|
The following insights come from the CS Lewis Institute blog that I receive. It comments that in his book, The Problem of Pain, C. S. Lewis points out that our definition of God as love may be true, but our understanding of what love means needs correction. He writes, |
|
“By the goodness of God we mean nowadays almost exclusively His lovingness; and in this we may be right. And by Love, in this context, most of us mean kindness-the desire to see others than the self happy; not happy in this way or in that, but just happy. What would really satisfy us would be a God who said of anything we happened to like doing, 'What does it matter so long as they are contented?' We want, in fact, not so much a Father in Heaven as a grandfather in heaven-a senile benevolence who, as they say, 'liked to see young people enjoying themselves' and whose plan for the universe was simply that it might be truly said at the end of each day, 'a good time was had by all'. Not many people, I admit, would formulate a theology in precisely those terms: but a conception not very different lurks at the back of many minds. I do not claim to be an exception: I should very much like to live in a universe which was governed on such lines. But since it is abundantly clear that I don't, and since I have reason to believe, nevertheless, that, God is Love, I conclude that my conception of love needs correction.
I
might, indeed, have learned, even from the poets, that Love is something
more stern and splendid than mere kindness: that even the love between
the sexes is, as in Dante, 'a lord of terrible aspect'. There is
kindness in Love: but Love and kindness are not coterminous, and
when kindness (in the sense given above) is separated from the other
elements of Love, it involves a certain fundamental indifference to its
object, and even something like contempt of it. Kindness consents very
readily to the removal of its object - we have all met people whose
kindness to animals is constantly leading them to kill animals lest they
should suffer. Kindness, merely as such, cares not whether its object
becomes good or bad, provided only that it escapes suffering. As
Scripture points out, it is bastards who are spoiled: the legitimate
sons, who are to carry on the family tradition, are punished. (Hebrews
12:8) It is for people whom we care nothing about that we demand
happiness on any terms: with our friends, our lovers, our
children, we are exacting and would rather see them suffer much than be
happy in contemptible and estranging modes. If God is Love, He is, by
definition, something more than mere kindness. And it appears, from all
the records, that though He has often rebuked us and condemned us, He
has never regarded us with contempt. He has paid us the intolerable
compliment of loving us, in the deepest, most tragic, most inexorable
sense.
|
In
today's postmodern culture love is often seen as kind tolerance of anything as
long as it's consensual and does no harm. This is a far cry from the holy love
of God that actively promotes goodness, seeks justice, protects the innocent, is
gracious, slow to anger, and disciplines His children so that they may grow to
become more like Jesus. God is love-that is as defined by God, not us.
|
"My
son, do not regard lightly the discipline of the Lord, nor be weary
when reproved by him. For the Lord disciplines the one he loves, and
chastises every son whom he receives."
HEBREWS 12:5b-6, (ESV)
|
| 1
C.S. Lewis. The Problem of Pain. Touchstone: New York, 1996, pp.
35-37 |
For
more:
follow on Twitter @jefflampl
No comments:
Post a Comment