What is Ordo Amoris?

 

JD VANCE: There is a Christian concept that you love your family and then you love your neighbor, and then you love your community, and then you love your fellow citizens, and then after that, prioritize the rest of the world

A lot of the far left has completely inverted that pic.twitter.com/XkoTiKgq3g

— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) January 30, 2025

 

Just google “ordo amoris.” Aside from that, the idea that there isn’t a hierarchy of obligations violates basic common sense. Does Rory really think his moral duties to his own children are the same as his duties to a stranger who lives thousands of miles away? Does anyone? https://t.co/otvv5g1wFN

— JD Vance (@JDVance) January 30, 2025

 

Time for a bit of seminary.

Thanks to a bit of discourse JD Vance engaged in, we have our next big question. 

What is ordo amoris?  

The Vice President appeared on Fox News to discuss the administration’s immigration policies and picked up an emergent thread in conservative circles regarding the “sin” of empathy, arguing the political left carries empathy too far and attempted to shrink the bounds of empathy to a closer circle of people.  From the quote, highlighted in the tweet above, “There is a Christian concept that you love your family and then love your neighbor, and then you love your community, and then you love your fellow citizens, and then after that, prioritize the rest of the world.”

It’s a great quote and it’s a great sound bite.  

The problem is that it is a stretch and a misstatement of the Christian concept.

As many in the subsequent days, including Vance himself, have pointed out, Vance seemed to be trying to highlight the theological concept of ordo amoris, or “ordered love”.   

The concept comes from the work of St. Augustine in The City of God.  Augustine believed that true virtue and moral goodness stem from properly aligning our affections and desires with what is truly valuable and worthy. Thus, God’s love must be centralized in reordering our affections.  Our ultimate fulfillment then lies in the pursuit of virtue and moral goodness required the proper ordering of our desires, with God as the ultimate object of love and devotion.

“But if the Creator is truly loved — that is, if He Himself is loved, and not something else in place of Him — then He cannot be wrongly loved. We must, however, observe right order even in our love for the very love by which we love that which is worthy to be loved, so that there may be in us that virtue which enables us to live well. Hence, it seems to me that a brief and true definition of virtue is ‘rightly ordered love.’” (City of God, XV.22).

We can see the genesis of Augustine’s theories in Jesus’s encapsulation of the commandments.   “And he said to him, ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.  This is the great and first commandment.  And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.  On these two commandments depend all the Law and Prophets.’”  Matthew 22:37-40.  In these two, Jesus is likewise tying the order of love together.  To love others, we must love God first, and to love God is to love our neighbor.  

C.S. Lewis described this relationship in his letters.  “To love you as I should, I must worship God as Creator. When I have learnt to love God better than my earthly dearest, I shall love my earthly dearest better than I do now. In so far as I learn to love my earthly dearest at the expense of God and instead of God, I shall be moving towards the state in which I shall not love my earthly dearest at all. When first things are put first, second things are not suppressed but increased.” Letters of C. S. Lewis.  To do otherwise, is to create idols in one’s relationships.  We’ve all seen these.  The parents that have made idols of their children and lift of their children as the greatest importance in their lives.  The spouses that lift up their mate as their idol, prioritizing their mate to the exclusion of all else.  It’s not to say these relationships aren’t important or that making them a priority is bad.  It’s when it comes out of order that a person’s life is unhealthy.  But that is a sermon for another time.

Vance doesn’t include God in his list of loves, so it’s hard to determine if his list would follow the concept of ordo amoris or not.

His comments instead seem to go to a related concept discussed by Thomas Aquinas.  Ordo caritatis, or the order of charity, a concept in which the application of our love, or of how our affection is expressed is directed to those more closely related to us.  This principle is outlined by St. Paul in his letter to Timothy.  “But if any man have not care of his own, and especially of those of his house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.” 1 Timothy 5:8.   Aquinas ordered love as follows:

• God
• Ourselves, as a man ought to love himself more than his neighbor
• Our neighbors
• Our bodies, as a man ought to love his neighbor more than his body

“On this respect we love all men equally out of charity: because we wish them all one same generic good, namely everlasting happiness. Secondly love is said to be greater through its action being more intense: and in this way we ought not to love all equally.” STh q. 26, a. 6.  Our love therefore applies universally, but our charity is not distributed equally.  The degree of our charity is then applied according to our proximity.  In friendship, in kinship, in nationality, in physical space, etc.  “Moreover there is yet another reason for which, out of charity, we love more those who are more nearly connected with us, since we love them in more ways. For, towards those who are not connected with us we have no other friendship than charity, whereas for those who are connected with us, we have certain other friendships, according to the way in which they are connected.” STh q. 26, a. 6.

This is just common sense.  Of course we love those closest to us in different ways.  The bonds are stronger, we go to greater distances for them.  

It is not, however, a good philosophy for foreign policy, nor is it exactly applicable to our current immigration issue.  First, as foreign policy, we would have to assess at a broader scale the concept of our neighbor.  Who is the United States neighbors?  Is it just Canada and Mexico, literal proximate neighbors?  And of late, it doesn’t seem like we are acting too charitably to them.  Is it the countries we share kinship with, like the United Kingdom?  Or friendship or our allies?  What is the neighbor to a country?  Vance would like this to be just another part of America First, but it ignores a much deeper concept.

Secondly, with regard to immigration, we are largely dealing with an issue that is here already.  The issue is proximate.  It’s at our door.  So the question is more how we treat the stranger that is already among us than the foreigner that is very distant.  

Here, I think John Calvin gives perhaps the greatest critique.

"Now, since Christ has shown in the parable of the Samaritan that the term 'neighbor' includes even the most remote person (Luke 10:36), we are not expected to limit the precept of love to those in close relationships.

I do not deny that the more closely a man is linked to us, the more intimate obligation we have to assist him. It is the common habit of mankind that the more closely men are abound together by the ties of kinship, of acquaintanceship, or of neighborhood, the more responsibilities for one another they share. This does not offend God; for his providence, as it were leads us to it.

BUT I say: we ought to embrace the whole human race without exception in a single feeling of love; here there is no distinction between barbarian and Greek, worthy and unworthy, friend and enemy, since all should be contemplated in God, not in themselves.

When we turn aside from such contemplation, it is no wonder we become entangled in many errors. Therefore, if we rightly direct our love, we must first turn our eyes not to man, the sight of whom would more often engender hate than love, but to God, who bids us extend to all men the love we bear to him, that this may be an unchanging principle: whatever the character of the man, we must yet love him because we love God."     John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 2, Chapter 8, Section 55.

As Calvin outlines, this is the whole point of the parable of the Good Samaritan.  Remember, the parable of the Good Samaritan comes in Luke immediately following Jesus outlining the two greatest commandments.  A young student of the law asked Jesus what he must do to attain eternal life and Jesus asked him the commandments.  The student repeated the two commandments Jesus stated above. Jesus then acknowledged his correct statement.  

The young student of the law had to ask one more question.  Luke adds, desiring to justify himself, the lawyer asked, “Who is my neighbor?”

The lawyer, the pharisees then and now wanted a neat box tied around who their responsibility to love covered.  Fellow Israelites would be certain.  Showing hospitality to foreigners and travelers was to be expected.  But surely Jesus could not expect them to love a Samaritan, or worse, a Roman.

Jesus responds with a familiar story that I've written about before.  He tells of a Levite and a priest that pass by the injured man and worry more about themselves. What will happen to me if I touch this man?  Will I be defiled?  What has he done to deserve such a fate?  It's important to note that both the Levite and the priest could not imagine themselves in the man's position.  They could not empathize enough to see his need for assistance, so they crossed on the other side of the road to avoid him.

The Samaritan on the other hand worried about what would happen to the man if he did nothing.  Perhaps, the Samaritan could imagine himself in a similar situation.  He knew the treachery of the road and saw how it could have easily been him in that fate.

From the story, we see that the only response to Jesus' question at the end, asking who was the neighbor to the man who fell to robbers, is "he who showed mercy on him."  We see that all we come in contact with are people who are our neighbors.  And we have the opportunity to be neighborly in response by being the ones who show mercy and love.

Who we are called to love in our order of love, who we are called to those in our order of charity is those that God has brought into our paths.  We focus on that proximate connection.  The one that God has ordained and brought around us.  Not just the nice ones.  Not just the ones we choose.  Not just the convenient ones. 

Our order of love extends to the messy ones, the broken ones, the bleeding ones, the inconvenient ones that are brought in our circles.  The ones that don’t look like us.  The ones that we disagree with.  The ones that we have no other connection beyond a creator.  And especially the ones where we have no other connection than a faith, as we love our family in Christ.

So here, it calls us to care for and love to the migrant among us.  The refugee.  

They are here.  They are our neighbors.

For, the order of our love is in God’s control, not ours.  So let’s stop trying to justify ourselves.  Let’s stop putting limits on what God has called us to.

And if you need more encouragement…

"You shall not wrong nor oppress the stranger, for you were strangers in the Land of Egypt"  Exodus 22:20

"The strangers who reside with you shall be to you as your citizens … for you were strangers in the land of Egypt."  Leviticus 19:34

"For the Eternal your God is God supreme and Lord supreme, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God, who shows no favor and takes no bribe, but upholds the cause of the fatherless and the widow, and loves the stranger, providing food and clothing — you too must love the stranger, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt."  Deuteronomy 10:18-19

“Share with the Lord’s people who are in need. Practice hospitality.” Romans 12:13

“Offer hospitality to one another without grumbling.” 1 Peter 4:9

“Do not forget to show hospitality to strangers, for by so doing some people have shown hospitality to angels without knowing it.”  Hebrews 13:2

“Rather, he must be hospitable, one who loves what is good, who is self-controlled, upright, holy and disciplined.”  Titus 1:8

“For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in.”  Matthew 25:35

“Dear friend, you are faithful in what you are doing for the brothers and sisters, even though they are strangers to you. They have told the church about your love. Please send them on their way in a manner that honors God. It was for the sake of the Name that they went out, receiving no help from the pagans. We ought therefore to show hospitality to such people so that we may work together for the truth.”  3 John 1:5-8

Agents of Mercy

"I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship.  Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect."

Romans 12: 1-2

Like most believers across the nation, we participated in virtual church on Sunday.  This allowed us to listen to a message from a church we would like to visit here in Indianapolis, as well as listen to the message from what we still consider as our home church, Stonepoint.  Brandon's message for Stonepoint was from Romans on The Art of Being Different in an Age of Indifference.  Particularly important now.

What struck me was one of the first questions that Brandon posed.  Paul starts Romans 12 with an appeal that has resulted from his discussion in the prior eleven chapters.  An appeal by the mercies of God, in which he is appealing to us to be agents of the mercies of God.  Which raises the question, are we agents of the mercies of God?

Are we acting as agents of the mercies of God?

Are we demonstrating his mercy?  His long-suffering patience?  His generosity?  His kindness?  His love?

Realizing of course, all of this was shown to those who were enemies of God.  Who were far from Him.  Who despised Him.  Who spat on Him and injured Him. "Love your enemies," indeed.

I guess I worry that, all too often, we desire to be agents of His judgment or His wrath, as opposed to mercy.  We want to be the one convicting or condemning, which was never our job.  Those fall to the Spirit, and the Father, respectively.  Our's was always love, under which mercy should fall naturally.

And in times like this, our mercy should be flowing abundantly.

We, the church, should be the ones caring for those that are scared, that are hurting, that are suffering during this time.  Doing our part to prevent the spread of this disease, following the guidelines and regulations as they come, but still being the hands and feet of Jesus.  

Instead of hoarding, we as Christians should be the first giving our supplies away.  We should be the first to share non-perishable food items, to share cleaning supplies, to share paper goods.  To share toilet paper.

One suggestion the church in Brownsburg had was creating an emergency supply kit in a shoebox.  Not for yourself, but for your neighbors.  To share supplies and an encouraging word.  A shoebox with a roll of toilet paper, with a card letting them know you are thinking of them and want to help in anyway you can, and any other supplies you can fit.  To work in social distancing times, these could be just left on a porch or by the door.  

For churches with kitchens, is there a way you can help get meals to those who need them?  Could you set up a curbside pickup for meals to go, particularly for the most at-risk among us?

If not food, is there monetary assistance we could be providing?  Are there expenses that we could meet for those that have been furloughed or lost their job in this time?  

At a most basic level, can we be merciful with our words?  Can we be careful not to minimize or belittle the anxiety that people are feeling about this disease?  "It's just the flu" isn't really factually accurate or helpful right now.  Likewise, quoting statistics on mortality to someone who has a family member suffering or infected, or even to someone who is worried about their immuno-compromised friend or family might not be the most merciful thing to do.  We can discuss and validate their concerns, with the best thing we can do often being just listening and being there.

So, how are we doing?

What kind of agent are you?  I know I'm having to check myself regularly.  Am I being an agent of the mercies of God?  Am I trying to be an agent of some other aspect of Him, where I should not be?  or am I not an agent at all, rather only serving myself?

Thankfully, God's mercy is vast and displayed to us in spite of our shortcomings.

"The Lord is merciful and gracious, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love.  He will not always chide, nor will he keep his anger forever.  He does not deal with us according to our sinds, nor repay us according to our iniquities.  For as high as the heavens are above the earth, so great is his steadfast love toward those who fear him; as far as the east is from the west, so far does he remove our transgressions from us."

Psalm 103: 8-12

Big Question #4: Am I willing to yield?

"In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion."

Carl Sagan

This topic has been on my mind a lot.  I think it shows in the history of this blog.  The nearly two years of this blog are littered with topics on the dangers of our insistence on being right.  Our refusal to compromise.  Our refusal to admit when we are wrong.  And our refusal to admit when we don't know.

More recently, Brother Paul's sermon brought it back to the forefront, with the passage in James showing that true wisdom is willing to yield.  It is open to reason.


"Who is wise and understanding among you? By his good conduct let him show his works in the meekness of wisdom.  But if you have bitter jealousy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast and be false to the truth.  This is not the wisdom that comes down from above, but is earthly, unspiritual, demonic.  For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there will be disorder and every vile practice.  But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason [willing to yield], full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere.  And a harvest of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace."

James 3:13-18

This makes me pause and reflect.  Am I willing to yield?  Is my wisdom of the type that could be described as pure, peaceable, gentle, open to reason, willing to yield?  

Am I willing to debate?  And not in the sense of screaming at each other, with entrenched positions, designed only to make myself look better, smarter, more informed?  Am I really willing to engage in conversation?  To hear other points of view?  To actually consider them?

Am I open to having my mind changed?  Even on things that I may have considered sacred?  Am I willing to evaluate those sacred cows to see if they are essential, or just preferential?

And this goes in every realm of life.

Am I willing to admit that Republicans have good policies and Democrats make mistakes?  For entrenched conservatives, are you willing to admit that Democrats make good policies and are acting in what they believe is the best interest of this country?  Likewise, are you willing to admit that Republicans overreact, make bad policies, make mistakes, and sometimes look out for personal interests over country?

Am I as a Christian willing to concede points to atheists on theological debates, when the matters concern non-essentials of the faith?  Atheists, are you willing to concede that there are matters far beyond our comprehension, and questions that will remain un-answered regarding spiritual issues?

Am I as a person of faith willing to admit that science may better explain how the universe was created and functions?  And as a person of science, am I willing to admit that faith offers a better explanation as to why?

With issues of faith, am I willing to discuss differing interpretations and positions with fellow believers without drawing a right/wrong line?  Without falling into an us versus them trap?  To recognize that we both may be right and we both may be wrong, and possibly all at the same time?

As a white person, am I willing to yield to people of color when it comes to issues of racial disparity?  To acknowledge that the issues they raise do exist?  Such as those raised by black lives matter?

Am I willing to judge other groups by their best examples and myself by my worst intentions, instead of the other way around?

Am I willing to listen to traditionally oppressed groups and treat their concerns with validity and respect?

I hope I am.  I hope that my willingness to ask questions reflects a willingness to engage in meaningful dialogue and debate.  That I am open to having my mind change.  I believe I am, but I also know and recognize that I have biases and blindspots that I may not recognize (another question coming up).

We as a society need to be able to compromise again.  To be able to have our minds changed.  To be able to grow.  To learn.  

It makes our world bigger and opens new possibilities.  I pray we have not become as hardened and as entrenched as it first may seem.  I still believe in the power of conversation.  Maybe not on a mass scale; that dialogue may be lost thanks to the commercial based news cycle.  But individually, one-on-one, I have to believe we can help each other see the other side.  To understand each other.  To reach each other.

If we are just willing to engage in a meaningful way.

“How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, “This is better than we thought! The Universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant?” Instead they say, “No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way.” A religion, old or new, that stressed the magnificence of the Universe as revealed by modern science might be able to draw forth reserves of reverence and awe hardly tapped by the conventional faiths.”

Carl Sagan

The Goodness of God

"Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the Lord for ever."

Psalm 23:6

As Psalm 23 comes to a close, it contains the promise of the Psalm.  That goodness and mercy will follow us, and that we will dwell with the Lord forever.  Regarding this verse, I want to amplify two things from the message Sunday.  First, regarding what it looks like for goodness to follow us.  Second, what it means to dwell in the house of the Lord.  Both parts can be easily misunderstood by focusing on a single aspect of the promise.

It's easy to see how we can get turned around regarding goodness.  We all too often associate goodness with good things happening to us.  Goodness is following us when fortune smiles on us.  When we get what we want.  When things are going well.

We have coined "prosperity gospel" for this exact ideology.  For the teaching that God wants what is best for you and will give you nothing but good things.  If your faith is strong you will be healthy and wealthy.  Sickness, suffering, and want are symptoms of a lack of faith.

It's seductive, certainly.  But it's a false gospel.  We have too many passages that promise that we will suffer as followers of Christ.  "Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, while evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived."  2 Timothy 3:12-13.  We will be provided for, yes, and we will have joy, but we will also face hardships.

How we respond in those times says a lot about what we believe about goodness and about God.

As Brandon conveyed, the goodness here reflects on the goodness of God.  That God is our good shepherd.  The shepherd that cares for His sheep.  The faithful shepherd, that does not leave his sheep to their own destruction.  But the one that ensures the sheep are healthy and productive members of the herd.

Goodness here also reflects more on the consistency of the goodness of God.  That God remains good in any and every circumstance.  That he is always the good shepherd.  Even when the suffering comes.

In the first few years of our marriage, it seemed like Jamie and I lost a family member a year.  In that time, God was still good.

Through our the two miscarriages, including the ectopic that could have killed Jamie, God was still good.

Through the job loss and the two month period of unemployment, God was still good.

Through every hurricane, storm, and strife that has affected our families, God has remained good.

He was, is, and will always be good.  Past, present, and future; imperfect tense.

I like to think of goodness here referring to the grace of God.  His ultimate goodness towards us.  Giving us what we do not deserve.  Salvation, sanctification, glorification.  All the grace of God.  So when paired with mercy, we have grace and mercy following us all the days of our lives.  God giving us what we do not deserve (restoration), and not giving us what we do deserve (death), through the days of our lives.

The picture becomes even more beautiful when you consider the Hebrew word for follow.  The word in Hebrew is radaph, and follow is perhaps too tame to accurately translate the text.  Radaph indicates pursuit, to be chased after.  Grace and mercy are pursuing us throughout our lives.

If that is not a picture of the Gospel, I don't know what is.

Viewing it through the metaphor of a shepherd and his sheep, you can almost picture goodness/grace and mercy as the two faithful sheepdogs of the shepherd.  Continually reigning the sheep in.  Guiding them, pursuing them when they stray, nipping at their heels when needed.

Such a radical departure from the mistaken idea that "only good things should happen to me now, goodness is going to follow me."  And given this context, it should make us consider another consequence.

If the grace and mercy of the Lord are pursuing us, and we are following the good shepherd, then grace and mercy should be pouring out of our lives.  Our cups should runneth over.  Goodness and mercy should follow where we go.  In this way, we should not only as sheep be receiving these blessings, we should also be about transmitting goodness and mercy.  About sharing grace and mercy to those we are in contact with.

If all that is left is what we make in this world, let us make good.

Can that be said about our lives?

I think we all too often avoid our responsibilities in this area because we focus on the wrong part of the promise with regard to the second section of this verse.  An improper focus on what dwelling in the house of the Lord forever means.

For most of us, I think we all view this as referring exclusively to Heaven.  About our eternal life in our Heavenly home in the presence of the Lord.  Forever.  This section certainly does cover that.  But I believe it is much broader.

In David's day, the house of the Lord was the tabernacle, the tent of meetings which was, quite literally, the dwelling of God.  To dwell in the house of the Lord would be dwelling in the tabernacle with God.

In that, we see that this promise has an earthly component.  It is to be near God, to be with God forever, both here and in the heavenlies.

It's the opportunity for the sheep to get to go into the master's barn.  Or in certain cases, to be in the master's house.  To be in the presence of the shepherd continually.   And to then be led back to the green pastures in season.

As believers, the dwelling of the spirit of the Lord is in us.  The temple is now each and every one of us.  I don't think we emphasize that point enough.  The promise is fulfilled in a seeming inverse.  The Lord will dwell with us forever.

That gives us an awesome responsibility as sheep - to be about the shepherd's business.

To be messengers of goodness and mercy.

To be proclaiming the goodness of the shepherd.

To sing of the goodness of God.

"All my life you have been faithful,
All my life you have been so, so good
With every breath that I am able
I will sing of the goodness of God."

Forgiveness

Yesterday, we witnessed one of the greatest acts of forgiveness in recent history, from the heart of an eighteen year old.

After the sentencing of Amber Guyger, Botham Jean's brother Brandt asked to make a victim impact statement.  Brandt used his statement to forgive Guyger, to plead her to go to God, to say he loves her as any person, and to ask to give her a hug.

In the midst of tragedy, in the midst of the horror, there God is.  For that kind of forgiveness does not come from man.  Our human frailties may lead us to error, but the ability to forgive it is divine.  It is the highest form of our faith.

"Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice.  Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you."

Ephesians 4:31-32

We forgive because we are forgiven.  We forgive only because he enables us to do so.  I cannot imagine being in that position.  I would like to believe that I would be able to rise to that level.  But I know, I would likely be consumed with vengeance.  I think I would want to be sitting at that prosecution table, looking to pile on the charges with what evidence I could dig up.

But that eighteen year old spoke with wisdom beyond his years.  He acted with more faith than most people that have sit in pews all their lives.

And the impact of his actions reached far beyond what he could have even anticipated.

Following Jean's hug, Judge Tammy Kemp stepped off her bench and walked over to Guyger at the defense table.

"You understand?" she asked.

The judge then went back to her bench and grabbed her bible.

“You can have mine. I have three or four at home. This is your job.” The judge opened the Bible and began to discuss John 3:16, indicating that this would strengthen Guyger. “You just need a tiny mustard seed of faith. You start with this.”

Guyger then embraced the judge, who hugged her back. Guyger whispered something to the judge.

“Ma’am,” the judge replied, “it’s not because I’m good. It’s because I believe in Christ. You haven’t done so much that you can’t be forgiven. You did something bad at one moment in time. What you do now matters.”

There's a lot of people that need to hear that.  There's a lot of people that need to know, that need to believe that they have not done so much that they cannot be forgiven.

Forgiveness is out there.  Mercy, grace, and love are out there.

It starts with us.  It starts with us being able to step out in faith and in forgiveness.  To forgive as we have been forgiven.

To love as He loved us.

It's what we've commanded to do.

Can you imagine what the world would look like if we did?  That's the world I want to live in.

"For if you forgive other people when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.  But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins."

Matthew 6:14-15