Deleuzian Psychosis in Nietzsche's Account of Christian Love

On the face of it, Christian love appears to be a most wholesome endeavor. However, iconoclastic German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche would beg to differ. In fact, taking Nietzsche's account of Christian love in his The Anti-Christ and French philosopher Gilles Deleuze's concepts of sadism and masochism in his Coldness and Cruelty under consideration, it becomes apparent that analyzing Christian love through the filter of sexual perversion isn't that far-fetched. What we will find is that aspects of it contain both sadism and masochism, depending on who the subject of inquiry is (the laity, the priests, or the theology itself) and in so doing falls outside sadism and masochism. Rather than being a form of sadism or masochism, Christian love, with the help of Deleuze, is better to be described as a form of psychosis.  To begin, we will outline Nietzsche's critique of Christian love followed by a comparison of it against both Deleuze's ideas of sadism and masochism. Finally, it will be shown how that in escaping both Deleuzian sadism and masochism, Christian love then can only be described as psychotic.
            Nietzsche begins by stating that Christianity is a religion of pity and that through the use of this pity, suffering becomes contagious. (Nietzsche 130). It starts with one person suffering, then he is pitied by his contemporaries, which causes them to suffer with the original wretch. What Christianity does is institutionalize this pity so that it forces everyone to suffer with the wretch, so that even if one has no immediate reason to suffer, they are made to. This institutionalized, preemptive pity is better known as guilt. But why would one even be compelled to feel guilty? For Nietzsche, those compulsions are convictions. "Conviction as a means…The 'believer' does not belong to himself, he can be only a means, he has to be used…His instinct accords the highest honour to a morality of selflessness: everything persuades him to it…" (Nietzsche 184). What starts out as a lie for Nietzsche (the promise of eternal paradise) by the priest class, becomes the faithful conviction of the laity. For Christians, God hurts us (allows us to hurt, makes us to hurt) because he loves us and we expect others to hurt with us because we love each other. Thus, Christian love for Nietzsche is nothing more than the endless perpetuation of suffering.

            Now that Nietzsche's concept of Christian love has been detailed, we will now compare it to Deleuze's sadism and masochism, starting with sadism. Deleuze's description of the sadist is the instructor that uses violent demonstrations of reason (and violence in general) in an attempt to completely negate everything or at the very least partially negate at an ever accelerating rate. (Deleuze 18, 26). Some connections can be made to the priest class here. The typical sermon has all the characteristics of the sadistic pontification: with the priest violently subjecting their congregation to his insular theology, even to the effect of not particularly caring whether the congregations agrees with him; he knows they agree with him because they are compelled to by their own convictions. What's interesting is that the priest is not above his own theology, and is in effect preaching to himself as well as his congregation. In this regard, the sadist is not the practitioners or the priest, but the theology itself.

            The sadist's obsession with negation is also similar to Christian theology: "The Christian's world of ideas contains nothing which so much touches upon actuality: on the other hand, we have recognized in instinctive hatred for actuality the driving element, the only driving element in the roots of Christianity." (Nietzsche 163). However the connection here is ambiguous. It's difficult to say whether Christianity seeks to actively destroy actuality (as is the sadist's want) or to merely despise it and hysterically disavow and deny it. Further, the broader connection of Christianity to sadism is incomplete, completely leaving out the laity; also, it would seem that pleasure is conspicuously absent. Perhaps we should look elsewhere in our project to define Christianity.

            Masochism is the next logical step. Deleuze's description of the masochist is the seductive educator that seeks through fantasy, suspension, and fetishization to disavow and deny reality. Clearly, masochism's suspension of reality fits with Nietzsche's account of the Christian "conviction"; but it still remains ambiguous. Is Christianity's hatred of actuality an example of sadistic negation, or masochistic disavowal? Again, the answer to that question depends on who we're analyzing: Christian theology, as it exists in a purely symbolic form, is able to actively negate reality; but the practitioners (priests included) can only hope to deny it. They lack the potency to accomplish any sort of negation, because Christian theology celebrates weakness and submissiveness -- "Active sympathy for the ill-constituted and weak…" (Nietzsche 128). This explains the absence of the sadistic spiral of the acceleration of partial negation; but again, pleasure is conspicuously missing. It is true that there is a conditioning to suffering through faithful convictions, consistent with masochism, but there is no indication it is done for pleasure. More likely, the suffering is meant to be endured as a means to the idea of the Christian heaven, rather than endured for its own sake. Additionally, the absence of the "seductive educator" is a point against Christianity as masochism.

            So what are we left with? Nietzsche is never clear as to whom he is referring to in The Anti-Christ. Christian theology is sadistic (as it is aggressively espoused from the mouths of the priests onto the congregation), its practitioners are masochistic (as they continually endure suffering and engage in a suspension of actuality) and its priests, being both the conduit for the theology and practitioners themselves, contain elements of both. What is Christianity? It is clear that to label Christianity as either sadistic or masochist would grossly over simplify it. We need a new classification. Nietzsche makes an interesting observation, that is much help to us here:

"From a lofty standpoint, this strangest of all facts, a religion not only determined by errors but inventive and even possessing genius only in harmful, only in life-poisoning and heart-poisoning errors, remains a spectacle for the gods…" (Nietzsche 164).

What could Nietzsche mean by saying that Christianity is "a spectacle for the gods"? Deleuze has the answer for us here: if pain and suffering is to have any meaning, it has to be enjoyed by someone. This can happen in three ways: 1) the enjoyment is had by the one inflicting the pain (sadism), 2) the enjoyment is had by the one experiencing the pain (masochism) and 3) the "normal one". Deleuze explains what is meant by "the normal one": "…the "normal" one, is of a moral and sublime character; it states that pain is pleasing to the gods who contemplate and watch over man…" (Deleuze 118).This speaks to the trouble we had trying to locate pleasure in either a sadistic or masochistic reading of Christian love. The one who is truly experiencing the pleasure, isn't the priest or practitioner, but God himself.

            Deleuze comments further: "It should be clear that the normal answer is the most fantastic, the most psychotic of the three." (Deleuze 118). Deleuze is absolutely spot-on in his assessment. From what we've seen of Christian love there really is no other way to describe it: the viralization of suffering through pity, attained through a faithful conviction to a grand lie for the benefit of a God that had to be invented to justify self-created suffering. If that is not psychotic behavior, I'm not sure what is.

Nietzsche's account of Christian love being the endless perpetuation of suffering through pity is far too involved to simply label it "sadistic" or "masochistic", but with the help of Deleuze, we can label it for what it really is: psychotic. While it is true that aspects of Christianity can be attributed to both sadism and masochism, the reality is that it's theology is far more perverse than even the likes of sadism or masochism: a mass delusion, the psychosis of Christianity