We all know Dorothy Sayers for her excellent Lord Peter Wimsey mysteries, but in "Creed or Chaos?" we see her at her provocative and insightful best, but as a Christian apologist. In this book--written as WWII was coming to an end and people were beginning to speculate what they would be doing "after the peace", Sayers takes on the fatuous feel-good nostrum: "It doesn't really matter what you believe, as long as you're sincere." Maybe in a Disney movie, but not--as Sayers resoundingly demonstrates in a real world where objective consequences flow from decisions made.
There is so much to enjoy in this cogent book-- a collection of speeches and radio addresses reworked to hang together--from why our complacency regarding spiritual questions is dangerous to the triumph of Easter and a really profound analysis of the relevance of the "other six deadly sins." A few highlights:
Speaking of the historical proof for Jesus' existence, crucifixion and resurrection, demands why we are not more pumped about this reality? "The people who hanged Christ never, to do them justice, accused Him of being a bore; on the contrary, they thought Him too dynamic to be safe. It has been left for later generations to muffle up that shattering personality and surround Him with an atmosphere of tedium. We have very efficiently pared the claws of the Lion of Judah, certified Him 'meek and mild," and recommended Him as a fitting household pet for pale curates and pious old ladies."
Sayers notes that as an answer to people who assert they cannot believe "in a God that would permit XXX to happen", "...man's will is free, and that evil is the price we pay for knowledge, particularly the kind of knowledge we call self-consciousness...We can behave as badly as we like, but we cannot escape the consequences." Rather than the ignorant questioning of why God doesn't create a world which we would prefer to see, Sayers poses a counter question: "Why should God, if there is a God,, create anything, at any time, of any kind at all?..[w]e may all, perhaps, allow that it is easier to believe the universe to have come into existence for some reason than for no reason at all. The Church asserts that there is a Mind which made the universe, that He made it because He is the sort of Mind that takes pleasure in creation, and...[that He] loved His own creation so completely that He became part of it, suffered with and for it, and made it a sharer in His own glory and a fellow worker with Himself in the working out of His own design for it." Namely, that working with God (instead of in rebellion to Him), we may see God turning evil into good.
Speaking of the misguided efforts of the Church to make the Gospel "nice" and "acceptable" to all, Sayers retorts: "Surely it is not the business of the Church to adapt Christ to men, but to adapt men to Christ." Further, all too often, "...we observe in kindly tones, 'if we just go on being brotherly to one another it doesn't matter what we believe about God.'" But what then to say to the man who says: "'If I do not believe in the fatherhood of God, why should I believe in the brotherhood of man?'...It is fatal to let people suppose that Christianity is only a mode of feeling; it is vitally necessary to insist that it is first and foremost a rational explanation of the universe. It is hopeless to offer Christianity as a vaguely idealistic aspiration of a simple and consoling kind; it is, on the contrary, a hard, tough, exacting and complex doctrine, steeped in a drastic and uncompromising realism."
"...you cannot have Christian principles without Christ..., because their validity as principles depends on Christ's authority..."
Sayers also has an uncompromising view of what work should be, rejecting "[t]he fallacy...that work is not the expression of man's creative energy in the service of society, but only something he does on order to obtain money and leisure." In particular, she fears the loss of the (largely) common mission of the population in England and its allies pulling together to save the world from the evil of Hitler once the war ended. She calls for work "as a way of life in which the nature off man should find its proper exercise and delight and so fulfill itself to the glory of God. ...that man, made in God's image, should make things, as God makes them, for the sake of doing well a think that is well worth doing." And that "Christian work" is not the same as ecclesiastical work, but "t]he only Christian work is good work well done....God is not served by technical incompetence... ."
The final chapter provides a more relevant look at the so-called seven deadly sins. In discussing the sin of "ira" or anger, she notes its relatedness to pride, as when we play God in asserting our vision warrants our flinging ourself "into a debauch of fury...". Says Sayers: "It is very well known to the more unscrupulous part of the Press that nothing pays so well in the newspaper world as the manufacture of schism and exploitation of wrath. ..To foment grievance and to set men at variance is the trade by which agitators thrive and journalists make money."
Next to envy. Sayers provocatively and I think correctly notes that "Envy...hates to see other men happy. The names by which it offers itself to the world's applause are Right and Justice, and it makes a great parade of these austere virtues. It begins by asking, [plausibly: 'Why should noy I enjoy what others enjoy?' and it ends by demanding: 'Why should others enjoy what I may not?' Envy is the great leveller: if it cannot level things up, it will level them down, and the words constantly in its mouth are: 'My Rights' and 'My Wrongs.' At its best, Envy is a climber and a snob; at its worst, it is a destroyer--rather than have anybody happier than itself, it will see us all miserable together...Envy cannot bear to admire or respect; it cannot bear to be grateful."
As one example, Sayers calls out the English government for imposing massive tax increases especially on the rich. Even if the stated uses of such taxes is to help the poor, the effect of the taxes she saw was for the government to take the money from those who had formerly been responsible for England's charitable work, so that iin effect the same people are paying, but instead of blessing the relationship arising out of the people paying and those receiving, we have a government, which has expanded greatly and inefficiently, announcing that it is the fount of virtue and decision maker of how to use other people's money.
Next to sloth. "It is the sin which believes in nothing, cares for nothing, seeks to know nothing, interferes with nothing, enjoys nothing, lives for nothing and only stays alive because there is nothing it would die for...Sloth persuades us that stupidity is not our sin, but our misfortune..."
And finally to pride--which seems to lie beneath all the other sins. "It is the sin of trying to be as God. It is the sin which proclaims that Man can produce out of his own wits and his own impulses and his own imagination the standards by which he lives: that Man is fitted to be his own judge....we ought to distrust all those high ambitions and lofty ideals which make the well-being of humanity their ultimate end. Man cannot make himself happy by serving himself--not even when he calls self-service the service of the community; for "the community" in that context is only an extension of his own ego. Happiness is a by-product, thrown off in man's service of God."
As the reader will be able to agree, Sayers' analysis of man in the 1940's remains accurate 80 years later--"nothing new under the sun". Well written and a succinct challenge to our re-focusing on taking the world, and our role as God's creatures---as seriously as we have been made to do.