Turn the Other Cheek

On Christ's words in the Sermon on the Mount, Lewis suggests three possible interpretations. The first is the absolute literal hermeneutic of the pacifist, the second is the hyperbolic interpretation which assumes that Jesus was not being literal but overstating his point for effect (much like the exhortation to cut off limbs and pluck out eyes that cause one to sin). Not satisfied with either of the first two, Lewis suggests a third option which he explains:

"I think the duty of non-resistance is here stated as regards injuries simpliciter, but without prejudice to anything we may have to allow later about injuries secundum quid. That is, in so far as the only relevant factors in the case are an injury to me by my neighbor and a desire on my part to retaliate, then I hold that Christianity commands the absolute mortification of that desire. No quarter whatever is given to the voice within us which says, 'He's done it to me, so I'll do the same to him.' But the moment you introduce other factors, of course, the problem is altered. Does anyone supposed that Our Lord's hearers understood Him to mean that if a homicidal maniac, attempting to murder a third party, tried to knock me out of his way, I must stand aside and let him get his victim? ... I think it equally impossible that they supposed Him to mean that the best way of bringing up a child was to let it hit its parents whenever it was in a temper, or, when it grabbed at the jam, to give it the honey also... it seems unlikely that they [Christ's audience] would have ever supposed Our Lord to be referring to war. War was not what they would have been thinking of. The frictions of daily life among villagers were more likely to be in their minds."

(Timeless at Heart, 62-63)