Chronicles of Narnia: Devil worship or christian allegory?

[SeRapH&CheRi]

I read through the entire Chronicles a few years ago and loved it! And now, I am currently re-reading through the series. It is definitely one of my favorite series writtien. IMO, I think these books have got to be one of the most beautiful series ever written. The biblical symbolisms are extremely powerful and poignant. Even if Lewis was not fond of allegory, anyone who reads the Chronicles of Narnia cannot help but see the symbolism in each story.

 

[Eruliel]

That article makes me sad. It shows the fear that alot of Christians have about being destroyed by God if we even think about reading something besides the Bible. As his children we are not put under condemnation (John 3:18). We have alot of liberty in Christ. In fact we are told that Sexual Immorality, the eating of blood, foolish talk, coarse jesting, obscene stories,impurity, and greed are not to be found among the people of God.(Ephesians 5:11, Acts 15:20 NLT). Compared to what the laws were set down in the OT that's quite a little. The Chronicles of Narnia have none of the affore mentioned things. In fact I think that those stories follow the guidelines of things that are noble, pure, of good report, lovely, true etc(Phillipians 4:8 New Living Translation)
I find nothing wrong with the series, and if the Father at my church is a half baked Christian then I'm an athiest. I say that because he recently (today) lent me "Mere Christianity" by Lewis
Slainte!
Eruliel.
ps. What I mean by true is there are elements of truth in the series. Aslan being a lion, the king of beasts, him being killed by evil incarnate, him conquering evil, him being the creator of all life on Narnia, him being able to turn into a lamb...the list goes on and on and on and on...and on. It's amazing. It's a pity the article writer doesn't have an e-mail. I would like to talk to him/her/it/they about the subject.

 

[humuhumunukunukuapua'a]

Concerning Devil Worship, I suggest reading Mere Christianity or the Screwtape Letters.

 

[Visum Cuspis]

Well, C.S. Lewis was Catholic, and some people do believe the Catholic Church is evil incarnate so it doesn't surprise me that they'd find his works to be evil.

I think they're great, personally. On that note, it will be interesting to see what hollywood does with the movie...

 

[ApopkaDad]

Well, C.S. Lewis was Catholic, and some people do believe the Catholic Church is evil incarnate so it doesn't surprise me that they'd find his works to be evil.

I think they're great, personally. On that note, it will be interesting to see what hollywood does with the movie...

I think Mr. Lewis was Anglican.

 

[Milla]

I think Mr. Lewis was Anglican.

I think the confusion arises from Lewis, at one point, describing himself as (iirc) "very Catholic". He was actually a member of the Church of England (Anglicans), yes.

 

[StAnselm]

In the same way, I suppose, that CF is very catholic...

 

[meebs]

wow! - there is one thing i notice about the Narnian books is that they are some of the most christian books you could ever read, without being too direct.

And though im an atheist i love them!

I love the idea of Aslan.

 

[jillpole]

Devil Worship? Bored? WOW! In C.S. Lewis's "Letters to Children" He asks the children

who 1. died for a traitor 2. came back to life and 3. was known as a lion? He obviously

knew his stories were an allegory. But he didn't come right out and tell the world

(though just reading the books is evident enough!)

 

[Ellesar]

The Chronicles of Narnia is most definitely Christian allegory in my book

 

[Milla]

There's a difference between allegory and allusion.

 

[Muzza]

To put the whole allegory thing straight. Yes the books were Christian allegory and yes he meant them very much so to be allegory. Tolkien, who was a very good friend of his, was the one who couldn't stand allegory in his books, while Lewis was as someone said earlier 'very fond of allegory'. He was very similar to George MacDonald in that aspect.

As for the books being devil worship because they have things like sun worship in them and heatherns and paganism? Well the bible has aspects of all of that, and talks about it, and shows what it can do to people, does that make the Bible a book about devil worship? HARDLY!! All Lewis is doing with that kind of content, is showing how it can destroy your life, and if the people who accuse it of such leanings actually take the time to read the books properly then they'll see that Aslan and the kids he calls to Narnia in each book, battle and defeat or convert those characters.

Anyone who says that Lewis is not a believer in God or that he was writing books deserving of hell has not read his books 'The Screwtape Letters', or 'Mere Christianity', and until they have read them really have no leg to stand on, or right to say anything against Lewis, or his books and any message they are trying to get across.

 

[Milla]

To put the whole allegory thing straight. Yes the books were Christian allegory and yes he meant them very much so to be allegory. Tolkien, who was a very good friend of his, was the one who couldn't stand allegory in his books, while Lewis was as someone said earlier 'very fond of allegory'. He was very similar to George MacDonald in that aspect.

At the risk of being a pedant:

If Aslan represented the immaterial Deity in the same way in which Giant Despair represents despair, he would be an allegorical figure. In reality however he is an invention giving an imaginary answer to the question, ‘What might Christ become like, if there really were a world like Narnia and He chose to be incarnate and die and rise again in that world as He actually has done in ours?’ This is not allegory at all.

 

[StAnselm]

No, I don't think you're being pedantic, Milla. But you already quoted that in post 16 - I fear some people are not reading the whole thread.

As for George MacDoanld, I remember reading one of his books, (it might have been The Golden Key) which said on the very first page, "This is not an allegory, and none of the characters are allegorical."

 

[Skier672]

Sorry to get off-topic, but I am currently listening to "Mere Christianity" on cd. I cannot see that C.S. Lewis is a satanist or detractor from Christ. I have not read any of his fantasy books yet. Isn't it amazing that some of the earliest fantasy-sci-fi writers (at least Tolkien and Lewis) became followers of Christ?

 

[Waiting for the Verdict]

The christian allegory is pretty obvious I think, but some people think these books are evil, evil, evil because it has sun worship or paganism or something. This website is a good example http://www.balaams-ass.com/journal/homemake/lewissun.htm. Anyone have an opinion?

I have actually had people tell me Lewis was a Satanist. It blows me away. I don't know how any people can beleive that. But part of the problem is that people don't understand Lewis's intentions in writing the Chronicles. He loved the pagan myths, but he wanted to Christianize them somewhat, so that is what he did in the Chronicles. Similarly, I think some people get mad at Lewis because his views were not strictly evangelical or fundamentalist, but rather broadly conservative. His love for George Macdonald (Christian Universalist) and Tolkien (a Catholic) and Keats (an atheist?) may alienate people. Couple that with his own theistic evolutionary views, and people will find a reason to hate him. Fortunately, the views expressed at balaams don't represent most of evangelical Christianity.

Conicidentally, has anyone read Phillip Pullman's article on the Chronicles? He hates the Chronicles because he thinks its too conservative...talk about getting it from both sides!

 

[Llauralin]

The christian allegory is pretty obvious I think, but some people think these books are evil, evil, evil because it has sun worship or paganism or something. This website is a good example http://www.balaams-ass.com/journal/homemake/lewissun.htm. Anyone have an opinion?

Apperently that writer spends too much time being a "student of mythology," and too little time being a Christian.

When faced with paganism, there are two main positions Christianity has taken: separtation and conversion. Mr. Lewis tends towards the method of conversion, the same part of Christianity that has given us Christian holidays, symbols, art, and liturature; the stance that something must be bad merely because it has been enjoyed by pagans. Both methods of relating to the world, separation and conversion are necessary. One takes a stand against the things of this world that are inherently evil, while the other puts things that are basic human goods back in their proper place and context. Narnia beautifully combines the natural joy of the pagan with the supernaturaljoy of the Christian, which is imho an enterprise deserving of thanks, not condemnation.

 

[cyberfugue]

Actually, neither. Obviously, it's not devil worship. Anyone who reads the Chronicles of Narnia with a basic knowledge of the character, background, and thought of Lewis can tell that he is not writing something as a means for devil worship. However, at the same time, it is not an allegory either. Lewis actually detested allegory as a genre, much like Tolkein. The Chronicles of Narnia is a fantasy story about how if there was another parallel world to ours that it would also need redemption, just as ours does. So he proceeds to tell the story of how that world was created, cared for, and redeemed through use of archetypes and symbols that line up with the Christian faith.

Ummm... in other words, allegory.

 

[philN]

Ummm... in other words, allegory.

No. There is a huge difference between using archetype and allegory. In allegory, everything lines up exactly with it's parallel. In the Chronicles of Narnia, everything does not match up exactly with another story. For example, Edmund is a Judas-like character, but he is redeemed at the end, rather than falling away as Judas did. Also, in the Magician's Nephew, when the fruit is picked from the tree, she was already fallen; whereas in the biblical story that is being alluded to, it is the actual eating of the fruit that brings about the fallen nature. There are elements that are symbolic, but they are just archetypes, not exact allegory.

Pilgrim's Progress is an allegory. The characters are one-dimensional, because they are what they represent; they do not undergo changes. (It could be argued that Pilgrim's Progress' allegorical nature breaks down in a few places where Bunyan begins preaching and becoming more didactic, which impedes the progress of the story itself). In Lewis' books, with the exception of Pilgrim's Regress, the characters are dynamic and multi-dimensional. They represent something, but they are not limited to that which they represent (much like how Tolkien's story has many Christ-figure archetypes in the Lord of the Rings, so that people can have character rather than just being symbolic).

Do you see the difference? In my opinion, archetype is a much better literary device than allegory, because allegory does not allow for straying or embellishing, as the story is confined to parallel something else or it loses it's spot in the allegory category.

 

[philN]

Sorry to get off-topic, but I am currently listening to "Mere Christianity" on cd. I cannot see that C.S. Lewis is a satanist or detractor from Christ. I have not read any of his fantasy books yet. Isn't it amazing that some of the earliest fantasy-sci-fi writers (at least Tolkien and Lewis) became followers of Christ?

I'm not sure about Tolkien, but Lewis became a Christian before he wrote his science-fiction works.