Love: Defined|Examined|Applied

     Throughout the course of the last week, I have been vigorously discussing the topic of government recognized homosexual marriage on Facebook.  The video I posted was a Special Comment from Keith Olbermann on CNN, and it has prompted an unusually high number of responses from friends, family, and former schoolmates.  It seems like, for the most part, we arrived at an impasse and chose to lovingly disagree--a testimony to the wonderful hearts behind all of the participants.  It really gave me great cheer seeing how we rarely got disrespectful towards each other, and when we did, we were quick to admit it, apologize, and forgive.  Kudos to all of you who participated!
     If there was one word that I felt was the most disagreed upon throughout the entire thread, it was the word love.  Everyone involved in the conversation seemed to be rightly motivated out of their definition of love, and that is a noble place to start.  But my friend Lindsay brought up a portion of the Bible in her post that we as Christians often refer to as The Love Chapter in 1 Corinthians 13.  In this chapter, the Apostle Paul gives us his working definition of love.  And, for those of us who believe that the Bible is inspired of God, I wonder if that definition isn't a better place to start than our own definitions.
     In a message response to her, I wrote the following paragraphs as an exposition of what I think Paul is getting at.  It's not perfect, it's not comprehensive, and it certainly isn't Scripture.  But it is my current perspective, for those who would care to know what I believe.  And I hope it will unlock your hearts to pursue love as God defines it with as much passion as you might pursue any political cause or religious experience.  So, without further adieu, my post [slightly grammatically redefined to fit this new audience, and with my editorial comments in brackets]:

     I'm really glad you used the Bible as part of the exposition of your opinion.  It's a fantastic place for us to be able to reason together, since we both think that it's the word of God and whatnot.  But I'd love to just take a closer look at your passage from 1 Corinthians 13 in an attempt to expose my understanding of what I believe Paul was saying about love.
     "If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing."  First of all, if we are Pentecostals [as both Lindsay and I are], this verse should perk our ears right up!  We grew up being made very aware of the gifts of the Spirit, and we have known the importance of those gifts.  However, Paul has a very distinct warning to our Pentecostal culture: don't you dare stop loving.  Although, we haven't covered what that means yet, precisely, it is important to mention that you and I should both be extremely diligent in applying the following principles to our particular brand of Christian upbringing.
     "If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing."  Herein lies the caveat to those who promote nothing more than a social Gospel.  It's not something our religious past would necessarily condition us toward, but if we were ever to get to a point where we were trying to distance ourselves from our past, surely this would be one of the first directions we'd head.  And I'm aware of that fact, and guard against it very closely.  Love is not only an outward display, but it is an inward reality of recognizing Jesus as the ultimate embodiment of a life of grace and truth that manifests itself in loving action toward the world around us.  So, be aware that we stand together on guard of a hollow, overly liberal message of salvation through good works.  But now to the meat...
     "Love is patient."  I'll pause right there.  Patient.  Patience........  What can this mean other than enduring through the decisions that other people are making as they navigate through a process of discovering truth?  If love is patient, than how do we apply love through patience to the way we as Christians live as American citizens?  Do we create laws that manage people's decisions for them because we are sure we know what the ideal for their life is?  Or do we give them the latitude and time it might take them, individually, to go through the process themselves?  Which way do you think God is doing this with you or with me?
     "Love is kind."  The Greek word that is translated kind means "to act benevolently" toward someone.  In other words, love acts with a big heart.  My concern about the conservative argument for 'tough love' is that they are basing their interpretation of love on what this passage doesn't tell us about what love is.  I hope we could discover something beautiful and true in what it does tell us that love is.  Love gives with open arms; Unconditionally.
     "[Love] does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud."  Perhaps we as Christians have nothing to envy in the homosexual lifestyle, and that is a reasonable perspective to have.  But, I wonder if our desire to make our voices so prominent in the halls of American power is a form of envy in itself.  Certainly, once we get there, we grow quite boastful.  I was among the Republicans in 2000 and 2004 who cheered Bush's election, and I was quite among those who were encouraged to pray AGAINST Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and John Kerry.  Now I see a little more clearly that the greatest danger to a Christian in a democratic society is assuming that, because we are allowed a say by our government, we should say whatever we want, whenever we want.  When we pray against a person or party--because candidates and parties represent ideas which may war and clash, but are still composed entirely of humans--we assume that our opinions are so utterly aligned with God's that God himself would come swiftly to our aid just to prove us right.  This is our pride.  This is our boast.  And when we don't get our way, this is our envy.
     "[Love] is not rude."  I have seen enough rude conservatives on TV, in pulpits around Seattle, and in political demonstrations to know that we don't really, really take this one seriously.  Does this mean that we should avoid speaking our opinion if it might be perceived as rude?  I didn't write the words, Paul did.  This is a complex issue, and should not be easily glossed over.  I'd encourage you to fully explore what Paul might possibly mean by this, and then decide for yourselves what loving conduct might look like if it shouldn't look rude. 
     "[Love] is not self-seeking."  God doesn't care if America prospers or not because God didn't make America.  God made people.  The extent to which God cares about America is the extent to which he cares for every human being who comprises the citizenry of humanity.  Therefore, can we--as not mere citizens of "America", but as citizens of humanity and of the Kingdom--see that it is sin for us to let America's interests stand in the way of the well being of even one Iraqi?  Or one communist?  Or one homosexual?  I'm glad that we care about the well being of our country and the people around us.  It's a great place to start.  But even evil men care about their own people.  It takes divine goodness to cause men to care about the weak, the foreign, the poor, and the sinner.
     "[Love] is not easily angered, [Love] keeps no record of wrongs."  Seriously.  Jesus is God, God is love, and love is not easily angered.  And we're called as His children to become like our daddy.  All of this Christian preemptive political maneuvering toward self-preservation--both in war and in domestic policy--has turned us into a people who look very easily angered.  And we keep a record of wrongs with such stunning diligence that we even take a record of the wrongs that MIGHT eventually be done to us, before they have even been done to us!  What sin is this?
     You might make the point here, again, that there is a distinction between the right actions of a person, and the expedient actions of a government.  Here we agree.  But instead of submitting Jesus' commission to love without condition beneath the rights of our American citizenship, I think both Jesus and Paul might call us to surrender our rights of citizenship to the commission to love without condition.
     "Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth."  Now, if a conservative Christian were trying to be argumentative, this might be the verse they'd pounce on after ignoring all the preceding verses.  Interestingly, you'd find me pouncing right along with them, and I'll tell you why.  I hope that I would never rejoice in the sin of another human being.  I pray that I could let the grief of the realization of what they're doing to themselves, to their families, and to society thoroughly ravage my heart and cause me to mourn for them.  For, to delight in the sin of another is either a cop out of some sort, or an exposition of one's own selfish desire to escape the judgment of their own sins.  Therefore, I will not delight in evil, but I will delight in what is true. 
     You see, it doesn't say, "Love does not delight in evil, but distances itself from everybody who is evil until they realize that their acts are evil and start coming to church."  Nor does it say, "Love does not delight in evil, but organizes society in such a way that people who act in a manner that is the special kind of evil that we can't tolerate shall feel like they have less access to love than 'good' people."  It merely says it delights in the truth.  And the truth is Jesus--not any code of ethics or morality or acceptable behavior.  Therefore, we celebrate the victories that God works in the hearts of people, and apply patience, kindness, goodness, etc, to the failures, as we would hopefully do to ourselves. 
     "It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres."  In what ways does a conservative ideology help us protect other than with a gavel or gun?  And, does this use of the verb protect really offer any sort of indication of whom love protects?  It doesn't protect only it's own; it just protects.  It protects all, always.  And if love always trusts--even when planes are running into important buildings--and, if love always hopes--even when we 'know homosexuals could wreak havoc on our society'--and, if love always perseveres--even when others might give in to their nature of writing people off because they take too much expense to relate to or to improve--then I ask you this: why are we wasting any of our time and money on politics as the means for bringing about all this love?
     "Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears."  Yes, even this great experiment called America will disappear.  All of our freedom of speech, our freedom of religion, and all of the other government sanctioned freedoms will one day melt before the absolute freedom found in Christ.  On that day, we will become a society ruled by Christ--not from heaven above with a gavel and gun, but from within our hearts, where He has written His law.  But this promise of the kingdom is also for us now.  Though it may lead to us being rejected by the world or religious institutions, scorned, spat upon, and even killed in His name, this freedom is ours for eternity if we believe on Christ.  Eventually, society will be brought up to speed.  But let us not forsake the freedom in our own hearts to love unconditionally to pursue vain human attempts to enforce love in our societies.
     "When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me."  These issues of love and society are complex issues requiring adult analysis and discussion.  There is no pat answer, no proposition, or no law that can truly define God's love ethic.  Even God's own perfect law--The Torah--was not good enough to create a society in Israel that loved God and was without sin.  It takes the sovereign Spirit of God moving in the hearts and minds of men and women, and the gentle mercy of His Son's grace being demonstrated through the people of his Grace to even begin to make such an impact.  Let us put behind us these laws, these rules, and these rights and instead pursue Jesus' higher calling to LOVE everybody.
     "Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known."  We can't get it perfect.  But that's the beauty of grace.  We need grace; homosexuals need grace; Iraqis need grace; and all the pregnant single mothers of this world need grace.  And not just some implied, theoretical grace that is functioning behind our social engineering, but a grace that would descend from our position of power like Christ from heaven.  We need a grace that would wash the feet of fishermen (the average worker), tax collectors (those who would abandon and betray the people of God or their own societies), and prostitutes (the sexually immoral or devious).  And we need a Grace that would then die condemned by those who would judge Him, although He was innocent.  In other words, we need to show a grace to this world that is so obvious, it can be seen as grace through any cultural lens from a million miles away.
     "And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love."  There are only three things left for us to do--have faith in Christ, take hope in all things, and love everyone (God and people) without condition.  There are no laws to pass, there are no rules to enforce, there are no societies to organize.  There is only to love unconditionally, even as we are loved unconditionally.  That is the greatest thing of all.

     I know that was super long, and I'd give y'all mad props if you read it the whole way through.  I just wanted y'all to know that I don't draw back from the conservative position because I think they're being too fundamentalist about Scripture.  I draw back because I think they're not being fundamentalist enough.  Grace and peace to all of you!