Ideals versus People

Despite what has been said about no man being an island, we aren't quite the Pangaea that one might think. Rather we seem to be connected by the currents of activity which happen to thrust us together - a rapid version of continental drift that pulls us apart, and brings us in close apposition. We never quite touch, although at times it seems we come close to it. Perhaps it is our fallen nature that prevents of from ever fully sharing in each others' world.

In interacting with others, it pays to realise that ideals are weak things, and that ideas are only as strong as their impetus to realise, or actualise them. People build up so many ideas about what they want in relationships, about what they are looking for, that they are invariably disappointed. There is nothing wrong with developing these ideas of the sake of conversation, but the double-edge to ideas is that they very often stick around. They influence day-to-day decision-making subtly and pervasively such that the expectations you have of someone, the way you relate to them, and the impression you form, are all coloured by your preconceived notions.

When it comes to ideals, is it not more exciting to hold off thinking about them until you find yourself actually in a relationship with someone? Then, you can build on each others' perspectives and craft ideals and worldviews together, rather than endlessly turning these over and over in your mind before you start, building them up as barricades and hindrances that fortify a lonely island. Some think otherwise. Some think that by doing so, by preempting future troubles and concerns, and by firmly establishing their conceptions, they can avoid later strife or error. The problem is that there is a disjunct between theory and real life, and that ideas can never comprehensively address people and the intricacy that is life.

Colleague, boss, housemate, coursemate, brother or sister, prayer buddy, brother- or sister-in-Christ, bible study member, non-Christian friend, mother, father. Each seems to have its own set of predefined relational contexts and social norms. Whatever happened to just loving someone? Christians in particular seem to spend their time forging ideals and trying to get people in church to conform in the name of obedience, yet I fear an indviduals' path tends to take a narrative ethic rather than an absolute one. I have found that every person's moral dilemma is different, and there is no exact similarity between one person's choice and another's - that one action might be made in virtue according to one person's decision, but the same action might be made in vice in someone else's.

Yet there are so many meaningless church sessions trying to standardise the way we think about an idea, and attempting a reductionist's approach to moral decision-making. Ideas about sex, marriage, and gender roles, particularly, come to the forefront in the church where I am at. And I don't know how comfortable I am in the pews listening to what is said sometimes, as I see model become uniform reality, and a failure to recognise sinfulness within the paradigm, while readily recognising the sinfulness outside of it. Oh, we are such a sinful, fallen world. But when we do this, this is godly. But how very untrue this is! Within that very system of action it is possible to see where sinfulness can seep in, in the form of pride, selfishness, and all a manner of insidious ways, and this makes us no less prone to sin than the next person.

The strange thing is that I realise there is a role for this type of thinking in certain contexts. There are some things about morality, and about God, which are irrevocable. It is good to know what these are, and to be clear in them, and to be reminded of them, and to let these govern life decisions. Broad strokes paint a picture that I agree with, but the devil is in the details, and perhaps it is in these that I find real life prevails over human hermeneutic preaching.

Over the past year or so, I'm coming to appreciate more and more the simple reality that relationships in true reality, in God's kingdom, are best thought of in the context of being brothers- and sisters-in-Christ, and being accordingly loving. My experiences have led me to see that supporting someone with love means intimacy and empathy. It means rooting for them when they are struggling in the absence of judgement. This holds true whether you are relating as a colleague, boss, housemate, coursemate, brother or sister, or significant other. We can support each other by showing our care in the ways that we can, and realise we can never be perfect for someone, even so. Even more importantly, loving someone means forgiving them, or making the choice to forgive them preemptively. How much of blame and unforgiveness in a  relationship comes from someone not being able to address our own personal flaws, our own inadequacies, rather than their intentionality to hurt you.

Perhaps loving someone is not about doing what is right, doing what one ought to, because the underlying emotional truth is that in thinking in this way, in doing so, you are only stroking your own egotism and self-righteousness. Instead, what is right is defined by the process of loving others.