Sigmund, Carl and Alfred

‘If you want to be loved, love, somebody.’

Of course, that old saying presumes you know both how to love somebody and how to be loved. It also presumes that you are familiar with the tools of love.

In an age where image of often mistaken for substance, there needs to be distinctions made between what are real expressions of love and those that no more than prepackaged and predigested ‘meaningful moments’ for sale, geared towards those numbed by narcissism and self absorption. Big bouquets of flowers, giant greeting cards, jewelry, gifts and so on, are the equivalent of fast food masquerading as a healthy diet. Real expressions of love are often supplanted because many of us no longer realize what love means.

In other words, some people have replaced values (real love) with current expressions of what passes for popular culture (pretend love). What is truly sad is how this is now being taught to kids. Children learn what they see- and they are being deprived.

Is it any surprise that public displays and dramatic obsessions, masquerading as love, shaped and framed by popular culture and narcissism, are in full view? Is it any wonder that at times, it seems as if half the nation is caught up in the drama- as if somehow, knowing or not knowing details of some spectacular scandal. 

Love is redefined daily by the likes of astronauts gone wild, celebrities gone wild and boys and girls gone wild. Love is now defined in whatever way we need to love to be defined, so that it might fit our desires. Of course, that is the last thing love is about.

Love is a value, defined, taught by example and refined by time. It cannot be learned from a TV show, no matter how ‘touching,’ nor can it be taught by way of scripted expressions. Love is about choices, the manifestation of those choices and takes years and years to learn. The profundity of love is that the learning process itself can be a great joy. Real love rightfully conflicts with our cultural notions. Love is best when it is not efficient and love is best when served not from a prepackaged and portion controlled, off the shelf ideal.

Dr. Sanity writing about psychological defenses in A Most Ingenious Paradox has this to say:

An individual’s level of development; the depth and breadth of his interpersonal relationships, and the intensity of the perceived threat both combine to determine which psychological defense the EGO might deploy in a given situation. A child, for example, does not generally have either the life experiences or the internal wisdom to use one of the more mature defenses in a traumatic situation. But as life is lived and mild, moderate and severe trauma is survived; as the individual learns from his or her mistakes and gains mastery over the world; then the EGO has more options (i.e., more possible defense mechanisms available—from the most immature to the most mature) that can be utilized.

As a child matures, he or she also must deal with the quite natural pain and trauma associated with all interpersonal relationships. Even the most loving relationship can have tremendous pain associated with it, particularly when it is abruptly taken away due to the inevitability of separation and death. The child not only must learn to cope with physical trauma, but must learn to cope with this type of inevitable emotional trauma, also. Those whom he loves must be taken in psychologically and incorporated–both the bad and the good parts– and fully digested into his own self. Thus, does a person learn to accept that those they love and tend to idealize are not perfect and are “good enough.” Such fully digested individuals are never completely lost when death or separation happens, and the pain is mitigated so that the grieving process ultimately leads to a person’s individual growth, rather than threatening his very sense of self.

The loss of someone who has not been fully psychologically digested and processed (i.e., someone who is loved but whose bad qualities are so overwhelming that full digestion is difficult, if not impossible) can thus lead to so much internal conflict and misery that the grieving person’s life and maturation may be severely impeded from going forward.

There are people and commercial entities who take advantage of our desire to be loved. Read the right book, watch the right TV show, take the right magazine test and you too, can have a life filled with love, equal to those who took decades to learn the very things in which are now passed around like a plate of hors d’oeuvres .

As we have come to venerate the ubiquitous culture all around us, our identification with values have become more distant and clouded.

There is much talk of familial dysfunctionality. Certainly, the suffering and tragedy of those that have had to endure much hardship is not to be trifled with. That said, hardship and suffering do not need to be anchors that drown the victim- and more often than not, the victims family. The fact remains that if we do not overcome the legacy of suffering and tragedy, the cycle repeats itself. Those who choose (yes, it is most often a choice) not make their homes places filled with real love and values, remain forever in the ‘victim/survivor’ mode, never seeing beyond the immediate.

Some argue that overcoming ‘toxic relationships’ is a herculean task. Sometimes it is. On the other hand, dealing with a ‘toxic relationship’ need not be nearly as difficult as imagined.

There are many household chemicals that are toxic. We can’t avoid those chemicals, because they are in our cleaning products, pest control products, gardening compounds and so on- so we have to keep them around. We know that if we ingest those chemicals, we will be come ill. That is why we keep those chemicals stored away and out the reach of children. We take all the necessary precautions to keep our homes and families safe. We do not obsess over household chemicals and we don’t think about them, morning, noon and night. Why? Because we have secured those toxins and keep them in a place where they can not hurt us or our families. We have learned how to handle and deal with toxic chemicals. We are free to go on with our lives.

We cannot allow the toxicity of the past to poison the love of the present and future. We must engage in a ‘cleanup,’ so that future generations are not poisoned. No parent would expose their child to radioactive waste, willingly. The would do whatever it took to provide the child with a safe environment.

It is clear that the foundation pillars of a loving and healthy home are the spiritual connections that are found there. Not necessarily in the religious and stereotypical context of the word, but rather, spiritual in the sense of people who embrace life and celebrate life.

A loving home is where meaningful exchanges and conversations take place, where ideas are shared in a honest and encouraging way, discussed without fear of ridicule. A loving home is place where words do not have to be measured and there are no eggshells to be found. In a loving home, egos are not wielded like swords. Real love, shared, is about common goals and ideals and visions of an always expanding love and encouragement.

A loving home is a safe place. A home and family that knows love may not have the ‘right’ vase to put the dozen roses. A home and family that knows love may not even see that dozen roses. A home and family that knows love does not have to celebrate Mother’s Day with dinner at a restaurant.

What loving homes all have in common is commitment. Loving homes commit to the establishment and nurturing deep roots. As each garden is different, so is each home and family. If we do not learn, teach and commit ourselves to real and deep love, we will not have a loving home to come back to. If love- and the expressions of love- are defined by current ‘culture’ and not by values, we remain off balance. If we are off balance and lack real definition, no amount of riches or displays of au courrant cultural expressions will anchor us. Without deep rooted values and real love, we become hostages to a culture that has no deep roots That is who we become- an extension of our culture, not our values. Is that the legacy we want to pass on?

Unless people learn how to develop mature relationships and mature love, the ‘failure to launch’ in life will be the rule and not the exception.

The contrived Palestinian and Arab world outrage over archaeological digs and restoration in Jerusalem would be laughable- if the deceit weren’t so deadly.

Let’s clear a few things up.

Firstly, when it comes to the deliberate destruction of Holy Sites (Jewish and Christian), the Palestinians take the prize. See this and this.

Here is a reality check:

‘In A Brief Guide to al-Haram al-Sharif, a booklet published in 1930 by the “Supreme Moslem Council”, a body established by the British government to administer waqfs and headed by Hajj Amin al-Husayni (the same al Huysani that publicly allied himself with Adolph Hitler-SC&A) during the British Mandate period, states (page 3):

“The site is one of the oldest in the world. Its sanctity dates from the earliest (perhaps from pre-historic) times. Its identity with the site of Solomon’s Temple is beyond dispute. This, too, is the spot, according to universal belief, on which David built there an altar unto the Lord, and offered burnt offerings and peace offerings.” [A subsequent footnote refers the reader to 2 Samuel 26:25]

An original copy of the booklet published by the Waqf can be found for sale, here.

Sheikh Abdul Hadi Palazzi (the article is a must read) is Muslim religious leader from Italy.

Today’s politicized religious leaders, says Palazzi, especially the popular charismatic preachers, are usually far from being scholars. Often they are unordained, either in the traditional teacher-to-disciple sense, or in the sense that they had never attended institutions of Islamic studies. Palazzi recalls an al-Quds interview with Sheikh Ahmed Yassin in which the charismatic Hamas leader revealed that he had never studied beyond elementary school, and that his “Sheikh” title was merely honorary, because of his age and status.

Palazzi also points to the denial by the Palestinian Authority-appointed Mufti of Jerusalem Ikramah Sabri that a Jewish Temple had ever existed on the Temple Mount. This, he says, is a flagrant slap at Islamic tradition.

Imam Qurtubi, the Islamic counterpart of the Jewish commentator Rashi, quotes the earlier commentator Imam Tabari who related the Prophet Mohammed’s response to a follower’s query about the ruins of the fabled Jewish Temple. Qurtubi sets out in writing Tabari’s words about the destruction of the Temple, which tally in every detail with biblical accounts of the Temple’s destruction by the Babylonians, reconstruction, and final destruction by the Romans.

Palazzi speculates that Sabri had been a PLO flunky before his appointment to his current position. Sabri had in fact complained to the director of the Mosque of Rome about Palazzi and the unusual views he had voiced as the Moslem representative a 1996 conference on Jerusalem held here. Palazzi asked the mosque’s director to give Sabri his address and fax number, so that Sabri could address him directly - but Palazzi is still waiting to hear from him.

PALAZZI says it is the Wahabi sect, that rules Saudi Arabia, that is responsible for the politicized Islam so dominant in the Middle East and throughout much of the Islamic world…

Sheikh Prof. Abdul Hadi Palazzi Secretary General of the Italian Moslem Association and Moslem co-chair of the Islam-Israel Fellowship of the Root and Branch Association - which promotes the study and practice of universal Jewish teachings - believes this strongly. So strongly, in fact, that he arrived last week, while the “Aksa intifada” was still raging, to be the keynote speaker at the association’s Conference on Jerusalem, held at the Jerusalem City Council chambers.

It bears remembering that in prior to the 1967 liberation of Jerusalem by the Israelis, every single Jewish house of worship was destroyed by the religiously tolerant and sensitive Jordanians (now ‘Palestinians’). In addition, centuries old tombstones from the Mount Olive cemeteries were used to line latrines and as sewage conduits.
The same people who committed those atrocities are now dictating to others on the matter of religious discrimination.

Lastly, the assault on the Temple Mount is not just an assault on Judaism and Jewish history. It is also a blatant assault on Christianity and Christian history.

Christians revere the site of the Temple as the site where Jesus, visited, taught and rearranged some furniture. Jesus visited the Temple Mount as a Jew. He lived as a Jew and died as a Jew.

John Paul II and other Christian leaders have prayed at the last remnant of the Jewish Temple. If it was sacred to them, it ought to be sacred to us. Unless Christians are prepared to give up their history and the foundations of their faith, we had better speak up.

For more on the destruction of sacred sites in Jerusalem, see this.

The latest Sanity Squad podcast is up.

This week, we look at global warming, bovine flatulence, science, politics. We can also declare definitively that ‘Chicken Little’ has indeed left the barnyard.

As the global warming three ring circus comes to your town, Shrinkwrapped, Neo-neocon, Dr Sanity and ourselves offer up the most insightful play by play of all the action.

While Sanity Squad podcasts does not offer up any really creative commercials with our collective brilliance (commercials would only interrupt the Niagara Falls-like flow of our wisdom), we can help you sense of the world around you.

There is a lot of science when to comes to global warming- and there is an equal amount of politics. Determining the truth, reality and selecting a reasonable response to rising temperatures is a lot more difficult. Some of the same players taking center stage on the global warming issue are those who think the failures and implosion of Palestinian and Arab world societies are the result of the Israelis and western democracies continued insistence that they be allowed to defend themselves from terror.

As we noted in the podcast, sometimes it seems we are all living inside a Salvador Dali painting.