we are definitely capable of love and even of deep, passionate love.

Unfortunately, life is not made up of moments of crisis, dramatic gestures, and people that are easy to love. Life is made up of all of us. And once we extend beyond our small world of ease, the degree of love that we show decreases dramatically. We love our kids, but not the teacher who treats them unfairly, the bully who is harassing them, or the employer who won’t give them the hours they need to survive. We love our neighbours and the people on the street – until they are an inconvenience to us or interfere with our peace and comfort. We love the poor, as long as we only have to sacrifice minimally to help them. We love other people, unless they disagree with us politically or philosophically. We love our spouses or significant others passionately, but not always practically. Dinner? Movie? Romantic getaway? Great! Pick up the clothes? Help with the cleaning? Forgive a minor offence? Not so easy. We love deeply in a moment of crisis (earthquake, death, shootings, etc.), then forget and carry on with our life as soon as possible.

As I said, I don’t want to paint too dramatic of a picture, but I also want to point out the obvious – we are not as good at love as we think we are. Consider the following questions:

  1. How well do you love people when you are tired, stressed or unmotivated to do so?
  2. How well do you love those who disagree with you?
  3. How quickly can you forgive and love those who offend you? Or who hurt you deeply?
  4. How often do you really know what is best for someone else and how often do you just follow the trends of society or guess at what is best? In other words, is your love for them actually love, or does it accidentally end up harming them?
  5. How willing are you to sacrifice for others to show love? I mean really sacrifice – give up eating out to help feed the homeless in your community, set aside your agenda for the evening to let your spouse/partner do what they want, etc.?

My point (especially with that last one) is not to make you feel overwhelmingly guilty, or to argue that you should never think of yourself. There is a balance to find between taking care of yourself (being healthy) and sacrificing for others. Nor is it my desire to belittle the idea of love. I do think that the Beatles were onto something when they sang that all we need is love. It’s just that I think we need some help to love, and to love well. And I’m pretty confident that I know where to look.

In the Bible we find an interesting little comment: “God is love” (1 John 4:8). We also find one of the most beautiful descriptions of love (1 Corinthians 13:1-8, 13), a description of the power of love (Song of Songs 8:6-7), and the best example of love in Jesus, who lived a life of love and then was willing to die for us to restore our connection with God.

What has happened, though, is that we have disconnected love from God. We have made love our goal, not recognizing that we’re not very good at identifying what is loving behaviour and only sporadically successful at showing love to others – especially those who are difficult to love. What’s more, love, being alternately a concept, a feeling or a verb, is not something that we can easily capture or hold onto. It is elusive, easily misguided and often misinformed. It is a fickle mistress. Especially when guided by our heart, which Jeremiah accurately describes as “deceitful above all things and beyond cure” (Jer. 17:9). Just as we tend to think love by itself is the answer, so we think that we are good enough to understand and guide it in the way it should go. There is a good reason that Jesus himself said, “No one is good – except God alone” (Mark 10:18). Although we do get love right at times, we very often do not. We need help.

So where do we turn? I think there is no better source than God himself, who is love and the source of love. There is no better example than Jesus Christ, who modelled love (even for the difficult and even when it cost him tremendously) and offers to us that unconditional love that we long for. There is no better guide than the Bible, which shows us what God loves and what love should look like, rather than what the shifting sands of culture try to tell us. There is no better power than the Holy Spirit, Christ himself living in us, to help us to love when we find it impossible to do so ourselves.

Christianity has always been defined by its love. In different times and places, followers of Christ have forgotten that, got sidetracked by culture, failed and modelled anything but love. And at times, even with God’s guidance, it is difficult to know how to love well. But in God (more specifically, in Christ), we have the source, the example, the guide and the power to live lives of love. If we pursue Him, we get love. If we pursue love, we end up all over the place.

So if you, like so many, long for our world to be a place of love, I encourage you to establish that connection with Jesus or (if you are already a Christian) to look closely at your life in light of his example and guidance.

Love truly is all we need. As long as we understand “love” to be “God”.

Wallpaper courtesy of Analaurasam.
https://analaurasam.deviantart.com/art/wallpaper-all-you-need-is-love-388228814

 

So We Changed the Anthem…

So We Changed the Anthem…

Una nota por mis amigos que hablan español: Ya que este artículo trata con un tema muy específica de Canadá, y en parte con un asunto particular de la idioma inglés, no voy a traducir este post a español.

So as of this past week, the Canadian national anthem has officially been changed, with a desire to make it “gender neutral”. While this change hasn’t elicited as much response as I had expected, I have seen some people posting complaints about it, while others are celebrating it. Both the change and people’s response to it kind of intrigue me, so I thought I would add a few thoughts to the discussion. Hopefully this will be a balanced approach that both sides can benefit from.

Note: For those who haven’t heard, the change occurs in the fourth line, where “In all thy sons command” was changed to “in all of us command”.

  1. Change is hard. Since 1914, Canadians have been singing the current version of O Canada. That means that most people presently alive have only sung the anthem as it was before this change. Tradition is a strong thing, and for many, the change feels completely unnatural. Although some people have rightly pointed out that the original song adopted in 1908 used the line “thou dost in us command”, I don’t know if anybody now alive ever sang that. Messing with something aswell-known as our national anthem is going to produce an emotional reaction. So if you happen to agree with this change, show compassion and grace to those who don’t. For many, it simply doesn’t sound right.
  2. It’s not oppressive! Another reason for or against the change is the “patriarchal” language. In other words “sons” refers to all of us, just as mankind does, etc. The language uses the male figure to refer to everyone. Some find this offensive or not inclusive. Some even argue that the entire patriarchal system and language is oppressive. While I don’t disagree that women have been abused and oppressed at times (more than many care to admit, but less than others try to make it seem), I think an automatic equation of patriarchal language with oppression is over the top and unfortunate. For most, this was simply the language used. Throughout history and various (most?) cultures, the male-dominated society simply made sense and seemed natural. Men are generally stronger and in a survival society, they automatically focused more on the tasks that were more physically demanding (warfare and working the fields among them). Women are the only ones who can physically have and nurse kids, and since families often needed to have lots of kids (many would die young, and they were the parents’ old-age security), the women cared for them and the household. It made sense. And the culture and language developed from there. So please step down a bit from automatically equating patriarchal language with oppression. Oppression happened (and sometimes still happens), but for most people, it’s just the way the language was used, and many see no need to change it.
  3. But language and times change. That being said, the culture has changed, and language is bound to change with it. I have heard a variety of women, from little girls to much older ones, question where they fit in comments that use male language. We do live in a different time, and while some might think that change is not beneficial (a much larger topic), I’m personally okay with it. Those who wish the anthem would stay the same need to recognize that some people honestly feel like it doesn’t include them. If the purpose of the line in the song is to refer to all of us (which it obviously is), why is it a big deal to adjust it so that everyone feels comfortable? Let’s put it this way – if we had been singing “in all of us command” for the past 100 years, nobody would even be fazed about it. It’s not a big deal – the bigger issue is just that it sounds strange, or it’s being changed and we don’t like it, or that some feel it’s not really necessary and that people just need to understand that’s how the language works! But that’s the rub – if that’s not how the language and culture actually work anymore, maybe we do need to change it.
  4. It doesn’t sound as good. From a purely linguistic and poetic point of view, I think the old way sounds better than the new way. “thy sons” just sounds more poetic than “of us”. But I recognize that part of that is just that I’m used to singing it that way. Also, as I mentioned before, if we had been singing it that way for the last 100 years, we wouldn’t even think about it.
  5. But it is clearer. I’ll admit, until a couple of years ago, I had never really thought through the entire anthem carefully. The result? I was hearing “sons” as a possessive, not as a plural. I was hearing “in all thy sons’ command” or, in other words, that our sons (all of us as Canadians) were commanding something – I just never really thought about what they were commanding. It wasn’t until I really read it carefully and thought about it that I realized that we weren’t commanding anything, but Canada was commanding true, patriotic love in (or from) all of us. Oops. I’m curious how many others have made that mistake. The new way just sort of eliminates that confusion.

So, in 5, 20, or 50 years, how much will this matter? I anticipate our kids will grow up learning the new way and never give it another thought. Do we need to argue to keep language the same, even when people don’t identify with it the same way that they did? I don’t think so, even though I will probably end up singing it the old way most of the time without thinking about it. It’s just deeply engrained in me by now.

So, if you love the change, sing it the new way, but recognize that change is hard for many people and many honestly (without being oppressive or oppressed) feel like it’s unnecessary. Either way, be patient with them. The change is made, and it will gradually be adopted.

If you hate the change, realized that it’s not a conspiracy! Our culture has changed, and many people feel awkward singing it as it was written or even feel excluded. It is what it is. Learning the new way won’t hurt anyone in the long run, even you. And if you keep singing it the old way, either because “that’s the way it’s always been” or because “we didn’t need to change it” or even just because you don’t like it as much, so be it. Just please don’t be belligerent about it. There is not actually anything wrong with the change, and no matter what the official language is and the law says, it will take a long time for the new wording to become popular and accepted. Just like switching to the metric system, right? It hasn’t hurt anybody, now we’re used to it, and for the most part, it’s just the way it is.

Whatever the specific words we might use, we are all still Canadians. That is the focus.