Let’s not confuse true happiness with simple self-satisfaction.
Every saint can be our study of happiness.
Last week, the Wall Street Journal published a story titled “They’re the Happiest People in America. We called them and asked why.” If you, as a Catholic, clicked through the article to find out why, you are a fool. Because you have nothing to learn from him; it may even confuse you.
The Church probably does not have a more explicit teaching than what happiness is and how to be happy. The Catechism teaches that we have a natural desire for happiness, which “God has placed in the heart of man to draw him to himself because only he can fully satisfy it” (1718). Happiness is our primary goal, the ultimate purpose of our life.
But “true happiness is neither in wealth or prosperity, nor in human glory or power, nor in any human creation, however useful it may be, such as science, technology, art, nor in any creature, but only in God, the source of every good and every love” (1723).
Even a child can easily understand it: we were created to know God, love and serve him in this world and the next. Within the tradition, a distinction is sometimes made between “objective happiness” or what makes us happy, which is God, and “subjective happiness” or our happiness, which is the possession of God within the beatific outlook. In both cases, however, our happiness is God.
Let’s note the teaching: “True happiness is not… in prosperity” – or, we might add, in “development” or self-actualization. Happiness is not development.
If God is our happiness, then what makes us happy in this life? Whatever brings us to God and enables us to finally unite with him. Therefore, the “science of happiness” is precisely the same as the “science” of holiness. Avoid mortal sin. Often resort to the sacraments. Pray every day and often. Do everything for God. Live in his presence. Follow his law, not your own will. Try to live virtues to a heroic degree. Learn how Christ lived, and let his life be a model for yours.
“Beatus” means “one of the happy” in Latin. Every Saint is a study in happiness. They are our role models. The Church even “canonizes” them, which means that it makes them a reliable standard for you and me. Therefore, the “science of happiness” is the same as the study of the lives of saints.
It is unfair to the wisdom of the Church to say or imply that there is some special “science” of happiness that makes us better understand joy. Research science has nothing to say about happiness. It’s just not the right place to look.
And how did the Wall Street Journal find the happiest people for its story? They described themselves as such. And that is treacherous, because we often judge ourselves incorrectly. If we apply good criteria, then whether someone is “pleased” in this life is an objective fact about which the person can be wrong.
The interviewers asked, “Overall, how would you say you are these days—would you say you are very happy, fairly happy, or not?” Of this sample, 12 percent said “very,” 56 percent “quite ” and 30 percent “not very happy”. The interviewers gave no guidelines on how the respondents should understand the question. They left it up to everyone to decide what happiness is and how to decide whether they are happy or not.
It probably is a correct guess that most people answer based on whether or not they feel satisfied with their lives. Thus, for the purposes of the survey, happiness is tacitly defined as self-satisfaction.
However, self-satisfaction is not the same as true happiness. We can be content even when we divide our lives into unrelated areas, ignore or don’t think about a secret sin, an addiction or a broken relationship that we left (and maybe we broke an oath in the process), or a problem that we know is it must be dealt with.
We can be satisfied even when we lower the bar. A young man who strives to be the best in his field may be highly dissatisfied with his failures, while an old man who has accepted defeat is already satisfied.
We can be satisfied even when we adopt the wrong standard. A young person who works hard to support his family may feel dissatisfied because of constant stress and worry, while an older adult who has a modest lifestyle and no dependents may feel content because he can easily pay his bills.
I mention the young versus the old because, according to the story, the biggest difference was between them. The largest percentage of “not very happy” is among the young and “very happy” among the old.
It is clear that when you juxtapose two people, one seeking God and the other seeking self-satisfaction, you are showing two different lives and two very different intentions. If we asked a saint who believes he is the greatest of sinners, would he answer that he is “pleased”? Was the publican satisfied with himself, beating his chest repentantly? A contrite Dismas on the cross? Mary, who anointed the Lord’s feet with tears?
Philosophers talk about the “paradox of happiness”, which is that it is impossible to achieve happiness if a person strives for it. According to false conceptions of happiness, this makes sense. Happiness as self-satisfaction is like a pleasure that has the nature of a side effect. One must first love something to find joy in it.
It could be said that striving for self-satisfaction is not sustainable, because this motive would ruin what we are doing. Let’s say you had a free afternoon and went to visit a friend. If you declare that you did not intend to meet him but to find satisfaction through strengthening the relationships in your life, he should show you the door. The soldier dying on the beach may have found happiness, but not self-satisfaction.
Let the last words be: “Whoever loses his life for my sake will find it” (Mt 16, 35). That is the Lord’s paradox of happiness.
Michael Pakaluk, the expert on Aristotle and full professor at the Pontifical Academy of St. Thomas Aquinas, is a professor at the Busch School of Business and Economics at the Catholic University of America. He lives in Hyattsville, Maryland, with his wife Catherine, also a professor at the Busch School, and their eight children. His acclaimed book on the Gospel, according to Mark is The Memoirs of St Peter . His new book Mary’s Voice in the Gospel of John: A New Translation with Commentary, is also on sale. Professor Pakaluk was appointed to the Pontifical Academy of Saint Thomas Aquinas by Pope Benedict XVI.
Visitors counter: 111
