Carl_Heinrich_Bloch_-_Suffer_the_Children (1)

Agape Love for Christmas

So many of our conflicts today stem from a mistaken, deformed notion of love—one that departs sharply from what Jesus Himself taught long ago.

Some of our nation’s most thoughtful thinkers see the United States heading towards another civil war. A Zogby poll this year found more Americans thought civil war was likely than otherwise. 

While some might point out that from a historical perspective our divisions are not unique, the general sense that our country is becoming increasingly divided is based on real and increasing trends.

For instance, our political, philosophical, cultural, and socio-economic differences are increasingly resulting in decreased trust and friendship and increased suspicion and distance. And our media landscape and political dialogue have turned into echo chambers that serve to exacerbate these differences.

Christmas is an ideal opportunity to reflect on and heal these divisions because Jesus’ life and lessons represent a better way forward.

This way unsurprisingly revolves around love. Having a correct understanding of love can help heal the divisions among us. When Jesus says that He gives us a new commandment to love one another, the Greek word used is agape.

As we seek to heal our communities, may we turn to the Master of Love, the Christ.

Agape is also the word most often translated as love in the New Testament. Because of its importance in the Christian faith tradition, the word agape has been dissected and nuanced millions of times. Even so, it’s still easy for us to dismiss what the word would have most commonly meant to the writers who chose it.

Strong’s Concordance defines agape as simply, “To welcome warmly.” 

Christ’s example is filled with instances of Him sitting and conversing with those He would otherwise disagree with. Foremost among these is the story of Christ eating with the sinners and publicans.

Today many people miscast this story as one of Jesus approving of the sinners, or even favoring them over other groups. But Jesus’ stated reason for being with them was to call them to repentance, even if doing so brought the approbation of others.

Similarly, we can demonstrate Christian agape love by welcoming those we disagree with, without concern for guilt-by-association.

Just like the Pharisees of old, those who wield today’s cancel culture weapons have many fearing that they will face social consequences if they are seen sympathizing or fraternizing with those harboring ugly beliefs. 

In many quarters today, love is not defined as Jesus historically used it, but instead through the lens of Rogerian humanism. They define love as unconditional acceptance. 

In the same moment, they can then twist the idea of love to defend excluding others—especially those who don’t embrace this same vision of love. If certain people don’t accept everyone unconditionally, then perhaps, they reason, the way to show that they themselves accept everyone is by rejecting these people?

So many of our social divisions today are born on the back of this strident, non-Christian understanding of love.

There is a better way—and Jesus Himself shows it.  As we seek to heal our communities, may we turn to the Master of Love, the Christ. As we seek to welcome all in His way, we can emulate the example of the Jesus we worship in this season—and together find greater peace and civility.

About the author

C.D. Cunningham

C.D. Cunningham is a founder and editor-at-large of Public Square magazine.
On Key

You Might Also Like

Belonging at Church

The second in a series on unity, belonging, and striving toward the just society of “Zion.” This article explores how to achieve a community of belonging in our congregations and church-sponsored schools.

“Deep” Norwegian Film About Nothing in the End

How does a community and the families within it respond to a nearly unspeakable accusation? How do you treat everyone with dignity? How do you suss out the truth? Do you need to? “Armand,” the Norwegian submission for The Academy Award’s best international feature film, sets out as though it is interested in answering those questions. The film opens with a young teacher, a principal, and a school staff member wondering what they are going to do. Armand has done something again. The parents are called in. The film’s premise is that Armand was accused of hitting Jon in the bathroom when Jon said he didn’t want to play with Armand. There are many additional revelations about the context, the relationship between Armand and Jon’s families, and the history of Armand’s family. There are accusations upon accusations that both indict and exonerate the boys and the adults around them. But these revelations eke out. It feels like filling up a mug from a leak in the sink. “If you want us to know what’s happening, just tell us,” I felt like shouting at the screen more than once. The film’s first act works well. The cinematography is ragged, framing its subjects well but always just off from what we’d expect. Too close, or the light is just wrong. It felt like how I imagine it would feel to have my child accused of something horrific.  And when the parents first start talking the tension is terrific. Those first few drops of exposition in the mug were thrilling. Oh there’s something happening here; it’s complicated and interesting.  Thea Lambrechts Vaulen, plays Sunna, a young teacher in over her head trying to manage the meeting between Armand’s mother, Elisabeth, played by Renate Reinsve, and Jon’s parents Sarah and Anders played by Ellen Dorrit Petersen and Endre Hellestveit.  Vaulen is particularly effective. She has been sent on a mission by her principal, Jarle, to make sure the whole thing blows over. Watching her struggle to navigate this while the parents are processing what’s been said is captivating. But it just keeps going.  The film’s entire second act consists of learning the basic facts of what has happened and the context around it. This is a complicated situation, and as a viewer I’m interested to see how the compelling characters navigate that situation. But the screenplay seems mostly interested in telling you the information. As though learning that Armand “plays doctor” at school is enough to compel me to the film’s ending. But once the audience finally understands the situation, the third act begins and flies wildly off the handle into surrealism, including two interpretive dance numbers, three over-the-top metaphors, and five straight minutes of Anders’ mother laughing.  The movie feels so desperate to be deep that it forgets to be about anything. It’s the first film of director Halfdan Ullmann Tøndel, so perhaps the bold ideas and beautiful cinematography will be wielded for a more worthwhile story next time. The film is entirely in Norwegian. And its English subtitles include a fair amount of profanity, though not an overwhelming amount. And the accusations that fly include suicide, alcoholism, and sexual assault. So these are adult themes. The film is R-rated, but not an egregious one, it pretty well all takes place in a parent-teacher conference.  I can’t imagine ever showing this to my kids. The themes are hard ones, and the film has nothing worthwhile to say about them. Two out of five stars. Armand releases in US theaters on February 14, 2025.