Theology and George MacDonald

Like many others, I have read and reread much of Lewis’ work; but I have found MacDonald much more difficult to approach.  One reason is the greater distance (over 100 years) between us.  Another is that much of his writing is designed to elicit a feeling—an emotional and spiritual response—rather than an intellectual response.  I happen to be wired for an intellectual response.

I knew that there was something profound there, but what?I have lately begun to study MacDonald, starting with my favorite genre of writing: his fantasies and fairy tales.  I can still recall the first time I attempted to read Phantastes, probably sometime in high school.  I do not believe I made it past the first chapter.  Both the point of view (first person) and the language put me off.  I managed to get through it a few years later in college, and felt like I had just enjoyed an incredibly vivid, yet somehow inexplicable, dream.  While I thoroughly enjoyed the book, I could not explain it.  I knew that there was something profound there, but what?

I now have a college degree in English literature, have completed a term of graduate work, and greatly expanded my reading repertoire including many authors that predate the twentieth century.  Feeling much more comfortable with nineteenth century literature, I recently reread Phantastes, Lilith, The Princess and the Goblin, and several other stories by George MacDonald.  Again I was struck by the feeling that I was being shown things that could not be understood intellectually—yet somehow truth and profound thought could be found there.  This is where I began to dig into George MacDonald’s history.

How do we have an author who manages to write prose that evokes the same response as great poetry?The eighteenth and nineteenth century are generally referred to as the Enlightenment or Renaissance of human thought.  During this period of time great emphasis was placed on clear, scientific, empirical study and analysis.  From a literary point of view, logic, clarity, and intellectual writings were the mainstay.  How then do we have an author who not only rejects this view, but manages to write prose that evokes the same response as great poetry?

In fact, George MacDonald rejected the intellectual approach.  His biography describes a rigid Calvinist upbringing that, like the scientific trend of the day, focused on an intellectual Christianity.  At an early age MacDonald struggled with and ultimately rejected a faith that rested solely on intellectual arguments and logical constructs.  He felt that too much emphasis was placed on discovering the mechanics of Christian living.  According to his biography, one of his favorite verses was John 7:17 “If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine…” (KJV).  He refused to discuss doctrine, stating, “But, I ask, is not the living man, the human God, after his 3 and 30 years on earth, poor and scanty as the records of him, a definite enough object of faith for your turn?  He is not, I grant you, for the kind of definiteness you would have, which is to reduce the infinite within the bounds of a legal document…” (Letter  to “W” 31 January 1886).  Clearly MacDonald wrote and promoted Christian ideology.  Yet his means differed greatly from that of other writers during the same period.  Like a good writer, “show, don’t tell” was MacDonald’s mantra.  And that is what we see in his fantasy, his poetry, his sermons, and even his life.

You will find yourself nodding in agreement:  “Yes, I have felt that way before.”The writings of George MacDonald can be difficult to interpret; they can be difficult to understand or explain.  Yet somehow the essence of true spirituality can be found there.  His writing, while certainly not the lucid and logical form of C.S. Lewis, nevertheless find a way of touching the heart—you will find yourself nodding in agreement:  “Yes, I have felt that way before.”  You may not understand, but understanding is not the same as knowing.  As C.S. Lewis wrote so many years ago in Surprised by Joy, talking about his first experience with Phantastes, “What it actually did to me was to convert, even to baptize ... my imagination.”

I believe that Christianity is logically sound, and can be discussed and debated through doctrine and theology.  But at some point logic breaks down; doctrine and theology can take us only so far.  To ignore the spiritual—the “feeling” side of Christian faith—is dangerous and ultimately destructive.  I do not suggest that we should abandon doctrine or theology; instead, I believe that these should not be or become the only points of interest.  No man or woman is saved because of doctrine.  A person is saved when he realizes that he needs God.  George MacDonald admirably shows this through words that take us far beyond theology, into the essence of belief and faith.

Login to add comments