5.
Two things emerge clearly from this rapid overview of the concept
of eros past and present. First, there is a certain relationship
between love and the Divine: love promises infinity, eternity—a
reality far greater and totally other than our everyday existence.
Yet we have also seen that the way to attain this goal is not simply
by submitting to instinct. Purification and growth in maturity are
called for; and these also pass through the path of renunciation.
Far from rejecting or “poisoning” eros, they heal it
and restore its true grandeur.
This is due first and foremost to the fact that man is a being made
up of body and soul. Man is truly himself when his body and soul
are intimately united; the challenge of eros can be said to be truly
overcome when this unification is achieved. Should he aspire to
be pure spirit and to reject the flesh as pertaining to his animal
nature alone, then spirit and body would both lose their dignity.
On the other hand, should he deny the spirit and consider matter,
the body, as the only reality, he would likewise lose his greatness.
The epicure Gassendi used to offer Descartes the humorous greeting:
“O Soul!” And Descartes would reply: “O Flesh!”.[3]
Yet it is neither the spirit alone nor the body alone that loves:
it is man, the person, a unified creature composed of body and soul,
who loves. Only when both dimensions are truly united, does man
attain his full stature. Only thus is love —eros—able
to mature and attain its authentic grandeur.
Nowadays Christianity of the past is often criticized as having
been opposed to the body; and it is quite true that tendencies of
this sort have always existed. Yet the contemporary way of exalting
the body is deceptive. Eros, reduced to pure “sex”,
has become a commodity, a mere “thing” to be bought
and sold, or rather, man himself becomes a commodity. This is hardly
man's great “yes” to the body. On the contrary, he now
considers his body and his sexuality as the purely material part
of himself, to be used and exploited at will. Nor does he see it
as an arena for the exercise of his freedom, but as a mere object
that he attempts, as he pleases, to make both enjoyable and harmless.
Here we are actually dealing with a debasement of the human body:
no longer is it integrated into our overall existential freedom;
no longer is it a vital expression of our whole being, but it is
more or less relegated to the purely biological sphere. The apparent
exaltation of the body can quickly turn into a hatred of bodiliness.
Christian faith, on the other hand, has always considered man a
unity in duality, a reality in which spirit and matter compenetrate,
and in which each is brought to a new nobility. True, eros tends
to rise “in ecstasy” towards the Divine, to lead us
beyond ourselves; yet for this very reason it calls for a path of
ascent, renunciation, purification and healing.
6. Concretely, what does this path of ascent and purification entail?
How might love be experienced so that it can fully realize its human
and divine promise? Here we can find a first, important indication
in the Song of Songs, an Old Testament book well known to the mystics.
According to the interpretation generally held today, the poems
contained in this book were originally love-songs, perhaps intended
for a Jewish wedding feast and meant to exalt conjugal love. In
this context it is highly instructive to note that in the course
of the book two different Hebrew words are used to indicate “love”.
First there is the word dodim, a plural form suggesting a love that
is still insecure, indeterminate and searching. This comes to be
replaced by the word ahabà, which the Greek version of the
Old Testament translates with the similar-sounding agape, which,
as we have seen, becomes the typical expression for the biblical
notion of love. By contrast with an indeterminate, “searching”
love, this word expresses the experience of a love which involves
a real discovery of the other, moving beyond the selfish character
that prevailed earlier. Love now becomes concern and care for the
other. No longer is it self-seeking, a sinking in the intoxication
of happiness; instead it seeks the good of the beloved: it becomes
renunciation and it is ready, and even willing, for sacrifice.
It is part of love's growth towards higher levels and inward purification
that it now seeks to become definitive, and it does so in a twofold
sense: both in the sense of exclusivity (this particular person
alone) and in the sense of being “for ever”. Love embraces
the whole of existence in each of its dimensions, including the
dimension of time. It could hardly be otherwise, since its promise
looks towards its definitive goal: love looks to the eternal. Love
is indeed “ecstasy”, not in the sense of a moment of
intoxication, but rather as a journey, an ongoing exodus out of
the closed inward-looking self towards its liberation through self-giving,
and thus towards authentic self-discovery and indeed the discovery
of God: “Whoever seeks to gain his life will lose it, but
whoever loses his life will preserve it” (Lk 17:33), as Jesus
says throughout the Gospels (cf. Mt 10:39; 16:25; Mk 8:35; Lk 9:24;
Jn 12:25). In these words, Jesus portrays his own path, which leads
through the Cross to the Resurrection: the path of the grain of
wheat that falls to the ground and dies, and in this way bears much
fruit. Starting from the depths of his own sacrifice and of the
love that reaches fulfilment therein, he also portrays in these
words the essence of love and indeed of human life itself.
7. By their own inner logic, these initial, somewhat philosophical
reflections on the essence of love have now brought us to the threshold
of biblical faith. We began by asking whether the different, or
even opposed, meanings of the word “love” point to some
profound underlying unity, or whether on the contrary they must
remain unconnected, one alongside the other. More significantly,
though, we questioned whether the message of love proclaimed to
us by the Bible and the Church's Tradition has some points of contact
with the common human experience of love, or whether it is opposed
to that experience. This in turn led us to consider two fundamental
words: eros, as a term to indicate “worldly” love and
agape, referring to love grounded in and shaped by faith. The two
notions are often contrasted as “ascending” love and
“descending” love. There are other, similar classifications,
such as the distinction between possessive love and oblative love
(amor concupiscentiae – amor benevolentiae), to which is sometimes
also added love that seeks its own advantage.
In philosophical and theological debate, these distinctions have
often been radicalized to the point of establishing a clear antithesis
between them: descending, oblative love—agape—would
be typically Christian, while on the other hand ascending, possessive
or covetous love —eros—would be typical of non-Christian,
and particularly Greek culture. Were this antithesis to be taken
to extremes, the essence of Christianity would be detached from
the vital relations fundamental to human existence, and would become
a world apart, admirable perhaps, but decisively cut off from the
complex fabric of human life. Yet eros and agape—ascending
love and descending love—can never be completely separated.
The more the two, in their different aspects, find a proper unity
in the one reality of love, the more the true nature of love in
general is realized. Even if eros is at first mainly covetous and
ascending, a fascination for the great promise of happiness, in
drawing near to the other, it is less and less concerned with itself,
increasingly seeks the happiness of the other, is concerned more
and more with the beloved, bestows itself and wants to “be
there for” the other. The element of agape thus enters into
this love, for otherwise eros is impoverished and even loses its
own nature. On the other hand, man cannot live by oblative, descending
love alone. He cannot always give, he must also receive. Anyone
who wishes to give love must also receive love as a gift. Certainly,
as the Lord tells us, one can become a source from which rivers
of living water flow (cf. Jn 7:37-38). Yet to become such a source,
one must constantly drink anew from the original source, which is
Jesus Christ, from whose pierced heart flows the love of God (cf.
Jn 19:34).
nextpage 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10
|