Showing posts with label C. S. Lewis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label C. S. Lewis. Show all posts

Monday, August 16, 2010

On Knots And Faith Untying

As a mere child, C. S. Lewis lost his faith in God and the whole of the Christian story. There were several reasons for this, all of which he describes in his lovely autobiography Surprised By Joy. But one reason particularly speaks to me; it is indeed the only thing I share in common with the young Mr. Lewis. In short, Mr. Lewis came to believe the universe was thwarting his simplest ambitions. He describes the cosmos' stubborn resistance as one of the "seeds of pessimism" that found fertile soil in his mind, a pessimism that grew till he became "an apostate, dropping my faith with no sense of loss but with the greatest relief." Permit me to quote Mr. Lewis at length:

As to the sources of my pessimism ... I am now inclined to think that the seeds of pessimism were sown before my mother's death. Ridiculous as it may sound, I believe that the clumsiness of my hands [Lewis and his brother were both born missing the first joints in their thumbs. -- Ed.] was at the root of the matter. How could this be? Not, certainly, that a child says, "I can't cut a straight line with a pair of scissors, therefore the universe is evil." Childhood has no such power of generalization and is not (to do it justice) so silly. Nor did my clumsiness produce what is ordinarily called an Inferiority Complex. I was not comparing myself with other boys; my defeats occurred in solitude. What they really bred in me was a deep (and, of course, inarticulate) sense of resistance or opposition on the part of inanimate things. Even that makes it too abstract and adult. Perhaps I had better call it a settled expectation that everything would do what you did not want it to do. Whatever you wanted to remain straight, would bend; whatever you tried to bend would fly back to the straight; all knots which you wished to be firm would come untied; all knots you wanted to untie would remain firm.

It is important to note that Mr. Lewis does not argue his public life was thwarted by the body politic or by his family. He does not suggest teachers inhibited his creative progress or some nemesis intimidated him to such a degree he fell back in retreat. Instead, what Mr. Lewis tells us is that this sense of "resistance or opposition on the part of inanimate things ... occurred in solitude." [emphasis mine] He was privately thwarted; when alone, he felt that something stood against him.

I said above that this is the only thing Mr. Lewis and I share in common, but even this commonality is distinguished in two ways. First, I do not conclude, as Mr. Lewis seems to, that the universe is poorly designed (he playfully refers to his accepting the "Argument from Undesign" as the strongest argument for atheism). I do not conclude that either the universe or God is deficient, but that I am. My inabilities and limitations tempt me to self-condemnation: I should be better; I am not good enough. Second, my pessimism is unlike Mr. Lewis' not only because mine is directed inward, but because it is something I have not outgrown. He would describe, or so I bet, his pessimism as rather adolescent. I am sure he would even see it as part of his adolescent "passion" or "lust" for the Occult. I am sure he discovered in himself a naïveté, formed in the imaginative play common to boys in solitude, that the universe was a magical place where young boys could attain mastery ("maistry", as Lewis suggests) as magicians, wizards, knights. In fact, I am quite confident he did discover that very thing, at least unconsciously, and that he would agree with what I've just written.

I, too, accepted this view of myself as a boy. I expected great things, even superpowers, of myself. In solitude I believed my knots would hold and that my aim was straight. I recall even believing I could will by sheer force of mind a heavy snowstorm resulting in a "snow day" in which school was canceled. Child that I was, there was just enough success to reinforce my illusions and just enough failure to ensure I'd delude myself that willpower and pride could attain perfection.

Interestingly, when I became a Christian; when I fully poured myself into the Faith, I brought with me this sense of the superman. Maybe it was not so much a sense of being a superman as it was of being a super sage, a sort of Christian wizard. I would attain and achieve. I would prosper. I would possess "maistry." Indeed, I really did believe that I could attain a level of spiritual invincibility where God -- my benevolent Father -- and my deep faith in His benevolence, could clear a path for my faithful feet broader than the dry lands the Israelites marched upon through the parted Red Sea.

And somehow, as St. Paul might argue, sin seized an opportunity. The fruits of faith for me began to turn sour. When thwarted I abused myself. When I stumbled I became my greatest scold. Pride cast its aspersions: What sort of fool have you become? This struggle is beneath you, you worthless clod. Look at how you flounder. Look at how others do not. See with what ease they live their lives? But you. You disgrace me.

This is not God or the universe speaking so unlovingly. It is my own soul. God is not shaking His head or wagging His finger. The universe is not out to get me; it is not, as Mr. Lewis suggested, "a menacing and unfriendly place." I am out to get me; I am an unfriendly place to myself.

I shall follow this installment of Contratimes with a tale of a knot. I intend to share this tale tomorrow. It is a fine tale about an extraordinary knot and the moment of atheism such a marvelous knot inspired. Of course I may not get to my tale as planned, since plans, especially as summer wanes, have a way of changing. But the hope is there, and where there is hope, well, there is everything.

Peace.

Part II begins here.


©2010/All Rights Reserved. 


Tuesday, December 12, 2006

Ideas About Ideologues

I know more than a few people who often dismiss certain folks as "ideologues." It is almost said reflexively. At times it seems a curious habit. The disparagement is always done with great facility and, perhaps, felicity. And I never quite understand it. Definitions in some of the older dictionaries I own show that, first and foremost, an ideologue is an expert in ideology, which is defined as "the body of doctrine, myth, symbol, etc., of a social movement, institution, class, or large group." The secondary meaning is that of a person who deals with systems of ideas. And the tertiary meaning describes a person "who advocates a particular ideology." (The Random House College Dictionary, 1975).

Curiously, more recent definitions are rather blunt. For example, the American Heritage Dictionary is utterly matter of fact:

ideologue (noun): An advocate of a particular ideology, especially an official exponent of that ideology

And the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary gives us this definition for ideologue:

1 : an impractical idealist : THEORIST
2 : an often blindly partisan advocate or adherent of a particular ideology

It is interesting to note how unnuanced these online definitions prove themselves to be. I wonder if this is the trend in computer age diction, where words become more rigid, lacking subtlety, posited in all their raw black-and-white glory. Computer users are, after all, in a hurry.

My observation -- provincial as it is -- about the word in question is that the man denouncing another chap as a "mere ideologue" is usually himself something of an ideologue. With that said, I, of course, admit that my comment lacks subtlety. I promise to make amends in a forthcoming essay on the topic.

For now, two things. First, I would love to hear what you think "ideologue" means: what does it connote and who does it denote? Second, I urge you to read one of my all-time favorite essays (fragmented as it is) by C. S. Lewis. After reading his capital essay, Bulverism, this morning, I am reminded -- again -- how careful I must be.

Peace.

©Bill Gnade 2006/Contratimes -- All Rights Reserved.

Tuesday, November 22, 2005

That Glorious Strength: Rumors Of Angels

Today I give thanks, though not in a holiday sense. I will wait two days for that fine American celebration. Instead, I give thanks for a man who died 42 years ago today, in England, his death overshadowed by the assassination of U.S. President John F. Kennedy. Odd that this man, along with Kennedy and the great humanist Aldous Huxley, would have died within hours of each other.

I am talking of C. S. Lewis. No other person of letters, I believe, has had a more profound impact on my life, even if I admit that there are other writers and thinkers I prefer. For it was Lewis who set me on my way, speaking to both heart and mind; emboldening me to live a life where faith and reason, where mysticism and intelligence, are not exclusive one to another, but two sides of one glorious and mysterious coin. In him I met Christ the thinker, the poet; the creator. In him I met the Christian imagination with all its possibilities: Narnia, Ungit, Perelandra, the pantheon, and even Middle Earth. Hobbits came to life for me, largely because of Lewis' love and support of his best friend, J.R.R. Tolkien, and both men's unwavering devotion to the ancient creeds of Christendom.

And in the wake which Lewis left in my life, I fell on St. Francis and St. Thomas, George MacDonald, G. K. Chesterton, E. C. Bentley, Owen Barfield, Sheldon Vanauken, Thomas Howard, Peter Kreeft, Grady Spires (an unpublished elvish genius), T. S. Eliot (whose work Lewis abhorred), Charles Williams, Malcolm Muggeridge, Madelyn L'Engle, and even Annie Dillard. Though there might not be a causal chain between these writers' works and Lewis, there is indeed a causal chain between Lewis and my reading them, for he inspired me to be a thinking Christian, and I am all the better for that chain, and for that inspiration. And had not Lewis' books found their way into my life, I doubt that I would know of John Donne, Thomas Traherne, George Herbert, or even William Butler Yeats. And I am not afraid to say that I might even be dead now without the influence of Lewis' testimony.

This is neither idolatry, nor is it gratuitous beatification. Lewis is my mentor. He has, along with Christ, preached to me in prison; he has descended into hell and handed me a tiny silken thread, the very thread he found in the dark and venomous mines described in MacDonald's "The Princess and the Goblin." I hold that thread now, standing, as I so often do, in the deep and chilly dark.

Before this day began I was reading Peter L. Berger's A Rumor of Angels, a famous little book written by the lauded sociologist from Boston University. In his examination of the death of the supernatural in modern society, and the apparent death of God, Berger shared this anecdote:

"A few years ago, a priest working in a slum section of a European city was asked why he was doing it, and replied, "So that the rumor of God may not disappear completely." [emphasis added]

Lewis could have been that priest, for surely he worked in the slums of so many forsaken and forsakeable ideas. Lord knows he worked in mine. And in small homage to him, I do the same, here and elsewhere, trying to keep rumors alive.

Contratimes

©Bill Gnade 2005/Contratimes - All Rights Reserved.