On Self-Control

O

I don’t think most would argue against the assessment that America has a self-control problem. In a previous post, I pontificated on our peculiar penchant to preach on particular perils while ignoring others that are just as (or even more!) deleterious to us as individuals and a culture. Today, I’m writing about on our lack of moderation as a whole, why that is, and what I think needs to be done about it.

Let’s start in the future

Once in a while, a book, television show, movie, video game or even television commercial will capture the audience’s imagination in unexpected and sometimes unprecedented ways. One example of this is WALL-E, a 2008 Disney & Pixar film that soared to a Metascore of 95 and brought in about three times what it cost to make — a critical success, by any stretch. In this movie, the future of humanity (set in 2805) is portrayed as not-quite-typically dystopian, as many futuristically-set movies opt to do (think Mad Max or Book of Eli). Instead, it’s more of a half-Huxleyan reality as opposed to a darkly Orwellian one: in WALL-E‘s world, people are smiling, satisfied, happy, amused. They’re carted about everywhere and apparently all independently wealthy (or at least devoid of financial obligations), with robots doing their bidding here and yon. But, naturally, there’s a trade-off; for all of these creature comforts and amenities, there’s been a price to pay in the form of pollution, consumerism, obesity, and a few more societal ills.

This picture of humanity arrested its viewers to the point that this cute G-rated family movie was referenced in multiple avenues of content creation from news articles to Youtube videos not for its entertainment value, but for its prophetic virtues: people viewed this movie as more than mere conjured-up fantasy; they saw it as a sincere warning about our potentially bleak future.

I typically save the quotations for my podcast, but I’m impelled to allow Futurism’s Jake Aaronkind to describe this phenomenon for me as follows: “Although the world of Wall-E is set in 2085, our careless, waste-driven society might convince you that Pixar’s Wall-E predicted the future. The garbage-filled, mucky Earth destroyed by mass consumerism and the sheer appetite of its inhabitants looks eerily similar to the destruction of our own environment. Toxic waste continues to pollute the natural world around us, killing trees and hopes of a greener future simultaneously. The largest corporations of the world continue to grow, as more aspects of our lives are shoved under the umbrellas of Amazon, Apple, and so on. Futuristic self-driving cars are starting to look a lot less futuristic as Google, Tesla, and several other companies make strides toward a computer-driven automobile. As our smart phones grow smarter and our attention spans grow weaker, society as a whole continues to immerse itself in the devices in front of us.”1

Well, that’s Just like, Your opinion, man

I’m of the persuasion that although the towers of trash and en masse motorized wheelchair highways featured in WALL-E are still a ways off in the future, there’s plenty of Neil Postman’s dystopia to go around today. For those unaware, cultural critic Neil Postman authored the book “Amusing Ourselves to Death” way back in 1985 in which he decries, among other things, the forceful way in which entertainment has been shoehorned into every meaningful message or activity due to our incessant demands for it and intolerance for anything lacking a “showbiz” flair. To Postman, this, in addition to the blanching of any helpful or meaningful context attached to the information we receive over the airwaves, would be our eventual downfall.

While I largely agree with Postman’s postulate, I would nonetheless like to delve a bit further and recognize that although our craven lust for amusement and instantaneous gratification are absolutely undeniably bad for our society, these tendencies themselves are really symptoms of a deeper pox: a lack of self-control. A dearth of discipline. A vacuum of moderation. An absence of the ability to simply say the word “no” or the perhaps even more difficult admission, “that’s enough.”

Our culture does not like moderation. You might disagree up front, citing a recent billboard you’ve seen that warns against drinking too much alcohol or gambling away one’s last dime, but I submit to you that there are many other enjoyments with which we inebriate ourselves. There’s the more obvious ones, such as sexual pleasure, entertainment, wealth, sugar, and so on. And then there’s the ones that, for whatever reason, my denominational tradition and political affiliation both seem to purposefully ignore, vilifying anyone who takes them seriously: pollution, waste, exploiting the earth rather than stewarding it, the insidious child labor practices responsible for our cell phones, and so forth. We are absolutely out of control. In the most real and visible sense.

Okay, so Why?

As far as the “why” goes, I won’t spend a tremendous amount of time here, because there’s far too much that could be said, and far too many opinions to be shared. If you’d ask Sapolsky he’d tell you it’s because we’re wired that way. If you’d ask your average preacher, he’d blame Satan or quote Jeremiah 17:9. And I’m sure there’s a glint of truth in all of that. Truly. But in the end, I can think of at least one surefire reason as to why there’s no self-control being practiced in most parts of the world, as well as in Christendom: we’re simply not taught to control ourselves. Partly because it’s not seen as a need anymore.

Let me explain: carefully moderating oneself is not a natural thing to do, and it’s oftentimes a very difficult thing to do. However, in today’s post-industrial age, we we’ve come up with great ways of eliminating or at least hiding the consequences of our excess these days. As a result, we’ve neglected the important virtues of discretion, moderation, and prudence simply because they’re increasingly redundant in our society. In short, we don’t spend as much time considering the consequences of our individual and collective actions and excesses because we’ve innovated so many ways to avoid them.

Here’s some examples: You still want to indulge in the sweetness of way, way, way too much sugar distilled into a concentrate and packed into a small aluminum can, but don’t want the consequences of that excess? Here you go — indulge yourself with a diet soda. Go crazy! You want the pleasures of extramarital sex without the consequences of that excess? Here it is — birth control, morning-after pills, and abortifacients. Have as much sex as you want: No babies, no diseases; you’re all set.

The message in every instance is clear: “Now you can live life without limits.” “Now, there’s no need to say ‘no’ because we’ve made a way so that you can say ‘yes’ every time.” As a result, our culture does not spend much time teaching or practicing self-control, because someone, somewhere is going to provide us with a solution where we can have our cake and eat it, too.

An’ This goes for you, too, Bub!

I also consider the Christian world at large here, as well. I have often found that when a Christian struggles with a particular sin, one of the first complaints is why Christ won’t just give them victory over their sin. Or, particularly, if they’re struggling with lust, why women just won’t cover up more (and while I do believe men and women have a shared responsibility in defusing our sexually-charged culture, the approach to just tell women to wear more clothes doesn’t work). Or if they’re chronically sick because of their continued obesity, why God won’t just heal them. There’s a staggering abdication of personal responsibility within Christianity, and this, I believe, has led to a real absence of self-control.

To illustrate this point in a different way: I recently heard on a podcast episode2 about a particular conservative Christian family with many children. In this home, the young ladies wore long skirts and dresses, so as not to “defraud” their brothers and other men. While this may have been well-intentioned and possibly helpful, I think if we peer past the layer of intended helpfulness, we might see something a bit more harmful: these young ladies were, at least in part, responsible for the purity of these young men in this family.

To further the point: As these children grew up, they adopted an interesting practice, no doubt taught by their parents: whenever they were out and about, when one of the daughters saw an immodestly dressed woman, they would say a codeword to the young men, to let them know not to look. Fair enough — I can see where this might be helpful. However, we see the same pattern: these young ladies once again bore the mantle of responsibility for the moral purity of their brothers. I wonder if as much attention was given to teaching the young men to be responsible for their own morality. I don’t know, but given the outcome of this family, it appears that this may have not been the case.

I want to be clear and say that I see and proclaim the virtue and value in both men and women teaming up together to say, “how can we best help each other in a sexually-overloaded culture?” This involves wise thinking and deference from both genders, yes, but never to the point of shifting personal responsibility to another person or party. Case in point: when our daughters dress for the day, one guideline that we have never used and will never use is, “will this cause someone to sin?” Because I won’t participate in a culture that robs men of their own responsibility to control their own eyes and lusts. We do, however, encourage our daughters to be mindful of their apparel and how they conduct themselves in a way that promotes a spirit of love and awareness rather than one of guilt and shame.

I spent more time on that section than I thought I would, but I hope to have so far made the case that we do not have self-control as a nation (not that such a case needs much asseveration!), and I hope to have shown one of the reasons why I think that is. So what now?

Then what’s the solution, genius?

In order to come to a solution, I think it is ofttimes helpful to explore what the solution is not. I’ll be deductive about this one: I can assure you that more regulations, burqas, laws, phone filters, restrictions and general asceticism are not the answers we need. While I think some certain presently-legal indulgences should be illegal to aid in a flourishing and just society, and while I think a phone filter or accountability software or an appetite-suppressing pill (are those still legal?) can be helpful tools, none of these are tenable as long-term solutions.

If we can learn anything from the Israelites, it’s that having a law code comprised of hundreds of restrictions does very little (read: nothing) to reform or transform the human heart, however meaningful or practical those laws may be. In fact, I think I could build a sustainable case that the more rules and regulations are placed on a society, the more that society will raise its head up against them or, more often, find clever ways to circumvent them. The insightful reader will already be societally circumspect at this point, cognizant that this isn’t limited to the Israelites, but is clearly the case in America as well. It’s never going to stop, this spiral of rebellion and exceeding all boundaries. We see it in Genesis’ Garden of Eden, and we see it today all around us: when rules are pitted against our desire to consume without restrictions, we’ll pick the latter every single time.

This leaves us with a grave and intimidating reality, that, if I were to let the late Carl Sagan say it, would sound something like “no one is coming to save us.” But to disagree with Prof. Sagan, I would submit to you that he already has. In one of the most meaningful and substantial selections of prose in all of human history, Jesus of Nazareth took the time to point out that we’re very good at finding loopholes in any law that comes from the outside, so the real change has to come from the inside. This isn’t to say that our conscience should be our guide, as that’s a terrible idea (just read up on Marina Abramovic’s experiment called ‘Rhythm 0’ for proof of this, or just hop on Reddit for a few minutes if you prefer). What I am saying, however, is that there’s something to be said about what the New Testament authors call the indwelling influence of the Holy Spirit, which bears fruit. One of these fruits is temperance or self-control.

I don’t pretend to understand all of what is taught in the Scripture about the Holy Spirit and his indwelling of the believer. But since ultimately, moderation must come from within, not without, I am of the persuasion that what the Bible describes as “Christ in us” is the only answer to to the current plague of excess and overindulgence. To allow him to transform our desires, not restrict our actions. To allow God to give us a soft heart instead of a one made of stone. We need this inward transformation from him, because we’ve shown time and time again that we have no clue (or real desire) to live within healthy boundaries on our own.

In the end: without a heart transformed by Christ, all we’re left with — individually and societally — is WALL-E’s wasteland.

  1. https://vocal.media/futurism/how-pixars-wall-e-predicts-the-future ↩︎
  2. https://www.doctrineanddevotion.com/podcast/yoga-pants ↩︎

About the author

M. Ernest
By M. Ernest

M. Ernest

About Me

I have the privilege of pastoring in the northeastern United States, and I am blessed with a wonderful wife and four precious children. We also have a dog, a cat, and a few chickens.

I enjoy writing about theology, current events, and issues that many would deem controversial (because, well, they are).

I am presently writing a book about how to be an absolutely insufferable Christian, drawing from my deep wells of experience as an absolutely insufferable Christian.

The Other Thing I Do

You can find M. Ernest's other endeavor, the Equipoise Podcast, here.