Over the years, I have re-read C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity numerous times. It is a wonderful book if you have never read it - chock of full of the humble wisdom and theological insights that I always find to be hallmark of Lewis. Many of his thoughts have made it into the larger Christian consciousness (even as the memes above), and many of them continue to rumble through my mind, even 30 years after I originally read them.
The comment above is one that continues to haunt me.
It haunts me, because I am well aware of my own tendency to categorize people based on any number of factors: Are they "On my side"? Are they arrogant or proud or obviously have no self control? Are they a flagrant sinner? Are they a "Christian In Name Only?"
Lewis confronts me with the fact that although these are relevant questions to ask, they are perhaps not the most important question.
Every person we meet, every person we discard or help or fight with or use or a treat well or treat poorly, each of these individuals is someone who, at the end of the day, will become either a creature beyond our comprehension of beauty or disgust (as Lewis says). We are mortal in the sense that we die, but we are immortal in the sense that we all have souls. How does that impact how we treat people? How should that impact how we treat people?
If in every encounter I saw not a person, but an immortal either on their way to either Heaven or Hell (for Christians, those are the options we are given), how should that change my encounter? If my treatment of them or interaction with them has the ability to help them reach one destination or the other, it probably makes the most sense to do all that I can to help along towards one and away from the other (which is really what Christ talks about, of course: we are to reflect Him and be guides pointing towards Him).
If I had that kind of awesome power in my grasp - which I do, every single day that I get up and talk to a single person - how am I using it?
As CS Lewis served in both WW1 and 2, saw the Irish IRA and such he has some strong self-preservation instincts. Perhaps his writing is the best of life style vs real life?
ReplyDeletePossibly Michael, although his studies in Greek and Latin Literature and Philosophy and history gave the opportunity to read widely. Good writers are often good readers, having the lived experience and styles of hundreds if not thousands to pull from.
DeleteAlso, he had a great native talent
Great stuff for pondering today. What a great question at the summation.
ReplyDeleteWhen I had the privilege to teach at church, I loved the open ended question. Everyone had a different answer. Most were quiet when asked, as their mind began to cipher and sift. I loved the looks on faces when they found an answer, but it was too personal to share. Exactly where I wanted to aim.
It is terrifying when you truly dwell on it STxAR, which is part of way that Lewis phrases it. We have within our power to help usher folks along one or two paths (not that we determine that; it is far above our impact).
DeleteI hold in my head something I read or heard years ago, where someone posed the question of meeting someone in Hell - a friend, a colleague, someone a person had a chance encounter with - and that person saying "Why did not you not warn me?". Yes, I understand that for many such an outcome does not exist, but that is again not our job. As in the multiple analogies of the Farmer Christ used, we are responsible for planting; the growth comes from God.
A though provoking post TB, going to get my hands on that book since I've never read it, thanks.
ReplyDeleteAwesome Nylon12! If I was going to recommend a plunge into C.S. Lewis, I would start there. He is very systematic and logical in his presentation. If you like it, let me know - I have most of his works and am happy to suggest others.
DeleteThe good news it is an older book, and should be readily available as a used book or electronic.
Great quote - and there is a much deeper Truth than we often consider.
ReplyDeleteThere are so often deeper truths we fail to see, John. Part of it, I suspect, is our own blindness; part of it is that we are not longer encouraged to think after such things.
Delete