The Truth About Love

Have you ever had one of those random moments in life—personal or professional—when someone asks you something, and when you open your mouth to respond, you’re amazed by the profound insight that comes out? You know you said it, but the wisdom had to have come from God?

Well, years ago, while teaching in Austin, I took a group of students to work at an orphanage in Mexico. In addition to showering the children with attention and affection, we did a bunch of home-improvement style projects – from cleaning to painting to repairs. The poverty was staggering. While we helped both physically and financially, it was abundantly clear that our charity was not going to bring about a real and lasting change.

That evening, we did the Mission-Trip-Circle-Up conversation to discuss and process our day. One student, Travis, was extremely conflicted: “I feel really good about myself, but I feel guilty for feeling that way. We have so much, and they have so little. It just doesn’t make any sense; I don’t like the fact that I feel so good about myself.”

I suggested to Travis that “feeling good” was not reflecting some kind of “superiority,” but rather he felt good because he was participating in true agapic love. In the Gospel of John, Jesus called us to love one another as he loved us; to participate in agape. This was not a “to-do-list” task, but an invitation. The act of selfless giving in service (and in love) feels great because in it, we experience the divine.

And it doesn’t matter which kind of love we’re talking about: philia (friendship love), eros (passionate love), storge (family affection), or agape (unconditional giving of oneself for the good of another).

What a profound “God-is-love” truth.

The act of selfless giving in love feels great because in it,

we experience the divine.

For some reason, when talking about love, it’s a lot easier to get our heads around what love means when we take romance out of the equation. But this same dynamic of selfless-giving-feeling-great applies to all four loves.

Allow me to explain:

Remember Erich Fromm’s definition of love (from Art of Loving 19)? I concluded my post on dependency (I Need You to Need Me), with this:

Mature Love “is union under the condition of preserving one’s integrity” or individuality.

If we were to diagram that one, it would be two stick figures choosing to come together to hold hands, maintaining their integrity, freely capable of individuality. This “pattern” can and should apply to all four kinds of love.

In all four types of love, one can and should be able to give of oneself without giving up one’s identity.

Going on, Fromm names four basic elements that are common to all types of love: Care, Responsibility, Respect, and Knowledge.

Care – When we care about someone or something, we are concerned for their well-being. When we don’t care, we don’t love.

Care “is the active concern for the life and the growth of that which we love” (Art of Loving 24).

Responsibility – Instead of limiting our understanding to some assigned “duty,” Fromm goes to the root of the word:

“Responsibility, in its true sense, is an entirely voluntary act; it is my response to the needs, expressed or unexpressed, of another human being. To be ‘responsible’ means to be able and ready to ‘respond’” (25).

Respect – Without the element of respect, the element of responsibility “could easily deteriorate into domination and possessiveness” (26).

Respect is the ability to see a person as they are, to be aware of their unique individuality (26).

It’s about respecting the person’s human dignity – in God’s image (not your image). This means allowing the other person to grow and unfold as they are (not as you would have them become…even if you have the best of intentions).

If I love the other person, I feel one with them, but with them as they are, not as I need them to be (26).

Love means letting people be free to be who they are, right now.

Knowledge – As we seek to become closer with people—friends and family as well as our beloved—we come to see how many layers there are to truly knowing someone. Knowledge of a person is key to real, mature love.

We all have had “THAT conversation” with someone, and we recognize it as a turning point in a relationship – be it as friends or lovers.

Fromm points out that “Care, responsibility, respect and knowledge are mutually interdependent.” They are all attitudes found in love, and they are each needed to balance one another.

“To respect a person is not possible without knowing him; care and responsibility would be blind if they were not guided by knowledge. Knowledge would be empty if it were not motivated by concern” (26).

So then love is all these things:

Agape, Eros, Storge, Philia
The will to extend one’s self for the purpose of nurturing one’s own or another’s spiritual growth – M. Scott Peck
Union under the condition of preserving one’s integrity and individuality, practiced with care, responsibility, respect, and knowledge – Erich Fromm

Love is all of this and more.

Painters by Bart Everson licensed under CC BY 2.0

If you enjoyed this post, Please Share

Read More Julie Dienno-Demarest Aug 27,2011

Love, Love and Relationships

0 4

You’ve Lost That Lovin’ Feeling

Falling in love is simultaneously one of the most fun and most confusing experiences in life. The butterflies… the smiles… the overwhelming elation… the excitement…

It often catches us by surprise—we neither see it coming nor choose it. It just happens. Sometimes we fall for people that (for whatever reason) we shouldn’t.

And before we know it, we find ourselves either singing along to You’ve Lost That Lovin’ Feeling or being serenaded (and not in the good, fun Top Gun way).

Add in a few Three’s Company style misunderstandings or a Romeo and Juliet conflict-of-loyalty and you’ve got the plot to a bulk of the romantic movies, sitcoms, and dramas out there.

No wonder we find it so shocking that

Love is not a feeling.

Even that passionate kind of love known as eros is not a feeling. (See my post Love, Love, Love for more explanation on eros.)

This is not to say that love is devoid of feeling. In fact, when we love, it feels great.

As we understand love, as we teach children about love, as we practice love in our relationships, it would be so much healthier if we understood that feelings are a fantastic side effect of loving, but feelings are not the essence of love itself.

When it comes to the topic of “Falling in ‘Love,’” M. Scott Peck says, “Of all the misconceptions about love the most powerful and pervasive is the belief that ‘falling in love’ is love…It is a potent misconception” (Road Less Traveled,84).

Recall Peck’s thorough definition of love (from my post What Do You Mean?).

Love is the will to extend one’s self for the purpose of nurturing one’s own or another’s spiritual growth (81).

Mistaking the feelings associated with “falling in love” as the essence of Real Love contradicts every aspect of Peck’s definition.

Falling in love has no purpose: “Falling in love has little to do with…nurturing one’s spiritual development” (89 emphasis added)
There is no extension of one’s self (circular process) with falling in love.
Falling in love does not necessitate self-love (more on this in a future post on Dependency)
Falling in love is effortless – it happens to us.
Falling in love is not a choice; we don’t choose who we do or do not have feelings for.

In my second year of teaching high school, I was in my early 20’s and (unbeknownst to me) in the most unhealthy relationship of my life, which is why I find it so ironic that it was then that I stumbled upon one of the most helpful visual diagrams of relationships that I have ever seen.

The Relationship Cycle

The explanation of the Relationship Cycle reads like the story of an actual relationship:

Attraction/Infatuation – This is that beginning of the relationship, becoming increasingly attracted to one other…also known as falling in love. As the (somewhat) straight line indicates, this is the easy phase where everything is wonderfully agreeable. Most of us (subconsciously) are on our best “job-interview” behavior, either overlooking or overcompensating for any possible “faults,” because we’re in love and everything is perfect!

Social psychologists estimate that infatuation has a shelf-life of 18 months, tops.

Confrontation of Faults and Differences – Whether it’s as meaningless as what movie to see or as meaningful as the role of children, money, careers, religion, etc., this is where the couple begins to identify and confront their differences. Many people look at this and exclaim, “Ooooo – first fight!” Perhaps… or perhaps it’s just a quiet recognition of the truth… Here, we often hear someone say something to the effect of: “You’re not who I thought you were.”

Somewhere in-between these two phases, the “falling in ‘love’ feeling” fades

Crisis of Disappointment/Dissatisfaction/Disillusionment – As the ease of the so-called honeymoon ends, it can be disappointing. Devastating, even.

“We need to talk.”

Acceptance or Separation/Abandonment of the Relationship – At this point, the couple has a choice to work out their differences or decide that the relationship is over.

The key here is honesty… ignoring problems or lying to yourself/partner about “working out those differences” doesn’t actually bring the relationship to the next phase.

Love – The most obvious implication here is that love is a choice. With the effort of working through differences, the couple truly chooses to love one another.

Commitment – The cycle continues… as the couple keeps discovering more and more about one another, they will continue have a choice to make: work it out or abandon the relationship. Commitment is a matter of continually choosing to love at every turn.

I think my favorite thing about this Relationship Cycle is being able to really see that the “falling in ‘love’” phase is just the fun beginning. Real Love is a lot deeper than that. Real Love is a choice which embraces truth. And that, my friends, feels incredible.

“Monarch butterflies migration © Depositphotos.com/Elenarts”

If you enjoyed this post, Please Share

Read More Julie Dienno-Demarest Aug 22,2011

Love, Love and Relationships

0 1

What Do You Mean?

While enjoying a Wine and Chocolates night with my sister, we touched upon the topic of love.

“What do you think love means?” I asked.

Laurie had read my previous post Love, Love, Love, and appreciated the description of the four different kinds of love, but she—like so many of us—still felt at a loss for how do put it into words.

“I don’t know how to define love. I know how I feel, and I know what I do, but I don’t know how to define it.”

The very nature of the word “define” (which means to put limits on something) seems to contradict the infinite possibilities (and mystical nature) of love. With that said, I think it’s important that we pursue a better understanding of what we mean by “love.”

Bestselling author and psychiatrist M. Scott Peck (d. 2005) set out to do just this in The Road Less Traveled (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1978). He dedicates a whole section to love, beginning with “Love Defined.” I appreciate how he starts off by acknowledging the tension between the worthy pursuit of a definition, but the inherent difficulty in doing so.

In a very real sense, we will be attempting to examine the unexaminable and to know the unknowable. Love is too large, too deep to ever be truly understood or measured or limited within the framework of words. I would not write this if I did not believe the attempt to have value, but no matter how valuable, I begin with certain knowledge that the attempt will in some ways be inadequate (81).

In my years of teaching—and moreover—in my years of learning from my own personal successes and failures (lots of failures) “in the field,” so to say, I find Peck’s definition of love to be clear, thorough, and helpful.

Love is the will to extend one’s self for the purpose of nurturing one’s own or another’s spiritual growth (Ibid).

Now that is a sentence packed with meaning. In the pages that follow, Peck offers five concise points about his definition which help better explain his meaning.

Love has a distinct purpose. The goal of love is spiritual growth.

It’s not about forcing (yourself or) someone else to fit into your image of what they should be. But about encouraging them to become their very best selves, in God’s divine image. Notice the word-choice here: nurturing… not implementing, evoking, or creating this change (in oneself or others), but nurturing. That’s significant.

Love is a circular process. The more we practice extending one’s self, the better we become at doing it.

It’s easy to think that the circular process refers to “the more you give, the more you get.” But that’s not what Peck means. Instead, think of it as extending your limits and expanding your ability to love—akin to working a muscle. (And you know what, if it helps, think of the phrase love-muscle…whatever works!) The more you work it, the stronger it gets.

Real love necessitates self-love.

This is a tough one to explain or understand without talking about the distinction between love and dependency (which will be the topic of a post in the very near future). What it really comes down to is that love is about giving of one’s self, and you can’t give what you don’t have.

Real love requires effort.

Anytime you “extend your limits” or “expand your ability” to do something, it requires effort. Many people read this with a tinge of negativity, thinking: “effort”means work, and “work” means drudgery. But a lot of wonderfully fun things that we do require effort. What’s that cliché? Anything worth doing is worth doing well. That, my friends, implies effort.

Love is an act of the will; it is a choice.

Love is a decision; it is a choice you make, particularly when we are talking about nurturing one’s own or another’s spiritual growth. Both the idea that love requires effort and that love is a choice will become much clearer in future posts about the distinction between love and feelings.

While Peck never used the word agape, his definition certainly aligns with that Greek term for love. I hope his definition helps you as much as it has helped me come to a deeper understanding of what love means.

So think about it… Which parts of Peck’s definition resonate with your own experience? What part(s) do you struggle with?

Consider what kind of “spiritual growth” the experience of love has nurtured for you (and that which you have nurtured in others). In doing so, I invite you to understand this phrase, spiritual growth, as Peck intended: as the health and growth of the whole person. Body, mind, and soul. Physically, intellectually, emotionally, and spiritually.

If you enjoyed this post, Please Share

Read More Julie Dienno-Demarest Aug 17,2011

Tag Archives: m. scott peck

The Truth About Love

The act of selfless giving in love feels great because in it,

we experience the divine.

Mature Love “is union under the condition of preserving one’s integrity” or individuality.

If you enjoyed this post, Please Share

You’ve Lost That Lovin’ Feeling

Love is not a feeling.

Love is the will to extend one’s self for the purpose of nurturing one’s own or another’s spiritual growth (81).

If you enjoyed this post, Please Share

What Do You Mean?

If you enjoyed this post, Please Share

Never Miss a Post