Saint Paul speaks in his epistle of idolatry, the placing of something before God as an end in itself (cf. Eph. 5:5). God is the end of everything and everything must be directed to this end, even marriage.
To begin with, one must believe in God. If there is no faith in God, then there is no reason to talk to one about love. God exists and it is an undeniable reality. Love is the nature of God, and in the context that love must be between two persons — and that love must be defined as an absolute —, then God must be a Trinity: Love Loving the Beloved. If one believes in God as a Trinity, then one understands the truth about Love. If one does not believe, love becomes relative. It can mean whatever one wants it to be. In this light, there is no ability to love because one does not know what is love and there can be no agreement that the two want the same thing. Let me provide an example. Two persons made a contract to exchange gold: 16 plus ounces of unrefined gold for a 16-ounce gold ingot. Then it was discovered the person who was to provide the unrefined gold brought 16 ounces of fools gold. Tell me, would the other person be obligated to live up to the contract?  Both may well have had the idea that each was giving to the other gold; still, the one bringing the pyrite obviously has no concept of what exactly gold is. No one, therefore, would hold the other person to the contract; rather they would say the first person was a fool and the second would be also if he accepted the pyrite.
To avoid such mistakes, it would be necessary to make clear that both parties understand what is gold: a soft metal, number 79 on the periodic table of elements, with the symbol of AU, the first two letters of gold in Latin, aurum. Because fool’s gold may look like gold, it would be necessary to explain the possibility of falling into this error by explaining that some are deceived by what seems to be gold but is fact iron sulfide – the compound FeS2 – a very common metallic material found everywhere. It is true that pyrite is sometimes found with some gold in it or where there can be gold. But pyrite is never gold.

When it comes to love, it is exactly the same. Two persons are going to make a contract that is an exchange of love. If one has a fools love and the other has true love, can one say the contract is valid? It is necessary to instruct both as to what is true love and what is fools love so that both understand they must bring true love. Of course, if one still brings a fools love and the other exchanges true love, do they not now also possess a fools love in place of true love?

The Church charges the priest to insure, as much as it is humanly possible, that such a contract does not happen where marriage is concerned. The priest, therefore, is instructed to teach those who wish to enter into this contract so they may give full consent to the contract and not claim ignorance.

St. John, in his First Epistle, Chapter 4, verse 8, states: God is Love. It is true that the Douay Rheims gives the translation of charity. Be that as it may, the same Greek root is used in its verb and noun forms, agape:

He that loveth not, knoweth not God: for God is charity. By this hath the charity of God appeared towards us, because God hath sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we may live by him. In this is charity: not as though we had loved God, but because he hath first loved us, and sent his Son to be a propitiation for our sins. My dearest, if God hath so loved us, we also ought to love one another. (1 John 8-12)

If God is Love, then the first response is to convince one that God exists and Marriage is a gift from God who bestowed the faculties that make a marriage possible. These faculties must be used as God ordains. They are not for ones personal use, that is, an end in itself. Marriage, as stated in the Nuptial Prayer, it is a gift given with a blessing which was not taken away in punishment for original sin nor by the sentence of the flood. (cf. Rituale Romanum, De Matrimonio). How does God want us to use this gift of marriage? As He directed: To establish a family.
The life of the Church is parallel to the life of the family. When one considers the words of St. Paul to the Ephesians, This is a great sacrament—but I speak in Christ and in the church—, it becomes easy to see the similitude God implies between the Marriage of a man and woman and the union of Christ with His Bride, Holy Mother Church.
Remember, faith in God is the foundation of marriage, even a natural marriage. Lack of faith brings only the perversion of the relationship between two persons. This is not easily dismissed if one glances at human relationships today: fatherless and abandoned children, promiscuous teenagers, men and women co-habitating like brute beasts, sodomitic vices, and human trafficking. For over 1900 years the Church had literally declared war and fought against such de-humanizing abuses. Unfortunately, with Vatican II, the Catholic Hierarchy surrendered. Some may say that this is not true, but one has only to see the change of the Church since Vatican II: No Religious Sisters or Brothers inspiring our youth to virtue and sacrifice; no obligation to fidelity to Church teaching; no obligation to be present at Her sacrificial meal, Holy Mass; No condemnation of extra-marital relationships – in fact, endorsing them by granting Catholic Divorces under the euphemism of annulments; and so-called Catholic Politicians, after visiting the Vatican for the “Popes Blessing,” being in the forefront of anti-Catholic movements promoting abortion, sodomy, and secularism. There is no opposition at all against the neo-paganism that has engulfed society beyond a few token words of the need for society to be “Christian,” which, today is interpreted as being tolerant of the intolerable.
Where is the outcry against the attack against the family? Where is a John the Baptist? Because definitely there is no forceful response from Rome which has become the modern Sanhedrin under the High Priest calling for the arrest and death of Truth. If parents do not take their responsibility seriously, they will have to answer to God for sending their children directly to Hades. How can a mother or father train their child to be a slave to Baal, as Scripture expresses it? (Cf. Judges 8:33) Look at the little girls, those that should be innocent and angels, dressed as for the brothel. And parents permitting the boys and men to handle and fondle this sensual merchandise without inhibition—rather they receive diabolical encouragement.
If you respond that the state educates your children, then my question to all the mothers (and fathers) is: Why did you give up the responsibility God directly entrusted to you and handed it over to the state? If you dont send your children to these pre-schools you are letting the state know your children are your responsibility, not theirs. Unfortunately, for a mess of pottage (cf. Gen. 25:34) – be it money or freedom – you have given up your birthright (salvation).

On the contrary to world opinion, Pope Pius XI wrote the difference between “the haves and have nots” regarding the family:
All these things, however, Venerable Brethren, depend in large measure on the due preparation remote and proximate, of the parties for marriage. For it cannot be denied that the basis of a happy wedlock, and the ruin of an unhappy one, is prepared and set in the souls of boys and girls during the period of childhood and adolescence. There is danger that those who before marriage sought in all things what is theirs, who indulged even their impure desires, will be in the married state what they were before, that they will reap that which they have sown; [Gal., Vl. 9] indeed, within the home there will be sadness, lamentation, mutual contempt, strifes, estrangements, weariness of common life, and, worst of all, such parties will find themselves left alone with their own unconquered passions.
Continuing, then, on marriage, one has to go to its institution. This is found in Genesis, where one reads:

(Chapter 1) And [God Father] said: Let us make man to our image and likeness: and let him have dominion over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and the beasts, and the whole earth, and every creeping creature that moveth upon the earth. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them. And God blessed them, saying: Increase and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it, and rule over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and all living creatures that move upon the earth. (1:26-28)

These words express that God instituted marriage, but not as something outside of nature, but within, that is, marriage is within the very nature of man. This does not mean that man must marry, anymore than any other creature must reproduce, such as ones domesticated animal – which there is no need to divert into. It does mean that everyone has the right to marry if there is no obstacle to such a union. This is why the Church teaches that parents cannot forbid their children from marrying; but also why the Church can proffer that her faithful who do not marry consider devoting themselves to the service of Charity or the Priesthood. That it is within nature is the gift to accomplish what God desires, the propagation of the human race. But this gift must be used as God orders it: Male and female He created them. He then explains why: To increase and multiply. When man and woman are united to accomplish this, they are married and God blesses the union: And God blessed them. The man and the woman feel complete peace and joy and understand it is what ought to be. It is not like the unions between illicit liaisons who may be mistaking the chemical reactions of bodily hormones responding to the perceived stimulating environment, which are no different than within the mob lynching a mistaken suspect or the robber stealing gold, i.e., excitement, pleasure and satisfaction, but sensing at the same time that this ought not to be and the guilt that follows. It is not like those illicit liaisons that are seeking something that cannot be obtained and are filled with a void but refuse to accept the reality that it can never be found without true love. This is a union between one man and one woman who accepts that they must cooperate with God in the procreation and education of the children they together bring into the world.

If one were to go through the history of mankind and observe all the various cultures, each would be centered on marriage between one husband and one wife. Even the most remote peoples seem to understand that marriage is essentially a union of one man and one woman. Promiscuity seems to have been present in many cultures, especially in their pagan rituals, but unfortunately the woman who participated was usually ostracized and no child of such relations had any rights within the community. The discussion of polygamy could be addressed, but for now it, too was a deviation, not the rule. Todays sodomitic relationships seem to have cropped up in all civilizations that first enjoyed luxury and quickly fell into immorality that soon ended in their demise. If one referenced the Scriptures one would find, as the author of the series of booklets, Toward Happiness and Holiness in Marriage:

Actually, in the Old Testament, marriage was not only characterized by the note of sanctity but it was also considered a foreshadowing of the sacrament of matrimony of the New Law. That is, a reading of the Old Testament passages relating to marriage allows us to see the eventual sacramental nature of marriage in the plan of God. Several of its passages, for instance, dignify and sanctify marriage by employing it as an image of the relationship between God and the individual human soul. Thus the Canticle of Canticles has this for its very theme. It depicts the union of the human soul with God as a betrothal in which the lover and the beloved are united in holiness.
Furthermore, marriage, according to the Old Testament, can be taken as a foreshadowing of the Incarnation, or the union of the divine nature with human nature in the person of Jesus Christ. It can also be taken as a symbol of the future union of Christ with His Church in the Mystical Body. Thus earthly marriage, since it can be taken so readily as a symbol of the union between God and man in so many ways by writers under divine inspiration, must have possessed a holiness in the eyes of the Old Testament writers that prompted them to use it as a most favorable symbol to express the present and future relationship of God with man. The note of sanctity with which marriage is endowed in the Old Testament foreshadows the note of grace with which marriage is endowed in the New Testament in the time of Christ in view of its institution as a sacrament. (Marriage in Christ, The Family Life Bureau, National Catholic Welfare Conference, 1955)

Taking a look again at the passage, Male and female God created them, there is also expressed the fact that God originally placed equality between husband and wife. This equality was lost through Original Sin, but restored with the coming of Christ. The words God addresses to the woman in Genesis 3:16, after the Fall, I will multiply thy sorrows, and thy conceptions: in sorrow shalt thou bring forth children, and thou shalt be under thy husbands power, and he shall have dominion over thee, find their fulfillment in the unnatural brutality man forced upon the woman of the ancient and pagan world: slavery, concubinage, and divorce. St. Pauls letter to the Ephesians does not speak of bondage, but the role each has as husband and wife being recognized and not to be rejected: Being subject one to another, in the fear of Christ (Eph. 5:21); There is neither Jew nor Greek: there is neither bond nor free: there is neither male nor female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus (Gal. 3:28). In his book, Cana Is Forever, Charles Doyle writes:

Every married person ought to take time out to read and meditate on the words of Holy Scripture relative to the first married couple who were ever joined in sacred wedlock. It is worthy of note that after God had created Adam and set him in "a paradise of pleasure to dress it and keep it," He commanded the first man not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Only after that primeval command was given did God say: "It is not good for man to be alone: let us make him a help like unto himself . . .  Then the Lord God cast a deep sleep upon Adam: and when he was fast asleep, He took one of his ribs, and filled up flesh for it. And the Lord God built the rib which He took from Adam into a woman: and brought her to Adam."
Observe in the Scriptural account as recorded in Genesis, Chapter 2, first verse, that one of the reasons for Eves creation was that she should be a helper to her husband. Secondly, note that Adam was commanded to abstain from the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge prior to Eves creation, that, doubtless, God created Eve to help Adam keep that law, and finally, that Eve was made from one of Adams ribs—that is, from his side. The early Fathers of the Church drew therefrom this lesson. They reasoned that God had not made Eve from a bone from Adams foot, lest some might believe that womans place was ever to be at the feet of her husband, groveling in servitude. Nor was woman made from a part of Adams head lest woman might claim dominion over mans mind, but, rather, Eve was made from the side of man, to indicate forever that a womans place was to be beside her husband as his helper. (c. 8)

Marriage, therefore, is a divinely instituted society between a man and a woman with the primary intention to bring children into the world and educate them for the next. Yet, even here the cooperation of man with God must be seen. For it is not God who chooses the companion, it is the man and woman who choose each other. They make a contract: To have and to hold, from this day forth, for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, until death do us part. (cf. Rituale Romanum. This is read in the instruction before marriage and said by the Groom and Bride in English speaking countries.) Once that contract is consummated, no man can put it asunder (cf. Matt. 19:6). It is not the Church that marries the couple. The couple themselves exchange the vows; they sanctify each other. This is why a natural marriage is still a valid marriage: Non-Catholics are not bound by Church laws, but they are bound by Gods laws. This is also why non-Catholics cannot change marriage: Because it is not a human institution, it is a Divine institution.

You may ask, then, why marry in the Church? Let it simply be said it was “bound on earth” by the Church (cf. Matt. 16:9 and 18:18) to uphold the sacredness of sacramental marriage when marriage  was reverting to barbaric customs.
Holy Mother Church reminds her children that she is the Mother of fair love, and of fear, and of knowledge, and of holy hope (Ecclus. 24:24), and her children should hearken . . . and learn the discipline of understanding, and attend to [her] words in th[eir] heart (16:24) because He that hearkeneth to [her], shall not be confounded: and they that work by [her], shall not sin. (24:30) With this is mind, Marks Gospel, speaks of the deaf-mute whom our Lord opens his ears with the words, Ephpheta, that is, Be thou opened. (Mark 7:34) Because, unless ones ears are opened, one cannot be instructed, as Job says: Then he openeth the ears of men, and teaching instructeth them in what they are to learn. (Job. 33:16)
The eternal truths that have been revealed to us by Our Lord, the Eternal Word of God, have been spoken to all, to the whole world (cf. Rom. 10:18). The question the Church asks through St. Paul is: Are you, right now, holding it fast as preached to you? (cf. 1 Cor. 15:1ff)
With the theme of marriage, this question must also be asked: Is one holding fast to the concept of marriage revealed by the eternal Word of God? Today one often hears the same words many of the disciples of Jesus said when He spoke of eating His Body and Blood: This saying is hard, and who can hear it? (John 6:61) Yes, one can walk away from the truth and join the rest of the unbelievers. Christ Jesus anticipates this struggle and asks: Will you also go away? (v. 68). Hopefully one has enough faith to respond as Saint Peter: Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life. (v. 69)
May, then, one attend to [Holy Mother Church], and learn: and . . . apply thy mind, . . . [and] be wise. (Prov. 8:33) For it has been the unfortunate ruin of so many who, stopping their ears to her wise teaching, engage into unions that are not blessed by God but are open invitations to the old serpent who seduceth the whole world (cf. Apoc. 12:9)
That God Father took the union of man and woman as desirable is expressed in the words: And God saw all the things that he had made, and they were very good. And the evening and morning were the sixth day. (Genesis 1:31) It is again re-emphasized in the relating of the special creation of Eve:

And Adam said: This now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man. Wherefore a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be two in one flesh. And they were both naked: to wit, Adam and his wife: and were not ashamed. (Genesis 2:23-25)
One does not want to conceive an idea that since this passage of the Bible was written about 3400 years ago that the audience was a simple un-educated people. The Scriptures have always been held as Gods Word, that God Himself has composed them, and that they treat of Gods marvelous mysteries, counsels and works as Pope Leo XIII wrote in Providentissimus Deus (November 18, 1893). The Ecclesia has meditated on the Scriptures for over three millennia. If, therefore, one takes the Words of Scripture seriously, ones sees why St. Paul can write to Timothy:  All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice, That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work. (2 Tim. 3:16-17) For Pope Pius XII wrote about Sacred Scripture: For as the substantial Word of God became like to men in all things, "except sin," (Heb. 4:15) so the words of God, expressed in human language, are made like to human speech in every respect, except error.

Taking this passage as a reflection upon mans psychological character, one can see that no one wants to be alone: be it the child clinging to the mother; the teenager hanging out with friends, the wife waiting for the husbands return, or the husband finally on his knees begging his wife not to leave after another drunken episode. Man seeks companionship and God is letting man know that it can be found only in another like unto himself.  (Gen. 2:18) It is not as though God forgot to create Eve and just recognized His mistake. It is to instruct man that within his nature God placed the desire to have companionship to fulfill that function God already mentioned in Genesis 1:28: Increase and multiply and fill the earth.
The next verse after introducing Adams loneliness, there follows the naming of the beasts. Man is over the beasts and man does not see in the beast any resemblance to himself. It is true man sees the acts of the animals that correspond to his bodily nature, but he does not recognize in them another person, an I that can respond to another I and therefore establish an I-you relationship. They appear only as objects, not as subjects. The child asks another person, what is that? Not the tiger. The child asks another person, who are you? Not a dog.
On the same level, then, it opposes those who support the evolvement of man from other animals, for man would find some semblance and relation to his ancestor; but, there is none physically, biologically, neurologically or culturally (because they have no culture). This is especially evident when one goes to the zoo. The small child, not instructed in zoology, still will not ask why his brother is locked up in a cage because he does not find the ape like unto himself.
As God presents the woman to Adam, Adam sees himself in the woman. And Adam said: This now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man. [Gen. 2:23) St. Paul, in his letter to the Ephesians, chapter 5, interprets these words in the following manner when speaking to the husband: For no man ever hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, as also Christ doth the church: Because we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. (v. 29-30) The only way one can leave the body is in death. The only way one can leave ones spouse is through death.
Adam also chooses to take Eve as wife in pronouncing the words: This now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh (Gen. 2:23) There is no question that Eve reiterated the words necessary to establish an I-you relationship for love is never one sided. One cannot say they love the other person and there is love between them. It is as ridiculous as the liberal theology today found in the Conciliar Church that claims that since God loves everyone there is a relationship between God and everyone and, therefore everyone goes to heaven. It is absolutely as deceptive as the serpent in the garden (cf. Gen. 3:1ff). There can be no love between God and man unless both choose to love each other and that is witnessed in Baptism, where the person then receives sanctifying grace, Gods Love, in the love between a Father and the adopted child. If not, why baptism? In this same sense, the contracting parties, the bride and groom, exchange their vows to one another in the marriage ceremony. If one were merely to believe that because they wanted to love someone the other person must love them in return they would quickly meet with rejection. If they were to outwardly express such a thought, those around would consider the person insane.
The words which follow, Wherefore a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be two in one flesh, (2:24) cannot be addressed to Adam and Eve, because they did not have a father and mother. God Father is addressing all those who would wish to marry: They are to leave all because they are Adam and Eve again, starting a new society, without father and mother. Any man who expects to marry must be able to support his family without any dependence on his parents. If he cannot do this, he is not ready to marry. Why? Because he cannot support a family! God Father expresses this clearly: Shall leave father and mother. The man is now the father, not his father. The wife is now the mother, not his mother. Not to leave means not to assume the obligation of what marriage life is. Not to leave means to face parental interference in the relation. The father cannot be father. The mother cannot be mother. The husband is not a true husband and the wife is not capable of being a wife. Leave father and mother! If not, donot marry. This is why it is so ludicrous when you see children marrying children (speaking about maturity). This is why it is so tragic when you see a young boy with a young girl who is with child because it is so unnatural. Unnatural? Yes, because humans are rational being by nature and this is irrational since the two still depend on their father and mother. When society says it is only natural, it is a lie. It is a denial of ones humanity. The serpent told Eve: You shall be as gods. (3:5) Society tells the youth: You are animals and should be free to indulge your animal impulses – but, since you cannot be neutered like cats and dogs, dont forget to pick up the free condoms; and, if that or the pill doesnot work, an abortion is promptly scheduled without the parents knowledge. Of course they work in darkness because if it were not evil, why must it be hidden? (cf. John 3:19)

Let the young man who considers his vocation to be a husband and father devote himself to providing a decent home to his family. When he arrives at that point in life, then he can look forward to carrying his bride over the threshold of his home and they can establish a holy family. The Holy Family, Joseph and Mary and the Child Jesus are not found in the home of Josephs (or Marys) parents despite the poverty and despite being fugitives.
Let the young woman who considers her vocation to be a wife and mother devote herself to learning the duties of managing a household of which she will one day of necessity be responsible. If she is not yet mature and devout, she should wait to avoid running headlong into encounters that only brings fatherless children into misery. She should seek a mature man who can be a husband and father, not an imagined “Prince Charming” who quickly vanishes as soon as responsibility appears. One reads in the book of Tobias (7:12): To him who feareth God is thy daughter due to be his wife: therefore another could not have her.
The final words of this chapter of Genesis states: And they were both naked: to wit, Adam and his wife: and were not ashamed. (Genesis 2:25) The declaration reminds the husband and wife that sanctified marriage is not shameful. What makes it shameful? Sin before and after marriage.