By Rev. Joseph J. C. Petrovits, J.C.B., S.T.L.
VI. Bucceroni makes a clear distinction between the two loves. " The love of Christ'' he says, "inasmuch as it is uncreated, is something indistinct from the Divinity, hence, it carries with it an inherent reason for adoration. Inasmuch as it is created, it resides in the soul of Christ, which is hypostatically united to the Logos, and for this reason has a claim to adoration." He does not mean to give an equal importance to the two loves when they are considered in the light of an object of the Devotion to the Sacred Heart, but he makes it plain that a comprehensive notion of the formal object presupposes the inclusion of the uncreated love.
VII. Muzzarelli refers frequently to these two loves, but fails to give a clear idea of the uncreated love. However, it may be legitimately presumed that he advocated the opinion which means to include the latter as a partial object in the Devotion. " It is most certain," he says, " that the will and the love of the divine nature of Jesus Christ are altogether different from His human love and nature, and that the love of the divine nature is uncreated, immanent, infinite, whereas that of the human nature is a created love, ineffable, indeed, but of a finite entity."
VIII. Franzelin fails to make mention of the uncreated love. On the contrary, he maintains that the Heart of Christ manifests theandric affections and is the symbol of the love and interior life of the God-man. Father Vermeersch intimates that Franzelin wishes to confine the formal object to the created love.
