logo
A book that changed my mind: ‘The Screwtape Letters'

A book that changed my mind: ‘The Screwtape Letters'

Boston Globe21 hours ago

Get The Gavel
A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr.
Enter Email
Sign Up
By high school, I had discovered a predilection for Nietzsche's 'The Genealogy of Morality,' believing that many of society's shortcomings were the direct result of Christianity's 'turn the other cheek' mentality, which seemed to me to be the antithesis to the establishment of justice.
Advertisement
By 18, I had gone through 12 years of school without ever once having encountered religious texts, doctrines, or ideas in a positive light. Reared on the scientific method, I saw the universe as a series of models: Mathematics could explain the optimal number of people to date before settling down, and cost-benefit analysis could calculate whether having children was worth the carbon footprint. I aligned myself with atheist intellectuals — Sam Harris, Robert Sapolsky, Christopher Hitchens — whose frameworks I believed would help me best make sense of our complex world.
Advertisement
Around that same time, I was assigned books from the Old Testament in my freshman literature seminar and learned to look at the Bible as a collection of stories that had informed the development of literary history rather than as a religious text to be taken seriously. That same year, the election of Donald Trump caused me to roll my eyes once more at religious fanatics who were blindsided by some words written in an old book.
It might not have been until my early 20s that I first directly interacted with anyone who held religious sensibilities. I had met secular people from religious backgrounds, but I had never encountered anyone who believed any of the words printed in the Holy Bible or who spent their weekends at church or a synagogue. And I distinctly remember the first devout Catholic I had ever had a conversation with, because he did not strike me as your typical Catholic at all: He was raised by Buddhist parents in Hong Kong and converted to Christianity after becoming convinced that Christianity would bring him closest to 'the Truth.'
I was puzzled. How could someone with whom I had just spent 30 minutes arguing about creationism possibly have any sort of stake in 'the Truth'? But my new friend — who likely believed that I was going to Hell for my atheism — wanted me to be open-minded. As he saw it, I might never believe in the same version of reality that guided his day-to-day experiences, but I could certainly find value in many of religion's moral teachings.
Advertisement
I was skeptical. My idea of religious morality had always come from Nietzsche — the philosopher who believed that religion was a system designed to glorify meekness and guilt while stifling human potential. What could religion possibly have to teach me about morality?
But my friend recommended that I read C.S. Lewis's 'The Screwtape Letters' — a book he believed would speak to my English-major sensibilities — and I decided to humor him.
'The Screwtape Letters' is an epistolary novel written from the perspective of Screwtape — one of Satan's senior demons — to his nephew Wormwood, a novice demon who is assigned an unnamed 'Patient' to lead away from God and down the path of temptation. Though I went into the book with an open mind, I was initially unconvinced that I would find anything to relate to in its pages — my way of life was so vastly different, after all, from that of someone like C.S. Lewis, a devout Anglican convert whose world was populated by formal theology and Latin quotations. But the further I read, the more I forgot that the book had anything to do with God or the Devil or Christianity at all — Lewis was simply proposing a philosophy for how to live well.
In one letter, for instance, Lewis, speaking through the voice of Screwtape, explores the idea that doing nothing is worse than doing something actively evil, because it suggests an utter absence of purpose. How many times have we gleaned similar prescriptions from studies demonstrating the harm, for instance, of scrolling for hours on end through social media? In another letter, Lewis critiques the modern obsession with constant change and progress, arguing that such a fixation can lead to restlessness and dissatisfaction. Wasn't I witnessing this very phenomenon at Columbia University, where students lost nights of sleep and popped Adderalls just to chase the latest thing to add to their resume?
Advertisement
And in my favorite letter, Lewis underscores the ideal of love as self-sacrificial, rooted in action rather than in fleeting 'romantic' emotion. The strongest relationships were based not on passion but on commitment — and I had seen this play out in the loving household that I came from. These were not solely 'Christian' beliefs — these were ideas that anyone could adopt to live a better life.
After finishing 'Screwtape,' I grew fascinated by the development of religion in our society. I read Thomas Aquinas and St. Augustine and began to see their ideas crop up in day-to-day life — even in many of the tenets of secular humanism that I had so deeply idolized from childhood. I didn't believe that Eve had been created out of the rib of Adam or that Adam had been created in the likeness of God, but I sure as hell believed in something like sin — the idea that some actions, such as murder, were categorically immoral.
In abandoning religion, we — the secular rational humanists of progressive dogma — might be missing a large chunk of the puzzle of human existence. Religion, after all, is a set of narratives that grapple with morality — ideas that teach us to discern right from wrong. Today, when we are in desperate need of societal harmony, borrowing ideas from religious morality systems can help many of us avoid falling into depression, raise our children in stable two-parent households, and promote learning over violence. Such values are not arbitrary — they are ideas that have kept many societies from devolving into anarchy. They are the values that have upheld civilizations for centuries — and perhaps even made them possible.
Advertisement
I'm still far from religious, but I've come to appreciate the moral architecture that religion provides in a stable society — and I believe that it deserves a place in contemporary life. After all, are those of us who turn up our noses at religious people any better than the same religious people who reject evolution or believe in the afterlife? We secular humanists might have lots to teach creationists, but they have plenty to teach us. Perhaps true enlightenment lies not in rejecting tradition, but in rediscovering the wisdom buried within it.
This is part of a series from Globe Ideas about how people change their minds. If you'd like to write about a book or film or other work that made you reconsider your point of view on an issue, we're accepting submissions at ideas@globe.com.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Catholic bishops try to rally opposition to Trump's immigration agenda
Catholic bishops try to rally opposition to Trump's immigration agenda

Boston Globe

time8 hours ago

  • Boston Globe

Catholic bishops try to rally opposition to Trump's immigration agenda

Advertisement The image in Los Angeles and elsewhere of ICE agents seizing people in Costco parking lots and car washes 'rips the illusion that's being portrayed, that this is an effort which is focused on those who have committed significant crimes,' said Cardinal Robert W. McElroy of Washington, in an interview from Rome. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'The realities are becoming more ominous,' he said. 'It is becoming clearer that this is a wholesale, indiscriminate deportation effort aimed at all those who came to the country without papers.' McElroy, who has frequently spoken against Trump's immigration policies, was named the archbishop of Washington as one of Francis' final major actions in the United States, reflecting the Vatican's desire to counter the Trump administration's immigration agenda. Immigration arrests are rising sharply, and ICE has a goal of apprehending 3,000 people a day. Advertisement 'A very large number of Catholic bishops, and religious leaders in general, are outraged by the steps which the administration is taking to expel mostly hardworking, good people from the United States,' McElroy said. Trump campaigned on aggressive immigration tactics, and polls before his inauguration captured broad support among Americans for deportations. Since then, Americans have 'mixed to negative views' of the administration's immigration actions, according to an early June survey by the Pew Research Center. The Trump administration has said the aggressive immigration tactics are necessary to protect public safety because some illegal immigrants are violent criminals. Vice President JD Vance, who converted to Catholicism six years ago, articulated his personal views in an interview last month, saying that immigration 'at the levels and at the pace that we've seen over the last few years' was destructive to the common good. 'I really do think that social solidarity is destroyed when you have too much migration too quickly,' he added. 'That's not because I hate the migrants or I'm motivated by grievance. That's because I'm trying to preserve something in my own country where we are a unified nation.' It is not clear how much influence the bishops will have on the issue. In Congress, there has been little debate between the two chambers over the immigration portion of the policy bill. The bishops expressing concern stand in opposition to the voices of key Catholics in executive leadership, including Vance. 'We as a church unfortunately don't have the kind of megaphone that the administration does,' said Bishop Mark Seitz of El Paso, Texas. 'It's a real challenge to reach even Catholics, especially when maybe one out of five who identify as Catholic make it to Mass on Sunday.' Advertisement Leo, an American and Peruvian citizen, has from the beginning of his papacy called for the need to respect the dignity of every person, 'citizens and immigrants alike.' After his election in May, his brother John Prevost said Leo was 'not happy with what's going on with immigration. I know that for a fact.' But so far the new pope has not directly weighed in publicly on Trump's deportation campaign. On Thursday, Archbishop Timothy P. Broglio, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, implored Congress to 'make drastic changes' to Trump's domestic policy bill, despite its anti-abortion provisions. He wrote that the bill failed to protect families including 'by promoting an enforcement-only approach to immigration and eroding access to legal protections.' Leading Catholic prelates including McElroy and Cardinal Joseph W. Tobin of Newark, New Jersey, went even further in an interfaith letter to Senate leadership Thursday night, strongly urging them to vote against the bill entirely. In their letter they claimed that the bill, which calls for billions of dollars to bolster ICE, would spur immigration raids, harm hardworking families and fund a border wall that would heighten peril for migrants. 'Its passage would be a moral failure for American society as a whole,' the letter states. The letter was organized by Archbishop John C. Wester of Santa Fe, New Mexico, who attended an ecumenical protest against the bill last week. 'This draconian, heavy-handed, mean-spirited way that the country is dealing with immigrants today, it is not fair, it is not humane, it is not moral,' he said. 'It's something we have to really be earnest about, and do everything we can within the law to make our voices heard.' Advertisement Archbishop José H. Gomez of Los Angeles, a naturalized U.S. citizen born in Mexico, has long supported immigration reform and Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, a program that shields from deportation people who were brought into the United States as children and did not have citizenship or legal residency. But as the recent raids were executed in Los Angeles, his criticism of the Trump administration became more direct. 'This is not policy, it is punishment, and it can only result in cruel and arbitrary outcomes,' he wrote in a recent column. In an interview, he pointed to the example of Bishop Michael M. Pham of San Diego, the first bishop named by Leo in the United States. Pham, who fled to America from Vietnam as a child, recently went to a courthouse to support migrants waiting for hearings. 'We may have to do that,' Gomez said. More than a third of the Catholic church in the United States is Hispanic. In recent weeks, priests have increasingly reported that families are not leaving their homes to come to Mass because they are afraid. Still, many Catholics support Trump. The president increased his share of Catholic voters in 2024, receiving the majority of their support unlike in 2020, and his support from Hispanic Catholic voters also grew, to 41% from 31%, according to a new analysis from the Pew Research Center. Progressive and moderate Christians have expressed concern over Trump's immigration plans for years, particularly fearing the consequences of his reelection. At his inaugural prayer service, Episcopal Bishop Mariann E. Budde pleaded with the president to 'have mercy' on vulnerable people, particularly immigrants and children who were afraid. Trump lashed out, and a Republican member of Congress called for her deportation. Advertisement At a private retreat in San Diego this month, bishops discussed the crisis at length over meals. 'No person of goodwill can remain silent,' Broglio, the bishops' conference president, said in an opening reflection that was made public for churches, to reach immigrant families. 'Count on the commitment of all of us to stand with you in this challenging hour.' Bishops still oppose abortion, in alignment with church teaching. But immigration 'has become more and more a serious situation' that must be addressed, said Seitz, who chairs the bishops' committee on migration. In his area, auxiliary bishops and religious sisters in El Paso have been showing up at immigration court to stand alongside migrants who are appearing at required hearings. Some of the migrants have been seized by ICE agents. McElroy and several other top prelates have had private conversations with senior members of the Trump administration on this issue this month. They are also working with their priests to address pastoral needs on the ground. Not all priests are in lockstep about how far to take their response, but McElroy said that significant numbers of them feel they need to take strong action. In East Los Angeles, Father Brendan Busse, pastor of Dolores Mission Church in Boyle Heights, rushed to the scene after a call that ICE vehicles had rammed a car, deployed tear gas and hauled out a man, leaving his wife and two babies in the back seat. He said he sensed that some Catholics believe their political allegiance comes before the values of their faith. Advertisement 'My body is tired, my emotions are all over the place,' he said. 'But I have to say, my spirit is strong, I think, in part because there's a kind of moral clarity in moments like this.'

Blast ‘em: Get rid of the blocky brutalist buildings that blight our nation's capital
Blast ‘em: Get rid of the blocky brutalist buildings that blight our nation's capital

New York Post

time15 hours ago

  • New York Post

Blast ‘em: Get rid of the blocky brutalist buildings that blight our nation's capital

There's a reason God created dynamite. The brutalist federal buildings that have blighted Washington, DC for decades deserve the same fate as Carthage after the Third Punic War, and the nation's capital is finally beginning to move on from these concrete monstrosities. The Department of Housing and Urban and Development just announced that it is leaving its godawful headquarters in Washington for less hideous space in northern Virginia. Advertisement HUD Secretary Scott Turner has described the structure as 'the ugliest building in DC,' which is a dubious claim only because there are so many other buildings in Washington that compete for that distinction. He's not the first HUD secretary to hate the building. Jack Kemp called it '10 floors of basement.' Meanwhile, the FBI is also departing its HQ, designated by the UK building materials retailer Buildworld as the ugliest building in the United States and the second ugliest in the world. Advertisement The moves are in keeping with the spirit of President Donald Trump's executive order stipulating that federal buildings should 'respect regional, traditional, and classical architectural heritage in order to uplift and beautify public spaces and ennoble the United States and our system of self-government.' That EO should be considered common sense, but has several trigger words for defenders of the architectural status quo, including 'traditional,' 'classical,' and perhaps foremost of all, 'beautify.' In response, the American Institute of Architects expressed its 'strong concerns that mandating architecture styles stifles innovation and harms local communities.' According to The Nation magazine, Trump's initiative is part of an agenda to 'to make historical architecture on the whole inextricable from Eurocentric white supremacy.' Advertisement In short, it's an unforgivable offense to want a government building to look nice. Brutalism, with its blocky, minimalist structures made of poured concrete, was a creation of a post-war Europe that wanted to embrace the fresh and new and to economize on rebuilding. Although the name 'brutalism' perfectly captures the aesthetic effect, it actually comes from the French for raw concrete, béton brut. To be sure, concrete is extremely important to modern life, but no one has ever said, 'Oh, it's so elegant and uplifting.' Advertisement The brutalist buildings in Washington were largely built between the late 1960s and mid-1970s — an era of grievous architectural mistakes, including cookie-cutter multiple-purpose baseball stadiums and modernist Catholic churches. Get opinions and commentary from our columnists Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters The buildings never had a heyday, but were hated when they were erected and are still hated now. The seedbed of the trend was a Kennedy administration commission that advocated contemporary designs and said — laughably, in retrospect — that federal architecture should 'reflect the dignity, enterprise, vigor and stability of the American national government.' Instead, the brutalist buildings speak of a lumbering bureaucracy with no regard for the sensibilities or priorities of ordinary people. They are about what you'd expect if a DMV were headquartered in a maximum-security prison, or in a massive pillbox. These buildings could easily be used as stage sets for docudramas about East Germany. They are a tribute to soulless monumentality and a gut punch to the human spirit. Advertisement If they don't eventually get a well-deserved appointment with a wrecking ball, they should be donated to North Korea. The original justifications of brutalism no longer apply. The buildings aren't new anymore, and they aren't cheap. They haven't aged well in any sense, not aesthetically or functionally. The FBI building is literally falling apart, and the expense of maintaining the HUD building has become ruinous. Advertisement Defenders of the brutalist buildings say that they are now part of our heritage and should be preserved as such. That's not fair, though, to the people who have to work in them, or who walk or drive by them every day. They are a net subtraction to the DC landscape and to human happiness. If one of them has to be kept for historical reasons, it should be made into a Smithsonian museum devoted to idiotic fads that were indulged much too long. Twitter: @RichLowry

Favoring Trump, SCOTUS Majority Undermines Federal Court Judges
Favoring Trump, SCOTUS Majority Undermines Federal Court Judges

Black America Web

time16 hours ago

  • Black America Web

Favoring Trump, SCOTUS Majority Undermines Federal Court Judges

Source: The Washington Post / Getty Closing out another term, the right-wing Supreme Court majority gave the Constitution and the Rule of Law the finger in Trump v. CASA , limiting the ability of federal courts to serve as a check on extreme executive action. In its 6-3 opinion in CASA , the right-wing majority sidesteps the issue of birthright citizenship and positions itself as reigning in the power of the federal courts instead of the increasingly out-of-pocket executive branch. At issue were federal court injunctions that prevented Trump's January 20 executive order restricting birthright citizenship for babies born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents. The majority in CASA essentially hides behind its interpretation that a federal court does not have the authority to issue a nationwide injunction for arguably unconstitutional actions of the Trump administration that impact the entire country. This would force impacted individuals to sue in every single jurisdiction to have their rights enforced and could create disparate application of the Constitution based on where a person was living. Writing another formidable dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson pulled no punches, rebuking her colleagues and the Trump administration's erosion of the Constitution. 'This perverse burden shifting cannot coexist with the rule of law,' wrote Jackson. 'As a result, the Judiciary–the one institution that is solely responsible for ensuring our Republic endures as a Nation of laws–has put both our legal system, and our system of government, in grave jeopardy.' The shrug and wink happening between the right-wing majority on SCOTUS and in the other two branches of the federal government should be alarming. As Elie Mystal wrote for The Nation, SCOTUS just made it difficult for federal courts to stop Trump from exceeding his authority to end constitutionally protected birthright citizenship. 'It's a distinction, one that lawyers will try to exploit for an entire rearguard action to defend citizenship in this country, but one that's unlikely to make much of a difference if you happen to be born on the Republican side of the tracks,' wrote Mystal. 'Once you read the fine print, it becomes clear that this decision is a historic, five-alarm catastrophe.' Testing the limits of the majority's opinion in CASA , a coalition representing immigrant rights advocates, filed a nationwide class-action lawsuit challenging the executive order restricting birthright citizenship. The legal coalition behind the class-action, including the ACLU and the Legal Defense Fund, still have a separate case making its way through the federal courts that was not considered in Friday's SCOTUS opinion. 'The Constitution guarantees birthright citizenship, and no procedural ruling will stop us from fighting to uphold that promise,' said Tianna Mays, legal director for Democracy Defenders Fund. 'Our plaintiffs, and millions of families across this country, deserve clarity, stability, and justice. We look forward to making our case in court again.' On its face, the majority opinion in CASA appears to be a mixed bag. Still, it gave Trump enough leeway to feel vindicated in his erosion of the Constitution, a cornerstone of American democracy. Unambiguously affirmed in the 14th Amendment, Birthright citizenship has been widely recognized for generations. 'Citizenship is a right afforded to us by birth, not by privilege,' said Karla McKanders, director of the Legal Defense Fund's Thurgood Marshall Institute. 'The Trump administration's executive order is an unlawful attempt to entrench racial hierarchies and establish a second class of citizens in the United States. We will continue working to ensure that birthright citizenship — a right granted by the U.S. Constitution — is protected, and that families are not torn apart because of this executive order.' As SCOTUS cannot invalidate the amendment itself outright, it distorts legal analysis to help the Trump administration subvert over 150 years of legal precedent. Judith Browne Dianis, executive director of the Advancement Project, called the decision 'one of the most dangerous and blatantly unconstitutional attacks on immigrant communities and the rule of law in modern history.' 'Through its restrictions on universal injunctions, the Court is placing limits on who could be protected from this executive order, which means to strip U.S.-born children of non-citizen parents of their birthright citizenship in a direct assault on the 14th Amendment,' Dianis said. 'As Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson points out, today's ruling is an existential threat to the rule of law because it allows the Trump Administration to apply the executive order to many newborns who are guaranteed citizenship under the 14th Amendment but have not yet filed a lawsuit in federal court.' While this decision may not directly impact Black Americans, the expansion of authoritarian power granted to the Trump administration will certainly find its way to our doorstep. One of three Reconstruction Era amendments, the 14th Amendment has served as a launch pad for ensuring equal protection and due process, and various civil and human rights. 'To challenge it erases a core American promise and serves as a calculated step toward authoritarianism,' Dianis said. 'This reckless and racially motivated executive action is a transparent attempt to silence and disempower communities of color, particularly Latine, AAPI, African, and Caribbean immigrant families. And it comes alongside a barrage of executive orders that attempt to dismantle racial equity, voting rights, and immigration protections, each designed to chip away at our collective power.' SEE ALSO: Netflix Docuseries 'Amend' Is Good For A Rewatch After Abortion Ruling SCOTUS Medicaid Decision Could Defund Planned Parenthood SEE ALSO Favoring Trump, SCOTUS Majority Undermines Federal Court Judges was originally published on

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store