Truth is Truth

The sun still rises in the east. Blue is still blue. Two plus two are still four. And the conjugal union of a man and woman is still the only relationship that is capable as constituting marriage.

Truth does not change.

The question is -- Do you stand for truth? Or do you bend to legal fictions? Will you marvel at the emperor's pretend clothes?

Having a Spousal Relationship with Christ

In the post below on St. Thérèse and marriage and family, we show that Blessed Pope John Paul II, in his theology of the body, which was discussed in a series of Wednesday Audiences, as well as various encyclicals, apostolic letters, and homilies, advanced the remarkable insight of "marriage as primordial sacrament." That is, in the outward visible sign of human marriage between man and woman, we see the primary model for the Triune God's plan for humanity.

The spousal meaning revealed in the human body by God, and the spousal imagery used in His divine pedagogy throughout Salvation History as recorded in scripture, shows that we are called, not to a mere generic kind of love of God, but most especially to have a spousal kind of love for Him, a complete gift of self in a dynamic loving communion of persons in one Body. The name Jesus (Joshua or Yeshua in Hebrew) means "God saves." Jesus is our Savior, but redemption and salvation are not the only reasons for God becoming man. The Lord is also Emmanuel, God with us. It seems that He because man also because He loves us and wanted to join us to Him more fully for its own sake. We are all called to this spousal-type of relationship with the Lord. Each of us is called to be a "bride" of the Bridegroom.

We are all called, each and every one of us?? I can understand how a woman might see herself as called to be a bride of Christ, I can even understand how a cloistered virgin nun, such as St. Thérèse, might see herself as being a bride, but men too? Isn't that confusing things a bit too much, isn't this a bit like the secular world out there which denies any sexual differences in favor of an androgynous society, not to mention sounding a bit like "same-sex marriage"? Isn't this taking the spousal analogy a bridge too far?

Yes, it cannot be denied that the secular world, with its dictatorship of relativism, has been quite successful in taking the truth of the human person and twisting and distorting that truth for various ideological purposes. So we must readily recognize that understanding the spousal analogy is now a bit more challenging. But included in this concept of "bride" are men as well, not just women. Perhaps we can get beyond our discomfort if we focus first on just exactly what a spousal love, or a spousal-type of love if you prefer, entails -- a full and complete gift of self, a fullness and purity of love that is so full and so pure that two are able to become one, that we are able to become one in and with God Himself.

Apostolic Letter Mulieris Dignitatem (1998)
Blessed Pope John Paul II

23. In [the Letter to the Ephesians,] the author expresses the truth about the Church as the bride of Christ, and also indicates how this truth is rooted in the biblical reality of the creation of the human being as male and female. Created in the image and likeness of God as a "unity of the two", both have been called to a spousal love. . . .

Since the human being - man and woman - has been created in God's image and likeness, God can speak about himself through the lips of the Prophet using language which is essentially human. In the text of Isaiah quoted above [Is 54:4-8, 10], the expression of God's love is "human", but the love itself is divine. Since it is God's love, its spousal character is properly divine, even though it is expressed by the analogy of a man's love for a woman. . . .

25. In the Letter to the Ephesians we encounter a second dimension of the [spousal] analogy which, taken as a whole, serves to reveal the "great mystery". This is a symbolic dimension. If God's love for the human person, for the Chosen People of Israel, is presented by the Prophets as the love of the bridegroom for the bride, such an analogy expresses the "spousal" quality and the divine and non-human character of God's love: "For your Maker is your husband ... the God of the whole earth he is called" (Is 54:5). The same can also be said of the spousal love of Christ the Redeemer: "For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son" (Jn 3:16). It is a matter, therefore, of God's love expressed by means of the Redemption accomplished by Christ. According to Saint Paul's Letter, this love is "like" the spousal love of human spouses, but naturally it is not "the same". For the analogy implies a likeness, while at the same time leaving ample room for non-likeness. . . .

Christ has entered this history and remains in it as the Bridegroom who "has given himself". "To give" means "to become a sincere gift" in the most complete and radical way: "Greater love has no man than this" (Jn 15:13). According to this conception, all human beings - both women and men - are called through the Church, to be the "Bride" of Christ, the Redeemer of the world. In this way "being the bride", and thus the "feminine" element, becomes a symbol of all that is "human," according to the words of Paul: "There is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Gal 3:28).

From a linguistic viewpoint we can say that the analogy of spousal love found in the Letter to the Ephesians links what is "masculine" to what is "feminine", since, as members of the Church, men too are included in the concept of "Bride". . . . In the sphere of what is "human" - of what is humanly personal - "masculinity" and "femininity" are distinct, yet at the same time they complete and explain each other. This is also present in the great analogy of the "Bride" in the Letter to the Ephesians. In the Church every human being - male and female - is the "Bride", in that he or she accepts the gift of the love of Christ the Redeemer, and seeks to respond to it with the gift of his or her own person.

Christ is the Bridegroom. This expresses the truth about the love of God who "first loved us" (cf. 1 Jn 4:19) and who, with the gift generated by this spousal love for man, has exceeded all human expectations: "He loved them to the end" (Jn 13:1). . . . At the same time Christ emphasized the originality which distinguishes women from men, all the richness lavished upon women in the mystery of creation. Christ's attitude towards women serves as a model of what the Letter to the Ephesians expresses with the concept of "bridegroom". Precisely because Christ's divine love is the love of a Bridegroom, it is the model and pattern of all human love, men's love in particular. . . .

27. In the context of the "great mystery" of Christ and of the Church, all are called to respond - as a bride - with the gift of their lives to the inexpressible gift of the love of Christ, who alone, as the Redeemer of the world, is the Church's Bridegroom.

For a man to be a "bride" is not meant to emasculate him or to detract from his manhood, but to see that manhood in the proper light of placing himself in the position of servant. Far from holding themselves to be superior to women, men are called to raise themselves up to the dignity and "genius" of woman in their thoughts and actions of love (and, conversely, women are likewise called to recognize and live up to their own inherent dignity and genius as intended by God). Men, in addition to women, are called to give themselves to Christ "as a bride," not only in order to become one with the Bridegroom, but because it is from the "bride" that new life is born. Men too are called to become like the Blessed Virgin Mary, allowing themselves to become "pregnant" with Jesus in the "wombs" of their hearts so that they take Him with them in all their encounters with others. Filled with His Spirit, men too must help produce for Him new children of God through the Church's mission of witness and evangelization.

If you still do not like the term "spousal," if Blessed John Paul's explanation above isn't satisfactory, since he notes that it is a term of analogy and imagery, perhaps you would prefer to speak of having a Trinitarian-type of love, that we love Him as He Himself loves? God is Love and God is Truth. He is, by His nature, a relationship in loving communion of three persons in one divine being, the Father loves the Son and the Son loves the Father and this Love which proceeds from the Father and the Son is Himself the person of the Holy Spirit, a Trinity of three in one. And man -- male and female -- is made in the likeness and image of this divine Trinity. We are made to love as the Triune God loves within His being. This is what is meant by "spousal-type of love."

7. The fact that man "created as man and woman" is the image of God means not only that each of them individually is like God, as a rational and free being. It also means that man and woman, created as a "unity of the two" in their common humanity, are called to live in a communion of love, and in this way to mirror in the world the communion of love that is in God, through which the Three Persons love each other in the intimate mystery of the one divine life. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit, one God through the unity of the divinity, exist as persons through the inscrutable divine relationship. Only in this way can we understand the truth that God in himself is love (cf. 1 Jn 4:16). . . .

Being a person means striving towards self-realization (the Council text speaks of self-discovery [Gaudium et Spes 24]), which can only be achieved "through a sincere gift of self". The model for this interpretation of the person is God himself as Trinity, as a communion of Persons. To say that man is created in the image and likeness of God means that man is called to exist "for" others, to become a gift.

This applies to every human being, whether woman or man, who live it out in accordance with the special qualities proper to each. . . .

29. The passage from the Letter to the Ephesians already quoted (5:21-33), in which the relationship between Christ and the Church is presented as the link between the Bridegroom and the Bride, also makes reference to the institution of marriage as recorded in the Book of Genesis (cf. 2:24). This passage connects the truth about marriage as a primordial sacrament with the creation of man and woman in the image and likeness of God (cf. Gen 1:27; 5:1). The significant comparison in the Letter to the Ephesians gives perfect clarity to what is decisive for the dignity of women both in the eyes of God - the Creator and Redeemer - and in the eyes of human beings - men and women. In God's eternal plan, woman is the one in whom the order of love in the created world of persons takes first root. The order of love belongs to the intimate life of God himself, the life of the Trinity. In the intimate life of God, the Holy Spirit is the personal hypostasis of love. Through the Spirit, Uncreated Gift, love becomes a gift for created persons. Love, which is of God, communicates itself to creatures: "God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us" (Rom 5:5). (Mulieris Dignitatem)

Understood in this Trinitarian way, any objection to the idea of a man having a spousal love of God should disappear. It means that that purity of love that is the longing of a husband to be in the presence of his wife, it means the fullness of love that is a complete gift of self, even to the point of laying down his life. This is the pure fullness of love that a man should have for the Lord, a love that is so pure and so full that it is both unitive, it creates communion with Him, two become one, and it is dynamic and fruitful -- from the fullness of such love with the One who makes all things new, new life bursts forth.
______________________

See also, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the collaboration of men and women in the Church and in the world, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Prefect)

St. Thérèse and Our Relationship with the Lord

In the discussion following the first episode of Fr. Barron's Catholicism, where we noted that Christianity is primarily about establishing a relationship with Jesus Christ, and not merely adopting His ideas, we asked what type of relationship (or relationships) is that supposed to be? There are many types of relationships, many models to follow, but there is one in particular that we should consider, the one whereby we become one with the Lord, a fruitful loving communion of persons in one Body.

Today is the feast day of St. Thérèse of Lisieux, Thérèse of the Child Jesus and of the Holy Face. Last year, Cinema Catechism showed the film Miracle of St. Thérèse in connection with our exploration of the theme of Marriage and Family. This is a theme that is just as timely now, perhaps more so given that this is election season, with marriage and family continuing to be under assault.

Although she remained in the cloister, St. Thérèse is the patron saint of missionaries, so in the New Evangelization, it is right that we should look to her example in how to better understand and spread the Good News of Jesus Christ with respect to the truth of marriage and the human person.

Marriage and Family: St. Thérèse and the Vocation to Love
originally posted October 7, 2011

This season of Cinema Catechism, we are exploring the theme of Marriage and Family, and the film for October is Miracle of St. Thérèse.

St. Thérèse?? OK, I can see what Thérèse Martin has to do with the family part -- she came from a very devout and pious Catholic family, her parents are both beatified, her four surviving siblings all went on to become nuns. But Thérèse was a cloistered nun, what does she have to do with marriage?

Quite a lot actually. True, she did not enter into a earthly human marriage with a man, but she did have a spouse. She loved with a spousal love in a spousal relationship. And to understand that, we must first understand the idea of "marriage as primordial sacrament," in the words of Blessed Pope John Paul II.

A "sacrament" is an outward visible sign of a mystical nonvisible reality. And in the marriage of man and woman, we see the primary model for God's plan for humanity.

Indeed, there is a spousal meaning revealed in the human body, as shown both in natural observation of the human body and as explained in the opening chapters of Genesis. "Man," male and female, made in the image of the Trinity, is by "his" nature a social being, made for relationship. It is not good that man should be alone -- in solitude, he is missing an essential element, he is incomplete. Man is made for relationship; hence he (singular) is made both male and female (plural). Thus, it is not just any relationship man is made for, where they (plural) are male and female (plural), but he is specifically oriented toward a spousal relationship, a loving communion of persons become one that is fruitful, just as the Trinity is a loving communion of three persons in one divine being who is procreative. Again, in the human marriage of man and woman, we see the primary model for God's plan for humanity.

In scripture, in the story of Salvation History, we can plainly see God's relationship with humanity in general, and Israel in particular, described in spousal terms. The Annunciation to Mary has often been described as a kind of marriage proposal by God to her, with Mary saying "yes" on behalf of all mankind. The first miracle Jesus performed was at a wedding, and many of His parables involved marital imagery. Jesus is, of course, the Bridegroom, having taken as His virginal Bride, the Church. And in the eschatology of the Book of Revelation, life after the resurrection of the body is described in the spousal terms of the wedding banquet of the Lamb. So, marriage is clearly the model by which to understand God's plan for us.

There is a spousal meaning to the human body, every human body. Since we all have a human body, we are all made for a "spousal" relationship of some sort, we are made to love and be loved in that pure and complete fullness of love that is both unitive and procreative, that involves a communion of persons that bears many fruits. This might manifest itself in the human marriage of the flesh, the marriage of a male and female, especially in the Sacrament of Matrimony, resulting in physical children. But it also manifests itself in the spousal relationship that a priest has, in the manner of Jesus, with His Bride, the Church, whereby, in that virginal marriage, there is a loving communion of persons that is fruitful, that results in spiritual children. Likewise, this spousal relationship might manifest itself in a spiritual marriage with Jesus, as we see with Sister Thérèse and other consecrated women religious.

But what about the rest of us? Those who are still "single," who have yet to discern their vocation (marriage or religious life) or who have discerned that they are called to marriage, but, for some reason, it has not happened? Or what about those with a same-sex attraction?

Single people have a vocation too, but it is not a vocation to solitude. It is not good that man should be alone -- in solitude, he is missing an essential element, he is incomplete. Each of these single people also has a spousal meaning in his or her very body. They too are called to that vocation which is the primary vocation of all -- the vocation to love. They too are called to love and be loved in a relationship of pure and complete love, the fullness of love with the Lord that is communion with Him and is fruitful. So, if they cannot enter into a human marriage, for whatever reason -- if, for example, they have not found anyone who wants to marry them or because they are same-sex attracted -- they are still called to a relationship of spousal love. If they wish to be true to the person that are made to be, even if they do not pursue the consecrated religious life, they should still seek to love the Lord and His Bride as a spouse loves his or her beloved, fully and completely, in a dynamic and fruitful loving communion of persons.

The Story of a Soul
St. Thérèse of Lisieux

Chapter 8
It was the Nativity of Mary. What a beautiful feast on which to become the Spouse of Jesus! It was the little new-born Holy Virgin who presented her little Flower to the little Jesus. Everything was little on that day except for the graces I received and the joyful peace I felt as I gazed at the stars in the evening sky and thought that I should soon ascend to heaven and be united with my divine Spouse in eternal happiness.

On September 24, I took the veil. . . . Eight days after I took the veil, our cousin, Jeanne Guérin, married Doctor La Néele. Some time later, as we were talking in the parlour, she told me of all the care she lavished on her husband. Her words stirred me and I said to myself: “It’s not going to be said that a woman will do more for her husband, a mere mortal, than I will do for my beloved Jesus.” I was filled with fresh ardour and made greater efforts than ever to see that all I did was pleasing to the King of kings who had chosen me as His bride.

When I saw the letter announcing Jeanne’s marriage, I amused myself by composing an invitation which I read to the novices to make them realize what had struck me so forcibly: how trifling are the pleasures of an earthly union compared to the glory of being the bride of Jesus.

ALMIGHTY GOD
Creator of Heaven and Earth
Supreme Sovereign of the Universe
and
THE MOST GLORIOUS VIRGIN MARY
Queen of the Court of Heaven
Announce to you the Spiritual Marriage of their august Son
JESUS
KING OF KINGS and LORD OF LORDS
with
Little Thérèse Martin

now Princess and Lady of the Kingdoms of the Childhood of Jesus and His Passion, given to her as a dowry by her divine Spouse from which she holds her titles of nobility OF THE CHILD JESUS and OF THE HOLY FACE.

It was not possible to invite you to the wedding feast held on the Mountain of Carmel, September 8, 1890, as only the heavenly Court was admitted, but you are nevertheless invited to the At Home tomorrow, the Day of Eternity when Jesus, the Son of God, will come in the clouds of heaven to judge the living and the dead in the full splendor of His majesty.

The hour being uncertain, you are asked to hold yourself in readiness and to watch. . . .

__________________

Read the rest of the original post and more from The Story of a Soul here.

The Most Important Thing

Before it is a movie about sports, before it is about determination and an inspiring story about an underdog, it is a love story. Rocky is first and foremost a love story. Love -- love is the most important thing. And because it is, Rocky is actually a winner at the end. It is love which makes us a world champion.



They've known each other for a long time, both thought by others and themselves to be losers in life. And when they go on their first date, shortly before Thanksgiving and before Rocky has been offered a shot at the championship, it really is one of the more charming love scenes in film.



Love is life. But, eventually the life of the one we love will end. By the time of Rocky Balboa, Adrian has died, their son is struggling in his life, and Paulie is broken and lost.



Love is life. As we discussed below, love is not always easy -- life is not always easy. But it is necessary to go on, to not let yourself get beaten down. That "is how winning is done," in life and in love.

Let me tell you something you already know. The world ain't all sunshine and rainbows. It's a very mean and nasty place and I don't care how tough you are it will beat you to your knees and keep you there permanently if you let it. You, me, or nobody is gonna hit as hard as life. But it ain't about how hard ya hit. It's about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward. How much you can take and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done!

Now if you know what you're worth then go out and get what you're worth. But ya gotta be willing to take the hits, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you wanna be because of him, or her, or anybody! Cowards do that and that ain't you! You're better than that!

I'm always gonna love you no matter what. No matter what happens. You're my son and you're my blood. You're the best thing in my life. But until you start believing in yourself, ya ain't gonna have a life. Don't forget to visit your mother.

But when life, or love, seeks to beat us down, we do not have to fight the fight alone. We don't have to take the hits alone or try to move forward alone. As the very first scene in Rocky shows, which begins with a painting of Christ before panning down to a fight, we have Someone in our corner ready to help.

.

An Encyclical on Human Love

All this talk about marriage, but what about sex? Often in discussions about Church teachings on marriage and family, the issues of sex and contraception, etc., are more or less front and center, and practically nothing has been said here about them before now. Even when, in the discussions, the terms "unitive" and "fruitful" have been used below, there has been no talk of sex, only love -- but aren't those components primarily about sex?

Unfortunately, there is a great deal of confusion about the Church's teachings on human sexuality. Much of that confusion is caused by a hyper-sexualized culture that has been corrupted by a utilitarian mind-set, but some of that confusion is brought about by the manner of presentation of those teachings, especially with respect to Humanae Vitae, as well as Pope John Paul II's Theology of the Body.

Properly understood, the Church's teachings on human sexuality are not unique, stand-alone teachings -- there is no reinvention of the moral wheel when it comes to human sexuality. Rather, if we understand what love is, if we come to learn about and know what authentic love is, if we simply truly and fully love the other, then all the sexual issues will take care of themselves.

The Truth of the Encyclical Humanae Vitae
by Karol Cardinal Wojtyla, Archbishop of Krakow, Poland
as published in L'Osservatore Romano
Weekly Edition in English
16 January 1969, page 6

A correct and penetrating analysis of conjugal love presupposes an exact idea of marriage itself. Marriage is not "the product of unconscious natural forces" (H.v. 8), it is "the communion of beings" (H.v. 8) based on their reciprocal gift of self.

And for this reason, a correct judgment of responsible parenthood presupposes "an integral vision of man and of his vocation" (H.v. 7). To acquire such a judgment "the partial perspectives — whether of the biological, psychological, demographic or sociological orders" (H.v. 7) are not at all sufficient. None of these views can constitute a basis for an adequate and just answer to the questions [about regulating birth]. Every answer that comes from a partial view can only be a partial one.

In order to find an adequate answer, it is necessary to have a correct vision of man as a being, since marriage establishes a communion of beings which is born and brought about through their mutual gift of self. Conjugal love is characterized by the elements which result from such a communion of beings and which correspond to the personal dignity of the man and the woman, of the husband and the wife.

It is a matter of total love, or love which involves the whole man: his sensitivity, his affectivity, and his spirituality, which must be both faithful and exclusive. This love "is not exhausted in the communion between husband and wife but it is destined to continue raising up new lives" (H.v. 9); it is therefore fruitful love. This loving communion of a married couple, through which they constitute, according to the words of Genesis 2, 24, "a single body" is a kind of condition of fruitfulness, a condition of procreation. This communion being a particular type — since it is corporeal, it is in the strict sense "sexual" — of realization of the conjugal communion between beings, must be brought about at the level of the person and must befit his dignity. It is on this basis that one must form an exact judgment of responsible parenthood. . . .

Parenthood which comes from love between persons is "responsible parenthood." One could say that in the Encyclical "Humanae vitae" responsible parenthood becomes the proper name for human procreation.

This basically positive judgment of responsible parenthood, however, requires some further explanation. . . . According to the doctrine of the Church, responsible parenthood is not and cannot be only the effect of a certain "technique" of conjugal collaboration: in fact, it has primarily and "per se" an ethical value. . . .

Love is the communion of persons. If parenthood, and responsible parenthood, correspond to this love, then the way of acting which leads to such parenthood, cannot be morally indifferent. In fact, it decides whether the sexual activity of the communion of persons is or is not authentic love. "By safeguarding both these essential aspects, the unitive and the procreative, the conjugal act preserves in its fullness the sense of true mutual love..." (H.v. 12). . . .

The encyclical of Paul VI as a document of the supreme Magisterium of the Church presents the teaching of the human and Christian ethic in one of its key points. The truth of "Humanae vitae" is therefore primarily a normative truth. It reminds us of the principles of morality, which constitute the objective norm. This norm is even written in the human heart . . .

The responsibility of parenthood, to which the entire encyclical is principally dedicated, itself speaks of [the value of human life, that is, of that life already conceived and blossoming in the living together of the married couple].

The fact that, in the encyclical, this value of life already conceived or in its origin is not examined within the framework of procreation as the purpose of marriage, but rather within the vision of the love and the responsibility of the partners, places the value of human life itself in a new light.

Man and woman in their matrimonial life together, which is a living together of persons, must in and of itself create a new human person. The conceiving of a person by means of persons — this is the just measure of values which must be used here. This is, at the same time, the just measure of the responsibility which must guide human parenthood. . . .

The encyclical "Humanae vitae" contains not only clear and explicit norms for married life, conscious parenthood and a correct regulation of birth, but through these norms, it indicates the values. It confirms their correct meaning and warns us against false meanings. It expresses a profound solicitude to safeguard man from the danger of altering the most fundamental values.

One of the most fundamental values is that of human love. Love has its source in God who "is Love." Paul VI places this revealed truth at the beginning of his penetrating analysis of conjugal love because it expresses the highest value which must be recognized in human love. Human love is rich in the experiences of which it consists, but its essential richness consists in being a communion of persons, that is of a man and a woman, in their mutual self-giving. Conjugal love is enriched through the authentic giving of one person to another person. It is this mutual giving of self which must not be altered. If in marriage there is to be the realization of authentic love of persons through the giving of bodies, that is, through the "bodily union" of the man and the woman, then out of regard for the value of the love itself, this mutual gift of self cannot be altered in any aspect of the interpersonal conjugal act. . . .

In various fields, man dominates nature and subordinates it to himself through the use of artificial means. The sum total of these means in a certain sense is equivalent to progress and civilization. In this field, however, where love between one person and another is expressed through the marital act, and where the person must authentically give himself (and "give" also means "to receive" reciprocally) the use of artificial means is equivalent to an alteration of the act of love. . . .

This love is also expressed in continence — even in periodic continence - since love is capable of giving up the marital act, but it cannot give up the authentic gift of the person. Renouncing the marital act can be in certain circumstances an authentic gift of self. Paul VI writes in this regard: "...this discipline which is proper to the purity of married couples, far from harming conjugal love, rather confers on it a higher human value" (H.v. 21).

In expressing the thoughtful concern for the authentic value of human love, the encyclical "Humanae vitae" addresses man and calls upon his sense of dignity as a person. In fact, man and woman in marriage must realize this love, according to its authentic value. The capacity for such love and the capacity for the authentic giving of self demand from both partners the sense of personal dignity. The experience of sexual value must be permeated by a vivid awareness of the value of the person. . . .

The questions which agitate modern man "required from the teaching authority of the Church a new and deeper reflection upon the principles of the moral teaching on marriage: a teaching founded on the natural law, illuminated and enriched by divine Revelation." Revelation as the expression of the eternal thought of God permits us, and at the same time commands us, to consider marriage as an institution for transmitting human life, in which the marriage partners are "the free and responsible collaborators of God the creator" (H.v. 1).

Christ himself confirmed this perpetual dignity of married persons and He inserted the totality of married life into the work of the Redemption, and He included it in the sacramental order. By the sacrament of Marriage "husband and wife are strengthened and as it were consecrated for the faithful accomplishment of their proper duties, for the carrying out of their proper vocation even to perfection, and the Christian witness which is proper to them before the whole world" (H.v. 25). Since the doctrine of Christian morality was set forth in the encyclical, the doctrine of responsible parenthood understood as the just expression of conjugal love and of the dignity of the human person, constitutes an important component of the Christian witness. . . .

.

All You Need Is Love

Beauty in the Suffering Caused by Love

Pope Benedict has said often that there can be no love without suffering. If one loves, one must suffer, be it, for example, the suffering caused by loss of the other or by having to come out of the safety of our shells, vulnerable to infidelity or injury done by the one we love or by love not being returned. If we did not love, none of these things would matter, but because we do love, or at least seek to love, instead of the joy we want, we get pain.

In the end, even the “yes” to love is a source of suffering, because love always requires expropriations of my “I,” in which I allow myself to be pruned and wounded. Love simply cannot exist without this painful renunciation of myself, for otherwise it becomes pure selfishness and thereby ceases to be love. . . .

[Yet,] in all human suffering we are joined by One who experiences and carries that suffering with us; hence con-solatio is present in all suffering, the consolation of God's compassionate love — and so the star of hope rises. (Spe Salvi 38, 39)

To love is to suffer. But we are not alone in that suffering. Pope Benedict also says that there can be, paradoxically, a kind of beauty in the ugliness of that suffering, as Luciano Pavarotti demonstrates below. And because there can be beauty in the pain of love, there is again hope -- hope that it is not all pain, not all anguish, but that the suffering can be transcended and transformed.

In [marital] crises, in bearing the moment in which it seems that no more can be borne, new doors and a new beauty of love truly open. A beauty consisting of harmony alone is not true beauty. Something is missing, it becomes insufficient. True beauty also needs contrast. Darkness and light complement each other. Even a grape, in order to ripen, does not only need the sun but also the rain, not only the day but also the night. . . .

We must put up with and transcend this suffering. Only in this way is life enriched. I believe that the fact the Lord bears the stigmata for eternity has a symbolic value. As an expression of the atrocity of suffering and death, today the stigmata are seals of Christ's victory, of the full beauty of his victory and his love for us. We must accept, both as priests and as married persons, the need to put up with the crises of otherness, of the other, the crisis in which it seems that it is no longer possible to stay together.

Husbands and wives must learn to move ahead together, also for love of the children, and thus be newly acquainted with one another, love one another anew with a love far deeper and far truer. So it is that on a long journey, with its suffering, love truly matures. (Pope Benedict, Meeting with the priests of the Italian Diocese of Albano, August 31, 2006)

It is not only in "Per la gloria d'adorarvi" that Luciano Pavarotti makes the suffering born of love sound beautiful. There is also Pagliacci.

In this famous scene, Canio, who plays a clown in a traveling troupe of players, has just learned that his wife Nedda, whom he dearly loves, no longer loves him, if she ever did, but loves another instead. But despite his suffering, it is necessary to go on. The show goes on. The people want their laughs. Life goes on. Regardless of what has been said before about love, even with tears streaming down his face because his heart is tragically broken, even though his love is smashed on the rocks, life demands that he go and play the clown.



Recitar! Mentre preso dal delirio, non so più quel che dico, e quel che faccio!
Eppur è d'uopo, sforzati!
Bah! Sei tu forse un uom? Tu se' Pagliaccio!

(Act! While in delirium, I no longer know what I say, or what I do!
And yet it's necessary... make an effort!
Bah! Are you not a man? You are a clown!)

Vesti la giubba, e la faccia infarina.
La gente paga, e rider vuole qua.
E se Arlecchin t'invola Colombina,
ridi, Pagliaccio, e ognun applaudirà!
Tramuta in lazzi lo spasmo ed il pianto
in una smorfia il singhiozzo e 'l dolor, Ah!

(Put on your costume, powder your face.
The people pay to be here, and they want to laugh.
And if Harlequin shall steal your Columbina,
laugh, clown, so the crowd will cheer!
Turn your distress and tears into jest,
your pain and sobbing into a funny face – Ah!)

Ridi, Pagliaccio, sul tuo amore infranto!
Ridi del duol, che t'avvelena il cor!

(Laugh, clown, at your broken love!
Laugh at the grief that poisons your heart!)

Per la gloria d'adorarvi (For the glory of adoring you)

.

Per la gloria d'adorarvi, voglio amarvi, o luci care.
Per la gloria d'adorarvi, voglio amarvi, o luci care.
Amando penero, ma sempre v'amerro.
Si, si, nel mio penare.
Amando penero, ma sempre v'amerro.
Si, si, nel mio penare.
Penerò, v'amerò, luci care.
Penerò, v'amerò, luci care.

(For the glory of adoring you, I love you, Oh dear light.
For the glory of adoring you, I love you, Oh dear light.
Loving I will suffer, but always I will love you.
Yes, yes, in my suffering.
Loving I will suffer, but always I will love you.
Yes, yes, in my suffering.
Suffering, I love you, my dear light.
Suffering, I love you, my dear light.)

Senza speme di diletto, vano affetto, e` sospirare.
Senza speme di diletto, vano affetto, e` sospirare.
Ma i vostri dolci rai,
Chi vagheggiar può mai e non, e non v'amare?
Ma i vostri dolci rai,
Chi vagheggiar può mai e non, e non v'amare?
Penerò, v'amerò, luci care.
Penerò, v'amerò, luci care!

(Without hope of delight is to long for vain affection.
Without hope of delight is to long for vain affection.
But your sweet rays,
Who could ever contemplate and not, and not love you?
But your sweet rays,
Who could ever contemplate and not, and not love you?
Suffering, I love you, my dear light.
Suffering, I love you, my dear light.)

--Ernesto's aria in Griselda, by Giovanni Bononcini.

As demonstrated here by the voice of Luciano Pavarotti, even when love involves pain and suffering, there still can be beauty.
.

Letters on Love from Father Karol Wojtyla

In 1950, during his time as a university chaplain and priest at St. Florian's church, Father Karol Wojtyla established the first marriage preparation program in the history of the Archdiocese of Kraków, as well as one of the first in the world. Before then, most marriage "preparation" consisted of a meeting or two with a priest, and that mostly to discuss the ceremony itself. However, as George Weigel reports in Witness to Hope, Fr. Wojtyla "set out to create a pastoral program that systematically prepared young couples for Christian marriage and family life through religious reflection, theological education and a frank exploration of the practical and personal difficulties and opportunities of married life and child rearing." (p. 97)

In addition, a network of friendships formed around Fr. Wojtyla. He called this active social group of young people his Rodzinka (little family). Members called him "Wujek" (uncle), partly out of affection and partly because calling him "Father" in public might arouse the suspicions of the state secret police. Some of these young men and women fell in love and later married. Others simply sought the counsel of Fr. Wojtyla. One of these was Teresa Heydel, who exchanged letters with him on the question of love.

December 1956

Dear Teresa,
People like to think that Wujek would like to see everyone married. But I think this is a false picture. The most important problem is really something else. Everyone...lives, above all, for love. The ability to love authentically, not great intellectual capacity, constitutes the deepest part of a personality. It is no accident that the greatest commandment is to love. Authentic love leads us outside ourselves to affirming others: devoting oneself to the cause of man, to people, and, above all, to God. Marriage makes sense...if it gives one the opportunity for such love, if it evokes the ability and necessity of such loving, if it draws one out of the shell of individualism (various kinds) and egocentrism. It is not enough simply to want to accept such love. One must know how to give it, and it’s often not ready to be received. Many times it’s necessary to help it to be formed.
- Wujek

The following month, Fr. Wojtyla wrote another letter to her about the nature of love and the human person.

January 1957

Dear Teresa,
Before I leave for Warsaw, I have to tell you a few things (think together with you): (1) I don’t want you ever to think this way: that life forces me to move away from the perspective of something that is better, riper, fuller, to something that is less good, less mature, less attractive. I am convinced that life is a constant development toward that which is better, more perfect — if there is no stagnation within us. (2) After many experiences and a lot of thinking, I am convinced that the (objective) starting point of love is the realization that I am needed by another. The person who objectively needs me most is also, for me, objectively, the person I most need. This is a fragment of life’s deep logic, and also a fragment of trusting in the Creator and in Providence. (3) People’s values are different and they come in different configurations. The great achievement is always to see values that others don’t see and to affirm them. The even greater achievement is to bring out of people the values that would perish without us. In the same way, we bring our values out in ourselves. (4) This is what I wanted to write you. Don’t ever think that I want to cut short your way. I want your way.
- Wujek

These ideas of love as gift, part of Karol Wojtyla's "personalist" ethic (which emphasizes respecting and loving others as "persons," and not using them as if they were "things," as is the case in utilitarianism), can be seen in The Jeweler's Shop and in Love and Responsibility, as well as in his later papal teachings. As Weigel summarizes in Witness to Hope, "This 'Law of Gift' was built into the human condition, he argued philosophically. Responsible self-giving, not self-assertion, was the road to human fulfillment. Wojtyla posed it not only as an ethic for Christians, but as a universal moral deman arising from the dynamics of the human person, who is truly a person only in relationship. A genuinely human existence was always coexistence, a meeting with others wisely." (pp. 136-37)

The Unity of the Two Through the Gift of Self

In Act One of his play, The Jeweler's Shop, Blessed Karol Wojtyla tells the story of Andrew and Teresa, who had known each other for quite some time before they realized their love for each other. Andrew, in fact, had avoided her, even seeking to evade those thoughts of her that kept persisting in his mind. And when he proposed marriage, it was in a curious manner.

Teresa - Andrew has chosen me and asked for my hand. . . . We were just walking on the right side of the market square when Andrew turned around and said, "Do you want to be my life's companion?" That's what he said. He didn't say: do you want to be my wife, but: my life's companion. What he intended to say must have been thought over. He said it looking ahead . . . as if to signify that in front of us was a road whose end could not be seen. . . .

Andrew – I don't think I even know what "love at first sight" means. After a time, I realized that she had come into the focus of my attention, I mean, I had to be interested in her. . . . There must have been something in Teresa that suited my personality. . . . It was not an assent independent of an act of will. I simply resisted sensation and the appeal of the senses, for I knew that otherwise I would never really leave my "ego" and reach the other person - but that meant an effort, for my senses fed at every step on the charms of the women I met. . . . gradually, I learned to value beauty accessible to the mind, that is to say, truth. . . .
I had wanted to regard love as passion, as an emotion to surpass all – I had believed in the absolute of emotion. And that is why I could not grasp the basis of that strange persistence of Teresa in me, the cause of her presence, the assurance of her place in my “ego,” or what creates around her that strange resonance, that feeling “you ought to.” . . . love can be a collision in which two selves realize profoundly that they ought to belong to each other, even though they have no convenient moods and sensations. It is one of these processes in the universe which bring a synthesis, unite what was divided, broaden and enrich what was limited and narrow.

Teresa - If I was not quite unprepared for his proposal it was because I felt that somehow I was the right one for him, and that I supposed I could love him. Being aware of that, I must already have loved him. . . .

Andrew – The rings in the window appealed to us with a strange force. Now, they are just artifacts of precious metal, but it will be so only until that moment when I put one of them on Teresa’s finger, and she puts the other on mine. . . . The weddings rings did not stay in the window. The jeweler looked long into our eyes. Testing for the last time the fineness of precious metal, he spoke seriously, deep thoughts, which remained strangely in my memory.

The Jeweler – The weight of these golden rings is not the weight of metal, but the proper weight of man, each of you separately and both together. Ah, man’s own weight, the proper weight of man! Can it be at once heavier, and yet more intangible? It is the weight of constant gravity, riveted to a short flight. The flight has the shape of a spiral, an ellipse – and the shape of the heart.
Ah, the proper weight of man! This rift, this tangle, this ultimate depth – this clinging, when it is so hard to unstick heart and thought. And in all this – freedom, a freedom, and sometimes frenzy, the frenzy of freedom trapped in this tangle. And in all this – love, which springs from freedom, as water springs from an oblique rift in the earth. This is man! He is not transparent, not monumental, not simple, in fact he is poor. This is one man – and what about two people, four, a hundred, a million – multiply all this (multiply the greatness by the weakness), and you will have the product of humanity, the product of human life. . . .

Chorus – New people – Teresa and Andrew – two until now, but still not one, one from now on, though still two. . . . Ah, how man thirsts for feelings, how people thirst for intimacy. Teresa and Andrew. . . . Love – love pulsating in brows, in man becomes thought and will: the will of Teresa being Andrew, the will of Andrew being Teresa. . . .
How can it be done, Teresa, for you to stay in Andrew forever? How can it be done, Andrew, for you to stay in Teresa forever? Since man will not endure in man and man will not suffice.
Body – thought passes through it, is not satisfied in the body – and love passes through it. . . .

Andrew – And the jeweler, as I have already mentioned, looked at us in a peculiar way. His gaze was at once gentle and penetrating. I had a feeling he was watching us while he was selecting and weighing the rings. He then put them on our fingers to try them. I had the feeling that he was seeking our hearts with his eyes and delving into our past. Does he encompass the future too? The expression of his eyes combined warmth with determination. The future for us remains an unknown quantity, which we now accept without anxiety. Love has overcome anxiety. The future depends on love.

Teresa - The future depends on love.

Andrew – At one point, my eyes once more met the gaze of the old jeweler. I felt just then that His gaze was not only sounding our hearts, but also trying to impart something to us. We found ourselves not only on the level of His gaze, but also on the level of His life. Our whole existence stood before Him. His eyes were flashing signals which we were not able to receive fully just then, as once we had been unable to receive fully the signals in the mountains – and yet, they reached to our inner hearts. And somehow we went in their direction, and they covered the fabric of our whole lives. . . .

[Act Three - many years later, Christopher, the son of Andrew and Teresa, considers his own love for Monica, the daughter of Anna and Stefan]

Christopher – You have compelled me, Monica, to grasp my existence as an untold completeness, enhanced and delineated because you have drawn near. . . . We have to accept the fact that love weaves itself into our fate. . . . If I could take your freezing hands, warm them with my hands – a unity will emerge, a vision of new existence, which will embrace us both. . . .
Love is a constant challenge, thrown to us by God, thrown, I think, so that we should challenge fate. . . .
I cannot go beyond you. One does not love a person for his “easy character.” Why does one love at all? What do I love you for, Monica? Don’t ask me to answer. I couldn’t say. Love outdistances its object, or approaches it so closely that it is almost lost from view. Man must then think differently, must leave behind cold deliberations – and in that “hot thinking,” one question is important: Is it creative?
But even that he cannot tell, since he is so close to his object. When the wave of emotion subsides, what remains will be important.

_______________

Excerpts from The Jeweler's Shop (1960), translated by Boleslaw Taborksi (1980)

"There must have been something in Teresa that suited my personality. . . . It was not an assent independent of an act of will." Love is a choice. Even if the initial attraction to another is based on "something" in the other, something we perhaps cannot immediately put our finger on, as with Christopher, still the feeling of emotion stemming from such intangible attraction is not itself love. "When the wave of emotion subsides, what remains will be important." We must not confuse that initial rush and thrill that we might for being love, such emotions come and go, as happened with Anna and Stefan. Rather, properly understood, the occasion presents the choice to proceed further, to give our assent to love or not. It is an act of the will to make a gift of love or not give.

Such a gift of self in love necessarily requires a coming out of self, a letting go of ego, to allow the other to be part of you, and you a part of the other, "the will of Teresa being Andrew, the will of Andrew being Teresa." Such love is not something that "just happens," and the gift of self cannot be compelled. Love is choice. Love is an act of freedom - "a freedom, and sometimes frenzy, the frenzy of freedom trapped in [a] tangle. And in all this – love, which springs from freedom, as water springs from an oblique rift in the earth."

Love is Demanding: Finding Oneself by Giving Oneself

Letter to Families
Blessed Pope John Paul II
November 22, 1981

The unity of the two

8. The Second Vatican Council, in speaking of the likeness of God, uses extremely significant terms. It refers not only to the divine image and likeness which every human being as such already possesses, but also and primarily to "a certain similarity between the union of the divine persons and the union of God's children in truth and love."

This rich and meaningful formulation first of all confirms what is central to the identity of every man and every woman. This identity consists in the capacity to live in truth and love; even more, it consists in the need of truth and love as an essential dimension of the life of the person. Man's need for truth and love opens him both to God and to creatures: it opens him to other people, to life "in communion," and in particular to marriage and to the family. In the words of the Council, the "communion" of persons is drawn in a certain sense from the mystery of the Trinitarian "We," and therefore "conjugal communion" also refers to this mystery. The family, which originates in the love of man and woman, ultimately derives from the mystery of God. This conforms to the innermost being of man and woman, to their innate and authentic dignity as persons.

In marriage, man and woman are so firmly united as to become — to use the words of the Book of Genesis — "one flesh" (Gen 2:24). Male and female in their physical constitution, the two human subjects, even though physically different, share equally in the capacity to live "in truth and love." This capacity, characteristic of the human being as a person, has at the same time both a spiritual and a bodily dimension. It is also through the body that man and woman are predisposed to form a "communion of persons" in marriage. . . .

The sincere gift of self

11. After affirming that man is the only creature on earth which God willed for itself, the Council immediately goes on to say that he cannot "fully find himself except through a sincere gift of self." This might appear to be a contradiction, but in fact it is not. Instead it is the magnificent paradox of human existence: an existence called to serve the truth in love. Love causes man to find fulfillment through the sincere gift of self. To love means to give and to receive something which can be neither bought nor sold, but only given freely and mutually.

By its very nature, the gift of the person must be lasting and irrevocable. The indissolubility of marriage flows in the first place from the very essence of that gift: the gift of one person to another person. This reciprocal giving of self reveals the spousal nature of love. In their marital consent the bride and groom call each other by name: "I... take you... as my wife (as my husband) and I promise to be true to you... for all the days of my life." A gift such as this involves an obligation much more serious and profound than anything which might be "purchased" in any way and at any price. Kneeling before the Father, from whom all fatherhood and motherhood come, the future parents come to realize that they have been "redeemed." They have been purchased at great cost, by the price of the most sincere gift of all, the blood of Christ of which they partake through the Sacrament. . . .

It is the Gospel truth concerning the gift of self, without which the person cannot "fully find himself," which makes possible an appreciation of how profoundly this "sincere gift" is rooted in the gift of God, Creator and Redeemer, and in the "grace of the Holy Spirit" which the celebrant during the Rite of Marriage prays will be "poured out" on the spouses. Without such an "outpouring," it would be very difficult to understand all this and to carry it out as man's vocation. Yet how many people understand this intuitively! Many men and women make this truth their own, coming to discern that only in this truth do they encounter "the Truth and the Life" (Jn 14:6). Without this truth, the life of the spouses and of the family will not succeed in attaining a fully human meaning. . . .

Love is demanding

14. Love is true when it creates the good of persons and of communities; it creates that good and gives it to others. Only the one who is able to be demanding with himself in the name of love can also demand love from others. Love is demanding. It makes demands in all human situations; it is even more demanding in the case of those who are open to the Gospel. Is this not what Christ proclaims in "His" commandment? Nowadays people need to rediscover this demanding love, for it is the truly firm foundation of the family, a foundation able to "endure all things." According to the Apostle, love is not able to "endure all things" if it yields to "jealousies," or if it is "boastful... arrogant or rude." True love, St. Paul teaches, is different: "Love believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things" (1 Cor 13:5-7). This is the very love which "endures all things." At work within it is the power and strength of God Himself, who "is love." (1 Jn 4:8, 16) At work within it is also the power and strength of Christ, the Redeemer of man and Savior of the world. . . .

The hymn to love in the First Letter to the Corinthians remains the Magna Charta of the civilization of love. In this concept, what is important is not so much individual actions (whether selfish or altruistic), so much as the radical acceptance of the understanding of man as a person who "finds himself" by making a sincere gift of self. A gift is, obviously, "for others": this is the most important dimension of the civilization of love.

We thus come to the very heart of the Gospel truth about freedom. The person realizes himself by the exercise of freedom in truth. Freedom cannot be understood as a license to do absolutely anything: it means a gift of self. Even more: it means an interior discipline of the gift. The idea of gift contains not only the free initiative of the subject, but also the aspect of duty. All this is made real in the "communion of persons." We find ourselves again at the very heart of each family. . . .

As we know, at the foundation of ethical utilitarianism there is the continual quest for "maximum" happiness. But this is a "utilitarian happiness," seen only as pleasure, as immediate gratification for the exclusive benefit of the individual, apart from or opposed to the objective demands of the true good.

The program of utilitarianism, based on an individualistic understanding of freedom — a freedom without responsibilities — is the opposite of love, even as an expression of human civilization considered as a whole. When this concept of freedom is embraced by society, and quickly allies itself with varied forms of human weakness, it soon proves a systematic and permanent threat to the family. In this regard, one could mention many dire consequences, which can be statistically verified, even though a great number of them are hidden in the hearts of men and women like painful, fresh wounds.

"The Bridegroom is coming. This is his precise hour."

In Act Two of his play, The Jeweler's Shop, Blessed Karol Wojtyla tells the story of Anna, whose marriage to Stefan began with promise, but has turned to the bitterness of disappointment and disillusionment. They have become like strangers in the same house, and she believes that their love is dead. But the mysterious jeweler will not take her wedding ring when she tries to sell it -- her husband still being alive, her ring alone does not weigh anything when he places it on his scales, which "weigh not the metal, but man’s entire being and fate." Ashamed, but still desperate for love, she leaves the jeweler's shop and meets a "chance interlocutor" who speaks to her of the Bridegroom who is coming.

In the parable of the Bridegroom and the Ten Virgins, which is the Gospel reading at Mass for this Sunday (Mt 25:1-13), we usually think of its lesson of constant readiness, but Pope John Paul uses it to add a couple of insights to our understanding of love.

Adam – I told Anna, “The Bridegroom will come shortly.” I said this thinking of the love which had so died in her soul. The Bridegroom passes through so many streets, meeting so many different people. Passing, he touches the love that is in them. It if is bad, he suffers for it. Love is bad when there is a lack of it. . . .

Anna – Isn’t what one feels most strongly the truth? . . . Is not love a matter of the senses and of a climate which unites and makes two people walk in the sphere of their feeling?
Adam, however, did not fully agree with this. Love is, according to him, a synthesis of two people’s existence which converges, as it were, at a certain point, and makes them into one. And then again he repeated that the Bridegroom would walk down this street shortly. This news, heard for the second time, not only fascinated me, but suddenly awoke a longing in me. A longing for someone perfect, for a man firm and good, who would be different from Stefan -- different, different . . . And with the feeling of this sudden longing, I must have started running, looking closely at the men I passed.

[Anna begins to encounter various men passing by.]

Adam – This is just what compels me to think about human love. There is no other matter embedded more strongly in the surface of human life, and there is no matter more unknown and more mysterious. The divergence between what lies on the surface and the mystery of love constitutes precisely the source of the drama. It is one of the greatest dramas of human existence. The surface of love has its current – swift, flickering, changeable. A kaleidoscope of waves and situations full of attraction. This current is sometimes so stunning that it carries people away – women and men. They get carried away by the thought that they have absorbed the whole secret of love, but in fact, they have not yet even touched it. They are happy for a while, thinking that they have reached the limits of existence and wrested all its secrets from it, so that nothing remains. That’s how it is: on the other side of that rapture, nothing remains, there is nothing left behind it. But there can’t be nothing, there can’t! Listen to me, there can’t. Man is a continuum, a totality and a continuity – so it cannot be that nothing remains! . . .

Anna – [meets a second passerby] I was almost ready to cling to his arm . . . I longed so much for a man’s arm and a walk along the avenue of wilting chestnut trees. He went on to say, “How about stepping into that club?” . . . “And then?” I asked. He did not reply, and I seemed to take fright at that “then.” He must have had a wife . . . Suddenly, I realized what the expression “a casual woman” could mean. . . . I kept walking, however, still thinking about the same thing, coming forward, as it were, toward every passing man. . . .
Now I’m on the edge of the pavement. On the curb.... There’s a car; an expensive one. The window is partly lowered, a man at the wheel. I stopped.

Adam – Love is not an adventure. It has the taste of the whole man. It has his weight. And the weight of his whole fate. It cannot be a single moment. Man’s eternity passes through it. That is why it is to be found in the dimensions of God, because only He is eternity. . . .

Anna – I stopped and fixed my eyes on the car, the windows, the man. . . . The man looked. I approached. He had a low, warm voice when he said, “Won’t you join me?” He indicated the seat next to him. In a while, he will start the engine. We shall move off. We’ll drive into the unknown. . . . I shall be somebody again. . .
I want to, I think I want to very much. I think I had already put my hand on the door handle. I only had to press it. Suddenly I felt a man’s hand on mine. I looked up. Adam was standing above me. I saw his face, which was tired; it betrayed emotion. Adam looked me straight in the eyes. His hand was just lying on mine. Then he said, “No.” I felt the car moving past us. In a moment, it was gone. “It’s strange that you should come back; I thought you’d disappeared for good.”

Adam – I came back to show you the street. It is strange. Not because it is full of shops, neon lights and buildings, but because of the people. Look, on the other side of the street there are some girls passing by; they are walking, laughing and talking loudly among themselves. . . . Their lamps are out, so they are on their way to buy some oil. They will fill the lamps, and the lamps will burn again. . . .
They are the wise virgins.... And now look over there. Those are the foolish virgins. They are asleep and their lamps are lying by the wall. One has even rolled across the pavement and fallen into the gutter. To you it seems they are asleep in those recesses, but in reality, they too are walking down the street. They are walking in their sleep. They are walking in a lethargy – they have a dormant space in them.
You now feel that space in you, because you too were falling asleep. I have come to wake you. I think I am in time.

Anna – Why did you wake me? Why?

Adam – I’ve wakened you because the Bridegroom is to walk down this street. The wise virgins want to come forward and meet him with their lights; the foolish virgins have fallen asleep and lost their lamps. I promise you they will not wake in time, and even if they do, they will not be able to find and light their lamps. . . .
The Bridegroom is constantly waiting. He constantly lives in expectation. Only this is, as it were, on the far side of all those different loves without which man cannot live. Take you, for instance. You cannot live without love. I saw from a distance how you walked down this street and tried to rouse interest. I could almost hear your soul. You were calling with despair for a love you do not have. You were looking for someone who would take you by the hand and hug you.
Oh, Anna, how am I to prove to you that on the other side of all those loves which fill our lives, there is Love! The Bridegroom is coming down this street and walks every street! How am I to prove to you that you are the bride? One would now have to pierce a layer of your soul, as one pierces the layer of brushwood and soil when looking for a source of water in the green of a wood. You would then hear him speak: “Beloved, you do not know how deeply you are mine, how much you belong to my love and my suffering” – because to love means to give life through death; to love means to let gush a spring of water of life into the depths of the soul, which burns or smolders, and cannot burn out. Ah, the flame and the spring. You don’t feel the spring, but are consumed by the flame. Is that not so?

Anna – I don’t know. I only know that you have been talking to my soul. Don’t be afraid! It goes with my body. How can it be embraced or possessed without my body? I am a foolish virgin. I am one of the foolish virgins. Why did you wake me? …
There they are again, those girls. Their faces are not even attentive. Are they really pure and noble, or is it just that they have fared better in life than I? …

Adam – The Bridegroom is coming. This is his precise hour. Oh, look – the wise virgins have just gone by, holding their freshly lighted lamps. Their light is bright, because they have cleaned the glass in the lanterns. They walk gaily, almost dancing as they walk. . . .

Anna – I went on looking. A man was walking, dressed in a light coat, he was not wearing a hat. I did not notice his face at first, because he walked lost in thought, his head lowered. On impulse I began to walk in his direction. But when he lifted his face, I nearly gave a shout! It seemed to me I clearly saw Stefan’s face. And I immediately withdrew ... I have seen the face I hate, and the face I ought to love. Why do you expose me to such a test?

Adam – In the Bridegroom’s face, each of us finds a similarity to the faces of those with whom love has entangled us on this side of life, of existence. They are all in him.

[Act Three - several years later, during which Anna had begun the process of healing her marriage]

Adam – That evening I saw Anna again. The memory of her encounter with the Bridegroom was still vivid to her. Anna had entered the road of complementary love. She had to complement, giving and taking in different proportions than before. The turning point occurred that night many years ago. At that time everything threatened destruction. A new love could begin only through a meeting with the Bridegroom. What Anna felt of it at first was only the suffering. In the course of time a gradual calm came. And something new that was growing, was still intangible, and, above all, did not “taste” of love. One day they may learn to relish the taste of that something new . . .
_______________

Excerpts from The Jeweler's Shop (1960), translated by Boleslaw Taborksi (1980)

In our exegesis of scripture, we know the Bridegroom to be Christ, and His Bride is the Church. In many parables, we are the guests at the wedding banquet or the virgins awaiting the Bridegroom's arrival. But although the Bride is the Church and we appear to be bystanders, who is the Church?

We the faithful make up the Church. We are the Bride. You are the Bride. "Oh, Anna, how am I to prove to you that on the other side of all those loves which fill our lives, there is Love! The Bridegroom is coming down this street and walks every street! How am I to prove to you that you are the bride?" Each of us is the Bride that Jesus loves with such a fierce deep passion, if only we would realize it and accept it. “Beloved, you do not know how deeply you are mine, how much you belong to my love."

However, to be the Bride, one with Christ, means also to be one with His Passion. “Beloved, you do not know how deeply you are mine, how much you belong to . . . my suffering.” The spousal love of Jesus for us, and that we ought have for Him, passes through the Cross. But in that encounter of love comes not the death of love, but new life for our relationships of love with others. "A new love could begin only through a meeting with the Bridegroom."

At first, it may appear that there is only the suffering. But in the course of time, a transformation occurs, something new grows. At first, it may seem intangible and not have the “taste” of love that we are accustomed to. But in Him, in the Bridegroom, we can learn to relish the taste of that something new, the eternity and absolute of love.
.

"I Have a Love"

Maria loves, even after learning that her beloved has killed her brother.

The Nature, Origin, and Cause of Love

What is "love" and where does it come from?

Ultimately, love comes from God, who is Love, as do all things come from Him. But more immediately for the individual person, the question of "where" is illuminated by the question of "what."

What is love? In its purest and truest and fullest, love is a gift, a gift of self, and it is something which is given unconditionally, without concern for whether the other "deserves" it, or what we may or may not receive in return, although it is a joy when it is reciprocated.

In recognizing that it is something selflessly given, not merely something experienced, we can also see that the immediate cause of love in us is our decision to give it. It is not something that overcomes us or is imposed upon us, or something that "just happens." That is, in the individual sense, love comes from our free choice of the will. And in choosing to love, in choosing to give of oneself, we ultimately are choosing to accept God, who is, after all, Love itself. Conversely, not loving is not something that "just happens," not loving is also a choice.

However, love in its fullest sense is not all about such agape love of noble self-sacrifice, which many might see as joyless duty, it is also about the brotherly, fraternal, friendship kind of love that is philia, as well as being about the love of purified eros, the thirsting kind of love that naturally seeks an “other,” a joyous, passionate, ascending, intimate kind of love, longing to be with the other.

And, as we have discussed in previous weeks and months, marriage is the "primordial sacrament," there is a spousal meaning in the human body, so we are all called to a spousal-type of love that is both unitive and creative, as exemplified by husband and wife, God and Israel, Jesus the Bridegroom and His Virgin Bride, the Church, a loving communion of persons in one fruitful being, as in the image of the Trinity. The fullness of love is, by its nature, dynamic and fertile, it bears fruit, and it is this is fullness of love, in a complete gift of self, that we are all called to give. This is why, among other reasons, the use of contraception is wrong; by its very nature, contraception involves a partial withholding of self, by the barrier it imposes between man and woman, contraception is inherently inconsistent with the truth that we are made for the fullness of love in a complete gift of self that is unitive and fruitful.

Still, in all of these aspects of love, even in the attractive love of eros, there is an element of free choice. There is only one “love,” notwithstanding its multiple aspects and dimensions. And this is true whether it is love of a sweetheart or love of an enemy.

“Fundamentally, ‘love’ is a single reality, but with different dimensions; at different times, one or other dimension may emerge more clearly.” – Deus Caritas Est

If love were merely a positive feeling, then how could we love our enemy, whom we do not even like?

“Love is not merely a sentiment. Sentiments come and go. A sentiment can be a marvelous first spark, but it is not the fullness of love.” – Deus Caritas Est

The greatest gifts that God gave us in addition to our existence are reason, free will, and the capacity to love. We were created by God out of love, we were made through the Logos by an act of creative reason, and for love. Our purpose, the reason that we are here, is to love and be loved. Does it make sense that, in that area for which we are created, love, God would deprive us of those other gifts of reason and free choice of the will?

Love is not love if it is not freely given. Love is not love if it is not the fruit of a conscious decision. It may be suggested that love is a feeling, an emotion, an attraction, a desire for the other, a sense of fulfillment. And certainly these things often do accompany love, but they are not love in and of itself. Feelings come and go. Sentiments come and go. Attraction comes and goes. And yet love -- if it truly is love -- remains. Indeed, this is seen when Jesus tells us that we must love not only those close to us, but our neighbors, that is, total strangers we don’t even know, and even our enemies, people we don’t even like.

True love is not merely pleasure or sentiment. Love is more than just an emotional feeling, more than attraction and affection, and more than a desire for personal happiness or fulfillment. Love is a conscious, decisive choice of the other as the focus of affection, a commitment of the will to subordinate yourself, and to seek the good and welfare of the other, including the gift of yourself for the other’s benefit. In short, in all its aspects, love is a free choice.

And such a love is secure because it does not depend upon and is not contingent upon the other person -- it only depends on you.

“The ‘commandment’ of love is only possible because it is more than a requirement. Love can be ‘commanded’ because it has first been given [by God]. Some people object and say that love cannot be commanded, that it is ultimately a feeling which is either there or not, nor can it be produced by the will. However, God has loved us first and he continues to do so; we too, then, can respond with love. God does not demand of us a feeling which we ourselves are incapable of producing. In God and with God, I love even the person whom I do not like or even know. This can only take place on the basis of an intimate encounter with God, an encounter which has become a communion of will, even affecting my feelings.” – Deus Caritas Est

So, how do you love – truly love? You make a conscious decision, an act of the will, that you will love no matter what, freely and unconditionally. If the other has hurt you or disappointed you or even rejected and abandoned you, the end of love is not an automatic thing -- you have a decision to make, a choice: Do I stop loving them? "No, I don't want to stop loving, I will not stop loving." No one can make you stop loving except you. Love is a gift of self, accepting the person who is loved as they really are, without the merits of whether or not they “deserve” to be loved. And if you feel that you do not have that power within you, ask for a little help, which we call grace, from God.

The paradox of love. It is by having such a complete loving disposition toward gift of self that we are able to obtain a level of contentment and happiness that is permanent. It is another one of those curious paradoxes -- by sacrificing yourself, even your personal happiness and security, you gain an even greater happiness and security; by letting go of your self-centered ego, you find yourself; by emptying yourself, you become fulfilled. Agape and eros in one.

Such love is not all drudgery and duty, but leads to joy, real heart-soaring joy and contentment and fulfillment. The more that you are disposed to love, the better you are able to love and find love in male-female and other interpersonal relationships. The more you are disposed to love, the more you will be able to see the good qualities in others. These others become more physically attractive, more intelligent, more humorous, more enjoyable. However, the more you are turned inward, seeking to satisfy yourself, complaining that there are no good men or women out there, the more trouble you will have finding them. A perfect Christian, embracing love perfectly, should be able to be united to anyone and be attracted to them, and desire them, and want to be with them, because they have love, and they see in the other the image of Christ.

Such a loving disposition is also something which approaches the divine. Let us consider the love of God -- God is perfect; He is Truth itself. Therefore, the highest and most perfect and truest love is God’s love. And what kind of “love” is that? Deus caritas est. God is caritas; God’s love is love as caritas, charitable gift.

We must love as God loves. God does not love us because we are so incredibly attractive and pretty or because we are sexy or funny or smart or because we have money and power and fame or because we are so likeable - most of us are none of these things. And yet, He loves us even in the absence of these things; He loves us unconditionally for ourselves, as we are. He loves, He gives - fully and completely, to the extent of giving His life, even though we do not deserve it. He gives us His love because He seeks the good for us, because we need love. Love is life.

Indeed, if we were to honestly and justly consider the matter, we must concede that none of us "deserve" such love. After all, mankind has given God little more than rejection and infidelity throughout history. And yet, He continues to love us, fully, completely, and unconditionally. He refuses to stop loving us, even when we torture Him and murder Him. He continues to give.

But it is through the Cross that one attains the Resurrection. It is by and through the Lord's gift of self, first by becoming man, and then on the Cross, that "all things are made new." Love is by its very nature dynamic and fertile, it is life itself, and it is this fullness of love that has the power to transform dull and social lifelessness to a new life of authentic happiness, true ecstasy, and even bring new life into a love that which was once dead. But we, like He, must first choose to make that gift of self.

We must love as God loves. If we would have others love us, if we would seek to enjoy the joyous fruits of love for ourselves, we must love perfectly and truly as He loves. We must choose not to be selfishly focused on our own wants and desires by eating from the Tree of Knowledge, but must instead freely choose to eat from the Tree of Love.

___________________

See also the comment section below in What is this thing called “love”?
.

What is this thing called “love”?

We say it all the time. We think it all the time. And yet, we spend our entire lifetimes trying to figure out what it is. And some of us never figure out what love is. Some of us are clueless as to what love really is, and we spend our lifetimes looking and looking for it, in constant misery and unhappiness. And so, some questions --

What is Love?

1. What is this thing called “love”?
2. What do we mean when we say “I love you,” or when we ask “Do you love me?”
3. Are there different kinds of love, or is there only one love which is exhibited/experienced in different ways or varying degrees?
4. Is the concept of love objective, or is it different for each person? Does the definition of love change depending upon the situation?
5. Is the religious and Biblical concept of love different, separate, and/or distinct from the “romantic” concept of love?
6. Is being “in love” different from love generally? Is there a difference between being “in love” and being “in” love?
7. Is being “in love” different from being “in like” with someone?
8. What is love? Oh, let us count the possibilities. Is love --

-- a thought? an emotion or feeling? an attitude?
-- a psychological condition? a left-over remnant from infancy, when mommy and daddy protected you and provided for you?
-- an obsession? a form of insanity?
-- an electro-chemical reaction in the brain? raging hormones? some other purely physical or biological condition?
-- instinct or a genetic condition? or a result of socialization?
-- fate or destiny?
-- a myth, a construct or abstraction that was invented to facilitate sex and the formation of associations to provide security for one another?
-- a myth, a lie that we can use to get what we want from the other?
-- a liking of the other? an affection or sentiment for the other person?
-- an attraction to the other? physical attraction? intellectual attraction?
-- a want or desire to possess or consume the other?
-- a want or desire for companionship, to be with or in the presence of the other?
-- a want or desire for physical, spiritual, and/or sexual closeness and intimacy with the other? a passion or craving or hunger or longing for the other?
-- a bond between persons? a unification of persons? a want or desire to integrate, interpenetrate, and become one with the other?
-- an enjoyment of the other? a want or desire to utilize the other to make us happy?
-- romance and dreaminess? a feeling of pleasure or ecstasy or thrill?
-- something that is profound and intense? something that leaves you breathless and weak in the knees
-- a feeling of security or contentment? something that makes you happy or satisfied?
-- something that leaves you warm and fuzzy? something that leaves you miserable and depressed?
-- an act of reason? a rational decision? a conscious choice or act of the will?
-- a concern or care for the other, without regard to what they can or cannot provide us?
-- a desire or will for the good of the other? for the happiness of the other?
-- something that we take from the other?
-- a right that we may properly demand from the other?
-- an inter-personal, two-way, reciprocal relationship? or something that may be given or experienced whether or not it is given to us in return?
-- a gift of self? a commitment to the other? a sacrifice for the other? a subordination of self for the good and sake of the other?
-- a gift to the other without regard to whether the other deserves it or not?
-- a compassion and respect for the other as he or she really is, flaws and all?
-- an affirmation of the value of the other as a person, rather than a thing or means to our own satisfaction?
-- a duty or obligation?
-- eros, philia, agape, and/or amore?

9. Is love something that is primarily centered on or concerned with the self, or with the other person?
10. Does love involve our bodies only, or our souls as well? Does love involve only a portion of our bodies or the totality?
11. Is love something that we experience physically, spiritually, or both?
12. Is love purely corporeal, temporal, and worldly, or is it transcendent as well?
13. Is there any relationship between love and friendship? Is the love of another greater than being their friend? Is love deeper than friendship?
14. Are there things that we would accept in a loved one that we would not accept in a friend? Are there things that we would accept in friend that we would not accept in a loved one?
15. Is love a moral good? If it is a good, should a love relationship with another always be pursued?
16. Can you love someone even though you do not like them? Can love co-exist with hate? with anger?
17. Does love mean “never having to say that you are sorry”?

What is the source or cause of love?

18. Why do we love? How does love (or being “in love”) happen? What causes love? What is the source of love? Where does it come from?
19. Is the cause or source of love something that is external to us, or is it internal?
20. Is love something that is necessarily temporary, or is permanent love possible?
21. What does it mean to “fall in love”? Is love really something that we “fall” into? And is it something that we fall out of?
22. Is love ready-made? Is it something that just happens or just doesn’t happen?
23. Is love something beyond our control? Is love the result of an uncontrollable force of attraction or affinity?
24. Is love thrust upon us, like Cupid’s arrow? Are we compelled to love without regard for our reason or free will, or even against our will?
25. Does loving someone depend entirely upon the other person? Do we love them because they “make us happy”?
26. Which comes first – attraction and happiness, or love? Does happiness and/or attraction cause or otherwise lead to love, or does love lead to happiness and attraction?
27. What is the source of happiness? of attraction? of desire?
28. Is it still love if it is painful or annoying? if we are disappointed or unhappy?
29. Do we love because the other person fulfills us and completes us?
30. Do we love the other person because of some attribute of that person – because they are physically attractive or smart or funny or honest or a good provider or someone that shares our values?
31. How well do you have to know someone before you can sincerely say “I love you”? Is “love at first sight” possible?
32. Is there only “one, true love” for us, a soul mate, a Mr. or Miss Right? Should we have to “settle” for anything less than the best?
33. Is it possible to love an unsavory person? an ugly person? a boring person?
34. Is perfect love between two persons possible? Do two persons have the power and ability in themselves to create this perfect love, or is some outside assistance needed?
35. What is the cause of the loss of love? Is the cause of the loss of love something external to us; is it something beyond our control?
36. Do we stop loving the other person because of some attribute of that person? Do we stop loving them because they no longer “make us happy”?
37. Can we “make” the other person love us? If the other person does not love us or stops loving us, is that because there is something wrong with us? Will they love us again if only we change?
38. Is love possible in an arranged marriage? If so, how?
39. Is love possible in other involuntary relationships, such as parent-child and brother-sister? If so, how?

The Ultimate Question About Love

40. What is the most perfect and truest love? the Love that will provide the answers to all of the previous questions?

_____________

See also above, 70 possible answers to the question of love.

.

Loving Human Love

Crossing the Threshold of Hope
Pope John Paul II (1994)

It is [the] vocation to love that naturally allows us to draw close to the young. As a priest, I realized this very early. I felt almost an inner call in this direction. It is necessary to prepare young people for marriage, it is necessary to teach them love. Love is not something that is learned, and yet there is nothing else as important to learn! As a young priest, I learned to love human love. This has been one of the fundamental themes of my priesthood – my ministry in the pulpit, in the confessional, and also in my writing. If one loves human love, there naturally arises the need to commit oneself completely to the service of “fair love,” because love is fair, it is beautiful.

After all, young people are always searching for the beauty in love. They want their love to be beautiful. If they give in to weakness, following models of behavior that can rightly be considered a “scandal in the contemporary world” (and these are, unfortunately, widely diffused models), in the depths of their hearts they still desire a beautiful and pure love. This is true of boys as it is of girls. Ultimately, they know that only God can give them this love. As a result, they are willing to follow Christ, without caring about the sacrifices this may entail.

Love's Creativity

John Paul II on Love & Responsibility
Love & Responsibility Foundation
Summer 2002 Edition
www.catholicculture.com

“Man must reconcile himself to his natural greatness,” declares Pope John Paul II in his book, Love and Responsibility , written while the future Pope was still known as [Bishop] Karol Wojtyla.

John Paul II is a great man, but even more, he is a believer in our own greatness as human beings. Only the human being can love, and only the person is able to bring into this world another person capable of yet more love. It is this capacity of man to love — and to bring love into the world — that gives us our “natural” splendor.

“As a young priest I learned to love human love,” the Holy Father tells us. “This has been one of the fundamental themes of my priesthood — my ministry in the pulpit, in the confessional, and also in my writing.”

This publication, John Paul II on Love & Responsibility, pulls together excerpts from the Pope’s many writings on love — drawing from his works of philosophy, his literary endeavors as playwright, his statements as Pope, and two private letters he wrote to a young woman.

The Pope was popular with young people during his years of service as a university chaplain, and the book Love and Responsibility was born of his work with these young people who wanted to learn from him “how to live.”

The Holy Father argues in Love and Responsibility that if love is to be beautiful, if it is to be whole and complete, it must be “fully integrated,” meaning it must incorporate in correct order of priority all the elements of a true love.

“People generally believe that love can be reduced largely to a question of the genuineness of feelings,” but “love in the full sense of the word is a virtue, not just an emotion, and still less a mere excitement of the senses.” . . .

Here is where the importance of the “integration of love” becomes clear. A love that is merely an “excitement of the senses,” that does not unite two persons in a true interpersonal union, is a love that “squanders” this “natural energy.” True, enduring love remains elusive.

Thus, couples, “while cultivating as intensively as they can” the passions that draw them close, must “endeavor to achieve objectivity” for “only if it is objectively good for two persons to be together can they belong to each other.”

Love’s Objective Dimension

How can we know if a love is objectively good? For the character Christopher in the Holy Father’s play, The Jeweler’s Shop, only “one question is important: Is it creative?”

Here we arrive at the true “grandeur” of love: We each have the capacity to create, to give birth — to give new life to others — both physically, in the form of children, and spiritually, in a legacy of inspired friends and neighbors.

When we each confront ourselves with the question — Why am I alive? — we should know the answer. We have been born so that we may give birth to others — in all that we do. Our physical birth is a metaphor for the spiritual birth we are called upon — continually — to give to others.

“I am also many times unborn”

Our mission of giving spiritual rebirth to others — being “spiritual parents” to those we come across in our lives — is a beautiful vocation, and we must know it, for who among us cannot say, along with the child Monica in Radiation of Fatherhood, “though born once, I am also many times unborn and want to be born many times.”

Or, as the playwright Pope has Monica, looking up to her father, more poetically say:

I am putting my feet in the water. What a soothing coolness, what freshness, what rebirth! Life enters anew into all my cells. Ah, as I am being born anew from this forest stream, I ask: Be water for me! I ask: Be water for me!

We are born to “be water” for others. . . .

It is the irrevocable gift of self, whether made to a spouse or directly to God Himself, that is the decisive act of our lives. Through this gift, “the lover ‘goes outside’ the self to find a fuller existence in another.”

“Take away from love the fullness of self surrender, the completeness of personal commitment, and what remains will be a total denial and negation of it.”

___________________

Read the rest of this informative summary of Love and Responsibility here (.pdf format).