Well, l think there is a very serious problem if she is saying this because she is deriving her sense of self-worth from the relationship in general, and in particular from the attention that you are showing her. It is a problem because although she probably doesn’t realise it or mean to, she is actually using you as an emotional tranquiliser, and you are only making the situation worse by feeding it in the belief that both of you are in love.
The danger is when both parties lack the insight to see that they are really using each other. They go on to get married, and then eventually the attention they used to show each other out of unspoken and unrecognised necessity must be directed towards the children, and then they wonder what went wrong because each person feels deprived of attention from the other. In fact, nothing went wrong because it wasn’t right to begin with.
You see, neither person in the above example is capable of love because their relationships with other people are driven by getting rather than giving. Eventually something has to give, and in the context of this thread, that often and sadly means separation.
It’s a bit like an example l heard about piety. A person can attend daily Mass, say the Rosary daily, go to frequent Confession, and yet habitually fly off the handle at their neighbour for the smallest thing. How is such a thing possible? Probably because piety to that person is what a bottle of alcohol, a hit of heroin, a packet of cigarettes, or the attention garnered from wearing immodest clothes is to another: a temporary distraction from some form of pain, incurred either during their childhood or during their adult life, which the person never really confronts. The pain becomes buried, it simmers, and then it takes a hold of the person in other ways which leaves them painfully and, if left unresolved or untreated, permanently mystified. Often, though, people just resign their identity to their pain without ever acknowledging it. They might even say that’s how God made them when in fact it could be how they made themselves or allowed themselves to become.
In the case of a husband and wife, well, when the temporary hits of spousal affection wear off, enter alcohol addiction, enter adultery, you name it. The other person has become like a bottle of beer, but unlike a beer, a human being cannot be thrown away, cannot be consumed at leisure and to excess whenever the need arises. What happens when their partner becomes seriously ill or depressed?
This is just one example. I could give many others. My point being, and it’s a pretty simple one, is that instead of turning to God when they should, people turn to each other for fulfillment. It might work for a while, but it’s not sustainable, and by the time either person realises what’s gonig on, the damage has already been done. They turn to God at the end rather than at the beginning.
I hope my post shows a few possible consequences of that.
When people talk about being “whole”, they are simply talking about what makes them tick, what drives them. Unfortunately, secular culture encourages people to draw all of their strength from within, and to base all of their value on what they can provide and possess. The problem comes about when a person goes through hard times, as we have already seen, since everything they’ve based their life on and around is in pieces. Faith and trust in God is replaced by consumerism, careerism and exploitation that is cleverly rebadged as some kind of spirituality. But enough of that tangent.
What we need to do is to examine who we are, in a psychological or natural sense, in the context of what we are in a supernatural sense.
I don’t think l’m saying anything unreasonable or heretical here.
Just my :twocents: