Recently I was in a situation in which someone who has not known one of my sons very long, identified him in an educational document as somewhat of a \u201cclass clown.\u201d While aspects of the description were not without merit, I respectfully requested that we alter the document.<\/p>\n
\u201cI don\u2019t disagree with the behaviors you describe,\u201d<\/em> I asserted. \u201cThe challenge is the label. Once we put a label on something, it sticks. And then that\u2019s how we tend to see and treat the person always thereafter.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n Thankfully, in the educational setting, everyone in the room respectfully recognized the potential pitfall\u2026 If we identify a person as \u201c_________ ,\u201d they will forever be viewed as \u201c_________.\u201d<\/p>\n Fill in the blank with whatever word you wish \u2014 positive or negative\u2026<\/p>\n Friend or foe\u2026 genius or jerk. Labels stick.<\/p>\n One label I\u2019ve heard from many as of late \u2014 perhaps due to the volatility of the current political climate \u2014 is the identification of another as our \u201cenemy.\u201d Socially, relationally, politically, you-name-it. We disagree\u2026 someone gets hurt\u2026 an initiative is obstructed\u2026 and our political leaders unfortunately then encourage the mass labeling.<\/p>\n The potential pitfall is that if we can get the \u201cenemy\u201d label to stick, then we can treat the person differently. We can justify it. We can even think lesser of that person \u2014 and then actually get lured into the idea that such is a wise thing to do. At that point it becomes completely acceptable to ignore another\u2019s entire analysis or perspective\u2026 They are the enemy,<\/strong> after all.<\/em> They are not deserving of our respect or consideration.<\/p>\n Who respects their enemy?<\/em><\/p>\n If persons are identified as the enemy, then they are certainly not our neighbor, because no way would we live anywhere close to them.<\/strong><\/em> And if they are not our neighbor, guess what? We don\u2019t have to love them. We don\u2019t have to like them. We don\u2019t have to even try.<\/em> It\u2019s only our neighbor we\u2019re universally called to love\u2026 right?<\/p>\n \u2026\u201cLove the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind, and love your neighbor as yourself\u201d\u2026<\/em><\/p>\n Love your neighbor as yourself\u2026<\/em> the Intramuralist sees such as a pretty profound concept\u2026 I mean, I do love myself, and I\u2019m pretty hip on my family and friends. But my neighbor? That\u2019s more of a reach. I suppose I love most<\/em> of them.<\/p>\n But notice how we have minimized the profoundness of loving our neighbor as ourselves because we\u2019ve curtailed who can actually be considered in the neighbor category. We have made the imperative easier. Once we identify another as the enemy, we can justify treating them however is easiest and most convenient for us\u2026 No need to work through the tough stuff with this one\u2026 no need to pursue relationship or reconciliation\u2026 no need to give any validity to any of his perspective… nope\u2026 he\u2019s the enemy.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n For years I\u2019ve led a study encouraging attenders to seek the greatest wisdom. One exercise repeatedly practiced is based on the timeless tale of the Good Samaritan. As has been shared for centuries in all sorts of circles, a traveling man is attacked, beaten, robbed, and left for dead. Multiple persons walk by, notice him but intentionally avoid him; obviously, they don\u2019t see the injured man as their \u201cneighbor.\u201d Since they have labeled him as something lesser, there exists no need to help.<\/p>\n Along comes the Good Samaritan \u2014 an ethnicity at the time which was despised by pharisaic leaders. The Samaritan gave the injured man first aid, disinfected and bandaged his wounds. He even lifted the man onto his donkey, led him to an inn, and made him comfortable. Still, he paid the innkeeper for the injured man\u2019s stay.<\/p>\n The Good Samaritan knew who his neighbor was.<\/em> He never minimized it. He never allowed any belief, behavior, ethnicity, income, political or social standing\u00a0to alter his awareness of who his neighbor was. He never confused his neighbor with the enemy.<\/p>\n In our study, we thus asked of one another: Fill in the blank with whomever you wish. My suggestion is we first learn better who is our neighbor.<\/p>\n Respectfully\u2026 {Gleren Meneghin<\/a> on Unsplash<\/a>}<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Recently I was in a situation in which someone who has not known one of my sons very long, identified him in an educational document as somewhat of a \u201cclass clown.\u201d While aspects of the description were not without merit, I respectfully requested that we alter the document. \u201cI don\u2019t disagree with the behaviors you … <\/p>\n
\n\u201cWho would be the person on the side of the road hardest for you to help?\u201d<\/em>
\n \u201cWho have we labeled as our enemy?\u201d<\/em>
\nAnd \u201cwho have we justified loving less?\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n
\nAR<\/p>\n