I just watched The Last Station, which is about the end of Leo Tolstoy's life. I thought it was fascinating, exploring the dangers of making a person into an idol and how to mix social radicalism with a life of romance and happiness.
It was thought-provoking. I haven't quite sorted what I think of it and its implications for my life, but I felt I needed to write about it so as to maybe make some sense of it.
I worry that I might be turning into an angry radicalist. I have no problem being radical, and having opinions that are contrary to popular opinion. But I don't want to turn being different into being hostile. And unfortunately, when people disagree with me, or think differently than me, I get defensive. I hate that people think I'm stupid or wrong. So it's easier to get angry than to feel inferior.
But I don't want to be that way. I want to hold my beliefs with confidence, but not force them upon others or feel the need to be proved right. I'm very scared of looking wrong. More than being wrong, I hate looking wrong. Which makes having a blog very annoying, because I constantly change my opinions of things, and now they are publicly documented.
I have very strong opinions on love and romance. I am an idealist. I grew up a romantic, naive and stupid. But that bit me in the butt, and I saw too many romances fall apart. That left me in my current situation, where I vacillate between wanting to be the ultimate, awesome, confident, God-empowered single woman or wanting to be the communicative, honest, unbiased, partnered married woman.
The problem with idealism is Chris. He is an idealist, and he is constantly miserable. I don't want to end up that way, the way that I am headed. But I don't want to give up my ideals. I want a love that will succeed, a love that is built on God and that won't waver. Or I want to be single, to give up all attachments to this world and focus my whole person on obeying God.
Unfortunately, life is not ideal. No matter how my life goes, I will be disappointed. I don't know how to hold to my ideals while remaining happy. I don't know how to be a pacifist, how to be non-materialistic, how to be free of religious law, without becoming angry.
Liz said she loved that I love things so passionately, but sometimes I think my passion can be more of a detriment than anything else.
I'm all confused, basically. I don't know how to be who I am. I don't know how to navigate life without my brain or my heart exploding.
EDITED TO ADD: Of course when I go to Donald Miller's blog he is talking about something similar. I will just quote him, because this is what I want to be. I want to be like Jesus.
"It’s interesting to me that Jesus never forced anybody to agree with Him. Instead, He has a quiet confidence. He was responsible to say the truth and to be Himself and he let others take responsibility for their lives. He spoke the truth, He wasn’t offended when people didn’t agree, and He gave them their own will to do as they wish. But what’s more, He loved them regardless. He loved them whether they followed Him or tried to kill them. He even loved them while they were killing Him.
If you have an opinion, and somebody disagrees, let them. Just make it know what you think about the issue, listen to them closely, and then love and care about them regardless. If they keep trying to change your mind, gently explain to them that you simply don’t agree, but you don’t want it to interrupt your friendship. If people can only be friends with others who think the way they think, this is a weakness in character.
The Jesus kind of love, the love that speaks the truth and yet does not try to control, is supernatural. It is a very confident position and it comes from God. Will it always win? No, but the point is not to win, the point is to love, even to our deaths."
I just watched that movie last night! Interesting comments.
ReplyDeleteA few comments from an older man who has seen a lot of life:
ReplyDelete1) There is nothing wrong with being an idealist, and it especially easy to be one when you are young. (I know I was) But, as you noted, Chris is miserable because of his idealism. One thing that life and years will teach you is that the world is not ideal, nowhere even near it, and to maintain idealism is to suffer. You will end up denying yourself many things because they do not meet your ideals.
2) You do not have to give up your ideals...you do have to realize that you probably aren't going to achieve them. "Go with the flow" makes sense as long as you maintain your faith and morals and standards. Maybe the ideals need to be toned down a bit to reflect reality?
3) Donald Miller would be a hard man to have a discussion with because he assumes he is correct, and he will listen to you and love you, but he is not going to change his mind or learn something from the interchange. I sense he is comparing himself to Jesus, who spoke the truth with confidence. Yes, He did do that. But I doubt whether Donald (or Tricia) has the complete truth so that they can listen and love and keep their original opinions regardless. There is an old Chinese saying that a wise man is a fool who knows he is a fool and a fool is a wise man who knows he is a wise man. I would prescribe a teaspoon full of humility for Donald.
I went to the library and asked them to get the Susan Isaacs book. :)
ReplyDeleteJennie - YAY! Tell me what you think of it, please!
ReplyDeleteTommy - I see what you are saying, but I'm going to defend my man Donald and say that I very much doubt he would be okay with comparing himself to Jesus. What I got from that quote is that Jesus is to be our role model, and we should follow His example in everything, including how we deal with people who disagree with us. And I don't think Donald Miller is merely, if at all, referring to two Christians debating cultural or side theological issues. I think a big part of what he's talking about is inter-faith dialogue. In that situation, I do think we Christians are speaking the truth, which makes his comment make more sense. Maybe I am defending him and really he is being proud. But it's good advice regardless of where it came from.
Tricia, I have not read Donald's blog, so perhaps I spoke in haste and he is really not being proud. But I would argue with the statement that Jesus wasn't offended when people disagreed with Him. The Pharisee's were constantly on his case and He gave them tit for tat. He called them hypocrites, snakes, broods of vipers, whitewashed tombs with nothing inside but dead men's bones and uncleanliness. He said that they cleaned the outside of their dishes but were dirty inside with greed and self-indulgence. He said they were blind fools and when they won a convert they would make him twice as much a son of hell as they were themselves. I imagine He roasted them pretty good when He would preach in the synagogue. It must have been interesting when he cleaned out the vendors and money changers from the temple area. I bet He was angry.
ReplyDeleteOne thing I learned as I aged was that whenever someone disagrees with you, don't just blow them off, but find out WHY they disagree with you. Rarely does someone disagree just to be a pain in the butt. They usually have a reason, and if you find out what that reason is, you may learn something. You don't have to agree with the reason, but you should understand where it is coming from and why. From this comes wisdom. This is what bothered me with Donald's willingness to just agree to disagree and love them without finding out WHY they disagreed with him. The "I am right and you are wrong but that is OK I love you anyway" just kind of rubbed me the wrong way.
Tommy