Reflection #98 (9th February 2025 at Essex Church / Kensington Unitarians)
There’s a saying that used to be used a lot in Unitarian and Universalist churches, as a kind-of covenant, and it starts with the phrase: ‘Love is the doctrine of this church.’ And I don’t think it would be controversial to say that love is what we think we’re about as a community – it pops up on a regular basis in our hymns and prayers – it’s right at the centre of who we are and what we do (or at least what we aspire to do). But, strangely, we don’t often make it the particular focus of a service – possibly because it’s just too big a topic to get a handle on – or too slippery a concept.
At least once a year Valentine’s Day prompts us to give it a try though – hence today’s theme – though the event is (usually) squarely focused on romantic love. The culture we’re immersed in tends to promote romantic love as the absolute pinnacle of human experience, and when we’re young, especially, pursuit of a romantic relationship (our ‘happy ever after’) can become a significant focus. The ideal that’s sold to us is that we can (and should) get all our needs met in one relationship – we will rely on one person for more-or-less everything – sex, companionship, practical support – for the rest of our days. Romantic coupling is presented almost as an organising principle for our lives and society – at least in theory – in reality such relationships end up being rather more of a mixed bag.
Now I’m not saying it’s impossible to have that idealised fairytale experience of falling in love, and staying together for the long haul, with most of your needs being met within that one lasting bond. But it seems to be the exception rather than the rule. And these days many more of us are coming to the realisation that other forms of love, other ways of being in relationship, are just as important (and worthy of our attention) as the conventional coupling we usually celebrate on Valentine’s Day.
I say ‘these days’ – of course this is not new – as we just heard the Ancient Greeks had all these words for other loves many centuries ago: Pragma, Philia, Ludus, Agape, Philautia. They certainly still celebrated eros – the ‘falling in love’ kind of love – the desire that sweeps us off our feet, magnetically attracts us, stirs us to act – a love associated with drama and transformation. But they also honoured pragma – a kind-of mature love you can rely on – the sensible and unglamorous love of committed long-term relationship which endures ups and downs. And also philia – intimate friendship – I say that to distinguish from the more easy-come easy-go connections where the word ‘friend’ is bandied about without that deeper loving connection. Then there’s ludus – playful love – I would say this includes short-lived consensual dalliances where two people delight in each other for a time but know it’s ‘of the moment’ and won’t last. And philautia, which mustn’t be overlooked, that’s all about healthy self-love and self-care.
Agape is the one which most frequently gets mentioned in religious contexts – more universal – sometimes traditionally translated as ‘charity’ but I tend to connect it with ‘compassion’ – a generalised benevolent fellow-feeling for the well-being of others whoever they may be. It’s a slightly tricky concept to get a grip on, but I found a really interesting take on it in an essay by the philosopher Myisha Cherry, who wrote: ‘agape is not an affectionate feeling nor does it require ‘liking’ the beloved. Instead, love is an attitude. The reason for loving the beloved is unmotivated and groundless therefore, agape is not aimed at a selective few but rather all members of the moral community. [The only grounds for loving is because they are human.] It involves understanding, goodwill, respect, and active concern. Agape is not passive or weak but active and tough. It desires the common good, resistance to injustice, and restoration of the beloved community. Although agape is generalized love towards everyone, it often is expressed differently to particular people.’ (pause) A helpful take on agape from Myisha Cherry which draws out its connection to social justice.
Culturally, societally, as I said before, we do tend to put these different forms of love into a hierarchy, with this all-consuming romantic love at the top, and the ‘other loves’ as also-rans. We see this played out in various ways – in the past I have certainly been guilty of disappearing into romantic relationships and neglecting my friendships for a time (until the gloss wore off) – and I have also been on the other side of that equation on numerous occasions when I felt I’d been ‘dumped’ by friends who were suddenly giving all their time and attention to their latest flame instead.
Today’s service theme was inspired in part by this book ‘The Other Significant Others: Reimagining Life with Friendship at the Centre’ by Rhaina Cohen. It contains stories of people who have defied convention by choosing a friend as, in some sense, a life partner – co-owning a home together, or co-parenting, or being committed caregivers to each other in later life – and as the book’s blurb says ‘these stories unsettle widespread assumptions, including the idea that sex is a defining feature of partnership, and that people who raise kids together should be in a romantic relationship… Cohen argues that we undermine romantic relationships by expecting too much of them, while we diminish friendships by expecting too little of them… she insists that we recognise the many forms of profound connection that can anchor our lives. This book challenges us to ask what we want from our relationships – not just what we’re supposed to want – and transforms how we define a fulfilling life.’
I won’t try to summarise the stories in this book – I couldn’t do them justice – but I found it fascinating to read about how people realised that a platonic friendship was their most important relationship – the one connection they wanted to build their life around – their ‘significant other’. More generally, it’s becoming increasingly apparent that there are all these different ways of doing relationships, and there are lessons to learn from people who are being thoughtful and reflective about making less conventional choices and sharing their lived experiences. I’m thinking particularly of the asexual and polyamorous communities, from whom we might learn about approaching our relationships with fewer default expectations as to what sort of relationship it will turn out to be.
The Valentine’s Day version of love puts a lot of emphasis on grand passions – big emotions – but love is more than just a feeling. We’ve said before that ‘love is a verb, love is a doing word’ (to quote Massive Attack). When I was at Heythrop College some years ago studying the best-titled philosophy module ever – ‘Love, Sex, Death and God’ – I discovered that the philosophers had a whole range of perspectives on love: yes, it can be a feeling or emotion which comes upon us spontaneously, but it can also be an attitude we hold, an action or behaviour we engage in, or a sustained commitment.
bell hooks, in her classic text ‘All About Love’, wrote: ‘Learning faulty definitions of love when we are young makes it difficult to be loving as we grow older. Most of us learn early on to think of love as a feeling. When we feel deeply drawn to someone, we cathect with them; that is, we invest feeling or emotion in them. That process of investment wherein a loved one becomes important to us is called “cathexis”… and most of us “confuse cathecting with loving”… If we remembered that “love is as love does”, we would not use the word in a manner that devalues and degrades its meaning. When we are loving we openly and honestly express care, affection, responsibility, respect, commitment, and trust.’
And feminist theologian Carter Heyward has said: ‘Love does not just happen. We are not… puppets on the strings of a deity called “love.” Love is a choice—not simply, or necessarily, a rational choice, but rather a willingness to be present to others without pretence or guile. Love is a conversion to humanity—a willingness to participate with others in the healing of a broken world… Love is the choice to experience life as a member of the human family, a partner in the dance of life, rather than as an alien in the world or as a deity above the world, aloof and apart from human flesh.’
Words from Carter Heyward. Love is a choice – and we need to choose love – more so now than ever. In this world of perma-crisis and precarity, we can (we must!) still turn to one another for comfort, solidarity, and practical support. As the social safety nets we might have expected to rely on are cut, community building and mutual aid networks become ever more crucial, and all this is love in action.
So in the week to come – maybe on Valentine’s Day itself, this Friday – I encourage you to take a more expansive view on love than the one the purveyors of cards, chocolate, and flowers are selling. Take a moment to appreciate your people – all of your ‘significant others’ – and consider how you can honour established relationships, nurture new connections, and express your love all year round. And if you feel you need more love in your life – of whatever flavour – be it romantic, platonic, playful, compassionate, or self-love (maybe approach that question with openness and let life surprise you) – why not you could make the first move to reach out and connect, as bell hooks said, to ‘openly and honestly express care, affection, responsibility, respect, commitment, and trust.’
I’ll close with a very short blessing from Unitarian Universalist Laura Riordan Berardi: May we find love in the here and now: love in our hearts, love for the broken-down, love for the lonely, love for those yet to feel whole, love for those in-between, love for those out of our reach. May we find love, add love, and be love in this world. And may it be so for the greater good of all. Amen.
Reflection by Jane Blackall