I'm back. So to speak. I was told by someone that they still look here to see if I have posted, so it seems worth writing, if only for the one reader. I guess I have the option of writing things here that if I want someone to get a look at my nature, I can direct them here. Could be a good time-saver in terms of repetitive subject matter, i.e. the stuff you talk about when you are getting to know someone.
I have a new definition for love. It is the feeling you have for someone that you don't ever want them to get hurt, especially if it is you causing it. That still amounts to being a Christ-like love, but it's directed more specifically. We are supposed to have charity for everyone, but we can only have a few people in our lives that we put ahead of everyone else enough to try and ensure that they never get hurt.
To do that for too many ends up being mutually exclusive. Sooner or later there is a conflict and one of those people will have to be hurt in order for you to keep from hurting the other, and you likle. To break it down all the way, you really can only have one person in your life that you can devote yourself entirely to protecting and promoting their happiness. It's mathematically certain. For those who claim they can love more than one person, I'd like to know how they get around that.
Of course, I am only talking about love in the absolute sense; in other words, true love. You can probably love any number of people nearly completely, but there be only one that truly has your complete love and commitment. The ideal would be for that person to be your spouse, but marriage isn't a universal institution, so there has to be a way of looking at it for lesser degrees of commitment than a marriage contract.
Wait a second... what lesser degrees of commitment can there be? We're talking about true love. Either you're committed or you aren't. If you aren't it isn't true love. If you aren't willing to display that commitment with marriage, you aren't committed. Ergo, marriage means true love. If you don't believe that, and you are married, that makes you a liar. If you believe in true love and you aren't married (under circumstances that would generally require marriage) you are lying to yourself as well. True love is absolute commitment to the happiness of the person who is the recipient of your love. Withholding anything based on your own preferences is not true love. Go ahead, argue with me.
I look at a couple like Gordon B. Hinckley and his wife Marjorie and see prime examples of true love. When Pres. Hinckley talked about his wife, there was no question of his absolute devotion to her. I remember thinking, "I wish I had a wife like that." Is there a bigger dope on the planet than me?
I had a wife like that. I just wasn't a man like that. I used to think I was at least approaching that ideal, but I recently realized I wasn't even going that direction. I should have made her first in everything, but I didn't make her first in anything. I am no longer mystified at being divorced, and to further compound my stupidity, I have since that event had the idea that I would look for a "wife like that." I should have been trying harder to be a man like that, but I didn't know that I wasn't, and I didn't know what kind of man I had been.
It all hit me in a flash in December. I suddenly comprehended the whole ridiculous ugly truth about myself. It was very liberating, because I also realized that knowing that meant I didn't have to be that anymore. Now I really could find a woman and make her the object of that kind of devotion, but it was also as clear to me in that realization that it can't be just anyone, even anyone of good qualities. There is still that element of romantic love that must be there. You can't just say that you are going to make that person the most important in your life. They have to be that person to you because you can't imagine any other possibility.
There is, in fact, only one person that fits that description for me, and in my eternal covenants, I am still married to her. I have not had any decree or pronouncement made that removes the obligation to honor those covenants, even though I never truly did before anyway. I am still bound by them, but more than that, I am still bound by the fact that I do love her that much. All my resentments are gone. In my heart, there is only infinite charity toward her. I want to do everything I can to make her happy, and living my covenants will be an important part of it.
I realize I might give the rest of my mortal life to the proposition of being a real husband to her, whether she wants it or not, and in the end have her still reject me. That is her right. It doesn't remove any of my obligation. This isn't just between her and me. These covenants were made between us and our Heavenly Father. He expects me to keep my promises. Sure, he expects her to as well. I've already had that thrown at me, but it's irrelevant. I can't think of any bad choice she has, or might have, made that I couldn't have prevented her even having the choice to make if I had been what I should have been.
It's not a matter of if I will from this point on, be the devoted husband she never had. It's only a question of whether she will accept the gift. I won't retract it either way. It's not my life to give her. There's no question that I owe her all of it. It's my life for her to give back, if anything, but I really, really, really want her to choose to hold me in thrall, and I hope, in love. I simply no longer have any interest in any other woman in the universe. I want my wife. I want Michele.
