(despite saying TexasLynn at the top, this post is actually authored by Rick from the blogs Awesomefun, and Awfulfun)
About Rick
I was raised United Methodist in Center, Texas, where Lynn and I met. I’m now a deacon in a small Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) in Frisco ,Texas. I’ve lived on both coasts, and a few states in-between, but was born in Texas and have spent most of my life here. I believe the Bible is the collected writings of a people of faith spanning centuries. It must be read intelligently and prayerfully to be understood. Nonetheless, it is sacred, and it reveals a living God to those willing to seek him.
Chapter 2
In Chapter 2, the bus is en route to the unknown, but presumably better, destination. And it is in this setting that we find the first true debate of philosophy — at least in a formal, named fashion.
There was a foreshadowing of this, in Chapter 1, when our narrator comments that in this dreary place there are only the sort of bookshops that sell “The Works of Aristotle.” This is both a common book that only school kids buy, and an allusion of a Christian-centered debate to come.
Aristotle has long been used as a friend and supporter of Christian theology. A little background on Aristotle would help both for this discussion, and an understanding of Lewis in general:
Socrates never wrote anything, but his student, Plato, did. It’s been said that all of Western philosophy is footnotes on Plato, and indeed, most of the core ideas come from his works — for example, Freud’s Id, Ego, and Superego are just renaming of Plato’s idea of a three-part soul (appetite, emotion, and reason).
Plato, in turn, was the teacher of Aristotle (who mentored Alexander the Great — yep, interesting line of folks there).
Aristotle’s works influenced Thomas Aquinas, whose works are the bedrock of the Scholastic philosophy of the Middle Ages. So, via Aquinas, Aristotle has been used by church fathers for centuries as their chief extra-Biblical apologist for both the existence and nature of God.
Why does this matter in a discussion of “The Great Divorce?” Because Lewis is a great fan of the Scholastic view, which shapes his entire position on goodness and Heaven and God himself (which he expounds on in other works, such as “The Problem of Pain”).
In the Scholastic point of view, Lewis found minds who could actually believe something once proven. Logic applies to God as well as everything else, so for thinkers like Aristotle and Aquinas and Lewis, there cannot be both Free Will and Fate in some mysterious understanding of the Deity, not because those are barriers for God’s power, but because they’re nonsense opposites. This gives Lewis’ mind boundaries from which to work from, as discussed by the narrator and the other passengers as the bus rises toward… well, wherever it’s going. All these passengers, in some form, want to be allowed into a better place without being better people, which for Lewis (as supported by Aristotle and Aquinas), is an impossibility.
The Intelligent Man describes one of the finer points by noting that the longer people have been there (Hell), the less likely they are to even reach the bus (to Heaven). That’s because their vanity drives them further and further away from their fellows, until they are infinitely far away from the bus stop (opportunity for redemption)– an idea of separation that parallels one in “The Screwtape Letters,” where the namesake tempter suggests that Satan was not thrown out of Hell, but rather removed himself infinitely from God’s presence because God’s love for humans was spiritually repugnant.
In both examples, Lewis suggests that God does not cast anyone into Hell, as a punishing, angry deity — rather, that to maintain their world-views, these Hell-bound souls must separate themselves from God. For a Scholastic thinker, this is not a sign of a limited deity, but simply a fact to be faced when dealing with a God who demands forgiveness of others, no matter whether they’ve insulted your poetry or stuck a knife in your ribs. If you haven’t forgiven and repented (turned toward God), you can’t come to the party. You can only dress up your little piece of Hell – and, given the folks who inhabit the Nether Realms, good luck with that.
This is a central to Lewis’ understanding of evil, which is something that was once good (intelligence, creativity, courage), still thinks itself good (though it was not applied towards goodness), and just wishes that God or society — i.e., everyone and everything else — would just come to their senses. For Aristotle, Aquinas, and Lewis, this is an impossibility for anything worthy of being called “good.” If you are not God-like, you are not good, and cannot get into Heaven — or steal trinkets from there to sell back at your curio stand in Hell, as fellow passenger, the Intelligent Man, plans to do.
He thinks that, with the right commercial setup, people would be better off… not exactly happier; he admits there would still be fighting, but implies the taxes from good businesses could fund a police effort. According to the Intelligent Man, the souls in Hell can already get whatever they imagine, but it’s poor quality. Not amusing enough. Therefore, better products are the answer (rather than better hearts). It’s a variation on Lewis’ recurring theme: Redemption is not a fixer-upper opportunity. It’s a complete overhaul; a replacement. Commerce cannot resolve this, nor can Communism (anti-commerce), as mentioned by the spoiled young man/suicide at the start of the chapter.
The chapter concludes with the fat, clean-shaven man, who represents the modernist era, or the unclouded thoughts of atheism. “All the nightmare fantasies of our ancestors are being swept away,” he says, and pulls a passenger window down to let in some fresh air, which instead lets in a divine light that nearly destroys the thin souls aboard the bus.
This foreshadows the terror to come — that is, what being made suitable for Heaven will truly mean for these passengers, should they try to ascend.
But that will be Chapter 3, and Lynn’s turn. 🙂
Lynn’s Reply
>> Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas
I sure hope you researched this a little bit before this post. If you did this off the top of your head, I’m woefully ignorant.
To be in the position he was in; Lewis was obviously well read and had spent a lot of time reasoning out his positions. This philosopher lineage and background information does provide insight into Lewis’ thinking. Thanks.
>> In the Scholastic point of view, Lewis found minds who could actually believe something once proven. Logic applies to God as well as everything else.
So you are saying that I find a connection to Lewis (and past philosophers) because we share a “Scholastic” (logical) point of view. Logic has always been an instrument that bolsters my faith. I look at the complexities of nature, of math, of physics, and how it all fits together and I can’t help but say… “This is not coincidence! This is by design!”
A preacher I knew taught Calculus and other math courses at Center High School. He once told me he felt the same way about math. The way it all fit together, the logic and beauty, was evidence of the existence of God.
>> Logic applies to God as well as everything else (according to Scholastic thought).
Hebrews 13:8 “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.”
So God is like a force of nature and/or physics. Something you can count on (have faith in) to do the same thing over and over again. I have faith that gravity will pull the apple to the ground every time. I have faith that God loves me unconditionally, forgives me my trespasses, and bestows blessings and grace upon me… EVERY TIME.
>> there cannot be both Free Will and Fate in some mysterious understanding of the Deity, not because those are barriers for God’s power, but because they’re nonsense opposites.
As a lot of Christians, I have to admit that I have a lot of trouble with the Free Will and Predestination (Fate) issue. Logically, I agree that they are opposites; but at the same time I can’t allow myself to ignore the references to being “chosen” by God.
If you entertain the idea of God choosing the saved; then you must immediately ask “Am I chosen?” You then look at your sin and say “No, there’s no way.” But if you look at Jesus, what he did and what he says, you can say “Yes!” But “Why was I chosen and not my neighbor?”…
I then have to throw in one more aspect of this issue, Foreknowledge, which I think is the cousin of Predestination. If God knows I will make that fateful decision and be lost; why doesn’t he take action to lead me to a better decision (against my free will)? I know he is a God of action; I’ve read about it in the Bible. So if he chooses to act or not act, isn’t that Predestination?
Arghh… my logic is failing me… so what do I do!
“Stop, Be Still, BE STILL… (I usually have to be told twice)… and know that I AM.”
Add one more thing to the list of things the Human mind (at least mine) cannot fathom. Also know that this little detail is not a requirement for my salvation. Don’t try to grasp what is only God’s to know. And know that I was put on this Earth for one purpose; to bring glory to your Creator. How I do this, is through faith, worship, and service. He will and has taken care of the rest.
First, Further Observation on the Poet
The chapter begins with Jack sharing with us what he learned from the “tousle-headed poet” about the poet himself. This guy was a leach upon whomever he was in contact with in life; and not only did he not have any appreciation, he formed a bias or even a hatred for those who tried to help him or at least enabled his victimhood. Aside: The guy reminded me of James Reardon’s brother from Atlas Shrugged.
He was always the victim, seeking money, acceptance, praise, and never giving in return. He finally threw himself under a train; which was just a bump in the road in regards to his existence. He is a victim once again, because he showed up in the grey city when he obviously didn’t belong there. And he would have left sooner but he stayed hoping to find what he could not in life.
Now he’s on the omnibus, but for the wrong reason. He spent a long time searching for accpetance and praise in hell and hasn’t been able to find it. Now he travels to “heaven” searching for the same thing. To stay he would have to abandon his poetry. He’ll be on the return bus; despite his acclamations to the contrary.
Let me add this. As the reader this is the first indication I’ve gotten that the ghosts know they are dead; and some even know (or have some inclination as to) where they are.
Discussion Intelligent Man
The discussion with the Intelligent Man is intriguing and reveals a lot more about Hell and it’s inhabitants.
– Things aren’t really real in hell. If you want something, just imagine it and it’s there.
– The inhabitants are all spread out over unfathomable distances. This is by choice because they can’t get along.
– The bus stop is thousands of miles from the drop off point of dead souls. It took centuries for the ghosts on the bus to arrive at this point. Does that mean Jack has been in hell for centuries already?
– Famous villains in Hell and very far away and spread out, plus I get the feeling they digressed further than our bus riders; as was the case with Napoleon, pacing eternally and searching for someone to blame.
It should still be noted that this is simply the author’s imagining of hell and not a biblical representation.
Then the Intelligent Man goes into the conspiracy theory from Hell. And it stands to reason. If I lived in eternal twilight, I might be paranoid about what happens if night finally falls. I’m dead. I’m not in Heaven. I remember something about eternal torment. Is that what I have to look forward to?
It’s kind of funny that the Intelligent Man wants something tangible to help protect him when that night comes; because what safety could an imaginary structure provide. He also wants other ghosts around him; for safety again. But if you think about it what good would either do if his theory is right, night is coming, and the minions of Hell will descend upon them. It is human nature to seek the appearance of safety and once attained, ignore the facts (appearance over substance).
Conspiracy Theories in Hell
Jack seems to be the most ignorant ghost in Hell; which I guess makes it easier to tell the story. He’s heard nothing of this before and is understandably concerned. He exclaims loudly, “Who are ‘They’? And what are you afraid they’ll do to you? And why should they come out when it’s dark? And what protection could an imaginary house give if there was any danger?”
This exclamation exposes a second human inclination towards danger, pretend it’s not there and ostracize anyone who says differently. Many on the bus want to beat the rumor spreaders (including Jack) while another gentleman wants to dismiss them with a rosier theory. This isn’t really twilight, but rather the dawn. Perhaps this gentleman does indeed represent the enlightened modern atheist as Rick suggests. But how do you remain an atheist if you die and find yourself in the afterlife. At that point, you’re just being stubborn… really stubborn.
It’s Jack who actually lets down the window to let in the fresh air; and gets severely chastised for it. “What the hell are you doing? … Want us all to catch our death of cold?”
I find this kind of humorous, along with the knives and guns drawn during the scuffle earlier. These are ghosts, without physical bodies. There is no disease, no cold, etc… But I guess there is pain based on the man punched back at the bus stop. Or perhaps the ghosts are just reacting to their memory of disease, cold, and physical harm; another grasp for something real. (Note: I think this is actually the first mentioning as the characters on the bus as ghostly.)
The Light
The light starts pouring in through the closed windows. It is then that Jack is better able to see the ghostly forms about him; and the vision he sees is horrible. He sees faces full of “impossibilities, some gaunt, some bloated, some glaring with idiotic ferocity, some drowned beyond recovery in dreams; but all, in one way or another, distorted and faded.”
But notice there is no mentioning the source of the light. “We seemed to be floating in a pure vacancy. There were no lands, no sun, no stars in sight: only the radiant abyss.” This reminds me of when Moses went upon the mountain and saw God. He didn’t see the face of God (for he would have died) but was allowed to see God’s back. God shown with such an intense light that Moses actually glowed when he came down from the mountain. Is this the light the Ghosts are bathed in now?
The ending of this chapter is perfect. Jack describes the horrors he sees in the other ghosts about him; and then sees himself in a mirror. Lewis does say it. He doesn’t have to. Jack is no different. “And still the light grew.”
>I sure hope you researched this a little bit before this post. If you did this off the top of your head, I’m woefully ignorant.
Top o’ me head. But this philosophy stuff is something I’ve been into for 20+ years. I’m a generalist; I couldn’t go a whole lot deeper than I’ve done here. (I’ve actually read Works of Aristotle, for fun, long after school… it’s only now I find it interesting.)
>So you are saying that I find a connection to Lewis (and past philosophers) because we share a “Scholastic” (logical) point of view.
YES. Exactly. For people like you, Christianity is not a mystery religion — it’s a religion with certain mysteries in it. 🙂
This appears to be an area where Tolkien and Lewis had common ground, too — which would make sense, with Tolkien’s Catholic perspective (and emphasis on medieval lit).
Given a different place for your birth, I suspect you’d have been a fine Roman Catholic. There’s so much detail and structure and well-reasoned philosophy/scholarship there.
>As a lot of Christians, I have to admit that I have a lot of trouble with the Free Will and Predestination (Fate) issue.
I like Lewis’ suggestion that perhaps, since time is part of creation, God is outside of time, and from his perspective, it’s all known, but for those of us inside time, it’s still a choice. I forget what essay he discussed this, but it’s one of his ideas (or at least it’s from him that I heard it) — maybe it’s at the tail end of Mere Christianity, as an aside.
>Let me add this. As the reader this is the first indication I’ve gotten that the ghosts know they are dead; and some even know (or have some inclination as to) where they are.
Yes, I like that — I think it reflects Lewis’ idea that most of us don’t recognize where we are right now, participating in eternity… but we’re easily distracted (by Screwtape, perhaps) from such heady concepts, and it’s much easier to deal with traffic and work and what’s for dinner, isn’t it? 🙂
>It is human nature to seek the appearance of safety and once attained, ignore the facts (appearance over substance).
Yes. It’s also easier to go with groupthink than to stand out, even if you strongly suspect the group is wrong. But, there’s a danger in falling in love with conflict for its own sake, or one’s own voice, or partisanism/team loyalty over truth (or compassion).
>Perhaps this gentleman does indeed represent the enlightened modern atheist as Rick suggests. But how do you remain an atheist if you die and find yourself in the afterlife. At that point, you’re just being stubborn… really stubborn.
Yep, and I love that, within the story. To me, it reflects the current state of you and I and everyone else on Earth. Most of the time, we do not recognize the tenuous nature of our own existence. Sure, we’re reminded of it when a friend dies, or a child is born, but most of the time, we just muddle on, and get irritated when someone says, “Wait. Look at that!”
And I think you’re right, re the ghosts simply going through familiar motions, whether or not the knives cut or the guns wound, whether or not they actually experience pain (though they do, once on the edge of Heaven… which is interesting).
Sorry! Skipping ahead again.
>This reminds me of when Moses went upon the mountain and saw God. He didn’t see the face of God (for he would have died) but was allowed to see God’s back. God shown with such an intense light that Moses actually glowed when he came down from the mountain. Is this the light the Ghosts are bathed in now?
I remembered Moses and God *speaking* face to face… so I had to Google this. Interesting. I have to smirk when I think of God’s “back parts.” But I don’t think of God as a human form, so this is kinda strange for me. Some critics imply it means “regal garb” or “lesser aspects” or something like that. I need a rabbi/ancient Hebrew expert for this one. Very interesting; just not a detail that stuck with me, till now. (That’s one of the many things I enjoy about Biblical study. You can read the same book you’ve read 30 times, and still go, “Well! Look at that.”)
The detail I remembered about Moses was, unlke the movies, he did not speak to Pharoah. God spoke to Moses, who spoke to Aaron, who spoke to Pharaoh. And that’s interesting, too; it essentially makes Moses into God, Aaron into the prophet, and Pharaoh the follower, like in a little one act play, orchestrated by the Lord.
But that’s a whole ‘nother conversation, and I’m not as fluent in that stuff as I am in the Greek and Roman stuff. 🙂
This is fun! Thanks for suggesting it. Maybe we can get an XM radio program: “Christ Chat with Redneck and the P’erfessor.” 😀
>> I like Lewis’ suggestion that perhaps, since time is part of creation, God is outside of time, and from his perspective, it’s all known, but for those of us inside time, it’s still a choice.
God outside of time is a very common notion. I’ve heard it a lot in the Church of Christ (and other sources) and promise you, we didn’t get it from Lewis. I’m not sure what the biblical sources for this are. Still, I believe the notion to be true.
I’m still not pacified with the outside of time perspective. If I see a ball rolling to the edge of a table, I know the future of that ball is to fall to the floor. (This is the best omnipotent me example I can come up with.) If I then take no action to catch the ball or stop its progression, have I not predestined it? Even if the ball is sentient, and chooses to roll along?
>> I remembered Moses and God *speaking* face to face…
Yeah, the “face to face” part didn’t happen, but Moses so wanted to look upon God that the Big Guy granted his wish and let him look upon his back. That part I remembered; it was recently I read something about Moses wearing a veil when he came down from the mountain. There were two theories as to why he did that; both assuming he was glowing. Theory one said that he wore the veil because the glowing would scare the people. The other theory said that he knew the light of God (in him) would fade and he didn’t want the people to witness that.
>> Thanks for suggesting it. Maybe we can get an XM radio program: “Christ Chat with Redneck and the P’erfessor
I would never refer to you as “Redneck”.