by Evelyn Murphy ’25
The first uses of the term “self-love” beheld negative connotations such that it referred to “excessive regard for one’s own interest” (“self-love,” def. 1). However, starting in the seventeenth century, the term adopted a therapeutic use, referring instead to one’s attention to personal well-being. It became “a natural and appropriate attitude towards oneself” (def. 2). Following this trend of viewing self-love as a positive part of human nature, many Christian scholars now understand a love of oneself to be the root of human ability to love God and others (Poppa 50). As the Gospel of Matthew exhorts, the two greatest commandments require that Christians “love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength” and “love your neighbor as yourself” (Matt. 22.37-9). With these commandments in mind, scholars point to the Bible’s command to love others “as yourself” as an indication that to love oneself is not inherently bad but necessary for the Christian lifestyle.
Self-love is often evaluated on a spectrum that is predicated on the existence of a “proper self-love,” of which two extremes are self-centeredness and self-annihilation (Lippitt 127). Self-centeredness is the orientation of one’s thoughts and desires toward the benefit of the self. On the other end of the spectrum rests self-annihilation, which is conversely described as generously giving of oneself at the expense of oneself. In this, the self fails to acknowledge the inherent value in God’s creation and “fails to pay attention to the ‘as yourself’ of the second love commandment” (131). In unison with other Christian scholars, John Lippitt’s argument urges Christians to recognize the vices which spring from living out of self-centeredness or self-annihilation and find a place in the middle of the spectrum.
These current discussions of self-love are largely focused on the question of whether it should be part of the Christian life; however, instead of asking whether it is a virtue or a vice, the conversation should be focused on current presentations of self-love and the practical implications of the belief that self-love is more of a virtue than a vice. This paper aims to identify the place where contemporary culture lands on the spectrum of self-love, comparing it with the location of the Church. I concede that self-love is, to an extent, a necessary and healthy part of the Christian life, but I argue that the contemporary cultural application of self-love is a static, self-indulgent one. The Church responds to this in two ways: she recognizes this self-indulgence and remedially chooses to embrace self-annihilation, or, more prominently, she allows it to seep implicitly into her appeal tactics and overall message. With this understanding, it is necessary to identify the proper self-love that should be adopted by the Church—one which flows from God and enables the love and growth of self and neighbor.
Cultural Self-Love as Static Self-Indulgence
Though the belief in self-love as normal is not inaccurate or antithetical to Christian teaching, modern arguments assert worth and love for every being without any mention of a source. Indeed, one’s worth is now claimed amid “mainstream culture’s rejection of any kind of sacred order” (Trueman 297). A love of self that exists outside of such a source lacks authentic value and relies on the belief that all people are of worth according to ever-changing cultural standards. This secular worldview faces the challenge of arguing intrinsic value without “root[ing] its authority in anything that lies beyond [itself],” and it can only do such things with shallow affirmations and as part of self-glorifying social media posts (77). With this challenge in mind, questions are raised by a post on Instagram that champions the popular phrase “you are loved” (@rewriteyourlight): loved by whom? Because of what? Based on the secular views of the self that contemporary cries for self-love appeal to—those which declare worth over individuals and tell of their perfection as they are—these questions must be answered without any authoritative order or source. When social media posts, music, or other types of media tell an audience that they are loved or worthy of love, they advocate for an acceptance of self which supposedly stands on its own, without any roots. The instability of this self-love makes it normal insofar as it is something that is advertised on a regular basis. It no longer flows from anything greater nor leads to anything more meaningful than oneself; rather, this love of self assumes that human beings have inherent value without any philosophical or religious basis.
In addition to this presentation of secular self-love as normal, social media campaigns advocate a love of self which is static—one that calls people to love and accept themselves as they are without a call for progress or growth in response to human fallibility. According to Aquinas’s definition of love—to will good for someone (Gallagher)—the love of self should be understood as a fluid and forward-moving value (Leonhard). It may require discipline, change, or corrective behavior for a person to truly find what is best for them. However, the self-love displayed in mainstream culture calls for unfettered self-acceptance, and it implies no forward progress. This attitude is exemplified on social media through posts that feature self-affirming quotes such as this one from Elyse Santilli: “You are worthy. You are capable. You are beautiful… Celebrate yourself. Rule your queendom” (Pictured Quote). Santilli is “a qualified life coach and oracle” (Elyse Santilli). Part of her career focuses on making women feel loved and capable. She reminds people of their worth and guides them on journeys to manifest success. Her message in the quote above calls the audience to self-acceptance in the form of blind satisfaction that stands apart from any form of self-improvement. Though the statement’s latter half may imply some sort of manifestation of forward-motion, it does not address a process or any discomfort in coming to “rule your queendom.” Rather, in accordance with her mission statement, Santilli helps others recognize their own beauty and love themselves in a static and unchanging form (Elyse Santilli).
Based on the way it is represented by trends on social media, this natural and static self-love falls into the extreme of self-indulgence. According to Jefferey Gates, a professor at Cedarville University, self-indulgence is a tendency to engage with oneself in a way that goes beyond simply caring for oneself. Gates sees this indulgence similarly to other scholars: as an inclination to care for oneself above others and a focus on the success of self beyond the preservation of self (Trueman 116-8). Social media is flooded with pushes toward self-care that border on self-indulgence. One such example is a recent trend in which people, most often young females, compile a series of pictures of themselves into a video that reveals “things [they] love about [them]selves” (V.). This video is then played over an audio clip from a song entitled “I Am Woman.” The lyrics of this song go as follows: “I am woman, I am fearless / I am sexy, I’m divine / I’m unbeatable, I’m creative” (Meli). These lyrics exemplify a static self-love that depends on personal affirmation of physique and character. Moreover, the act of compiling pictures where the user feels each statement is clear evidence that social media is influential in how people view themselves in a self-indulgent way that borders on self-glorification. A connection can be drawn between this trend and a study that found a “positive correlation between the number of ‘likes’ on the participants’ own posts and their level of appearance self-esteem” (Gallinari 1030). The conclusion of this study further displays how our contemporary application of self-love is rooted in self-indulgence: pursuit of affection and love from others through social media and the increased efforts to portray oneself more attractively which flow from that pursuit.
Presentations of Self-Love Within the Church
Though the love of self which is championed by the Church may be rooted in Christ as its origin, this is not so clear in her practical presentation of the subject. While one might expect the Church to represent a healthy and theological view of self-love, she often leans toward self-annihilation in her effort to avoid the vices of self-indulgence or, by contrast, enforces a mere imitation of the secular self-love described above. Either way, she does not often land in the realm of proper self-love.
The Church often overcompensates in her effort to avoid the vices of self-indulgence, landing at the other extreme: self-annihilation. She tends to “warn more forcefully of the dangers of improper self-love than of improper self-sacrifice,” despite both being equally dangerous and incompatible with Christian discipleship (Lippitt 132). The Christian Church has become aware of the vices of self-centeredness, compensating for this sin in such a way that she tends to “all too eas[ily] slide from proper self-sacrifice to outright self-annihilation” (125). When faced with the task of avoiding vainglory, conceit, and narcissism, the Church often teaches her people to sacrifice themselves and all that they are for the way of Christ—to give more of themselves than they receive in turn or than they have to give to begin with. The Church’s antidote to worldly self-love then becomes a complete denial of selfhood, but this threatens the Christian life just as greatly as the alternative (Lippitt). It signifies a lack of reverence for God as the creator of one’s self and, therefore, ignores the inherent value of that creation. In such situations, proper preservation of self should not be sacrificed, as a person who is unhealthy or unstable will be unable to give anything of themselves for Christ or for their neighbor. Those things that a person requires to live must not be given up. Where self-preservation is absent, burnout becomes likely for individuals, for they fail to meet their own needs either personally or relationally. For these reasons, the Church’s sacrificial response to the vice of self-love is equally as concerning as falling into the trap of worldly self-love.
In a less overt way, the static, self-indulgent love of self championed by contemporary culture has seeped into the appeal tactics employed by modern Evangelical churches. To appeal to rising generations in a contemporary context, some of the churches’ foundational doctrine is being altered or avoided for the sake of making the institution more palatable to modern taste. This might mean the rewriting of common hymns, the dissolution of theories of atonement, or, more importantly for the purposes of this paper, the amplification of certain religious affirmations to the detriment of its more crucial message of the gospel (American Gospel). These affirmations tend to draw from biblical messages, declaring that audiences are made in God’s image, “fearfully and wonderfully made,” or that they can be accepted as they are (Gen. 1.27; Ps. 139.14; John 6.37); however, such affirmations fail to tell of the gospel and the heart of those Scriptural messages in context. According to a study of Evangelical megachurches conducted by Jennifer Dyer, such churches “lure in members with their attention to self-admiration… but the leaders and adherents of megachurches fail to reduce fully the problem of narcissism in individuals or the group” (Dyer 242). The conclusion of this study is one that disproves the popular belief that churches use tactics of self-love to get people through their doors but abandon them in messages and discipleship. Dyer argues that the church fails to abandon such affirmations of self, and many of the relationships within a church function based on affirmation and pride. In Dyer’s words, “pastor–parishioner ‘patting on the back’ occurs, a swapping of affirmations and role-playing between the leadership and the congregants” (248). Focusing on the relationship between a pastor and a congregant, she recognizes that relationships are largely built on the exchange of compliments and validation regarding character, gifts, ministries, et cetera. This makes it evident that the rising Church is basing her ministry on a self-indulgence that is theologically unsound. The Church uses the desires of a self-loving culture to appeal to unchurched and worldly peoples at the expense of her own foundational beliefs. Thus, the appeal tactics employed by the Church, combined with messages presented from pulpits and in everyday media and conversation, prove that her interpretation of self-love is not the healthy, Christian alternative that one might expect.
Beyond appeal tactics, the message of the modern church is increasingly becoming one that imitates the static self-indulgence evident in contemporary culture. This secular form of self-love is present in the church’s music, whether contemporary Christian music or modern worship music. One example of this in contemporary Christian music is Leanna Crawford’s song entitled “Crazy Beautiful You.” The lyrics of this popular Christian song are focused on the puffing up of the self rather than its building up. It affirms listeners that they are “marvelous, wonderful / magical, beautiful…show-stopping, star-shining, / masterpiece[s]” (Crawford). Though Crawford’s intent is to encourage a rising generation to see themselves as God’s beautiful creation, her lyrics are a perfect example of the way modern churches have allowed the self-indulgence of contemporary culture to infiltrate their messages presented through media. The song neglects the gospel that underlies such affirmations, so it leads its young or unchurched listeners to understand self-acceptance to be the message of the Church.
This sort of affirmation and self-indulgence has also crept into the worship practices of the modern Church. In a song entitled “I Am Loved,” which is played in corporate worship gatherings, congregants join in singing “all that I am / all that I have / is beautifully made by Your hands” (Maverick City Music). Not only do these lyrics feature worship that is oriented toward the human self, but they go on to say, “there is no doubt / that you look at me and feel proud.” This is yet another example of the static affirmation of self—the cultural tendency to affirm people without any notion of progress. Yes, Scripture says that God loves His creation, but this is not the extent of the gospel. Neglecting the larger Christian message, this song takes on a type of worship that focuses on the self and fails to meet the criteria of right worship. In proper worship, there is an orientation toward God. In proper self-love, there is a forward motion that seeks what is good; however, lyrics found in contemporary Christian music and modern worship music affirm listeners and champion the message of a loving God, neglecting the fallible and dynamic nature of man.
The Self-Love Which Ought to Be Recovered
With an understanding that the Christian Church has lost a proper form of self-love, it is necessary to evaluate the implications of this truth for the Church moving forward. In some situations, she embraces self-annihilation as an alternative to indulgence, and it is clear in worship, messages of affirmation, social media posts, and many other formats that the Church has been infiltrated by the cultural tendency to adhere to a static, self-indulgent self-love. Therefore, a practical response is necessary to aid the Church in redefining and accurately applying self-love in its own context. Proper, theological self-love comes from God, works in tandem with the love of neighbor to aid in living by the second greatest commandment, and is focused on self-preservation rather than self-indulgence or secular self-care.
In the Christian life, God is both the source and the orientation of self-love. Contrary to cultural affirmations, the root of proper self-love is in Christ, for man’s worth flows from his Creator. “God created man in his own image” (Gen. 1.27). This is the foundation of Christian views of selfhood. Physically and spiritually, man is the likeness of God; therefore, as God’s creation, man has worth in God alone. It is through God that a person comes to understand themself, and it is this understanding of self in relation to God that empowers a person to live with an attitude of proper self-love. A proper knowledge and love of self flows from a growing relationship with God. Moreover, it is in orienting oneself to the work of God that proper self-love can be achieved in a practical way: “if we love God, then we love the One who surpasses and contextualizes all our objects and concerns” (Gorringe 97). When a person fully devotes themselves to the work of God, they might achieve a practice of proper self-love. God the Creator is the source of one’s being, the reference to which we can turn for evaluating authentic love, and the means by which “all things work together for good” (Rom. 8.28). According to Aquinas’s definition of love, if God wishes good for His creation, then a person living with proper self-love must submit to God for the good of himself. Proper, theological self-love therefore flows from God and is oriented toward Him.
In response to arguments for self-love as the means by which a person can follow the second greatest commandment, the application of self-love becomes one that views the love of self and of neighbor as inextricably linked. The command to love others “as yourself” is an indication that the love of self is part of the Christian life, and it implies a need to love oneself to be able to love others in earnest. Furthermore, in response to the second greatest commandment, the Church should love others in submission to God’s goodwill. The church must view the common good—for herself and for her neighbor—as her goal, so her “well-being is neither divorced from nor subordinate to that of others” (Gorringe 97). The Church must not prioritize one over the other but acknowledge that she, in accordance with the will of God, should prioritize the common good. In doing so, she submits to her Creator with full acknowledgement that His intent for both the individual and the whole is goodness and hope. On an individual level, this submission of intentions to the Creator follows the instruction of Ephesians 4:15, which states that we must devote ourselves to “speaking the truth in love, [that] we will grow to become in every respect the mature body of him who is the head, that is, Christ.” Submission to His will is a focus on growth toward Christ and toward mature membership of the whole. The individual might endure troubles or engage in hard things in an attempt to grow—to move past some weakness or selfish desire—and they might speak the hard truth into the life of a loved one for the sake of leading them toward the same, thus displaying the love of neighbor. Moreover, when an individual part of the body is growing toward Christ, it is, consequently, loving its neighbor. Therefore, to submit to God’s will is to engage in difficult tasks, remembering that His desires are the ultimate good. This submission to Christ and engagement in processes of growth demonstrates a proper love of self and neighbor in the Christian life.
The love of neighbor may also take the form of sacrifice. However, as discussed in the previous section, this self-sacrifice must be guarded closely and understood through the lens of Christ. There are three crucial truths that should contribute to healthy practices of sacrifice for the good of a neighbor. First, as is previously recognized, man finds his value in God, his creator. Therefore, “proper self-sacrifice ‘must emphasize the worth of the self that is emptied out’” (Lippitt 132). Based on this, the second truth urges that self-preservation must be a focus in the mind of he who wishes to give of himself. Though contemporary culture has effectively blurred the line between needs and wants, a Christian should recognize and respond to their own needs, by God’s grace, to keep sustained the stores from which they give. One must maintain enough health and strength in their being to continue fighting the world’s corruption in the way in which he is commanded. In practice, this seems to imply a need for personal devotion and spiritual formation—the maintenance of relationship with Him who is man’s creator and sustainer. If this second truth is lived out, then the third is this: distinguishing a proper form of self-sacrifice might be the difference between putting others’ needs above one’s own and complete submission to others in a way that makes one a doormat rather than a step ladder. One must allow themselves to be a valuable being if they wish for their sacrifice to mean anything to others, for the sacrifice of anything that lacks value is no sacrifice at all.
The final point of tension is resolved by the distinction between self-indulgence—that which goes beyond self-care and preservation—and proper self-love—a focus on care and preservation of self. The self-indulgence which is present in the rising Church follows cultural tendencies toward shallow affirmation and static self-love. In contrast, the Church’s application of proper self-love must take the form of self-preservation. It is not that Christians should ignore the command given in Matthew 16:24 that instructs them to “deny [themselves] and take up [their] cross and follow [Christ].” Rather, “when Jesus referred to self-sacrifice, he spoke of giving up self-indulgence rather than self-care” (Gates 13). This is a call to honor God in all that she does, doing nothing out of selfish ambition, avoiding harm, and paying attention to her general well-being (6). In focusing her energy on the work of God, the efforts of the Church become a movement toward progress in the name of God. All desires of the human heart should then exist in accordance with the good and perfect will of God.
Though the practice of proper self-love requires healthy sacrifice, growth, and devotion, it is the task of the Church to identify it and live by its principles. She must be cautious in her presentation of self-love, always rooting such things in Christ. She must be wary of following in the footsteps of contemporary culture, finding her place in the middle of the spectrum even in the effort to appeal to worldly people. She must be careful not to let recognition of the vices of self-indulgence lead her to embrace the self-annihilation which lies at the opposite end of the spectrum. The Christian Church must be alert to the biblical call to place her foundation in God, find her worth in God, meld her desires to the will of God, live in unity with her neighbor, and care for herself in a balanced way.
Works Cited
American Gospel: Christ Alone. Directed by Brandon Kimber, Transition Studios, 2018.
Crawford, Leanna. “Crazy Beautiful You.” Story House Collective, 2018. Spotify app.
Dyer, Jennifer E. “Loving Thyself: A Kohutian Interpretation of a ‘Limited’ Mature Narcissism in Evangelical Megachurches.” Journal of Religion and Health, vol. 51, no. 2, Mar. 2012, pp. 241-55. Academic Search Ultimate, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-012-9579-8.
Gallagher, David M. “Thomas Aquinas on Self-Love as the Basis for Love of Others.” Acta Philosophica, vol. 8, no. 1, 1999, pp. 23-44, https://doi.10.17421/1121_2179_1999_08_01.
Gallinari, Elizabeth. “‘Likes’ for Self-Love? The Effects of Social Media on Self-Perception.” The Undergraduate Review, vol. 13, no. 13, Aug. 2017, pp. 100-5. Virtual Commons, https://vc.bridgew.edu/undergrad_rev/vol13/iss1/13/.
Gates, Jeffery. “Self-Care: A Christian Perspective.” Evangelical Review of Theology, vol. 39, no. 1, Jan. 2015, pp. 4-17. Academic Search Ultimate, https://web.p.ebscohost.com/ehost/ pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=4&sid=983b4ff8-6d4d-49d7-9564-1ff5394da879%40redis.
Gorringe, Jim. “Self-Love and Christian Ethics.” Studies in Christian Ethics, vol. 17, no. 3, Dec. 2004, pp. 96-8. Academic Search Ultimate, https://doi.org/10.1177/095394680401 700315.
The Holy Bible. English Standard Version, Crossway, 2016.
Leonhard, Evan. “Opinion: Contemporary Promotion of Uncritical Self-Love May Do More Harm than Good.” Reveille, 8 Feb. 2021, https://www.lsureveille.com/opinion/opinion-contemporary-promotion-of-uncritical-self-love-may-do-more-harm-than-good/article _da6ff10e-6a3b-11eb-b630-572c78b66a1a.html. Accessed on 14 November 2021.
Lippitt, John. “True Self-Love and True Self-Sacrifice.” International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, vol. 66, no. 3, Dec. 2009, pp. 125-38. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25652 844.
Maverick City Music. “I Am Loved.” Tribl Records, 2019. Spotify app.
Meli, Emmy. “I Am Woman.” Sony Music, 2021. Spotify app.
Poppa, Kristin. “Self-Care is Soul Care.” Journal of Spiritual Formation and Soul Care, vol. 12, no. 1, May 2019, pp. 50-70. Academic Search Ultimate, https://doi.org/10.1177/1939 790918795633.
Santilli, Elyse. Elyse Santilli, https://elysesantilli.com/. Accessed 26 November 2021.
— [Elyse Louise]. Pictured Quote from Elyse Santilli. Pinterest, https://www.pinterest.com.au/p in/346003183863614233/. Accessed 26 Nov. 2021.
“self-love, n.” OED Online, Oxford UP, September 2021, www.oed.com/view/Entry/175338. Accessed 20 Nov. 2021.
Trueman, Carl R. The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self: Cultural Amnesia, Expressive Individualism, and the Road to Sexual Revolution. Crossway, 2020.
V., Vera [@veranothing]. Video Featuring Clips Pictures of Vera V. Instagram, 25 Nov. 2021, https://www.instagram.com/p/CWhnpZTgWjB/. Accessed 26 Nov. 2021.
[@rewriteyourlight]. Photo with Unattributed Affirmation. Instagram, 26 July 2021, https://www.instagram.com/p/CRzY–mDpsp/. Accessed 26 Nov. 2021.