Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Love

This post is partially in response to Peter's recent musings.  But I think it merits a discussion on it's own.  Love is much talked of, and nearly as often misunderstood.  I do not claim expertise, but I would like to present what I see as a Biblical view of love.  I confess I will not have nearly as many scripture references as this discussion merits, partially due to my own inadequacy, and partially due to time constraints.  I hope this will be beneficial to all of us as I'm sure it will be to me.  Just one clarification.  I am dealing with love as it is manifested in interpersonal relationships, not between the mortal and the divine.  

I would like to suggest that love is a three pronged thing.  As I thought on it, I thought it was strange that should be the case at first, but I decided that it made sense based on a variety of things.  The easiest being that (according to the most widely held view) we are three parts.  Spirit, Mind, and Body.  You'll see what that makes sense later.  

Emotional (Relational) Love
The best way I could think to define this is "the warm fuzzies".  Hopefully everyone knows what I mean by this.  Emotional love is very much a feeling which we experience towards another person.  It is often described as being "In love", and such things.  This is what the world thinks of when it thinks of love.  I would argue, however, that it is not always a romantic love.  We have the same love in a sense for our close friends and family.  It is fundamentally a love based in emotion and relation.  We all know the term "soul mates".  I believe this type of love is in a very real sense an intertwining of souls, one with another.  

Sacrificial Love
I debated over what to label this one, but I decided on the above.  Sacrificial love is an attitude, or a state of mind.  It is an attitude which places the well being of another above our own, that they are more important than we are.  It has nothing to do with feelings, or even with actions.  it is an attitude.  I am willing to give up myself for this person's benefit.  Think of Christ dying for the church as a picture of how a husband is to love his wife.  

Active Love
This is love in a physical, tangible way.  It is speaking a kind word, or opening one's home to someone in need.  It is being patient, kind, not envying, not boasting, not being proud, rude, etc.  And yet I think it is something deeper: living our lives towards one another in a way that is consistent with who we really are, bearers of God's image.  This is perhaps the most mystical and difficult thing to understand in the whole matter. Practicing active love, not separate from, but as a part of Sacrificial and even emotional love, is part of glorifying and enjoying God because it is recognizing, and respecting God's image in our neighbor.  Somehow our actions towards one another have absolute moral significance.  There are words I could say that would be absolutely unloving, and those I could say that would be loving.  It is an outworking of our sacrificial and emotional love, but it stands on its own as well.  I may speak a word to you with every good attitude and emotion in my heart, and yet, because I am a fallible creature, my words may be taken by you in another way entirely.  My words were not loving.  

So what does all this mean?  Let me use an analogy.  The thing that immediately comes mind...  Love is like a tree.  The root of the tree is our attitude.  If the tree is to be healthy the roots must be strong, and if the roots are compromised, the whole tree will fall very easily.  Our actions are the trunk and branches.  What others see and experience of our love is our works.  If the branches are strong, we know that the roots must be as well.  And emotional love is like the fruit.  As far as the structure of the tree, the fruit is quite unimportant, and yet it is the sweet product of strong roots and well tended branches.  If we are not bearing good fruit, the solution is not to try to squeeze more fruit out of ourselves, but to look to the state of our roots and branches, and see where the problem is.  To take the analogy one step further, the branches also produce leaves, which strengthen and nourish the roots and help grow the fruit.  So too we often find that even when our attitude is bad, and our emotions are in the gutter, being faithful to keep actively loving helps us to correct our attitudes and emotions.  

I could go on for much longer, and I realize that I need to look up proof texts etc, but that will be for another time.  I guess the point of the whole thing, is to say that loving one another is not a single dimensional thing.  It involves every bit of us, including our emotions, our attitudes, and our actions.  

I just remembered what question I was actually trying to answer when i started.  What type of love do we owe to whom?  

I would say that we owe to all men both active love.  (clear from the scriptures)  We are to treat all men with the dignity and respect that their position of image bearers of God dictates.  I am undecided on sacrificial love.  Certainly we do not owe it equally to all men.  But I would have to say that to a degree we are to show it to all men, and particularly to our brothers and sisters in Christ.  (Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others.)  I think the ultimate obligation we have to show sacrificial love is to our spouse.  Emotional love I think it would be absurd to say we owe to all people.  You can not have your soul intertwined with all people equally, and not at all with people you have not met or do not know personally.  

So to deal specifically with what Peter said, " In heaven, we will feel that same emotional devotion toward everyone. Why would we not be called to start that now?"  (see the context...it might be helpful)  :-)  I don't know that we will feel the same emotional devotion in heaven towards all men.  In fact, I tend to think we won't.  In a sense that would take away from the individuality which we have as image bearers.  But if what you say is correct, [I believe] it will be because we have a full knowledge of all people, which we certainly do not have, and cannot have in this life.  As I said, certain types of love, I do believe we owe to all men, though it may be to varying degrees, but others we do not.

I hope this has been helpful.  I certainly found it encouraging to dwell on these things.  comments would be just dandy.  I certainly don't have this all figured out, and if you have good proof texts to suggest, that would be great as well!  God bless!

2 comments:

Peter said...

I think that you're wrong about two things, and everything else I think is a very good treatment of the subject.

One, our actions do not have "an absolute moral significance", necessarily, because our actions are only properly known in a context of intent/motive. As you point out, you could say words with the best of intentions, but the hearer might be hurt by them. This does not mean your words were not loving. In fact, Christ's words often had this effect.

Two, your argument against full emotional love here on earth is altogether too similar to an argument that "we'll never be perfect on earth, because we're sinful humans" for me to be very comfortable with it. I don't think we can argue eternal or even temporal "ought"s from "can"s.

I do agree that, in practice, our love is not 'lacking' simply because it fails to adore anyone and everyone. But I do not agree that we are not called to pursue that fondness as a result of recognizing their status as image-bearers. One does not have to approve of someone to find him loveable, even in an emotional way. It is quite clear that, despite the fact that there was nothing in us to 'approve of', God *loved* us and pursued us all the same. You might say that this was sacrificial love, but I think it's very clear that sacrificial love, ultimately comes about either because we 'know we ought to even though we don't feel like it' or because we 'love this person dearly and want to sacrifice for him' --- and I'm quite sure that God didn't decide to die simply because He 'knew He ought to'.

Cedric said...

Just a quickie ^^ I think interesting that you said "our spouse"

Being as "our" is in a plural tense and "spouse" I thought at first you were refering to the church :)