The final and possibly the greatest risk of love is the risk of exercising(行使) power with humility(谦逊). The most common example of this is the act of loving confrontation. Whenever we confront someone we are in essence saying to that person, “You are wrong; I am right.” When a parent confronts a child, saying, “You are being sneaky(鬼鬼祟祟的),” the parent is saying in effect, “Your sneakiness is wrong. I have the right to criticize it because I am not sneaky myself and I am right.” When a husband confronts a wife with her frigidity(性冷淡), he is saying, “You are frigid, because it is wrong for you not to respond to me sexually with greater fervor(热情), since I am sexually adequate and in other ways all right. You have a sexual problem; I do not.” When a wife confronts a husband with her opinion that he does not spend enough time with her and the children, she is saying, “Your investment in your work is excessive(过多的) and wrong. Despite(尽管) the fact that I do not have your job, I can see things more clearly than you, and I rightly know that it would be more proper for you to invest yourself differently.” The capacity to confront, to say “I’m right, you’re wrong, you should be different,” is one that many people have no difficulty exercising. Parents, spouses and people in various other roles do this routinely and casually(随意地), leveling criticism left and right, shooting from the hip(鲁莽地做事). Most such criticism and confrontation, usually made impulsively in anger or annoyance(烦恼), does more to increase the amount of confusion in the world than the amount of enlightenment(启迪).
For the truly loving person the act of criticism or confrontation does not come easily; to such a person it is evident(清楚的) that the act has great potential(可能性) for arrogance(自大). To confront one’s beloved is to assume a position(作出姿势) of moral or intellectual superiority(优越感) over the loved one, at least so far as the issue at hand is concerned. Yet genuine love recognizes and respects the unique individuality and separate identity of the other person. (I will say more about this later.) The truly loving person, valuing the uniqueness and differentness of his or her beloved, will be reluctant(不情愿的) indeed to assume, “I am right, you are wrong; I know better than you what is good for you.” But the reality of life is such that at times one person does know better than the other what is good for the other, and in actuality is in a position of superior(更高的) knowledge or wisdom in regard to the matter at hand(即将到来). Under these circumstances the wiser of the two does in fact have an obligation to confront the other with the problem. The loving person, therefore, is frequently in a dilemma(进退两难), caught between a loving respect for the beloved’ s own path in life and a responsibility to exercise loving leadership when the beloved appears to need such leadership. The dilemma can be resolved only by painstaking(刻苦的) self-scrutiny(详细审查), in which the lover examines stringently(严格地) the worth of his or her “wisdom” and the motives behind this need to assume leadership. “Do I really see things clearly or am I operating on murky(难以理解的) assumptions? Do I really understand my beloved? Could it not be that the path my beloved is taking is wise and that my perception of it as unwise is the result of limited vision on my part? Am I being self-serving(自私的) in believing that my beloved needs redirection?” These are questions that those who truly love must continually ask themselves. This self-scrutiny, as objective as possible, is the essence of humility(谦逊) or meekness(谦恭). In the words of an anonymous fourteenth-century British monk and spiritual teacher, “meekness in itself is nothing else than a true knowing and feeling of a man’s self as he is(实际上). Any man who truly sees and feels himself as he is must surely(无疑) be meek(谦恭的) indeed.”
There are, then, two ways to confront or criticize another human being: with instinctive and spontaneous certainty that one is right, or with a belief that one is probably right arrived at through scrupulous(一丝不苟的) self-doubting and self-examination. The first is the way of arrogance(自大); it is the most common way of parents, spouses, teachers and people generally in their day-to-day affairs; it is usually unsuccessful, producing more resentment than growth and other effects that were not intended(预期的). The second is the way of humility(谦逊); it is not common, requiring as(conj. 照……方式) it does a genuine extension of oneself; it is more likely to be successful, and it is never, in my experience, destructive.
There are a significant(相当数量的) number of individuals who for one reason or another have learned to inhibit(约束) their instinctive tendency to criticize or confront with spontaneous arrogance but who go no farther, hiding in the moral safety of meekness, never daring to assume power. One such was a minister and father of a middle-aged patient who was suffering from a lifelong depressive neurosis. My patient’s mother was an angry, violent(暴力的) woman who dominated the household(家庭) with her temper(坏脾气) tantrums(发怒) and manipulations and not infrequently beat her husband physically in front of the daughter. The minister never fought back and counseled(劝告) his daughter also to respond to her mother by turning the other cheek and, in the name of Cristian charity(仁慈), being unendingly submissive(顺从的) and respectful(尊敬的). When she began therapy my patient revered(尊敬) her father for his mildness(温暖) and “lovingness.” It was not very long, however, before she came to realize that his meekness(谦恭) was weakness, and that in his passivity he had deprived her of adequate(适当的) parenting every bit as much as her mother had with her mean(刻薄的) self-centeredness(自我中心). She finally saw that he had done nothing to protect her from her mother’s evil and nothing, in fact, to confront evil, leaving her no option but to incorporate(包含) her mother’s bitter manipulativeness(善于摆布) along with his pseudo(伪装的) humility as role models. To fail to confront when confrontation is required for the nurture of spiritual growth represents a failure to love equally as does thoughtless(欠考虑的) criticism or condemnation(谴责) and other forms of active deprivation of caring. If they love their children parents must, sparingly(一点点) and carefully perhaps but nonetheless actively, confront and criticize them from time to time, just as they must allow their children to confront and criticize themselves in turn. Similarly, loving spouses must repeatedly confront each other if the marriage relationship is to serve the function of promoting the spiritual growth of the partners. No marriage can be judged truly successful unless husband and wife are each other’s best critics. The same holds true for friendship. There is a traditional concept that friendship should be a conflict-free relationship, a “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours” arrangement, relying solely on a mutual exchange of favors and compliments(恭维) as prescribed my good manners. Such relationships are superficial and intimacy-avoiding and do not deserve the name of friendship which is so commonly applied to them. Fortunately, there are signs that our concept of friendship is beginning to deepen. Mutual loving confrontation is a significant part of all successful and meaningful human relationships. Without it the relationship is either unsuccessful or shallow.
To confront or criticize is a form of exercising leadership or power. The exercise of power is nothing more and nothing less than an attempt to influence the course of events, human or otherwise, by one’s actions in a consciously or unconsciously predetermined manner. When we confront or criticize someone it is because we want to change the course of the person’s life. It is obvious that there are many other, often superior, ways to influence the course of events than by confrontation or criticism: by example, suggestion, parable(寓言), reward and punishment, questioning, prohibition(禁止) or permission, creation of experiences, organizing with others, and so on. Volumes can be written about the art of exercising power. For our purposes, however, suffice(满足……的需求) it to say that loving individuals must concern themselves with this art, for if one desires to nurture another’s spiritual growth, then one must concern oneself with the most effective way to accomplish this in any given instance. Loving parents, for example, must first examine themselves and their values stringently before determining accurately that they know what is best for their child. Then, having made this determination, they also have to give greater thought to the child’s character and capacities before deciding whether the child would be more likely to respond favorably(亲切地) to confrontation than to praise or increased attention or storytelling or some other form of influence. To confront someone with something he or she cannot handle will at best(最好的情况下) be a waste of time, and likely will have a deleterious(有害的) effect. If we want to be heard we must speak in a language the listener can understand and on a level at which the listener is capable of operating. If we are to love we must extend ourselves to adjust our communication to the capacities of our beloved.
It is clear that exercising power with love requires a great deal of work, but what is this about the risk involved? The problem is that the more loving one is, the more humble(谦虚的) one is; yet the more humble one is, the more one is awed(充满敬畏的) by the potential for arrogance in exercising power. Who am I to influence the course of human events? By what authority(权力) am I entitled(使享有权利) to decide what is best for my child, spouse, my country or the human race? Who gives me the right to dare to believe in my own understanding and then to presume(假设) to exert(施加影响) my will upon the world? Who am I to play God? That is the risk. For whenever we exercise power we are attempting to influence the course of the world, of humanity, and we are thereby playing God. Most parents, teachers, leaders-most of us who exercise power–have no cognizance(认知) of this, In the arrogance of exercising power without the total self-awareness demanded by love, we are blissfully(充满喜悦地) but destructively ignorant of the fact that we are playing God. But those who truly love, and therefore work for the wisdom that love requires, know that to act is to play God. Yet they also know that there is no alternative except inaction(不作为) and impotence. Love compels(强迫) us to play God with full consciousness of the enormity of the fact that that is just what we are doing. With this consciousness the loving person assumes the responsibility of attempting to be God and not to carelessly(不注意地) play God, to fulfill God’s will without mistake. We arrive, then, at yet another paradox: only out of the humility of love can humans dare to be God.