Introduction
Love is an integral aspect of human nature because it defines human nature and reflects the state of humans among other creatures and creators. Diverse theologians and philosophers have studied love and have come up with different views, which have become the cornerstone of the modern religions, particularly the Christianity. Among Christians, it is common knowledge that there are different types of love. There is love between humans and God and there is love between humans and humans. Philosophers and theologians who regard love as being directional classify love as being love from God to humans, love from humans to God, and love from human to other humans. The differences in the parties involved in love and the direction of love have generated diverse views of love among Christians and have formed the basis of different schools of thought.
Pieper defines love as something that man has power over, concerning whether to love or not, because they are independent beings, who can reason. Pieper criticizes love by explaining that God is not the only source of love, but rather an object of love. Nygren defines love as something with a direction whereby there is love from God to humans, love from humans to God, and love from one human to another. Nygren criticizes love by stating that love is not God but that God himself is love. In this view, this essay examines the meaning of love according to Pieper and Nygren, different assumptions that lead to different views of love, similarities of views, and Pieper central point of criticisms.
Pieper Meaning of Love
Nygren Meaning of Love
Nygren recognizes the existence of Eros and Agape as two types of love. In defining the meaning of love, Nygren holds that love can be Eros or Agape. Eros love is a form of love that is common among humans because it is egocentric. Fundamentally, Nygren states that Eros is a human desirous love because it seeks to fulfill needs, seeks God, entails human effort to achieve salvation, pursue immortal life, and is under the motivation of benefits. In contrast to Eros, Nygren asserts that Agape love is God’s sacrificial love because it seeks humans, provides grace, and yields to humans. Moreover, Agape creates values due to the spontaneous and sovereignty, power, and has not motivation of any benefits.
Assumptions
The assumptions that lead to different views of love between Pieper and Nygren emanates from the nature of humans and God. Pieper assumes humans are creatures of God, and thus, they have the ability to make choices regarding love. Moreover, Pieper assumes that humans play a role in both Agape and Eros because they cannot be mere conduits of love. In contrast, Nygren assumes that there is a great gap between God and humans. In this assumption, Nygren holds that humans can bridge this gap through Agape. Another assumption is that love has a direction in that there is love from God to human, love from human to God, and love from human to another. This assumption of direction makes humans subjects and objects of Eros.
Differences between the two authorsPieper believes that love involves more than a belief where a person’s believes that for love to happen, there must be strings attached. Pieper differs from Nygren since he believes that God is not the only source of love.Nygren claims that Gods love is incomparable, has no boundaries and is unmotivated. Nygren believes in loving other people just like Christ loved all. He also differs from Piepers point of view as he believes that God is love,
Similarities about Love
Love Exists
Although there are various similarities between Nygren and Pieper, some of the major similarities comprise their belief in the existence of love, the unconditional nature of love, and the mutual aspect that love demonstrates. Fundamentally, the authors believe that love exists and it consists of feelings that individuals have towards certain objects. In the context of Nygren (1953), love exists in a number of ways in relation to the parties involved. According to Nygren, love can involve humans and God, humans and their neighbors, and human own self. As such, the author accepts that love exists and involves certain parties, which comprise God, humanity, and other individuals, who live around the subject. Consequently, Pieper explains that love exists and involves some parties. In his assertion, Pieper explains that love can involve an object or love between two individuals. The explanation by the authors depicts some kind of similarity that indeed love is an existing concept, and as such, influences the manner in which human beings undertake their activities.
Love Is Mutual and Unconditional
Another similarity, which is very practical from the two authors, concerns the mutual and unconditional aspect of love. Concisely, Nygren explains that love is an aspect that benefits the parties involved. When, for instance, he explains the sacrifices that God made to gain the love of men and the nature in which men need to appreciate him for the sacrifice, he coins the aspect of mutual gain as is expressed in the study. In his regard, Nygren states that Agape and Eros have some kind of sacrifice where humans can either take a step towards the deity or the deity coming towards humans. In the context of Pieper, love is mutually beneficial as it entails the gains that the two parties have towards each other. According to his view, love should not be one sided, but should have equal benefits to the involved parties. In coining the aspect, Pieper states that by saying that one is happy about another’s existence, the demonstration of love implies the existence of another party, an aspect that clarifies the mutual satisfaction resulting from love.
Pieper’s Central Point of Criticism
Pieper gives an account that demonstrates various factors of love and God. In his account, he argues that God is a higher deity, and as such, needs honor and submission. In his explanation Pieper, states that although God is love, humans cannot compromise his love and only rely on the love that God provides. In effect, he explains that humans are independent and can make their own informed decisions on whether to love or otherwise in line with their happiness. Pieper argues that by depicting humans as objects of love as is the case with Agape and Eros, the concept of love reduces and minimizes human happiness. Minimization of love according to Pieper is contrary to the need for happiness that should override all love.
Motivation, Roles of Parties Involved, and Diversity
Notably, Pieper provides an account on the essence of motivation and the roles of the parties involved in the concept of love. In the perspective of Pieper, love is not one sided, but needs involvement from the subjects involved. As such, he challenges the love presented by Eros and Agape, which demonstrate love as directional from God to humans or from humans to God. Moreover, he explains that love has a motivation that sparks the feelings of the involved parties. As such, Pieper’s account seeks to establish the relevance of motivation that leads to the feelings of love amongst the parties. Consequently, Pieper outlines that love is diverse and does not only involve God, Man, neighbors, and self. Pieper argues that love extends and incorporates the feelings that two people of different gender feel towards each other. The type of love between two individuals of the opposite gender is not present in Agape and Eros kinds of love, and therefore, is an extension provided by Pieper.
Conclusion
Nygren and Pieper are among the authors, who have tried to explain the aspect of love and its diversity. The authors explain that indeed love exists between parties, which may be between humans and God or humans. In their assertion, the authors explain that love is a vital component that dictates the livelihoods of individuals. Although Pieper and Nygren share some similarities on the concept of love, they also hold some ideas that differ. The similarities and differences play a very important role in expounding the relevance of love in humanity as well as the importance of involvement. According to the two authors, love is one of the major drivers of humanity and scholars cannot underscore its significance in their quest to understand love and its diversity.
Bibliography
Nygren, Anders. 1953. Agape and Eros A Study for the Christian Idea of Love . Joanna Cotler Books.
Pieper, Josef. 2011. Faith, hope, love. San Francisco: Ignatius Press.
Pieper, Josef, & Wald, Berthold. 2007. For the love of wisdom: Essays on the nature of philosophy. San Francisco: Ignatius Press.
