Kirk’s Question of the Day: What do you think of Christian language of loving “on” people (“…we just need to love on____”). It seemed to fade there for a while, but has recently been making quite a comeback (must have heard it 2 dozen times in the last 10 days).
For my part, I’m not a fan – not only because of the bad grammar – but mainly because I think it creates a strange distance. Somehow loving “on” people feels different (and safer) that simply “loving” them.
Loving “on” sounds like “acting lovingly” (not that I’m against it!), but behavior is different than actual connection. Loving “on” has – to me – a subtle air of condescension (someone just needs a hug), vs. a mutual vulnerability. To actually love someone is to engage in mutuality – I’m as vulnerable in this relationship as you are. To love “on” someone is to dole out loving behaviors from a secure distance.
I know that many good things happen in the name of “loving on” (and much loving “on” is genuine love that has simply adopted the idiom of the day). But I wonder if adding the preposition might put a slightly unhelpful spin on what we are actually called to do…
Thoughts?
March 21, 2012
The whole “Christian” vocabulary really just strikes me as a stumbling block to people’s walk with the Lord. But I know that’s really just my besetting sin, and I would covet the uplifting of any prayer warriors who could come alongside me in that struggle.
March 21, 2012
Well played, sir! 😉
March 22, 2012
You’re definitely on to something here. I’ve noticed something very similar in my church (and, to be fair, my own heart)–there are those that we want to serve, and those that we want to serve with. The people we want to serve with (i.e. love) are those pretty much like us, while the ones we want to serve (i.e. “love on”) are the poor unfortunate “others” who are “out there.” So I don’t think the “love on” phrase is just a kind-of-creepy evangel-idiom, but instead may be a sign of a deeper heart issue.
March 22, 2012
Rich, thanks so much for the thoughtful and articulate response. (Can’t tell you how happy it makes me to hear from introspective, engaged people. Truly!)
Clearly I agree that the intent to “love on” comes from a good place, but might reflect (and unintentionally encourage) a separation between “us” and “them.”
And I LOVE “evangelidiom.” Not heard it before, but plan to use it constantly ever after! 🙂
April 24, 2012
I agree with KWK and with Rich. KWK, I don’t see your viewing the Christian vocab as a stumbling block as a besetting sin of yours. You’re just being honest. It’s like we all belong to this very elite club with its own way cool lingo (which is exactly as it SHOULD NOT be). ‘Let’s love on these people’ always brings to mind the visual of a person in someone’s headlock, receiving ‘noogies’ (like the old SNL skit with Todd and Lisa). Another one that seems to get a lot of airplay at my church when speaking about supporting others is “we need to come alongside them.” I picture a person magically appearing beside someone in need, like Casper the Friendly Ghost apparition (I’m sorry — I’m a very visual kind of gal). I am not a big fan of these phrases. If we want people to see us, followers of Christ, as being sincere and authentic, then we need to speak sincerely and authentically and drop the Christianese. I do think it makes folks feel like they’re on the outside, peering in at us, instead of welcome among us.