Love and the Greeks

I have been a part of the mainstream Christian church for more than forty years. While I am Heterodox--I don't believe in any orthodox dogmas or doctrines--I still believe myself Christian in that I see in Jesus--and Gautama--models for living that, translated to modern time, provides a guidance worth paying attention. 

In all that time, I have heard pastors and other learned people prattle on about love. They almost always say something similar to, "There are three words in Koine Greek (The language spoken about 2,000 years ago and of the New Testament.) Those words are 'agape', 'philia', and 'eros'. The word agape means self-giving love which does not even have to have an emotional content. Philia is the word the Greeks used for the love of friends. Eros is romantic and sexual love." Most of those lectures put the words in order of value—and they did not value eros very much. Clearly “agape” is the ideal love—and we won’t even speak of “eros” except in passing.

To begin with, the original premise is incorrect. There are at least four words. Storge is another Greek word for love, being affection—like a parent with a child.

But the word “eros” has also been mis-defined. Yes, it does include sexual and romantic love. The original story of the love between the god Eros and the human woman Psyche is the prototype. But Eros was so passionate about his love that he was willing to give up everything for her. That was not merely sexual. However, the Greeks went far beyond this. They used the word to express this power of passion. In fact today people speak of platonic relationships. Plato used the word eros to designate that kind of love that is beyond physical attraction, but powerful and passionate. Too often we speak of platonic love as against erotic love. That is just an expression of ignorance of Plato.

We have gotten to this point because people are fearful of their passions, especially sexual passions. We work to limit them, afraid that they will take control of us. So the church—as most religions—hides sex, and limits it. But in so doing it limits also the energy and power of all passion.

From my experience of many years helping people deal with their emotions, I think the agape, philia, eros (and storge) distinctions are sometimes helpful. However, the reality is that in human life, these first three are never experienced independently. The exact “quantities” in the mix differ from situation to situation, but they are always all there.  Agape without passion diminishes the humanity of both parties. And eros without self-giving love quickly becomes merely self-centered.emotional greed.

The Hebrew Bible (Which some call the Old Testament) actually recognizes this. Read the Song of Songs and experience the passion, the eros of the words there. The churches have largely  ignored this book. In all those mentioned years, I have heard only one sermon from this source. Even when they acknowledge it, they make it an allegory about God and humanity. But, no! It is a story of romance, passion and sexuality. In fact it is something to be read in a romantic setting with candlelight, roses, sweet smells and touch. 

Occasionally, the churches take baby-steps toward addressing sexuality but they rarely follow through. The National Sex Forum in the 1970’s was started by the Methodist (and other denominations) church and the Rev. Ted McIlvenie. But as the support waned in the 1980s, it was spun off and become a degree granting university without the benefit of a depth of interest in spirituality.

More recently the United Church of Christ and the Unitarian Universalist denominations, produced a very well-done curriculum for adult sex education—unfortunately still abstinence-based. But if you ask pastors about it, most of them don’t even know of the curriculum’s existence.

Now, I have not even mentioned that every other major religion has a similar story. Islam is sexophobic. Buddhism is equally fearful of sex when it isn’t just silent. Hinduism is often looked on as the exception and people will point out the Kama Sutra. But the Kama Sutra is mostly about how to live life according to certain rules and the sexuality is restricted or celebrated only under particular practices that are intended to enhance spirituality. Of course American practioners of Tantra have gone beyond in recent years.

We are afraid of our passions, including especially the sexual ones. We are fearful that they will sweep us up and become uncontrollable. If we breach the walls between us, we might be caught up in our passions and not able to control our sexual urges.

As a counselor/psychotherapist I am often struck by the way the various psychotherapy organizations have found it necessary to put restrictions in their codes of ethics preventing any physical contact. If I hug a client, I may not be able to stop until I have “ravished” her. There are times when it is exactly a hug that a client needs. And sometimes it is a “he”.

Of course, in the counseling relationship we must be vigilant and aware of issues of “transference” and “counter-transference”. Another of my mentors used to ask a client, “Whose head are you putting on my body?” Everything we do in that role is to be considered as to whether it will have a beneficial or deleterious effect on the client. But that concern cannot become a set of handcuffs preventing us from pursuing the client’s good.

Love is the final frontier. It is the emotion most needed. Children who don’t get enough love suffer—even growing less well-developed brains, not just less well-developed emotions. (More on this later.) Agape without eros fails. I have no doubt that the Greeks used different words, but they did not make the mistake of separating the aspects of love by inserting impermeable walls between them.