imposing gay agenda married love 
CHAPTER TWO: THE PERSON AND LOVE
I. GENERAL ANALYSIS OF LOVE
6. Married Love (5)
general analysis of love has an especially metaphysical nature, but in any when we referred to the psychological and ethical aspects. These different aspects of love interpenetrate in such a way that is impossible to examine one without mentioning any other. So far we have sought to highlight what is of the essence of all love and what, in a specific way, finds its expression in the love between man and woman. In the individual subject, the love is formed through the attraction, lust and benevolence. With all finds its fulfillment not in a single subject, but in a realción between individuals, between individuals. Hence the problem of friendship that we have to analyze speaking of sympathy and reciprocity with respect to friendship. Step the "I" to "we" is to love no less essential than getting out of his own self, which is expressed by the appeal, in the love of lust and benevolence. The love-and especially the concern here, is not just a trend, but much more so a meeting, a union of persons. It is clear that this meeting and the union are made on the basis of attraction, love of lust and growing benevolence in individual subjects. The individual aspect does not disappear in the inter-personal aspect, on the contrary, it is conditioned by it. Where is that love is always a certain inter-personal synthesis of taste, desire and goodwill.
Married love differs from all other aspects and forms of love that we analyzed. Consists in the gift of the person. Its essence is the gift of himself, his own self. There is something in it, while more than the attraction, lust and even the benevolence. All modes of leaving himself to go to another person, putting the good looks of it, do not go so far as love marriage. "Visitors" is more than "will the good" even in cases where, because of this desire, another "I" becomes somewhat my own, as in friendship. Both from the point view individual subject and the union created by inter-personal love, 's love marriage is at once something difrerente and more than all other forms of love. gives rise to the mutual gift of the people.
this problem requires deeper. A question is put away, was whether a person can give to another, and we have found that every person is, by its very nature, inalienable, alters incommunicabilis . It is, therefore, not only in control of herself ( sui juris), but you can not even alienate or give. The nature of the person is opposed to the gift of himself. Indeed, in the order of nature, can not speak of the gift from one person to another, especially in the physical sense of the word. What is personal in us is above any form of gift, be it in any way whatsoever, and over an appropriation in the physical sense. The person may not, as if it were one thing, being owned by another. Therefore also excluded the power to treat the person as an object of pleasure, as we have seen. But that no wife or pursuant to the rule, in the order of nature and physical sense, can take place in the order of love and moral sense. Here, one that a person can be another man or God, and thanks to the gift of a particular form of love is created, which we call love marriage. This shows the particular dynamics of the person and the laws governing its own existence and development. Christ has said in this sentence, which may seem paradoxical: "He who has found life will lose it, and who has lost his life because of Me will find it" (Mt 10, 39).
There is indeed a profound paradox in the love marriage, only verbal paradox, but intrinsically real, the words of the gospel express a particular reality and contain a truth that is manifested in human life. He (Hete) here that because of its nature, everyone is incommunicable, inalienable. In the order of nature, is oriented towards the improvement of itself, tends to the fullness of his being that is always an "I" concrete. We have already found that such training was done through love, parallel to it. However, the most complete love is expressed precisely in the gift of himself, in fact give a total property that "I" inalienable and incommunicable. L a double paradox here is going in two directions: first, that can leave their own "self" and, secondly, that such leave is not destroy or detract from it, but instead enrich it, obviously in the metaphysical sense, moral. The gospel clearly points: "who have lost ... find", "who have found ... lost" . So here would not only personalistic norm itself, but also very specific guidelines and very risky, that extend the standard in several respects. The world people have their own laws of existence and development.
The gift of himself, as a form of love springs from the depths of the person with a clear vision of the values \u200b\u200band the availability of the will to indulge in just this way. couple's love can in no case be fragmentary or incidental within the inner life of the individual. Is a direct crystallization of the self whole human, which, thanks to this love, is determined to have and of itself. In the gift of himself, are, therefore, surprising evidence of possession of himself. Demonstrations this love appear to be very different. Not to mention the selfless dedication of a mother to her son, did not find anything this gift of himself, his "I" in the attitude of the doctor about the patient, for example, the teacher who selflessly devotes the formation of his pupil, or the priest who, with similar dedication, there is the soul that you trust? Militants or apostles are given to people because they do not know personally and they serve to serve the society. It is not easy to distinguish the extent involved in these cases the love of dedication, because in all these cases may simply act benevolently honest and sincere friendship with the other. For example, to follow the vocation selflessly doctor, teacher or priest, enough to want the good of those for whom we agree. But even if our attitude that takes the character of the gift of himself and thus confirms, in love, there can be no basis to define as love marriage.
The concept of spousal love indicates the gift of one person to another. For this we use this term in some cases, even when it comes to define the relationship between man and God (return to this in Chapter IV). Much more so is justified to speak of the purpose of marriage to love marriage. The love of man and woman in marriage leads to reciprocal gift of self. From the point of view, is a gift of self made to another person, from the standpoint of inter-personal is a mutual gift. There has to be compared (and, therefore, not be confused) the gift of self, that we are dealing here with the "gift" in purely psychological, and even less with the "abandonment" in the sense purely physical. Moreover, it is only women, or at least mostly women, which is experiencing its share of the marriage as an "abandonment", the man sees it differently, so that psychologically, he said there is some correlation between "abandonment" and "possession." But the psychological point of view here is not unique. Indeed, extending this analysis to the final objective, ontological, therefore, the conjugal act, we see that in this relationship must necessarily intervene gift from the man himself, felt differently than women but no less real. Otherwise, the man is in danger of treating women as objects, ie as an object of pleasure. If, then, marriage has to respond to the demands of the personalistic norm, it is necessary to perform on him the gift of self, mutual marital love.
According to the principle of reciprocity, two gifts for each other, the man and the woman are in it, which, psychologically, they have a different form, but are ontologically real, "up" along the gift mutual self. This gives rise to a special duty to man, to accompany his "conquest" and "possession" of the woman with an attitude that is equally permissible to give himself.
It is therefore clear that, in marriage, the gift of self can have no significance only sexual. Not being, as it is not justified by the gift of the person fatally lead to these forms of utilitarianism that we tried to analyze in the first chapter. It must stress this, because there is a more or less marked to understand the "gift of self" in a purely sexual, psychological or sexual. However, an interpretation PersonalSite is indispensable here. Thus morality in which the commandment to love playing the leading role very well be reconciled with the fact reduce marriage to the love of spouses, or exactamante-to adopt the standpoint of education-related materials make it the marriage of this kind of love. Hence are also other consequences that are discussed in Chapter IV (first part) to justify monogamy. The gift of self, as made by the woman to man in marriage, rule-morally speaking, that he or she can give the same time and in the same way to others. The sexual element plays a particular role in the formation of the love of spouses. Sex make this love-even limited to one partner, acquire a specific intensity. Only in this way is limited and may extend into the more new people who are the natural fruit of conjugal love of man and woman.
The notion of marital love is important in determining the rules of any sexual morals. In the objective order, is certainly among the sex and the person an entirely particular relationship, which in the order of consciousness, the feeling of the right answers to the ownership of your "self." (Discuss this problem in Chapter III, "Metaphysics of shame"). Therefore, it is not being a sexual abandon that had no significance of a gift of the person and not to come, one way or another, into the orbit of the demands we are entitled to put in the love of spouses. These requirements are derived from the personalistic norm. husband's love, but differs essence of all other forms of love previously discussed, can not form except in relation to them. It is especially imperative that is closely linked to the kindness and friendship. Deprived of such a relationship, love can fall into a very dangerous vacuum, and the people involved would be so helpless in the internal and external events, recklessly, they would have come in them and between them.
(5) The meaning of this term is explained later, especialemnte on pages 248 ff.
SOURCE: Book Love and Responsibility. Study of sexual morality. By: Cardinal Karol Wojtyla (John Paul II). Pp: 101-107. Second edition in Castilian. Edit. Reason and faith, SA Madrid, 1978. (First Polish edition: 1960, Second Edition: 1962)
This is a newsletter created to promote faith-based ideas and Tradition of the Catholic Church, Pope John Paul II. You have been asked or someone you know has suggested a possible interest. If so, we hope it will contribute in its formation and faith, otherwise, you can send an email to consentidoblog@blogspot.com to terminate your address. If you require further information on these topics may apply to blog www.consentidoblog.blogspot.com
