The Art of Courtly Love by Andreas Capellanus is a testament to his aristocratic ideals of love, which he advocates through a set of “rules” for young men to follow on a path to success. Capellanus’ views contrast sharply with the teachings of St. Paul the Apostle, as espoused most completely in his first Epistle to the Corinthians. While Capellanus sees love as a pastime to occupy the mind with longing and elaborate rhetorical flirting games, Paul describes a strong emotional connection that transcends such trivialities to encompass the totality of the union that a true bond of love creates. Admittedly, they are discussing two very different ideas, Capellanus thinking of eros, the Greek concept of sexually charged relationships; whereas Paul speaks of agape, the Greek concept of unconditional compassion that can exist between any and all beings. In the classical languages, these two concepts are divided for the purpose of not confusing shallow and complex relationships with each other, as is established by the King James Version translation of agape as “charity,” rather than love like in more modern translations. While these are different concepts, they are related, and the distinction does not even exist in the English language.
St. Paul also puts down the idea of erotic love in I Corinthians in favor of agape-based marriages built around mutuality and the controlling of sexual urges. Capellanus’ love as a diversion outside of marriage has no place within the system of morality Paul sets out in I Corinthians 7. For example the advice to simply rape peasant woman is not particularly inspired by any sort of Biblical sentiment, as expressed by either Paul or Jesus Christ himself. Ultimately, Capellanus paints a picture of a bleak and lifeless love, versus the vibrant and kind love extolled by St. Paul.
“Love is a certain inborn suffering derived from the sight of and excessive meditation upon the beauty of the opposite sex” (Andreas Capellanus, The Art of Courtly Love, p. 28). Thus Capellanus begins his treatise on the nature of love, with a definition of his subject matter. Love, in his view, is a painful set of emotions that occur when two people are physically attracted to each other. This seems to be a negative view of an entire set of human emotional experience, casting love as a kind of undesirable madness that people put themselves through purely because their bodies tell them to go forth and multiply. Everything noble that people do is a calculated gambit to make one look better for potential mates.
While Paul does say that love “suffereth long” (I Cor. 13:4), he refers to patience inspired by the emotion rather than the actual substance of what love in fact is. Paul’s conception of love is one of infinite good will, where the individual chooses to show love to others, no matter what they receive in return. Paul’s love is not limited to sexual relations, or even to one-on-one friendships, but extends to all people in all circumstances. While this love is willing to suffer through whatever the object will do, it is not the suffering that forms the substance of the love itself, but the willingness to face the suffering for the sake of the beloved. Not a selfish love, but a selfless love that seeks the good of others.
“II. He who is not jealous cannot love…XX. A man in love is always apprehensive…XXI. Real jealousy always increases the feeling of love…XXII. Jealousy, and therefore love, are increased when one suspects his beloved…XXVII. A slight presumption causes a lover to suspect his beloved” (Capellanus, p. 184). This series of “rules” make a particularly telling point in Capellanus’ opinion of the nature of love as a concept. Jealousy and suspicion is necessary to his conception of love, as the need to possess the other is that which creates the feeling he terms love. A man in love, according to Capellanus, must always be in suspicion of his beloved, and be thinking of his own position in her esteem constantly.
This differs markedly from St. Paul, who says “Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil” (I Cor. 13:4-5). These views are mutually exclusive, with Paul saying that love never makes one think ill of another, and is totally unconcerned with position in the eyes of the other. This unconditional nature of Paul’s love sets it apart from Capellanus’ mechanical and vain peacock-like system. In a Capellanus style relationship, it is a constant struggle for dominance and attention, a Darwinian free-for-all of emotions. Paul’s love does not care what the other person thinks, whether any feelings are even returned at all. It is a matter of pure caring for the other, regardless of reciprocal emotions, and is not even limited by being a romantic love. Paul’s love can be extended to all people, all things, though it clearly seems his ideals for marriage, including the “marriage debt”, are based in a similar sort of agape way of thinking.
The inclusiveness of Paul’s doctrine makes it far more useful as a philosophical goal than Capellanus’ eros, which consists almost entirely of how to obtain sexual favors. Everything Capellanus writes is obsessed with how to get someone to agree to sex, with every noble action being a mere gambit to impress the beloved. In Paul, it works the exact opposite way, going from a general will to do good to all, down to the specific love for an individual that creates the mutual bond of marriage. Two more different views on the subject cannot be imagined.
“IV. It is well known that love is always increasing or decreasing…XIII. When made public love rarely endures…XIX. If love diminishes, it quickly fails and rarely revives” (Capellanus, p. 185). Capellanus views love as a transient state that is changeable and mortal in nature. One can fall out of love as easily as falling in love, in such a system. Paul, on the other hand, says “Charity never faileth: But whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away” (I Cor 13:8). Paul’s agape love is unchangeable, immortal, and unconditional. No matter what happens around it, Paul’s style of love will fight through to survive. It is tenacious and energetic, not a limp sort of longing as extolled by Capellanus. Capellanus’ love is obsessed with position, and can easily be distracted by the next best thing over and above what had previously been the object of desire.
Capellanus even has rules stating how one should end an affair, or how long to wait between affairs, and so on and so forth. Paul’s love needs no such rules, because the nature of his love is infinite. There is no way to measure how much love there is in Paul’s system, as it neither waxes or wanes. It is a constant, something that lives on even if the object is dead. But, it is also flexible enough to embrace all things, so it is possible to love everybody, each in their unique way. Capellanus love is limited to obsession with, at most, a few individuals at a time.
Champions of fundamentally different ideas of love in the form of agape and eros, St. Paul and Capellanus are on opposite ends of the spectrum. Capellanus was a cleric, and hence technically a disciple of Paul, showing the 12th century Frenchman to be a hypocrite ultimately. He is supposed to be following the teachings of Paul and Christ by denying himself worldly pleasures, thinking of things higher and nobler than physical reality. Instead, he decides to write a self-help book about how to get laid. Even if the book is an elaborate joke, as is quite possible given the cultural context it was composed in, the fact that he is thinking about the topic seems to be out of place with the stated philosophy of his chosen path of life. The sort of love he advocates is vain and empty, being nothing more than adolescent trysts sought out by bored aristocrats. The love Paul backs is more universal in nature, and provides a better way to live.
No comments:
Post a Comment