Love & Marriage

No. 3 and the consideration of the subject of marriage have lead me to additional musings that may be our subject for a little while. One of my favorite books is "Love and Responsibility" by Karol Wojtyla. It is a philosophical consideration of the subject of love, freedom and the human person. It was the basis for several papers I decided to write in college and has been the ember which ignited a passion in me. So much so, I have considered continuing my studies in Marriage and Family Life.

Anyway, enough about that. Let's take a step back before we continue on. Let's jump back to before the "I Do's" and try to understand why it is that people get married to begin with. With a study of that all too famous four-letter word, L-O-V-E.

What is love? Probably one of the more common of the basic, human philosophical questions that gets asked today. Although it is usually predicated by the question, "Am I in love?” From young and old alike, the query is posed. If you look up Love on dictionary.com, you will find a whole smattering of romantic sentimentalism. Now, truth be told, I am a hopeless romantic and such would be the definition if you ask anyone who knows me. However, I prefer a stronger, deeper and classical answer to this age old question as most simply defined: to will the good of the beloved for his own sake.

Now, my readers, you may be thinking... that doesn't sound particularly romantic. Where are all the hearts, candles and sentimentality? Well it just takes a little deciphering. It did for me when I had just heard it for the first time.

Think back to that first love, that first declaration. When you heard someone {not related to you} declare their love to you. Or if it has not happened yet, hang on, you still should be able to understand the following example.

It is a starry night in mid-summer. The moon is coloring the world in warm hues, and you look at each other. You have anticipated this moment for a while. And all of a sudden your beloved looks in your eyes and says "I love you." You just gaze back, trying to let it sink in. Knowing that the declaration has been made is glorious. Now your beloved continues, "I love you because of the moonbeams, the scent in the summer air, the mist in the water and the fireflies darting about. This is why I love you."

If you were that person standing there, listening to this, what would you be thinking? Most likely, you would be thinking, "How does that have anything to do with me? If those are the things that are making you love me, than anyone could be standing here and you could love anyone." And you would be right to think that!

But, if your beloved continued his declaration as, "I love you because you are you, your beauty, your charm, your positive outlook and caring nature, the joy you bring to my life, and the way you understand me." Now, you would be thinking, "This person is truly declaring their love to me, how shall I respond?" And obviously if you love them too, you declare it right back.

What is the difference between the two? The first example, love is declared due to outside circumstances. Things that can change and have no relation to the beloved. In the second example the lover loves the beloved for who they are as a person, not because the moon is shining. But because they have experienced the other as a true good (1). Karol Wojtyla in "Love and Responsibility" says that 'the human person is a good toward which the only proper response is love.'

Back to the definition of love. If you experience the beloved as truly unique, one whom you love, what would you desire to give them? You would want them to have every good thing, right? You would want their happiness, and not only would you wish this for them, but even strive to attain it, right? Now enter the candles and teddy bears; the bestowal of gifts and surprises, to show that you think of that person when you are not together and that you want them to know how much you care. So, this definition not only allows for the sentimental expressions of love, but also a deepening of affection into a lifelong commitment to strive to love the other, no matter the cost.

Up next, love & sacrifice.

Footnotes:
(1) Aristotle distinguished between intrinsic and extrinsic goods. Intrinsic goods are those valued for themselves alone such as health and happiness. Extrinsic or instrumental goods are desirable for the sake of something else, such as money or tools.

The Gimme-Now Culture

It is just so apparently clear to me after reading several news feeds over the past few days of how obsessed we are as a culture with instant gratification. Now I know this is not a new concept {at least maybe not to most of my readers}. But it goes way beyond the faster, newer, cooler techno-gadgets and gizmos. It is how generations are being "wired". Whatever happened to saving to buy what you want? Now it’s plastic to the rescue. Or waiting until marriage? No need, that's an "archaic" rule-based-system. Or wait your turn. Why should I, I am more important then that woman behind me. Or, the good will conquer in the end {add the old saying; good things come to those who wait}. Well, who said anything about evil or good? That's some kind of moral-mumbo-jumbo. Everyone knows that it’s all relative.

But how is it that one day, not so long ago, morality was not relative, people believed in good and evil and a being greater than themselves. But who is right, our forefathers or us? Are we more "enlightened" then they were?

So many of the modern "philosophers" would say yes. We have been loosed from the shackles of rigidity and objective truth. We are now free. Free from what, or to do what? The answer follows: "Whatever you want. Just be a good person." To which the response would be, "Whatever I want? Oh, my goodness... that is fabulous! No restrictions. I am going to go and do just that. But you mentioned that I should be good. I thought you said there is no such thing. What does that mean?" "Well, you know, just don't kill anyone." "But isn't that a restriction, I thought you said we were free?" "We are." "Then I'm confused."

Might I posit, at the risk of sounding slightly-looney to the contemporary culture, that our forefathers actually had it right? There is objective truth, good and evil and no matter how much one may like to deny it, a Supreme Being who is the reason we {and this whole world} are even here.

Stay tuned for the coming posts... as I will try to illumine some of the major defects in the new millennial "thinking".