DL Tolleson.com

Publication History: The Heart Pines © Copyright 2001, 2009, 2019 by DL Tolleson. All Rights Reserved. Excerpts from this work are permissible if author attribution is included. However, beyond this no part of this material may be reproduced in any form or by any means without written permission from the author.

Tolleson, DL. “The Heart Pines.”
DLTolleson.com, 2009.
http://www.dltolleson.com/poetry/heartpines.php.

Tolleson, DL. “The Heart Pines.”
TheLighthousePress.com, 2016.
http://www.thelighthousepress.com/dltolleson.com/poetry/heartpines.php.

Description: Poetry—127 words.

Commentary: How can we be certain that anyone is actually moral, faithful or honest? With certainty we cannot. This is why we often hear things like, “I’m shocked he (or she) would do that; it’s so out of character.” Of course the problem with that it is a confusion of “character” with “reputation” (but that is a topic for another time).

As for morality, faithfulness and honesty… The crux is in determining upon what we are depending for the basis of morality being exhibited in others (or ourselves).

If the basis for morality is merely that something is “the right thing to—or not to—do,” then there should not be any surprise when a “perfectly” and “thoroughly” moral man or woman suddenly exhibits behavior contradictory to their previously established norms. After all, if the basis upon which the person was moral in the first place was no greater a thing then because it was, “the right thing to do or not do,” that is a determination founded upon an internal source. Thus, when acting in contradiction to a previously perceived immorality of some stamp, the person was merely re-defining what constituted, “the right thing to do or not do.”

This is what is meant by “moral relevance.” It depends upon nothing more stable than a person’s subjective determination of “right and wrong.” Since we are speaking of human nature, that determination is not beyond influence and is subject to change. It’s an invitation to, “move the goal post.”

The only alternative to moral relevance is an absolute standard. An absolute standard is unchanging and determining relevance in a given situation is mostly a matter of weighing the severity of guilt. In contrast to moral relevance, an absolute standard is better known as God.

So, does the basis upon which a person’s morality is founded have barring upon whether a person will initially violate his or her own principles? Because we are speaking of human nature, we can only say that it does so in proportion to how important a given standard is to a given person. We are imperfect and subject to influence. But just as importantly—and maybe more importantly—is the basis of a given standard after a person violates his or her principles. That is the time when we can, with certainty, divine a person’s standard.

For the person who practices moral relevance may just as easily alter his or her morality after a violation of principles. Such an individual may not feel a depth of sorrow for a transgression because he or she can justify his or her actions. But the person having an absolute standard cannot seek solace by justifying a transgression. Such a person must return to the absolute standard—that is, if he or she is able to recover from the paralyses of soul-rending sorrow.

This is the purview of the poem, The Heart Pines. It is the lament of a narrator who has violated an absolute standard of faithfulness and regardless of forgiveness is unable to move beyond the sorrow of transgression.

—DL Tolleson