C. S. Lewis’ Mere Christianity is a consideration of Christian belief. Borrowing from Acts 11:26, Lewis broadly
defines a Christian as a person who follows the teaching of the apostles. Lewis wants to explain the essence of such
following. Hence, Mere Christianity. Lewis’ explanation of mere Christianity
requires four steps (each each presented in an individual book that comprise
the entirety of Mere Christianity). It begins with an attempt to establish facts
that allow Christianity to make sense. Lewis then places Christian doctrine into
dialogue with these facts to see if it addresses the needs such facts create, followed
by an exploration of how such doctrine affects morality. Lewis concludes with a discussion of who the
Christian God is and what this God is turning people into.
In Book I come the facts, along with an
understanding that facts – by their very nature – are subject to debate. An external standard of morality exists. People everywhere have an idea of how we
should behave – “the law of human nature”.
Our problem is adhering to this idea.
Actually, other people have
this problem. People are acutely aware
when another wrongs them, which implies the external standard. However, people regularly excuse why they themselves
are not culpable when another is wronged.
This also implies the same standard; otherwise why make the excuse. We cannot measure morality the same way we
measure other facts (like the fact of gravity).
Debates about science vs. religion unnecessarily confuse things. Science measures one aspect of reality,
whereas religion measures another.
Science is not the proper tool to measure morality.
Book II is a conversation between Christian
doctrine and this external morality. Lewis
notes that believing in a god and being a Christian are not synonymous. The Christian God is a particular type of god
who exists (as opposed to not existing) and is good (as opposed to being beyond
good and evil). Other religions also describe
their gods this way so understanding the Christian God requires more information,
particularly surrounding his goodness.
Evil cannot exist on its own.
Instead, it needs a standard of goodness to oppose. Christianity teaches that evil is a
corruption of good – initiated by the personal creature “Satan” – and that God
is working to restore the world to its pre-corrupted state.
This suggests two things: first, that
God created people with the intention that people find the source of life in
him, and second, that Jesus is this creator God. If it is true that the human Jesus is also the
creator God, we need to ask why he was here.
The New Testament indicates his primary purpose was to suffer, die, and
resurrect. In doing so, Jesus took away
the power of death. This is the essence
of Christianity.
Book III asks a question about Christian
doctrine: It is good that it is internally logical, but does its approach to
morality actually affect how people behave?
Christian morality differs from other moralities. Christian morality has three components:
treating others fairly, acknowledging personal sin and working to address it,
and being in tune with the creator. Christianity
says that personal sin exists and people need to have a relationship with God,
which is not true of all moralities. While
other moralities may say something similar, Christianity also differs in how it
addresses personal sin and a relationship with God.
Christian morality is best explained
through virtue. Virtue is acting rightly
without being compelled to act rightly.
There are four cardinal virtues, agreed upon by most everyone, which are
prudence, temperance, justice, and fortitude.
Christianity also suggests three theological virtues, which are how
Christian doctrine affects morality. The
first theological virtue is charity
(love). Charity is not an emotion, but
rather treating other people rightly regardless of our particular emotions
about them. The second is hope.
Hope looks ahead to the ultimate stage of the Kingdom. This does not mean ignoring present need. Instead, as we strive for the ultimate stage,
we inevitably address the needs in front of us now. The third is faith, which has two components.
Faith is the acceptance of Christian doctrine. Faith is a virtue because it continues in
spite of changes in mood. Faith also
includes trusting God. We demonstrate
this trust by obeying God through the imitation of his goodness.
Book IV attempts a theological
explanation of God. God exists as a
Trinity. This means that properly
understanding God requires, first, connection to a loving community and,
second, connection to God because we were made to be with him. Jesus is the begotten Son of God because he
is of the same essence as the Father.
Jesus rose from the dead. This
means that both God and Man resurrected. When we see the resurrected Jesus, we see a
man as he is supposed to be.*
Repentance is how God allows people to
become the creatures we are supposed to be.
When God changes us, he does so completely. We do not become not-so-bad-people, but are
instead being made into perfect people.
We cannot judge the success of this process by whether a particular person who is a Christian is
a nicer person than a particular person
who is not a Christian. Instead, we
should ask what the particular Christian
would be like without Christ.
Repentance changes what we are. Christians are no longer merely creatures of
God. God has made us into sons of
God. We are entirely new beings. If God is to make us into new creatures, we
must give up our old nature. This means
trusting God to provide a full life.
Mere
Christianity is
what comes about when a brilliant and creative mind explains theology. This book, particularly the first chapter of
Book IV, is among the best descriptions I have read about my religion. As I read, I often found myself thinking that
Lewis was directly answering questions that I posed to him. Whether you share Lewis’ faith or not, I
sincerely hope that you read this book.
It has the potential to inspire, but if nothing else, it will provide a
thorough and clear description of one of the world’s major belief systems.
This is not to say that the book is
perfect. Lewis holds to hierarchical
gender relationships, which he acknowledges to be unpopular**. Certainly The Bible does include similar
teaching at points (which is undoubtedly where Lewis gathers his ideas from),
but at this point enough theology and biblical study exists to convince me that
such hierarchy is a cultural injunction for a particular time and place rather
than a universal rule. I also wonder if Lewis
was too assumptive surrounding the cardinal virtues when stating that all
“civilized people recognize” them. I
wonder if most people still (or ever did) agree that the cardinal virtues in
particular – prudence, temperance, justice, and fortitude – are all good or
even whether a universal morality in general is even possible to agree about.
The critiques I have of Lewis have
little to do with the general direction of the book. In fact, I can even more easily highlight
particular points where I agree with Lewis.
Chapter 3.6 concludes by noting that Lewis wouldn’t want another
religion legislating its entire ethic through parliament, so he should not want
to impose his entire ethic legislatively.
Lewis also strikes what I see as a perfect balance between giving to
charity and working for a just society in parallel (Chapter 3.3).
I did a Christian apologetics class at
seminary and one of the things I learned was that apologetics are important
descriptors of the faith not only for people who are not Christians, but also
for people who are. Why I think Mere Christianity is so important comes from
how it presents belief to me, an Evangelical Christian who experiences a bit of
scepticism. I thought it was interesting
that Lewis did not start with what one would typically call an explanation of
what Christianity is. Instead, by
starting with areas of common humanity – namely whether morality exists and how
to define it if it does – and then testing whether Christian teaching is able
to speak to these areas, Lewis makes some of the harder to grasp aspects of my
faith easier to encounter. Even when
disagreeing with Lewis, I was able at least to see that his ideas were
thoughtful and considered. Similar can
be said about how Lewis periodically notes that not every step he takes his
readers on indicates that Christianity is a viable faith choice. Some steps lead in this direction but are not
the entire journey.
I expect you will find this book
valuable.
*I
hope you will forgive my gender exclusive language. Using it makes me uncomfortable, but the
plural is grammatically unwieldy here. I
used “Man” because that is what Lewis did and because Jesus was incarnate as a
male.
**See
Chapter 3.3 regarding obedience, as an example.
No comments:
Post a Comment