Being in Love June 19, 2007
Posted by metaphysicalrealist in Uncategorized.trackback
I’m currently reading through C.S. Lewis’ Mere Christianity in which he has a chapter on Christian Marriage. He makes the interesting argument that “being in love” is not the same as “to love.” For context sake, I quote in length:
“Being in love is a good thing, but it is not the best thing. There are many things below it, but there are also things above it. You cannot make it the basis of a whole life. It is a noble feeling, but it is still a feeling. Now no feeling can be relied on to last in its full intensity, or even to last at all. Knowledge can last, principles can last, habits can last; but feelings come and go. And in fact, whatever people say, the state called “being in love” usually does not last. … But, of course, ceasing to be “in love” need not mean ceasing to love.
[A] notion we get from novels and plays is that “falling in love” is something quite irresistible; something that just happens to one, like measles. …When we meet someone beautiful and clever and sympathetic, of course we ought, in one sense, to admire and love these good qualities. But is it not very largely in our own choice whether this love shall, or shall not, turn into what we call “being in love”? No doubt, if our minds are full of novels and plays and sentimental songs, and our bodies full of alcohol, we shall turn any love we feel into that kind of love.”
The question that arises in my mind from this portion of Lewis relates to Christianity. It seems as though part of Christianity, its novels, plays, and songs, attempt to get the believer to hold on to, or maintain a certain feeling. “Remember when you first came to Christ! Remember the zeal, the love you first had for the Lord!” I have digressed.
The question is this: Can a parallel be drawn between “being in love” and the experience many believers have at salvation? Then, based on that answer, can a parallel be drawn between “to love” in marriage, and the Christian experience in sanctification?
~ MR
.jpg)
Well said, MR, and thanks for pointing out the post, Joel. One would think, instead of merely remembering (or trying to resuscitate) the zeal, the “first love”, toward the triune God, that one’s love would deepen, would be purified and stabilized. Certainly, at least in my own experience with 18 years of marriage to a wonderful Godly woman, I look upon our early “feelings” as less than than where we are today. Perhaps, at 40, I am not as spontaneous as I once was. On the other hand, when I have cause for spontaneity, it is more noticeable because of the normal absence.
As regards the comparison to the Christian experience in sanctification, I would say that even though I may have fewer “fireworks” displays, I am much more thankful for smaller and smaller gifts of grace. Naturally, this is only the Lord’s doing. But I think that I speak less and listen more, to the extent that that which is truly intimate is a rejoicing with a “joy unspeakable and full of glory” (see I Peter 1:8)
As a parting thought, it reminds me of the invitation of Dr. Delnay to a recent bash, and the incredulous (although somewhat understandable) suggestion to record such conversation. Face to face communication is such that to record it would change it. We read that Moses spoke to God as one speaks to another face to face. Moses, more than most other people who have lived, repeated less than he experienced with God, or so it seems.
Could not the person, represented in our Lord’s parable, who accepts the message with great joy only to be soon choked be described as one who fell in love but never loved?