"Love may forgive all infirmities and love still in spite of them: but Love cannot cease to will their removal."
I am going to commit a mortal sin when I write this, but I think that Lewis got this a little bit wrong. It is not that as Christians we may forgive all infirmities, it is that we must always forgive. It is what love demands. Yes, I agree, easier said than done. Yet, that is our hallmark as Christians. We are to love the unlovely -- the prostitute, the drug addict, the homeless, or the... ex-wife (gulp!).
C.S. Lewis's main point, however, is that when we see flaws in others (it is so easy to find flaws in others, isn't it?), we are to love them anyway. But that love is not blind. If we have taken the log out of our own eye, our duty becomes helping others remove the speck out of their eyes. For example, I am to love my friend who complains a lot, as difficult as it is to be around him. But my "job" as his Christian brother is to help him see that complaining makes his life miserable, not only mine.
Again, easier said than done. When someone in our life hurts us or annoys us, what is our first instinct? Do we not tend to build walls, and say to ourselves, "I do not need that in my life."? It is true. We have to be careful being around toxic people who are very unhealthy or "dangerous." At the same time, we need to still show them love and help them overcome whatever the issue is in their life.
A very tricky balance...
What do you think?
I know this is a necro-post and the blog abandoned. Whatever:
ReplyDeleteThe quote is from C.S. Lewis' "The Problem of Pain," and his main point is not about loving your fellow man. Although I won't say I necessarily disagree with what you've taken away from it I do think it is rather naive in and of itself and falls far, far short from Lewis' actual point. He is writing about God's love for man, not man's love for man (or woman), though he uses these as analogies, and his main point is precisely the difference in quality between the love of God and our tepid, pale imitation of it. Picking up from what you've quoted:
"
Love is more sensitive than hatred itself to every blemish in the beloved; his "feeling is more soft and sensible than are the tender horns of cockled snails." Of all powers he forgives most, but he condones least: he is pleased with little, but demands all.
When Christianity says that God loves man, it means that God _loves_ man: not that He has some "disinterested," because really indifferent, concern for our welfare, but that, in awful and surprising truth, we are the objects of His love. You asked for a loving God: you have one. The great spirit you so lightly invoked, the "lord of terrible aspect," is present: not a senile benevolence that drowsily wishes you to be happy in your own way, not the cold philanthropy of a conscientious magistrate, nor the care of a host who feels responsible for the comfort of his guests, but the consuming fire Himself, the Love that made the worlds, persistent as the artist's love for his work and despotic as a man's love for a dog, provident and venerable as a father's love for a child, jealous, inexorable, exacting as love between the sexes.
"
You talk of a tricky balance. I understand. But Lewis' point is the exact opposite: God's love is not a balance. It is a terrifying extreme.
"This is wonderul and wonderfully written. Thank you. I'm a fan." I would like to know who you are. My comment was intended for you the commenter. Your writing is exquisite.
DeletePlease reach out to me. For some reason I am only able to reply anonymously. My name is Joshua Payne. My contact is on my website by the same name. https://joshuapayne.com
DeleteI hope to hear from you.
This is wonderul and wonderfully written. Thank you. I'm a fan.
ReplyDelete