Love's Legacy

Recently I was reading Saint Thomas Aquinas' Summa Theologiae when I came across this article: "Should a man love his wife more than his father and mother?" (For the modern reader, let's just pretend that he asked "Should anyone love their spouse more than their parents?" The inclusive wording does not change the question substantially, at least not for Thomas.) Now, immediately, I was startled that one should even consider such a possibility. How can one choose between parents and spouse? Ought one to love them differently, or does 'unconditional' summarize all true love? Click the following to read Thomas' treatment of the topic:

Summa II-II, q.26, a.11

As Thomas often does, he affirms what is in line with the best authority, but he then proceeds to qualify his own peculiar position. In this case, he responds that one should love one's parents more than one's spouse, objectively speaking (i.e., with a view to the object of love). However, considered subjectively (i.e., with a view to the subject loving), love for one's spouse is greater than that for parents. So, he effectively posits two scales for measuring love: one measures vertically the degree of reverence, the other registers horizontally the intensity of union between two equals.

Now, this is the part where I explain why anyone should care about Thomas' argument. At this point in my life, such musings are more than merely theoretical abstractions. Allow me to set the scene before I attempt to make Thomas relevant.

I live over five thousand miles away from my family. In a few days, I will be reuniting with them for the holidays. During the two months I will be home, my wife will give birth to our first child. Packing and preparing for such a trip has set all sense of order aside. And yet, I often pause and consider that the next time I'm sitting in this chair, maybe my daughter will be here with her magical giggles and harrowing screams. So, amidst the hustle and bustle, I find myself quietly contemplating the mystery of love. What exactly is the mystery?

Well, when a man meets a woman, and they really love each other...

As I see it, the mystery of love is identical with the mystery of the Trinity, and this is what Thomas has helped me to understand. The Trinity is mysterious in that three Persons exist in perfect unity of nature. Such an idea may seem preposterous to some, but I think lovers can perhaps accept such a proposition more readily. Something about fierce love provokes the lover to transcend herself, to exceed her own limits. Ecstasy is precisely the condition of true love. This being the case, an infinite God, of unsurpassed power to love, can quite reasonably be believed to actually transcend Himself, so much that He is Father and Son, united by the ever-gratuitous self-giving of the Spirit.

There are two key moments in this notion of love: First, an activity that transcends oneself, giving one's whole person to another with unrestrained and uncontainable effect. Second, in this reciprocal action, a unity of excess pours forth, such that the totality of love is not a mere exchange that leaves all accounts balanced. Instead, in its most perfect form, the unity of love always produces a surplus. And, since this surplus is shared by all, everyone gains from this ever-increasing economy of grace.

Having such a concept of God's love, the creation and order of the world become a reasonable consequent. We were created by and for love, because love is exactly that, being from nothing. And so, if humans are modeled after God in some way, it is fitting that the love between a man and woman, and by the unity of their flesh, another human should come into existence. This unity of marriage is, very literally speaking, a love that cannot limit itself to a closed pair; to the contrary, this is the basis for growth into a community. A love that produces newness and life overflows from the abundance its source.

Here we come back to Thomas, for he helps to define the two moments of love that are necessary for community to flourish. First, there must be an intense unity so that all members of the community are intimately connected and equal sharers of the benefits of membership. Yet, since this unity exceeds itself, the community is not static. Instead, it is outwardly open, expanding nonviolently by welcoming strangers, especially those newly born to members of the community. Thus, second, a hiercharchy is necessary so that neophytes are fully initiated into membership. For, since the love in such a community is dynamic, it changes those who receive it, enabling them to transcend themselves and achive a supernatural end. In order for this initiation to succed, new members must honor their elders as the only source of their life in the community. Likewise, elders must care for their charges by living the truth and teaching what is good.

As I see things now, this is the crux of true community, especially in its manifestation as a family. If Thomas is right (and he almost always is), children owe their parents loving reverence because a father and mother have always already given the child more than can be ever repaid; viz., life itself. Nevertheless, with this honor comes a natural corollary. Parents can never (morally) cease giving themselves to their children. By honoring, a child is well disposed to receive of her parents. But a parent must not hoard reverence greedily. Rather, the hierarchy of family is perfected in a love that strives to equalize, shaping the children after the best the parents can offer.

In this way, perfect love is its own legacy. It is always given, always improving, uniting past and future through those who learn to revere their betters and teach their lessers. To be honest, as a child I have often refused to honor those who deserved it. Now I must fill the role of a parent...I hope that my daughter will forgive me when I fall short of her love, failing to give myself entirely to her.