The Question of God

Armand Nicholi's seminar, which he has taught without interruption for the past 35 years, is now the basis for his book, 'The Question of God: C.S. Lewis and Sigmund Freud Debate God, Love, Sex, and the Meaning of Life.'

For Sigmund Freud there was considerable doubt. Freud, the father of psychoanalysis, didn't just question religious belief, he attacked it as childish, escapist, and unworthy of a mature, rational mind.

The doctrines of religion, Freud wrote, "bear the imprint of the times in which they arose, the ignorant times of the childhood of humanity." He asserted that "the religions of mankind must be classed among the mass delusions," and that "when a man has once brought himself to accept uncritically all the absurdities that religious doctrines put before him ... we need not be greatly surprised at the weakness of his intellect."

In 1967, when Armand Nicholi, associate clinical professor of psychiatry, began teaching a seminar on Freud at Leverett House, he found that many of his students were disturbed by Freud's rigidly materialist perspective.

"The students found Freud's works very interesting, but unbalanced," Nicholi said. "They wanted to know who would be a good counterpoint, someone who would be able to defend and define the spiritual worldview that Freud attacked."

Nicholi remembered a book he had discovered as an intern, "The Problem of Pain" by C.S. Lewis. Someone had left the volume in the hospital library, and Nicholi picked it up, hoping it would help him deal with the suffering he was encountering, suffering that at the time nearly convinced him to leave medicine.

"I found it helpful, but I think I mistook the clarity and simplicity of the writing for superficiality. It was only later that I realized how profound it was."

Clive Staples Lewis (1898-1963) was perhaps the 20th century's best known Christian apologist, author of such books as "Mere Christianity," "Surprised by Joy," and "The Screwtape Letters." An Oxford don, he also wrote extensively on the literature of the Middle Ages and Renaissance, and found time to compose "The Narnia Chronicles" and other works of fantasy for children and adults.

And thanks to the play "Shadowlands" by William Nicholson (later a movie with Anthony Hopkins and Debra Winger) the poignant story of Lewis' marriage to Joy Gresham has become well known.

Nicholi decided that Lewis would make a particularly apt counterpoint to Freud. There is no evidence the two ever met, nor did Freud live long enough to read any of Lewis' principal works, but there is ample evidence that Lewis was familiar with the theories of Freud, whose impact on literary criticism at the time was considerable.

Moreover, until he was in his 30s, Lewis ardently embraced the same brand of militant atheism to which Freud subscribed. It was only after arriving at Oxford and coming under the influence of a group of Christian intellectuals including J.R.R. Tolkien that Lewis began to question his own unbelief, converting to Christianity in 1931.

"When I added Lewis as a counterpoint, the discussion in class ignited," said Nicholi. "It's been a fun course to teach because everyone's interested in these issues."

It must be fun. Nicholi has taught the seminar without interruption for the past 35 years and still hasn't tired of it. Nor have the students. The course regularly receives accolades in the CUE Guide and attracts far more applicants than can be accommodated during a given semester.

For the past 11 years, Nicholi has also offered the seminar to students at the Medical School. He believes that for them, the issues raised are not only of vital personal interest but are professionally important as well.

"These are questions that medical students need to deal with. People facing life-threatening illness may wonder, 'Why is God doing this to me?' It's vitally important for a doctor to understand a patient's worldview."

Now the spirited discussion that Nicholi has presided over for the past 35 years has been opened to a wider group of participants. Nicholi has written a book based on his course: "The Question of God: C.S. Lewis and Sigmund Freud Debate God, Love, Sex, and the Meaning of Life" (The Free Press, 2002).

As he does in his seminar, Nicholi avoids taking sides in the debate, but rather allows Freud and Lewis to speak for themselves. He also examines their lives to determine the impact of their beliefs. Ultimately, the book asks the question, which man was happier, more satisfied? Is it better to be a believer or an unbeliever?

"Students always ask me, which side are you on? Half of them assume that because I'm a psychiatrist I must be a materialist. Others who embrace a spiritual perspective may make the opposite assumption. What I do is try to present an objective, dispassionate, critical assessment of both worldviews."

Nicholi's book, however, tells another story. In response to the question of happiness, the evidence is clear: Lewis wins, hands down. After his conversion, or, as he called it, his transition, he underwent a profound change from gloomy, introverted pessimist to cheerful extrovert, described by a close friend as "great fun, an extremely witty and amusing companion ... considerate ... more concerned with the welfare of his friends than with himself."

And contrary to Freud's conviction that a spiritual worldview is incompatible with reason and intelligence, Lewis' transition to Christianity came about as a result of a long and difficult period of critical reasoning and examination of the historical evidence. Determined to establish for himself whether Jesus was indeed the Son of God, Lewis read the New Testament in the original Greek, applying the rigorous methods he had learned as a literary scholar. Finally, he could not escape the conclusion that Jesus was exactly who he claimed to be.

Freud, by contrast, was a dour pessimist who argued violently with most of his friends and colleagues. His opinion of human nature was low. He once wrote to a friend that he found "little that is good about human beings on the whole. In my experience most of them are trash, no matter whether they publicly subscribe to this or that ethical doctrine or none at all."

Faced with suffering in his own life or in that of others, Freud's only answer was to "endure with resignation." He followed this philosophy consistently, stoically enduring the pain and discomfort of the cancer of the palate that afflicted him in the last two decades of his life. He died by assisted suicide at the age of 83.

But Nicholi is quick to point out that whatever his limitations as a person, Freud remains the most important single figure in the study of the mind.

"Everyone in my profession owes a great deal to Freud," Nicholi said. "Most forms of psychotherapy use one of more of the basic concepts that Freud developed. He's revolutionized how we interpret human behavior in many disciplines."

The debate between Freud and Lewis will soon reach an even wider audience. A four-hour PBS documentary based on the book is currently in production. Nicholi will appear in the production, alternating with dramatized episodes from the lives of the two men filmed on location in London and Vienna.

Nicholi hopes that the series will have the same sort of mind-expanding effect on TV audiences that his class has had on Harvard students, whatever their beliefs or predilections.

"I encourage students to understand the worldview they do not embrace. Although at first they find that unsettling, ultimately it will have a strengthening effect if they can confront the arguments and work through them. It may create doubt, but doubt is a part of belief."

There is enough credit and blame for protestant and Catholic concerning the Jewish Question.

Einstein left Germany in December 1932, a month before the Hitler takeover.

Arthur C. Cochrane, The Church's Confess ion under Hitler (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1962)

Wilhelm Niemoller in Kampi und Zeugnis der bekennenden Kirche - Struggle and Testimony of the Confessing Church

Simon Wiesenthal Center Multimedia Learning Center Online From the Protestant side, the basis for opposition to nazism was developed in the 1934 Barmen Theological Declaration approved at the first synod of the United Evangelical church (or Confessing Church) in Germany. Its aim was to counteract the errors of the so called "German Christians" (those Christians who positively identified themselves with the Nazi programs on religious grounds) and the Reich church government.

The Confessing Church in Germany also provided temporary asylum for Jews, becoming, in effect, stations on an underground railway leading to the safety of neutral Switzerland.

Despite the different interpretations, a few directions seem clear: (1) an overwhelming majority of Christian clergy acquiesced in the destruction of European Jews; (2) church leaders were unable to mount a successful effort against the Nazis. This bears serious reflection for the continuing struggles which the churches face in the contemporary world; (3) the church's self- understanding and its own sufferings under the Nazis were far too isolated from the sufferings of non-Christians, Jews in particular, to whom suffering meant death. Why did the churches raise the issue of Nazi murder of "baptized" Jews to the exclusion of the Jewish people at large?; (4) the churches were far too connected with the dynamics of German society to really stand in Judgment against it; (5) the Jewish Question could not be adequately addressed because of the long-standing theological tradition of anti-Judaism in the churches. This tradition must be obliterated once and for all by the post-Holocaust Christian community; (6) the churches, which will never regain the kind of control over society they once had, must reflect anew on how to combat totalitarian power. Where are their primary resources in such a context?; and, finally, (7) the churches' fear of communism blinded them to all other forms of totalitarian oppression. Is there danger of repetition in our day? Our Secularist Democratic Party (Long, Important Analysis)

Also see:CATHOLIC LEAGUE Pius XII and the Holocaust

<> With all due respect, I think it rather an iffy proposition to expect a Church to stop Hitler.

The Pope's record re WW2 is remarkable.

I leave it to others to engage in presentism in moral casuistry re culpability/complicity concerning the Pope during WW2.

The record of the Pope is clear. Atempting to "blame" him re Hitler is despicable.

ALL Popes, since Pentecost, have been crystal clear re sexual morality and I have yet to see the world pay heed to their Teaching authority.

Iffy INSANE proposition to expect a Church to stop Hitler

'Upon this Rock I shall build my church'

The Gates of Hell Shall Not Prevail

This curious statement is found in Matthew 16:18,

And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Ñ Ñ Ñ

Germany had no church; and/or Hitler was not equivalent to "the gates of hell."
Germany had an apostate church and Hitler was equivalent to "the gates of hell."
- It is not an INSANE proposition to expect a CHURCH to preclude a Hitler.
1. Are we precluding Killary Klinton? Our Secularist Democratic Party (Long, Important Analysis)

Germany had no church; and/or Hitler was not equivalent to "the gates of hell."

<> There was a Catholic Church in Germany. It was not run by the Govt.<>

Germany had an apostate church and Hitler was equivalent to "the gates of hell."

<> THe Catholic Church in Germany was faithful.Individual members of that Catholic Chuch were not<>

It is not an INSANE proposition to expect a CHURCH to preclude a Hitler.

<>. It IS insane to expect a Church to stop a Hitler...Free Will....Judas betrayed Jesus. Besides, Hitler was not a Catholic. To be Catholic, one must maintain the Bonds of Unity in Worship, Doctrine, Authority. Hitler rejcted all three. Hitler was not a Christian. <>

It was not run by the Govt

Didn't have to be to PRECLUDE Hitler.

THe Catholic Church in Germany was faithful

Just like the Confessing Church was in PRECLUDING...United States Holocaust Memorial Museum

Homosexuality and the Nazi Party, REVIEW

These men were viciously anti-Jew and anti-Christian because of the injunctions against homosexuality inherent in the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic.

While the neo-pagans were busy attacking from without, liberal theologians undermined Biblical authority from within the Christian church. The school of so-called "higher criticism," which began in Germany in the late 1800s, portrayed the miracles of God as myths; by implication making true believers (Jew and Christian alike) into fools. And since the Bible was no longer accepted as God's divine and inerrant guide, it could be ignored or reinterpreted. By the time the Nazis came to power, "Bible-believing" Christians, (the Confessing Church) were a small minority.

It is in this campaign against Judeo- Christian morality that we find the reason for the German people's acceptance of Nazism's most extreme atrocities. Their religious foundations had been systematically eroded over a period of decades by powerful social forces.

The probable reason for Hitler's attack on Christianity was his perception that it alone had the moral authority to stop the Nazi movement. But Christians stumbled before the flood of evil. As Poliakov notes, "[W]hen moral barriers collapsed under the impact of Nazi preaching...the same anti-Semitic movement that led to the slaughter of the Jews gave scope and license to an obscene revolt against God and the moral law.

<>I find your Christian-baiting despicable.

There is not a single Synagogue, Church, Mosque, existing, or that ever existed that PRECLUDES the existence of those who desire to act as their Will dictates.

Ping God and ask Him why He didn't PRECLUDE Hitler.... or Stalin (he killed more'n Hitler).....or Mao (He killed more'n Hitler and Stalin).

I challenge you to find a SINGLE Magisterial Document, Catechism, Encyclical, Ecumenical Council Document that supports ONE of your bigoted charges.

I have already said some INDIVIDUAL Christians acted atrociously. Did some Jews also act atrociously in re Hitler?<>

Oh, calm down.

I find your Christian-baiting despicable.

I'm not baiting or debating you.

PRECLUDES the ~~existence~~ takeover, via elections, of democratic societies and governments.

What do Priests for Life Index and American Life League - Life Issues advocate? Same thing Anti Abortion and Pro Life group 'Jews For Life' advocates, which is stopping the present holocaust Death as Deliverance: Euthanatic Thinking in Germany ca. 1890-1933 Writing in 1989, the late Cardinal John O'Connor of New York City, an ardent pro-life advocate, predicted that euthanasia would "dwarf the abortion phenomenon in magnitude, in numbers, in horror." and attempting to PRECLUDE it's logical progression - euthanasia.

Abortion as "Shedding Innocent Blood" & Lessons Toward Repentance ... claims ALL Protestants, Catholics and Jews are not converted/committed to the pro-life cause. World quotes R.C. Sproul of Ligonier Ministries: "One of the greatest travesties of the church is its silence on abortion, particularly the evangelical church."

A collection of quotes from the Founding FathersThe Importance of Morality and Religion in Government indicates that Christians should practice what is preached and in so doing be the Salt and Light (Matthew 5:13-16) of society.

Imagine the state of this nation 5 years from now, if you exiled/expelled all the social conservative Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox Jews today.

Sept. 2, 2000 ,Volume 15, Number 34 WORLD ON THE WEB, Marvin Olasky

Perhaps the most observant current viewer of Christophobia is not a Christian but an Orthodox Jewish rabbi. Daniel Lapin wrote in his book, America's Real War, "The educational bureaucracy expects the state to accommodate every possible bizarre cultural mutation and lifestyle, but finds prayer at graduation an intolerable and fatal compromise of state neutrality toward religion." Why else would such illogic reign if fear were not involved?

Some Jewish leaders would point to the Holocaust to say that their fear has an objective basis, yet the faith that animated Hitler was not Christianity but a racist version of Social Darwinism's emphasis on survival of the fittest. And the reason Hitler could put his faith into practice is because of a powerful government apparatus; although the left hates to admit it, National Socialism was one type of socialism.

That's why Rabbi Lapin's fearless statement makes sense: "Those of us who venerate freedom, be we Jewish or Christian, be we religious or secularized, have no option but to pray for the health of Christianity in America. No other group possesses both the faith and the numbers sufficient to hold back the ever-encroaching, sometimes sinister, power of the state."

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.