Love vs. In love
Showgirlbody
Posts: 402 Member
I read this in Dear Margo recently and thought it was very interesting. It helped me put some things in perspective regarding my own relaionship as I have wondered if I was lacking some of the lust part that was involved in love. It makes sense to me. What do you think?
Dear Readers: I was recently in the UK for a wedding. (It was my son’s, actually.) I was so impressed by what the Rev. Ben Bentham said to the couple standing before him that I asked for the text of his wedding blessing sermon. Some of his references were secular, if not entertaining, which was surprising to this American, because this, after all, was a Church of England ceremony. One portion in particular had resonance for me because it touched on a topic I am often asked about. Usually, the question is framed this way: “I love him, but I am not in love with him.” To be truthful, this declaration makes me want to scream. To all of you who have asked, or plan to, here is what the vicar of Sissinghurst has to say on the subject:
“In the film ‘Captain Corelli’s Mandolin,’ Captain Corelli and a Greek girl, Pelagia, have, as Americans might put it, ‘made out,’ and Pelagia’s father says this to her: ‘When you fall in love, it is a temporary madness. It erupts like an earthquake, and then it subsides. And when it subsides, you have to make a decision. You have to work out whether your roles have been so entwined that it’s inconceivable you should ever part. Because this is what love is. Love is not breathlessness, not excitement, not a desire to mate every second of the day; it is not lying awake at night imagining that he is kissing every part of your body. That is just being in love, which any of us can convince ourselves we are. Love itself is what is left when being in love has burned away.’
“He’s talking sense. The reality is that love burns like a furnace for a while, but then settles, and then it has to be worked at. The romantic and sexual love described in The Song of Solomon has to grow up, to be adult. There is no future in being ‘in love.’ You have to learn to love. And unfortunately, our cultures seem to have not the slightest shred of maturity when it comes to that. Love in the media is all the burning fire, when what is needed are the strength and wisdom to go beyond being in love to loving.”
In other words, being “in love” is unsustainable. Amen to that.
Dear Readers: I was recently in the UK for a wedding. (It was my son’s, actually.) I was so impressed by what the Rev. Ben Bentham said to the couple standing before him that I asked for the text of his wedding blessing sermon. Some of his references were secular, if not entertaining, which was surprising to this American, because this, after all, was a Church of England ceremony. One portion in particular had resonance for me because it touched on a topic I am often asked about. Usually, the question is framed this way: “I love him, but I am not in love with him.” To be truthful, this declaration makes me want to scream. To all of you who have asked, or plan to, here is what the vicar of Sissinghurst has to say on the subject:
“In the film ‘Captain Corelli’s Mandolin,’ Captain Corelli and a Greek girl, Pelagia, have, as Americans might put it, ‘made out,’ and Pelagia’s father says this to her: ‘When you fall in love, it is a temporary madness. It erupts like an earthquake, and then it subsides. And when it subsides, you have to make a decision. You have to work out whether your roles have been so entwined that it’s inconceivable you should ever part. Because this is what love is. Love is not breathlessness, not excitement, not a desire to mate every second of the day; it is not lying awake at night imagining that he is kissing every part of your body. That is just being in love, which any of us can convince ourselves we are. Love itself is what is left when being in love has burned away.’
“He’s talking sense. The reality is that love burns like a furnace for a while, but then settles, and then it has to be worked at. The romantic and sexual love described in The Song of Solomon has to grow up, to be adult. There is no future in being ‘in love.’ You have to learn to love. And unfortunately, our cultures seem to have not the slightest shred of maturity when it comes to that. Love in the media is all the burning fire, when what is needed are the strength and wisdom to go beyond being in love to loving.”
In other words, being “in love” is unsustainable. Amen to that.
0
Replies
-
:
“In the film ‘Captain Corelli’s Mandolin,’ Captain Corelli and a Greek girl, Pelagia, have, as Americans might put it, ‘made out,’ and Pelagia’s father says this to her: ‘When you fall in love, it is a temporary madness. It erupts like an earthquake, and then it subsides. And when it subsides, you have to make a decision. You have to work out whether your roles have been so entwined that it’s inconceivable you should ever part. Because this is what love is. Love is not breathlessness, not excitement, not a desire to mate every second of the day; it is not lying awake at night imagining that he is kissing every part of your body. That is just being in love, which any of us can convince ourselves we are. Love itself is what is left when being in love has burned away.’
saw this movie, and when he said that, it made a lot of sense. sometimes u get caught up with being in love or lust and falling for someone, but what really matters is if u love that person and cannot see yourself without them.0 -
Well, I dont agree that being 'in love' is any less adult than 'love'. And I dont see why love isnt breathless or exciting!!! I went through phases of those with the same partner for 12 years...........of course, it's not sustainable all day, every day, but I still looked at him with starry eyes right up until the point that he really pissed me off!!! :laugh:
Perhaps I'm just excitable.........I dunno! ..:bigsmile:
0 -
Yeah I don't think that "in love" doesn't last, nor do I think it's juvenile. I would use the term "lust" instead. I think you can still have passion after many years while loving, depends on the chemistry. But I think having the foundation of genuine like and respect and friendship will be there long after you are too old or tired to be breathless and mating all the time. lol Media makes it seem like it is all fireworks and make outs when you are in love and makes some of us feel like we are doing it wrong. I think the day to days of intimacy and comfortability make me feel more in love than just having someone I want to bang all the time. (But that would be nice. Hence my other post about urges for others). Passion just seems more exciting with someone who doesn't know you that well, but the guy I might want to jump all the time, I wouldn't necessarily want to have breakfast with or have stupid conversations about farting. I just like the part in the article where it says that love is what happens when the excitement is burned away. Some people flit between people every 3 months or so because that's when the lusty high seems to dissipate. I know I did and it just would fizzle out because there was nothing else binding us.0
-
Well said I think.
I would say though that he means when LUST has settled is there love there? Lust works better for me in the context of his words.0 -
I just like the part in the article where it says that love is what happens when the excitement is burned away. Some people flit between people every 3 months or so because that's when the lusty high seems to dissipate. I know I did and it just would fizzle out because there was nothing else binding us.
I think this is one reason why I have become so frustrated with online dating and all the expectations and pressures that go along with it. I'm at the point I would just rather meet these men as friends and go slow... Leave out all the sexual pressures and see if you have something on a basic level not just on a sexual level. Hormones cloud judgement. Then as lust starts to pass you realize you have nothing else binding you. Or you realize you may have had stuff to bind you but you let lust/hormones take ver and you ruined whatever could have formed.0
This discussion has been closed.