ALEIPHRBN
LOVE AND CONTEMPORARY MARRIAGE
The turn of the century earked the beginning of a new enlightment. Such thinkers as Freud, Marx, Darwin, Rus— sell, Barth and others have bequeathed toous such a vast amount of knowledge, the sig— nificance of which may not be realized for another hund- rgyyyeeee. It has forced us to view man end his universe in.e totally-new way. '
Traditional customs, beliefs and values are no longer appropriate in this new era. They have to be revised or rejected com- plately.
’ None of us cinsider this a pleasant task; our parents (and theirs) had well-defined value systems which were passed on and into which each of us found our place. It was re- latively easy and anxiety— free. But, no longer! We, of 1972, esnnot fit into value systems which are no longer appropriate. we are forced to tale it upon our- aelvee the responsibility to decide the nature of the va- lue systems of today and to— morrow. We are all familiar with the urge to shun the responsibility whichcintsib: ligent thinking demands. But our dilemma is such that there is no escape. Our thinking will require its h best in such areas as law, morality, marriage, politics, religion, science, to mention but a few. These concepts will, and must remain with tamoriew.
What follows is an ex- position of my,thoughts on the concepts of 'love' and 'marriage'. My observations lead me to believe that these two concepts are very much in need of re—evaluation
ALCI'PHRDN :
mannerg'but that does not remove the necessity of this form of love. It must event- ually prevail if man is ever to fully 'come of age' (Bonhoeffer). Today and yesterday, marriage lacked this cohesive form of love; but marriages were neces— sary for the perpetuation of society. It was therefore necessary for the state to legislate - to create laws- to ensure rslativs stability in the family, and hence, society. In the absence of Agape was law —- it was
(and is) necessary. If and when we as people can love as Jesus, St. Francis of As- sissi, Socrates, Gandhi and St. Paul did, then the necessity for marriage laws will no longer exist, for love is e lwe unto itself to which all other laws are subordinate.
Common—Law:
In the history of most societies there has always been in one form or another common-law marriage. Usually
it is defined as "any marriage
which does not have legal, social or religious sanction."
Common-law Marrangements' are common in our society; perhaps more than at any time in our history. But are they all common—law?
Let us suppose a man and woman share true Agaleic love. what need have they for getting 'churched'? Dr ab- taining social consenti(via
' marriage certificate)? None!
Although I do not doubt they would not. But that is not my point. This marriage would not be a cemmon-law
Page....6
marriage; quite the contrary, it would be a true marriage. In my opinion, no less than 90% of those who marry today are not in love; nor do they possess the capacity for genuine Agapeic-love. The individuals involved may remain together of not, but they are not true loveemaré riagee. These are the com- mon-law'marriages.
But these marriages must stay together for the sake of the state; therefore, since Agape is not the cohe— sive force, the must exercise its force. But, so long as the law is doing what each individual should be doing, the development of Agapeic love is in jeopardy becaUse
the onus is off the individual
to pursue the development of Agapeic love.
R How shall we ever learn to love this way? I am not competent to answer that question, but of the follow— ing I am certain - Jesus
commanded us to love one another. But this is absurd,
for love cannot be commended -
love is obeyed. _
So long as men pursue the satisfaction of their hedonistic desires, they shall never know the fruits of love.' But, yet, it is .lovs they are really seeking.
How then are these con— cepts to be treated? what form will they take? will the society we need require the family? Marriage? Love? where do you fit in? Do you fit at all? Need you? Can you escape these questions?
Stan Dalton
P.S. Do not consider your
education complete without reading Shulamith Firestones
book TW-
avaiiab 9 at the bookstore I Editor's note: sider your education com—
plete.
University of Toronto
in thp immediate future. summer COurses Perhaps one of the most in
important areas under dis—
cussion today is marriage. NICE. FRANCE
Marriage of the past has been intimatelyconnscted
Never cone
with family.8nd state. THE In addition to the regular Summer Session, the University of
Society perpetuatfld itsalf Toronto is ofifering Degree Courses in Nice. Jul 6 — August 18.
bY "9'"! 0f the family and Credit courses in English, Fine Art, French, History and Poli—
thrfiflflh Uh1°h its m°mb9r3 tical Economy will be given by professors from the Universities y; r°°°1V°d thflir Primacy of Toronto and Nice. Classes will be held each weekday at the (i socialization so necessary MINUTE Faculté des Lettres and the Ecole internationale d'Art de Nice.
, for coping later on with the _
responsibilities of citizen-
ship.. It eas necessary for AccommodatiOn will be provided in university residences, private
the family to have its roots homes. and pensions,
in a stable marriage. Now,
the only stable marriage is p . V
that which has its roots in H Cost? Approximately $750.00 (includes round trip, tuition for
love. (1.0. Christian love, 1 one course, room and board).
or Agape) But, throughout L
history, Agape did prevail, 0
rather, Philie or Eros, which 5
"Y '1 10V! YOU because-co", 0 'Further information:
but Agape says "I love you p
for Which You "Bad only 70 H Toronto-Nice Summer Pro ramme . ‘
350' It 13 still Very "n‘ ‘E Division of University Extension (416) 928—3405
reesonlble to expect every— R 119 St. George Street
one to love in the latter ~ Toronto 18], Ontafio