Nice post, Erick. I never knew of anyone before Aquinas using the idea of an un-caused cause, i mean, I didn't realize he was not the first canonized individual. Aside from those crazy greek thinkers. (hah, could you imagine the flame wars they must have had back in their own forae?)
The one time I went looking into the idea, it brought me to a secular discussion of the idea, and all I can recall is the position that an uncaused cause would necessarily have to exist with 100% objectivity. So, this means that it would exist outside the realm of its effect, but not inside of it. The effect, namely us and everything around us, would exist within the realm of this uncaused cause.
One downside, a pessimist might say, is that for this cause to be 100% objective with relation to us means complete ambivalence, no love or hate, but primarily no love, so what is the use? The upside would spring from the idea that
... transcendent wisdom, will automatically awaken infinite love
and I mean that complete objectivity would necessarily be transcendant wisdom.
The Cause of all is above all
The above is what triggered the memory.
The "what is north of the north-pole?" question is this: what if the idea generally considered a supreme existence, uncaused in our universe, happens to have a long chain of cause an effect preceeding it, and ultimately to its own uncaused cause?
Yea, that's where my brain starts gasping for air.
on a simpler note, while i've not attended mass in ages, I am still fond of the prayer of St. Francis of Assisi (clickety-click).