We Have Cause to Be Uneasy

Big idea

Summary

Lewis anticipates that some readers feel he has tricked them, leading them through what looked like philosophy only to arrive at 'religion' again. He responds first to the charge that returning to religious ideas is a step backward: real progress, he argues, means correcting course once you have taken a wrong turn, not stubbornly continuing forward, so if humanity has gone wrong, going back is actually the fastest way to move forward.

He clarifies that the argument has still not reached any specific religion's God, only a 'Somebody or Something behind the Moral Law,' discovered through unaided reasoning rather than borrowed from Scripture or church teaching. Weighing the two pieces of evidence available, the universe itself and the moral law within us, he concludes that the universe alone would suggest a brilliant but indifferent, even dangerous, maker, while the moral law, better evidence because it is 'inside information,' points to a power intensely concerned with honesty, fairness, and courage. Crucially, this moral seriousness is not comforting: the Moral Law is unsentimental and demanding, unconcerned with our convenience, so if God resembles it, God cannot yet be assumed to be soft or automatically forgiving.

This sets up what Lewis calls the 'terrible fix' humanity is in: we recognize the goodness behind the moral law as right, and part of us is even on its side, yet we also know we have consistently failed to live up to it and cannot expect to do noticeably better tomorrow. If there is no absolute goodness governing the universe, our moral efforts are ultimately pointless; but if there is, we stand condemned by it, since we have made ourselves its practical enemies. Lewis insists this uncomfortable dismay is not incidental to Christianity but the necessary doorway into it: the Christian message of repentance and forgiveness has nothing to offer someone who does not yet feel any need of it, just as medical advice is meaningless to someone who does not know they are sick.

The chapter ends by previewing, without yet explaining, what Christianity claims to offer in response to this dilemma: an account of how humanity fell into this condition of both loving and resenting goodness, and how the moral debt we cannot pay has somehow been paid on our behalf. Lewis is emphatic that real comfort in religion, as in anything else, can only be found by first pursuing truth honestly, even when that truth is unwelcome; searching directly for comfort instead leads only to false reassurance and eventual despair.

Key points

• Lewis argues that 'going back' from a wrong turn is genuine progress, answering the objection that revisiting religious ideas is regressive.
• The argument so far has reached only a generic 'Power behind the Moral Law,' not any specific religion's God.
• The universe alone suggests an artist who is also indifferent or dangerous; the moral law suggests a power devoted to goodness, and is better evidence because it is 'inside information.'
• The Moral Law is demanding and unsentimental, so its source cannot be assumed to be automatically forgiving or soft.
• Humanity is caught in a 'terrible fix': needing absolute goodness to exist, yet standing condemned by it if it does.
• Christianity's message of repentance and forgiveness only becomes meaningful once a person feels this moral dismay; seeking comfort directly, without truth, leads only to despair.

Illustrations & analogies

• Lewis compares humanity's situation to someone working through a math problem: admitting a mistake and starting over, rather than stubbornly continuing, is the truly progressive move, and likewise 'going back' toward the moral law is not regression but progress.
• He compares learning about God from the moral law versus from the physical universe to learning about a person from their conversation rather than merely from a house they built, arguing the moral law is the richer, more 'inside' kind of evidence.
• He compares an impersonal absolute goodness to a multiplication table that cannot 'let you off' a wrong sum, suggesting that pure moral law alone offers no obvious basis for mercy or forgiveness.
• He compares Christianity's message to a doctor's diagnosis: only someone who already knows they are sick has any reason to listen to a proposed remedy.

Notable lines

Going back is the quickest way on.

C. S. Lewis Book I, Ch. 5 — We Have Cause to Be Uneasy

It is as hard as nails.

C. S. Lewis Book I, Ch. 5 — We Have Cause to Be Uneasy

Christianity tells people to repent and promises them forgiveness.

C. S. Lewis Book I, Ch. 5 — We Have Cause to Be Uneasy

For reflection and discussion

1. Lewis claims that recognizing our moral failure must come before Christianity's promise of forgiveness can mean anything. Do you agree, and why might this order matter?
2. What does Lewis mean by calling humanity's situation 'the terrible fix,' needing an absolute goodness to exist, yet fearing it if it does?
3. How does Lewis's distinction between seeking truth and seeking comfort challenge the way people sometimes approach religion?