Setting Lewis straight

This post will probably be completely incoherent, as I’m working under a time deadline. I have a Viking Age Society meeting tonight.

Actually, I have plenty of time to write this, but you never know what will happen. I might get an attack of writer’s block and have to leave without posting. I might have a sudden toilet explosion and have to spend the evening with a plunger and towels.

Worry as globally as possible, that’s my motto. Because disasters are always so much more bearable if you’ve worried yourself sick about them in advance.

Also I’m not entirely sure I haven’t posted on this subject before. But if I did it was a long time ago, and who remembers? That’s the upside of writing ephemera.

Anyway, thinking along the lines of my post last night, I thought I’d mention one point on which I differ (I think) with C.S. Lewis.

(That sound you hear is everyone who knows me intaking breath. [Taking in breath? Performing an intake of breath? Clumsy. Clumsy whichever way you go. Replace it or let it stand? Let it stand. I’m in a hurry here.]) I’m well known to be one of those Christian English majors who have trouble telling the works of CSL apart from canonical scripture.

But Lewis says in several places (I’d look it up, but like I said I’m sweating under a deadline here. High R-factor in those deadlines) that Jesus Christ introduced no new ethical ideas. And this is a good thing, in his view (and in mine) because good and evil are universal, and have been recognized, in generally recognizable forms, throughout all cultures throughout all history.

But I think Christ did introduce one fresh, unprecedented teaching. One teaching that no one had presented before. And that was personal humility in relation to one’s neighbor.

Other religions have taught humility before God. But Christ (correct me if I’m wrong) was the first to say, “You should treat your neighbor as if you were his servant. You should do nothing to defend your personal honor.”

Remember, you read it here first.

Unless you didn’t.

Hey, I’m done! In plenty of time, too!

Now I can worry about something else. Computer crash. Traffic accident on the way to the meeting tonight. I’ll come up with something.

0 thoughts on “Setting Lewis straight”

  1. I would respectfully disagree. “In the beginning was the Word…” I don’t believe that jesus christ introduced ‘new’ concepts, I believe he introduced all ethical concepts. The Son (as part of the Trinity) is manifest all throughout the ‘old testament’ scripture. (Luke 24) I believe the language given to Adam had imbedded in it all (biblical) ethical and moral categories. I believe the pre-flood world (despite the silence in text) had a moral and ethical code. (How else could it have been judged, condemned and punished? by what standard could people have been called wicked? How else could figures like Enoch and Noah have been called righteous? In conclusion I believe all ‘ethics’ is either an affirmation of, or a rejection of, god’s revealed word to man.

    – p.s. The old testament does of course say; “thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” (And is filled with verses on how one should defer to one’s neighbour.)

    – Pro 16:19 Better [it is to be] of an humble spirit with the lowly, than to divide the spoil with the proud.

    – if you maintain christ introduced new ethical ideas it seems to me you run the risk of affirming a ‘progressive’ theology. (i.e. the idea ethics must change to fit changing times.)

  2. I’m speaking in historical terms. The “turn the other cheek” business was new with Jesus. There’s a lot of difference between being humble and being a servant.

  3. I plan to disagree with this in several minutes if not hours. You’re prob. right about what Lewis said, but I’m thinking doesn’t say that in _The Abolition of Man._

    For example, Confucius said avoid doing things to people which you wouldn’t want them to do to you. That’s fundamentally different than Jesus’ bidding to do those things to others which you would want done to yourself.

  4. You’re probably right that I was wrong about THE ABOLITION OF MAN. That book is so germane to the issue that I kind of made the mental jump, but Lewis isn’t really talking about Christianity there.

    I think most people consider Jesus’ Golden Rule a positive version of the older “don’t do as you wouldn’t be done by” rule preached in many societies. I guess it depends on how you define originality.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.