It is true. He is gone.

Just last night, a friend e-mailed the news.
“M. Scott Peck has died.”
I stared at the screen for quite a while and a funny (not funny) feeling sort of descended upon me, I guess it was a sense of loss. Coupled with disbelief.
I quickly consulted the internet to try and alleviate this latter reaction, I needed a second opinion, some sort of proof, and there it was, instantly.
It is true. He is gone.
All of the news reports were saying the same thing. Last Sunday (Sept. 25th), at his home in Connecticut, Peck finally succumbed to the ravages of pancreatic and liver duct cancer.

Back in July of 1994, I first read Peck’s The Road Less Travelled. Since that time I have read and re-read almost everything he has published, including his three books of fiction. The precepts of The Road Less Travelled — that life is difficult and is best approached by discipline, delaying gratification and taking responsibility – these themes really spoke to me (and continue to do so) because I always felt that the author shared his thoughts in a way that was properly authoritative but not delivered in an ex cathedra sort of way. The reader was never judged, but was rather allowed to judge (themself) and given the appropriate tools to do so.

All Peck's books are pretty fierce, especially for therapeutic bestsellers. They are about relinquishing one's illusions, about "doing the work of depression." They are about giving up parts of ourselves: arrogance, unrealistic fantasies, habitual sarcasm. And no matter what topic Scott Peck turned his attentions upon, I found that an honest and sensitive reading of him always resulted in a clearer understanding of myself and those around me.

I always appreciated his knack for summary statements... for instance, mental health is "an ongoing process of dedication to reality at all costs." Contemplation is "a lifestyle dedicated to maximum awareness." Salvation is "an ongoing process of becoming increasingly conscious." Of money, he said that "enough of it is not enough, at least not when we are chasing after the illusion of total security." He said that "death is probably the most important fact of life," and that "a grateful heart is one of the prerequisites for being a genuine Christian." He suggested that "laziness" might be the essence of what we call original sin. (Laziness not as physical lethargy, but mental, emotional and spiritual inertia). Peck said that "courage is not the absence of fear but the capacity to go ahead in the very direction of which you are afraid."

Peck's definition of love, which is "the will to extend one's self for the purpose of nurturing one's own or another's spiritual growth" is still the best (most sensible to me) definition I have ever heard.
But it is exactly this.... his use of the word “spiritual” that I perhaps love the most about Peck. [And from here on out I shall speak in the present tense].
“Spiritual” is a word we really trip over, it is a real pothole in the road. And it shouldn’t be, if for no other reason than that all of us, everyone reading this right now, is PROFOUNDLY a spiritual being! Whether you are religious or not is beside the point. You are a spiritual being, irregardless of religious involvement.
And I think this is one of the most significant things that Peck opened up to a world that was (and is, at times) mired in a purely psycho-physical understanding of human nature, and a purely mechanistic view of the universe and our place in it.
Some may read Peck’s definition of love (above) and think.... “What is he saying? If you love someone your biggest concern will be to sit together with them in church?”
HELL NO!
He is saying that if you really love someone, your primary concern for them will be in regards to their spirit. You will not only care about their spiritual well-being, but you will be interested in how you can enliven and nurture it. Cause it to grow into greater levels of understanding.

Because of Peck’s popularity [this book alone, The Road Less Travelled made 258 appearances on the New York Times bestseller list, and in his final days, Peck was raking in $15,000.00 a lecture].... because of his popularity, many people saw Peck as a prophet.
[Hey, say that real fast.... it’s one of those tongue-twisters..... “people saw popular Peck as a prophet...”]

When asked in an interview this past May (2005), about whether he sees himself as a “prophet” or whether he has become more modest with age, Peck replied: “Probably less modest. Yes and no. I’m more modest in some ways. I’ve had it thrown at me so much, the designation of prophet, that I’ve come to accept it — as long as a prophet doesn’t have to be a saint.”
It is the kind of considered answer that I think is typical of Peck.
He was well aware of the fact that he was not a “saint”.
And yet, he considered himself to be a “stage-four evolved person”, the highest spiritual stage a mortal can attain.
See, this appeals to me, this understanding that Peck seemed to have, that living in spiritual awareness did not necessarily mean being a saint. And by “saint” I suppose I am alluding to some sort of notion of moral perfection.
His own marital years [minus one professed decade of monogamy] were fraught with constant bouts of infedility, of which he was the infidelitor! [is that a word, even?]

In his final stages of life, Lily, his wife of 43 years left him. He promptly re-married.
In an interview, Peck said: “A fellow who was thinking of doing my biography once asked me: ‘God man, have you ever denied yourself anything?’ And I said: ‘Well, I’ve never smoked or drunk as much as I would like to.’ That’s about as close as I could come.”
If you are noticing a sort of incongruity with much of what he wrote, as compared to much of what he lived.... you would (I think) be most justified in doing so. To many people, this incongruity would nullify all that a man had said while he preached his gospel to others. But I am the weird sort of chap that is not bothered one iota by such concerns (or seeming inconsistencies). When I nod my head in agreement with my fellow man, I am never doing it with the proviso that they go out and prove themselves to me. I am doing it because they have shown me in their honesty that they themselves are not expecting reciprocal perfection from me.

Peck considered himself a Christian, but a rather unconventional one.
I kind of feel the same way about myself. If I am a Christian at all, I am a very very [EXTREMELY] unconventional one.
Perhaps this is among the reasons I so love him, because I can relate to him on this level?
I am willing to suggest that this is a possibility.

I love so many things about him. I love his concept of a purgatorial heaven, (yet not a “Catholic” purgatory) in the novel In Heaven As On Earth. I love the wonder that he grants to every moment of his travelogue In Search of Stones. I love his courageous perspective on what “evil” is, as presented in People of the Lie. I love his concept of “vocation” in A World Waiting To Be Born. I love his ideas about “community” in The Different Drum. I love the child-like innocence of A Friendly Snowflake. I love his concept of the nobility of dying, as discussed in Denial of the Soul.
A large portion of my bookshelf is devoted to his work, and his books will forever be a place I return to.
I will miss him in the sense that I feel, with his passing, that there is one less person on the earth thoroughly involved in the process of growing in awareness. I will miss him occasionally letting us in on his findings....

*************