Some Disturbing Aspects of CS Lewis' Version of a Christian Society -- Secular Associations

 

So, in discussing what appears to be C.S. Lewis concept of a Christian society, I have generally thought it not so bad.  A bit repressive in matters of sex and family, perhaps, but very respectful of individual differences and tolerant on morally neutral matters.  And he seems to see many things as morally neutral, or at least morally complex in a way that does not allow for simple rules.  

But there are a few things in The Screwtape Letters that, if taken at face value, seem rather disturbing. Granted, not everything in The Screwtape Letters can be taken at face value. The devil is a liar, after all, and many of these issues are not addressed, or much less addressed in Mere Christianity, so maybe I am over-interpreting.  But let me raise them anyhow.

Secular Associations

Clearly in a Christian society, churches will hold great sway and influence. To all appearances, Lewis's concept of a Christian society would give a wide scope of individual tastes and interests in morally neutral matters. His view appears to endorse a wide range of hobbies and artistic expression.  So far, so good.  

But the unstated assumption appears to be that people will pursue their interests individually and in isolation. But this does not seem like a realistic assumption.  People who like, say, stamp collecting or building model airplanes do not necessarily pursue these interests alone.  They form stamp collecting clubs and model airplane clubs and so forth. What does Lewis think of that?  I ask because in Letter 25, Lewis puts in a plug for his other work by having Screwtape complain that the "patient's" new associates are merely Christian.  "They all have individual interests, of course, the the bond remains Christianity."  What does Lewis think of other social bonds, such a common interests?

The Screwtape Letters talks on several occasions about Christian participation in social activism.  Lewis is ambivalent on the subject.  On the one hand, social reform can be invaluable in building an actual Christian society, a thing that the devil naturally abhors.  On the other hand, Lewis sees two dangers in Christian social activism.  

One is the danger of people using Christianity as a means of advancing social reform, rather than social reform as a means of advancing Christianity.  "Once you have made the World an end, and faith a means, you have almost won your man, and it makes very little difference what kind of worldly end he is pursuing."  (Letter 7). Lewis discusses the same idea in more serious terms in Mere Christianity, arguing that Christian social reformers (such as abolitionists) have achieved many great things, but only when they kept their eyes on the next world instead of this. This does not seem like too much of a danger in mere hobby clubs.  It seems unlikely that people will seriously confuse stamp collecting with their faith, or see Christianity mostly as an argument for how to build model airplanes.*

The other danger is more serious.  Lewis appears to endorse individual interests and tastes both as part of one's God-given nature and as having a sort of "innocence and humility and self-forgetfulness" and see liking "any one this in the world, for its own sake, and without caring two-pence what other people say about it" as a protection against vanity and snobbery.  (Letter 13).  But that assumes a solitary hobby.  Which leads to the other danger Lewis sees in social activism -- a general trust of institutionalized non-conformity:

Any small coterie, bound together by some interest which other men dislike or ignore, tend to develop inside itself a hothouse mutual admiration, and toward the outer world, a great deal of pride and hatred with is entertained without shame because the 'Cause' is its sponsor and it is thought to be impersonal. . . . We want the Church to be small not only that fewer men may know the Enemy but also that those who do may acquire the uneasy intensity and the defensive self-righteousness of a secret society or a clique.**

(Letter 7).  Note that these two things are essentially opposed to each other.  One is an argument for non-conformity, the other for conformity.  Of course, it is not clear that unfashionable hobbies will acquire quite the same sort of self-righteous intensity as unpopular religious or political organizations.  (Unfashionable artistic tastes might).  And people meeting to pursue the same hobby may give an opportunity to replicate the sort of vanity or snobbery that are unlikely to happen in solitary hobby.  On the other hand, at least some hobbies and interests -- team sports, for instance, or music -- seem necessarily to require associates and not be solitary.

Ultimately, Lewis is silent on this subject.

____________________________________________________

*Although certain football players who are sure that God roots for their team may make you wonder.

**That is, of course, exactly the form the Christian Church took for its first few hundred years before the time of Constantine.  Lewis does not address that.