L'Oreal launched a powerful slogan a number of decades ago that still resonates for many of us today. it even received recognition in 2002 when it was inducted into the ad slogan hall of fame (although i must confess, until now i did not know there was such a thing...)
because you're worth it
this whole business of worth establishment can get rather muddled if we set up our portfolio in relation to the wrong people, places or accomplishments. this muddling can place around our heads a very thick cloud cover that hides some of the most obvious things from us- leaving us with significant blindspots in our field of vision and vocation.
but when does entitlement become a justice issue?
when it violates the rights of another.
peter gabriel once wrote a troubling song about a little child who, being abandoned by his parents, finds himself alone at home and staring out into the streets. the emotional detachment that is accomplished through his ongoing alienation and loneliness causes the child to play new imaginary games. from his place behind the front door, he plays the assassin, imagining every car going by as part of a motorcade. a chilling lyric says it all:
I don't really hate you. I don't care what you do.
We were made for each other, me and you.
I wanna be somebody- you were like that too.
If you don’t get given you learn to take... and I will take you.
we read in scripture, history and today's newspaper of emotionally detached people in positions of power who act out their sense of personal entitlement to the complete disregard of the human rights of those being exploited. human beings are just really good at putting themselves and their personal interests before those of others.
to take the enthnocentric edge off, what is needed is an accountability partnership- a bonding together in the pursuit of commonly agreed-upon values; two people who decide to listen to one another in case their own personal perspective gets a little too comfortable. the busting of entitlement clouds is accomplished best within voluntary relationships of trust and vulnerability.
back in the old testament, pretty much every king (e.g. ahab, david) had a prophet- one who would speak with the king for God.
To us a single act of injustice- cheating in business, exploitation of the poor- is slight; to the prophets, a disaster. To us injustice in injurious to the welfare of the people; to the prophets it is a deathblow to existence; to us an episode; to them, a catastrophe, a threat to the world.
(Rabbi Abraham Heschel)
a prophet is an entitlement cloudbuster.
we all need one of those- not just they who are kings.
2 comments:
I think is mainly a Western mind-set - where we have become accustomed to Capitalism and 'individualism'. Everyone in this society is promised 'theirs' and they are going to try and het 'theirs'. I think we live in a perfectly selfish society complete with all the psychology to pretend we don't.
The being said, the commandment is 'to love your neighbor as you love yourself'. There needs to be a certain level of self-esteem and taking care of our needs that has to happen so we can show this same appreciation to another. I think it may come off as 'selfish' or even 'expectations' - but within balance - they may be justified.
That all being said, I am basically selfish in this society and don't do much for others (however when asked I am pretty reliable and give what I need). I always wonder if I am selfishly balanced or not?
"I think we live in a perfectly selfish society complete with all the psychology to pretend we don't. " (SVS)
well said.
however, i also agree that we are compromised a bit by this whole 'as you love yourself' clause... probably because we don't really know how to love ourselves right. the most insecure come off as the most arrogant and those who are always acting in the interest of others are often just beating back their own demons with a little 'philantherapy.'
somehow, i think it all reduces down to our inability to love and be loved the way God has intended. i'm not sure that this is exclusively western folly... it's just expressed this way here and that way there.
to add to this, there is that whole issue of ethnocentricity and projection: at our best, we try to love others the way we know we should love ourselves, and set out to express this love the way we would have it expressed unto us (a' la the golden rule)... in so doing, we once again limit everything to that which we can speculate upon, placing ourselves once again in the centre of everything.
the challenge is to place the other there
endeavouring to listen and respond rather than presuming and affecting the changes presumed to be needed.
that's why i like what you placed in the first bit of the brackets: "however, when asked I am pretty reliable..."
what's interesting is the second half of your parenthetical disclaimer... "and give what I need."
i love that somehow we meet a need in ourselves by responding to the needs of others. perhaps it is in this service that we put into action this whole idea of God-honouring self-love.
Post a Comment