Friday, March 10, 2006



Perhaps you read the news about Pope Benedict’s first major writing since he became pope? The subject of former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger’s first encyclical was Love: the meaning of God’s love, erotic love between humans, and the relationship between the two. According to Msgr. Paul Josef Cordes (president of the Pontifical Council Cor Unum, the Vatican’s charities division), the pope’s choice for his first topic was "astonishing." The 71-page document was titled "God is Love" (Deus Caritas Est). Benedict attempted to define at least 3 aspects of the term "love," which he describes as "one of the most frequently used and misused of words."
Consider how freely the term is used. "I love you." "Let’s make love." "The boy really loves his dog." "If you loved me you’d give me what I ask for." "God so loved that world that he gave his only begotten son." Etc. Obviously, not all of these "loves" are the same thing.
Benedict spoke of erotic love (eros, or physical love) as something that is debasing if it is reduced to just sex, especially when it is sold. He writes that eros must be enhanced by spiritual love in order to "achieve a higher and full meaning." He used the term "agape" to refer to spiritual love. He also referred to acts of selfless loving – assisting others, loving your neighbor – as "caritas."
Interestingly, this encyclical was signed by the pope on Christmas day of 2005, but was not released until a month later due to problems in preparing the different translations. Also, according to Vatican analyst Sandro Magister, numerous Vatican documents has languished untranslated as part of a subtle campaign of protest against Pope Benedict (L.A. Times article by Tracy Wilkinson, 01/26/06 A3). Passive aggressiveness in the Vatican?
Perhaps Benedict should have read the classic book on Love, Erich Fromm’s The Art of Loving. Fromm defines Love as an art, that is, something that must be practiced in order to master. He states that in order to master this art it must be of the greatest concern to the individual to learn the theory and to apply it in his or her life.
Fromm says that Love is the answer to the problem of human existence. He then defines the different aspects of love, such as brotherly love, motherly love, erotic love, self-love, and love of God. He explains how the practice of love has disintegrated in modern society.
Lastly, Fromm delineates the practice of this most important of arts. As an art, it requires discipline, concentration, patience, and making it a matter of supreme concern.
I have read Fromm’s book several times, and made many annotations. And though I have only read what others had to say about Benedict’s encyclical (I’ve not actually read it), it still seems as if Benedict is thinking down the same line as Fromm, that they both want us to understand the great necessity of Real Love, and they both want us to eliminate the Counterfeit Love from our own personal lives.
Fromm’s book is readily available from used book stores, and I highly recommend it. What are your thoughts on this subject?


tseeker said...

Hello Christopher,
Mentioning 'Agape' got me remembering 'The School at Athens' depicting Plato and Aristotle, one in red and one in blue. The one pointing to the heavens, the other to the Earth.
But which color is what? Do loves of flesh, self or other, vary, or do they all vary from love of light and truth?
I agree that the word love and its many meanings can obscure.
What if we try substituting 'nurture' for applications, acts of love, upon the physical manifestation.
Then we might apply love to that cognizance of the magnificence, the beauty of the creation and of the necessary existence of the motive force or subsuming universal law that is driving the becoming or unfolding of such creation.
Where would that leave us as that which was created in the image? If we do not actually look like Him, then what could the meaning be?

Christopher said...

You bring up some good food for thought, tseeker. Perhaps the key point is that our language that we currently use is inadequate (at least in this case) to fully express the many different meanings of "love." In trying to answer your questions (which I cannot), I began to think of the distinctions of love. Consider how a man feels towards a woman he is physically attracted to. Is the man merely attracted to the body, or the person? In my mind's eye, I did an exercise. Think of someone you are attracted to. Then, holding what you know about that person in mind, see them as an ethereal being. The breasts disappear, the genitals disappear, all the physicality gone. Do you still "love" that person? Do you even know that person?
Thanks for your mind-food.

Jonh Neo said...

Great Work!!!
this is a good link you can refer Art Collection

elv8_my_mnd said...

In thinking of the right words to respond to your shared article only these came to mind. "Let your life be your message".
No words can describe LOVE for what it really is. After all the purpose of words in any language is to describe through specifics so that the correct message can get across and LOVE being the "ALL" cannot be compartmentalized in words or ideas. This is why no words no matter how grand or beautiful will ever come close to it. But acts of love, now there is a cause worth undertaking. Let your life be your message and may your message always be one of love.

elv8_my_mnd said...

In thinking of the right words to reply to your shared article I found only the following words applied. “Let your life be your message.”
Though we strive to describe love for what we think it is, our feeble words fall short time and time again regardless of what language we speak. I believe we fall short due to the fact that the purpose of language is to describe through specifics and love in itself is the “ALL”. It cannot be compartmentalized through words no matter how grand or beautiful these may be.
But acts of kindness and love, now there is a worthy cause. To let your life be your message and to let this message be love.
That is a story worthy of being told because it is truly a love story.