The Expulsive Power of a New Affection
Mardi Gras is a fascinating creation of the religious calendar. Ash Wednesday begins 40 days of abstinence in preparation for Easter, and Fat Tuesday is the getting of it all out of your system before the fast. In many ways the Catholics get it more right than us protestants. But let’s not pretend that the current expressions of Mardi Gras in New Orleans or the southern hemisphere’s version, Carnivale, have anything to do with Catholics preparing to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus. I love a good party as much as the next guy, debauchery for the sake of debauchery does not sound appealing to me.
I recently read an essay entitled The Expulsive Power of a New Affection. It was written by Scottish pastor and theologian Thomas Chalmers (1780-1847). It is public domain so you can download the pdf for free here. Chalmers starts off his proposal with these words:
There are two ways in which a practical moralist may attempt to displace from the human heart its love of the world - either by a demonstration of the world's vanity, so as that the heart shall be prevailed upon simply to withdraw its regards from an object that is not worthy of it; or, by setting forth another object, even God, as more worthy of its attachment, so as that the heart shall be prevailed upon not to resign an old affection, which shall have nothing to succeed it, but to exchange an old affection for a new one.
Words have been significantly cheapened since 19th century Scotland. The richness of language utilized by Chalmers makes it a slow but rewarding read (it’s only 11 pages). This anti-legalism essay says that "The love of the world cannot be expunged by a mere demonstration of the world's worthlessness.” It is impossible to just tell new Christians (or old ones for that matter) to simply stop loving the world. The world has an allure about it that cannot simply be cut off, the old affection must be exchanged for a new one. The approach cannot simply be to go to Mardi Gras and tell people that Jesus wants them to stop doing what they are doing. Sinful indulgence is too fun for that. Something better must be offered instead.
I couldn’t help but think about my relationship with my wife as I was reading this essay. The essay is not about marriage, but about Jesus, and that affection for Jesus can and should be powerful enough to expel the old affections for this world. But God uses the earthly institution of marriage to describe his love for us in Scripture for good reason. The love I have for my wife has so expelled the affection I have had or could have for any other woman that those old or other affections have no piece of my heart. Now I’m not a fool, and I put up safeguards in my life, but it is not the safeguards that keep my faithfulness in tact. Better yet, it is not the keeping in tact of my faithfulness that is the chief aim of my marriage - rather it is a passion, a love, an affection that saturates every cell, every thought, every action. I don’t remain faithful just for faithfulness’ sake, the truth is that my experience of my wife is better than _________. You can fill in that blank with any name, picture, emotion, it doesn’t matter - my experience of my wife is better.
And so it is with Jesus.
There is another analogy that might help illuminate the point. We put a fence around a yard to keep the dog in. Our neighbors don’t have a fence. Neither my neighbor’s dog, nor my dog wanders around the neighborhood or, worse yet, runs away. Ours because of the fence, our neighbor's because of good training. Their method is better than ours. If we took away our fence, who knows what the dog would do. The fence is the only barrier, and if it fails we are in trouble. The church (and indeed unhealthy marriages) has built fences because it has feared the dog would get out, because it assumes that the dog wants to get out, and because it fears that what is beyond the fence is better than what is inside of it. It is only the fence that is holding the dog back.
Chalmers says love, "when its object is in possession...becomes love in a state of indulgence.” My love for my wife is love in a state of indulgence. My love for my wife is in no way based on the joys of denying myself indulgence in other women. My love for my wife isn’t based on what our relationship will ultimately become someday. Our love is here and now, it is gluttonously indulgent.
And so it is with Jesus.
I love Jesus not because a life of abstaining from the pleasures of the world is better than indulging in what the world has to offer. I love Jesus not because someday, when my heart stops beating, my relationship with Jesus will be great. I am not kept close to Jesus because of fences I have placed in my life, I am kept in Jesus because Jesus is better than ____________. To spend a raucous Tuesday indulging in all of the things you won’t get to partake of for the next 40 days because you are spending it focusing on Jesus is an exercise in completely missing the point. I get lent. I appreciate the practice of sacrificing something that is not necessarily evil to focus extra time and energy on Jesus. But don’t (and this was Jesus’ point in Matthew 6) walk around with your ‘woe is me’ attitude because you are focusing on Jesus.
If you know not of this new affection, and if you see religion in other people as something they are doing which, in your view is making their lives miserable, then I would say you aren’t looking at someone who has experienced the expulsive power of a new affection.
I recently read an essay entitled The Expulsive Power of a New Affection. It was written by Scottish pastor and theologian Thomas Chalmers (1780-1847). It is public domain so you can download the pdf for free here. Chalmers starts off his proposal with these words:
There are two ways in which a practical moralist may attempt to displace from the human heart its love of the world - either by a demonstration of the world's vanity, so as that the heart shall be prevailed upon simply to withdraw its regards from an object that is not worthy of it; or, by setting forth another object, even God, as more worthy of its attachment, so as that the heart shall be prevailed upon not to resign an old affection, which shall have nothing to succeed it, but to exchange an old affection for a new one.
Words have been significantly cheapened since 19th century Scotland. The richness of language utilized by Chalmers makes it a slow but rewarding read (it’s only 11 pages). This anti-legalism essay says that "The love of the world cannot be expunged by a mere demonstration of the world's worthlessness.” It is impossible to just tell new Christians (or old ones for that matter) to simply stop loving the world. The world has an allure about it that cannot simply be cut off, the old affection must be exchanged for a new one. The approach cannot simply be to go to Mardi Gras and tell people that Jesus wants them to stop doing what they are doing. Sinful indulgence is too fun for that. Something better must be offered instead.
I couldn’t help but think about my relationship with my wife as I was reading this essay. The essay is not about marriage, but about Jesus, and that affection for Jesus can and should be powerful enough to expel the old affections for this world. But God uses the earthly institution of marriage to describe his love for us in Scripture for good reason. The love I have for my wife has so expelled the affection I have had or could have for any other woman that those old or other affections have no piece of my heart. Now I’m not a fool, and I put up safeguards in my life, but it is not the safeguards that keep my faithfulness in tact. Better yet, it is not the keeping in tact of my faithfulness that is the chief aim of my marriage - rather it is a passion, a love, an affection that saturates every cell, every thought, every action. I don’t remain faithful just for faithfulness’ sake, the truth is that my experience of my wife is better than _________. You can fill in that blank with any name, picture, emotion, it doesn’t matter - my experience of my wife is better.
And so it is with Jesus.
There is another analogy that might help illuminate the point. We put a fence around a yard to keep the dog in. Our neighbors don’t have a fence. Neither my neighbor’s dog, nor my dog wanders around the neighborhood or, worse yet, runs away. Ours because of the fence, our neighbor's because of good training. Their method is better than ours. If we took away our fence, who knows what the dog would do. The fence is the only barrier, and if it fails we are in trouble. The church (and indeed unhealthy marriages) has built fences because it has feared the dog would get out, because it assumes that the dog wants to get out, and because it fears that what is beyond the fence is better than what is inside of it. It is only the fence that is holding the dog back.
Chalmers says love, "when its object is in possession...becomes love in a state of indulgence.” My love for my wife is love in a state of indulgence. My love for my wife is in no way based on the joys of denying myself indulgence in other women. My love for my wife isn’t based on what our relationship will ultimately become someday. Our love is here and now, it is gluttonously indulgent.
And so it is with Jesus.
I love Jesus not because a life of abstaining from the pleasures of the world is better than indulging in what the world has to offer. I love Jesus not because someday, when my heart stops beating, my relationship with Jesus will be great. I am not kept close to Jesus because of fences I have placed in my life, I am kept in Jesus because Jesus is better than ____________. To spend a raucous Tuesday indulging in all of the things you won’t get to partake of for the next 40 days because you are spending it focusing on Jesus is an exercise in completely missing the point. I get lent. I appreciate the practice of sacrificing something that is not necessarily evil to focus extra time and energy on Jesus. But don’t (and this was Jesus’ point in Matthew 6) walk around with your ‘woe is me’ attitude because you are focusing on Jesus.
If you know not of this new affection, and if you see religion in other people as something they are doing which, in your view is making their lives miserable, then I would say you aren’t looking at someone who has experienced the expulsive power of a new affection.
Comments
Post a Comment