The Moral Law Reflection Assignment

Page

of 2

Zoom

---

Part 1
Why is the moral law self-evident
The moral law is self-evident because we can’t help but feel it.
When I was a young child, I was staying overnight at my aunt’s house, and my older
cousin suggested that we watch an R-rated movie, which was inappropriate for my age.
At such a young age, I did not know it would be wrong for me to watch it. I had not
expected it to be bad, but afterwards I felt extremely guilty.
The fact that I can find myself in a situation, not even consciously knowing that it’s
wrong, yet still feel guilty about it afterwards, points to the fact that the knowledge that
it’s wrong has come from somewhere beyond myself.
Though we know the law, why don’t we follow it
In future years, I would do far greater wrongs but feel far less guilt about them. The fact
that my feelings of guilt were never as strong as that one instance when I was a child, I
think, highlights an important principle. That is, as we commit sin, it clouds our judgment
and makes us more inclined to sin again, which helps to explain why, though we feel the
moral law in our hearts, we increasingly have the temptation not to follow it.
I believe the extreme guilt I felt was a product of my relative purity, being that I was fairly
young. I was seeing more clearly than I would see in the following years.
Thankfully, the opposite is also true. As we draw close to God, who is the author of all
truth, we start to see reality more clearly; we start to see it as it really is. This is why one
of the hallmarks of the great saints is that, as they grew in holiness, they were more
starkly aware of their own sin.
Why does all of this point to God
This points to God because it reveals a knowledge within us, which we could not have
known by our own power but must have been put there by something beyond ourselves.
This knowledge becomes stronger or weaker, clearer or more unclear, as we draw
closer to or further away from the One who put it there.

Part 1
Why is the moral law self-evident
The moral law is self-evident because we can’t help but feel it.
When I was a young child, I was staying overnight at my aunt’s house, and my older
cousin suggested that we watch an R-rated movie, which was inappropriate for my age.
At such a young age, I did not know it would be wrong for me to watch it. I had not
expected it to be bad, but afterwards I felt extremely guilty.
The fact that I can find myself in a situation, not even consciously knowing that it’s
wrong, yet still feel guilty about it afterwards, points to the fact that the knowledge that
it’s wrong has come from somewhere beyond myself.
Though we know the law, why don’t we follow it
In future years, I would do far greater wrongs but feel far less guilt about them. The fact
that my feelings of guilt were never as strong as that one instance when I was a child, I
think, highlights an important principle. That is, as we commit sin, it clouds our judgment
and makes us more inclined to sin again, which helps to explain why, though we feel the
moral law in our hearts, we increasingly have the temptation not to follow it.
I believe the extreme guilt I felt was a product of my relative purity, being that I was fairly
young. I was seeing more clearly than I would see in the following years.
Thankfully, the opposite is also true. As we draw close to God, who is the author of all
truth, we start to see reality more clearly; we start to see it as it really is. This is why one
of the hallmarks of the great saints is that, as they grew in holiness, they were more
starkly aware of their own sin.
Why does all of this point to God
This points to God because it reveals a knowledge within us, which we could not have
known by our own power but must have been put there by something beyond ourselves.
This knowledge becomes stronger or weaker, clearer or more unclear, as we draw
closer to or further away from the One who put it there.

• Seth Johnson

Part 2
The moral law in my own life
These principles have affected my own life profoundly. Oftentimes, when I have fought
against my own temptations, those temptations have become stronger. Whether this is
due to my own inclination to sin, attacks from the demonic realm, or a combination of
the two, I cannot be sure. But I have learned over the years that I cannot overcome
them on my own; they can only be overcome by drawing close to God and trusting in
His grace to help me.
Oftentimes I have not felt like drawing close to Him, but I have found that if I look upon it
as a sort of duty to be done, whether or not I feel like it, He is faithful to meet me where I
am and bring me the rest of the way.
I’ve also learned that God because he has made us both physical as well as spiritual
beings, that he often works through physical means. This takes the form of my Christian
brothers and sisters praying for me and keeping me accountable, the graces I receive
through the sacraments of the Church, and the beauty of the liturgical year itself, with its
moments throughout the year calling me to stop and reflect on my own walk with God,
examining my life and making changes where needed.

Part 2
The moral law in my own life
These principles have affected my own life profoundly. Oftentimes, when I have fought
against my own temptations, those temptations have become stronger. Whether this is
due to my own inclination to sin, attacks from the demonic realm, or a combination of
the two, I cannot be sure. But I have learned over the years that I cannot overcome
them on my own; they can only be overcome by drawing close to God and trusting in
His grace to help me.
Oftentimes I have not felt like drawing close to Him, but I have found that if I look upon it
as a sort of duty to be done, whether or not I feel like it, He is faithful to meet me where I
am and bring me the rest of the way.
I’ve also learned that God because he has made us both physical as well as spiritual
beings, that he often works through physical means. This takes the form of my Christian
brothers and sisters praying for me and keeping me accountable, the graces I receive
through the sacraments of the Church, and the beauty of the liturgical year itself, with its
moments throughout the year calling me to stop and reflect on my own walk with God,
examining my life and making changes where needed.

• Seth Johnson

• Seth Johnson

Discussion Thread: The Undeniable Moral Law

The submissions for this assignment are posts in the assignment's discussion. Below are the discussion posts for Kyle Panchot, or you can view the full discussion.

from Discussion Thread: The Undeniable Moral Law

Jul 10, 2025 5:23PM

Kyle Panchot

 

What Does Lewis Mean When He Says, “Wherever You Find a Man Who Says He Does Not Believe in a Real Right and Wrong, You Will Find the Same Man Going Back on This a Moment Later”?

He means that, though a man may deny believing in a universal moral law, inwardly he still knows it is true. As soon as he is the one being wronged, he will likely appeal to that law as grounds for why the perceived wrong must be righted. If he is the accused, he will invoke it as the basis for why he did not transgress the law in the first place. Either way, his actions—whether he is conscious of it or not—betray the fact that he is, on some level, aware of that moral law.¹

Romans 2:14–15 — “When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires … they show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness.”²

An example of this would be a man who risks his life to save someone else’s child.

Richard Dawkins, in his book The Selfish Gene, offers an alternative explanation of the law of human nature, arguing that one’s motivations are governed by whatever is most likely to preserve one’s own genes. While this may explain a father’s inclination to risk his life for the sake of his child, it does not explain the inclination of a man to risk his life for a stranger’s child. If he were placed in that situation and failed to act, he would surely be haunted by his inaction.³

Nor does it explain a man who fulfills his civic duty by leaving his family and going off to war—especially a war far from home.

John 15:13 — “Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.”⁴

In both cases, if he were to perish, he would be putting his own family in harm’s way by doing so. Yet something inside him tells him he has a responsibility beyond his own family and, if he can reasonably do so, he should act to defend his neighbor’s family as well.

Leviticus 19:18, 34 — “You shall love your neighbor as yourself … the stranger who sojourns with you shall be to you as the native, and you shall love him as yourself.”⁵

The force of this truth can almost be heard in Cain’s defensive reply, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” Deep inside, he knows the answer is yes—and that he has failed to keep his brother in the worst possible way.

All of this points to something in the human condition that is external to itself. If there is something within a man that compels him to act not only against his own self-interest but also against the self-interest of those closest to him, then—regardless of whether he chooses to act—that impulse must have its origin in something external to himself. Someone beyond him makes a claim on that man and a claim on his actions, and that Someone can only be God.

“You have made us for Yourself, O Lord, and our heart is restless until it rests in You.”
— Saint Augustine, Confessions, Book I, chapter 1 (1.1.1).⁶

---

Notes

1. C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (New York: Macmillan, 1952), 5.
2. Rom. 2:14–15 (RSV-2CE).
3. Richard Dawkins, The Selfish Gene (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976), 11.
4. John 15:13 (RSV-2CE).
5. Lev. 19:18, 34 (RSV-2CE).
6. Augustine, Confessions, trans. Henry Chadwick (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991), 3.

---

Bibliography

Augustine. Confessions. Translated by Henry Chadwick. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.

Dawkins, Richard. The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976.

Holy Bible. Revised Standard Version, Second Catholic Edition. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2006.

Lewis, C. S. Mere Christianity. New York: Macmillan, 1952.

 

from Discussion Thread: The Undeniable Moral Law

Jul 12, 2025 4:17PM

Kyle Panchot

Hello Jeri,

That is a very interesting example you give using slavery. It is true that our culture’s universal condemnation of slavery today points to an ultimate moral truth. But what I find interesting about the example is that, in the past, it was exactly the opposite—slavery was almost universally accepted around the world until the values of Christianity gradually persuaded people that slavery was immoral.

Perhaps this is an example of how, though we know the moral law written on our hearts, we often fail to follow it. This certainly applies to individuals, but perhaps it applies to entire societies as well. For example, the Nazis with their treatment of the Jews, or the Aztecs with their human sacrifices. In these societies, these things were largely accepted, though maybe not universally. I imagine that if the roles were reversed and, overnight, those in power became the victims, they would be quick to object on moral grounds that it was unjust.

“Woe to those who decree iniquitous decrees, and the writers who keep writing oppression, to turn aside the needy from justice and to rob the poor of my people of their right…” (Isaiah 10:1–2).¹

---

Citations (Footnotes)

1. Isaiah 10:1–2 (RSV-2CE).

 

---

Bibliography

The Holy Bible: Revised Standard Version, Second Catholic Edition. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2006.

from Discussion Thread: The Undeniable Moral Law

Jul 12, 2025 5:00PM

Kyle Panchot

Hi Jessica, thanks for the post.

 

You wrote that, “one thing that they claim is that there is no ultimate truth and no ultimate right or wrong. Part of this is due to the fact that they believe we're all products of evolution... so it goes to reason for them at least that there shouldn't be any right or wrong.”

 

I completely agree with you on this. I have often in the past expressed my lack of surprise at the increase in mass shootings, because I find there to be a certain logic behind them. If we are all products of a Darwinistic, atheistic type of evolution—where we are here by a cosmic accident, and our continued existence relies on the survival of the fittest—then if I'm tired of my life and I have a beef with you, why should I not take you out with me? I see it as taking their logic to its natural conclusion.

 

Though it is interesting to see that many of those on the left, while holding to the exact same worldview, express a universal moral outcry over such an event. Not only are they being inconsistent with their own worldview, but their outrage is also a reaction that is almost instinctive. Though it goes against their professed beliefs, they almost can't help it—which, as you rightly point out, points to a higher truth, something beyond their own reasoning.

 

“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!” (Isaiah 5:20).¹

 

 

---

 

Citations

 

1. Isaiah 5:20 (RSV-2CE).

 

 

 

 

---

 

Bibliography

 

The Holy Bible, Revised Standard Version, Second Catholic Edition. San Francisco:

Ignatius Press, 2006.

 

 

 

The Tempter’s Challenge Essay

 

The Tempter’s Challenge Essay

 

Kyle D Panchot
APOL 330: C.S. Lewis and the Apologetic Imagination
July 6, 2025
Professor Seth Johnson

 

Introduction

“Be sober, be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour”¹

C. S. Lewis’s book The Screwtape Letters is a timeless classic, offering deep insight into the Christian life and the ways the devil may seek to attack it. Though it was written in the 1940s, it remains particularly relevant today. The effectiveness of the methods Lewis describes has only increased over time. In the following, I wish to describe some of these methods.

Distractions

“But the cares of the world, and the delight in riches, and the desire for other things, enter in and choke the word, and it proves unfruitful”²

At first, Screwtape seems content to use the distractions of daily life to keep the client from thinking about God or higher truths. By focusing his attention on the day-to-day grind, he will not have time to stop and ponder deeper matters. When those higher thoughts do creep into the client’s mind, Screwtape advises using practical concerns—like satisfying hunger by breaking for lunch—as a distraction.

This is particularly relevant in our modern world of social media and short videos, where algorithms learn your personal tastes and feed you an endless supply of videos and posts tailored to those tastes.

Cultivating Pride

“God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble”³

Screwtape advises Wormwood to cultivate pride in his patient. Pride is the king of vices; it is the root from which all sin derives. It is pride that turns one inward, seeking to put one’s own needs above all others. It was pride that caused Lucifer to say, “I will not serve,” and it was pride that led our first parents to give in to the temptation of being like God.

The irony is that when, out of love, we set aside our pride and put others’ needs before our own, we are more like God than at any other time. But pride brings a certain blindness, where we often cannot see what is right before our eyes.

Lewis writes, “You must bring him to a condition in which he can practise self-examination for an hour without discovering any of those facts about himself which are perfectly clear to anyone who has ever lived in the same house with him.”⁴

Natural Inclination Toward Sin

“For I know that nothing good dwells within me… For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I do”⁵

When the man encounters the living God—whom Screwtape calls “the Enemy”—the demon shifts his strategy. He exploits every person’s natural inclination toward self-centeredness to pit the man against those around him, urging him to notice all the little things people do that annoy him. By focusing on the faults of others and his preconceived notions of them, he is less likely to examine himself seriously.

This becomes especially apparent in his interactions with his mother, whom he is encouraged to think acts deliberately to irritate him.

Alongside social media distractions, the internet has spawned phenomena like the keyboard warrior and the internet troll, both emboldened by anonymity to treat others in ways they never would face to face.

Sexual Desire

“Do not desire her beauty in your heart, and do not let her capture you with her eyelashes; for the price of a harlot is only a loaf of bread, but a married woman hunts down a precious life. Can a man carry fire in his bosom and his clothes not be burned?”⁶

Screwtape urges the client to act on his base desires, viewing the object of his affection as merely that—an object to conquer and use for his own gratification, not someone to be loved and protected. By encouraging him to act on these desires, they hope to bind him to someone with whom he will be unequally yoked, ultimately bringing both pain and suffering.

Today we are bombarded by sexual content from every angle, all designed to inflame passions and manipulate us—whether through overtly sexualized imagery on screens and magazines, fantasies peddled in so-called romance novels, or explicit material online. All of this stems from the sexual revolution, which was fueled by the Church’s compromise on its teaching about the immorality of artificial birth control.

Attacks on the Family

“For I hate divorce, says the Lord the God of Israel”⁷

One of the most effective strategies today is the attack on the family. Lewis notes in The Screwtape Letters that convincing someone the only valid reason for marriage is the initial feeling of love leaves the door open to divorce once that feeling fades.

While this is true—just look at the “love at first sight” trope so famously pushed by Disney—this is far from the devil’s only tactic. I believe that if C. S. Lewis could see our time, he would be shocked by how broken the family has become, with the divorce rate among Christians nearly matching that of non-Christians and many today not even attempting to marry or have children.

In my view, there has been a clear progression: acceptance of artificial birth control → greater sexual promiscuity → perversion of the ideal of love → no-fault divorce → broken families → a generation that does not want marriage.

A New Strategy for the Modern World

“Do not be conformed to this world but be transformed by the renewal of your mind…”⁸

If C. S. Lewis were writing today, I think he would have Screwtape promote isolation—encouraging Wormwood’s client to withdraw from real human contact, relying instead on more frequent yet increasingly superficial online interactions.

This would erode the client’s support structures, leading inevitably to deeper loneliness and despair. Lewis writes, “Aggravate that most useful human characteristic, the horror and neglect of the obvious,” and today we are far too inclined to neglect the most obvious of things: real human interaction in favor of a digital imitation that pales in comparison.⁹

Conclusion

“Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil”¹⁰

Screwtape’s strategy is perfectly suited to today’s world. His timeless tactics, rooted in human nature, have only grown more effective.

The trends Lewis observed in his own day have been magnified by modern technology, especially the internet, providing precisely the kind of gentle slope Screwtape would have wanted: “The safest road to Hell is the gradual one—the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts.”¹¹

 

Citations

 

1. 1 Peter 5:8.

2. Mark 4:19.

3. James 4:6.

4. C. S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters, Letter 3.

5. Romans 7:18–19.

6. Proverbs 6:25–27.

7. Malachi 2:16.

8. Romans 12:2.

9. C. S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters, Letter 3.

10. Ephesians 6:11.

11. C. S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters, Letter 12.

 

Bibliography

 

Lewis, C. S. The Screwtape Letters. New York: Macmillan, 1942.

The Holy Bible, Revised Standard Version, Second Catholic Edition. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2006.

Reply- Discussion Thread: The Undeniable Moral Law- Jessica Adkins

 Hi Jessica, thanks for the post.

You wrote that, “one thing that they claim is that there is no ultimate truth and no ultimate right or wrong. Part of this is due to the fact that they believe we're all products of evolution... so it goes to reason for them at least that there shouldn't be any right or wrong.”

I completely agree with you on this. I have often in the past expressed my lack of surprise at the increase in mass shootings, because I find there to be a certain logic behind them. If we are all products of a Darwinistic, atheistic type of evolution—where we are here by a cosmic accident, and our continued existence relies on the survival of the fittest—then if I'm tired of my life and I have a beef with you, why should I not take you out with me? I see it as taking their logic to its natural conclusion.

Though it is interesting to see that many of those on the left, while holding to the exact same worldview, express a universal moral outcry over such an event. Not only are they being inconsistent with their own worldview, but their outrage is also a reaction that is almost instinctive. Though it goes against their professed beliefs, they almost can't help it—which, as you rightly point out, points to a higher truth, something beyond their own reasoning.

“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!” (Isaiah 5:20).¹

---

Citations

1. Isaiah 5:20 (RSV-2CE).

 

 

---

Bibliography

 

The Holy Bible, Revised Standard Version, Second Catholic Edition. San Francisco:

Ignatius Press, 2006.

Reply- Discussion Thread: The Undeniable Moral Law- Jeri Menzies

 Hello Jeri,

That is a very interesting example you give using slavery. It is true that our culture’s universal condemnation of slavery today points to an ultimate moral truth. But what I find interesting about the example is that, in the past, it was exactly the opposite—slavery was almost universally accepted around the world until the values of Christianity gradually persuaded people that slavery was immoral.

Perhaps this is an example of how, though we know the moral law written on our hearts, we often fail to follow it. This certainly applies to individuals, but perhaps it applies to entire societies as well. For example, the Nazis with their treatment of the Jews, or the Aztecs with their human sacrifices. In these societies, these things were largely accepted, though maybe not universally. I imagine that if the roles were reversed and, overnight, those in power became the victims, they would be quick to object on moral grounds that it was unjust.

“Woe to those who decree iniquitous decrees, and the writers who keep writing oppression, to turn aside the needy from justice and to rob the poor of my people of their right…” (Isaiah 10:1–2).¹

---

Citations (Footnotes)

1. Isaiah 10:1–2 (RSV-2CE).

 

---

Bibliography

The Holy Bible: Revised Standard Version, Second Catholic Edition. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2006.

Discussion Thread: The Undeniable Moral Law

 What Does Lewis Mean When He Says, “Wherever You Find a Man Who Says He Does Not Believe in a Real Right and Wrong, You Will Find the Same Man Going Back on This a Moment Later”?

He means that, though a man may deny believing in a universal moral law, inwardly he still knows it is true. As soon as he is the one being wronged, he will likely appeal to that law as grounds for why the perceived wrong must be righted. If he is the accused, he will invoke it as the basis for why he did not transgress the law in the first place. Either way, his actions—whether he is conscious of it or not—betray the fact that he is, on some level, aware of that moral law.¹

Romans 2:14–15 — “When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires … they show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness.”²

An example of this would be a man who risks his life to save someone else’s child.

Richard Dawkins, in his book The Selfish Gene, offers an alternative explanation of the law of human nature, arguing that one’s motivations are governed by whatever is most likely to preserve one’s own genes. While this may explain a father’s inclination to risk his life for the sake of his child, it does not explain the inclination of a man to risk his life for a stranger’s child. If he were placed in that situation and failed to act, he would surely be haunted by his inaction.³

Nor does it explain a man who fulfills his civic duty by leaving his family and going off to war—especially a war far from home.

John 15:13 — “Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.”⁴

In both cases, if he were to perish, he would be putting his own family in harm’s way by doing so. Yet something inside him tells him he has a responsibility beyond his own family and, if he can reasonably do so, he should act to defend his neighbor’s family as well.

Leviticus 19:18, 34 — “You shall love your neighbor as yourself … the stranger who sojourns with you shall be to you as the native, and you shall love him as yourself.”⁵

The force of this truth can almost be heard in Cain’s defensive reply, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” Deep inside, he knows the answer is yes—and that he has failed to keep his brother in the worst possible way.

All of this points to something in the human condition that is external to itself. If there is something within a man that compels him to act not only against his own self-interest but also against the self-interest of those closest to him, then—regardless of whether he chooses to act—that impulse must have its origin in something external to himself. Someone beyond him makes a claim on that man and a claim on his actions, and that Someone can only be God.

“You have made us for Yourself, O Lord, and our heart is restless until it rests in You.”
— Saint Augustine, Confessions, Book I, chapter 1 (1.1.1).⁶

---

Notes

1. C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (New York: Macmillan, 1952), 5.
2. Rom. 2:14–15 (RSV-2CE).
3. Richard Dawkins, The Selfish Gene (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976), 11.
4. John 15:13 (RSV-2CE).
5. Lev. 19:18, 34 (RSV-2CE).
6. Augustine, Confessions, trans. Henry Chadwick (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991), 3.

---

Bibliography

Augustine. Confessions. Translated by Henry Chadwick. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.

Dawkins, Richard. The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976.

Holy Bible. Revised Standard Version, Second Catholic Edition. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2006.

Lewis, C. S. Mere Christianity. New York: Macmillan, 1952.

Summary of The Screwtape Letters chapters 16–30

 

Letter	Key targets & tactics Screwtape recommends	Spiritual counter-lesson Lewis is teaching
16	Push the patient to “church-hop,” judging congregations for style, politics, or personalities, so he never settles long enough to receive grace.	Perseverance in an imperfect local church is itself an act of humility and obedience.
17	Exploit “gluttony of Delicacy”—not excess food, but the self-centered demand that every little preference be met (“all I want is …”)—to breed irritability.	True temperance is self-forgetful gratitude, not merely austere restraint.
18	Twist modern slogans about “falling in love” so the patient confuses transient feelings with the vow of marriage, either idolizing romance or fearing commitment.	Love is an act of the will ordered to charity; feelings follow but cannot replace covenant fidelity.
19	Encourage him to make “unselfishness” his end—so he secretly congratulates himself on sacrifice and resents others when his hidden program isn’t noticed.	Charity aims at the other’s good, not at curating a moral self-image.
20	Feed sexual day-dreams: either unattainable “spiritual” beauties or vulgar false ideals—keeping him from loving an actual, embodied woman within God’s design.	Chastity begins in the imagination; gratitude for real people replaces fantasy.
21	Inflame his sense of “my time,” “my things,” and “my rights,” so every small interruption feels like theft.	Time and possessions are gifts held in stewardship; gratitude dissolves possessiveness.
22	Use fatigue to trigger irritability, then conceal God’s presence by noise and “nothingness”—lulling him with small comforts and petty grievances.	God may feel absent, yet perseverance in prayer under dryness matures faith.
23	Promote fashionable “historical Jesus” quests that reduce Christ to a moral teacher and keep the patient chasing novelties instead of obeying revelation.	Authentic faith submits to the Jesus of Scripture, not the latest reconstruction.
24	Turn his fiancée’s sincere piety into spiritual pride; make him measure her holiness—and his own—against others with contempt.	True holiness produces humility and compassion, not superiority.
25	Craft an addiction to “the horror of the Same Old Thing,” driving him to boredom and restless change for its own sake.	Christian faith sanctifies routine; stability cultivates depth and joy.
26	Distort the lovers’ generosity into mutual black-mail: each demands gratitude for sacrifices, breeding bitterness.	Love gives freely and thanks freely, refusing to keep score.
27	Make him overvalue spontaneous feelings in prayer; when dryness comes he will presume prayer “failed” and give up.	Faithfulness endures aridity, trusting God beyond emotional consolation.
28	Lull him with safety, prosperity, and long life—worldly delay that keeps death (and decisive repentance) out of mind.	Remembering mortality sobers the soul and spurs readiness for eternity.
29	In wartime air-raids, swing him between cowardice and reckless bravado; either extreme chokes reason and charity.	Courage is a mean between fear and rashness, anchored in trust.
30	As severe bombing arrives, stoke “fatigue and anger” so the patient snaps at loved ones and wallows in self-pity.	Suffering can enlarge patience and love when offered to God moment by moment.