I've been reflecting a bit on Hugo's thought (see post below). At first blush, it is easy to disagree...we need money. We have more
fun when there is money. Our futures are more secure when we have
money. ...or so goes common legend. And yet, it seems undeniable that
something else goes on when we accumulate 'money in the purse'.
Something shifts. A grip tightens. The need to protect it goes up.
Time shortens. ...and we miss out on something very significant. While
we gain certain things, others begin to pass us by. In retrospect, I
would admit
that I've been more alive, more open, more aware of others and the
goings-on inside myself, more human, more dependent...during the times
when I didn't have money.
But I suspect Hugo is really
on to something more than simply the bane of mammon. Perhaps he is
speaking as much about the virtue of emptying oneself, the blessing of
giving ourselves to others, whatever the currency might be. Does he
know about the value of being empty, of being emptied, of allowing God
to fill us...rather than doing it for ourselves? I'm guessing he's
pointing to a great surprise awaiting all of us through our willingness
to be emptied for the sake of someone else...whether monetarily or
otherwise.
