Understanding C.S. Lewis' "Mere Christianity" Book 1, Chapters 2 & 3

[Wayward_Wind]

Chapters 2 & 3 are a continuation of Lewis’ Chapter 1 study of the Law of Human NatureChapter: Right and Wrong, As a Clue to the Meaning of the Universe

I have coupled them together in this thread for further comments and questions.

Chapter 2- Some Objections

Chapter 3-The Reality of the Law

If you have not done so, take a few minutes to first read the original thread: Understanding C.S. Lewis’ “Mere Christianity” Chapter 1

C.S. Lewis wrote “Mere Christianity” as a series of radio broadcast lectures he delivered from BBC London beginning in 1942. Through his broadcasts’, Lewis provided a logical step by step argument for believing not only in God but in Jesus Christ. The word “mere” is often misunderstood as meaning small or insignificant. Actually, as Lewis pointed out in his preface remarks, it means “common”,“central”, or all Christianity not any specific denomination. Lewis used the image of Christianity as the main hall in the house and each denomination as the room each Christian dwells in. He makes the point if you enter the house you must choose a room, you cannot dwell in the hall.

This thread is intended to explore “Mere Christianity” chapter by chapter to offer an insight into Lewis’ powerful arguments for believing and perhaps to compare Christian beliefs today to Lewis’ beliefs as presented in “Mere Christianity”.

Before beginning, a little about myself; I was raised in the Episcopal Church. I’m not a scholar in any sense of the word. I went through periods in my life when I was an active lay member and times when I was at best an agnostic. During one peculiar black period in my life I started reading “Mere Christianity”. I couldn’t get it out of my head, Lewis’ logic seemed too persuasive to just put aside. I’m now a Catholic Convert, having joined the Catholic Church in 2009, my room in the hall.

I believe the best way to take in “Mere Christianity” is to listen to it, as London did during the Blitzkrieg, I listen to “Mere Christianity” , Blackstone edition, on my mp3 player. My local public library offers it as a free download for members. It can also be purchased from a variety of sources.

So, for those interested, and I have no idea what the interest might be, let’s start with Chapter 1, first with posting comments on understanding, then arguments both in favor and against. If there is a real interest, I expect we need to wait about a week or so between chapters to insure everyone interested has a chance to read/listen beforehand.

Chapter 1-Right and Wrong, As a Clue to the Meaning of the Universe

****Here are the foundational points C.S. Lewis makes, in Book 1, Chapter 1:

• A. Human Beings, all over the earth, have this curious idea that they ought to behave in a certain way, and cannot really get rid of it.
• B. They do not in fact behave in that way. They know the Law of Human Nature, they break it.

As Lewis closes the Chapter, “these two facts are the foundation of all clear thinking about ourselves and the universe we live in.”

 

[Wayward_Wind]

In Chapter 2 Lewis addresses the difference between “instinct” and the “Law of Human Nature or Moral Law”; “Isn’t what you call the Moral Law simply our herd instinct?”

Lewis addresses this objection as a feeling or strong desire, say to help another person. Feeling a desire to help is quite different from feeling you ought to help whether you want to or not. He uses the scenario where you hear a cry for help. You probably feel two desires, the desire to help-the herd instinct and another strong desire to keep out of danger due to the instinct for self preservation. But inside you probably find a third thing which tells you that you ought to ignore the instinct for self-preservation and help. This thing that judges between to instincts and decides which should be encouraged cannot be either of them. The Moral Law tells us which note to play on a piano it is not one of the notes.

The other principal objection presented in Chapter 2 is the Moral Law is simply social convention put in each of us through education and therefore is a human invention.

Lewis addresses this objection through a comparison to mathematics. We are taught mathematics but a child who grows up on a desert island does not know mathematics. While some things we learn are conventions, like the clothes we wear or driving on the left or right side of the road develop differently from place to place, mathematics is a truth and is the same everywhere and not changing. And so is the Moral Law, is at its core the same everywhere and across time has remained unchanged.

Fr. Barron on Conscience and Morality:

youtube.com/watch?v=HYvbgOTGm7g&feature=player_embedded

Comments or Questions?