Love, in its own nature, demands the perfecting of the beloved; that the mere “kindness” which tolerates anything except suffering in its object is, in that respect, at the opposite pole from Love. . . . .

When Christianity says that God loves man, it means that God loves man: not that He has some “disinterested,” because really indifferent, concern for our welfare, but that, in awful and surprising truth, we are the objects of His love. You asked for a loving God: you have one. . . . .How this should be, I do not know: it passes reason to explain why any creatures, not to say creatures such as we, should have a value so prodigious in their Creator’s eyes. It is certainly a burden of glory not only beyond our deserts but also, except in rare moments of grace, beyond our desiring…

–

The Problem of Pain (New York: Macmillian Publishing Co., Inc., 1962), 46.

Title: C. S. Lewis for the Third Millennium

Author: Peter Kreeft

The title of Peter Kreeft’s book C. S. Lewis for the Third Millennium accurately describes its purpose. Less Lewisian analysis or commentary than application, Kreeft peers through the glasses of Lewisian thought–particularly Lewisian thought as inscribed in The Abolition of Man– at the third millennium. And if the glasses are clear, the view is breath-taking–at least, it could be (literally). But it is not pure doom and gloom; Kreeft consciously emulates the Old Testament prophets’ realism. It is a realism which spares no details in its description of the dire state of humanity; but it is also a realism which recognizes the reality of free will. There is hope because there is God, and because there is the possibility of change. In my opinion, the pervasiveness of these two themes–the reality of Western Civilization’s lostness and Man’s freedom–imparts a welcome seriousness and urgency. If “Man moves history before history moves men” (p. 126), then we can fight and maybe even win. But, this is not the type of fighting which requires bunkers, tax evasion, and stashed AK-47s. Kreeft is more realistic and more biblical than that:

It is good to work for peace in whatever social and political ways really do work, whether this means working for disarmament or for stronger armaments. We do not know with certainty which way will work best on the political level (though we nearly always claim we do). But we do know with certainty (because God himself has told us) what will work on the spiritual level, and we also know that that level cuts deeper and works at the roots. So to anyone who is concerned with peace and with the life and survival of our civilization, here is a summary in a single paragraph of what I have learned from my master C. S. Lewis:

Sodom and Gomorrah almost made it. If God had found but ten righteous men, he would have spared two whole cities. Abraham’s intercession nearly saved Sodom, and it did save Lot. We must be Abrahams. Charles Williams said that “the altar must often be built in one place so that the fire from heaven may come down at another.” It is also true that the altar must be built and prayer and sacrifice made at one place so that the fire from heaven may not come down at another. It can be done. The most important thing each of us can do to save the world from holocaust and from Hell, from nuclear destruction and from spiritual destruction, is the most well-known, most unoriginal thing in the world: to love God with our whole heart and soul and mind and strength and to love our neighbors as ourselves.

You the individual can make a difference. You can be the straw that breaks the camel’s back, the vote that wins the election. You can save the world. (p.31-2)

Kreeft sounds almost cliche. Perhaps some would call it that. But having read the whole book, and having previously read several of Kreeft’s books, I suspect, to use the helpful categories posited by one of my good friends, that Kreeft’s prescription merely reflects the simplicity which comes after one has forged through complexity (a simplicity born out of wisdom rather than ignorance). It is the simple and obvious conclusion that the path trod by Western Civilization as led far away from God. And it is the simple, though sometimes not so obvious, observation that God knows what He is talking about after all.

C. S. Lewis for the Third Millennium consists of six independent but related essays. The titles explain the content adequately enough for my purposes, so I will provide them instead of summaries. Some of these can be found as audio lectures on Peter Kreeft’s website.

1. How to Save Western Civilization: C. S. Lewis as Prophet
2. Darkness at Noon: The Eclipse of “The Permanent Things”
3. The Goodness of Goodness and the Badness of Badness
4. Can the Natural Law Ever Be Abolished from the Heart of Man?
5. Walker Percy’s Lost in the Cosmos: The Abolition of Man in Late-Night Comedy Format
6. The Joyful Cosmology: Perelandra’s “Great Dance” as an Alternative World View to Modern Reductionism

Kreeft does provide some useful Lewis study, particularly in the first essay. He abstracts 12 principles about Lewis’s philosophy of history, giving a brief overview of each one. But the book is not a scholarly work on Lewis, and it is not meant to be. It is meant to look along rather than at Lewis’s ideas, to think with him rather than about him. It is a fine specimen of applying Lewis’s thoughts to present problems.

But in my opinion its greatest strength lies not in Lewisian application but in imitation. In studying, appreciating, and learning from Lewis, Kreeft has, perhaps unwittingly, accomplished a feat very few can do, and still fewer can do well. Lewis did it very well. It is the task of stretching our horizons beyond the narrow confines of our town, of our state, of America, of Western Civilization, of this third rock from the sun. If life does not end when we die, then death is not the greatest evil–far from it, in fact. For on the other side of death, we will either regain paradise (in which case we will then know what we now believe: that death, even torturous death, is merely the door to Goodness, Truth, and Beauty) or lose even the echoes of a paradise with which we once lived (in which case life ending at death would be a comparative paradise). As a wise man once said, “from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away.” But remember how that phrase began? “To everyone who has will more be given, and he will have an abundance.”

This book helps fan that sometimes sputtering spark of hope into a flame that helps illuminate our true Home. When the greatest human threat possible–death–ceases to be a threat, fear dissolves. Did our Lord really mean it when He told us not to fear those who can only kill the body? If so, then we ought to thank those who remind us of of this truth by pointing us to The Truth. Thank you, Dr. Kreeft.

Title: Into the Region of Awe: Mysticism in C. S. Lewis

Author: David Downing

As David Downing notes at the end of the book, “Though Lewis was clearly well versed in the tradition of Christian mysticism, he never wrote about it at any length. He referred to mysticism dozens of times in his books and letters, and knew contemporary scholarship on the subject. But he never set down his thoughts on mysticism in a separate essay or book chapter, leaving only tantalizing hints scattered throughout his writings.”* As a consequence, if one wants to know what Lewis thought about mysticism, one must sift through his literature and letters with a fine-tooth comb looking for embedded hints. This Downing does, in my opinion, thoroughly and compellingly.

The title alone may be iconoclastic for those who picture Lewis as the ultimate rational defender of the faith. But in the eyes of some, Lewis could be classified as a mystic. At the very least, his thoughts were heavily influenced by those in the Christian tradition known as “mystics”. But if Lewis was a “mystic,” then we might call him a “rational mystic” (my term, not Downing’s). And that is what makes this book so thought provoking: it helps correct one narrow view of mysticism common today—the view which associates mystical encounter with anti-intellectualism and/or moral laxity. Downing shows that for most of the Christian mystics who influenced Lewis, their mystical leanings subverted neither their intellect nor their conscience. (Names such as St. Paul, Augustine, Bernard Clairvaux–author of the hymn, Jesus, the Very Thought of Thee–and Aquinas could be adduced here.) Lewis affirmed neither the salvific universalism of some of the ancient Christian mystics, nor the religiously syncronistic views of the Huxleyian Perennialists, nor the impersonal pantheistic ideas of the Eastern mystics. This ought to give pause to those who may carry a prima facie skepticism against Downing’s book–a negativism spilled over from a dully  justified skepticism of the types of mysticism often pursued today in both Christian and non-Christian circles.

With that said, I feel I can say little else without devoting myself to an entire essay on the subject. For mysticism seems to be one of those subjects about which one cannot even ask the most simple question without delving into a multitude of very complicated issues. Suffice it to say that while Lewis seems to have drawn great help from the insights and writings of Christian mystics, he did not do so uncritically: “The true religion gives value to its own mysticism; mysticism does not validate the religion in which it happens to occur.”**

One of the strongest assets of the book is that it consistently places Lewis’s thoughts in the broader historical and theological context of past scholars. The book is physically small, and it contains only 170 pages, but there is no fluff. Bearing testimony to this is the bibliography lying quietly at the back of the book which holds over 80 resources on mystics and mysticism. And this does not include primary and secondary sources on C. S. Lewis specifically. The intellectual richness of Downing’s book, however, is never flashy. Rather than footnotes, he uses a less cluttered system of documenting quotes and other references using endnotes which reference key words in the text. This makes the insertion of quotations and references clean and sometimes subtle (in a good way).

In sum, Downing has down a superb job of collecting and connecting all the references in Lewis’s writing relating to mysticism, and done so while preserving the complexities and intricacies of the man. Lewis was not a traditional type of mystic (if there is such a thing), but he learned from them and has some to teach us about real communion with God. Into the Region of Awe facilitates that teaching.

*Pg. 163

** Pg. 146. Lewis quote taken from Letters to Malcolm: Chiefly on Prayer.

Title: Jack: A Life of C. S. Lewis

Author: George Sayers

Out of all the C. S. Lewis scholars I’ve read, almost all of them agree that Sayers’ biography is one of the best. Many factors contribute to this book’s quality.

1. Mr. Sayers not only knew Lewis, he was in the small circle of friends with whom Lewis shared personal information. Sayers began as Lewis’s student at Oxford, and became a life-long friend.This gives the book, especially the latter portion, a personal feel–almost like one is sitting across the table reminiscing about a mutual friend.

2. Sayers combines first-hand experience with detailed scholarly research, achieving a healthy balance between an obvious heartfelt respect and honor, and the objective recounting of events  necessary for a good biography. One can tell that Sayers loved Lewis, but he does not hesitate to show by documented research that some of Lewis’s perceptions about his own life (for example, as stated in his autobiography Surprised by Joy) were not reflective of what actually happened. This is the value of a good biography. Autobiography will tell you what life looked like through the eyes of the author; biography should tell you what actually happened, for they sometimes may differ.

3. The book is thorough. At 411 pages, notes not included, the work presents a valuable resource for in-depth study. It is filled with interesting information, beginning with Lewis’s paternal and maternal history, and progressing though the different phases of Lewis’s life as a rough outline.

4. Sayers often points out faulty information which has made its way into other biographies on Lewis. As already noted, Sayers does not avoid talking about Lewis’s vices. But some biographies attempt to expose things about Lewis which, if true, would completely damage his reputation as a Christian teacher. Of course, if such things are true, it is best to know about them. But Sayers seeks to correct the false information either by directly challenging its veracity or by providing additional context to expose a false emphasis. (I will not state the particular accusations here. Write me or read Sayers’ book for the specifics.) What I particularly appreciate is that Sayers does not expect his position as one of Lewis’s personal friends to endow him with sufficient authority for such disputation. Familiarity with a friend’s character does lend a strong level of credibility, and Sayers uses that authority where appropriate. But, as any good scholar should, he also uses third party sources to collaborate his point.

4. It is well written. Not once was I bored or bothered by those irritating patterns of bad writing that sometimes creep into texts (I make no exception for myself). I would say, rather, that Sayers’ remarkable writing achievement is that his writing is not remarkable–at least, not in the sense of being positively or negatively distracting. It flows simply and easily.

However, the easy flow of the prose has a consequence worth noting. Many biographical books are boring because they chain themselves to a “in 1945, such and such happened; in 1946 such and such happened” type of pattern. Sayers escapes this by usually focusing on significant events or phases in Lewis’s life and connecting them to past and future causes and effects, sometimes following the ripples of an event through many years. This makes the overall picture more meaningful, but also makes it difficult for the reader to keep track of the chronological flow of Lewis’s life. (It is difficult, not impossible; for Sayers does peg events to clear dates. It is just done more subtly than is typical). I do not count this to be a fault of the book, for the overall effect is positive. But I would advise the serious reader to have in hand a good timeline of Lewis’s life to help properly visualize the sequence of events.

One-line summary: A book absolutely necessary for the serious Lewis enthusiast.