Love, however, does not concentrate on a function, but on personality. An organ does not include the personality, but the personality includes the organ, which is another way of repeating the theme: love includes sex, but sex does not include love.
Love concentrates on the object; sex concentrates on the subject. Love is directed to someone else for the sake of the other's perfection; sex is directed to self for the sake of se]f-satisfaction. Sex flatters the object not because it is praiseworthy in itself, but rather as a solicitation. It knows how to make friends and influence people. Most sound minds resent flattery because they see the egotism behind the screen of altruism. The ego in sex pleads that it loves the alter ego, but what it loves is really the possibility of its own pleasure in the other ego.
The other person is necessary for the return of the egotist upon himself. The egotist finds himself constantly being encircled by non-being, purposelessness, meaninglessness; he has the feeling of being exploited. Refusing to be related to anything else, he soon sees that nothing is for him: The whole world is against him! But love, which stresses the object, finds itself in constantly enlarging relationships.
Love is so strong it surpasses narrowness by devotedness and forgetfulness of self. In history, the only causes that die are those for which men refuse to die. The more love grows, the more its eyes open to the needs of others, to the miseries of men, and to compassion. The remedy for all the sufferings of the modern brain lies in the enlargement of the heart through love, which forgets itself as the subject and begins to love the neighbor as the object.
But he who lives for himself will eventually find that nature, fellowman, and God are all against him. The so-called "persecution complex" is the result of egotism. The world seems against him who wants everything for himself. Sex is moved by the desire to fill a moment between having and not having.
It is an experience like looking at a sunset, or twirling one's thumbs to pass the time. It rests after one experience, because glutted for the moment, and then waits for the reappearance of a new craving or passion to be satisfied on a totally different object. Love frowns upon this notion, for it sees in this nothing but the killing of the objects loved for the sake of self-satisfaction. Sex would give birds flight, but no nests; hearts emotions but no homes; throw the whole world into the experience of voyagers at sea, but with no ports.
Instead of pursuing an Infinite which is fixed, it substitutes the false infinity of never finding satisfaction. The infinite then becomes not the possession of love but the fruitless search for love, which is the basis of so many psychoses and neuroses.
The infinite then becomes restlessness, a merry-go-round of the heart which spins only to spin again. Real love, on the contrary, admits the need, the thirst, the passion, the craving, but it also admits an abiding satisfaction by adhesion to a value which transcends time and space. Love unites itself to being and thus becomes perfect; sex unites itself to non-being and thus becomes irritation and anxiety.
In love, poverty becomes integrated into riches; need into fulfillment; yearning into joy; chase into capture. But sex is without the joy of offering. The wolf offers nothing when he kills the lamb.
The joy of oblation is missing, for the egotist by his very nature seeks inflation. Love gives to receive. Sex receives so as not to give. Love is soul contact with another for the sake of perfection; sex is body contact with another for the sake of sublimation.
A body can exhaust itself, but it cannot nourish itself. If man needed only nourishment, he could devour love as he devours food. But having a Spirit which needs the Divine Love as a unitive force, he can never be satisfied by devouring the love of another person. A potato has a nature; a man is a person. The former can be destroyed as a means to an end; the human may not.
Sex would turn man into a vegetable and reduce a person to an animal. Sex makes hungry where most it satisfies, for the person needs the person, and a person is a person only when seen in an image of God.
Freudianism interprets man in terms of sex; Christianity interprets sex in terms of man. The romanticist loves love; the Christian loves a person. There is a world of difference between sex loving sex and a person loving a person.
Sex tries to be simultaneously both the receiver and the giver of passion; both the subject and the object. In sex the male adores the female. In love the man and woman together adore God. As a result of this dismemberment of sex from personality, sex is cerebralized, in the sense that it is made an intellectual problem. In normal human beings, sex is physical and organic. In the abnormal, it is something thought about, studied, dissected, and reduced to statistics and reports.
In the older barbarism, sex was considered as physical. In the newer barbarism it is mental. Much advertising is based on sex. Instead of concupiscence arising from the body, it is now made to rise within an artificially stimulated imagination. There is no doubt whatever that sex is an important energy in human life, but is it the basic energy as so many psychologists contend? Or is it, better, only one of the branches on the tree of life?
Instead of being the reservoir, may it not be one of several channels through which the original Life Endowment is communicated?
As water is basically H[2]O and can appear as liquid, steam, and ice, so there may be in the human person a fundamental dynamism and power, which comes from the soul- body unity, and which flows out in three different directions. Man is not a soul. As St. Thomas says: "My soul is not myself. The parents prepare the body; God infuses the soul and makes the person. The union of the body and spirit form one being! This Original Energy, which we will call Vita, has three principal manifestations, because man may be considered as related a to himself, b to humanity, and c to the cosmos.
In relation to himself, Vita appears as self-preservation, a consciousness of dignity, an urge to be all that one ought to be. Personality feels itself, therefore, as a bearer of inalienable rights and liberties which are given by God, and which no state or dictator can take away. The right to life inspires not only needed physical development, but mental and spiritual development, as well. In brief, it implies not only a self-respect, but also a very legitimate self-love, which strives for perfection.
In relation to humanity, this Vita manifests itself in the generation of the human species, the begetting of a family, which in turn becomes the unit of a state and society, in which his personal rights and liberties are conditioned by the rights and liberties of others for the sake of the good of all. In relation to the universe, the Vita takes another channel, which is that of compensating for the poverty of personal being through having, which becomes the ownership of private property as the economic guarantee of external liberty, as the soul is an inner and spiritual guarantee.
These three distillations of Vita are good because given by Divine Goodness. And all three emanations go together. No one would ever be so shortsighted as to describe man's role as self- development, leaving out his magnificent power of cooperating with God in the begetting of new areas of love.
Neither would one be so narrow as to describe man in terms of the things on which he works, or which he eats, or with which he clothes himself. It would be like describing an elephant in terms of his tusk, or his tail, or his trunk alone.
But, and here is the important fact, the right to self-preservation could become egotism, and the power of generation could become license, and ownership could be monopolistic capitalism or communism, if there ever were a basic disturbance of the Vita and the God-given relations of soul and body. And that is precisely what did take place in what is called the Fall of Man. The fringes of this truth modern psychology has rediscovered in the conflicts and tensions and anxieties which go on inside of man.
Something has happened to man to make him what he is. Whatever he is, he is not what he ought to be. All the disorder and anarchy both within himself and society possess the earmarks of being due to an abuse of freedom. Even though man now and then acts as if he lived in a jungle, one can still see in some of his actions that he once played in a Garden. It is not our point here to describe the rebellion of man against His Creator. Every one analyzing his conscience can find examples of what happened, especially when he becomes sad and remorseful because he has hurt someone he loved.
When the mainspring of a clock becomes broken, all the works are still there, but they do not function. In like manner, as a result of the rebellion against Divine Love, the Vita, the fundamental soul-body unity in man, lost its balance; it did not become intrinsically corrupt.
A derangement took place among the three outlets of the Vita. In relation to himself, man became inclined not always to do what he ought, but to do what he pleased, even though he hurt others and himself. In relation to the human race, man, because he was endowed with reason, could manipulate the levers of life, which animals could not do, and could seek the pleasures of the flesh without assuming responsibilities.
Finally, in relation to the cosmos, he became inclined to want more than he needed in the way of property, or to use illegitimate means to acquire what he did not have, or else to deprive others of what was their own.
If the pendulum denies its dependence on the clock, it is no longer free to swing. Because man denied his dependence on God, Who alone is the Source of his independence, the harmony of his nature became disturbed. There sprang up in his Vita what is called libido, or concupiscence, a tending toward certain things in defiance of rational restraint.
Abnormality was introduced in all the three channels of the Vita. From now on legitimate self-love could become Egotism and Selfishness; the union of two in one flesh could become Sex, in the modern sense of the term; and the right to property could become Communism, Monopolistic Capitalism, and Revolution.
They need not become any of these things, for man still has human freedom, but it became harder for man to keep the lower passions tamed and under control. This concupiscence or libido is not a sin; it is more like a temptation, which becomes a sin only when the will consents to this disorder. This original catastrophe to human nature made man eccentric, that is, inclined to get off center, from which tendency has come the need of Abnormal Psychology.
The first of these concupiscences becomes Pride or Egotism, the second becomes Lust, and the third, Avarice or Greed, and from these three flow all the sins that a human can commit. Note that there are three concupiscences or libidos, and not one of them is to be identified with the Vita. Pride is not the basic energy of life, nor is Sex, nor Greed, but all three are tendencies toward disorder in the one basic energy or Vita.
Most psychologists are narrow, in the sense that they take one of these to the exclusion of the others. Freud takes Sex and forgets the other two equally important libidos. Adler takes Pride, and Jung takes Greed or Security.
Psychology will never give a total understanding of man until it incorporates all three and relates them to something more basic in man. Freud is right in speaking of the importance of sex in man, as a man is right in describing the importance of a trunk to an elephant. Our complaint is that it is not scientific, because not total.
The libido is not sex, but sex is one of the expressions of the libido. The inferiority complex is not the basic libido of life, but it is one of them. The desire for security is not the sole explanation of man, but it is an important part of the explanation. Each of the great schools is one-third right. Of the three, Freud has chosen the one which is certainly the most appealing to a dis-God-ed generation. It is also very important, because the other libidos are not both personal and social.
Pride involves only one individual and avarice involves things. But sex implies two persons, and through them humanity. Freud dropped one dim hint that possibly he was too narrow, for toward the end of his life he suggested widening the term sex. But it was never widened enough to include even remotely the other two eccentric tendencies and disharmonies without which no psychology is complete. If sex were as "natural" as the sex psychologists assume it is, there should never be associated with it the sense of shame.
But if anarchy was introduced into human nature by an abuse of freedom, it follows that the shame accompanying sex has some hidden relationship to man's rebellion against God. Sacred Scripture tells us that before the Fall, Adam and Eve were "naked but not ashamed. The nakedness without shame was due in part to that inner spiritual perfection.
It is a well- attested fact that those people who are most impoverished in their souls try to cover up this inner destitution by extreme luxury on the outside. The more naked the soul, that is, the more devoid of virtue, the greater the need of the body to give the appearance of possession through fantastic dress, display, and ostentation.
The more the soul is clothed with virtue, the less is the need of outer compensation. The poor boy who wishes to be known as rich must make a display of riches. The boy who is really rich needs no such prop.
We meet the reversal of this distinction of the poverty and riches of the body and soul in the ceremony known as the clothing of nuns. In many communities, the day the young lady becomes professed she dresses first as a rich bride and is adorned with many jewels.
Some believe this is to express the fact that she is the Bride of Christ. That such is not the case is evident from the fact that after she pronounces her vows, she goes to her cell and exchanges the elaborate gown for the humble and menial habit of her community. The implication is that now that her soul is adorned with the beauty of God's grace, there is no longer need for seeming richness of the body. It is very likely that Adam and Eve, instead of being naked in our sense of the term, had reflected in their bodies an effulgence of light, which came from Original Justifying Grace in the soul.
As a result, one perceived less a body than a person bearing the Divine Image. It was only after our First Parents rebelled against God that they disturbed the equilibrium of their human nature.
It need hardly be stated here that Catholic tradition has never taught that their sin was the marriage act. On the contrary, God told our First Parents to "increase and multiply. Augustine says: "He who says that there would have been neither copulation nor generation but for the sin, simply makes sin the origin of the holy number of the saints.
Thomas is that there was far greater pleasure in the marriage act before Original Sin. Rather the same pleasure would have been all the greater, inasmuch as man's nature was then purer, and his body was therefore capable of more exquisite sensations. No one sins against Love without hurting himself.
A triple concupiscence, or tendency to excess, resulted from Adam's and Eve's turning from God. What effect did that have on the second manifestation of Vita, or generation?
As regards the marital act, St. Thomas says we "must distinguish two features in the present state of things: One which is natural, namely, the conjunction of male and female for the purpose of generation The other is a certain deformity consisting in immoderate concupiscence.
The latter would not have been present in the state of innocence, for then the lower powers were already subject to reason. It was after the loss of grace that our First Parents perceived themselves to be naked and were ashamed.
To some extent, the sense of shame may be natural, but it now begins to appear as associated with guilt. Shame can be, and often is, the expression of the tension and antinomy which in its higher realms was a rebellion against God.
Original Sin tore them from the union with God through grace, which is a participation in the Divine Nature. But the disruption of the union of man and God had an echo in the disturbance of the union of soul and body. The big cog in the machine broke, so the little cogs went out of order, too. Nothing better describes and represents this initial rebellion against God than the tendency of the body to rebel against the spirit.
Shame is one of the expressions of that rent. It must be repeated that it was not because of sex that Adam and Eve were ashamed, for they had sex, and they used it before their sin. It may very well be that the unsatisfying character of the union, in the sense that it does not fulfill the infinite longings of the soul for unity, is a reminder of how the finite was torn from the infinite and the creature from his Creator.
Augustine also states that in a sense shame is related to disobedience. Positively, this would mean that when there is perfect obedience to God, there is no shame. This confirms, somewhat, the spiritual truth that Catholic educators have observed, namely, that as obedience to the law of Christ increases, concupiscence or the passions actually diminish.
The sex passions are not the same in all persons. They are so much under control in some, that they resist them with the same automatic reflex as the blinking of their eye when dirt gets into it. The history of mysticism reveals that temptations of the flesh become less as one gets closer to God, although the temptations to pride may increase The Holy Eucharist, which is the Body of Christ, when worthily received, does diminish the uprisings of concupiscence.
There is not the hardship imposed on a celibate priest that the sex-world would imagine, for, given power over the Physical Body of Christ, he already has the cure for the rebellion of his own physical body. In a lesser degree, parents who are married by a Sacrament and live their married life in union with a love of Christ probably feel between themselves an almost complete extinguishing of a sense of shame, precisely because of their obedience to the Spirit.
There is also another reason for shame, which is more related to the natural order. Sex is rightly called a mystery. It has its matter and form. Its matter is the physical power of generation; its form is its power to share in the creative purposes of God. Because sex is related to creativity, and God is the source of all creativity, sex is seen to have an intimate bond with religion.
Because it is a summons to share in Creation, and because man and woman are God's coworkers in quarrying humanity, there is an awesomeness about the act. That is why all peoples have associated marriage with a religious ceremony. But everything that is mysterious tends to be hidden and concealed. The Eastern World is much more aware of this than the Western World. That is why the consecration in the Eastern religions takes place behind a screen, whereas in the Western rite it is more public.
The very hiding of the mystery of transubstantiation is a highly developed form of the concealing of anything which has to do with God. Since, in the natural order, there are few acts more mysterious than the union of two humans in one flesh, it follows that there should be a tendency on the part of man and woman to veil and hide themselves from others when they enter into the performance of that act which, in the supernatural order, symbolizes the mystery of Christ and the Church, and which in the natural order makes them co-creators with God.
Here the explanation would not be a sense of shame in the sense of guilt, but rather a sense of shame in the sense of reverence. This is what Pius XII said in an address to mothers: "The sense of modesty is akin to the sense of religion.
It takes three to make love, for lover and beloved are bound together on earth by an ideal outside both. If we were absolutely perfect, we would have no need of loving anyone outside ourselves. Our self-sufficiency would prevent a hankering for what we have not. But love itself starts with the desire for something good.
God is good. God is being, and therefore has no need of anything outside Himself. But we have being: Creation may be described as the introduction of the verb "to have" into the universe.
What makes us creatures is the fact that we are dependent; all that we have, we have received. Because we are not perfect, we constantly strive to make up for what is lacking, or to complement our having by having more. The craving for private property, for example, is one of the natural aspirations of man, for by it man hopes to enlarge his personality and to extend himself by owning things.
It is possible for man to mistake what is good for him, but it is impossible for him not to desire goodness. The prodigal son was right in being hungry: he was wrong in living on husks. Man is right in trying to fill up his life, his mind, his body, his house with what is good; he may be wrong perhaps in what he chooses as a good.
But without the desire for goodness, there would be no love, whether it be love of country, love of friend, or love of spouse. Through love every heart seeks to acquire a perfection or a good which it lacks, or else to express the perfection that it already has.
It follows then that all love is produced by goodness, for goodness by its nature is lovable. It may be difficult to understand why certain people are loved, but of this we can be sure: those who love see a goodness in them which others do not see. God loves us because He puts His Goodness into us and finds it there. We love certain creatures because we find goodness in them.
Saints love those whom no one else loves, because after the manner of God, they put goodness into other people and find them lovable. If it be asked why the drunkard loves alcohol, why the libertine loves perversion, or why the criminal loves stealing, it is because each of them sees some good in what he does.
What each seeks is not the highest moral good, for endowed with free will, each can always choose a partial rather than a total good, thus making a god of his appetites. Evil in order to be attractive must at least wear the guise of goodness. Hell has to be gilded with gold of paradise, or men would never want its evil. If evil were always called by its right name, it would lose much of its appeal. When the exaggerations and perversions of sex are called the "Kinsey Report," they give an air of scientific goodness to that which would have no appeal if it were called "lust.
Goodness is perfective of our being, and thus compensates for the meagerness of our having. If one is asked why he is in love with a particular person, he may, if he is a logician, put his argument into some such form as this:. As we have said, this goodness is not always moral goodness; it can be physical goodness, or utilitarian goodness.
A person is then loved because of the pleasure he gives, or because he is useful, or because "he can get it for you wholesale. The second cause of love is knowledge.
A woman cannot love a man unless she has had at least some knowledge of him. Even the dream girl of the bachelor has to be constructed out of fragments of knowledge.
The unknown is the unloved. The love of the animal begins with the knowledge that comes through its senses, but the knowledge of man comes from his senses and his intellect. As love comes from knowledge, so hatred comes from want of knowledge.
Bigotry is the fruit of ignorance. Though at the beginning, knowledge is the condition of love, in its latter stages love can increase knowledge. A husband and wife who have lived together for many years have a new kind of knowledge of one another which is deeper than any spoken word, or any scientific investigation; it is knowledge that comes from love, a kind of intuitional perception of what is in the mind and the heart of the other.
It is possible to love more than we know. A simple person in good faith may have a greater love of God than a theologian, and as a result a keener understanding of the ways of God with the heart than psychologists have. Goodness alone in isolation from knowledge could not prompt love; it must first be proposed to the mind and understood as good.
Knowledge can be either abstract or emotional. Geometry is abstract knowledge, but knowledge about sex is emotional knowledge. An isosceles triangle arouses no passions, but sex knowledge can do so! Those who advocate indiscriminate sex education to prevent sexual promiscuity forget that, because of the emotional tie-up, sex knowledge could lead to sex disorders.
It is argued that if a man knew there was typhoid fever in a house, he would lose the desire to go into it. True, but the knowledge of sex is not the same as the knowledge of typhoid fever. No one has a "typhoid" passion to break down doors with quarantine warnings, but the human being does have a sex passion, which needs a control. One of the psychological reasons why decent people shrink from vulgar sex discussion is because by its very nature it is not a communicable kind of knowledge.
Its method of communication is so personal as to make the two who are involved shrink from making it general. It is too sacred to be profaned. It is a psychological fact that those whose knowledge of sex has passed to a unifying love in marriage are least inclined to bring it back from the realm of their inner mystery to that of public discussion.
It is not because they are disillusioned about sex but because it has passed on to love, and only two can share its secrets. On the other hand, those whose knowledge of sex has not been sublimated into the mystery of love, and who therefore are most frustrated, are those who want to talk incessantly about sex matters. Husbands and wives whose marriages are characterized by infidelity are most loquacious on sex; fathers and mothers whose marriages are happy never speak about it.
Their knowledge has become love; therefore they do not need to gossip about it. They who presume to know so much about sex actually know nothing about its mystery, otherwise they would not be so gabby about it. The third cause of love, besides goodness and knowledge, is similarity.
This is a denial of the oft-repeated axiom that "opposites attract. Tall men marry short girls; fast talkers marry good listeners; and tyrants marry Milquetoasts. But in a more profound way, it is not unlikeness but likeness which attracts. The likeness between persons can be twofold: one arises from two persons having the same quality actually, as, for example, a mutual love of music.
This likeness causes the higher love of friendship, in which one wishes good to the other as to himself. This is what is meant when it is said that two persons are a "perfect match," or "they were made for each other. The stingy man loves the generous man because he expects from him something he desires. The vicious man can love the virtuous man when he sees virtue in conformity with what he would like to be. This kind of likeness causes love of concupiscence, or a friendship founded on usefulness or pleasure.
In this kind of love, the lover loves himself more than his friend. That is why, if the friend ever prevents him from realizing what he wants, his love turns to hate. Because we are imperfect beings, we seek to remedy our lack by possessions. Thus people who are "naked" on the inside, in the sense that they have no virtue in their soul, try to compensate for it by excessive luxury on the outside.
What one person lacks it is hoped the other will supply. Because the human heart desires beauty as its perfection, the ugly young man seeks to marry a beautiful rather than an ugly girl. On the surface, it would seem that his ugliness is the opposite of her beauty, but really it is his love of beauty which he does not possess actually , which attracts him to that which is beautiful.
The loves of all hearts are so many mirrors revealing their characters. Weak men in high positions surround themselves with little men, in order that they may seem great by comparison Capitalists who became rich because they struck some of God's wealth in the earth, love to build libraries to parade a learning which they do not possess. They love in appearance that which is similar to what they love in hope and desire. The woman who wishes to be a social climber will cultivate friends who are "useful," because of this similarity.
They have what she wants to have: social prestige. Saints love sinners, not because they both have vice in common, but because the saint loves the possible virtue of the sinner. On this subject no one has written with greater precision than St.
Thomas Aquinas, who in his monumental summary of Divine Wisdom points out that there are four effects of love. Because he envisages love as something higher than sex or a biological function, his observations apply in varying degrees to both human and Divine love. These four effects of love are: unity, mutual indwelling, ecstasy, and zeal.
All love craves unity. This is evident in marriage where there is the unity of two in one flesh. When a person loves anything, he sees it as fulfilling a need and seeks to incorporate it to himself, whether it be the wine that he loves, or the science of the stars.
In friendship, the other person is loved as another self, or the other half of one's soul. One seeks to do the same favors for him as one would do for oneself, and thus intensify the bond of union between the two. Whether it be love of wisdom, spouse, or friend, love is a unifying principle of both lover and beloved. Aristotle quotes Aristophanes as saying: "Lovers would wish to be united into one, but since this would result in either one or the other being destroyed, they seek a suitable or becoming union, to live together, speak together, and share the same interests.
Because love creates unity, we have explained why some heroic souls are willing to take on the sufferings and sins of others. A loving mother faced by a child's pain would take on that pain, if she could, in order to free her child of it. She feels the pain as her own, because her love has made her one with the infant. Just as love in the face of pain takes on the pain because of oneness with the beloved, so love in the face of evil takes on the sins of others, because of oneness with the beloved.
This sacrificial love reached its highest psychological expression in the Garden of Gethsemane, where Christ so identified Himself with sinners that He began to sweat crimson drops of blood.
It reached its greatest physical expression on Calvary, when He offered His life for those whom He loved. But before Gethsemane and Calvary, the law that love tends to unify the lovers produced the Incarnation, in which God, Who loved man, became man to save him from his sins. As saints become one with Our Lord through the identification of their will with God's Will, so those who love unto marriage become "two in one flesh.
The sense of emptiness in a person pushes him on to overcome his deficiencies, until ultimately he becomes one with what he loves. Incidentally, since love produces unity, it follows that one must be careful about that with which he is ultimately unified. Unity with God is necessarily immortal love. A love that has no higher destiny than the flesh will share the corruption of the flesh.
Our Lord made the fact of sex identification one of the reasons for His condemnation of divorce. Sex love creates a completeness between man and woman which goes far beyond any other unities of the social or political order! That is why the State which respects the family unity as the basis of civilization is much more unified than a civilization which ignores it.
A divorce-ridden civilization is already in cause, a disrupted civilization. It may take a few decades for the cracks in the family to become earthquakes in the political order, but one must not conclude, because its tombstone is not yet erected, that the civilization is not already dead. To justify their breaking of the unity, they may say: "Love has deceived me. And their deceit began with the day when they confused love and "sex thrill.
God never takes back His love, though we are sinners. We may betray Him, but He never abandons us. Mutual indwelling, the second effect of love, literally means that in love one inheres or exists in the other. The passion of love is not satisfied with mere possession but even seeks to assimilate the other into itself. There is hardly a woman in the world who has ever held a babe, who did not say: "This child is so sweet. I would like to eat it. If love did not imply inherence, there would be no psychological explanation for the fact that the harm and injury which is done to our friends can be felt as done to us.
This love in the supernatural order becomes an inherence which is identical with fixation. Sanctity is fixation in the love of God. Married love is fixation in human love for the love of God.
This indwelling of the thing or person loved is a fact in an intellectual as well as an affective way. The astronomer loves the stars, and he has the stars in his head, not in their material being but in a manner which is peculiar to his spiritual intellect. When an accident happened, the silly and adorable her saved her. From then on, a certain man lived a life. When Camille Chandler is fired from her job as a tabloid journalist, she is forced to consider a French billionaire playboy's proposal to make her his temporary wife.
Her sisters have found wedded bliss with their wealthy, wonderful dream men, but not Julietta Conte. I heard that the most powerful tycoon in A city, the gentry, was the one in charge of the Kang family — Kang Mo Bei. It was said that he would never smile, that his eyes were as cold as ice, and that his killing intent could penetrate through the air. Who Wants to Marry a Billionaire Vol 1. The Marriage Bargain by Jennifer Probst. Billionaire s Wife pursuing Ways by Hua Hua. The Marriage Merger by Jennifer Probst.
The Marriage Trap by J. We then made a pdf which we used to assist with editing the OCRed text. The last step enables us to hear and correct most of the errors that may have been missed by the other steps, as well as entertaining us during the work of transcription. The PDF version is constructed from dpi scans. The larger of the two TXT files is what you need to read the book using yBook.
The smaller of the two TXT files contains full instructions for creating audiobooks. Uploaded by Nick Hodson on July 21, Internet Archive's 25th Anniversary Logo. Search icon An illustration of a magnifying glass. User icon An illustration of a person's head and chest. Sign up Log in. Web icon An illustration of a computer application window Wayback Machine Texts icon An illustration of an open book.
Books Video icon An illustration of two cells of a film strip. Video Audio icon An illustration of an audio speaker. Audio Software icon An illustration of a 3. Software Images icon An illustration of two photographs.
Images Donate icon An illustration of a heart shape Donate Ellipses icon An illustration of text ellipses. The King's Own Item Preview. EMBED for wordpress. Want more? Advanced embedding details, examples, and help!
0コメント