Skip to main content

Many Forms of Love

                    Many Forms of Love

It is never surprising to come across a focus on love when reading different writers on spirituality.  And of course, that is not limited to Christianity.  We can find a focus on love in every major religious tradition.  In fact, it would be safe to say if you are going to be religious, then love is something you espouse and practice. 

Recently, I have had the chance to re-read one of my favorite theologians and spiritual giants in the Christian Church, namely, Bernard of Clairvaux.  I certainly never heard of this saint in my growing up years as a Quaker.  I am sure many Quakers know about this medieval saint, but those Quakers never mentioned him to me.  I may have heard about him while I was in college, but I am only sure I learned about him when I was in graduate school.  Not everything about him is attractive, i.e. his support of the Crusades is unfortunate.  But as one who experienced the Divine One and articulated what life with the Spirit is like, there is no one better.

Bernard was a 12th century French monk.  He became affiliated with the reforming monastic tradition in the Middle Ages, the Cistercians.  Basically, this group wanted to get back to the way monks were in the beginning---in the early church.  This meant they opted for a stricter life than other monks in this part of the medieval period.  But somehow, that rigor appealed to many men and women.  And surely, Bernard’s own leadership gifts made a big difference.

What I want to focus on now, however, is what Bernard has to say about love.  To talk about love is both a focus on God and a focus on humans, who are God’s creatures.  Let’s begin with God, for this is where Bernard surely would begin.  The starting point for any comment about God affirms that God is love.  The very nature of God is love.  And love how the loving God works in the world.  The creativity of God is grounded in and expressed as love.  Stated simply, God created because God is loving and wants creatures to love.

Of course, love is relational and mutual.  The loving God wanted to create creatures who also would be characterized by love.  God wanted---indeed, expected---that creatures also would be motivated to love and would act accordingly.  Because Bernard was working in Latin, he could nuance the language of love in a way that still instructs us today.  Let’s pursue this.

Bernard uses three Latin words to describe love.  The first word is amor.  This might sound familiar, even to English ears.  We can describe someone as amoris.  This means they are loving, but usually in a more flattering, even sexual, way.  The Latin word suggests desire and, even, often are linked with feelings.  It is close to the Greek word, eros, which often is limited to sexuality, but that is too limiting.  I like the language of desire.  Sex can certainly be one form of desire, but desire is much broader.  For example, it is appropriate to say that I desire God and to know God.  That is amoris.

The second Latin word Bernard uses is dilectio.  This form of love is less associated with feelings and more aligned with rationality and leads to peace, harmony, etc.  It is the love that is close to the Greek word, philos, which means brotherly love.  It is the fraternal love friends have for each other.  This is the kind of love that is characteristic of communities and the folks within community. 

The final love word Bernard uses is caritas.  It is not hard to see our English word, charity, in that word.  This is the most important word when Bernard talks about God.  For example, when Bernard says that God is love, it is always caritas.  This is close to the Greek word, agape.  It can describe love in its fullness.  It is love that will sacrifice.  It is the love that characterizes the union of humans and God in a mystical kind of experience.

So why bother with all this Latin stuff and a medieval monk?  I bother with the words and the monk because they teach me and help me understand the power and complexity of love.  We all know how loosely that language of love is used in our culture.  We love everything from pizza to spouses.  Surely, that is not the same experience, even though it is the same word.  I don’t want to confuse loving pizza with loving God or any of God’s creatures.  My feelings for pizza is not amor nor amoris!

Bernard gives me a way to understand who God is and how God works in the world.  It is a God who is caritas---who loves each of us into being.  And it is a God who expects a great deal from us.  Our nature and calling is love.  To settle for less is to settle for less than being fully human.  Working with Bernard helps me see how easily we can pervert love and the language of love.

I appreciate there are many forms of love.  That makes sense to me---something most of us intuitively know.  Bernard helps us with the language of love and God will help us know love, be loved and respond to our call to love God and others.   

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I-Thou Relationships

Those of us who have read theology or, perhaps, those who are people of faith and are old enough might well recognize this title as a reminder of the late Jewish philosopher and theologian, Martin Buber.   I remember reading Buber’s book, I and Thou , when I was in college in the 1960s.   It was already a famous book by then.   I am not sure I fully understood it, but that would not be the last time I read it.   It has been a while since I looked at the book.             Buber came up in a conversation with a friend who asked if I had seen the recent article by David Brooks?   I had not seen it, but when I was told about it, I knew I would quickly locate and read that piece.   I very much like what Brooks decides to write about and what he contributes to societal conversation.   I wish more people read him and took him seriously.             Brooks’ article focused on the 2016 contentious election.   He provocatively suggests, “Read Buber, Not the Polls!”   I think Brooks puts

Spiritual Commitment

I was reading along in a very nice little book and hit these lines about commitment.   The author, Mitch Albom, uses the voice of one of the main characters of his nonfiction book about faith to reflect on commitment.   The voice belongs to Albom’s old rabbi of the Jewish synagogue where he went until his college days.   The old rabbi, Albert Lewis, says “the word ‘commitment’ has lost its meaning.”    The rabbi continues in a way that surely would have many people saying, “Amen!”   About commitment he says, “I’m old enough when it used to be a positive.   A committed person was someone to be admired.   He was loyal and steady.   Now a commitment is something you avoid.   You don’t want to tie yourself down.”   I also think I am old enough to know that commitment was usually a positive word.   I can think of a range of situations in which commitment would have been seen to be positive.   For example, growing up was full of sports for me.   Commitment would have been presupposed t

Inward Journey and Outward Pilgrimage

There are so many different ways to think about the spiritual life.   And of course, in our country there are so many different variations of religious experiences.   There are liberals and conservatives.   There are fundamentalists and Pentecostals.   Besides the dizzying variety of Christian traditions, there are many different non-Christian traditions.   There are the major traditions, such as Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, and so on.   There are the slightly more obscure traditions, such as Sikhism, Jainism, etc.   And then there are more fringe groups and, even, pseudo-religions.   There are defining doctrines and religious practices.   Some of these are specific to a particular tradition or a few traditions, such as the koan , which is used in Zen Buddhism for example.   Other defining doctrines or practices are common across the religious board.   Something like meditation would be a good example.   Christians meditate; Buddhists meditate.   And other groups practice this spiri