Is Love Necessary for a Happy Marriage?

[Shin]

Here’s an answer from an old advice column, quoted to be helpful, despite some flaws in the columns from this source at times.

Is Love Necessary for a Happy Marriage?

Question: Is love necessary for a happy marriage?

Answer: It depends on what you mean by “love”. I might add that it also depends on what you mean by marriage, but we shall take for granted that you mean what the Lord meant, viz., an indissoluble sacramental partnership between a man and a woman who pledge themselves to help each other toward happiness on earth and in heaven, and to beget and rear children for the kingdom of God.

What do you mean by “love”? Do you mean that violent feeling of attraction, that all-suffering sense of helpless infatuation, that overpowering “can’t-think-of-anything-else” emotion, which the pulps, true story magazines and mashy novels describe as love? If you do, my answer is a quick “no”. This kind of love is not necessary because there have been thousands of happy marriages without it, from those in which the bridegroom was chosen for the bride (or vice versa) by elders, as was customary for centuries, down to the latest marriage of two young people who kept their wits about them all through their company-keeping and engagement. The wild infatuation that some mistake for love is a minor form of hysteria, and hysteria is not only not necessary for, but a positive drawback to, a happy marriage.

But if you define love correctly, I say that it is absolutely necessary for a happy marriage. Love is an intelligent willingness to surrender self-will, to make sacrifices, to place fidelity, charity and duty above feelings, in behalf of a person whom one has found to be a good companion, a sturdy character, and a believer in the same purposes of life and marriage as oneself. The degree of physical emotional attraction behind this determination of the free will may vary greatly, but it is never the essence of love. Too many young people have thought otherwise, to the effect that, with the inevitable lessening of infatuation after a year or two of married life, they have considered themselves no longer in love. Love is a function of the free will, and it can last as long as the free will exercises itself according to the above definition. Therefore, to say “I am in love” should mean “I am willing to surrender my will, to sacrifice my desires, to place duty and fidelity above all else, in behalf of one person whom I have found suitable for a successful marriage.”

… .

Note: “wild infatuation that some mistake for love is a minor form of hysteria, and hysteria is not only not necessary for, but a positive drawback to, a happy marriage.” Take that TV!
*
…
**
Is Love Sufficient for a Happy Marriage?*

Problem: If one is deeply in love with a certain person, is not that sufficient for a happy marriage, even though others advise against the marriage? I am in love with a young man, and want to marry him, but everybody tells me he won’t make me happy. I am so happy just being in love with him that I know I’ll be happy in marriage.

Solution: It has been set down as one of the most futile things in life to argue with a young person already in love, who believes that the happiness of being in love is a true measure of the happiness that will be found in marriage. However, those of us who are interested in the happiness of married folk will still go on trying to convince young people of the danger of this mistake.

You say that everybody tells you that the young man you love cannot make you happy in marriage. I presume that this means your parents, your pastor or confessor, your close friends. Such unanimity can hardly be a result of conspiracy against you, or unfounded on good reasons. With eyes undimmed by the infatuation that makes you a poor judge of your boy friend, they must see something in his character that makes him unfit for the responsibilities of marriage. Perhaps he is shiftless and undependable; perhaps a drunkard; perhaps unprincipled or irreligious. After all, there are thousands of divorces in America each year, and tens of thousands of broken hearted wives. Can’t you see that most of the latter married because they were breathlessly in love, and only afterward, too late, found out that love is not sufficient for a happy marriage?

You did not tell me on what ground everybody opposes your marriage to this boy, and therefore I do not say for certain that their opposition is justified. There is a good presumption that it is, however, from the fact that it is unanimous. I do say firmly, however, that you are clinging to a false principle when you say that “because you are happy just being in love with your boy friend, you know you’ll be happy in marriage.” It takes more than love, I assure you, to make a marriage happy, and sometimes it is only your parents, pastor, and good friends, who can tell you whether that something is present or absent.

 

[Shin]

**
On Love at First Sight**

Problem: “Do you believe in love at first sight? I recently met a man and fell head over heels in love with him on our first date. He seemed to feel the same way about me. If he asks me to marry him even after only three dates, I feel that I will just have to say Yes. Is not such a love sufficient to make marriage very happy?”

Solution: No, it isn’t, and if you look around, you will see hundreds of proofs of this fact. Love at first sight may be the preliminary to a happy marriage, but there is no guarantee that it will be. I should say that the chances are definitely against a happy marriage, if love at first sight and three dates are the only preliminaries.

The reason should be clear: as a rational creature you are expected to use your head as well as your heart in all the important actions of your life. There are few things more important than getting married, and once married, you are married till the death of either yourself or your partner. This love at first sight that you talk about is an emotional reaction to someone who seems to have many fine qualities on the surface. It cannot possibly see into the heart, into the conscience, into the will, into the past. It is easily possible that a man for whom a girl would feel love at first sight would be able to present a very lovable appearance for a time, while under the surface he was harboring any number of vices and evils. It takes time to find out whether a man has the interior qualities necessary to make a good husband and a happy marriage. And it takes common sense on your part not to say such things as that “you would have to say Yes at once if he asked you to marry him on your third date together.” By that time you might not even have found out whether he was married before; whether he had an ungovernable temper; whether he was subject to epilepsy, melancholia or alcoholism.

Most of the divorces result from short courtships and so-called love at first sight. Don’t be like the foolish ones of your generation. If you like this man at first sight, remember that you must use second sight and third sight and twentieth sight to know whether you can have reasonable assurance that he won’t be giving you black eyes in the second month of your marriage. Love at first sight is all right if after six months of going with the person you find that he is as good inside as he is outside, and that you won’t offend God or renounce God by marrying him.

How to Escape from "Love"

Problem: Is it possible for one who has fallen madly in love with another to fall out of love? I am terribly in love with a man. But I know that my family and friends are right when they tell me that he would not make a good husband because of his obvious character defects and his past. But what can I do? I love him so much that nothing seems to matter except being with him and marrying him any time he says the word. Is there any cure for this at all?

Solution: Yes, there is a cure for this unfortunate situation, if you will permit the intelligence God gave you to take command over your feelings. Most of the cases in which girls talk about being madly in love, contrary to their own better judgment, are due to too much reading of romantic magazine stories and novels, and too much indulgence in movies that represent love as a flame that cannot be extinguished. Such stories and movies are an insult to the God-given intelligence of every human being. They are based on the false principle that a person can do nothing about his feelings except give in to them. If this were true, we would all be worse off than brute animals, because the latter have instincts to preserve them from harm which we do not possess. Human intelligence is supposed to save us from harm.

These are the steps you must take to overcome the attraction you feel for a man whom you know to be unfit for marriage:

1. Convince yourself that you don’t have to let your feelings lead you around like a donkey on a halter. Cultivate a sense of shame for the very idea that you are helpless because of your feelings.
2. Use the special power, that is a part of your intelligence, of looking into the future. Visualize the unhappiness that will be yours in a very short time if you marry one who lacks decent character and virtue. Think of the shame that will be yours when your own conscience and everybody else will say: “I told you so.”
3. Make yourself acutely aware of the sinfulness of giving in to your feelings in this matter. It is wrong to wreck your life by acting on your feelings when you know this will end in tragedy for you, and will even endanger your immortal soul. Ask daily for God’s help in following your reason rather than your feelings.
4. Make the sharp and final decision not to see the person any more. Don’t torture yourself by accepting a single date with him after you have made your decision. Don’t act on the delusion that you can enjoy his company with no intention of marrying him.
5. Don’t pity yourself as if you were terribly abused because this had to happen to you. Everybody has to choose between feelings and common sense at some time or other in life. Make the choice proudly, as befits one who is the image and likeness of God.

 

[Shin]

If anything I think the advice doesn’t go far enough but I think it should be helpful for many folks who aren’t ready for sterner stuff.

It will make for some thought I am thinking.

 

[youkokun]

My mom divorced my dad because it was a mistake (priest said if she were Catholic she could get an annulment) and because he’s not a good husband or father–not a provider or protector, selfish and uncharitable. She remarried my stepdad, who’s a workaholic and favors my two younger sibs who are what you’d call “all-his”–but he’s a provider, willing to lead by example, stands by his values and so on. I’m pretty sure they only married because of premarital pregnancy, but their marriage is successful for the most part. They are good business partners. They function together efficiently and take time to work on problems together. I honestly don’t think they “love” each other romantically–Valentine’s Day is awkward, and they express anything like that with gifts if anything–but they’re bound by common goals, values, and sometimes interests.

So if you define a happy marriage by relative stability or an ability to take on life’s challenges together, I’ve seen it. I’d rather have a functional marriage than a romantic one.

 

[dshix]

Hi Shin,

I don’t know where you got this, or if you authored it yourself, but it certainly mirrors my view on the matter.

 

[7armyrugrats]

Thanks for sharing.

 

[Shin]

Ah this is good to hear. Thanks folks. It’s from an old Redemptorist I think.

'Without love the soul of man cannot exist. Her affections must be fixed on God or on creatures: if she love not creatures, she will certainly love God. Hence, the Holy Ghost exhorts us to guard our hearts with the utmost vigilance against all affections which have not God for their object: With all watchfulness keep thy heart, because life issueth out from it. While the heart loves God, the soul shall have life; but if the heart transfer its affections to creatures, spiritual death will be the inevitable consequence. In order, then, to become a saint, the spouse of the Lamb must expel from her soul what soever has not God for its end and object.

When any one demanded admission into the Society of the Fathers of the Desert, they answered him by the following question: “Do you bring a vacant heart, that it may be filled by the Holy Ghost?” Justly did they require a soul detached from earthly goods; for a heart in which the world dwells cannot be replenished with the love of God. Whoever brings to the fountain a-vessel replete with sand, will labor in vain to fill it with water unless it be first emptied of its contents.’

St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori

 

[Kevin12]

Yes, it is.

 

[Kevin12]

What do you mean by “love”? Do you mean that violent feeling of attraction, that all-suffering sense of helpless infatuation, that overpowering “can’t-think-of-anything-else” emotion, which the pulps, true story magazines and mashy novels describe as love? If you do, my answer is a quick “no”. This kind of love is not necessary because there have been thousands of happy marriages without it, from those in which the bridegroom was chosen for the bride (or vice versa) by elders, as was customary for centuries, down to the latest marriage of two young people who kept their wits about them all through their company-keeping and engagement. The wild infatuation that some mistake for love is a minor form of hysteria, and hysteria is not only not necessary for, but a positive drawback to, a happy marriage.

Although I know that there is really no point in arguing, I feel the least I can do in defense of “hysteria” is quote chapter 5 of the Song of Songs. And no, it is not just an allegory for Christ’s love for the Church, though that is certainly the primary meaning we should take from it - it is also a poem about married love.. I have a strong strong impulse to say some other things uncharitable things about this note, but I will leave it at this.

*I opened the bolt of my door to my beloved: but he had turned aside, and was gone. My soul melted when he spoke: I sought him, and found him not: I called, and he did not answer me.
The keepers that go about the city found me: they struck me: and wounded me: the keepers of the walls took away my veil from me.
I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem, if you find my beloved, that you tell him that I languish with love.
What manner of one is thy beloved of the beloved, O thou most beautiful among women? what manner of one is thy beloved of the beloved, that thou hast so adjured us?
My beloved is white and ruddy, chosen out of thousands.
His head is as the finest gold: his locks as branches of palm trees, black as a raven.
His eyes as doves upon brooks of waters, which are washed with milk, and sit beside the plentiful streams.
His cheeks are as beds of aromatical spices set by the perfumers. His lips are as lilies dropping choice myrrh.
His hands are turned and as of gold, full of hyacinths. His belly as of ivory, set with sapphires.
His legs as pillars of marble, that are set upon bases of gold. His form as of Libanus, excellent as the cedars.
His throat most sweet, and he is all lovely: such is my beloved, and he is my friend, O ye daughters of Jerusalem.
Whither is thy beloved gone, O thou most beautiful among women? whither is thy beloved turned aside, and we will seek him with thee?
*

 

[Musician]

“My soul melted when he spoke…” I still have butterflies and we are getting close to 28 years. Don’t discount falling head over heels in love. It is wonderful when it happens and awesome when it lasts.

 

[HB11]

:thumbsup:Yes I agree and am married almost twenty years. Also we married late in life if that’s an encouragement to folks out there. Awesome and needed when they leave the seat up Respect is another important thing too, . .

“My soul melted when he spoke…” I still have butterflies and we are getting close to 28 years. Don’t discount falling head over heels in love. It is wonderful when it happens and awesome when it lasts.

 

[Kevin12]

“My soul melted when he spoke…” I still have butterflies and we are getting close to 28 years. Don’t discount falling head over heels in love. It is wonderful when it happens and awesome when it lasts.

I’m glad there are still some Catholics out there who haven’t embraced a nearly Manichean view of love and human relations. It is a shame, though, that when such people let their views be heard, few stand up to them for fear of being labelled a relativist or a modernist.

I suppose, though, that we can take heart from John Paul II’s Theology of the Body, that view of such people is not that of the Church. Of course, there are some people who oppose the post-Councillar Church in all but name who will oppose any teaching that they have any doubt about being ex cathedra - but we can only hope that those people will either realize their error and join the Church in spirit as well as in name, or else admit they are sedevacantist and trouble us no further.

 

[chevalier]

Question: Is love necessary for a happy marriage?

(…)

But if you define love correctly,

That’s pointless. You can give any sort of answer you want if you define the question “correctly”.

Where x = y, it doesn’t really matter what number we assign to the variables. The equation will always work.

I’m really tired of all those threads going on about the necessity or superfluity of love after defining it whatever way the OP wanted to define, while somehow hinting that the conclusion is universal.

We might just simply sit down and talk about what love is, or what exactly (details, specifics) is important in what kind of situation, without getting excited by labels and trying to get a monopoly on concepts.

 

[EasterJoy]

“My soul melted when he spoke…” I still have butterflies and we are getting close to 28 years. Don’t discount falling head over heels in love. It is wonderful when it happens and awesome when it lasts.

The problem is that falling head over heels can obscure real defects that cannot be ignored forever. It is lovely to be charmed, but that is only if you are charmed by someone who also has the necessary qualities. Those, too, who have found themselves married to a toxic person who gained their consent via a charm that obscured a manipulative intent and then was used to gain pity the offender did not deserve can find themselves with a “taste aversion” to charm.

This is only IMHO, but I’d say that a marriage with romantic charm is like nutritious food that has good flavor. The flavor does not add nutritional value, perhaps, but it does make what is good for you attractive compared to what is bad for you and compared to starving yourself. It is good to marry someone who whets your appetite, and just as good flavor is in the nature of most good food, true romance is in the nature of most good marriages. Certainly it is something worth looking for, even if you have to be aware that it can cloud your judgment to people with serious defects, incompatibilities with you, or even general toxicity. Besides, life is short, and romance is a good thing that God made as a consolation for those in married life. Why not want that? It would be like wanting a prayer life with no consolations, and only dryness.

“Can a thing insipid be eaten without salt? Is there flavor in the white of an egg?
I refuse to touch them; they are loathsome food to me.”
Job 6:6-7