Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Moral Vision & J. R. R. Tolkein’s

Monday morning when I heard Martin Luther King Jr.'s magnificent articulation of his moral vision voiced by a young African-American man on NPR's Morning Edition, I was moved. For, indeed, “some things are right and wrong, eternally so, absolutely so.” And this reminded me of a similar moral vision articulated by J. R. R. in The Two Towers: “Good and ill have not changed since yesteryear; nor are they one thing among Elves and Dwarves and another among Men. It is a man's part to discern them, as much in the Golden Wood as in his own house.”

[This is essentially the text of the letter I sent to Morning Edition in response to their Kansas Celebrates MLK piece.]

Reflections on Roe v Wade at 35 Years and 50,000,000 Dead

This year's juxtaposition of Martin Luther King Jr., Day on January 21 and the anniversary of Roe v Wade on January 22 merits some reflection. As we saw yesterday, in a 1954 speech entitled, “Recovering Lost Values,” Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., said:

Some things are right and wrong, eternally so, absolutely so. It’s wrong to hate; it always has been wrong and it always will be wrong.

As these powerful words would imply, his speech included frontal assaults on moral relativism and pragmatism and on the practical atheism that he saw in churches and church people who failed to stand up for what is right.

So if we believe as Dr. King said that it is always and everywhere absolutely wrong to hate another human being, what does that imply for abortion? My dictionary defines “hate” as “extreme aversion.” And abortion, in fact, involves an aversion to an unborn human being so strong that it requires the destruction of that innocent human being. By Dr. King’s principle, then, abortion must be wrong.

After 35 years and 50,000,000 American lives lost, the American Holocaust continues. O Lord, how long? For encouragement in the endurance always required to defeat evil, I suggest that you turn to Psalm 94 and Psalm 130 .

Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Moral Vision

In 1954, Martin Luther King, Jr., said:

Some things are right and wrong, eternally so, absolutely so. It’s wrong to hate; it always has been wrong and it always will be wrong. It is wrong in America, and it is wrong in Germany, it is wrong Russia, and it’s wrong in China. It was wrong in 2000 BC and it is wrong in 1954 AD.

This morning when I heard this passage from King's "Recovering Lost Values" speech on NPR's Morning Edition, I was struck by his emphasis on moral absolutes. Indeed, in that speech he boldly attacked the moral relativism that he saw as a threat to the moral vision that underlay his dream of justice and peace for America.

Allan Bloom traced the intellectual history of this relativism in post-WWII America to its German roots in his The Closing of the American Mind. But moral absolutes were alive and well in King's mind and in the black churches that formed the backbone of the Civil Rights Movement. They well understood that in America, the surest basis for our knowledge of these absolutes was the Law of God handed down to Moses on Mount Sinai.

But in The Abolition of Man, C. S. Lewis outlined the "Way" or the "Tao," the universal moral insights of all the great civilizations in opposition to the Greenbook, which instructed British educators in how they should indoctrinate school children in relativism. And the Apostle Paul reveals to us that even in those nations that did not have the Law of Moses, "they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts" (Romans 2:15a).

The first thing I thought of this morning when I heard King's words was the passage from J. R. R. Tolkein's The Two Towers that I cited back in December:

Good and ill have not changed since yesteryear; nor are they one thing among Elves and Dwarves and another among Men. It is a man's part to discern them,
as much in the GoldenWood as in his own house.

King's speech deserves study as an example of the power of moral absolutes to motivate the nonviolent battle for justice. And Tolkein's words are an example of the power of literature to cast a moral vision. Thus, J. R. R. Tolkein inculcates moral absolutes imaginatively as surely as does Martin Luther King discursively. And J. K. Rowling just as surely inculcates the moral relativism King abhorred. Literature resembles politics in that, for better or worse, it is always ultimately moral

A transcript of "Recovering Lost Values" is available at: http://www.africanamericans.com/MLKjrRediscoveringLostValues.htm

Runner and Blogger Extraordinaire

Extreme distance runner (and pastor) Mark Swanson blogs at http://ultrapastor.blogspot.com/. Check it out, but don't take everything he says, expecially about the benefits of running, too seriously. On the other hand, he claims marriage is beneficial, too.

And I'm not sure about how many times he's read The Lord of the Rings, either.

The Fellowship of the Ring Revisited

I began this blog December 4 with a post about Tolkein's LOTR, and not long after I began rereading The Fellowship of the Ring for only the third time in my life. The story now seems more engaging, richer, than ever before. It's a pity I've waited so long between readings (1966, 2001, 2007), but you will notice that at least they are becoming more frequent as the years pass.

In chapter 2, "The Shadow of the Past," Gandalf tells Frodo the dark history of the One Great Ring of Power and reveals to him that the Ring must be destroyed and that "you were meant to have it." Frodo protests his inadequacy for the task by asking the why questions: "Why did it come to me? Why was I chosen?"

Gandalf replies, "Such questions cannot be answered." And he tells Frodo not to suppose that it was for his great merit but that since he has, indeed, been chosen for the quest, he must use such virtues as he has. Frodo still resists undertaking the quest and innocently, yet dangerously, tempts Gandalf by saying, "Will you not take the ring?"

Realizing that he could not resist the temptation to wield the evil Ring for good, Gandalf vehemently refuses Frodo's offer and concludes, "The decision lies with you."

Smoking his pipe in silence, Gandalf awaits Frodo's reply. At last Frodo hesitantly decides to undertake the perilous quest although it "would mean exile, a flight from danger into danger drawing it after me." Frodo supposes that he must go alone, but Sam Gamgee, by his eavesdropping on their conversation, inadvertently yet willingly volunteers to go with Frodo. Thus, the Fellowship of the Ring was born and its first three members selected.

These highlights of Chapter 2 are here written to tempt their readers to reread (or read) the chapter, the book, the trilogy for yourselves.

About the Incarnation

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . . And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us. . . (John 1:1, 14a).

That the Creator would take on the form of the creature is, to me, the most astounding revelation in the Bible. This good news of the birth of Immanuel ("God with us") is far more surprising than the good news of the Resurrection. Given that Jesus was the God-man, how could death hope to hold him? But given that man is sinful, who could hope that God would take on himself the very form of sinful man to rescue him? Yet that is what God did in Jesus Christ our Lord.

And for this gift, Christians are humbly grateful as we celebrate Christ's First Advent and eagerly await his Second Advent.

The Golden Compass

At our focus group dinner this afternoon, someone asked me about The Golden Compass. And while I have been following commentaries on Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials trilogy at least since Alan Jacobs and Ken Myers discussed their misgivings about it on Mars Hill Audio Journal after the first volume came out, I haven't read it. So I'll limit my comments to noting that his fantasy world is an anti-Narnia. In Alan Jacobs biography of C. S. Lewis, The Narnian, Jacobs quotes this summary of Lewis's message in Narnia as Pullman sees it:

Death is better than life; boys are better than girls; light-coloured people are better than dark-coloured people; and so on. There is no shortage of such nauseating drivel in Narnia, if you can face it. . . . those of us who detest the supernaturalism, the reactionary sneering, the misogyny, the racism, and the sheer dishonesty of his narrative method will still be arguing against him [even after Lewis's imagined canonization] (p 307).

For detailed comments from someone who has read the book, check out Tom Gilson's blog at http://www.thinkingchristian.net/?p=1111. This page will lead you to recent blog entries on The Golden Compass.