What if the most naive idealist and the most jaded cynic are both operating under the same wrong assumption?
What if the cynic and the idealist both wrongly think that our internal hope mechanism is meant to be directed towards a somewhat arbitrary lining up of circumstances?
What if both are working under the same operating assumption that says that hope is all about events lining up in such a way that suits our preferences at any given moment but that might change in the next based on the weather, our mood, what was served in the cafeteria that day, or who happens to be around at the time?
What if the idealist and the cynic both wrongly think that hope is about circumstances turning up roses? What if it's just that the idealist thinks those events will happen and the cynic has given up on those things ever happening? But what if it's all based on the same faulty assumption?
What if our hope mechanism is too wonderful, powerful, and valuable a thing to be used for such a flimsy purpose? What if the One who implanted the hope mechanism inside of us wants our hopes to be built around a Who rather than a fragile alignment of a series of What's?
What if the disappointments that pock-mark so many of our lives are a gift? What if disappointment is a tutor, designed to wean us off putting the weight of our hopes in a "what?"
What if disappointment is meant to coax us, lead us, bless us into putting the weight of our hopes into the Who that we were made to put them in?
What if cynics and idealists are both wrong for the exact same reason? What if hope wins, but it's not a hope that looks according to our scripts, in our timing, in our ways?
What if it really is all about a "who" not a "what?"
No comments:
Post a Comment