Amare et sapere vix deo conceditur.
(Publilius Syrus, Sententia 22)

Loving and understanding is hardly conceded to a god.

pron = ah-MAH-ray eht SAH-peh-reh DAY-oh kohn-KEH-dih-toor.

Comment: This proverb may tread on tender turf. So, let's reflect gently.

Why might anyone offer these as words of wisdom--that loving and
understanding are qualities that we cannot attribute to god?

The problem, as I see it, is the traditional view of god--as a being
out there somewhere--as a being separate from creation and from human
beings in particular. This version of god, which is still I think the
mostly commonly accepted one, if we can allow our refelction to
see--portrays god as a kind of medieval king--the one in charge who
lives in the castle up on the hill.

He does not love his subjects. He does not understand his subjects.
He does not love because he does not understand, and he does not care
to understand because he does not love. It is not because he is cruel
so much as that he is disconnected.

Hence, the problem. But, what if "god" were understood not as
separate, not as distant, not as other?

This sense of god, then, would at least be as loving and understanding
as those who know that the other kind of god is neither of these.
This sense of god would be reflected in every instance of authentic
loving, of real understanding.

And understanding this is not something that anyone else can work out for us.