In today’s episode, Jack asks what a truly Christian society would look like. He’s going to say some things to upset people on the Right and people on the Left…
S1E15: “Social Morality” (Download)
If you enjoy this episode, please subscribe on your preferred podcast platform, such as iTunes, Google Podcasts, Spotify, Audible, and many others…
For information about our schedule, please see the our Roadmap for Season 7.
Finally, if you’d like to support us and get fantastic gifts such as access to our Pints With Jack Slack channel and branded pint glasses, please join us on Patreon for as little as $2 a month.
Show Notes
Introduction
–
Quote-of-the-week:
If you want a religion to make you feel really comfortable, I certainly don’t recommend Christianity.
C. S. Lewis, God in the Dock
Toast
- Beer-of-the-week was Ballast Point Bonito again.
Discussion
01. “The Golden Rule Throughout Time”
- Jack kicks off the chapter with a shocking statement:
The first thing to get clear about Christian morality between man and man is that in this department Christ did not come to preach any brand new morality. The Golden Rule of the New Testament (Do as you would be done by) is a summing up of what every one, at bottom, had always known to be right … As Dr. Johnson said, ‘People need to be reminded more often than they need to be instructed.’
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Social Morality
- The “Dr. Johnson” that he is referencing is an 18th century writer, essayist, and poet.
- Matt shared the book “Breath of God”, which made the argument that Jesus studied Buddhism in the years before His ministry because of the similarities found in this mysterious period.
Really great moral teachers never do introduce new moralities: it is quacks and cranks who do that.
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Social Morality
- Even Jesus’ teaching concerning loving your neighbour had already been expressed in the Old Testament:
You shall not hate your brother in your heart, but you shall reason frankly with your neighbor, lest you incur sin because of him. You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbour as yourself: I am the Lord.
Leviticus 18:17-18
- However, we could say that Jesus widened and deepened this teaching, particularly in answering the question “Who is my neighbour?”
02. “An Obedience Problem”
- Lewis’ main point stands: we need to be reminded far more than instructed.
- Saint Paul tells the Philippians that he’s not teaching them anything new, but that they need to be reminded:
To write the same things to you is not irksome to me, and is safe for you.
Philippians 3:1
- You can watch David’s video series on Philippians here and his study notes for that book of the Bible can be found here.
- David also quoted the lead singer of the band Casting Crowns:
We are trained well beyond our level of obedience.
Mark Hall
- In other words, we do not have a knowledge problem, but an obedience problem. We don’t take Jesus seriously enough!
03. “Not a Political Programme”
- Christianity is not a political programme.
When [Christianity] tells you to feed the hungry it does not give you lessons in cookery. When it tells you to read the Scriptures it does not give you lessons in Hebrew and Greek, or even in English grammar.
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Social Morality
- In contrast, other religions (Judaism and Islam) set out a detailed programme for every aspect of personal and civil life. Christianity is instead a director and source of energy.
It was never intended to replace or supersede the ordinary human arts and sciences; it is rather a director which will set them all to the right jobs, and a source of energy which will give them all new life, if only they will put themselves at its disposal.
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Social Morality
- Jack really begins to irritate people now, especially Christians.
People say, ‘The Church ought to give us a lead.’ … when they say that the Church should give us a lead, they oght to mean that some Christians – those who happen to have the right talents – should be economists and statesmen, and that all economists and statesmen should be Christians, and that their whole efforts in politics and economics should be directed to putting ‘Do as you would be done by’ into action.
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Social Morality
- The Church does not just refer to the clergy. It is up to every Christian to bring the Golden Rule to his/her domain of responsibility and excellence. A document from the Second Vatican Council says the following:
Each individual layman must stand before the world as a witness to the resurrection and life of the Lord Jesus and a symbol of the living God. All the laity as a community and each one according to his ability must nourish the world with spiritual fruits.(212) They must diffuse in the world that spirit which animates the poor, the meek, the peace makers—whom the Lord in the Gospel proclaimed as blessed.(213) In a word, “Christians must be to the world what the soul is to the body.” [Epistle to Diognetus]
Lumen Gentium, Paragraph #38
04. “A New Testament Christian Society”
- The New Testament hints at what a fully Christian society would be like. We each find aspects of it which we like and other parts which we don’t like…
The New Testament, without going into details, gives us a pretty clear hint of what a fully Christian society would be like. Perhaps it gives us more than we can take. It tells us that there are to be not passengers or parasites: if man does not work, he ought not to eat. Every one is to work with his own hands, and what is more, every one’s work is to produce something good: there will be no manufacture of silly luxuries and then of sillier advertisements to persuade us to buy them. And there is to be no ‘swank’ or ‘side’, no putting on airs. To that extent a Christian society would be what we now call Leftist.
On the other hand, it is always insisting on obedience – obedience (and outward marks of respect) from all of us to properly appointed magistrates, from children to parents, and (I am afraid this is going to be very unpopular) from wives to husbands. Thirdly, it is to be a cheerful society: full of singing and rejoicing, and regarding worry or anxiety as wrong. Courtesy is one of the Christian virtues; and the New Testament hates what it calls ‘busybodies’.
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Social Morality
Lewis was referring to the passage in Ephesians about the duties of husbands and wives. On the subject, David mentioned Brant Pitre’s talk “Wives have to do what?!”. You can also watch the trailer for it, or even watch the entire talk online.
- David explained why he thinks the Garter toss at weddings is stupid.
05. “Cafeteria Christianity”
- Lewis explains the general feelings that most modern Christians would have towards such a society.
If there were such a society in existence and you or I visited it, I think we should come away with a curious impression. We should feel that its economic life was very socialistic and, in that sense, ‘advanced’, but that its family life and its code of manners were rather old fashioned – perhaps even ceremonious and aristocratic. Each of us would like some bits of it, but I am afraid very few of us would like the whole thing … You will find this again and again about anything that is really Christian: every one is attracted by bits of it and wants to pick out those bits and leave the rest.
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Social Morality
06. “Usury”
- The issue of usury was briefly addressed. David found this article helpful on the subject.
There is one bit of advice given to us by the ancient heathen Greeks, and by the Jews in the Old Testament, and by the great Christian teachers of the Middle Ages, which the modern economic system has completely disobeyed. All these people told us not to lend money at interest; and lending money at interest – what we call investment – is the basis of our whole system.
Nw it may not absolutely follow that we are wrong … That is a question I cannot decide on. I am not an economist and I simply do not know whether the investment system is responsible for the state we are in or not. This is where we want that Christian economist. But I should not have been honest if I had not told you that three great civilisations had agreed (or so it seems at first sight) in condemning the very thing on which we have based our whole life.
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Social Morality
- The money system has changed considerably since Biblical times. Lewis addresses this.
Some people say that when Moses and Aristotle and the Christians agreed in forbidding interest (or ‘usury’ as they called it), they could not foresee the joint stock company, and were only thinking of the private money lender, and that, therefore, we need not bother about what they said.
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Social Morality
- Matt referenced the movie “It’s a Wonderful Life”, and the struggle between George Bailey and Potter.
07. “Charity”
- Jack switches over to the virtue of “Charity”.
Charity – giving to the poor – is an essential part of Christian morality: in the frightening parable of the sheep and the goats it seems to be the point on which everything turns.
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Social Morality
- Lewis is talking about the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats from the gospels. David and Matt also discussed Mother Theresa, and the city on a hill.
And the king will answer them, ‘Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me.’
Matthew 25:40
- Some people say that rather than giving to the poor, we should build a society where poverty is not a state of being. However, as Jack points out, while striving for that type of society, there are still individuals who need temporary relief.
Some people nowadays say that charity ought to be unnecessary and that instead of giving to the poor we ought to be producing a society in which there were no poor to give to They may be quite right in saying that we ought to produce this kind of society. But if anyone thinks that, as a consequence, you can stop giving in the meantime, then he has parted company with all Christian morality.
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Social Morality
- Concerning care of the poor, how much is one obligated to give?
I do not believe one can settle how much we ought to give. I am afraid the only safe rule is to give more than we can spare … If our charities do not at all pinch or hamper us, I should say they are too small.
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Social Morality
- David and Matt talked about charity and about the question of how much we should give. Some people think it’s 10%, but it’s not that simple.
- Why do we not give more? Jack suggests it is because we’re afraid of our own financial security. David referenced a fantastic interview with Douglas Gresham.
For many of us the great obstacle to charity lies not in our luxurious living or desire for more money, but in our fear – fear of insecurity.
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Social Morality
- Matt also talked about Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s “The Cost of Discipleship”, which discusses the concept of belief and obedience going hand in hand.
- Matt also brought up The Parable of the Rich Man from the gospel of Luke.
08. “Validation”
- As we come to the chapter’s close, Lewis admits that he has probably irritated many people.
Before I end, I am going to venture on a guess as to how this section has affected any who have read it. My guess is that there are some Leftist people among them who are very angry that it has not gone further in that direction, and some people of an opposite sort who are angry because they think it has gone much too far.
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Social Morality
- In response, Jack offers a stinging assessment…
Most of us are not really approaching the subject in order to find out what Christianity says: we are approaching it in the hope of finding support from Christianity from the views of our own party. We are looking for an ally where we are offered either a Master or – a Judge.
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Social Morality
- In other words, most of us are looking for validation.
09. “Summary”
- How does all of this apply to us today?
Nothing whatever is going to come of such talks unless we go a much longer way round. A Christian society is not going to arrive until most of us really want it: and we are not going to want it until we become fully Christian. I may repeat ‘Do as you would be done by’ till I am black in the face, but I cannot really carry it out til I love my neighbour as myself: and I cannot learn to love my neighbour as myself till I learn to love God: and I cannot learn to love God except by learning to obey Him. And so, as I warned you, we are driven on to something more inward – driven on from social matters to religious matters. For the longest way round is the shortest way home.
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Social Morality
Wrap Up
Concluding Thoughts
- The outline for this chapter is available here.
After listening to the “Social Morality” podcast, I feel compelled to share some thoughts.
First of all while it is true that Christ didn’t come to preach a new morality (although he did raise some old moral truths to a new status like the indissolubility of sacramental marriage) and that we need to be reminded more than instructed in what is true, I would disagree that crackpot false theories are new. Like truths, particular falsehoods are nothing new either. Every “new fangled” fad is nothing more than a warmed-over regurgitated old fad. As the Book of Ecclesiastes says “Is there anything of which one can say, “Look! This is something new”? It was here already, long ago; it was here before our time.” (1:10) Another way of saying it is “Same old thing different day.” Even the heresy of Modernism, which was condemned by Pope St. Pius X was not all that modern. The same pope himself called it the “synthesis of all heresies”.
Sadly, the bishops today need no encouragement to interfere with things outside their realm of competence. They routinely overstep their boundaries in areas of economics and other societal issues. Immigration policy and capital punishment are two examples where they take sides undermining the legitimate diversity of opinion that Catholic teaching affords and marginalizes one segment of faithful Catholics while opening themselves to scandalous exploitation by another segment. Unfortunately, the mainstream orthodox Catholic media lacks the needed courage to push back against this. Now we have a pope who is taking this to a whole new level. In fairness, at least on the death penalty issue, even Pope St. John Paul II acted rather irresponsibly. His anti-death penalty posturing did a significant amount of harm to the pro-life message that he himself did much good to promote. Now, even though I am pro-death penalty and tend to take the more mainstream conservative view on immigration, I would object just as strenuously to the Church hierarchy using their offices to take that side of the issue because Church teaching regards to the other view as equally legitimate.
Now with the issue of charitable giving. Lewis’ view is something of a mixed bag in my opinion. Certainly, we must be generous with our resources. But Christian charity does not demand, in the normal course of things, that we give more than we can spare. In fact, barring extraordinary circumstances, it would be counterproductive. I would go so far to say that if our first consideration is what it may cost us to help others we have the cart before the horse. We are actually make it about ourselves, my sacrifice, what it is costing me. Our first consideration should always be considering the others’ good. To be sure, that may, and often does, entail sacrifice and difficulty on our part, but that’s really ancillary. The need to exercise good judgment in how we charitably give was not really addressed in the podcast. Nor does Lewis really address it. I would heartily agree with Tolkien that Lewis should not have just indiscriminately given his money to the panhandler. I would suspect the reason Tolkien made the admonition was that what Lewis did harmed the man as opposed to helping him. So what if Lewis was going to spend the money on beer? He probably would have done less harm in doing that, unless he was an alcoholic of course. But, to my knowledge Lewis was not. I don’t think Tolkien would have had an issue if Lewis would have emptied his pockets and put the money in a poor box at a church. I would also suspect Tolkien thought Lewis had other motives, in addition to charitable ones, for doing what he did like feeding his own pride. Here I think Lewis was engaging the very “showy” form of generosity he laments about those who tip more than they ought and less on those who are in real need. But since it was Lewis’ own money, he is free to disburse it as his will and conscience bids him. The main reason why I don’t give to panhandlers is that I honestly believe it does more harm than good. I think Mother Teresa also discouraged giving to panhandlers for that reason. Jesus’ admonition to as wise as serpents as well as being as innocent as doves applies as much to how we should should go about helping the least among us (which include not only the materially poor) as it does to everything else.
The citation you read from Lumen Gentium had an operative word that you might have overlooked. It talks about animating the poor, meek, and peacemakers. To animate, in this context, means to energize, to enable them to be more proactive in participating in bettering their lot. I know of no one who says that we should “teach a man to fish”, so to speak, would deny that we have to give him a fish in the meantime. This is a false dichotomy. In fact, those who take the “teach a man to fish” approach are those far more likely to give of their own resources to assist those less fortunate than those who take the opposite approach.
This gets to another thing we often don’t think about when we seek to help the poor. Do we think of the poor man as a man or a poor man? This is not splitting hairs. By looking at him as a man as opposed to a poor man is to recognize his inherent dignity as your equal and that his being poor as a matter of external circumstance or, as Mother Teresa would say, a disguise. When we confuse these things, all sorts of harm gets done especially to the poor under the guise of helping them regardless of intentions. For instance, the ever expanding welfare state in Europe and, to a lesser extent, here in the U.S. has compounded the problems it was supposedly designed to alleviate. Unfortunately, this travesty has had and still garners the support of world’s Catholic bishops. Socialism and Communism, which are always presenting under the guise of being for the poor, are the more extreme examples of this.
I think it is important to think of charitable giving in terms of making an investment. By investing in the good of the least among us we contribute to our own. As a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, society is only as strong as its weakest member. This I believe is a true view of a Christian society so few Christians really understand.
Now a few words on the garter toss at wedding receptions. While I would agree some unbecoming and rather inappropriate actions get included with it in many cases, the garter toss itself isn’t necessarily itself a bad thing. The washing of the feet is of course a lovely gesture. However, it bespeaks of a solemnity better included in the nuptial mass itself and not the reception.
Thanks Greg! Matt and I will be doing a “Mailbag” episode shortly and we’ll address some of your comments.
Pingback: How Much is Enough to Give – Becoming Perfectly Myself