Page 36 - EMCAPP-Journal No. 19
P. 36

And a li�le later “Shall we indeed accept good         Desire Unfilled
        from God, and shall we not accept adversity?”          This leads us to our next them: the eschatologi-
        (2:10, NKJV).                                          cal fulfillment of all human desire. This is a the-
        Like Job, Bernard is no sen�mentalist, no pro-         me Bernard returns again and again to in his
        ponent of posi�ve thinking, the prosperity gos-        sermons of the Song of Songs. In Sermon 50 he
        pel, or Chris�an life hacks. He is rather a sober      gives his brothers an overview of what he
        spiritual father who grounds his counsel to us in      means by love. Here he tells the monks that,
        the sacramental and asce�cal vision of the             yes, love is an emo�on or feeling it is however
        Chris�an life he found in the Church fathers and       something beyond my ability to fulfill as I would
        monas�c authors.                                       like much less in the measure required. This is
                                                               why, in this life, love remains an unfulfilled de-
        This vision is rooted in the analogy of being;         sire.
        crea�on, and redemp�on are both the work of
        God. Though with their own unique characters,          Ironically, nothing so kills love as my a�empt to
        their differences don’t obscure their funda-           consummate my desire. It is one thing to be in
        mental similarity and unity. To understand crea-       the presence of the Other (whether divine or
        �on is to also understand something of red-            human); it is quite another to possess the
        emp�on. Likewise, our understanding of red-            Other. Here Emmanual Levinas’s discussion of
        emp�on helps us understand God’s crea�ve               alterity is helpful. I can only possess the Other
        act. God creates in order to redeem and red-           by an act of literal or metaphorical violence
        emp�on fulfills God’s inten�on in crea�ng. And         that strips the other of his or her uniqueness
        so crea�on and redemp�on are related not               (otherness or alterity). Doing so I exchange an
        only analogically but teleologically. Crea�on          image (ikon, see Hebrews 8) for an idol.
        ends not by ceasing to be but by becoming              There remains even in the life to come, love re-
        what God from all intends it to be in Jesus            tains a certain unfulfilled quality. At least this is
        Christ.                                                the argument made by St. Gregory of Nyssa
                                                               who sees heaven as a process of our unending
        To understand then human psychology and psy-           growth in love for God. God being infinite
        chopathology is also to understand something           means that there is always more to discover,
        of the great drama of human redemp�on. To              more to know and love. To be in the divine pre-
        say grace perfects nature, is to say that nature       sence is to experience the possibility of desire
        aspires toward that which is above nature. Like-       that is never fulfilled not through any nega�ve
        wise, grace not only perfects nature but, in so        factor in us but rather because of the supera-
        doing, reveals nature to us.                           bundance of beauty in God.


        As for the work of grace which is salva�on,            A Ra�onal Desire and a Gi� to Be Received
        though not wholly absent in Bernard’s theolo-          As Levinas’s works suggest, there is a sense in
        gy, salva�on is not simply a forensic declara�o-       which love is perfectly natural and our proper
        nor moral improvement. To be a Chris�an in his         response to each other. At the same �me, while
        view means to “partake of the divine nature,”          natural [i.e., created] desires inspire me to love
        as the Apostle Peter tells us (see 2 Peter 1:4). In    (and here again, Levinas proves himself Ber-
        other words, his is a soteriology of deifica�on,       nard’s ally), divorced from right reason these
        of our becoming by grace what Jesus is by na-          same desires degrade love. To say love must be
        ture. “For if anything merely human remained           reasonable, is to say that it must conform not
        in man, how then should God be all in all?” Ber-       only to the divine will but the divine inten�on.
        nard asks before con�nuing “It is not that hu-         “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!
        man nature will be destroyed, but that it will         For you pay �the of mint and anise and cum-
        a�ain another beauty, a higher power and glo-          min, and have neglected the weigh�er ma�ers
        ry” (p. 36).                                           of the law: jus�ce and mercy and faith. These






                                                           36
   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41