"Where love rules there is no will to power, and where power predominates,
love is lacking. The one is the shadow of the other." - Carl Jung
LOVE versus INDIFFERENCE:
The opposite of love is not hate, but indifference. When
we hate somebody, we are at least acknowledging that they matter and they are
somebody of note in that they can have an impact on our lives. We are at least
showing them some respect in that they can have an affect, and we are paying
them some attention which everyone needs in order to live. When we are
indifferent to someone we are making a statement that they don't matter, that
they can have no impact on our lives, one way or another, whatsoever; they are
totally insignificant, worthless, minuscule.
LOVING JESUS: Jesus has told us what he wants or how we
can love him. There are only two ways, one direct and one indirect, and
they both involve loving ourselves simultaneously while loving him.
Primarily and directly we can love him by focusing on his message, paying
attention to what he said and did, and choosing to believe what he said.
John 14:23 "If any man loves me, he will cherish my word." Secondarily
or indirectly we can love him by supporting and cherishing his true
spiritual brothers. Mt 25:40 " As you have done it unto one of the least
of these my brothers, you have done it unto me." John 13:35 " By this
will all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one
another." John 15:17 "This I instruct you, that you love one another."
"Love never dies a natural death. It dies because we don't know how to
replenish its source. It dies of blindness and errors and betrayals. It dies
of illness and wounds; it dies of weariness, of witherings, of tarnishings."
- Anais Nin
What is being said above is that love is like a living plant
in ourselves and the other person. It needs to be tended, watered, nourished
and protected. It is NOT indestructible, and the other person has the moral
and ethical freedom to let it die if it is not nurtured.
INVOLVEMENT versus RELATIONSHIP: There are three types
of human involvement or social transaction—taking, giving and trading, and one type of
morale building human relationship, sharing. People can be generally categorized into four
types based on their primary way of interacting with others—takers,
givers, traders, and sharers.
Most of us fairly easily come to understand that taking is wrong, and
nobody likes an inveterate taker. In the material realm of this world these are
called conmen or thieves and eventually wind up incarcerated or ostracized. Taking
in a transaction means the taker "wins" and someone else loses.
We have been taught and conditioned by Christianity to
think of giving as being right, proper and virtuous. However, when taken
to its logical conclusion, givers go broke—there are too many takers.
Giving, called charity, is many times ultimately demeaning and counter-productive
to those receiving. Giving encourages and produces takers and taking.
Giving in a transaction means the giver loses and someone else wins.
Trading is the prevailing order of the day in our competitive world.
Caveat Emptor—let the buyer beware! May the best trader win! Even in a
fair trade where both parties improve their position, both parties
sustain loss, they both have to give something up so that they can get
what they want or need. The trading mentality permeates our entire
society and world. In the erotic realm, trading is called prostitution;
however, the coin of the realm is not always currency. This "coin" can
be status, security, respectability, or other political or social
advantages, it can even be having children.
The fourth possibility concerns relationship and is called sharing.
Sharing is a win/win situation, everybody wins, nobody loses. When Jesus
asked the rich young ruler to sell his possessions and give to the poor,
his primary concern was not for the poor but for the rich young ruler
who was going to lose nothing but obstacles to following Jesus and
entering the real Kingship of the heavens or realm of goodness.
COMMITMENT: True marriage is only sanctified or validated
by romantic love and naturally committed love, not by any formal rite,
ceremony or vows with priestly blessing.
Marriage as a legal contract is strictly a human institution and was
never ordained, instituted, or authorized by the creator. Marriage is
seen as "making a commitment", but love doesn't demand commitment and
loss of freedom, love CREATES commitment. Much of the time, the whole mentality of
marriage as it has evolved in the world is one of ownership and
obligation, completely opposite to the ideal way to live.
The only possible legitimacy or efficacy of a legal marriage contract between two
people who are romantically involved is strictly the benefit of having
a written legal contract as a form of an agreement between people in
this world when there is a dispute. This means that the legal marriage
contract as constituted in the general society of the United States is
the worst possible kind of contract in that it is vague, nebulous or
silent as to specifics and terms of abrogation, and is subject to a
different interpretation in every state, county and courtroom in the
country. Many people design and sign pre-nuptial agreements or other contracts.
Let's remember that Jesus had nothing good or
encouraging to say about marriage as it was so constituted or understood.
The idea, that some "representative"
of God can sanctify marriage in some formal ceremony whereby anything else is
"immoral", is nothing short of pretentious and absurd. No
wonder it is increasingly fashionable to delay or skip it.