Judging others

When we observe the things people do or have done, we need to remember that these are fruit. Another way of saying this is that everything we do or say is the consequence of our experiences and beliefs, even unrecognized. Experiences, thoughts, and things learned will influence and direct our actions and choices.  So instead of seeing someone and judging them, especially if they are different than us or different from what we find acceptable, we ought to ask the question (to ourselves), “What has influenced and motivated them to embrace such action?”

Far too often, we know little to nothing of people and therefore we have no ground upon which to stand in judging another.  It is not our place to judge someone, especially since we do not know them in any depth. Better, instead, is to assume the best and love that person anyway.

Speaking in categories

As is obvious, if one watches the news and current events, there are massive categorical disruptions taking place.  Women are beginning to respond to the sexism that has been so prominent in history, different races are beginning to speak out and act out against the horrible abuses that take place based on race.  The category of gender is being questioned, re-defined and re-formed.

It recently occurred to me that the practice we have of categorizing people is really just a form of stereotyping.  One cannot say that all women are weak, that all Asians are computer whizzes, that all Native Americans are alcoholics or that all homosexuals are flamboyant imitations of Liberace. To do this type of categorizing is simply not accurate.  I suspect that much of this practice comes from, of all unexpected places, the idea of “big”. We live in a big country, we live in big houses, we drive big cars, we go to big churches, we go to big malls, etc, etc. But if we look at every single one of these items, they are all malformed and twisted in some sense.  Big, almost always, results in deformation and abuse. The use of big typically results in anonymity and loss of accountability. And this is the root problem.

When anonymity and lack of accountability become the norm, there is a tragic disconnect that takes place in people.  No longer are we dealing with John, Jim, Mary or Sally, we are dealing with nameless faces, nameless numbers and statistics.  We begin dealing and thinking in terms of categories: white, black, Asian, straight, gay, etc., etc. And when our interactions lose personality, we have nothing to love, as one does not love a category, but an individual.  

Because love is what it is all about.  Jesus summed up the entire point of life as love of God and love of neighbor. There is nothing else needed.  

Our responsibility

Many of us have many things that come under our umbrella of responsibility,  and some of us take on additional responsibilities, often out of a feeling of love for God and for neighbor.  But the one great responsibility that we have, and cas odd as it sounds, it really is the most important, is that of our own holiness.
Saint Seraphim of Sarov, a monk in 18th century Russia, once said, "Acquire the Holy Spirit and a thousand around you will be saved."  In short, this pithy saying is saying, work on your own holiness, i.e., be filled with the Holy Spirit and in doing so, everyone around you will be affected as well. 
As someone once said, "You can't communicate what you do not know."  So despite all the best intentions and love for neighbor, if you do not know and love the love of God, you will never be able to communicate that to your neighbor. And even more so, the closer you are to God, the better you will know him, the more you will understand who God is and the better you will reflect and communicate that love to those around you, usually in more effective ways than you could even devise yourself.
"Acquire the Holy Spirit and a thousand around you will be saved."

About the self

I often talk about and think and critique the non Christian worldview and the terrible lack of recognition of what it even means to live like a Christian.  But, as of late, I am fearing that the problem goes much further than I realize.  Its fairly easy to draw a line in the sand and say one side is of those who are part of the church and the other side is those who are not.  And practically speaking, this is correct.  But there are so many nuances to this that a simple black and white is really not practical.
I am beginning to realize just how influenced we are by the modern mentality and how far we are from the historic faith.  Most of this is centered on the concept and importance of self.  Stepping back and looking at our lives objectively, we should come to the realization that most of what we do is centered on making ourselves comfortable and safe.  But is this right?
Is it right to expend the high majority of our time, energy and money on ourselves?  When we read through the lives of the saints, over the past 2000 years, this is not what we see.  We see people giving away everything they own, to take care of the needs of others.  There is so much need and yet we focus on our own comfort and physical well being.  Where does faith fit into this?
When we read through the Scriptures, we see, over and over, that if we do not do to the least of these, we do not do it unto God. In other words, we express our love and faith for God by loving our neighbor.  Nowhere do we read about the importance of building a comfortable home and a fat retirement cushion.
Honestly, I am so influenced by and immersed in 21st century American culture that I do not even know where to begin or if my thoughts are even realistic or accurate.
But I have to ask the questions.

Subjective or objective?

What does it mean to “love your neighbor”?  The further along I go into the Christian life, the more often this question keeps coming to mind.  And I’m afraid that I might not have the right answer.  It would be interesting to ask this question to a variety of “authorities” and see if there are differing answers.  Before jumping to conclusions, one must remember that one’s current culture, upbringing and personality all will have some effect on what we think is the answer.  For example, one response could be, “treat others as you would want to be treated.”  Does that then mean that if you prefer to be left alone for the most part, then you should leave others alone?  From the people I know, most prefer company over seclusion.

One thing that comes to mind is the relatively recent concept of “the five love types”.  I wonder if this system of categorization has any bearing on this question.  To suggest so, it seems to me, would be to make love subjective, rather than being objectively defined.  Which is, of course, a terrible slippery slope to start down.  But if “loving your neighbor” is objectively, then it can be objectively defined and therefore successfully (to some degree or another) carried out.  It would be nice to have a tangible definition in hand.

There is always an additional question

In the midst of the ever swirling existential questions that plague my mind, the idea came to the fore of what one question ought to underlie it all.  When we are thinking about, discussing or arguing some meta-ethical question, are debating some socio-political point or are questioning the validity of any particular political action, the question beneath them all should be that of love.  Are we loving our neighbor by doing this or that thing?
Is the current day coal miner, by doing his job, loving his neighbor?  In one sense, it depends upon the actual environmental effects of burning coal.  Is the CEO of the local nuclear power plant loving his neighbor? Maybe yes, maybe no, again it depends upon the long term effects of nuclear power and nuclear waste.
Are we loving our neighbor when we do things that adversely and possibly long term affect our neighbor and our descendants.  How many of our actions are driven simply by our desire to satisfy our comfort?

Us vs them?

Yes, this really is a question.  In most of the western religious world,  this is the unfortunate mentality. Evangelical America seems to believe that we as Christians are at war with the world.  But this really is not the case. That battle was already fought, that way was already won.  Jesus Christ is already king.
What is the situation then? What is our responsibility? It's love. Love is our responsibility.  The power of evil is already shattered.  We do not have to submit to the pathetic baubles and trinkets of sin.
If we could simply see all men as created in the image of God.....

Interpreting experience

Any experience we experience must be interpreted.  What we perceive and how we define these things are understood within a framework.  The religious, social, economic,  and historic culture in which we live will control how we understand any experience.
This is especially true of mystical experience. Without even going into the details of the experience, the fact of the experience actually taking place is interpreted differently by differing worldviews.  If someone is an atheist, a mystical experience involving a bright light at the end of a tunnel, will be interpreted as a mis-firing of the brain and flooding of chemicals into that brain.  Whereas a Buddhist may interpret this as a preparation for "the clear mind", or a Christian may see this as a transition from this temporal life into eternity with God.

Why am I thinking about this?  It has occurred to me that the use of experience as a tool for "proving" the validity of ones faith is not effective.  The same way that using particular texts from the Bible is not effective either, as differing minds will interpret texts (or even their applicability) in differing ways.  

When Jesus worked through his ministry, his instruction was very clear, "love God and love neighbor".  If we make this the focal point of our efforts in this life, we cannot go wrong.  We don't need to go door to door, we don't need to stand on street corners seeking to convince those passing by (of whatever) and we don't need to engage in intellectual debates and arguments to prove the other guy wrong.  We need to genuinely love other people.  And that means, in large part, to not judge them, condemn them or denigrate them when their current lifestyle is not up to the standard that we think it ought to be.  

We can argue and craft proofs all day long, but if someone does not see our love, we are nothing.