It seems that there is a war between different loves raging in this world, setting church against society and, indeed, Church against itself. The issue is clearly how it is appropriate to behave when one is "in love" - whatever that means.
I think that one of the contributing factors has to be this idea of Romance taken out of context.
There seems to be something terribly noble about the star-crossed lovers pledging their love in spite of apparently insurmountable odds. One can read Pride and Prejudice and see how Elizabeth Bennett finally navigates the obstacles of society and finally bags the dashing Mr Darcy. Apparently a box of tissues is a requirement when one watches Love Story or Titanic. There is the quandary over which woman to love in Dr Zhivago. How many women fantasise about their boyfriend in white uniform a la Richard Gere in An Officer and a Gentleman? Some classics, some not so, but they have this picture of love against the odds sometimes with tragic endings.
In these days of readily available media, many folk are presented with this notion of love against the odds, disobeying antagonistic parents, avoiding crowds of unwelcome suitors and ill-chosen subjects for an arranged marriage, or the disapproval of an oppressive regime in order for the couple to engage in the great embrace in the final reel, or suffer painful lingering deaths.
Is it possible, then, that people look on these as a generic component of falling in love, that there has to be some battle against an oppressive regime for there to be this frisson of Romance?
One looks at the modern acceptability of sex outside marriage. Society turns a blind eye, saying that this is now a reasonable and normal activity. Yet this was never the case in the past when unmarried sex was called fornication and seen as shameful. I suspect that what has happened is that Romance came on the scene.
What was taboo became suddenly terribly noble - the young couple expressing their love despite the tyrannical disapproval of a strict society bent on crushing any expression of tenderness by forcing them to commit themselves in that evil and binding notion of marriage. How wonderful to see this young couple overcome all the odds!
Similarly, homosexual relationships thrive because of the Romantic imperative. Two young men struggle against social and moral taboos in order to come to terms with the feelings burning within them. It's seen as beautiful, noble and thus completely acceptable to a society which equates the superficial expression of love with the true depth into which true love expands.
These folk also romanticise the life of Christ. His sacrifice against all the odds seems to give license to the view that Love can be expressed in any way that society permits. It is Mills and Boon Christ permits homosexual relationships because the love is true, and it struggles against the disapproval of the world. This superficial love needs to be seen for what it is - it permeates only to the level of feelings, not to the good of society as a whole. Everything may be permissible, but not everything is beneficial, and the Mills and Boon Christ seeks only to scratch an emotional itch, rather than seek to build up families and communities in a deeper and truly selfless action.
Looking at the lives of the saints, it is here in which we see the struggle to love against the odds to satisfy the desire that all folk should realise that they are loved by a personable, yet utterly transcendent God who wills their good and loves them more deeply than any rather falsified notion of affection spawned from some idea on the Big Screen.
If Romance truly exists then it is in the more cosmic story of a God and His Creation overcoming the oppression of free-will to be together in Eternity.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
A good piece, and highly needed. I feel impelled to add a somewhat different perspective, and, since it's even more direct and personal than I usually present, I think it wise to comment anonymously at this time. Yes, Jonathan, you do know who I am.
I believe in romantic love. I believe it to be an extsraordinarily powerful force, often for good, often for ill. I know what it feels like and what it works like, as a participant.
I am in love, very much so (hold your hat until you hear it all, please) with an underage boy. Who and what he is has a powerful grip upon my very being, and a large part of my conscious attention. It can pretty honestly be said that I am owned. It's not the emotional bond that is the problem in all the abuses we see, but the perception of where that bond should or even could lead. One has very little control over the emotions that stir within one.
Falling in love is very largely an involuntary thing, as is this mysterious thing we've chosen to call "orientation". Regardless of where these things come from, they are there, morally neutral in themselves, but standing ready to be used for good or ill.
One may not have control over emotions and attractions, but one does have control over actions, and, with God's help, one can even have control over the desires that link feelings with actions.
I am in love, but I choose to put that entirely in service of a God who has made it clear, for example, that sexual activity is for the married only, and especially that such activity in same-sex situations is not acceptable. Therefore, no matter how drawn, I do not want what I could easily want. It is not a possibility. If I truly love that boy, the last thing I could do would be to lead him into opposition to God. That would not be an expression of love at all.
So, there it is: a man, a boy, a deep love, and a commitment to holiness. He's not mine. He belongs to the One I love even more, the One who loves me and him infinitely. I must approach my friend with awe. It is God's love he needs to see, and anything in my actions which would point in an ungodl;y direction is point blank wrong. And yet, I cannot shirk the responsibility given me. That too comes from God. Perhaps, for a difficult child, such as he, it takes someone with a special attraction, to provide what needs to be provided.
Thank you for your candour, Anonymous. I think I do have a vague inkling of who you are (I've narrowed you down to three people), but clearly your honesty is certainly refreshing and much appreciated.
For those unfamiliar with the term, Mills and Boon is the collection of rather twee and soppy romance novels (usually read by ladies of a certain age).
Clearly Our Blessed Lord's love for us is so much deeper than such paper-bound fluff could ever be.
You might find C.S. Lewis writings the Greek words for love very poignant.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Four_Loves
Thanks Paul. I've read The Four Loves and it does make valuable points.
I find it interesting that when the Lord asks St Peter whether he loves him thrice, there is a subtle interplay between the Greek words phileo and agapo which English translations miss.
What would, I wonder, be a good translation of that episode?
Post a Comment