Love and acceptance are not cheap that they should be found in the arms of that which has no life. They are priceless gifts. Though we know this truth, we constantly turn from it, trusting instead in the things that are made to fulfill us. We desire worldly things that propagate the status-quo of a guilty conscience. Indeed, such selfishness demands no change from us and has no expectations. It is self-pleasing to a fault and yet gives birth to death for its lack of honor. It kills the spirit of a man.
Mankind is a pitiable lot; full of foolishness. We are fickle and double-minded even towards those gifts which give us peace and joy. The Christian is by no means safe from this. So often is he prone to see himself as the undeserving yet guilty recipient of a gift that, in its majesty and liberty, comes the fullness of "being." Yet, the acceptance of a gift on the part of the recipient has nothing to do with what that person deserves, but rather has everything to do with the generosity of the giver. We should not feel shame when given the greatest of unearned gifts! I obviously speak of the gift of grace which, by definition, is unearned forgiveness. This gift is only understood by faith, through humility, in a personal relationship with the Gift-Giver. Thus, knowing our shortcomings is important, but knowing Jesus who freely forgives us for them by His grace is the pinnacle of our created purpose.
Friday, February 7, 2014
Limiting our freedom to find liberty
Some time ago I watched "John Adams", an HBO miniseries documenting the fascinating life of one of our country's Founders and second President of the United States. He is shown as an honorable man who sacrifices his own creature comforts, family life, fortune, etc. in order to "establish a more perfect union" based on the pursuit of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".
In light of Adams' actions, I started thinking of a statement I heard often when I was younger. It was said that "Freedom isn't free" and it always made me take in a deep breath and consider those who had sacrificed their all. At a young age my patriotism (like many important things in early life) was only an uninformed feeling. I could not define "freedom". While pondering this idea I would come across definitions that did seem important, though limited. People would tell me that they were free to be able to drive between states without showing their papers. They were free to go out to the movies late at night. The one that takes the cake while perusing my memory banks is the classic statement of delinquent youth, however, to justify belligerency. After displaying a vulgar or uncouth attitude, I would often hear that it was one's right because "It's a free country".
This begs the question as to what the foundation of freedom is. If it is sacrificial then it finds its basis in morality as opposed to a natural "winner take all" mentality. If freedom is simply doing what one wants to do then we are no better than animals. Not many people would desire to make the case that animals have moral agency. Indeed, the moral person diminishes himself so that others can increase. He helps the needy and comforts the distressed. For instance, a drug addict who chooses to enroll himself in rehab is exercising his liberty by giving others control of a part of his life. His good works may start simply from constraining his ability to commit to bad ones. An indebted person who cuts up his credit cards does the same. On a deeper level, a married couple gives up their single rights and when they have kids they sacrifice their time alone. Freedom is not a license for anarchy. As shown above, some of the greatest freedoms come in willingly limiting ourselves and lifting others up.
In light of Adams' actions, I started thinking of a statement I heard often when I was younger. It was said that "Freedom isn't free" and it always made me take in a deep breath and consider those who had sacrificed their all. At a young age my patriotism (like many important things in early life) was only an uninformed feeling. I could not define "freedom". While pondering this idea I would come across definitions that did seem important, though limited. People would tell me that they were free to be able to drive between states without showing their papers. They were free to go out to the movies late at night. The one that takes the cake while perusing my memory banks is the classic statement of delinquent youth, however, to justify belligerency. After displaying a vulgar or uncouth attitude, I would often hear that it was one's right because "It's a free country".
This begs the question as to what the foundation of freedom is. If it is sacrificial then it finds its basis in morality as opposed to a natural "winner take all" mentality. If freedom is simply doing what one wants to do then we are no better than animals. Not many people would desire to make the case that animals have moral agency. Indeed, the moral person diminishes himself so that others can increase. He helps the needy and comforts the distressed. For instance, a drug addict who chooses to enroll himself in rehab is exercising his liberty by giving others control of a part of his life. His good works may start simply from constraining his ability to commit to bad ones. An indebted person who cuts up his credit cards does the same. On a deeper level, a married couple gives up their single rights and when they have kids they sacrifice their time alone. Freedom is not a license for anarchy. As shown above, some of the greatest freedoms come in willingly limiting ourselves and lifting others up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
