For a different friend

[hummingwolf]

who asked something about the previous post:

"If there lurks in most modern minds the notion that to desire our own good and earnestly to hope for the enjoyment of it is a bad thing, I submit that this notion has crept in from Kant and the Stoics and is no part of the Christian faith. Indeed, if we consider the unblushing promises of reward and the staggering nature of the rewards promised in the Gospels, it would seem that Our Lord finds our desires, not too strong, but too weak. We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us, like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily pleased."

--C.S. Lewis in "The Weight of Glory"


(Of course I'm sure Lewis didn't mean to denigrate the joys of sex and drink here, though he didn't seem too fond of ambition...)

Comments

[daisydumont.livejournal.com]

you know, i always have had trouble with the christian views (there are of course many) of pleasure and joy. there's so much sick-souled body hating that emerged during all those years (st. jerome had hideous ideas about women's bodies, and i've always despised augustine for ditching his concubine & child after getting religion). but obviously, the balance between loving pleasure for its own sake, to the point of addiction, and a sane and grateful love for the sensual pleasures of life, is hard to find. lewis himself loved his beer, loved long talks with his friends, and loved Joy. :)

thanks for the quote!

[hummingwolf.livejournal.com]

It's bizarre how so much hatred of pleasure crept into a religion whose founder's first recorded miracle involved turning water into wine at a wedding feast.

[pearldragon.livejournal.com]

Love that quote. Yes, many religions seem to diss the flesh as of not God. That is why I aim for a middle way which accepts both Spirit & Matter as each other.

[skygypsy.livejournal.com]

wow, cool quote.

i totally agree w/what pearldragon wrote!! even when it comes to the aeseticism of many religions as a path to the divine or enlightenement...

i think it's hogwash. it can be a "tool" for some people, but definitely not for me.

i believe the whole POINT of us being incarnated physically is to explore all the aspects of the physical world w/the senses given to our physical forms!!! imagine being only energy and not being able to touch someone's hand, taste chocolate or even water when you are thirsty, hear laughter, smell vanilla or fresh-baked cookies, or see all the wonders of this physical world... it would be a very different existence!!!

yea, i would really like to unload a lot of the guilt still ingrained in me, weighting down what is prolly a natural desire for pleasure and fulfillment... i think a lot of the religious restrictions which developed over pleasure was actually a way for men to gain control and power. think about the whole dynamic of men coming to women, not just sexually, but in the hunter/gatherer society, the women were the constant, the men went off and came back to them. (yes they provided, not dismissing that)... i think men felt uncomfortable w/their need of women and the power women had over them, and tried to create leverage for themselves, and were able to do so b/c they are physically stronger... ok, that's a very simplified anthropological outlook, but... i think there's *some* validity lurking in there ;)

[magnifelyn.livejournal.com]

Oh, gosh, that reminds me of a discussion i had with a fellow seminary student...

Remember what i said in your car about how conflicts are caused by all participants? Even the ones that look like victims?

Why are women so easy to shame? Why did women lose their faith in their rightful connection to the Divine?

'nuff said.