By: Drew

Drew — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:29:25 +0000

For posterity sake, I just wanted to copy-paste Facebook comments on this.
-
Dave said,
very nice Drew. Have you read “resident aliens” by Stanley Hauerwas? After your post I think you’d really like it, he touches on many of the same things you discuss.
-
Mike said,
Very nice message. The only criticism that I would offer would be two things: 1) Obama’s message is one of everybody pitching in, not necessarily one of just his administration. 2) I would agree with you that Jesus’ message contains at least 50% more love than the next leading brand (little joke, very little)… but I wouldn’t say that Obama’s is devoid of love. I would say that his love has just morphed, or been contained within a little thing we call “compassion.” When I think of the general sense of “compassion” I think of it as a type of love that we have for life in general, but since we’re incapable of having a personal love for each individual living thing like Jesus can, compassion is the closest we can come to His love.
I really enjoyed your article though, I found it very interesting. It’s always nice to see a nice contrast to so much of the conservative-only Christian political discourse.
-
This sparked the following conversation:
-
Drew said,
Thanks for the comments.
No offense though, but compassion literally means “suffering alongside.” Do you think Obama is literally planning on suffering alongside the poor or whatnot?
-
Mike said,
Currently? No. In the past he sure has. My point wasn’t that he was currently suffering with people. Compassion–latin roots aside–also has the meaning of sympathy, empathy, and is also sometimes used as a synonym for mercy. In scripture mercy and compassion are used together. All of that said, my point was that I don’t think Obama’s message omits love, I just think that the general concept is as close to love as you’re ever going to see from a leader of such a massive group of people. As a man it is impossible for Obama to love everybody individually… but he can be sympathetic, caring, compassionate, and genuinely want what’s best for them.
-
Drew said,
Exactly. But as a /Church/ we can VERY MUCH love everybody individually. I think this is why Christ was so effective — until his death and resurrection, all love he shared was with individual people. After the Holy Spirit came, all believers in the Church became part of God’s mission on earth, just as Christ was during his lifetime. Now, /each one of us/ can play the part of the individual-lover showing a piece of God’s love. That’s why I think the word compassion is so appropriate of Christ and of the Church as a whole and not of a political movement or of Oprah or something. Compassion means suffering alongside, so if you are to truly LOVE someone to that level, you have to experience life with them individually. This is why this level of love cannot be carried out by natural means — it requires a supernatural agent acting through a multi-bodied entity such as the Church to even get close to having the kind of compassion required to love the world.
-
Mike said,
I suppose we disagree with your assertion that Obama should suffer along side people as his expression of love. I think working in the political process to try to ease the suffering is just as valuable–perhaps more-so for a public leader–as suffering with them.
As Christians we should be more Christ-minded in thinking of how we can suffer with and ease the suffering of our neighbor… but I don’t think that compassion alone is enough. I think it’s also important for us to try to move our country forward to ease the suffering of our fellow citizens as well as–to the extent that we can and the extent that they want it–the rest of the world.
Maybe I just don’t get your point… they do seem like similar but over-all unrelated topics.
-
Drew said,
No, I don’t think Obama should be suffering alongside people. Different people have different arenas, and this isn’t his. But, it CAN be the Church’s, which is just my point. I guess my point is that Christians have a unique opportunity, nay obligation, to be suffering servants out of love just as Christ was a suffering servant. This is why I think the Church has a lot to do that it isn’t doing — compassion is a word often thrown around but rarely practiced, especially outside of the realm of fellow believers.
-
Mike said,
I don’t know if I’d say especially outside the realm of fellow believers… sometimes I think Christians have an even more difficult time exercising compassion and sympathy than those outside the fold. I think the most unfortunate reality is that those things which Christ calls us to do are the hardest thing for us to do.
I also think that the reason why we’re having such a hard time meeting the obligations we have from Christ is because we’re all so busy crusading on “moral” issues and this silly, divisive “culture war.” I know a lot of people in my own area that work so hard to try to keep “Christ in Christmas” all the while forgetting to make sure that we keep food in starving bellies. I don’t think Jesus cares whether Walmart tells me Happy Holidays rather than Merry Christmas, but I believe he does care if I’m following Brandon’s example in helping out at food pantries, or otherwise serving the weak, vulnerable, poor, and hungry.
-
Drew said,
Amen brother.

Comments on: The audacity of love

By: Drew