Say a friend of mine, Jill, asks me if I will help paint her house. Suppose, and this would not be far from actuality, that I donotlike painting. But I agree to help her regardless all the while grumbling under my breath about this arduous task I have now obligated myself to.

On the other hand, Borislovespainting! So Boris helps too, and with a much more inspiring attitude than mine. The question is, who is the "true" sacrificer in this case? The one with the negative attitude or thepositiveone?

Well, certainly my attitude is not exactly appreciated but does this not make it perfectly clear that I am in factsacrificing? On the other hand, Boris' attitude is certainly much more appreciated and commendable, but remember, helovespainting whereas I donot! If one gives Boris credit for being the "true" sacrificer, it seemsmisplaced.

The trouble I have with this is that the idea of sacrifice seems to necessitate a distaste for doing something, though doing it nonethelessin the name of sacrifice. Even if my grumbling is done surreptitiously, am I not still acting with somewhat of a rotten attitude? Which of these isgenuinesacrifice?

It seems to me the trick in getting help with something isnotto find people to "sacrifice". It is to find people whichlovedoing whatever task is at hand. Of course I need not have it pointed out that many of the tasks we need help with will be loved bynone! I think we just need to accept the fact that sacrifice will seldom if ever be met with cheers and smiles. This, after all, seems to be what makes it asacrifice.

If one lauds those who conceal their contempt for the task at hand, might we suggest their lack of being forthright about this as being in some waydishonest? Might the best sacrificer be the one who makes it perfectly clear he would rather be on a beach frolicking about with beautiful babes than helping out with thismiserabletask?What is sacrifice?