Of Love

We like lists.

Here’s one.

Love is a song
Love is the greatest song
Love is integral
Love is alive
Love is gospel
Love is power
Love is work
Love is desire and fulfillment
Love is suffering
Love is free
Love is true to reality
Love is accurate
Love is simple
Love is individual
Love is a surprise
Love is fearless
Love is exchange of selves
Love is triumphalistic
Love is natural
Love is faithful
Love is ready
Love is all-inclusive
Love is “sexist”
Love is as strong as death

The list is from Three Philosophies of Life, by Peter Kreeft. It’s the parts, each 1-2 pages long, from the book’s chapter on Life as Love. The three chapters are

Life as Vanity
Life as Suffering
Life as Love

and correspond to the wisdom literature

Ecclesiastes
Job
Song of Songs

as well as Dante

Hell
Purgatory
Heaven

among other things. One of Kreeft’s gifts is to show how ideas connect across ages and across philosophies. One of his other gifts is to write about them succinctly, confidently, and lyrically. The book is a short and awesome read.

Here is the list, as I rewrote it in short paragraph form.

Love is a song. In fact, it’s the greatest song. It is a song in dialogue, and all of its parts work together in harmony. This makes it alive, which is good news. A living thing that is good and powerful, but that requires work. There is something we want in it, and love can provide it, but it will require work, and suffering, lots of suffering. Lots of suffering. We choose this in accord with reality, and with seeing things well and rightly.

It’s not, despite the song, complicated. Simply focus on the one individual — God, M, etc. — and be so strong and brave. You will have to be courageous. The results will be a surprise (the good kind). This is true for both parties — both of the individuals — for it is an exchange of selves — God, M, etc. They are doing the same thing you are doing.

Triumph! It’s a celebration! This is where life is, and where we should be. Love must be trusted; faith is central to love, and we cannot divide ourselves in it. Love is ready to do good and right, and so must encompass everything. Love is roles, proportion, and it outlives death.

Of course all of this supposes at least a decent and reasonable understanding of love to begin with — it’s not a feeling, for instance, as it is commanded, and you can’t command a feeling. Feelings are usually one part, both prior and later, of love. But love is not, cannot be, just feeling.

And it also asserts love as how it actually is in goodness, beauty, and truth — and so, how it should be in practice. Our results may vary. And if they do, perhaps our plan is not working. Or we’re doing it wrong.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent

Coyotes and Christians

I am not saying Christians are like coyotes. [For that, some could cut caustically to coyotes are like Christians — tricksters, roaming in the dark, feeding on the dead … ] Simply noticed — somewhat in passing, as it’s said, having attained, apparently … achieved? … some kind of state where nearly anything I hear,

Read More »

And Did Dostoevsky Say ‘Beauty Will Save’

Short answer: he did not. Neither did Prince Myshkin, that we know of. Likely both believed it. Beauty — in the person of Christ — will do so. And clearly D wrote of M in The Idiot to explore art and beauty and ugliness and salvation. But did he say it, and did he believe that

Read More »

What I Recalled Watching Netflix

[Television is educational.]   One Saying the same stuff over and over looks like you have different things to say. Two If you’re ever in a below-average film or streaming series, and you beat the tar out of a guy, in a house, and you gaze down in both some shock as also a certain

Read More »

Seeking the King

A line everywhere misattributed to Chesterton reads thus: The young man who rings the bell at the brothel is unconsciously looking for God. This line is not from the great [several senses of the word] man who recently celebrated his 150th birthday, but the mid-century most unmodern novelist Bruce Marshall. The words — which do

Read More »

Random

Meme! Meme! Meme!

Memes are perfect for the extremely limited things they can do. Or as my Da usedta say, prolly swiping from mid-20th century comedian Benny Youngman Berle, they’re in pretty good shape for the shape they’re in. If they weren’t limited they wouldn’t be easy and if they weren’t easy they wouldn’t be common and as

Read More »

Shock And Ow

I’ve had many exchanges over the years where my statement about something was taken as surprise at the event rather than what it was — which is anger over human inaction facing it. Having worked 1.75 teenage males through the household over the last dozen years this has often been a thing one or the other has

Read More »

Trilemma

Bear no malice nor ill-will to any man living, for either the man is good, or naught: if he be good, and I hate him, then am I naught; if he be naught, either he shall amend, and die good, and go to God; or abide naught, and die naught, and so be lost.  

Read More »

God a Day

My sister gave me a “page-a-day” calendar for Christmas. Michele’s not as fond of them, because of all the paper I think she says. For me, it seems the perfect item: you tear one off, and bam! you’re done. Though it is a lot of paper … But mine is Bible verses, and it’s a

Read More »

Related

Subjective, Objective

The other day I wrote on a wing and a whim … and misremembering. Or as Prufrock put it, quoting Woman — That is not it at all, That is not what I meant, at all. Nearly nothing I recalled happened in that way. Except of course the recalling. And a bit more. Wasn’t a

Read More »

The Weighty Beauty of the IBM Selectric III

As Annie Dillard might say, I didn’t write this, I typed it. In fact, I typed it on a black 15″ IBM Selectric III — correction, a Correcting Selectric III, which began production, I am informed, in 1980. It’s the one I learned to type on and, I know now, began to learn to write.

Read More »

Why Not Two Cupcakes?

Something we know well and another I know little. Remember … re-member … before we begin Dallas Willard on knowing — namely … named-ly … not intellectual apprehension but interactive relationship. Each and both come from the same aim: good and right and lovely when well and harmful on all counts when not, as is

Read More »