скачать книгу бесплатно
I was talking nonsense when we last discussed this matter: I hadn’t really grasped the point that Man is the true Temple. That is a splendid bit on p. 76
(#ulink_1c8efc03-e759-58e6-9ffa-5cec3b966530) about the true sense of ‘it is finished’-the sword ‘finished’ when its life as a sword can begin)
(#ulink_18670df2-c3d8-50cb-9218-1a6ad0c90e54) How did you think of it? Why did all the rest of us non And the explanation on p. 26 of why the Bride is never mentioned, is brilliant.
(#ulink_5f05fc81-32f8-5c79-b30a-138c1f6c3767) Indeed, I’ll say it is clever-why should we acquiesce in that word’s sliding into a contemptuous meaning. And many, many thanks for St. Bernard’s conception of the Palm Sunday procession.
(#ulink_a5934305-ec5b-50cc-9138-8c66fb1f6c32) And the daring use of larval at the bottom of p. 45 is a complete success: I wanted to clap my hands when I came to it.
(#ulink_8549d701-c41d-5769-9aa8-4bcfd03892bc)
Now for a few tiny flaws, or what I think to be such.
P. 3. ‘Expectation, therefore, is a specifically human exercise.’
(#ulink_e025b40d-ffb4-5824-bd4b-91c55047e75c) Yes, in the peculiar sense you give it of ex-spectation. But you haven’t explained that yet, have you? Won’t the reader take it in the current sense of
(#ulink_181366ec-bfc8-5ba9-9c8f-01f316d92d62) and say that ‘expectation’, far from being specifically human, is seen at its v. maximum in a dog waiting to be taken for a walk or to have a ball thrown for it?
P. 5. at top. Basis or foundation wd. for many reasons be a better word than fundament.
(#ulink_e85a7d9d-c29b-58d3-a243-3c0f90890daf)
P 5 later. Oh, oh why should an attitude almost impossible to a Pagan be called ‘neo-Paganism’?
(#ulink_7a15e883-84fe-5bb8-b775-6dd5bd49a308) You know that no Pagan, bless him, wd. ever have dreamed of thinking the sky belonged to Man. They had their faults, but that is just the sort of sin they never committed. They had too much αίδώσ,
(#ulink_7e9c864c-8da3-5d4f-a360-bc93ecb47668) and δειδαιμονα,
(#ulink_fb19968b-ce5e-53a0-a49a-c8c49e81ea35) and all that. You are falling into the common error of equating the post-Christian with the pre-Christian. They are as different as an unmarried girl is from a woman who has deserted her husband.
P. 44. Here I’m not sure, but, as the barristers say, I ‘put it to you.’ Can we take χóσμον
(#ulink_ee65ebc3-49b3-500c-ac9e-0bc6031a6f97) to mean Universe (as dist. from Earth) in view of other Johannine uses of it? But you are so often right that I dare say you will convince me on this point too.
Anyway, it is a lovely little book. I am very much in your debt. All blessings.
Yours sincerely
C. S. Lewis
TO CORBIN SCOTT CARNELL (W):
(#ulink_1979cbd6-0855-5b3a-94db-1b85e6344b9e)
Magdalen College
Oxford
5/4/53
Dear Mr. Carnell
I am myself a little uneasy about the question you raise:
(#ulink_21b4ca1b-9ce0-5fa0-910e-cbd1f0f1a4d1) there seems to be almost equal objection to the position taken up in my footnote and to the alternative of attributing the same kind and degree of historicity to all the books of the Bible. You see, the question about Jonah and the great fish does not turn simply on intrinsic probability. The point is that the whole Book of Jonah has to me the air of being a moral romance, a quite different kind of thing from, say, the account of K. David or the N.T. narratives, not pegged, like them, into any historical situation.
In what sense does the Bible ‘present’ this story ‘as historical’? Of course it doesn’t say ‘This is fiction’: but then neither does Our Lord say that His Unjust Judge, Good Samaritan, or Prodigal Son are fiction. (I wd. put Esther in the same category as Jonah for the same reason). How does a denial, or doubt, of their historicity lead logically to a similar denial of N.T. miracles?
Supposing (as I think is the case) that sound critical reading reveals different kinds of narrative in the Bible, surely it wd. be illogical to conclude that these different kinds shd. all be read in the same way? This is not a ‘rationalistic approach’ to miracles. Where I doubt the historicity of an O.T narrative I never do so on the ground that the miraculous as such is incredible. Nor does it deny ‘a unique sort of inspiration’: allegory, parable, romance, and lyric might be inspired as well as chronicle. I wish I could direct you to a good book on the subject, but I don’t know one. With all good wishes.
Yours sincerely
C. S. Lewis
TO MARY VAN DEUSEN (W):
Magdalen College,
Oxford.
6/4/53
Dear Mrs. Van Deusen
I think our official view of confession can be seen in the form for the Visitation of the Sick where it says ‘Then shall the sick person be moved (i.e. advised, prompted) to make a…Confession…if he feel his conscience troubled with any weighty matter.’ That is, where Rome makes Confession compulsory for all, we make it permissible for any: not ‘generally necessary’ but profitable. We do not doubt that there can be forgiveness without it. But, as your own experience shows, many people do not feel forgiven, i.e. do not effectively ‘believe in the forgiveness of sins’, without it. The quite enormous advantage of coming really to believe in forgiveness is well worth the horrors (I agree, they are horrors) of a first confession.
(#ulink_000c6c15-82a9-5579-acbc-7ccbb4adf27b)
Also, there is the gain in self-knowledge: most of [us] have never really faced the facts about ourselves until we uttered them aloud in plain words, calling a spade a spade. I certainly feel I have profited enormously by the practice. At the same time I think we are quite right not to make it generally obligatory, which wd. force it on some who are not ready for it and might do harm.
As for conduct of services, surely a wide latitude is reasonable. Has not each kind–the v. ‘low’ & the v. ‘high’-its own value?
I don’t think I owe Genia a letter, and I think advice is best kept till it is asked for. Of course she, and you, are always in my prayers. I think she is of the impulsive type, but one must beware of meddling.
Yours, with all blessings,
C. S. Lewis
TO MARY VAN DEUSEN (W):
Magdalen College
Oxford
7/4/53
Dear Mrs. Van Deusen
I don’t think gratitude is a relevant motive for joining an Order. Gratitude might create a state of mind in which one became aware of a vocation: but the vocation would be the proper reason for joining. They themselves wd. surely not wish you to join without it? You can show your gratitude in lots of other ways.
Is there in this Order, even for lay members such as you wd. be, not something like a noviciate or experimental period? If so, that wd. be the thing, wouldn’t it? If not, I think I can only repeat my previous suggestion of undergoing a sort of unofficial noviciate by living according to the Rule for 6 months or so and seeing how it works. Most of it is the things you probably do anyway and are things we ought to do. (The only one I’m doubtful about is the ‘special intention’ clause in No. 3. I’m not quite sure what the theological implications are.) The question is whether the fact of being compelled to it by a vow wd. act as a useful support or be a snare and a source of scruples: I don’t think I can tell you the answer to that. Is the vow irrevocable or can you contract out again?
About putting one’s Christian point of view to doctors and other unpromising subjects I’m in great doubt myself. All I’m clear about is that one sins if one’s real reason for silence is simply the fear of looking a fool. I suppose one is right if one’s reason is the probability that the other party will be repelled still further & only confirmed in his belief that Christians are troublesome & embarrassing people to be avoided whenever possible. But I find it a dreadfully worrying problem. (I am quite sure that an importunate bit of evangelisation from a comparative stranger would not have done me any good when I was an unbeliever.)
I hope it’s all true about the President.
(#ulink_2b402a21-e3a5-5421-a837-a9a73a681e1d) But let us hope he will not pursue the line of ‘Godliness for the sake of national strength’. We can’t use God as a means to any end.
About Democracy and all that. Surely we stand by equality before the Law? If no law disqualifies a man from office, and if he has broken no law, are we entitled to exclude him because we dislike his views? But I don’t really know the facts of your situation well enough to apply this.
Thanks for the charming photos of Genia. Yes, I do hope & pray she’ll be in smooth water now. Blessings on you all.
Yours ever
C. S. Lewis
TO GEOFFREY BLES (BOD):
Magdalen College,
Oxford.
13/4/53
My dear Bles
Thanks for your letter of the 8th.
I’m glad you like the new story. The title needs a little thinking of as this tale is sung or recited after dinner in Chap III of the Silver Chair and we must harmonise. What are your reactions to any of the following? The Horse and the Boy (wh. might allure the ‘pony-book’ public)-The Desert Road to Narnia–Cor of Archenland–The Horse stole the Boy–Over the Border–The Horse Bree. Suggestions will be welcomed.
Please dedicate The Silver Chair to Nicholas Hardie. Thanks for reminding me.
As to realism in the new one, Miss Baynes may base her ideas of Calormene culture either on the picture of the Arabian Nights world, or on her picture of Babylon and Persepolis (all the Herodotus and Old Testament orient) or any mixture of the two. But their swords must be curved because it says so in the text. And we want her to try v. hard to make Bree look like a war-horse–big fetlocks etc.
I’ve had a nice time walking in the Malvern area & feel much better. I hope you are both in good form.
Yours
C. S. Lewis
TO MARY WILLIS SHELBURNE (W):
Magdalen College
Oxford
17/4/53
Dear Mrs. Shelburne
I’m not quite so shocked as you by the story of Charles and Mary. If even adult and educated Christians in trying to think of the Blessed Trinity have to guard constantly against falling into the heresy of Tri-theism, what can we expect of children. And ‘another of whom he was not quite sure’ is perhaps no bad beginning for a knowledge about the Holy Ghost.
About my fairy-tales, there are three published by Macmillan, New York (The Lion, the Witch & the Wardrobe, Prince Caspian, and The Voyage of the Dawn Treader). Local bookshops are often very unhelpful. If your friend wants these books she shd., of course, write to the publisher at New York.
I expect there is a photo of me somewhere, but my brother, who knows where things are, is away and I couldn’t find it today. Ask me again at a more favourable hour!-if you still have the fancy for this v. undecorative object.
I’d sooner pray for God’s mercy than for His justice on my friends, my enemies, and myself. With all good wishes.
Yours sincerely
C. S. Lewis
TO MARGARET DENEKE (BOD):
Magdalen College
Oxford
18/4/53
Dear Miss Deneke
I do not see what I could put in a preface except a dilution of what I have already sent you: and that wd. be no good.
(#ulink_1b6b6ebd-7551-5d02-bd6b-7cc60e5fd40a)
The next step is to try the old device of publishing by subscription. We’ll all subscribe of course and it will go hard but we’ll raise over £48. A List of subscribers gives a fine 18th. century air to a book, too. What wd. Mr. Johnson (whose advice is much more valuable than mine) say to this.
My brother would join me in good wishes if he were not away.
Yours very sincerely
C. S. Lewis
TO GEOFFREY BLES (BOD):
Magdalen College
Oxford
22/4/53
My dear Bles
A priori I shd. have thought that a series which doesn’t sell too well once a year wd. sell worse if the tempo was speeded up: but I presume you think otherwise and of course your opinion on such a point is much more informed than mine. Of course, then, do exactly as you think fit. No author, on general grounds, ever thinks his book appears too soon!
Was it and his Boy or and its Boy?. I’m completely neutral on the point: print which you prefer.
