Let us talk Love:

Dictionary.com
1. A deep, tender, ineffable feeling (Incapable of being expressed, indescribable or unutterable) of affection and solicitude toward a person, such as that arising from kinship, recognition of attractive qualities, or a sense of underlying oneness.
2. A feeling of intense desire and attraction toward a person with whom one is disposed to make a pair; the emotion of sex and romance.
3.
a. Sexual passion.
b. Sexual intercourse.
c. A love affair.
4. An intense emotional attachment, as for a pet or treasured object.
5. A person who is the object of deep or intense affection or attraction; beloved. Often used as a term of endearment.
6. An expression of one's affection: Send him my love.
7.
a. A strong predilection or enthusiasm: a love of language.
b. The object of such an enthusiasm: The outdoors is her greatest love.
8. Love Mythology. Eros or Cupid.
9. often Love Christianity. Charity.

One day a man went for a walk, back in the days when that was the way to get from one place to another. A band of thugs accosted him and left him lying on the ground in a pool of blood. Now it happened that a Jewish priest was passing along the same pedway but when he saw the man he passed by hugging the far wall. See priests were not allowed to touch a dead body. Then a Levite came and although he paused he too passed by. See he didn’t what to get unclean because it took a whole lot of ritual and time to get clean again and he might miss his turn to minister at the temple. Along came a Samaritan whom the Jews righteously kept away from because their doctrine was all screwed up and he helped the man and paid for his recovery.
So if you were the priest which do you do? Keep the law for sure by doing what the priest in the story did, or take the chance of breaking the law just in case the man was still alive so that you could show him love?
God is love. Define God
The rich young ruler kept the law - Jesus did not castigate him for not - and Jesus loved him BUT “one thing you lack” Jesus said “go sell all that you have and come follow me” ie show your love for me by giving up all that you hold dear. It happens all the time, as with sincerity, we think that someone is showing love, they are not doing all the things that one is not to do and they are doing all the things that one is to do to show love, or sincerity, and bang . . . !
Even the dictionary says that you can not define love – “ineffable”! We can say what it is not, we can say a lot of things that it includes but ‘when the rubber meets the road’ we can NOT define love. We all know what it is and we all know when we are not doing it (it is even hard for us to be sure ourselves, often enough, when we really do love someone) we can all get pretty close when we decry someone else’s claim of love . . . Tomorrow we talk about Honesty.
My suggestion is - the Reform definition of love (basically it looks like you are saying love is keeping the law) is why they can come up with the rule “No occasional hearing” Which is more important, me not getting unclean for the brothern or sistern or me loving them by fellowshipping and eating at the boss’s table with them? ? ? (when we all agree that they are indeed Christians)
See when you are working on an ethics system one of the things that you must address carefully and in great detail is – what happens when there is a conflict of norms?! I was talking about stress, Ray G brought to up, and how we create a lot of stress for ourselves with unnecessary expectations. (for me the prytry reform oath WOULD be a very BIG stress BECAUSE I TRY to do what I say) Now why ever did Jesus pick a priest as the number one ‘bad’ guy? Didn’t He know that the law said “NO EXCEPTIONS a priest shall not make himself unclean because of a dead body even wife or kids!? Why bring up such a controversial situation? Did Jesus mean that Love takes precedence over that law?
Sorry but I do not think that the Bible anywhere says that the law was given to define love. Not at all saying that the negative side positive side thing about the law is wrong, the reason given in the Bible for the law is to convict the guilty. NOT to make anyone guilty – to convict those who are already guilty. When Paul said “without the law there is no sin” he did not mean that suddenly because a law was introduced that says ‘do not steal’ there are a bunch of criminals. (like the drug company moving the definition of high blood pressure down ten points and thus creating millions of new patients that need drugs) He meant without a law the criminal can not be convicted. The reason for the big ten in the Mt Sinai covenant was, besides providing the way to convict, to make the people realize that they could never get in favour with God without the Messiah! The law Does define some of the parameters of love especially when the positive aspects of it are also considered. Love is bigger than the law negative and positive! Living is MUCH bigger than the law negative and positive. Love and living are the trip, the law is only the road signs. True the only means at my disposal to ‘convict’ someone of not loving is the law.
My point is that the church does not have the mandate to convict anyone including its own members. Sorry, I do not see where the NT says if someone is clearly not being Christian after due process call the elders together and draw up a formal writ of excommunication and legally expel them from membership. NB in my next church there will be an annual membership renewal. Each member will have a form that says ‘I subscribe to the constitution of this local congregation’ and each year the board will put them all on the table at the back of the church for two weeks only. Each member who does not personally sign and date it will automatically be dropped from the role PERIOD. No formal declaration necessary, spiritual discernment required, after due process – Matt, tell two then tell the whole church -, someone who is demonstrating non Christian activity will get ostracized. Politely told not to come back without demonstrable change of behavior and a convincing apology. There would be no membership problem; one year max and it would automatically be taken care of. That does not require a formal gov’t with derived authority, a set of rules with which to convict someone, and a formal order of procedure for due process!
When I went to college the guy from the room next to me in the dorm came running in one day all excited. His girl friend had written “Je tu ami tres bien!” on the bottom of his most recent letter. He came from the US and since I am Canadian he assumed that I could translate it for him. I warned him that I could give only a literal word for word translation; “I you like very much”. That evening while we were busy scrubbing pots and pans on the same crew I turned to the Frenchman in our midst and asked, with no preamble, to whom would you address the phrase “Je tu ami tres bien!”? He laughed and replied; “ you would say that to your dog”. When he found out the particulars of the case he said “oh, you want to say ‘I love you’ well in French you say …. half and hour later he was not finished (oh to have a romantic language). Do we all know that she meant, “I love you very much”?