Today I stumbled on an idea that I thought worth developing. The idea was that it's easy to get hung up on the logistics of a relationship and approach love and friendship as a "balance of payments". "Balance of payments" is a pretty intuitive term but I think I should probably explain what I mean by logistics as it pertains to relationships. These are things like sharing physical space, accepting the accidentals of a personality, and realizing that the things you like about a person are worth tolerating the things that drive you nuts. I think too often relationships are put at the mercy of things that don't have a lasting impact or don't really matter beyond a particular instance. I read an article several years ago in Catholic Digest about "Bowl Wars" where a married couple butted heads over which way the bowls go in the dishwasher. It's laughable for a moment, until I realized that I've started, "finished", lost, and won MANY "Bowl Wars" with people I care about over the years. Looking back and comparing the results of "victory" to "defeat", I don't recall a single instance where victory felt much better than defeat. And really, when two people who are supposed to be working together engage in competitive argument, they have both already lost the battle. The challenge isn't to be right, it's to stay intact.
Relationships that disintegrate because of logistics were probably doomed long before those challenges materialized. Dealing with logistical challenges requires both parties to be willing to make some sort of sacrifice to reach a compromise. But this is not a negotiation! In an ideal situation, the "competition" wouldn't be who could KEEP the most of what is laid on the bargaining table, it would be who could GIVE the most. This sort of selflessness is at the very core of Love. But even then, "competition" cannot exist. I have found that even in selflessness there can be a very dangerous form of pride that develops a certain "arrogant humility" that can erode relationships as fast as blatant arrogance. A real and sincere gift of self requires that the giver think nothing of it. This runs inherently contrary to the idea that relationships revolve around a constant "balance of payments" where each favor has to be returned with another favor. This also undermines the modern mandate that relationships must be 50/50. Sure there are relationships where this is true, but the more important the relationship, the more investment it requires of both parties. Thus, the ideal ratio would be 100%/100%. Of course, in this ideal many more factors come into play. Can you trust the other person to give 100%? Can you sustain 100% with that person? Is the other person capable of sustaining that sort of selflessness? Since nobody is perfect, the answer to each of these question will probably be something ranging between "Yes, usually" and "No, not very often at all". But the intent and motivation to strive towards an unconditional "Yes! Always. Because I love you" must be there or the relationship will be at the mercy of logistics.
But even this sort of compassion is not enough by itself. There must also exist an understanding of what to offer and how to offer it. A man may truly love his wife, but if he does not understand that she prefers intimate dinners at home, spending enormous amounts of money on her at a 5-star restaurant has less impact than even a poorly cooked meal prepared in their own kitchen*. Compassion may empower a person to give of themselves, but Understanding enables a person to insure that their gift is meaningful.
*Which is why I'm glad to have developed a knack for cooking. You never know when it will come in handy!
