On one of my favorite Yahoo groups for homeschoolers, a debate is raging over C. S. Lewis . . . again.
Lewis is widely regarded as one of the most important Christian apologists of the 20th century, and rightly so, in my opinion. Yet there are some who loudly proclaim that he was not a Christian, but rather a dangerous atheist who will lead our children into error.
This debate fascinates me, and I purpose to study through Lewis’s works, as well as what others have written about him (including critics), and write about the issues here from time to time, perhaps even over the course of several years.
Total objectivity is impossible, so I should acknowledge that I am a Lewis fan. In fact, I regard The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe as an incredibly powerful picture of Christ’s redeeming love for traitorous sinners. (Interestingly, my young children instantly recognized the symbolism of Aslan’s death and resurrection when we read that book aloud years ago.) But I will not hesitate to acknowledge any theological problems I may find in Lewis’s writings, despite my fondness for his works.
Judging from what I have already read, the debate over Lewis is volatile. I welcome thoughtful discussion of this subject, whether you agree with me or not. All I ask is that you evaluate Lewis on the basis of what he wrote, in context. Please refrain from simply posting a URL or an out-of-context quote and commenting, “There! That proves Lewis was an atheist!” Thanks in advance for keeping the tone of this discussion respectful.
Mary Jo
Copyright 2005 by Mary Jo Tate
Mary Jo,
I’ve read a considerable amount of Lewis’ work by now. Several things can be truly said about the man. He was a cigar-chomping, brandy sipping Anglican, a nominal evolutionist, and an academic steeped in the pagan mythology of the 8th century Anglo-Saxons. He came to believe in Christ after his Roman Catholic drinking buddy, J.R.R. Tolkien, persuaded him that Jesus was actually a true, living example of the old “dying god” myth.
One can also truly say that C.S. Lewis was the greatest articulator of Christianity in the oh-so-cerebral 20th century. He took the simple truth of the Gospel and presented in ways that confounded the elites, and still do today. His famous argument that Jesus was “Liar, Lunatic or LORD” is widely used today.
The theology in his fiction can extend from fanciful to aberrant. Surely Aslan is NOT Jesus. Surely the Fall is not limited to the “Silent Planet.” Surely each planet does not have an “Oyarsa” — a presiding archangel that serves the One God. Surely dead souls like Napoleon do not still have a chance to chose redemption, ala’ “The Great Divorce.”
But Lewis, in his apologetical works and his allegory, provokes out thoughts and gets us thinking about Biblical truths. No single individual of the last century has done that as effectively or as creatively. Surely the context of Lewis is important as having been raised an Edwardian Englishman. Augustine of Hippo also expressed some brilliant thought as well as some aberrant theology. We should not dismiss him outright for being a 4th century African who is regarded as a Doctor of the Church in Roman Catholicism.
And by extension, who is to say that 20th century American evangelicalism encapsulates the entire truth of God’s theology? Perhaps a future generation might view contemporary American doctrines — from “Hal Lindsey/Tim LaHaye” eschatology, right-wing conservatism, televangelist sideshows and the “Prosperity Gospel” — as theological aberrations? Indeed, such topics are far from the minds of the suffering church in China and the Arab world, whose lives are closer to “Foxe’s Book of Martyrs” than our own here in the good ol’ USA.
Anyway, rather than stand in judgement of the theological ideosyncrasies of Christians greater than myself, I prefer to seek the “faith of a little child,” and to “prove all things, hold fast to what is true,” and ultimately let the LORD decide to whom He will extend His grace on The Last Day.
Hi Mary Jo, I was “just funnin'” with you by writing “ElectricBibliophile,” per your higher-above post! Sorry about that subtle attempt at humor! I’ll be sure to call you by your *real* nom de plume in the future! (cc’ed at my blog as well)
Well, Jay, despite my profession, I normally refrain from “editing” blogs or e-mails, but since another reader had commented just the day before that she had trouble adding me to her friends because she typed “electric,” I guess I was a little hypersensitive.
All the “gurus” say to use domain names that are easy for everyone to remember and spell, and I made an exception for words I love. Now look what trouble I’ve gotten myself into! 😉
A bit redfaced,
Mary Jo Tate
eclectic, electric, but occasionally clueless