Lewis here does one of the things which jesus also does which stymies me a bit. he seems to make a clear distinction between good and bad people.
this used to really bother me. As I’ve gotten a bit older, I’ve gradually realized that the distinction can actually be useful. there are good people, and bad people. they are out on the fringes–the tails of the distribution. most of us are gently ensconced here in the middle of the distribution–the normal people, as it were.
I’m curious as to what he meant by “religious”. I’m guessing by “religious people” he is talking about people who are familiar with and consider themselves insiders within the trappings of formal religion of whatever brand. Is this a good reason to escape such formal religion? I mean the thing is that it seems like the reverse might be true as well. Of all good people, religious good people are the best. could be?
when I read Lewis’ quote - I thought - yes! that is how I experience it.
then I read Benjamin’s question -
Of all good people, religious good people are the best. could be?
Here is how I experience Benjamin’s statement - to make this personal, my experience with Helen, tells me she is a good person. Would Helen be “gooder” if she were religious? I don’t think so. (yes, I know “gooder” isn’t a word)
For me what makes
religious bad men are the worst
is that they say they are good, but their actions are not - and their arrows of religiousness harm/hinder others from coming to know God and Jesus.
For me, all good people, increase my faith in God - they reflect his light whether they are “religious” or not.
Actually, the whole “religious” word has negative connotations for me.
As I’ve gotten a bit older, I’ve gradually realized that the distinction can actually be useful. there are good people, and bad people.
I agree, Benjamin. I think that all people have both good and evil in them. In Christian terms, they are both made in the image of God and they have a sin nature. But there are some people whose choices lead them so far to one side or the other, that they are almost completely bad or good, such as Hitler or Gandhi. I think that when C.S. Lewis refers to “bad men,” I think he means bad primarily in the sense that their impact on other people is bad. Bad religious people harm others and good religious people help others.
Actually, the whole “religious” word has negative connotations for me.
I know what you mean, Elaine. It has long been popular among American evangelicals to say “Christianity is not a religion, it is a relationship.” And many people in our culture will say, “I’m spiritual but not religious.” But I think in Lewis’ mid-20th century British context, religion was not considered an inherently negative word. Anglicans certainly would not have protested that they were not religious. So I think Lewis means that there is good religion (or faith or spirituality) and bad religion.
Comment by: benjamin ady
1 08/28/07 11:38 AM | Comment Link |Lewis here does one of the things which jesus also does which stymies me a bit. he seems to make a clear distinction between good and bad people.
this used to really bother me. As I’ve gotten a bit older, I’ve gradually realized that the distinction can actually be useful. there are good people, and bad people. they are out on the fringes–the tails of the distribution. most of us are gently ensconced here in the middle of the distribution–the normal people, as it were.
I’m curious as to what he meant by “religious”. I’m guessing by “religious people” he is talking about people who are familiar with and consider themselves insiders within the trappings of formal religion of whatever brand. Is this a good reason to escape such formal religion? I mean the thing is that it seems like the reverse might be true as well. Of all good people, religious good people are the best. could be?
Comment by: Elaine
2 08/28/07 2:39 PM | Comment Link |when I read Lewis’ quote - I thought - yes! that is how I experience it.
then I read Benjamin’s question -
Here is how I experience Benjamin’s statement - to make this personal, my experience with Helen, tells me she is a good person. Would Helen be “gooder” if she were religious? I don’t think so. (yes, I know “gooder” isn’t a word)
For me what makes
is that they say they are good, but their actions are not - and their arrows of religiousness harm/hinder others from coming to know God and Jesus.
For me, all good people, increase my faith in God - they reflect his light whether they are “religious” or not.
Actually, the whole “religious” word has negative connotations for me.
Comment by: Rachel
3 08/28/07 5:56 PM | Comment Link |I agree, Benjamin. I think that all people have both good and evil in them. In Christian terms, they are both made in the image of God and they have a sin nature. But there are some people whose choices lead them so far to one side or the other, that they are almost completely bad or good, such as Hitler or Gandhi. I think that when C.S. Lewis refers to “bad men,” I think he means bad primarily in the sense that their impact on other people is bad. Bad religious people harm others and good religious people help others.
I know what you mean, Elaine. It has long been popular among American evangelicals to say “Christianity is not a religion, it is a relationship.” And many people in our culture will say, “I’m spiritual but not religious.” But I think in Lewis’ mid-20th century British context, religion was not considered an inherently negative word. Anglicans certainly would not have protested that they were not religious. So I think Lewis means that there is good religion (or faith or spirituality) and bad religion.