Richard Clements, who has a Ph.D. in clinical psychology from Purdue University, is the author of The Meaning of the World Is Love: Selected Texts from Hans Urs von Balthasar with Commentary (Ignatius Press, 2022). He has taught psychology at several universities and written articles for numerous psychological journals. Clements left academia to be a full-time father. He lives in Valparaiso, Indiana, with his wife, Jessica, and their five children.
Clements recently corresponded with CWR about his new book, the writings of Hans Urs von Balthasar, and the nature of God, love, truth, and much more.
CWR: How and when did you first discover and read the writings of Fr. Hans Urs von Balthasar? What was the first book of his that you read? And what was your impression of what you read?
Rick Clements: I first started reading Balthasar’s work almost fifteen years ago. I had seen occasional references to his theology in journals like First Things and newspapers like the National Catholic Register. They were only passing references, but they intrigued me – Balthasar was generally referred to as a brilliant theologian, but one whose work could be challenging to grasp. I assume the latter characterization stemmed from Balthasar’s immense erudition, as well as the sheer volume of his writings, which run to tens of thousands of pages.
I don’t recall exactly which one of Balthasar’s books I read first, but I do recall that it was one of the volumes in his trilogy on the beautiful, the good, and the true. I remember being struck by the eloquence, boldness, and confidence with which he wrote, the profundity of many of his insights, and his extensive references to the works of an incredibly wide and varied group of thinkers: Fathers of the Church, other theologians both old and new, philosophers, novelists, poets, playwrights, etc.
That first book drew me in, and I immediately starting reading one Balthasar book after another.
CWR: What led to this book? How did it develop and come to fruition?
Clements: Having been struck by the beauty and profundity of Balthasar’s theology, I wanted to find a way to make some of his insights more accessible to a broader audience. Realizing that not many people have the time (or the inclination, I guess) to read all of Balthasar’s writings, I thought it would be useful for me to go through his work and select some of his most significant insights, organize them by topic, and provide commentary that would hopefully give readers some context for understanding those insights more fully.
Since the topic of love is central to Balthasar’s theology, and love is a topic of almost universal interest, I thought that putting together a collection of Balthasar’s most important comments on that topic would be a worthwhile project. Over the course of seven or eight years, I read a large chunk of Balthasar’s oeuvre and took extensive notes. I then spent about six months selecting the quotations to be included in The Meaning of the World Is Love and writing the commentary to accompany those quotations.
CWR: You write, in the Introduction (“A Theology of Love”) that, “For Balthasar (and I am firmly convinced that he is right about this), the answers to all of these questions revolve, in one way or another, around love.” What are some of those questions? And why is love so essential to addressing them?
Clements: One of the aspects of Balthasar’s work that has been really appealing to me has been his willingness to ask (and answer) the “big” questions about life, the existential questions that most of us wonder about at one time or another, such as: Why is there something rather than nothing? Why are we all here? Why am I, in particular, here? What is life all about? Is there any ultimate meaning or purpose to life? How can we attain ultimate happiness? How can we attain ultimate freedom?
It’s completely on target that you asked why love is so “essential” in answering these questions. Balthasar would say that love is essential to answering the deeper questions about life because love is the essence of life itself. More specifically, Balthasar would say 1) love is the essence of God (1 John 4:16); 2) God is not just one being among all other beings, but God is Being itself, existence itself, life itself; 3) therefore the essence of being/life is love. Love is what life is all about.
In Love Alone Is Credible, Balthasar asserts that love is the only credible answer to the fundamental question of philosophy, the question of why there is something rather than nothing. We human beings, and the entire universe itself, were all created from and for love. The inner-Trinitarian life of God is an eternal circulation of love, a communion of love, and God invites all of us to share in that divine life and love forever. That’s why we are all here. Only in love, only in sharing in the divine love, will we find the perfect happiness and freedom that we so deeply desire.
Balthasar called life a “theo-drama”, a drama in which the destiny of each and every one of us hinges on our free decision of whether to say Yes or No to God’s invitation to love. He also referred to life as a “grand school of love” – we are all here to learn how to love as God loves, to learn to love as Jesus showed us how to love, so that we can participate as fully as possible in the divine life of love. Each of us also has a unique, God-given mission of love to fulfill during our life on earth, a mission that fits within Jesus Christ’s overarching mission of love and that further contributes to the meaning and purpose of our lives.
CWR: What are some ways in which Balthasar defines or articulates the nature of love?
Clements: In The Meaning of the World Is Love, I draw upon several passages in which Balthasar discusses the nature of love in order to formulate a definition that I think captures Balthasar’s conception of love: Love is the selfless gift of self, given and received.
In the book, I discuss Balthasar’s thoughts regarding each of the elements contained in this definition of love. At the heart of love lies the gift of self. Balthasar, who wrote in German, liked to use the German term Hingabe to refer to this self-gift. Hingabe can be translated as surrender, or more specifically, in the present context, self-surrender. For many of us, the word “surrender” has negative connotations: if you “surrender”, this is a sign of defeat, failure, weakness, etc. But as Balthasar points out, loving self-surrender is actually a sign of strength, not weakness. To genuinely surrender ourselves in loving self-gift, we have to be strong, by which he means, at least in part, possessing a healthy self-love, being in control of ourselves, and having attained a fair degree of mastery over our fallen inclination toward egoism and selfishness.
Hence the related emphasis on selflessness in Balthasar’s definition of love. Selflessness involves ekstasis, breaking out of what Balthasar calls the “prison” of our ego and stepping outside ourselves in love toward the Other/other. Selflessness also requires kenosis, a self-emptying of our selfish tendencies in order to “be for” the other rather than being only “for self”. Balthasar speaks a great deal of the sacrificial nature of love, but he also refers to the joy that comes from making sacrifices, in love, for the sake of God or neighbor. Balthasar also speaks at length of the two movements of love (the giving and receiving of the gift of self), emphasizing repeatedly the openness that is required for a mutual exchange of the gift of self to take place and noting that both distance and “otherness” are required for the existence of genuine love.
CWR: Are there false or flawed notions of love that Balthasar addresses? What sort of direction does he give about both recognizing and embracing the authentic love of God?
Clements: In one of his books (The God Question & Modern Man), Balthasar laments the contemporary overuse, and especially the misuse, of the word “love”, commenting: “Must we really keep on using this word ‘love’ which has gradually become unbearable, and continue to tear it to rags?” But of course, he is not arguing that we should, in fact, stop using the word “love” (for how could we stop using the word that refers to the essence of God and to the essence of life itself?), but rather that we should stop misusing and abusing the word (for example, by using the word “love” to refer to a sexual relationship that is, at best, a thinly disguised egoism rather than a mutual exchange of the gift of self). However, Balthasar focuses almost exclusively in his writing on a positive description of genuine love rather than a criticism of the misconceptions and misunderstandings of love that are out there in society.
The authentic love of God is characterized by the elements of love that Balthasar emphasizes: self-gift, selflessness, and the free and mutual exchange of that gift of self. Jesus Christ revealed the divine love to us and literally “embodied” it, putting a face on the invisible God and making it possible for us to share in the divine life and love by embracing the divine love revealed in Christ.
CWR: “Balthasar’s theology, ” you emphasize, is “both thoroughly Trinitarian and thoroughly Christocentric,” and nearly everything he has to say about love and other vital topics flows from this. What are some examples of this? And how does this help ordinary Christians as they deal with the various struggles and challenges of life?
Clements: Balthasar’s definition of love itself as the selfless gift of self given and received is drawn from his understanding of love as it occurs within the intra-Trinitarian relationships among the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Balthasar asserts that God is self-gift and self-surrender: God the Father gives himself entirely to the Son in begetting him; the Son returns that love in a thankful, reciprocal gift of self; and their mutual self-gift spirates the Holy Spirit. Jesus Christ is both the revelation of the nature of the divine love and our path into a participation in the divine life and love.
Many of the key concepts within Balthasar’s theology are also drawn from the nature of the Trinity and from the life of Jesus. For example, Balthasar emphasizes the centrality of kenosis within the divine life, asserting that God the Father empties himself of everything except his status as Father in begetting the Son, completely sharing the divine nature with the Son, and the Son, in turn, empties himself completely in his grateful reciprocation of the gift of self to the Father. He also describes the divine kenosis involved in creating a universe that includes free beings like ourselves, beings who can use that freedom to oppose the divine will. And of course, there is the kenosis of the Son in emptying himself of his divinity in order to take on our human nature. We are called to imitate this kenotic love of God in our own lives.
Balthasar also speaks of Jesus’ self-gift to us in the Eucharist and exhorts us, along with other theologians including Origen, to “break ourselves open and pour ourselves out” in love for other people, serving as figurative “food” and “drink” for others on their journey toward God in imitation of Jesus’ literal Eucharistic self-gift.
The divine bliss, according to Balthasar, consists precisely in the eternal circulation of love among the three Persons of the Trinity, and our ultimate happiness, the happiness that all of us human beings so deeply desire, is to be found in a participation in this divine bliss, a participation in the eternal exchange of the gift of self within the Trinity and among all the members of the Body of Christ.
If life is, indeed, a school of love in which we are here to learn to love as God loves, the more we know about the way God loves, the better we can learn to imitate his love in our relationships as spouse, parent, friend, co-worker, etc. in our everyday lives, and the more we will experience at least a foretaste of the divine bliss in this earthly life.
CWR: What is the relationship, in Balthasar’s theological work, between the Incarnation and human deification?
Clements: Balthasar would say that the Incarnation is the precondition for human deification, a necessary but not sufficient condition for our divinization. The paschal mystery (the passion, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus) is the other crucial part of the deification process.
CWR: There are, in today’s world, many lacking or false understandings of love, as well as a relativistic or even nihilistic view of truth. What insights does Balthasar provide in his considerations of the relationship between love and truth?
Clements: Balthasar defines truth as the revelation, unveiling, or self-disclosure of being. Since love is self-gift, love is also self-disclosure, and thus one can say that love is, in this sense, truth. He tends to emphasize the interactive, relational aspect of the knowing process, particularly between persons. Learning the truth about others is a dynamic, interactive process involving the voluntary disclosure of one’s own being on the part of one person (the “object” in this case) and the voluntary receptivity of the other person (the “subject”) to that disclosure. The “object” to be known must disclose or give herself or himself to the other, and the subject to whom the gift of self-disclosure is offered must open himself or herself up to the proffered gift of self.
CWR: What do you hope readers will be able to glean from this book?
Clements: My hope is that readers will gain a deeper understanding of the nature of love and of the beauty, goodness, and truth of love, a greater receptivity to the divine love, and some inspiration to reciprocate the divine love more fully and pass the divine love along to others by striving to embody that love more fully in their own lives.
On a less significant level, I hope that The Meaning of the World Is Love will stimulate readers’ interest in the ideas of this brilliant theologian and enkindle in them a desire to read some of Balthasar’s books directly.
CWR: Any final thoughts?
Clements: People sometimes ask me, “What would be a good book by Balthasar for readers who are completely new to Balthasar to start with?” My personal favorite is Heart of the World, a beautiful book that Balthasar described as “a hymn to Christ in rhythmic prose”. Other good choices would be Love Alone Is Credible, Engagement with God, Prayer, or Credo. If a reader is looking for more of an overview of some of Balthasar’s key ideas, I would recommend My Work: In Retrospect or Epilogue.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
A wonderful contribution, this book. Of Balthazar, we read: “…he is not arguing that we should, in fact, stop using the word ‘love’ (for how could we stop using the word that refers to the essence of God and to the essence of life itself?)…” But, we might also use more the word “charity,” which is a theological virtue more clearly open to the Trinitarian mystery so beautifully proclaimed by Balthazar and in the author’s interview.
In a similar vein, we might also rediscover the theological virtue of “hope” as more than optimism, and the Trinity’s self-disclosure inviting “faith” as more than our own merely expressive religion (or even a fraternity among religions).
A wonderful contribution, Richard Clements’ rendering of Balthazar accessible to a thirsting readership. And, rather than anything less, might we expect the new dicastery on Evangelization to be a clear beacon of faith, hope and charity for an increasingly fallen world?
When anyone looks to God for guidance, that person finds the best way. To search for insight and discernment and to share beneficial knowledge with others, allows us to be better servants and share the blessings that God has given.
Acts 17:27 That they should seek God, in the hope that they might feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us,
Proverbs 8:17 I love those who love me, and those who seek me diligently find me.
Jeremiah 29:13 You will seek me and find me, when you seek me with all your heart.
Matthew 7:7 “Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.
Matthew 6:33 Seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.
1 Timothy 6:6 Now there is great gain in godliness with contentment,
Thanks be to the Lord for those who are God fearing writers of books and homilies.
Thanks to CWR for striving for truth and enlightenment. Another place where we can unburden our hearts before the Lord.
In response to von Balthasar’s question, “why there is something rather than nothing”, it’s more applicable to a divinity that is pure act, as such not subject to the suggestion of causality in respect to love as the answer – to say that created existence is a manifest good of the divine nature [not subject to position in time and space].
Furthermore, the question cancels itself, because God’s existence is absolute [the only true absolute truth] and cannot be subject to query.
Jesus says ”Why do you call me good “No one is good—except God alone”
The reality of the goodness of God is so great that no created being can look upon him or know him in His inmost being. In Isaiah’s vision, even the seraphim, the highest angels, cover their faces before Him proclaiming “Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of Hosts; all the earth is full of His glory” Reflecting Hallowed be thy name which is meant to remind us that God is perfect, pure, holy, and worthy of all praise and honor.
While out of love for our sake, Jesus consecrated Himself in truth so that we also may be consecrated (Made Holy) in truth.
Quote From a Homily of Benedict XVI for Chrism Mass on Holy Thursday
” Jesus says: “For their sake I consecrate myself”. What does this mean? Is Jesus not himself “the Holy One of God”, as Peter acknowledged at that decisive moment in Capharnaum (cf. Jn 6:69)? How can he now consecrate – sanctify – himself?
To understand this, we need first to clarify what the Bible means by the words “holy” and “sanctify – consecrate”. “Holy” – this word describes above all God’s own nature, his completely unique, divine way of being, one which is his alone. He alone is the true and authentic Holy One, in the original sense of the word. All other holiness derives from him, is a participation in his way of being. He is purest Light, Truth, and untainted Good.
We are taught that the true worshiper will worship the Father in spirit and truth and we do this when we worship Him in our spirit by openly showing/owning the spiritual reality/truth of our hearts before Him, this creates a humble heart which is the known dwelling place of the Holy Spirit (God). Which I have often expressed as ‘Truth and Love are one and the same’ as Truth sets our hearts aflame.
This is in keeping with this quote from the article above Balthasar defines truth as the revelation, unveiling, or self-disclosure of being. Since love is self-gift, love is also self-disclosure, and thus one can say that love is, in this sense, truth
Also, this quote from Benedict XVI. When we talk about being sanctified in the truth, should we forget that in Jesus Christ truth and love are one. Being immersed in him means being immersed in his goodness, in true love
Whereas the Angles dwell and Worship in the continual blissful light of God’s Glory
Originally all angels were created Good by God with free will, in order to love and serve Him while dwelling in the truth.
Satan with other angels rebelled and Jesus said of him “He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth because there is no truth (Love of God) in him” and my simple understanding is that all created beings with free will this statement holds true ‘The essence of love is Truth’ as obedience to God is the love of God, reflected in these words “Thy Will be done on earth as it is in Heaven
From the article “More specifically, Balthasar would say 1) love is the essence of God”
But is not the transforming action of Truth at the core of reciprocal love?
As Jesus says I am the way the ‘truth’ and the life
kevin your brother
In Christ
All riiiiiiiiiiiiight: so a theologian who incurred accusations of heresy before Vatican II (accusations tactfully concealed from readers of this article) is now lauded to the skies by … a clinical psychologist.
A clinical psychologist!
What could possibly go wrong?
I’ll stick to Garrigou-Lagrange, Fulton Sheen, and Frank Sheed, thanks very much: they happened to write theological prose in which every sentence has one, clearly perceptible, meaning.
But hey, the Gospel of Universal Salvation is one of those ideas (like “the classless society”, “the separation of church and state”, and “sex with no strings attached”) which via its sheer combination of stupidity and evil is probably guaranteed to last for as long as fallen human nature itself does.
Von Balthasar was not a universalist. Even clinical psychologists know this.
Where did I accuse Balthasar himself of being a universalist? Nowhere.
I simply pointed out that the Gospel of Universal Salvation is probably a perennial heresy. And the fact remains that before Vatican II several competent authorities within the Church did believe that Balthasar was peddling universalism.
So do a lot of CWR readers, if Larry Chapp’s article of December 2020 is any guide. Nevertheless, perhaps Mr. Olson no longer reads his own magazine with any attention.
For whatever it might be worth, my own view remains that Balthasar’s prose is so appallingly turgid as to conceal whatever outright heresies he adopted not only from his readers, but from himself. Teilhard de Chardin engaged in analogous self-confusion, as Sir Peter Medawar pointed out ages ago.
But it’s interesting to see how touchy Mr. Olson is on the topic. Why, one could be forgiven for thinking that he had a bad conscience about it. Temper, temper!
Oh, and as for clinical psychologists, the important causative role of that profession in making inevitable the Catholic sexual abuse crisis – a role documented with horrific completeness by, among other sources, Australia’s royal commission into institutionalized child abuse – is more than enough reason for faithful Catholics to be leery of them in general, however laudable individual clinical psychologists might be. As a former U.S. president urged: “Trust, but verify.”
“Where did I accuse Balthasar himself of being a universalist? Nowhere.”
Sigh. You write about von Balthasar and then snark about “the Gospel of Universal Salvation…” It’s obvious.
“But it’s interesting to see how touchy Mr. Olson is on the topic.”
Yeah, because pushing back against vague attacks and snark is being “touchy”. Sure. If I’m “touchy,” you left touchy in the dust ages ago.
“Temper, temper!”
You’re embarrassing yourself.
“Nevertheless, perhaps Mr. Olson no longer reads his own magazine with any attention.”
Dr. Chapp never asserts that von Balthasar is a universalist. Readers without a rusty, broken axe to grind can judge for themselves.
“…however laudable individual clinical psychologists might be…”
Yet you have no qualms about slandering Richard Clements. Funny how you can attack, attack, attack–but as soon as someone pokes you, you cry foul. Sad.
Mr. Olson, once again you have calumniated me by ascribing to me sentiments which neither on this thread, nor in any other place, have I uttered.
I never vilified Dr. Clements; I expressed healthy Catholic doubt as to the merits of his profession (and gave justification for my healthy Catholic doubt), but to confuse this healthy doubt with vilification of an individual is something that most kindergarteners know better than to do.
You will not have a chance to calumniate me afresh, Mr. Olson, because the relevant section of this comments thread has now been copied and forwarded to the Archbishop’s office.
If His Grace decides that you have outlived your usefulness to the organization and is sufficiently incensed by your behavior to dismiss you from your job rather than allow further freewheeling libels from you against faithful Catholics, then you will have only yourself to blame.
It is my hope and prayer that you will take yourself immediately to the nearest confessional rather than continue to defame and misrepresent readers, some of whom (myself included) might even have been tempted to donate to CWR before your antics made this impossible.