3 types of love for Lent

and their inter-connections

During this season of Lent, we hear quite a lot about prayer, fasting and alms-giving. We have diverse type of sentiments relating to the three of these; some may appreciate one or more; some may hate one or more too. A thought, I like to share is, how related each one is with the other. Or all three go together. Each one affects the other two.

To elaborate my claim, I like to connect these three spiritual weapons or attitudes to the commandment to love. And in the summary commandment to love, there are three types of love — love for God, love for self and love for the neighbour. Prayer can easily be linked with love for God; almsgiving (not just giving a bit in charity) can be linked with love for the neighbour, and neighbour in today’s context will also include the entire creation; fasting can be linked to the self-love.

Fasting may be the most difficult one to connect to self-love, and many a times, it is connected to self-loathing. Think in very general terms — different kinds of fasting are done by health conscious people, and this is a certain expression of the love for my own well being. Or when we look at the fasting done by Jesus during his 40 days in the desert, it was not to glorify fasting or anything; but it was a preparation for his mission and to understand his own mission. A hidden self-love (in the best sense of the idea) is implicitly there, and this self-love is never in competition with love for God and love for others. They all stand together.

So if you have doubts about your prayer, fasting or almsgiving — or if you wonder, whether my lent is going well or not, don’t worry. Just love and express it in its fullness.

If our love for God is not leading to love for the neighbour and self, that is fake Christianity.

If we forget about self love (and many people don’t even think about or confuse it with pride or obsession etc), the second commandment is almost difficult to practice — love your neighbour as yourself.

Now, let me push things a little bit — it is always better to see all the three in their interconnectedness and to love in its entirety. But if someone is adamant and say — I can follow two, not three. Which one should I avoid? As a Christian, I still think of the deeper interconnectedness, and find it so difficult to throw out one. But if pushed to the limit, which of the three can be hidden?

I would go with love for God. Some might be surprised at my answer. Some might say that this is exactly Christianity without God. Give me a chance to put my point of view.

As a Christian, I am deeply convinced that God’s love is the foundation of the creation. I would never want to convince someone who don’t accept this aspect, as this is not a conviction on the realm of proof. And there is no superiority of me over someone who doesn’t believe in this dimension. I strongly believe in that implicit presence (if it was so explicit, proof would have been easy), which becomes a little more explicit when someone recognise that presence of God. Obviously a believer can only do this. Or that recognition automatically makes that person a believer. And the response to this recognition is loving God back, loving the self and loving the neighbour.

Now why I say, if I have to leave one of the three loves, what I leave is the love of God. Yes, this is an option taken for the purpose of thinking. Even if that is the case, how can I take this option?

If I say I love God, and I don’t do the other two — I am a hypocrite. Adoration of God without love in acts and deeds for the self and the other is hypocrisy. So If I choose love for God, the other two goes with it. I can’t avoid it. Probably we have avoided it so often that life of Christians is so far from the life of Christ. Or Gandhi would have never said the famous statement “If it weren’t for Christians, I’d be a Christian?” Now there are some doubts whether Gandhi really uttered it, but the point of the quote is relevant. If we say we love God, love for the self and the neighbour goes with it. And we (Christians like me) have forgotten it some times or many a times. So if I have to throw one of the loves, it can’t be love of neighbour or self, as love for God automatically implies the other two.

Now the only option is to throw away the love for God (not God’s love, but my love for God). But I do love myself and I do love others genuinely. Just like God’s love is implicitly present in the entire creation, a love for God is implicitly present in the genuine love of the self and the others. Thus this authentic atheist (no love for God, but genuine love for self and others) is an implicit believer (atleast for me, and I never want to give that label to him or her). This authentic atheist is much better than a hypocritical Christian.

Through the genuine love of self and others, authentic Christians and authentic atheists light a flame — and that is a light shining, seeing which I (a believer) can give glory to God.