[.ca] C.S. Lewis for the Third Millennium: Six Essays on the ... (ISBN 0898705231)

The Abolition of Western Civilization:
Prof. Peter Kreeft of Boston College and author of several books such as "Making Sense Out of Suffereing" and has written a reflective writing on C.S. Lewis' "The Abolition of Man" and its prophetic role in today's civilization. Dr. Kreeft has done a great job in making Lewis' work understandable and demonstrates how much foresight Lewis actually had in regards to the problems facing western society. Further, Kreeft expands this thought and details the modern trends of thought without overburdening the reader with "academic" jargon. The chapters "Darkness At Noon" and "Can Natural Law Be Abolished" are the works strongests arguments for Kreeft's position, which if you want to know what that is, then buy this book. The book is cheap and is an easy read. Kreeft's wit also makes this little book likable and fun.

I can't get enough of this book!:
Just read the preface to the book and you'll be hooked! Kreeft does a wonderful job of elaboration upon Lewis' ideas of the process of "abolishing" humanity. The central question to Lewis's book is: can we cease to be human by loosing our moral sense? Kreeft's central question is: how does Lewis's writings and thought apply to us in the Third Millenium? His most haunting chapter is Chapter Four: "Can Natural Law ever be Abolished from the Heart of Man?" He discusses weather or not we can ever lose our moral sense, our conscience. This is an urgent dicussion, when you look at the souless children killing children in the school shootings. We seem to be raising up a generation of moral zombies who are acting like Hannibal Lecter eating each other up. The Founding Fathers well recognized the necessity of moral law, and that structure in government can only go so far (see Federalist Papers 10 and 51). there needs to be an undergirding morality upon which our government, and every government rests. If not, somthing worse than the dark ages will occur. (Question: What is the difference between someone without a moral sense, and someone who ignores it? I can't see any difference.) Kreeft's voice is a voice of warning. But will we listen? And will we care?

Eclipse of the First Things:
"Can the natural law ever be abolished from the heart of man?" Prof. Kreeft presents both sides of the argument, pitting Aquinas ("no") against C.S. Lewis ("yes"). I think it is a "loose" argument. Lewis in The Abolition of Man says there will be no men left. Natural law ceases to be because man ceases to be. Does that mean that Lewis' position is correct - that the natural law can be abolished? Well, one might argue that if man himself ceases to be a moral agent, he is no longer truly human. Kreeft holds out the hope that Aquinas is correct, that man will awaken to his danger. But, in this polity, a society where people decide how to order their lives together, we are facing a powerful tyranny of thought that has granted unto itself the obligation of making those decisions. That power asserts that the belief of "an ethic or morality that transcends human invention" is a "religious" notion - and that religion can play no part - indeed, must not be permitted to play a part - in the life of the polity. This tyranny of thought is found in the judicial chambers of our government, in the US Supreme Court and its circuit courts. Surely, the reasoning behind many Court decisions over the past 50 years can be found in the list of 20 "heresies" Prof. Kreeft supplies. This book is a very "uncomfortable" work - reading it, one should be concerned about the erosion of the polity, should be unhappy about it, should be ready to do something about it. That list of 20 failed philosophies is the most important and valuable part of this work, and possibly the most uncomfortable aspect of it: I am sure the reader would recognize many of his or her own personal beliefs (and those that have been presented to him or her in school or church) described somewhere in that list. We don't stone prophets anymore - the Court just rules them inadmissible.

Boring:
I have read most of C. S. Lewis's works. I have read some Kreeft before and I enjoyed his writings. However, these essays are boring. I could not get through them. The essays have very little to do with what Lewis thought and a lot to do with what Kreeft thinks about. What's more after the first essay, I could care less what Kreeft thinks about. I would suggest that you reread "Abolition of Man" again and save your money.

A BOOK TO AVOID IF YOU ARE INTELLIGENT:
The occasional good or interesting idea manages to escape from a confused sea of mannered verbiage. This is the written essence of talk radio. The writer seems more intent on giving paternalistic viewpoints in annoyingly cute expressions than explaining. A poor choice for an intelligent person. Rather than look at ideas, set them down, weigh them, and discuss methodically, this book rants. Would make good bird-cage flooring, however, and may be commended for that. The subject matter of the book is of great concern; the treatment, however, is for the mass consumption of the fear prone. I want my money back. The book should be called Kreeft for the Third Millenium, but then, who would buy it.