Entitlement
I am, at times, forced to wonder at our society. We, the so-called 'Middle-class,' not only have the audacity to foster complaints, feelings of entitlement, and demands for fairness; but we have come to build our culture upon them. I recently happened across an online advertisement which quite kindly enlightened me that, considering what a safe and responsible driver I am (perhaps even considerate to other drivers!), I should get something in return.
Indeed. Seeing as I have fulfilled my responsibility to my neighbour by taking care not to run him down in the street, I clearly have the right to demand something from someone. I beg to differ. The very car which I so graciously (if only hypothetically) maneuver through the hostile streets, in fact can hardly be called more than a luxury!
And what if that to which we feel entitled is denied us? We demand that management give a full accounting of the scandal, as well as an apology. It is assumed that, if someone is uncomfortable, if someone is unhappy, if there is some poor soul that is dissatisfied by a product or service he has received, then something has gone terribly wrong, and the victim's losses must be compensated for in no more than 30 business days. Even if the complaint is legitimate; if the unlucky chap that gets the short end of the stick really was gypped out of his cut, have we no grace? Can we not consider that vague possibility that the particular monstrosity of an institution we are dealing with bears no actual ill-will toward us, and was merely negligent in their duties? In the mighty name of Alan Greenspan, NO! We cannot! We will have our money back! We will be compensated! I will have that to which I am entitled!
Likewise, I consider the 'efficiency' of our society. The fast food phenomenon comes to mind. We begin with the idea that our food is cooked and partially assembled before we even look at the menu. One might call it a sort of corporate clairvoyance that Burger King always seems to know that I will be craving a Double Quarter Pounder (w/ cheese), and has been kind enough to whip up all the ingredients within the previous five minutes. The difficulty with this system is, of course, that one must get out of the car, walk across the parking lot (if unfortunate enough to have been forced into the nether-lands of the lot), into the establishment, and wait in line before ordering. Then, after waiting the interminable 180 seconds (give or take) to actually receive the food, this long-sufferer must repeat the first three steps, in reverse order. Needless to say, only the stout-hearted care to embark on such a quest, now that we have been presented with the brilliant innovation of drive-thrus. Drive-thrus were designed to be so efficient that even the "o" and the "gh" in "through" were omitted such that the phrase would meet the industry's aerodynamics standards. Increasingly, however, even drive-thrus are proving inefficient. The line to get your fast food faster is too long. Some even choose to simply enter the building to get their food, as in days of old. I suppose the next innovation in culinary efficiency will be an express lane for the drive-thru. One could purchase a year-long pass for this express lane, in which they will doubtlessly find lines longer than those for the standard drive-thru. But I find myself obliged to digress. My point here is that these developments are rather sad when contrasted with those who (quite rightly) view themselves as fortunate to have a mere twenty minute walk to and from the market to buy food for themselves and their families.
All this and more to say, I am rather fed up with everyone (myself included) going about thinking that we're good enough that we deserve something, and even more fed up with every billboard, commercial, and banner ad that tells us that we're right.
We do not exist to serve ourselves. We do not exist to be served by others. Others, realistically, do not exist to serve us. We exist to love and serve God, followed by love and service of others.
Whether or not you believe in an omniscient, omnipotent, loving Creator; and whether or not you believe that Christ's death atoned for the sins of those that believe in Him, it seems to me that one thing is clear. The only way that humans can have a hand changing the world for Good is by sacrifice. It is by giving up everything to which we think we are entitled. Not only our possessions, but our rights as well; even those which are 'inalienable.' It is only after surrendering life, surrendering liberty, and surrendering the pursuit of the empty happiness of this world that a human can experience the true liberty which Christ knew in His life. I know this to be the liberty found in bondage to the Father and His Righteousness.
Take this and do with it what you will. Let me exhort you, however, to live in acknowledgement that your rights are worthless, first in comparison to the joy and honour of serving others, but Foremost in comparison to the joy and honour of the Service of the King. Complaints and demands are the tools of the self-lover; grace and humility are the powerful instruments of the Kingdom.
Indeed. Seeing as I have fulfilled my responsibility to my neighbour by taking care not to run him down in the street, I clearly have the right to demand something from someone. I beg to differ. The very car which I so graciously (if only hypothetically) maneuver through the hostile streets, in fact can hardly be called more than a luxury!
And what if that to which we feel entitled is denied us? We demand that management give a full accounting of the scandal, as well as an apology. It is assumed that, if someone is uncomfortable, if someone is unhappy, if there is some poor soul that is dissatisfied by a product or service he has received, then something has gone terribly wrong, and the victim's losses must be compensated for in no more than 30 business days. Even if the complaint is legitimate; if the unlucky chap that gets the short end of the stick really was gypped out of his cut, have we no grace? Can we not consider that vague possibility that the particular monstrosity of an institution we are dealing with bears no actual ill-will toward us, and was merely negligent in their duties? In the mighty name of Alan Greenspan, NO! We cannot! We will have our money back! We will be compensated! I will have that to which I am entitled!
Likewise, I consider the 'efficiency' of our society. The fast food phenomenon comes to mind. We begin with the idea that our food is cooked and partially assembled before we even look at the menu. One might call it a sort of corporate clairvoyance that Burger King always seems to know that I will be craving a Double Quarter Pounder (w/ cheese), and has been kind enough to whip up all the ingredients within the previous five minutes. The difficulty with this system is, of course, that one must get out of the car, walk across the parking lot (if unfortunate enough to have been forced into the nether-lands of the lot), into the establishment, and wait in line before ordering. Then, after waiting the interminable 180 seconds (give or take) to actually receive the food, this long-sufferer must repeat the first three steps, in reverse order. Needless to say, only the stout-hearted care to embark on such a quest, now that we have been presented with the brilliant innovation of drive-thrus. Drive-thrus were designed to be so efficient that even the "o" and the "gh" in "through" were omitted such that the phrase would meet the industry's aerodynamics standards. Increasingly, however, even drive-thrus are proving inefficient. The line to get your fast food faster is too long. Some even choose to simply enter the building to get their food, as in days of old. I suppose the next innovation in culinary efficiency will be an express lane for the drive-thru. One could purchase a year-long pass for this express lane, in which they will doubtlessly find lines longer than those for the standard drive-thru. But I find myself obliged to digress. My point here is that these developments are rather sad when contrasted with those who (quite rightly) view themselves as fortunate to have a mere twenty minute walk to and from the market to buy food for themselves and their families.
All this and more to say, I am rather fed up with everyone (myself included) going about thinking that we're good enough that we deserve something, and even more fed up with every billboard, commercial, and banner ad that tells us that we're right.
We do not exist to serve ourselves. We do not exist to be served by others. Others, realistically, do not exist to serve us. We exist to love and serve God, followed by love and service of others.
Whether or not you believe in an omniscient, omnipotent, loving Creator; and whether or not you believe that Christ's death atoned for the sins of those that believe in Him, it seems to me that one thing is clear. The only way that humans can have a hand changing the world for Good is by sacrifice. It is by giving up everything to which we think we are entitled. Not only our possessions, but our rights as well; even those which are 'inalienable.' It is only after surrendering life, surrendering liberty, and surrendering the pursuit of the empty happiness of this world that a human can experience the true liberty which Christ knew in His life. I know this to be the liberty found in bondage to the Father and His Righteousness.
Take this and do with it what you will. Let me exhort you, however, to live in acknowledgement that your rights are worthless, first in comparison to the joy and honour of serving others, but Foremost in comparison to the joy and honour of the Service of the King. Complaints and demands are the tools of the self-lover; grace and humility are the powerful instruments of the Kingdom.
posted by Aurenande | 12:25 AM
5 Comments:
wow...well said
Well said.
You have considered the relationship between a rights-based political ethic and the metaphysical idea of the autonomous subject? Both are clearly problematic; perhaps in moving away from one we create an opening in which we can move away from the other.
See what I mean? I DESERVE this College Degree!
Thank you davidharolds2649407648 for this case in point!
Q. 1. What is the chief end of man?
A. Man’s chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever.
Q. 2. What rule hath God given to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him?
A. The Word of God, which is contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, is the only rule to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him.
Q. 3. What do the scriptures principally teach?
A. The scriptures principally teach, what man is to believe concerning God, and what duty God requires of man.
Thank you Westminster assembly. This life is not about man's requirements, but God's requirements of man.
Well written. One area I've seen this played out is in property rights. I am continually dumbfounded at how a transfer of money and ownership papers confers on people not only the legal rights but also the freedom of conscience to abuse, neglect, or even outrightly destroy the land they've purchased. Ownership, of land or anything else, cannot be understood outside the context of relationship. Since our relationship with land extends only as far as our stewardship of it, I find little moral basis for exercising most of the legal rights granted to land owners. Have our freedoms and rights become so legislated that we can no longer distinguish morality from legality? I would love to see a broader exhortation of Christians to voluntarily give up rights the legal system (or our cultural expectations) entitle them to. I myself struggle at times to do so; I often feel keenly entitled to wander barefoot wherever I want, regardless of the wishes of store managers or airline personnel.
Post a Comment
<< Home