The Nature Of True Virtue, 1

Yesterday I was reviewing George Marsden's scholarly biography of Jonathan Edwards and I was attracted to Edward's treatise, The Nature Of True Virtue.  Reading it today, or beginning to do so, I was struck by its application to the Gospel.  I am going to attempt to BLOG on this but it may be a failure as this is rough reading . . . . and I may have missed the point entirely.

Here is where I am going: Edwards makes some painful statements regarding the trend of some Christians to be parochial.  By parochial I mean the pursuit of the good of my particular family or church or society to the exclusion of all others.  It is, in essence, a form of "As for me and my house -- we will serve the Lord -- and if we are well, let the rest of the world be hanged."  Private love with no interest in the public good is not love at all.

Edwards finds narrowed sympathies or parochialism to be a denial of true virtue.  He establishes true virtue on the glory of God and insists it will be seen in a broad a concern for the public good as can be developed.  Let me try to explain as best I can.

Edwards says this, engaging in the debate with the moral philosophers of his day, True virtue most essentially consists in BENEVOLENCE TO BEING IN GENERAL. Or perhaps to speak more accurately, it is that consent, propensity and union of heart to being in general, that is immediately exercised in a general good will.

What he means by this is this (simply put): true virtue desires the highest good to all beings.  It does not rejoice in evil, but rejoices in good.  Being established upon the glory of God as the highest good, it desires all to enter into the enjoyment of God.

What he goes on to assert is that the test of all true benevolence is its root -- is it established upon a desire to see all blessed!  God is to be delighted in above all -- and true benevolence would desire others to enjoy Him as well.  Here he goes (with comments):

the nature of true virtue consists in a disposition to benevolence towards being in general; though from such a disposition may arise exercises of love to particular beings, as objects are presented and occasions arise. (In other words, if there is true love to all being, then it will show up in love to individuals, for example . . . )  No wonder, that be who is of a generally benevolent disposition, should be more disposed than another to have his heart moved with benevolent affection to particular persons, with whom he is acquainted and conversant, and from whom arise the greatest and most frequent occasions for exciting his benevolent temper.(But he goes on to say it is not the same in reverse -- that love for particular persons, if not rooted in love in general to all, is not virtue:) But my meaning is, that no affections towards particular persons or beings are of the nature of true virtue, but such as arise from a generally benevolent temper, or from that habit or frame of mind, wherein consists a disposition to love being in general.

In other words, if I love my wife and children, and even my church, but do not demonstrate love to my neighbor or community or co-workers -- in all likelihood, my love is a sham and not true virtue.  It is selfishness in some form.  Sin turns us in on ourselves, and that self absorption can look like virtue.

That, it seems to me, is what Edwards is saying in his opening two chapters. 

What it means is that a privatized version of Christianity is actually not a weak version of the Gospel, but a denial of the Gospel.  And I think the life of Christ bears this out -- for he went about doing good (indiscriminately) and healing all who were oppressed by the devil.  The nature of God's goodness is to seek the good of all.  This is not a sentimental love for God is just -- but it is true desire to bless.  Elsewhere Edwards says that true love is the expansion of the heart so that we take great delight in the well being of others as much as in our own.

So, as I drive home tonight and stop by the store -- is it a godly thing to ignore the name and person of the one who takes my money for my purchase?  Or to drive into my neighborhood with no prayer for the good of those who live nearby?

I think of two examples of men who lived this -- William Wilberforce and Wayne Alderson, but more on them at another time.

Comments

[Caleb Maskell]

Hi Mark:

Glad to see smart folks writing blogging about JE!

Check out our Jonathan Edwards website at http://edwards.yale.edu. If you like it, please consider adding it to your blogroll.

Cheers,

Caleb Maskell
Jonathan Edwards Center
Yale University

[DLE]

Mark,

Nice post. More people should have this kind of understanding. We've gone so far into ourselves that fewer and fewer people think outside their families. That kind of insular thinking is hurting the mission of the Church in this country, while simultaneously hurting our communities.