Love

Passages

Every passage tagged with this emotion in the Vela corpus. Search the body text, narrow by source or register, click through to a book’s profile to see how the passage sits with the rest of the work.

Page 178 of 184 · 20 per page

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  Whether out of charity God ought to be loved for Himself?Objection 1: It would seem that God is loved out of charity, not for Himself but for the sake of something else. For Gregory says in a homily (In Evang. xi): “The soul learns from the things it knows, to love those it knows not,” where by things unknown he means the intelligible and the Divine, and by things known he indicates the objects of the senses. Therefore God is to be loved for the sake of something else. Objection 2: Further, love follows knowledge. But God is known through something else, according to Rom. 1:20: “The invisible things of God are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made.” Therefore He is also loved on account of something else and not for Himself. Objection 3: Further, “hope begets charity” as a gloss says on Mat. 1:1, and “fear leads to charity,” according to Augustine in his commentary on the First Canonical Epistle of John (In prim. canon. Joan. Tract. ix). Now hope looks forward to obtain something from God, while fear shuns something which can be inflicted by God. Therefore it seems that God is to be loved on account of some good we hope for, or some evil to be feared. Therefore He is not to be loved for Himself. On the contrary, According to Augustine (De Doctr. Christ. i), to enjoy is to cleave to something for its own sake. Now “God is to be enjoyed” as he says in the same book. Therefore God is to be loved for Himself.

• From In Search of Paul: How Jesus's Apostle Opposed Rome's Empire with God's Kingdom (2005)

  I will pray with the spirit, but I will pray with the mind also; I will sing praise with the spirit, but I will sing praise with the mind also…. I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you; nevertheless, in church I would rather speak five words with my mind, in order to instruct others also, than ten thousand words in a tongue. (14:15–19) Again and again, Paul reverts to his basic principle: “Let all things be done for building up” (14:26). Finally, therefore, if there is glossolalia, there should also be interpretation, there should be somebody who can say what it means. Despite all those problems with that gift, however, Paul never says to stop it. Interpretation yes, order yes, peace yes, but “do not forbid speaking in tongues” (14:39). Still, the only hierarchy that Paul accepts is the primacy of those who best build up the community, and that can only be done by those who love, that is, those who share fully and completely what they have received as not their own to have, to use, or to boast about. All of that is, quite simply, Paul’s egalitarian vision in action of a Christian kenotic community that empties itself in love and service for others. But, as some at Corinth assured him, that is not how the wise and strong of this world operate, not outside Christianity and not inside it either. That is not, they could have said, the normalcy of either civilization or religion, which always work by wisdom and strength overpowering foolishness and weakness. To which Paul’s only reply would have been: Yes, but “God’s foolishness is wiser than human wisdom, and God’s weakness is stronger than human strength” (1:25).

• From Love 2.0: Finding Happiness and Health in Moments of Connection (2013)

  Ordinary positive emotions don’t resonate like this at all. They are not mirrored back to you. Although the warmth of any positive emotion stretches your mind and spurs you to grow in ways that leave you more resourceful and resilient than before, only love creates such a deep interpersonal resonance. That’s because within micro-moments of love, your own positivity, your own warmth and openness, evoke—and is simultaneously evoked by—the warmth and openness emanating from the other person. This shared positivity gets further amplified by the synchronized changes in biochemistry that course through your bodies and the attention you each show the other—the smiles, the leaning in, your verbal and nonverbal expressions of care and concern for each other. These are powerful, energizing moments. Your body was designed to harness this power—to live off it. Your ability to understand and empathize with others depends mightily on having a steady diet of positivity resonance, as do your potentials for wisdom, spirituality, and health. Odds are, if you were raised in a Western culture, you think of emotions as largely private events. You locate them within a person’s boundaries, confined within their mind and skin. When conversing about emotions, your use of singular possessive adjectives betrays this point of view: You refer to “my anxiety,” “his anger,” or “her interest.” Following this logic, love would seem to belong to the person who feels it. Defining love as positivity resonance challenges this view. Love unfolds and reverberates between and among people—within interpersonal transactions—and thereby belongs to all parties involved, and to the metaphorical connective tissue that binds them together, albeit temporarily. The biology of love, as you’ll see in chapter 3, concurs. Love alters the unseen activity within your body and brain in ways that trigger parallel changes within another person’s body and brain. More than any other positive emotion, then, love belongs not to one person, but to pairs or groups of people. It resides within connections. It extends beyond personal boundaries to characterize the vibe that pulsates between and among people. It can even energize whole social networks or inspire a crowd to get up and dance.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  THAT HUMAN CHOICES AND VOLITIONS ARE SUBJECT TO DIVINE PROVIDENCETHE government of providence proceeds from the divine love where with God loves His creatures. Love consists chiefly in the lover wishing good to the loved one. The more God loves things, then, the more they fall under His providence. This Holy Writ teaches, saying: God guards all that love him (Ps. cxliv, 20); and the Philosopher also teaches that God has especial care of those who love understanding, and considers them His friends. Hence He loves especially subsistent intelligences, and their volitions and choices fall under His providence. 6. The inward good endowments of man, which depend on his will and choice, are more proper to man than external endowments, as the gaining of riches: hence it is according to the former that man is said to be good, not according to the latter. If then human choices and motions of the will do not fall under divine providence, but only external advantages, it will be more true to say that human affairs are beyond providence than that they are under providence. CHAPTER XCI HOW HUMAN THINGS ARE REDUCED TO HIGHER CAUSESFROM what has been shown above we are able to gather how human things are reducible to higher causes, and do not proceed by chance. For choices and motives of wills are arranged immediately by God: human intellectual knowledge is directed by God through the intermediate agency of angels: corporeal events, whether interior (to the human body) or exterior, that serve the need of man, are adjusted by God through the intermediate agency of angels and of the heavenly bodies. All this arrangement proceeds upon one general axiom, which is this: Everything manifold and mutable and liable to fail may be reduced to some principle uniform and immutable and unfailing.’ But everything about our selves proves to be manifold, variable, and defectible. Our choices are evidently manifold, since different things are chosen by different persons in different circumstances. They are likewise mutable, as well on account of the fickleness of our mind, which is not confirmed in its last end, as also on account of changes of circumstance and environment. That they are defectible, the sins of men clearly witness. On the other hand, the will of God is uniform, because in willing one thing He wills all other things: it is also immutable and indefectible (B. I, Chapp.XXIII,LXXV). Therefore all motions of volition and choice must be reduced to the divine will, and not to any other cause, because God alone is the cause of our volitions and elections.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  I answer that, The preposition “for” denotes a relation of causality. Now there are four kinds of cause, viz., final, formal, efficient, and material, to which a material disposition also is to be reduced, though it is not a cause simply but relatively. According to these four different causes one thing is said to be loved for another. In respect of the final cause, we love medicine, for instance, for health; in respect of the formal cause, we love a man for his virtue, because, to wit, by his virtue he is formally good and therefore lovable; in respect of the efficient cause, we love certain men because, for instance, they are the sons of such and such a father; and in respect of the disposition which is reducible to the genus of a material cause, we speak of loving something for that which disposed us to love it, e.g. we love a man for the favors received from him, although after we have begun to love our friend, we no longer love him for his favors, but for his virtue. Accordingly, as regards the first three ways, we love God, not for anything else, but for Himself. For He is not directed to anything else as to an end, but is Himself the last end of all things; nor does He require to receive any form in order to be good, for His very substance is His goodness, which is itself the exemplar of all other good things; nor again does goodness accrue to Him from aught else, but from Him to all other things. In the fourth way, however, He can be loved for something else, because we are disposed by certain things to advance in His love, for instance, by favors bestowed by Him, by the rewards we hope to receive from Him, or even by the punishments which we are minded to avoid through Him. Reply to Objection 1: From the things it knows the soul learns to love what it knows not, not as though the things it knows were the reason for its loving things it knows not, through being the formal, final, or efficient cause of this love, but because this knowledge disposes man to love the unknown. Reply to Objection 2: Knowledge of God is indeed acquired through other things, but after He is known, He is no longer known through them, but through Himself, according to Jn. 4:42: “We now believe, not for thy saying: for we ourselves have heard Him, and know that this is indeed the Saviour of the world.” Reply to Objection 3: Hope and fear lead to charity by way of a certain disposition, as was shown above ([2573]Q[17], A[8];[2574] Q[19], AA[4],7,10).

• From Love 2.0: Finding Happiness and Health in Moments of Connection (2013)

  Perhaps counterintuitively, love is far more ubiquitous than you ever thought possible for the simple fact that love is connection. It’s that poignant stretching of your heart that you feel when you gaze into a newborn’s eyes for the first time or share a farewell hug with a dear friend. It’s even the fondness and sense of shared purpose you might unexpectedly feel with a group of strangers who’ve come together to marvel at a hatching of sea turtles or cheer at a football game. The new take on love that I want to share with you is this: Love blossoms virtually anytime two or more people—even strangers—connect over a shared positive emotion, be it mild or strong. To put it in a nutshell, love is the momentary upwelling of three tightly interwoven events: first, a sharing of one or more positive emotions between you and another; second, a synchrony between your and the other person’s biochemistry and behaviors; and third, a reflected motive to invest in each other’s well-being that brings mutual care. My shorthand for this trio is positivity resonance. Within those moments of interpersonal connection that are characterized by this amplifying symphony—of shared positive emotions, biobehavioral synchrony, and mutual care—life-giving positivity resonates between and among people. This back-and-forth reverberation of positive energy sustains itself—and can even grow stronger—until the momentary connection wanes, which is of course inevitable, because that’s how emotions work. I’ve come up with a visual metaphor for positivity resonance that likens it to a mirror. This seems apt because a moment of positivity resonance, by definition, involves considerable mirroring at three different levels: You and the other person mirror the positivity in each other’s emotional state; you mirror each other’s gestures and biochemistry; and you mirror each other’s impulse to care for one another. So in a moment of positivity resonance, to some extent, you each become the reflection and extension of the other. Sure enough, when you face a conventional mirror, you meet eyes only with yourself. Imagine, though, facing a mirror straight on and seeing this other person. Before this moment of positivity resonance, the two of you were off doing your own thing—feeling your own emotions, making your own moves, and following your own inclinations. But in this particular moment of connection, your respective feelings, actions, and impulses align and come into sync. For just a moment, you each become something larger than yourself. This is no ordinary moment. Within this mirrored reflection and extension of your own state, you see far more. A powerful back-and-forth union of energy springs up between the two of you, like an electric charge.

• From Little Sister: A Memoir (2019)

  Through their encouragement and support, I was able to overcome my anxiety about publishing my book. The first rendition was more diary than memoir—a blithe recollection of anecdotes, events, and memories. But the more I wrote, the more I became involved in the depth of the full story. I engaged in the dual roles that are the prerogative of the memoirist—to be both protagonist and narrator, both insider and observer. The passage of so many decades from my childhood to the recording of it was beneficial because it allowed me to have a better sense of perspective and a deeper sense of perception. At the heart of my story is a tale of love—the story of a family that may have been separated but could not be broken. A family that found a way to spin an endless and unbreakable web of devotion so strong that when the day came and they were reunited, there was no rancor, no need to rebuild trust. The family was whole, and so it remained. For nearly forty years after life at the Center, we were once again a complete family, until my father died peacefully during a nap, four months shy of his ninetieth birthday. My mother, for the next eleven years attended daily Mass and was abundantly cheerful—enjoying her five children, ten grandchildren and eleven great-grandchildren. She passed away as this memoir was going to print. She read it in its entirety and it had her blessing. Afterword F riends have asked me why I’m not angry, why I don’t hate my parents, and why I seem so “normal.” To be honest, I have spent little time analyzing why I’m happy. That is not to imply that I have been free of any anger; rather that the anger I have felt has been directed, not at my parents, but at Catherine Clarke. From an early age, I had a subliminal conviction that my parents were somehow victims of the powerful Leonard Feeney and Catherine Clarke. It appeared to me that my parents, my siblings and I were thrust together in a world that was foreign to our kinship. With the benefit of adulthood and maturity, I came to realize that my parents were free to have left the Center and thus to have prevented our family from being sundered. They allowed their religious zealotry to supersede their parental obligations and the joys associated with them. When I try to understand why my parents did what they did, I cannot. I could never have made such a sacrifice. Nor do I pretend that I didn’t wish my childhood had been different. Those endless hours consumed craving family life, wondering if we were the only thirty-nine children in the whole world who were being raised in a religious order, forbidden to call our parents “mummy” and “daddy.” This incomprehension is real, as is the pain. What anger I have experienced is aimed fully at Catherine Clarke, the power behind the throne of Leonard Feeney.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  Whether God can be loved immediately in this life?Objection 1: It would seem that God cannot be loved immediately in this life. For the “unknown cannot be loved” as Augustine says (De Trin. x, 1). Now we do not know God immediately in this life, since “we see now through a glass, in a dark manner” (1 Cor. 13:12). Neither, therefore, do we love Him immediately. Objection 2: Further, he who cannot do what is less, cannot do what is more. Now it is more to love God than to know Him, since “he who is joined” to God by love, is “one spirit with Him” (1 Cor. 6:17). But man cannot know God immediately. Therefore much less can he love Him immediately. Objection 3: Further, man is severed from God by sin, according to Is. 59:2: “Your iniquities have divided between you and your God.” Now sin is in the will rather than in the intellect. Therefore man is less able to love God immediately than to know Him immediately. On the contrary, Knowledge of God, through being mediate, is said to be “enigmatic,” and “falls away” in heaven, as stated in 1 Cor. 13:12. But charity “does not fall away” as stated in the same passage (1 Cor. 13:12). Therefore the charity of the way adheres to God immediately. I answer that, As stated above ([2575]FP, Q[82], A[3]; Q[84], A[7]), the act of a cognitive power is completed by the thing known being in the knower, whereas the act of an appetitive power consists in the appetite being inclined towards the thing in itself. Hence it follows that the movement of the appetitive power is towards things in respect of their own condition, whereas the act of a cognitive power follows the mode of the knower. Now in itself the very order of things is such, that God is knowable and lovable for Himself, since He is essentially truth and goodness itself, whereby other things are known and loved: but with regard to us, since our knowledge is derived through the senses, those things are knowable first which are nearer to our senses, and the last term of knowledge is that which is most remote from our senses. Accordingly, we must assert that to love which is an act of the appetitive power, even in this state of life, tends to God first, and flows on from Him to other things, and in this sense charity loves God immediately, and other things through God. On the other hand, with regard to knowledge, it is the reverse, since we know God through other things, either as a cause through its effects, or by way of pre-eminence or negation as Dionysius states (Div. Nom. i; cf. [2576]FP, Q[12], A[12]).

• From Jesus and the Disinherited (1949)

  Title : Jesus and the Disinherited Author: Thurman, Howard ASIN : B005K98IU0 [image file=Image00000.gif] To My Beloved Daughters OLIVE and ANNE and to the future of their generation in whom the struggles of the past will find fulfillment ContentsForeword to the 2022 Edition Foreword to the 1996 Edition Preface I. JESUS—AN INTERPRETATION II. FEAR III. DECEPTION IV. HATE V. LOVE EPILOGUE Foreword to the 2022 EditionF ROM the day my son was born, I told him every morning, “You are a child of God. God loves you. There is no one greater than you but God.” I knew that my son would be growing up in a society that would despise him for his Blackness. Therefore, I wanted to provide him with that part of Black faith that would not allow “a piece” of the white racist/anti-Blackness of the world in which he would grow up to be “implanted deep within” him.1 The morning conversations I had with my young son reflect the conversations Black parents have had with their children across generations so as to protect their souls and personalities from being destroyed by a society that does not respect their humanity. It is the conversation that Langston Hughes so intimately captures in the poem “Mother to Son”: “So boy, don’t you turn back. /Don’t you set down on the steps. /’Cause you finds it’s kinder hard.”2 It is the conversation James Baldwin has when he writes his nephew on his fourteenth birthday: “Please try to remember that what they believe, as well as what they do and cause you to endure, does not testify to your inferiority, but to their inhumanity and fear.”3 And it is the conversation that Howard Thurman engages in his book Jesus and the Disinherited. For some, Thurman’s book perhaps represents one mystic’s attempt to capture the inner spiritual strivings of Jesus. For others, it may exemplify theological liberalism’s overemphasis on the historical Jesus as a great exemplar and role model for humans to follow. And for still others, Thurman’s book is a precursor to twentieth-century Black theologians’ declaration that Jesus was Black. While each of those renderings undoubtedly captures an aspect of the theological significance of Jesus and the Disinherited, they do not capture its timeless meaning and why it continues to speak to us more than seventy years after it was written. What Langston Hughes captured through poetry and James Baldwin in a letter, Howard Thurman captures through a testimony of his faith.

• From Sense and Sensibility (1811)

  This circumstance was a growing attachment between her eldest girl and the brother of Mrs. John Dashwood, a gentleman-like and pleasing young man, who was introduced to their acquaintance soon after his sister’s establishment at Norland, and who had since spent the greatest part of his time there. Some mothers might have encouraged the intimacy from motives of interest, for Edward Ferrars was the eldest son of a man who had died very rich; and some might have repressed it from motives of prudence, for, except a trifling sum, the whole of his fortune depended on the will of his mother. But Mrs. Dashwood was alike uninfluenced by either consideration. It was enough for her that he appeared to be amiable, that he loved her daughter, and that Elinor returned the partiality. It was contrary to every doctrine of hers that difference of fortune should keep any couple asunder who were attracted by resemblance of disposition; and that Elinor’s merit should not be acknowledged by every one who knew her, was to her comprehension impossible. Edward Ferrars was not recommended to their good opinion by any peculiar graces of person or address. He was not handsome, and his manners required intimacy to make them pleasing. He was too diffident to do justice to himself; but when his natural shyness was overcome, his behaviour gave every indication of an open, affectionate heart. His understanding was good, and his education had given it solid improvement. But he was neither fitted by abilities nor disposition to answer the wishes of his mother and sister, who longed to see him distinguished—as—they hardly knew what. They wanted him to make a fine figure in the world in some manner or other. His mother wished to interest him in political concerns, to get him into parliament, or to see him connected with some of the great men of the day. Mrs. John Dashwood wished it likewise; but in the mean while, till one of these superior blessings could be attained, it would have quieted her ambition to see him driving a barouche. But Edward had no turn for great men or barouches. All his wishes centered in domestic comfort and the quiet of private life. Fortunately he had a younger brother who was more promising. Edward had been staying several weeks in the house before he engaged much of Mrs. Dashwood’s attention; for she was, at that time, in such affliction as rendered her careless of surrounding objects. She saw only that he was quiet and unobtrusive, and she liked him for it. He did not disturb the wretchedness of her mind by ill-timed conversation. She was first called to observe and approve him farther, by a reflection which Elinor chanced one day to make on the difference between him and his sister. It was a contrast which recommended him most forcibly to her mother.

• From The Trembling of the Veil (1922)

  I was right in my conjecture; for Mary instantly entering the Room, informed us that a young Gentleman and his Servant were at the door, who had lossed their way, were very cold and begged leave to warm themselves by our fire. “Won’t you admit them?” (said I.) “You have no objection, my Dear?” (said my Father.) “None in the World.” (replied my Mother.) Mary, without waiting for any further commands immediately left the room and quickly returned introducing the most beauteous and amiable Youth, I had ever beheld. The servant she kept to herself. My natural sensibility had already been greatly affected by the sufferings of the unfortunate stranger and no sooner did I first behold him, than I felt that on him the happiness or Misery of my future Life must depend. Adeiu. Laura. LETTER 6th LAURA to MARIANNE The noble Youth informed us that his name was Lindsay—for particular reasons however I shall conceal it under that of Talbot. He told us that he was the son of an English Baronet, that his Mother had been for many years no more and that he had a Sister of the middle size. “My Father (he continued) is a mean and mercenary wretch—it is only to such particular freinds as this Dear Party that I would thus betray his failings. Your Virtues my amiable Polydore (addressing himself to my father) yours Dear Claudia and yours my Charming Laura call on me to repose in you, my confidence.” We bowed. “My Father seduced by the false glare of Fortune and the Deluding Pomp of Title, insisted on my giving my hand to Lady Dorothea. No never exclaimed I. Lady Dorothea is lovely and Engaging; I prefer no woman to her; but know Sir, that I scorn to marry her in compliance with your Wishes. No! Never shall it be said that I obliged my Father.” We all admired the noble Manliness of his reply. He continued. “Sir Edward was surprised; he had perhaps little expected to meet with so spirited an opposition to his will. “Where, Edward in the name of wonder (said he) did you pick up this unmeaning gibberish? You have been studying Novels I suspect.” I scorned to answer: it would have been beneath my dignity. I mounted my Horse and followed by my faithful William set forth for my Aunts.” “My Father’s house is situated in Bedfordshire, my Aunt’s in Middlesex, and tho’ I flatter myself with being a tolerable proficient in Geography, I know not how it happened, but I found myself entering this beautifull Vale which I find is in South Wales, when I had expected to have reached my Aunts.”

• From Quiet (2012)

  It explains how it’s possible for an extroverted scientist to behave with reserve in her laboratory, for an agreeable person to act hard-nosed during a business negotiation, and for a cantankerous uncle to treat his niece tenderly when he takes her out for ice cream. As these examples suggest, Free Trait Theory applies in many different contexts, but it’s especially relevant for introverts living under the Extrovert Ideal. According to Little, our lives are dramatically enhanced when we’re involved in core personal projects that we consider meaningful, manageable, and not unduly stressful, and that are supported by others. When someone asks us “How are things?” we may give a throwaway answer, but our true response is a function of how well our core personal projects are going. That’s why Professor Little, the consummate introvert, lectures with such passion. Like a modern-day Socrates, he loves his students deeply; opening their minds and attending to their well-being are two of his core personal projects. When Little held office hours at Harvard, the students lined up in the hallway as if he were giving out free tickets to a rock concert. For more than twenty years his students asked him to write several hundred letters of recommendation a year . “Brian Little is the most engaging, entertaining, and caring professor I have ever encountered,” wrote one student about him. “I cannot even begin to explain the myriad ways in which he has positively affected my life.” So, for Brian Little, the additional effort required to stretch his natural boundaries is justified by seeing his core personal project—igniting all those minds—come to fruition. At first blush, Free Trait Theory seems to run counter to a cherished piece of our cultural heritage. Shakespeare’s oft-quoted advice, “ To thine own self be true,” runs deep in our philosophical DNA. Many of us are uncomfortable with the idea of taking on a “false” persona for any length of time. And if we act out of character by convincing ourselves that our pseudo-self is real, we can eventually burn out without even knowing why. The genius of Little’s theory is how neatly it resolves this discomfort. Yes, we are only pretending to be extroverts, and yes, such inauthenticity can be morally ambiguous (not to mention exhausting), but if it’s in the service of love or a professional calling, then we’re doing just as Shakespeare advised. When people are skilled at adopting free traits, it can be hard to believe that they’re acting out of character.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  Reply to Objection 1: Although the unknown cannot be loved, it does not follow that the order of knowledge is the same as the order of love, since love is the term of knowledge, and consequently, love can begin at once where knowledge ends, namely in the thing itself which is known through another thing. Reply to Objection 2: Since to love God is something greater than to know Him, especially in this state of life, it follows that love of God presupposes knowledge of God. And because this knowledge does not rest in creatures, but, through them, tends to something else, love begins there, and thence goes on to other things by a circular movement so to speak; for knowledge begins from creatures, tends to God, and love begins with God as the last end, and passes on to creatures. Reply to Objection 3: Aversion from God, which is brought about by sin, is removed by charity, but not by knowledge alone: hence charity, by loving God, unites the soul immediately to Him with a chain of spiritual union. Whether God can be loved wholly? [*Cf. Q[184], A[2]]Objection 1: It would seem that God cannot be loved wholly. For love follows knowledge. Now God cannot be wholly known by us, since this would imply comprehension of Him. Therefore He cannot be wholly loved by us. Objection 2: Further, love is a kind of union, as Dionysius shows (Div. Nom. iv). But the heart of man cannot be wholly united to God, because “God is greater than our heart” (1 Jn. 3:20). Therefore God cannot be loved wholly. Objection 3: Further, God loves Himself wholly. If therefore He be loved wholly by another, this one will love Him as much as God loves Himself. But this is unreasonable. Therefore God cannot be wholly loved by a creature. On the contrary, It is written (Dt. 6:5): “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart.” I answer that, Since love may be considered as something between lover and beloved, when we ask whether God can be wholly loved, the question may be understood in three ways, first so that the qualification “wholly” be referred to the thing loved, and thus God is to be loved wholly, since man should love all that pertains to God. Secondly, it may be understood as though “wholly” qualified the lover: and thus again God ought to be loved wholly, since man ought to love God with all his might, and to refer all he has to the love of God, according to Dt. 6:5: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart.”

• From Love & Sex: A Christian Guide to Healthy Intimacy (2018)

  Angie responded, “You know my history, and how I have been terrified to let myself attach to my husband—I was so afraid of being known I had an affair to try to destroy what little attachment we did have.” She looked at her husband to see if she was saying too much. He gave her the nod to go ahead. “I can’t believe he has decided to stay with me. His not leaving me has made me believe in attachment. I feel wanted by him. “I have never felt wanted. I think I had the affair to see if he would pursue me or dump me because I was too much trouble. I felt that way with my mom, like I was just too much trouble. I figured Dylan would prove me right, but I’m grateful he proved me wrong. I’m feeling things for him like I have never felt for anyone and I think it’s because his actions are saying to me, ‘I am attached to you even when you hurt me. You can’t run me off that easily.’ Wow, that’s love. You remember how I wanted to get rid of him. Now I can’t get enough of him! This attachment thing is actually really sexy.” Olivia smiled, while her eyes filled with tears. Yes, she thought to herself, they are getting it. “Angie, you said that so well. Dylan, thanks for coming today. You are our hero. It took guts to stay. I think your faithfulness has won your wife’s heart. We know that wasn’t easy. It took courage to stay,” Olivia celebrated. “Angie, you said it, attachment is sexy. When we are securely attached to our mate, it releases all kinds of feel-good hormones, security, and safety. It provides a couple a safe haven from the ravages of the world. When you have earned secure attachment, you know, whatever happens, you have someone by your side, someone who has your back, and someone to come home to at the end of a day. As a culture, we have been so dismissive about how beautifully sexy attachment is. A solid, secure attachment lays a foundation for some erotic passion.” Evan, in the back of the room said, “How? How does attachment build erotic passion? I don’t get it.”

• From Love & Sex: A Christian Guide to Healthy Intimacy (2018)

  Later that day, after the boys were settled at her mom’s and the house was quiet, Kaycie walked into her closet and picked out her sapphire blue heels—the ones Sam called her “rocket shoes.” She wasn’t sure why he called them that, but assumed it meant they were pretty great. He loved rockets. Perfect, she thought, a great pair of heels always makes everything better. She finished her outfit with a pair of skinny jeans and a pretty, sleeveless top that showed off her toned arms adorned with a touch of the “rocket blue.” As she put the finishing touches on her makeup, she whispered, “Jesus, help me, calm me, and tell our story through me. You are my healer and deliverer; may this bring You glory and draw the students closer to You and Your love.” James held her hand as they walked into the auditorium. Before she knew it, the announcements were made, the worship was over, and James was standing on the platform introducing her. As she walked up to the platform, she could read the love in his eyes, and she knew that no matter how this went, his love was integrated into her soul in ways she hadn’t realized. His love filled her with confidence. With James by her side and God’s Spirit indwelling in her, she was suddenly ready to be in this moment. She paused before she spoke to take in the faces of these students she loved and the new faces she would love soon enough. Especially if she let them know her, the real, vulnerable, wounded, and healed parts of herself. With a deep breath, she opened her mouth and allowed the story to flow out of her. The students sat mesmerized. No one moved; you could have heard a pin drop. Eyes glistened with tears. One young man wrapped his arms around his girlfriend, signaling I am here. Whatever happened to you, I want to be a safe man for you—I won’t hurt you. Kaycie told the students how she trusted a man, a minister, who betrayed her. She didn’t sugarcoat the rape and how it impacted her for several years until she got the help she needed. She shared how she loved James, but until the truth was uncovered and her soul healed, she couldn’t really let him in. The youth pastor shattered her ability to trust. And it wasn’t just the youth pastor; her own father was frequently abusive, so trusting a man was more than her heart would allow. While speaking, it crossed her mind that perhaps she had needed James to cheat, to prove her belief system was true, You can’t trust a man; they all cheat. Olivia talked with her about self-fulfilling prophecies, and how they can be a positive or a negative belief system that causes those expectations to be fulfilled.

• From Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity (1989)

  This is one way in whic h at least his mode of expression gave his ancients-derived theo ry a modern twist . 2.. The othe r is also suggested in the word 'affectio n'. The ancient theo ries which Shaftesbury drew on ma ke harmony and equil ibrium of the soul their majo r goal. Even when dealing with the way we treat others, bal ance and order are cruci al. Justice and tempera nce are the primary virtues whic h ought to preside over our dealings with oth ers. The inju nction of the Stoic writer is well known, 47 that in commis erating with anothe r for his misfo rtune, we ought indeed to talk consoli ngly, but not be mov ed by pity. This is one respect in whic h Christianity was radically different from pagan thought. The highest virtue was a kind of love, unstinting giving, whos e paradigm exempla r gave his life for others. The centre of gravity of the mo ral life shifts. These two moral outlooks were fitted together in Christi an culture, not always in easy union, naturally, but perhaps most harmoniously in the famou s Tho misti c doctrine that superadds the three "theol ogical" virtues to the natural one s. With the affirm ation of ordinary life, agape is integrated in a new way into an ethic of everyday existence. My work in my calling ought to be for the general good. This insistence on practical help, on doing good for people, is carried on in the various semi-s ecularized successo r ethics, e.g., with Bacon and Locke. The principal virtue in our dealin g with other s is now no longer just jus tice and temperanc e but beneficence. With the internalization of ethical thought, wh ere inclinations are crucial, the mot ive of benevole nce becomes the key to goodn ess. Shaf tesbu ry is part way alo ng in this sh ift. He still speaks like his ancient mentors of the good life as producing "a const ant compl acency, constant security, tranquill ity, equanimit y"; 48 and Theocles describes in The Moralists Moral Sentiment s • 259 how the good man "becomes in truth the architect of his own life and fortune, by laying within himself the lasting and sure foundations of order, peace, concord,,. 49 But in the former of these places, the three items list ed above are preceded by "a generous affection, an exercise of friends hip unint errupted, a constant kindness and benignity". Doing good also has crucial importance for Shaftesbury.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  There is also another reason why the aforesaid assistance of God has received the name of grace.’ One person is said to be in the good graces’ of another, because he is well loved by him. Now it is of the essence of love that he who loves should wish good and do good to him whom he loves. God indeed wishes and does good to all His creatures, for the very being of the creature and its every perfection is of God willing and working it (B. I, Chapp.XXIX,XXX: B. II, Chap.XV): hence it is said: Thou lovest all things that are, and hatest none of the things that thou hast made (Wisd. xi, 25). But a special tie of divine love is observable in connexion with those to whom He renders assistance, enabling them to attain the good which transcends the order of their nature, namely, the perfect fruition, not of any created good, but of God’s own self. This assistance then is aptly called grace,’ not only because it is given gratis,’ but also because by this assistance a man comes to be, by a special prerogative, in the good graces’ of God. This grace, in the man in the state of grace, must be a form and perfection of him who has it. 1. That whereby a man is directed to an end must be in continual relation with him: for the mover works change continually until the body moved attains the term of its motion. Since then man is directed to his last end by the assistance of divine grace, he must continually enjoy this assistance until he arrives at the end. But that would not be if the assistance were afforded him only as a sort of motion or passion, and not as a form abiding and, as it were, resting in him: for the movement and passion would not be in the man, except when his attention was being actually turned to the end, as is not the case continually, which is evident most of all in men asleep. Therefore the grace that puts a man in the state of grace is a form and perfection abiding in man, even when he is not actively engaged. 2. The love of God is causative of the good that is in us, as the love of man is called forth and caused by some good that is in the object of his love. But man is excited to special love by some special good pre-existent in the object. Therefore where there is posited a special love of God for man, there must consequently be posited some special good conferred by God on man. Since then the grace that constitutes the State of grace denotes a special love of God for man, there must be likewise denoted some special goodness and perfection thereby existing in man.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  Now in all matters of appetite and action the measure is the end, because the proper reason for all that we desire or do should be taken from the end, as the Philosopher proves (Phys. ii, 9). Therefore the end has a mode by itself, while the means take their mode from being proportionate to the end. Hence, according to the Philosopher (Polit. i, 3), “in every art, the desire for the end is endless and unlimited,” whereas there is a limit to the means: thus the physician does not put limits to health, but makes it as perfect as he possibly can; but he puts a limit to medicine, for he does not give as much medicine as he can, but according as health demands so that if he give too much or too little, the medicine would be immoderate. Again, the end of all human actions and affections is the love of God, whereby principally we attain to our last end, as stated above ([2577]Q[23], A[6]), wherefore the mode in the love of God, must not be taken as in a thing measured where we find too much or too little, but as in the measure itself, where there cannot be excess, and where the more the rule is attained the better it is, so that the more we love God the better our love is. Reply to Objection 1: That which is so by its essence takes precedence of that which is so through another, wherefore the goodness of the measure which has the mode essentially, takes precedence of the goodness of the thing measured, which has its mode through something else; and so too, charity, which has a mode as a measure has, stands before the other virtues, which have a mode through being measured . Reply to Objection 2: As Augustine adds in the same passage, “the measure of our love for God is to love Him with our whole heart,” that is to love Him as much as He can be loved, and this belongs to the mode which is proper to the measure. Reply to Objection 3: An affection, whose object is subject to reason’s judgment, should be measured by reason. But the object of the Divine love which is God surpasses the judgment of reason, wherefore it is not measured by reason but transcends it. Nor is there parity between the interior act and external acts of charity. For the interior act of charity has the character of an end, since man’s ultimate good consists in his soul cleaving to God, according to Ps. 72:28: “It is good for me to adhere to my God”; whereas the exterior acts are as means to the end, and so have to be measured both according to charity and according to reason.

• From Fifty Shades of Grey (2011)

  “None at all? But you have needs.” “I need you more, Anastasia. These last few days have been hell. All my instincts tell me to let you go, tell me I don’t deserve you. “Those photos the boy took… I can see how he sees you. You look untroubled and beautiful, not that you’re not beautiful now, but here you sit. I see your pain. It’s hard, knowing that I’m the one who has made you feel this way. “But I’m a selfish man. I’ve wanted you since you fell into my office. You are exquisite, honest, warm, strong, witty, beguilingly innocent; the list is endless. I’m in awe of you. I want you, and the thought of anyone else having you is like a knife twisting in my dark soul.” My mouth goes dry. Holy shit. If that isn’t a declaration of love, I don’t know what is. And the words tumble out of me—a dam breached. “Christian, why do you think you have a dark soul? I would never say that. Sad maybe, but you’re a good man. I can see that…you’re generous, you’re kind, and you’ve never lied to me. And I haven’t tried very hard. “Last Saturday was such a shock to my system. It was my wake-up call. I realized that you’d been easy on me and that I couldn’t be the person you wanted me to be. Then, after I left, it dawned on me that the physical pain you inflicted was not as bad as the pain of losing you. I do want to please you, but it’s hard.” “You please me all the time,” he whispers. “How often do I have to tell you that?” “I never know what you’re thinking. Sometimes you’re so closed off…like an island state. You intimidate me. That’s why I keep quiet. I don’t know which way your mood is going to go. It swings from north to south and back again in a nanosecond. It’s confusing and you won’t let me touch you, and I want so much to show you how much I love you.” He blinks in the darkness, warily I think, and I can resist him no longer. I unbuckle my seat belt and scramble into his lap, taking him by surprise, and take his head in my hands. “I love you, Christian Grey. And you’re prepared to do all this for me. I’m the one who’s undeserving, and I’m just sorry that I can’t do all those things for you. Maybe with time… I don’t know… “…but yes, I accept your proposition. Where do I sign?” He snakes his arms around me and crushes me to him. “Oh, Ana,” he breathes as he buries his nose in my hair.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  2. There must be some union between those who have one end in view, as citizens in one State, and soldiers ranked together on the battlefield. But the final end to which man is led by the assistance of divine grace is the vision of God as He essentially is, which is proper to God Himself; and so God shares this final good with man. Man then cannot be led on to this end unless he is united with God by conformity of will, the proper effect of love: for it belongs to friends to like and dislike together, and to rejoice and grieve together. The grace then that constitutes the state of grace renders man a lover of God, as he is thereby guided to an end shared with him by God. 3. The grace that constitutes the state of grace must principally perfect the heart. But the principal perfection of the heart is love. The proof of that is, that every motion of the heart starts from love: for no one desires, or hopes, or rejoices, except for some good that he loves; nor loathes, nor fears, nor is sad, or angry, except about something contrary to the good that he loves. 4. The form whereby a thing is referred to any end assimilates that thing in a manner to the end: thus a body by the form of heaviness acquires a likeness and conformity to the place to which it naturally moves. But the grace that constitutes the state of grace is a form referring man to his last end, God. By grace then man attains to a likeness of God. And likeness is a cause of love. 5. A requisite of perfect work is that the work be done steadily and regularly. That is just the effect of love, which makes even hard and grievous tasks seem light. Since then the grace that constitutes the state of grace goes to perfect our works, the said grace must establish the love of God within us. Hence the Apostle says: The charity of God is spread abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost who is given to us (Rom. v, 5). CHAPTER CLIII THAT DIVINE GRACE CAUSES IN US FAITHTHE movement of grace, guiding us to our last end, is voluntary, not violent (Chap.CXLIX). But there can be no voluntary movement towards an object unless the object be known. Therefore grace must afford us a knowledge of our last end. But such knowledge cannot be by open vision in our present state (Chap.XLVIII): therefore it must be by faith.