Book 3, Chapter 1: The Three Parts of Morality

C.S. Lewis compares directing human behavior to directing a fleet of ships. In the first place, the ships must get along with one another. In the second place, the ships must be mechanically operable. Finally, they must be directed by a noble commander.
We see how profound this illustration is when we apply it to our lives in God's world. The civilized world spends most of its time trying to get the first part in order. We point the ships in the direction we want them to go and assume all is well. For instance, organizations like the United Nations would have us lay down our arms and just be nice. Since most of us do not like killing, this purpose seems noble. Lining the ships up so they don't collide seems sufficient until we see that people continue to kill each other even after they have promised not to. This is what takes us to the second part of Lewis's illustration.
People get along well with each other when they share a common purpose—that is—the internal driving force is a shared one. If you want the ships in your fleet to stop running into each other, their engine rooms and steering mechanisms must be properly tuned. When working with people we might agree with Paul and say that they need to be "one in spirit and purpose."
But more information shows us why this stool needs a third leg. What if you successfully keep the ships from colliding by uniting them in purpose (parts one and two) but find that their purpose is directed by an evil leader intent on destroying every other fleet of ships in the ocean? It really does make a difference who owns the ships. We wrongly assume that our vessels are independent of all the others and that our own behavior makes no difference as long as we allow the other ships to stay afloat. But this is not the case if we are owned by another. Lewis puts it this way: "If somebody else made me, for his own purposes, then I shall have a lot of duties which I should not have if I simply belonged to myself."
Here is why I think this chapter is very relevant you. You are at the point in your life when you are making decisions about relationships with the opposite sex, establishing standards for your personal entertainment and setting priorities for the use of your time, treasure and talents. It is very difficult to have other people tell you what kind of standards to set, but you must remember that you are not your own. Be patient with parents and institutions who apparently want to control your life. Is it possible that they have a better picture than you of where the Admiral wants his ships to go (or not go)? Our Great Commander designed the ships and not only knows how they should run, he knows where the mission will take them. As I told a friend who was destroying his life: "You were built for better purposes."

What do you think?

Book 2, Chapter 5: The Practical Conclusion

This may be one chapter in which you will find disagreement with C. S. Lewis (sacramental view of baptism and communion). Please don't throw the rest of the chapter out, however. He roars back like a fiery, Calvinistic evangelist and says this: "[The Christian] does not think God will love us because we are good, but that God will make us good because He loves us; just as the roof of a greenhouse does not attract the sun because it is bright, but becomes bright because the sun shines on it." Notice the warning Lewis gives at the end of the chapter: "When the author walks on to the stage the play is over. God is going to invade, all right: but what is the good of saying you're on His side then, when you see the whole natural universe melting away like a dream..." The question for discussion: When, in our desire to win a person to Christ, does it become necessary to warn them about hell?

Book 2, Chapter 4: The Perfect Penitent

In this chapter Lewis is answering the two crucial questions answered first in the Gospels: "Who is Jesus Christ?" and "What did he do?" On the first reading it looks like Lewis is downplaying theology. Quite the opposite is true. While he is hesitant to dig deep (remember his target audience), his bare-bones presentation calls the reader to embrace the death of Christ on his own behalf. That is theology. A chapter summary would have to be what Lewis calls "the catch." He says: "Only a bad person needs to repent: only a good person can repent perfectly. The worse you are the more you need it and the less you can do it. The only person who could do it perfectly would be a perfect person—and he would not need it.” Two questions for you: First, how does this knowledge that we are calling sinners to do what they have no power to do affect our theology? And, second, how does this affect our attitude when we seek to evangelize lost people?

Mere Christianity, Book 2, Chapter 3: "The Shocking Alternative"

I forgot to blog this last week for all of you non-Facebook people. Sorry. Here it goes:

Lewis gets to the heart of idolatry: men trying to "invent some sort of happiness for themselves outside God, apart from God." It is easy to throw stones at the list of consequences Lewis gives that result from trying to find substitutes to happiness in God: "money, poverty, ambition, war, prostitution, classes, empires, slavery." I think I should be more concerned about the consequences of my own God substitutes. When I think happiness is bound up in people liking me, I am controlled (and often crushed) by the opinions of others. When I seek joy in things I am convinced I am "way good at," I get depressed when people fall asleep during the sermon or when my Hebrew instructor humbles me with my own ignorance. The answer, then, is found in the "shocking alternative." If I merely admire his teachings I can add Jesus to my shelf full of idols. If he is Lord and God, my joy in him is complete no matter how I perform in the pulpit, the classroom or in front of my peers.

I will try to post Facebook or e-mail comments.

Book 2, Chapter 1: The Rival Conceptions of God

Something I like about this chapter is that, in classic Mere Christianity form, Lewis makes "good" the standard and "bad" the perversion. In other words, even the unspeakable evil around us points us to redemption. God is in the process of making everything right. Be humbled if you are part of the army God is using to rescue captives from the kingdom of darkness. Be humbled if you are having a hard week because your Redeemer is faithful and true. He is going to straighten it out—perhaps using your uncomfortable week as his hammer. "If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning." What do you think?

Mere Christianity, book 2, chapter 1: "The Rival Conceptions of God"

Let's work on this book in bite-sized chunks. I will raise one item for discussion and see how many of you respond. This is a short chapter:) Here's my thought for your response: You have to bless God because you are one of a handful out of 7 billion people on the planet who can comprehend what Lewis is talking about in this chapter. We know what injustice is because we know what justice is. We know what crooked is because we know what straight is. We know what wet is because we know what dry is. We know all this because we claim to know this personal God of absolutes, who rules absolutely. Here is where I have to squirm. I've been complaining this week about all the meaningless tasks I have to do. Counsel me. Why is my attitude inconsistent with the contents of this chapter?

Old study; new venue

Welcome back! Since it is very difficult to get all of you together in a brick-and-mortar establishment, our MC discussions will primarily be electronic discussions this year. Facebook (search "Phrisbee Phellowship" and ask to join the group) will be our primary venue, although I hope to share content between this blog and that one.

To make things easy, our first set of discussion questions will cover all of Book 1 in Mere Christianity. This will be review for some of you, but will allow others to catch up. Participate as you are able. You'll get as much out of it as you put in.

Some atheists and agnostics get very uncomfortable around people who talk about morality in absolute terms. You don't even have to mention the name of Jesus to be accused of shoving "religion" down people's throats. That is where Lewis is taking us as we approach Book 2. He wants to make us uncomfortable. He has not yet gotten to an introduction of Jesus Christ as a remedy for man's problems and already, as a former atheist, he anticipates the impatience of his detractors.

It is that very impatience which serves to prove a point Lewis has been trying to make. Our discomfort with the thought of having a judge watching us shows that we are "haunted" by the idea of a sort of behavior we ought to practice. There must be some explanation for this universal uneasiness and an explanation for why we continue to do what makes us feel uneasy. The anger some people express when they perceive they are being judged is evidence that their conscience is already judging them.

Here we go:

1. We have all known people who are "doctrinally pure" but have no passion for Christ. The Emerging Church movement is urging people to seek a more experience-based Christianity as a reaction. In reading the preface to Mere Christianity, do you think Lewis would agree that doctrine is a substitute for a real relationship with God? Why or why not?


2. How do people reveal that they believe in moral absolutes even when they say they do not? How does this demonstrate the claim of Romans 2:14-16?


3. Why is discomfort a good thing when you are searching out ideas that are new to you?
   
4. "Christianity tells people to repent and promises them forgiveness." Describe how Christians offer an explanation for how we got into our present state of hating goodness and loving it?