Seems like he is a ghost writer of some kind who supplies quotes for talks in conference and heartsell stuff members put on FB.

This famous author seems to get a lot of air time in mormondom.

Lewis is quoted by lots of religious "leaders."
For some reason, his supposed conversion from atheism to christianity is seen as "miraculous," and they think he's some kind of literary and logic genius.

When in reality, he's a good example of an irrational apologist who can write reasonably well, who makes fallacious arguments convincing only to the gullible.

Which means mormons love him...

Oh, come now. C.S. Lewis is a far, far more intelligent gentleman than any of the GAs could ever aspire to be and they know it. Since he is so highly regarded within the real Christian world by quoting the man they are hoping some Christianity rubs off on them and they fool some into believing that they too are indeed Christian as well.

Exactly. That makes perfect sense.

Heck, if some of CS Lewis could rub off on me, I might become the first female apostle. (jkz)

He was in a league of his own. I love CS Lewis quotes.

The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe? Only one of the most beloved children's stories of all time.

Learning about CS Lewis' life and how he evolved from atheism to Christianity was a most remarkable journey of an intellectual who found God through his pursuit of knowledge.

You say evolve .I would say devolve.

To keep the plebs in the land of Narnia.

Because they can't come up with anything original themselves.

he was a mystic christian

http://www.creationliberty.com/articles/fantasy.php

has a good article about him (mentions mormons)

CS Lewis got some things right:


"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies.

The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth.

This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be “cured” against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals."

--from "God in the Dock: Essays on Theology", 1948



Neo-Galileo

Lewis was a member of an informal group called the "Inklings" who met to read and critique each other's literary works. Tolkien, Williams, and Lewis were three of the better known of the Inkings, and all three used Christian themes in their writing. Each approached this in different ways to show the possible universality of spiritual principles in the intersections of spiritual and physical worlds. Tolkien employed Christian themes in a non-Christian fantasy, yet very realistic, Middle Earth. Lewis put real-world people into the fantasy world of Narnia.* Williams put the fantastic into the real world. Regardless of these differences, the ground rules remain the same. Of the three, Lewis' approach more closely parallels the Mormon religious perspective, particularly with the Book of Mormon, and his writing is intellectually more accessible.


For Mormons I think at least part of the appeal of this literature may be an unexpressed and perhaps unacknowledged appropriation of it to emotionally validate the Book of Mormon. "Look! He wrote this fascinating, inspiring book about an imaginary world and it is treasured by millions around the world! The Book of Mormon is just like that! That's true enough for me!"

* Lewis' Ransom trilogy has as its locales other planets in the first two books, and brings the action back to Earth for the third. Supposedly, Lewis' challenged Tolkien to also write a work of science-fiction, but there is no evidence that he did. I also wonder how much influence Williams had on the third book of the Ransom trilogy - it seems to read more like one of his works.

The Q15 should posthumously award him honorary GA status. I think he's quoted more than any of their dead prophets, since Brigham Young, anyway.

Some of his writing on Christianity was very good. He had the guts to address some difficult questions in honest and direct ways. In his A Grief Observed, for instance, he said something like "I still believe in God; I just didn't know he was THAT kind of a God." it was a decent treatment of "bad things to good people."

I suspect the church's English heritage and the high number of apostles who served missions in that country probably had a role, too. There was a patina of authority to his work merely because of his heritage and his facility with English.

In hindsight, though, I think the church missed some important points. Most important was the fact that Lewis's sort of logical consideration of Christianity was pseudo-heresy. His deep convictions were in some ways artificial. His conversion came after a conversation in which Tolkein said that Lewis's atheism was "a lack of imagination," meaning that if you liked the values and the mythology, you could imagine Christianity to be true. This comes close to admitting that you need delusion to believe. It also explains why he could apply a rather free form of logic to Christian beliefs, providing a modern religiosity that appealed to the Mormon leaders even as it represented a movement away from literalism and worship of established authority. In other words, I think Lewis could not have "happened" in an orthodox religious tradition; he represented, in a way, the erosion of church authority that has subsequently rendered the UK an agnostic or atheistic religion. He was the sort who, rather than devoting himself to Christianity, would sit at home and think about how cool the faith was while sipping tea.

The other element of his life that would have appalled the Mormon leaders, had they known about it, was Lewis's very extended sado-masochistic relationship with his friend's mother. That doesn't discredit his thinking at all, but it would have horrified those GAs who quoted him all the time. How, they would have asked, could anything coming from such a sinful man truly be inspired?

I think part of Lewis' rejection of Christianity was from his knowledge of classical mythology and its themes. How could he accept the story of Christ as being special when its plot elements show up in any number of myths from other cultures? As I recall, Tolkien's argument was that of course those elements should show up if they were based on principles that were true for all humans and not just 1st century Judeans.

I find it interesting that many of that generation not only renounced atheism and returned to religion, but that they converted to Catholicism as well. Was it in response to the social upheaval caused by the rapid changes in technology? Or maybe the loss of trust in human institutions that miserably failed to prevent world war and financial collapse?

Good points.

I share your belief that understanding of ancient religions and the commonalities with Christianity probably played a role in Lewis's early atheism. I don't think that Tolkein ever rejected religion but rather stayed true to the Catholicism into which he was baptised as a child. My point is that to both of these men religion was ultimately a matter of imagination; they chose, against the facts, to believe in the mythology because they liked the values and felt an emotional connection to the faith community and the idea of God. Theirs was a rarefied religion, an intellectual one, not one that could inspire normal people. It was, in my view, an early sign of Christianity's decline.

You are probably right in suggesting that the world wars and the depression drove a lot of people back to religion. That would, however, have been a counter current in a larger wave going in the other direction. World War One, in particular, cost Europe its faith in the future, its conviction that society was progressing, and its belief in a a loving and protective deity. People like Tolkein and Lewis were trying to make sense of this God, who was no longer a mover of nations and organizer of wars but rather a vicar with whom you could sit down and chat over tea.

The United States did not suffer as much from the world wars and the depression, which may be one reason its religiosity remained relatively strong. But I do think that at one level or another the intellectual nature of Lewis's writings appealed to Americans steeped in Christianity who were starting to look for more "reasonable" ways to think about God and Jesus. As in many other Christian faiths, Mormon leaders embraced Lewis because he elevated the discussion of religion and made it more palatable to people who were slowly but surely looking for a more "modern" God. Lewis added an important dimension to the relatively barbaric God of the Mormon scriptures.

The Lion House, the Witch and Bring'em Young??

RB

He's their role model. He showed the world how you can make money peddling crap you don't really believe while making it sound really deep.

I ate it up as a TBM, can't stand it now.

Clearly C.S. Lewis was extremely intelligent, because he used his first and middle initials, rather than his first name.

Sincerely,
G.B. Livin

I concur!

Very Sincerely Yours,
N.M.Nomo

Capish!

AJ March

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/07/2016 01:49PM by Amyjo.

I can't remember if it's in "Mere Christianity" or "Case for Christ" where Lewis explains his framework for sort of measuring whether a religion measures up to one's expectations, but it's clear that Mo'ism would not measure up to his. The article linked below mentions that Lewis actually wrote that he believed the BOM to be authored by JS**, and not the product of ancient Israelites, and also that he was aware of LDS claims, but rejected them.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2000/february7/8.72.html?start=2

Ironic then that he's so revered by them. But it's sort of like with this generations super apologist: Ravi Zacharius, who was invited to speak to the TBM masses. I listened to some of the videos and thought "yeah, he's taking them to task," and TBMs apparently listened and thought it was great. Perhaps it has to do with twisted vocabulary and/or twisted "logic."

** Joseph's Myth, by Joseph Smith!

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/06/2016 08:53PM by steve benson.

Yes, it gives them a semblance of intellect.

Hate to burst Mormonism's born-in-the-bubble babble, but my grandfather's "Beware of Pride" speech was cribbed from the writings of C.S. Lewis; ghost-written by my aunt, May Benson, wife of ETB's oldest child; and, finally, then read for ETB at General Conference by Gordon B. Hinckley.

Below are the details on how ETB didn't write his "Beware of Pride" talk; on how daughter-in-law did; and on how, because the Big Boys were too proud to admit depending on a woman, they refused to give her credit for it:

--Ezra Taft Benson’s Much-Loved “Beware of Pride” Sermon and How It Came to Be

Among faithful Mormons, one of the most famous and appreciated talks attributed to my grandfather (and I use the term “attributed” deliberately) was entitled “Beware of Pride.”

As one Mormon commentator has declared:

“['Beware of Pride' is] [p]erhaps the best remembered of all Ezra Taft Benson's talks. . . . [M]embers from all over the political spectrum love and agree with him here. This talk is NOT controversial, but loved.”

http://www.zionsbest.com/top25.html


Likewise, in a glowing obituary of my grandfather, the sermon was mentioned as follows:

"Continuing to help set the Church in order and perfect the Saints, he delivered another landmark address entitled 'Beware of Pride' . . ."

http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/daily/history/people/Benson_EOM.htm


(Actually, the sermon was not delivered by Ezra Taft Benson himself but, instead, read from the pulpit by First Counselor in the First Presidency Gordon B. Hinckley on 1 April 1989 during the Saturday morning session of the 159th Semi-Annual LDS General Conference).

Not only was the sermon delivered by someone else, persuasive evidence has surfaced that a person other than Ezra Taft Benson actually researched and wrote the talk. That individual’s identity is known and will be revealed below.

Further evidence also overwhelmingly points to the conclusion that the text of my grandfather's pride talk was itself borrowed, without attribution, from the writings of another author, who will also be identified herein.

Hence, the assertion of admirers that “this talk is NOT controversial” is becoming less accurate as the facts surrounding its actual genesis become more well known.

The sermon is, in fact, controversial because much of it consists not of the actual words or ideas of Ezra Taft Benson, but of words and ideas which were stolen from others, researched by others and written by others.
_____


--Ezra Taft Benson's Sermon on Pride Was Plagiarized From the Writings of C.S. Lewis

The following question was asked of me some years ago in this forum:

”Did ETB steal from C.S. Lewis? . . . The first time I read the C.S. Lewis passage, I nearly fell out of my (TBM) chair. ETB’s talk as so clearly lifted in large part from Lewis and nary an acknowledgment to be heard. Usually such a gaffe by a well-known person gets a lot of coverage, and yet I have never heard . . . any admission or apology. What say ye? Any info?" ("Bobby D," on "Recovery from Mormonism" bulletin board, 14 June 2003)

Likewise, another questioner followed up with a similarly direct inquiry:

"Was CS Lewis the author of the pride sermon from ET Benson? Where can that be found? Anyone know?" ("novel-t," on "Recovery from Mormonism" bulletin board, 20 January 2004)

The answer is a definitive yes.

Significant portions of Ezra Taft Benson’s pride sermon were directly lifted from, influenced by, and cobbled together from the writings of Christian apologist C.S. Lewis--specifically from his book, Mere Christianity, under the chapter of “The Great Sin” (C.S. Lews, "Mere Christianity," New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1952, revised and enlarged).
_____


--The Proof: Line-Upon Line, Plagiarism Upon Plagiarism

A line-by-line comparison of the text of both documents provides clear and convincing evidence that a major source source for Ezra Taft Benson's talk on pride was the earlier work of C.S. Lewis.

Moreover, this blatant and heavy borrowing, both in terms of wording and concept, was done without attribution.

Examples of these plagiarisms are listed below, by category.
_____


--Pride is the Ultimate Vice

Lewis:

"The essential vice, the utmost evil, is Pride." (p. 109)


Benson:

"Pride is the universal sin, the great vice."
_____


--The Competitive Nature of Pride

Lewis:

"Pride is essentially competitive--is competitive by is very nature . . .” (p. 109)

". . . Pride is essentially competitive in a way that other vices are not." (p. 110)

"Pride is competitive by its very nature." (p. 110)

“Once the element of competition has gone, pride is gone. That is why I say that Pride is essentially competitive in a way the other vices are not.” (p. 110)


Benson:

"Pride is essentially competitive in nature. . . .

”Our will in competition to God’s will allows desires, appetites, and passions to go unbridled."
_____


--The Proud See Themselves Being Above Others

Lewis:

"A proud man is always looking down on things and people; and, of course, as long as you are looking down, you cannot see something that is above you." (p.111)


Benson:

“Most of us consider pride to be a sin of those on the top, such as the rich and the learned, looking down at the rest of us.”
_____


--The Proud Also Look From the Bottom Up

Lewis:

“When you delight wholly in yourself and do not care about the praise at all, you have reached the bottom.” (p. 112)


Benson:

“There is, however, a more common ailment among us and that is pride from the bottom looking up.”
_____


--Pride Equals Enmity

Lewis:

"Pride always means enmity--it is enmity. And not only enmity between man and man, but enmity to God." (p.111)


Benson:

"The central feature of pride is enmity--enmity toward God and enmity toward our fellowman."

“Our enmity toward God takes on many labels, such as rebellion, hard-heartedness, stiff-neckedness, unrepentant, puffed up, easily offended, and sign seekers.”

“Another major portion of this very prevalent sin of pride is enmity toward our fellowmen.”
_____


--Pride and Self-Value

Lewis:

"You value other people enough to want them to look at you." (p. 112)


Benson:

"The proud depend upon the world to tell them whether they have value or not."
_____


--Pride vs. Humility

Lewis:

"The virtue opposite to it [pride], in Christian morals, is called Humility." (p. 109)

“ . . . if you really get into any kind of touch with Him you will, in fact, be humble—delightfully humble, feeling the infinite relief of having for once got rid of all the silly nonsense about your own dignity which had made you restless and unhappy all your life. He is trying to make you humble in order to make this moment possible . . .” (p. 114)


Benson:

"The antidote for pride is humility . . . "

“Choose to be humble. God will have a humble people. Either we can choose to be humble or we can be compelled to be humble.”
_____


--Pride Not Admitted in Self

Lewis:

"There is one vice of which no man in the world is free; which every one in the world loathes when he sees it in someone else; and which hardly any people, except Christians, ever imagine that they are guilty themselves." (pp. 108-09)


Benson:

"Pride is a sin that can readily be seen in others but is rarely admitted in ourselves."
_____


Only once in ETB's sermon was proper credit given to C.S. Lewis as a source:

"The proud make every man their adversary by pitting their intellects, opinions, works, wealth, talents, or any other worldly measuring device against others. In the words of C. S. Lewis: 'Pride gets no pleasure out of having something, only out of having more of it than the next man. . . . It is the comparison that makes you proud: the pleasure of being above the rest. Once the element of competition has gone, pride has gone' ('Mere Christianity' [New York: Macmillan, 1952, pp. 109-10)."
_____


--The Identity of the Individual Who Researched and Wrote Ezra Taft Benson’s “Beware of Pride” Sermon

Several years ago, I visited with May Benson (daughter-in-law of Ezra Taft Benson and wife of Reed Benson, Ezra Taft Benson’s oldest child), in their home in Provo, Utah, during which time the subject of pride and my grandfather’s sermon on the matter was a focus of conversation.

The first occasion was prior to the public delivery of Ezra Taft Benson’s sermon by Gordon B. Hinckley in the April 1989 General Conference and the second visit took place after the speech.

May said that she had very strong feelings about the subject of pride. She was especially offended and concerned with what she regarded as the Benson family's own problems with pride. (In fact, she said she had gotten up in disgust and walked out of a wedding breakfast for my sister Meg, when one of the daughters of Ezra Taft Benson, Beverly Benson Parker, as she was listening to the father of the groom, Cap Ferry, make some remarks to the assembled, leaned over and whispered self-righteously to others at the table, "Well, we know which family was blessed with the spirituality").

May said she had put together quite a few thoughts on the subject of pride that she hoped someday to compile and publish in a book.

However, after my grandfather’s pride sermon was delivered, May said that she no longer felt it necessary to publish her hoped-for book. Why? Because, she said, her husband, Reed, had spoken with Ezra Taft Benson about her research on the topic. May was clearly indicating that her information and study efforts had been used in crafting my grandfather’s sermon on pride.

However, the true extent of May Benson's involvement in that effort was not shared with us by her and did not become evident until some time later. Reliable sources in Provo subsequently informed me of rumors that May herself may have worked on Ezra Taft Benson’s sermon. This I was able to later confirm directly from a credible source inside the Benson family who knows May quite well, who was familiar with the situation and who wishes to remain anonymous. The source told me in a face-to-face meeting that May Benson, daughter-in-law of Ezra Taft Benson through marriage to his son Reed, traveled to St. George, Utah, where over a period of several weeks “she wrote his talk.”
_____


--Finally Giving Credit Where Credit Is Due

It appears that those responsible for the production and delivery of Ezra Taft Benson's "Beware of Pride" sermon were themselves too prideful to acknowlege that:

--(1) the sermon was largely plagiarized from the earlier works of noted Christian writer, C.S. Lewis;

--(2) the sermon was actually ghost-written by a woman, MaY Benson, doing research on the talk for an uninspired Mormon "prophet;" and

--3) the female who wrote the talk (May Benso), wasn't given credit by the man who was falsely said to have composed it (Ezra Taft Benson), nor by the other man who actually delivered it (Gordon B. Hinckley).

Nonetheless, praise to the man who depends on a woman. :)



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 12/06/2016 09:05PM by steve benson.

Bloody hell:/ I used to have a love/hate relationship with that talk. So your post has weirdly cheered me up, yet pissed me off at the same time.

I can understand being inspired by CS Lewis. But for ETB and daughter-in-law to resort to plagiarism in order to convey his message as ETB own, well, goes to intent to deceive.

Did May not know the difference between being a "ghost writer," and plagiarizing? Let me guess ... yes, she did.

Funny how Jesus can't give his chosen leaders pithy, memorable, inspiring statements of their own.

who had no sense of humor, either.

Maybe he did...

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/315940/10623450#comment_10623450

Have any GA's quoted Chesterton? Or haven't they discovered him yet?

Because they're living in Wonderland.

Thus was born C.S. Lewis Carroll.

The GAs;

Being largely professionals (doctors, lawyers, MBAs) they lack depth as both classicists and theologians.

Being fundamentalists, and thus literalists, they lack philosophical perspective and nuance.

C.S. Lewis is everything they aren't and the ones that are smart enough to recognize that fact cop his stuff to supplement their uninspiring overabundance of finger waving, pulpit pounding, guilt trips, and "because the LORD and I say so"(s).