Three writers have unwittingly passed the baton of spiritual and biblical truth to run a literary relay through my life: C. S. Lewis, Francis Schaeffer, and Os Guinness. And what companions and encouragers they have been to me. Lewis and Schaeffer in particular have helped me form my view of the meaning of the natural world. And it was Lewis who introduced me to the literary and spiritual mentor who helped him form his view of the creation—among many other views: George MacDonald. I have used MacDonald’s and Schaeffer’s thought extensively in the articles that reside on this site, but have somewhat ignored Lewis. So today I am going to let “Jack” have a say.
First a little background: I used to be a member of the Audubon Society—in large part in order to receive the always enjoyable Audubon magazine. My membership, of course, also gave me access to the local Society meetings, which I attended for a while. But, telling the truth, I always left those meetings with a feeling of sadness. I didn’t attend long enough to really develop any significant personal relationships with other members, but the impression I received was that few, if any, were followers of Christ. All seemed to be thoroughgoing naturalists in the philosophical meaning of that word. Nature provided them with their highest source of joy and practically functioned as their god. And when speakers would come and talk of the decline of this or that bird species or the continuing degradation of the natural world created by careless people, gloom settled on everyone.
If nature is the highest good and you believe that nature is all there is, it’s easy to understand why general depression presses down on you. If there is no hope beyond the material world we live in, the degradation of the earth leads to the degradation of hope. Here’s how Lewis explained it at the conclusion of chapter nine in his book Miracles:
Only Supernaturalists really see Nature. You must go a little away from her, and then turn around and look back. Then at last the true landscape will become visible. You must have tasted, however briefly, the pure water from beyond the world before you can be distinctly conscious of the hot, salty tang of Nature’s current. To treat her as God, or as Everything, is to lose the whole pith and pleasure of her.
Come out, look back, and then you will see: this astonishing cataract of bears, babies, and bananas [and birds]; this immoderate deluge of atoms, orchids, oranges, cancers, fleas, gases, tornadoes and toads. How could you ever have thought this was the ultimate reality? How could you ever have thought that it was merely a stage-set for the moral drama of men and women? She is herself. Offer her neither worship nor contempt. Meet her and know her.
If we are immortal, and if she is doomed (as scientists tell us) to run down and die, we shall miss this half-shy and half-flamboyant creature, this ogress, this [saucy girl], this incorrigible fairy, this dumb witch. But the theologians tell us that she, like ourselves, is to be redeemed. The ‘vanity’ to which she was subjected was her disease, not her essence. She will be cursed in character: not tamed (Heaven forbid) nor sterilized. We shall still be able to recognize our old enemy, friend, playfellow and foster mother, so perfected as to be not less, but more, herself. And that will be a merry meeting.
That is the joy of hope that resides in the heart of those who serve and love the true and living God. So we are indeed saddened to see the creation degraded and abused and species formed by the design and power of the Creator driven into extinction by our carelessness, greed, and over-consumption. But because we know the Creator and we know the hope that even nature has for its redemption and renewal in the coming Kingdom (Romans 8:18ff), that sadness ought to act as a motivation for us to once again become the stewards of creation we were intended to be. Schaeffer believed that it should compel us to be involved even before the consummation in a “substantial healing” of all the rifts created by the Fall.
It was this truth about the natural world that was in part the motivation for Lewis to write the Narnia series where a perfected natural world in tandem with the lovers of Aslan cooperated to defeat evil. The same understanding also works its way through Lewis’ less popular “Ransom Trilogy”—his three science fiction novels: Out of the Silent Planet, Perelandra, and That Hideous Strength.
Many of us in the north are caught in the late winter gloom of overcast skies, frigid air, and browning snow. We sometimes feel like we’re under the oppressive rule of Narnia’s white witch. But we do have hope, like nature, in God’s promise: spring will come; warmth will return; butterflies and bees will grace our days again. While we wait, though, I’d like to recommend that you read some Lewis books or MacDonald novels to help lift your spirits and remind you of the coming eternal spring. If you haven’t read Lewis’ science fiction series, give it a try—reading them in the order I’ve given above.
Lewis again:
Say your prayers in a garden early, ignoring steadfastly the dew, the birds, and the flowers, and you will come away overwhelmed by its freshness and joy; go there in order to be overwhelmed and, after a certain age, nine times out of ten, nothing will happen to you. (The Four Loves, ch. 2, para. 28)
See you outdoors!
Dean
January 28th, 2009 at 10:35 pm
As I read this entry I thought immediately of the PBS documentary I saw last night which examined the migration of monarch butterflies from Canada to Mexico. When millions of these awesome navigators finally arrive at their winter home, they are adored by the locals as the spirits of ancestors, as the focus of a Day of the Dead celebration which draws tourists and thereby supports the community’s ailing economy. This festive attitude was regarded by the scientists and documentary producers as an excellent means of encouraging the preservation of this amazing insect. But I couldn’t help feeling that once again the true nature God gave one of his creatures, this time the monarch, was being anthropomorphized and diminished, stripped of its dignity. When we look at nature, too often we see it as being all about us. Even when we study nature we do so to make ourselves smarter, to try and control it and its destiny. A sad irony considering we display so little control over ourselves! How awful that so many who treasure nature are blind to our only real hope, that He who created nature in the first place is able to restore it and renew it–and us–to life and harmony.
January 29th, 2009 at 8:49 am
Many years ago, when my son was young and learning about all things going on around him. I introduced him to Nature as a beauty to behold and an experiance to live.
I also from his earliest age introduced him to Christ and seen to his indoctrination into Christianity.
God the creator is seen in His creation. I wanted my son Matthew to see Him as well.
There was a Time Life Video series offered called “The Trials of Life”. A 12 part series about the wonders of nature. I bought it for my son and I. It turned out to be worth every penny.
How a Creator is not seen by anyone watching life played out by nature is a mystery to me.
From the smallest termite who uses a air conditioning system to eels that travel overland in the dark of night (with or without stars) to return to their headwaters for breeding. God’s design is obvious.
So in seeing God as the creator, we are able to properly place creation and nature. Not to be worshiped but rather as another testament to the endless ability of God.
January 29th, 2009 at 10:05 am
Linda, that’s quite a remark that if butterflies are anthropomorphized, (made human like), that they are diminished and stripped of dignity. But thinking about that, you are right. God gave the creatures their identities and characteristics as He sees best. And to imagine to change that just to suit our fancy is a stripping of their dignity.
Dean, I haven’t read all of Lewis’ works, but am fascinated by what I have read. Mere Christianity being a real classic in my opinion is worth reading once a year just to keep his ideas fresh in my mind.
But I’m frankly stumped by the last excerpt you gave. What I think Lewis is saying is not to go into a garden (I suppose that means also any natural area) to be “overwhelmed” (does he mean don’t go to allow nature to give you good feelings, or to show God to you, or what?) I think he is saying to go into natural areas to meet God, not to be mesmerized by it or to worship it. What is your take on what he is saying?
January 29th, 2009 at 10:53 am
Great “value added” comments, y’all!
I think what Lewis is saying is that real and lasting joy in nature comes only after we first acknowledge our dependence on the Creator of it all.
I suppose it could be compared to Adam and Eve communing with God in the “cool of the day.” A broken or non-existent relationship with the Creator ultimately takes away our joy in His creation. No doubt this is one of the key negative aspects of humanity’s self-centered and utilitarian use of nature.
That compels me to think that the Native American practice of paying homage to the Great Spirit before they took the life of animal or plant was superior to the colonial mindset that was almost purely anthropocentric and utilitarian. Which is the true “pagan” approach?
This is what T. S. Eliot was getting at in the quote I have added to the “Creation Quotations” page:
“For a long enough time we have believed in nothing but the values arising in a mechanized, commercialized, urbanized way of life: it would be as well for us to face the permanent conditions upon which God allows us to live on this planet. And without sentimentalizing the life of the savage, we might practice the humility to observe, in some of the societies upon which we look down as primitive or backward, the operation of a social-religious-artistic complex which we should emulate upon a higher plane.”
January 29th, 2009 at 11:28 am
That helps, Dean, thanks
Hey Steve, (SFDBWV) that was a cool comment. As this entire post is helpful to me by recognizing that nature is subservient to the Creator, we get a proper perspective of our world (actually the entire universe). And helping our family members see that perspective can really intensify efforts to enter into a genuine creation care mindset.
Dean, when the created world is redeemed, Lewis suggests that it won’t be tamed. I guess he means that danger will still be here, yet we are told that the lion and lamb will be able to lie down together. A child will safely play with venomous vipers. Wonder what kind of untamed things he means?
January 29th, 2009 at 12:02 pm
Perhaps it means the same as his Narnia statement that Aslan is not a tame lion. The natural world often functions with intense and “wild” forces that with wisdom we can protect ourselves from.
This is one of many questions about the coming Kingdom that we probably will not have a preliminary answer to.
I think we simply walk into the future aiming to be obedient and answering the tough questions like Abraham did Isaac’s: “God will provide.”