Chapter One
Good and Evil
in NarniaThe Last Battle - the final volume of the Chronicles of Narnia - is
dark and sad, especially for those who love Narnia and
are reading the book for the first time. Beyond the hint in the
title, the opening words of the book, "In the last days of Narnia,"
are disconcerting. Not much later, Tirian is referred to as the
last king of Narnia. The reader senses that something dreadful
is going to happen. But what? The warlike Calormenes, who
have formed an alliance with a traitorous ape named Shift, have
secretly been entering Narnia and are bent on conquest. Surely
the great lion Aslan will send help, won't he? And so he does send
aid by way of Eustace Scrubb and Jill Pole. But it is not enough.
The Calormenes are victorious, and Narnia comes to an end. The
story, however, does not end. Evil exists, but as in Christianity,
good will ultimately prevail.
It is not only in the final volume but also all the way through
the Chronicles of Narnia that we see themes of good and evil
displayed. Characters are presented with challenges and choices
and must make a decision about how to act. What they decide to
do has repercussions in their own lives and the lives of those with
whom they are connected. All this sounds a lot like our own life
stories, doesn't it? Indeed, our daily ethical challenges, both great
and small, are reflected in many ways in the pages of the Chronicles.
Without forgetting that we are reading a made-up narrative, and
certainly without losing a sense of the fun of it all, we can learn
valuable lessons in morality from these seven classic tales.
In the chapters that follow, we will look at what are, for the
most part, pairs of ethical opposites - virtues and vices - as
reflected in the Chronicles of Narnia. These will help us wrangle
with specific ethical issues that each of us must face in life. Before
that, though, it will be helpful to gain an overall view of C. S. Lewis's
ethical beliefs, especially as they are reflected in the Chronicles.
The first thing to note is that Lewis was by no means infected
by the modern (or, more accurately, postmodern) hesitancy in
calling wrong, wrong.
Moral Absolutes
Most people would condemn such things as rape, child abuse, and
terrorism. But why? (Or, more disturbingly, why not?) On what
basis do we determine right and wrong? Do cultural conventions
set the standards? Or could it be that a God exists and is the source
of such standards for all people at all times? Ethics is the branch
of philosophy concerned with right and wrong and, consequently,
with how one should or should not live.
In Mere Christianity, Lewis explained that as an atheist, he argued
against God on the basis of evil and suffering in the world. He asked
how he had gotten the idea of what is just and unjust, reasoning that
in order to consider something as wrong, one must have a concept
of right. But where does this standard come from? Following his
conversion to Christianity, Lewis often made the case for objective
moral truth. He was aware of fine ethical distinctions and moral
ambiguities, but, more basically, he wanted to affirm the difference
between good and evil. Paul Ford correctly observed in reference
to morality in Narnia, "Lewis believed there was a clear distinction
between right and wrong; between morality and immorality; and
between good acts and bad acts."
Lewis wrote before postmodernism had gained the popularity
it did in the late twentieth century. His position on moral absolutes
reflected the earlier, "modern" view that truth (meaning truth
that is valid for all times and in all places) really exists and can
really be known. Later thinkers in the postmodern vein were
more likely to view truth and morality as relative to culture and
to individual situations or tastes. Alan Jacobs elaborated, "Lewis
wrote in a time when, among the educated British public if not
among their professional philosophers, there was considerably
more agreement than there is now about, for instance, what
constitutes a valid and rational argument for a given case His
apologetic works presuppose, and rarely make any argument for,
the criteria for rationality themselves. Today those criteria simply
cannot be assumed."
These days, Lewis's argument for objective moral law would
have to be bolstered for those influenced by relativistic ethics.
But it may be that the climate of our day is warming again to
ideas of definite right and wrong. Lewis's words still resonate
with those who sense the danger of an ethic in which any type of
behavior might be acceptable under the right circumstances. As
old-fashioned as the ideas of virtue and vice in the Chronicles of
Narnia might at first appear to be, they speak to an eternal need
to know how to act when we are faced with a choice. Few books
can inspire us so well with the courage to do what is right as can
these simple tales. Maybe their underlying philosophy is not weak
or outmoded after all.
Of course, Lewis did not develop his ethical ideas without
the influence of past thinkers. While a thorough analysis of the
philosophical influences on C. S. Lewis is beyond the scope of this
chapter, it will be beneficial to gain at least a basic understanding
of these influences.
Great Thinkers Who Influenced Lewis
Lewis was clearly moved by the likes of English journalist and
writer G. K. Chesterton (1874-1936) and Scottish novelist
George MacDonald (1824-1905). Some elements of the philosophy
of Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) are also reflected in Lewis's
ethical concepts. As Armand Nicholi has observed, "Lewis agrees
with German philosopher Immanuel Kant, who pointed to the
'moral law within' as a powerful witness to the greatness of God."
But the greater philosophical influences on Lewis were classical
philosophers. Gilbert Meilaender rightly explained, "Lewis' views
are best characterized not by reference to contemporary thinkers
but . by reference to Augustine, Plato, and Aristotle." So great
were the influences of Plato and Aristotle on Lewis that he once
wrote that losing the influence of these two philosophers would
be like the amputation of a limb.
Plato believed in the unchanging world of Ideas or Forms.
Because ethical standards are derived from this unchanging standard,
Plato concluded that ethical standards are also unchanging.
Similarly, Lewis believed there are transcendent, universal, and
unchanging standards rooted in natural law. Moreover, like Plato,
Lewis believed that the current world is not all there is - that a
better, more real world awaits us. As Lewis has a character say inTill We Have Faces, "Nothing is yet in its true form." Lewis also
affirmed his affinity for Plato in The Last Battle. When Narnia is
destroyed, it is revealed that Aslan's country contains the real
Narnia - bigger and more beautiful than the "copy" or "shadow"
that was destroyed. The character Digory Kirke makes the connection
obvious when he says of the discovery that he has entered
the real Narnia that it is all explained in Plato.
Lewis also owed much to Plato's pupil Aristotle. Aristotle
believed that in the pursuit of ultimate good or happiness,
ethical standards require a balance between extremes - a golden
mean - of vice and virtue. According to Aristotle, developing
moral character is more important than following strict rules of
conduct. What matters is living a virtuous life based on reason.
Consequently, virtuous moral choices are desirable and, if
habitually made, will shape our character for the better. Lewis, too,
was more concerned with the virtuous life and the importance of
our daily choices in given situations than he was with adherence
to specific ethical commands.
Despite these influences by Aristotle and Plato, Meilaender
considered Lewis's overarching social and ethical views "as,
quite simply, Augustinian," referring to the African theologian
Augustine. In The Four Loves, Lewis called Augustine a great
thinker to whom he owed a tremendous debt. Lewis, like
Augustine, viewed evil as a privation. Good exists, but when the
good is missing, the result is evil. Lewis often referred to evil as
parasitical on good or as a perversion of it, such as in a 1933 letter
in which he referred to evil as "good spoiled." Ethically, Augustine
believed in transcendent and unchanging standards that have their
source in a personal, active God who has revealed Himself not
only in general revelation (evidence of God in nature or human
conscience) but also in special revelation (such as in the Bible and
the Incarnation). Lewis would agree with these points as well as
with Augustine's position that happiness can be found only in God.
Also, like Augustine, Lewis's ethics were built upon a foundation
of love. Lewis agreed that true longing and, hence, happiness can
be found only in God. In commenting on the Golden Rule ("Do
to others what you would have them do to you," Matthew 7:12),
Lewis acknowledged that repeating this phrase is meaningless
unless one is able to love his or her neighbor - a task that cannot
be carried out unless one first loves God. This is an Augustinian
view requiring obedience as well as love.
In at least one area of his ethics, Lewis appears to have owed
more to Scripture than to any philosopher or theologian. That
area is what is known as "the problem of evil." Given that the
biblical God is all-loving as well as all-powerful, why does evil
exist?
The Problem of Evil
The Old Testament prophet Isaiah wrote,
Woe to those who call evil good
and good evil. (Isaiah 5:20)
Biblically, it is clear that good and evil exist, as do moral
distinctions between them. The story of the Bible is the story of
a struggle between good and evil, with good ultimately prevailing
over evil as our world draws to a close. In an Augustinian sense,
our world is not the best possible world, but it is the best way to
the best possible world. Hence, evil exists, but it will finally be
vanquished. While some have accused Christianity of promoting
a sort of dualism between God and Satan, Christian theism does
not truly promote such a dualism, because Satan is a created being
and his power does not match that of God, who is all-powerful, all-knowing,
and ever-present. But in that case, why does evil exist?
The Greek philosopher Epicurus phrased the problem of evil
as follows:
God either wishes to take away evils, and is unable;
or he is able and unwilling; or he is neither willing
nor able, or he is both willing and able. If he is
willing and is unable, he is feeble, which is not in
accordance with the character of God; if he is able
and unwilling, he is envious, which is equally at
variance with God; if he is neither willing nor able
he is both envious and feeble and therefore not
God; if he is both willing and able, which alone is
suitable to God, from what source then are evils?
or why does he not remove them?
The basic problem is how to explain the presence of evil and suffering
in light of the existence of an all-powerful and loving God.
Intellectually, Lewis addressed this topic in The Problem of Pain.
Emotionally, he grappled with the matter in A Grief Observed. His
beliefs were nicely nuanced, and he certainly did not minimize the
complexity of the problem. He admitted that Christianity does not
necessarily have a neat or complete explanation for the problem of
evil, but he said that Christianity's explanation is far better than
others. He affirmed the biblical picture that, in the grand view, God
is in the process of redeeming the good and establishing justice for
all time. Through Christ's suffering, a way has been made to rescue
the repentant and punish the incorrigibly wicked.
This view of God's sympathy for and activity on behalf of the
suffering is implicitly addressed in the Chronicles. One example is
Digory's mother, Mabel, and her serious illness - something that
grieves Aslan. The death of Caspian in The Silver Chair is another
example. Caspian dies, but he arrives in Aslan's country (heaven)
submerged in water and is revived by the blood of the lion - a
distinctly Christian image no doubt inspired by the concept of
being cleansed by the blood of Christ (see, for example, Hebrews
9:13-15). Aslan weeps for Mabel and Caspian, thus expressing
God's sympathy for the human predicament. (Recall that Jesus
wept for Lazarus and, by extension, for the human condition, as
told in John 11:1-44.)
History is a stage on which God is working out His final
solution to the problem of evil. In the Chronicles of Narnia,
Christ is represented by Aslan, while His opponent, Satan, is
represented most nearly by the White Witch, Jadis.
The Lion and the Witch
In Aslan and the White Witch, we see the personification of
the struggle between right and wrong, good and evil. This is
not an interplay of two abstract concepts but the interaction of
two individual characters in Narnian history. Reflected in their
relationship is the drama that God is writing in terrestrial history
as He prepares for the final defeat of evil.
In each of the Chronicles, Aslan the lion is the centerpiece of
all that is good, holy, and just. Other characters may embody these
traits, but not nearly to the same extent and not consistently. Aslan
stands for virtue, condemns vice, and is clearly a Christ figure,
though not in a strictly allegorical sense. In The Lion, the Witch and
the Wardrobe, he willingly sacrifices his life to save the human child
Edmund from death. In Prince Caspian, Aslan participates in the
overthrow of the evil usurping King Miraz, while in The Voyage
of the "Dawn Treader," he is present in many instances of good, for
example, in a powerful encounter with Eustace and as the source
of Reepicheep's longing. In a scene in The Silver Chair reminiscent
of Jesus' discussion with the Samaritan woman at the well
described in John 4, Aslan speaks with Jill Pole on issues related
to salvation and once again seeks, through those who serve him,
to overcome evil with good, restoring Prince Rilian and, in the
process, destroying the evil witch of the Underworld. In The Horse
and His Boy, the four principal characters - Shasta, Bree, Aravis,
and Hwin - each learn ethical lessons from Aslan regarding
humility and pride. When Shasta is alone with Aslan, the great
lion explains the role he has played in the boy's life, always
watching over him.
The White Witch (Jadis in The Magician's Nephew) is not an
opposite of Aslan in a dualistic sense. She is a created being from
another world who enters Narnia at the time of its creation.
There are some parallels to the Christian account of Satan, such
as the witch tempting Digory in the garden, but they should
not be pressed to the point of actually equating the witch with
Satan, as there are simply too many differences. That the witch
is evil is clear. Aslan himself refers to her as evil in The Magician's
Nephew, and she exhibits a number of vices indicating her evil
nature: unfairness, dishonesty, pride, cruelty, a warlike nature, and
impenitence.
Those characters in the Chronicles who are allied with Aslan
act more like him, while those who are the witch's helpers reflect
her own evil propensities. So it is for us. There are good behaviors
(virtues) and bad behaviors (vices). We can choose whom we
follow and how we will act.
Vices and Virtues in Narnia
Lewis believed that everyday ethical decisions move one closer
in character to good or evil. As a result, even the small ethical
decisions made daily are, in the long run, incredibly important.
These decisions for good or evil accrue in our character like
a savings account earning compound interest, said Lewis,
indicating that a series of decisions for the good, however small,
may accumulate over time and result in a good ethical decision
in the future. Or, conversely, a series of small evil decisions will
build up, tarnishing one's character and allowing entry for further
(and likely increased) evil. Lewis elaborated on this matter inMere Christianity, in which he wrote, "Every time you make a choice
you are turning the central part of you . into something a little
different from what it was before." Over the course of a lifetime,
we are turning this central part of ourselves into either a "heavenly
creature" or a "hellish creature."
In that same work, Lewis gave an illustration involving tennis.
He noted that even a person who does not play tennis well may
make a lucky shot now and then, but a good player has the training
and experience that allows him or her to make numerous good
shots and become someone whose tennis skill can be relied upon.
Similarly, a person who regularly practices virtuous behavior will
attain a godly quality of character. This quality and not specific
actions, argued Lewis, is virtue.
(Continues.)
