Notes on St. Bernards’ “Affective and Effective Charity”

Medieval meaning of “Effective”

When he will speak about “effective charity”, he doesn’t mean “most effective”, he means it in the sense of the “efficient cause” of Aristotle, which is the tangible cause of an action. A ball rolls down the hill - the efficient cause is me pushing it. Our modern thoughts about “efficiency” and “inefficiency” are derivative of this classical idea of “efficiency” as action. 

Earthly charity is Effective, not Affective 

“Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart and with thy whole soul, with all thy strength and with all thy mind and thy neighbour as thyself,” concerns not affective but effective or active charity. For who could obey the command if it referred to feeling?”

He thinks that perfect love is not possible for a human being here on earth, but perfect action, or action in accordance with a love of God and neighbour is possible. He calls for effective charity (active, practical, pragmatic, action based charity) as opposed to affective charity (emotive love, love issuing from the soul). I am unsure what affective charity looks like, perhaps because I am incapable of this more powerful form of love. 

Love is pragmatic

“Thus, my brethren, should I speak were we convinced that the charity enjoined is affective charity. But in truth the object of the law appears to be rather effective charity. This becomes the more evident from the fact that after saying, “Love your enemies,” the Lord added immediately, “Do good to them that hate you,” which refers to good works, or to charity in operation. And elsewhere we read, “If thy enemy be hungry, give him to eat; if he be thirsty give him to drink.” Here also, as you perceive, there is question of love not in feeling but in effect. But attend once more to the Lord, where He is laying down the law concerning the love of Himself. “If you love Me,” He says, “keep my commandments.” In this place, again, by enjoining the observance of the commandments, He manifestly directs our attention to the works of charity. But if the love of Him whereof He is speaking, were only a matter of feeling, it would surely be superfluous to make mention of good works. It is in the same way, therefore, we must understand that other precept whereby we are commanded to love our neighbour as ourselves, even though this is not so clearly expressed.“

God doesn’t describe the love of one’s neighbour or enemy to be a purely emotional affair. In fact, he joins “love” to action at each turn. Love is practical, pragmatic (concerns itself with food and clothing and shelter), refers to good works. 

Let our acts of love be affective also

“But I do not mean to say that we should be devoid of affection, and that with hearts hard and dry we should exercise nothing but our hands in the works of piety. Amongst the other great and grievous crimes with which the Apostle charges the gentiles, I find this also enumerated, that they were “without affection.” Now, there is an affection which is begotten of the flesh; and there is an affection which is obedient to the rule of reason; and there is an affection which is seasoned with the salt of wisdom. The first is that whereof St. Paul declares, “It is not subject to the law of God, neither can it be.” Of the second the same Apostle bears opposite testimony, for it is the affection which “consents to the law (of God) that it is good.” These two, therefore, must differ from each other, since to one and the same law the latter is subject and the former insubordinate. But far removed from either is the last, which tastes and understands “that the Lord is sweet,” thus extinguishing the first and rewarding the second. For the affection of the flesh is pleasant but vile; the rational affection has strength without savour; whilst the affection of wisdom is both unctuous and sweet. Hence it is by the affection of reason that good works are performed; and it is truly a love of charity, not that emotional charity, which, as has been said, is seasoned and enriched with the salt of wisdom, and which replenishes the mind with a “multitude of (God’s) sweetness,” but the charity which I have called effective and operative. This indeed does not as yet delight and refresh the soul with the delicious love just mentioned, but it inflames our hearts with a vehement love of that love. “Let us not love in word nor in tongue,” says the Evangelist, “but in deed and in truth.”

There are three types of affection: 

The Three Affections

Of the Flesh	Obedient to Reason	Seasoned with Wisdom
“Not subject to the law of God, neither can it be”  (St. Paul)	“Consents to the law (of God) that it is good.” (St. Paul)	Tastes and understands “that the Lord is sweet”
Pleasant, but vile	Strength without savour - it acts in accordance with divine law, but without spiritual delight.	Sweet and unctuous  (In St. Bernard’s time, ‘unctous’ would mean richly anointed with oil, rather than the modern pejorative meaning of “oily”.)
Pulls the soul away from the divine order	Causes good works, dutiful, but not joyful.	It transcends and purifies the others: it extinguishes the first (flesh), rewards the second (reason), and tastes of divine charity.

We choose the things of this world (Effective Charity) 

“We are moved to the performance of good works rather by the impulse of vivid truth than by the attraction of affective charity. “He set charity in order in me,” exclaims the Spouse. But is it affective charity or effective? Both surely, yet in opposite ways. For whereas the latter loves best what is low, the former prefers what is high. It cannot be questioned, for example, that in well-ordered affective charity the love of God takes precedence of the love of one’s neighbour, and as amongst men, the more perfect are preferred to the less perfect, heaven is preferred to earth, eternity to time, the soul to the body. But well-regulated active charity moves in the inverse order, if not always, at least as a rule. For we feel ourselves pressed with greater solicitude and occupy ourselves more frequently in what concerns our neighbour than in the things appertaining to God; we show more care and assiduity in assisting the weak brother than him that is stronger; by the laws of humanity and the very necessity of our condition we pay more attention to the peace of earth than to the glory of heaven; we are so taken up with the worries of temporal affairs that we can scarcely give a thought to the interests of eternity, the wants of the soul receive little consideration, whereas we are all but constantly ministering to the needs of the body; “and such as we think to be the less honourable members of the body about these we put a more abundant honour,” as the Apostle speaks. Thus do we fulfil in a manner the word of the Lord Who said, “So shall the last be first and the first last.” 

Affective Charity aims at the love of God. Effective Charity aims at the weakest and poorest among us. He compares this to how we seek the things of this world over the things of heaven. That’s why effective charity belongs to us in this world, moreso than affective charity. But in heaven, “So shall the last be first and the first last.” He doesn’t chastise us for this, as you’ll see in the next section: 

Necessity Recognises No Law 

Who can deny that in prayer we converse with God? Yet how often are we not obliged to interrupt and abandon that exercise at the bidding of charity, for the sake of those who need the help of our words or works! How often are we not compelled in the interests of piety to exchange the repose of pious contemplation for the turmoil of worldly affairs! How often without prejudice to conscience do we not put aside our spiritual book in order to devote ourselves to manual labour! Nay, how often do we not find in the necessity of looking after our temporal concerns more than sufficient reason for intermitting even the celebration of the Holy Mysteries! Surely a preposterous order. But necessity recognises no law. Effective charity thus pursues its own course, “beginning from the last,” according to the command of the Father of the family. That it is just and pious we must certainly acknowledge, seeing that it has no respect of persons, and considers not so much the worth of objects as the necessities of men.

The world draws us away from God, through the necessity of feeding ourselves, clothing ourselves, and feeding and clothing those around us. In heaven, “So shall the last be first and the first last” - so that we might put conversing with God first! St. Bernard is sympathetic to this human reversal of the divine order - “it is just and pious we must certainly acknowledge.” Effective charity prioritises the necessities of men, its not for the love of objects, man being some intermediary between the things of this world, and the things of heaven. 

Truth of Charity vs. Charity of Truth

Remember that charity comes from caritas - meaning something close to ‘love’.

Truth of Charity	Charity of Truth
Connected to reason and effective charity	Connected to wisdom and affective chairity
Those with the greatest need are attended to the most.	The most perfect things attract the most affection, and the least perfect things attract the least affection.
	Comes when we feel affection for our rational charitable acts - when rational charity becomes sweet and unctuous!