What is reciprocity and what does Wojtyla consider genuine reciprocity? And in the context of love between man and woman, how do sympathy and comradeship differ from friendship? These were just some of the questions we pondered and debated during the course of this evening's discussion.

The Problem of Reciprocity

Diane led the group in discussing The Problem of Reciprocity (p. 84-88). Wojtyla begins with quite a beautiful thought, by describing love as something between the man and woman: “...love is not just something in the man and in the woman—for in that case there would properly speaking be two loves—but is something common to them and unique. Numerically and psychologically, there are two loves, but these two separate psychological facts combine to create a single objective whole...in which two people are joined.”

Wojtyla continues: “The route from one 'I' to another leads through free will, through a commitment of the will.” Unrequited love, when this route is one-sided, does not have the objective fullness which reciprocity would give it. Alberto drew our attention back to page 83 (top) where Wojtyla describes genuine love as love which is directed toward a genuine—not merely an apparent—good. If this one-sided love persists, as it sometimes does, for a very long time, this is because of some inner obstinacy. He pointed out how that person is not perceiving the truth about the object of his or her love, not seeing the true character of the other person. We agreed that this analysis on unrequited love is particular to love between man and woman; God loves us, though we may not love him in return, yet God's love is perfect.

Fully realized, love is essentially an interpersonal, not an individual matter. By its very nature, it is bilateral, not unilateral. Yet bilateral love is not in itself enough, since it still involves two 'I's rather than one 'we.' It is reciprocity that determines whether the 'we' comes into existence. This foreshadows Wojtyla's work “The Original Unity of Man and Woman.” Love matured to unity is reciprocity. Jorge added that at this point, your 'I' is identified to another; you are willing that other person's good. Alberto commented that marriage has a subjective characteristic—two flesh become one, in a mystery like the holy trinity. Marriage is often called a “school of love” in which both persons develop together as Christians, learning how to love through marriage. And, as well, it has objective unity, existing sacramentally. The sacrament gives the marriage the grace to attain mature love and to strive for perfection at a spiritual level.

Wojtyla then explains: “a person who desires another as a good desires above all that person's love in return for his or her own love, desires that is to say another person above all as co-creator of love, and not merely as the object of appetite.” Yet this can hardly be viewed as selfishness, as this reciprocity is the very nature of love. It is reciprocity that synthesizes love as good will and love as desire.

Aristotle described different kinds of reciprocity: a genuine reciprocity that is mature, deep and virtually indestructible, and a reciprocity based on self-interest, utility or pleasure. Reciprocity that assumes the characteristics of durability and reliability engenders trust in another person. “To be able to rely on another person, to think of that person as a friend who will never prove false, is for the person who loves a source of peace and joy. Peace and joy are fruits of love very closely bound up with its very essence.” This trust founded on reciprocity brings freedom from suspicion and jealous, which Wojtyla says often spring from human weakness. The group discussed jealousy: is jealousy always something negative? Is it a symptom of an imbalance of reciprocity? The Bible says our God is a Jealous God, Alberto commented, just as Christ was an Angry Christ with the money changers in the Temple. Yet Jesus said “Love is not jealous...”

Wojtyla ends by describing two types of reciprocity: a genuine reciprocity that is fully virtuous, and a false reciprocity based on a “consumer” attitude, based only on desire. He sets forth two conclusions: first, he underscores the need to analyze love not only from a psychological but an ethical point of view—referencing (p. 74) the Holy Gospel and Our Lord's great commandment to love. Second, practically speaking, he advises the “verification” of love before exchanging declarations, to determine whether reciprocity is not apparent but rather real. Ask yourself about your underlying motivation. Pray together. Listen well, to learn what the other person values most. “The structure of Love is that of an interpersonal communion.”

From Sympathy to Friendship

Next, Jorge led discussion on pages 88-95, where Wojtyla analyzes the bases of sympathy, friendship, and comradeship. Sympathy is based on emotions and sensations, on “vibes,” or “chemistry.” Sympathy can awaken a positive emotional response, and that response enhances the value of the other person. In this respect it is very fragile, due to this subjectivity. Wojtyla says “mere intellectual recognition of another person's worth, however whole hearted, is not love... Sympathy brings people close together, into the same orbit, so that each is aware of the other's whole personality, and continually discovers that person in his orbit.”

Yet sympathy is only one element of love. The most profound, and by far most important, element is the will. Love between a man and woman cannot remain on the level of mere sympathy—it must become friendship, where the will has a decisive role. Sympathy is the necessary basis of friendship, and as Jorge termed it, a “trigger” for friendship. Sympathy is often intense right from the start, whereas friendship is faint and frail at first.

Friendship brings with it the unification of persons, the doubling of 'I's. Wojtyla writes, “Friendship consists in a full commitment of the will to another person with a view to that person's good. There is, therefore, a need for sympathy to ripen into friendship and this process normally demands time and reflection.” Wojtyla points out that a mistake often made in love between man and woman is to leave it at the level of sympathy with no conscious effort to mold it into friendship. Then, when sympathy breaks down, love is often at an end as well.

Next Wojtyla, using a term that caused us to chuckle given the years he spent living under Communism, describes comradeship. “People attend the same class, work in the same laboratory, are employed by the same company, have the same special interest (philately, say), and this makes them comrades.” This comradeship gives man and woman an objective common interest (whereas sympathy links them in only a subjective way). Comradeship favors the development of love's objective side, without which it is incomplete. He concludes, “The social characteristic of comradeship is conspicuous in the fact that people linked by it usually form a distinct circle. This is another reason why comradeship may be very important for the development of mutual love between a man and a woman, if their love is to ripen into marriage and become the cornerstone of a new family. People capable of creating and living in a milieu of their own are probably well prepared to impart the character of a closely knit community to the family, and to create a good atmosphere for family life.”