SUSTAINING LOVE

“Some love sustains.  Some love smothers and kills.”

I had just had lunch with a friend who had just celebrated 46 years of marriage when I heard the statement, “Some love sustains. Some love smothers and kills.”

I couldn’t help but wonder how people love in a way that sustains marriage for 46 years. What are the ingredients that separate sustaining love from smothering love?

I am sure there are books written on the topic, but a few things randomly strolled across horizon of my mind.  

• Sustaining love respects the unique gifts of each; smothering love is always trying to reshape the other. 
• Sustaining love adapts to a growing soul; smothering love can’t allow the other to grow and change.
• Sustaining love wastes time with the other, playing in the heart; smothering love is all about working it out.
• Sustaining love follows energy; smothering love demands conformity.
• Sustaining love gives what it can; smothering love  constantly demands what it needs.
• Sustaining love forgives offense; smothering love holds onto grudges.

Sustaining love make it possible for each individual to not only be sustained, but to be nourished. You know it exists when each person is flourishing in who they are. They receive something in the relationship that contributes to their having the power to become their best selves and the courage to give those selves to friends, family and world.

I don’t know about my friend’s marriage and what he would say has fed their relationship for 46 years, but I suspect there was a lot of sustaining love going on. Each gives of themselves to the other and allows them space to grow into who they can be.

BE KIND TO KIDS

I preached at a congregation this morning.  Two services.  In the service there was time to share joys and concerns.  In the first service one of the members asked for prayers for a family with three young children whose father had committed suicide.  In the second service, a young person asked for prayers for the family of one of her classmates who had committed suicide.

I listened with an aching heart. I had read of children who were being bullied via the internet. I was struck by the life that people live and how little we know about the deep struggles of their souls. And I am aware of how often we are critical of others without being aware of what they are going through.

There are many joys for people to share in life, and we give thanks for those. But, there are many kids (young children and adults whose child cries out for love and attention) who are troubled and struggle with a sense of self worth. There are many whose pain seems overwhelming.  We never know.  

So, because we don't know, opt for kindness.  When you look into the eyes of any human who is priviledged to share life with you, think "be kind." Let your first impulse be to "be kind." 

My guess is that most of the time that act of kindness will touch the chid's heart much more deeply than a judgment or a criticism. Know that pain hides behind masks of bravado and charm. Even if you don't know what the pain is, if your first impulse is to "be kind" you can't go wrong.

EVIL FOR EVIL

One only has to wake up in the morning to know that there is plenty of hurt in this world. Nations hurt each other—sometimes out of greed, sometimes out of malice, sometimes out of ignorance. And when nations feel that someone has done evil toward them, the almost universal reaction is to respond in kind. There seems to be a political necessity that if you hurt us, we will hurt you.

And this policy is considered a deterrent. The philosophy is that people might think twice before hurting us if they know we will hurt them worse. Don’t tread on us or you will play double for your transgression.

And this policy is often practiced in personal ethics. When someone hurts me, there is an impulse to strike back. I feel a need to defend myself against further hurt or violation so if the other person knows that they will suffer pain if they do it again, it will function as a deterrent. 

But, this only perpetuates the cycle of retribution.

I wonder if there is not some other way to live our personal lives. In the Bible it is suggested that we “not repay evil with evil or insult with insult. On the contrary, repay evil with blessing, because to this you are called so that you may inherit a blessing.” (I Peter 3:9)

What would happen if we replied to hurt with blessing? What would happen if we spoke kindly instead of insult? What kind of community could we create if we repaid hurt with kindness?

We might find our lives a more blessed experience. It would take courage but it might help others realize that they do not have to strike out at us because we are not going to hurt them. It might be that we and they would inherit the blessing of peace if one of us had the  courage to respond to evil with blessing. The world may not understand this or be able to practice it, but maybe our personal lives might experience the blessing of grace if we did. And who knows, it might even work with nations if it were ever tried.

FINGERS

While walking around the roads in the north woods near Eagle River, WI, the driver of each car I met lifted a couple of fingers off the steering wheel in greeting. My memory was sent back to growing up in a small town in southern Missouri. Everyone I met cruising Broadway lifted a couple of fingers in greeting. Whether or not I knew them or they knew me, we greeted each as neighbors.

This doesn’t happen very often in the city. If anyone lifts a finger, it is more likely the middle finger. Our acknowledgement of each other isn’t simply because we share the same gift of road and space. Our presence is more likely acknowledged if we do something that pisses someone else off. The middle finger is not a neighborly response of greeting but it is a response to a feeling of threat by the other person.

I know we can’t live in the city the way we lived in the small town. I know that there are too many people for us to greet each other with a pleasant acknowledgement.  We would be so busy acknowledging the thousands of people we pass by that we couldn’t do anything else. Fingers lifted in greeting would have time to do nothing else.

But, I wonder what it would be like if we were a little more neighborly to those we happen to be in proximity to in the grocery store or at the coffee shop? If we were more open to each other in the ordinary intercourse of life we might be less threatened by the strangers we meet. The middle finger might be less necessary if we used the first two fingers more often.

INTERNAL DEBATE

The mansion of my mind has many rooms. Each is occupied by a different character. Each character is more or less demanding in desiring to set the rules of the house.

Two who are in constant debate with each other are Analyst and Actor.

Analyst gets up in the morning, gathers the morning silence around him, sips his coffee and ponders. He wonders about yesterday, reflecting on what the owner of the mind did in the past. He tries to understand what it means. He explores his motivation, his feelings, his desires.

But, yesterday doesn’t capture him. He also muses about today and tomorrow. What is the owner of the mind going to do today? Why? What is the best way to spend his day? How shall he interact with the unfinished business of yesterday? Where shall he explore tomorrow?

And then, bursting out of his room comes Actor. Actor has slept in. But, he gets up ready for action. He storms past Analyst’s door and starts emptying the dishwasher. He eats, gets dressed and goes out for a hike. He makes a list of the things that need doing and starts marking them off.

All along, Analyst watches. What is he doing? Why is he doing that instead of the more important things that need doing? What if he makes a mistake? The owner of the mind will have “hell to pay” if he does that.  

I am glad both of these characters live in my mind, but I sometimes wonder if Analyst has more power than Actor. I wonder if Analyst is so worried about making mistakes that he keeps owner from listening to Actor. I think Analyst has inherited some perfectionist tendencies that keep him giving some more space to Actor. I think some of my days would be better if Analyst would take more naps and let Actor have the run of the house.