C.S. Lewis

by Lee Ballard

In the November Daily Planet, Carl Mumpower devotes a big chunk of his column to C.S. Lewis and his “Screwtape Letters.” I found this fascinating.

I have no doubt that Professor Lewis would have enjoyed a meal with Mumpower. Indeed, in his last years, Lewis was certainly a libertarian. But I don’t think the conversation would have gone exactly like Mumpower might have expected.

I think Lewis would first have questioned the Mumpower-led rally that protested the topless event that took place before his rally.

Let’s say Mumpower answered Lewis as he did at the time, saying that city leaders should be held accountable for allowing the topless rally.  I think Lewis would have smiled — a sort of “what kind of libertarian is this?” smile.

You see, Lewis once wrote that certain actions (he listed them) are “evil,” but he disapproved of government’s intervention. “My own view,” he wrote, “is that the law should be concerned with none of them except adultery because it offends the principle that men perform their covenants [that is, keep their marriage vows as they would a contract].”

In his column, Mumpower quotes only one sentence from Lewis: “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.”  

Mumpower seems to apply his quote to what he calls people “in today’s screwy social slide.” But for full understanding, it might be helpful for us to look at the sentence that immediately follows that one:  “It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies.”

Lewis seems to mean something different from Mumpower’s interpretation.  He seems to be saying he’d rather live under out-of-control capitalists (whom he disliked) than “moral busybodies.”

An interesting phrase. Lewis didn’t see the socialism of the 1930s and 1940s — “Screwtape Letters” was published in 1942 — as a remedy for robber baron capitalism.  Rather he distrusted both because they took away individual liberty. Oops, did I say “liberty”? Lewis and Mumpower would have had an interesting exchange on that word, too.  

I found Mumpower’s notation about President Obama in the column a real head-scratcher: “You’ll find [Obama] always talking in bold broad terms … Big talkers are mostly posers dodging accountability.  Real achievers, in contrast, almost always know how to think small. They take immediate action ....”

What exactly is he criticizing the president for? For having broad vision? For not being an achiever? For not taking action? Obama is open to criticism, but not in those areas.
•
Lee Ballard lives in Mars Hill.