Chronicles of Narnia Follow Up

I appreciate the feedback I have received on the Narnia post. However, most of the comments on this site and others missed the purpose of the post. I was not attempting to judge CS Lewis or to “pick his bones” as it was put in one comment. Neither was I attempting to rate his literary skill. I am not his judge in regards to his eternal life, nor do I posses the literary acumen required to critique his writing ability.I do however possess all that is needed to examine any art and to view it through a Biblical grid in relation to how it should be discussed with my children. That is my responsibility as a parent to my children and to God. Secondly, as an individual participating in the market place of ideas I have this same responsibility before God to examine all things and understand them in light of what the scripture teaches. That is what this web site is about. We are to examine all things through the lens of God’s word to properly understand it.
As such, I was simply asking what the Bible has to say about the ideas presented by Lewis. This is an important question to ask because ideas do have consequences. The story and the personal life of CS Lewis, are not the point of the discussion, as much as the ideas portrayed in the story by him. The only reason the person of C.S. Lewis comes into play at all is because of his immense popularity and his literary ability. Because of these two things, I think questioning the validity of the ideas he presents is more important, not less. In the case of Lewis, some may tend to overlook the subject matter of the story because of the skill in which it is told. Further more, as evidenced by the response to my post, some will defend someone simply because of their skill as a writer, with no regards to the ideas presented.
With that background being more clearly spelled out, I would like to respond to three specific points that were raised. First many berated me for daring to call the story an allegory. They cite “Lewis’ own words” to show how foolish I was to not know this. However, I will hold that it is irrelevant whether Lewis intended the series to be an allegory or not. The fact of the matter is that it is perceived that way today by much of society at large and most of the Christians in the world. In fact many who made this objection, went on to tell me how I misunderstood the allegory. The point in this distinction was not the technical aspects of the story or it’s classification, but rather the consequences in attempting to align with a Biblical story line, but not remaining true to the plot. My point was simply that this can create confusion in a young readers mind. It plants ideas that later grow and produce the fruit according to their roots. In fact, though I dare not give Lewis the credit / blame for this, there has been much falling away from Biblical truths since Lewis’ time along the same waverings presented in this work and outlined in my first post. Again, ideas have consequences. I will concede that the ideas were not Lewis’ exclusively and that Lewis himself was as much a product of his age as a man of his own intentions. However, I think that strengthens the argument I attempt to make and does not diminish it.
Along those lines, someone told me that I mis-quoted the stone table scene and that it in fact said “a person without sin” not just any person who laid down their life and therefore it related perfectly to Christ. However, the point I was trying to make was that it could not be just anyone who was sinless that could die for our sins, but in fact had to be a direct descendant of Adam, who fell in the first place, and it had to be Christ himself as was predestined before the foundations of the world. Remember the pages of those boring scriptures listing all the genealogy? They do have a purpose and play a prominent role in the redemption story.
Lastly, I did not call for a boycott of all C.S. Lewis stories. I did not call for a boycott of any of them. In fact, I said my children would indeed read them and know about them…all about them as I have indicated. They might even enjoy some parts of them, I did. However, if they desire to write stories themselves that attempt to parallel the truths of the Gospel, we have discussed the responsibilities they have as Christians to hold to a higher standard of accuracy than Lewis did. Also, if someone would like to engage in a conversation about the “brilliance” of CS Lewis, they will be prepared to discuss all aspects of the man, both the good and the bad.
This may sound arrogant, or chide but again we are not talking about Lewis and where he is standing today. We are talking about training our children and living our own lives so that we can stand before God and give an account of the life he gave us. This is not a cry against literary tools. Christ himself used many literary devices in telling stories and parables to people. However, the difference and the standard by which we should hold ourselves to, is that he used his stories to convey truth, he did not mold truth to make a good story.

Comments are closed.