My friend Steve Kneale has written a very helpful article here about how we learn to experience love across cultures. In his article, he picks up on how the concept of “love languages” has often been misunderstood and misused.
Steve, observes that too often, people talk in terms of what their “love language” is meaning how they best experience love and know that they are loved. He argues that this misses the point that “love language” theory is as much about knowing how we express love and so rather than demanding that people love us the way we require, that we learn to see how they are showing love to us in their own way.
Now, I think there is something to be said for learning how others receive love, so that we can better love them. The classic example, and one I’m still trying slowly to learn, along with most husbands is that when wives unburden the frustrations and challenges of their days, they don’t want us to start to analyse and solve their problems, what they most need at that point is for us to empathise and to say “that sucks.”
However, I think Steve is broadly right. You see, whilst it is good to learn that someone else might not hear what you are saying or see what you are doing as loving, whilst we want to adapt to each other, there is also an element of recognising that if God has made us and gifted us in a particular way, that we still best love each other by acting in that way. I am by instinct a problem solver and so whilst yes I’m learning not to step in and solve problems, often the best thing I can do for you is to help you work through the problem and solve it.
As Steve highlights, the “love language” phenomenon is one among a number of examples of things that are basic common sense and potentially useful but often misunderstood and distorted. He mentions personality types. Another example is “learning styles.” Some of us learn best by reading and reflecting, others are verbal processors and some learn best through practical hands on experience. However, if we insist that we can only learn through our preferred learning style them we miss out on two things.
First, as well as your “learning style”, you will discover that your teacher has a “teaching style.” This is how they will communicate best and if they try to teach in another style, it may not be as effective.
However, both teacher and student need to be alert to another factor. It doesn’t matter if I learn best by reading and reflecting or you teach best through dialogue and visual aids, the only way I’m going to learn certain things, whether how to play football, become a doctor or hone my pastoral counselling skills is by hands on, practical experience. Teaching and learning styles are not just suited to individuals but to specific contexts and subjects. Some things are best learnt by sitting down and reading, others by listening to a talk and still others by practice.
It’s true as well of those love languages. Whatever my preferred method of receiving and giving love, the reality is that it is context dependent. The obvious Biblical example is the one James uses in his letter. If you are poor, hungry and in desperate need, then it matters not one ioa if you usually prefer to experience love through words of affirmation and I give it best through spending quality time with people. Of course you will appreciate both of them but the love language you need at that point is the giving of a gift as someone loves you by offering practical help.
Incidentally, all of this is perhaps an application of Ephesians 5:21ff. How do we submit to one another? Well, it means loving one another and letting others love us. This means learning not just how we best receive love or even how we give love but learning about what is most needed, most loving in any situation.
Faithroots 