The Jealousy of Venus: Renewal (Part 2)

He cannot ravish; He can only woo

(The Screwtape Letters, 8)

By God's own rules He cannot reveal His true self to His humanity. Doing so would immediately thwart their free will forcing them to be robots and automatons, not the sons He wants us to become. Hence, Venus, goddess of love and beauty, and stand-in for God in Till We Have Faces, cannot ramp up her own beauty to outshine Psyche. She must woo Glome into loving her.

Accomplishing this task is the punishment of Psyche as well as Orual. But for Glome to truly recognize Ungit/Venus more beautifully than in their pagan ways, more than Venus has to change. Glome has to change as well. That change we've discussed earlier. Glome's governance, economy, and mode of worship are enlightened by Orual so that Glome can now accept a God more beautiful than that of the pagans. 

But that final step, ushering God into an enlightened world, needs to be done by someone who loves God. Someone who does not love God would simply enjoy the economic prosperity and order and reject that its purpose is to comprehend God more fully, not less. This is Psyche's final test. Bringing beauty from the underworld. However, the question remains why beauty from the underworld would make Venus more beautiful in the eyes of the people?

Persephone, the daughter of Zeus and Demeter (the goddess of agriculture), was kidnapped by Hades and made queen of the underworld. In her distress over her daughter, Demeter causes a draught until Zeus is forced to allow Persephone to return home. However, because Persephone ate of the good of the underworld she must return there every year. When she does, during the winter, Demeter neglects to cultivate the earth until Spring when Persephone, the goddess of Spring, once again emerges from the underworld.   

In Till We Have Faces, Psyche becomes Persephone, as Orual hears the details from the old priest:

But, Stranger, the sacred story is about the sacred things — the things we do in the temple. In spring, and all summer, she is a goddess. Then when harvest comes, we bring a lamp into the temple in the night and the god flies away. Then we veil her. And all winter she is wandering and suffering; weeping, always weeping...

All winter Psyche suffers from having been abandoned by husband, but she emerges every Spring as the goddess of renewal.  

With this we can understand why Psyche must retrieve beauty from the queen of the underworld. It is there where Persephone is found and it is she that enables the renewal of people. Of course, Venus does not need renewal, but she needs the people to experience renewal, the reconnection with and rededication to the gods that is possible and present. 

Psyche, as an ardent follower of the gods herself becomes the tool the renewal for Glome to return to Venus. 

With this we have seen two levels of the story. The Greek story of Psyche in which the jealousy of Venus is paramount, and Lewis' story of Psyche in which the people must renew their love for Venus. In our next post we must address the true story, the love between God and Israel as told in Song of Songs. 

On Affection without Familiarity (continued)

For C.S. Lewis Reading Day I posted that my daughter had gotten engaged and addressed the question of whether or how, using the language of The Four Loves, one can have affection without the usual cause of familiarity. Well, the wedding took place a little more than a month ago, and I am happy to report that the young couple is doing well, and that my wife and I grow in our affection towards my son-in-law. 

Unfortunately, with everything surrounding the wedding, I have fallen behind of this blog (and lots of other responsibilities). But things are settling down so hopefully I'll have the chance to do a couple of posts this week. We have a lot still to do, and I just finished reading The Weight of Glory (which includes an essay of the same name, Transposition, and some other great essays) which requires extensive commentary.

So, please come back soon!

A Hebraic Inkling: Election

I've been procrastinating on commenting on the next definition of Brazier as it clearly requires someone far more eloquent to properly outline a Jewish approach. Nevertheless, for the sake of finally moving onwards I'll write something.

In the next section of the Introduction, Brazier discusses several terms that he feels must be defined an qualified. The first such term is "Election". Brazier properly proposes the following three questions. Who elects? Who is elected? And to what is the elected, elected? 

God does the electing.

The Jews were elected by God through Abraham. 

The Jews were elected as a Chosen People to guide humanity.

Brazier then adds, the elected are elected to salvation, atonement, forgiveness, reconciliation with God after humanity's fall. Those not of the Chosen People can be enfolded into the elected through the death and resurrection of Jesus.

Traditional Judaism will object to Brazier's addition in a number of ways:  

(1) Jewish theology of course rejects the importance of Jesus in the process of forgiveness and/or salvation. 

(2) While it is true that the mishna states, "All of the Jewish people have a share in the World-to-Come..." This seemingly universal statement is immediately followed by, "And these have no share in the World-to-Come..." Being a member of the Chosen People does not guarantee atonement or forgiveness. In fact, given the increased number of commands on the Chosen People, it might even be harder. 

(3) The Chosen People are chosen to guide humanity as a (Exodus 19:6), "Kingdom of priests and a holy nation." Just like not all priests deserve the ultimate reward, so too not all members of the Chosen People deserve such a reward. Furthermore, just as a goal of a priest is to guide his flock so that they can attain salvation, so too a goal of the Chosen People is to guide humanity so they can attain salvation. Finally, just like it is unnecessary to become a priest to achieve reward in the World to Come, so too it is unnecessary to join or be enfolded into the Chosen People to achieve reward in the World to Come. 

(4) With few exceptions, anyone can convert to become a full member of the Chosen People. But it's not necessary to achieve divine reward and it's not encouraged. 

So, already at this point we have an interesting twist that will follow us through Brazier's entire book. For Brazier, Lewis can be Hebraic if he sees gentiles enfolded into the election of the Jews. But for Jews, there is no need to enfold gentiles into Jews. Gentiles can stand on their own two feet and have a relationship with God without need for an intermediary. 

Letters to Malcom: Letter 4 Part 3

In the last part of this letter Lewis addresses the question of whether there is a threshold on the importance of a request in prayer, below which should not be included in one's prayers. I generally resonate with Lewis' approach to this, but a permanent liturgy of rabbinic Judaism does change he parameters. In the amidah prayer, the central prayer in all three daily services, the requests are already there.

The amidah prayer includes 13 blessings of requests, six are personal, six are communal, and one is a catchall. It is safe to assume that when our Sages established these blessings, they chose needs that were universally important for all people across time and space. Hence the six personal blessings are for wisdom, return (to God), forgiveness, redemption, healing, and prosperity. The order of the blessings is discussed in the Talmud (Megillah 17b) but the themes are presumably broad enough that they cover all important aspects of human need. In fact, specific requests can be made within each blessing for specific relevant requests. 

Nonetheless, I think our Sages are teaching us a lesson: there's not that much that we really need. 

Puddleglum and The Last Battle

I have previously made known my disappointment in Tirian the last King of Narnia, despite Alsan's tacit approval: (1) Tirian waited way too long to discover the truth of the arrival of Aslan. Immediately upon hearing of Aslan's arrival, he should have (minimally) sent reliable officers to verify the truth.  (2) Tirian rashly (as Lewis describes it) seeks to avenge the murdered dryad without a comprehensive (or any) plan. (3) This leads Tirian and Jewel to kill two unarmed Calormens (rightfully in my mind). (4) At that point Tirian effectively gives up, completely ignoring the possibility of repentance) and hands himself over the Shift and the Calormens. This is nothing short of a complete abdication of his duty as King of Narnia. 

However, there is a more fundamental question regarding the actions of Tirian and all of the Talking Beasts living in the north of Narnia. Why are they willing, without checking (!) to believe that Shift is Aslan's interpreter (even beyond the question of Shift's obvious character flaws)? Can they believe that Aslan would be willing to have such terrible deeds performed in his name? 

Ignored by Tirian is the theological charge of Puddleglum in the Silver Chair, "I’m going to live as like a Narnian as I can even if there isn’t any Narnia." Could a Narnian, based on everything known of Aslan, call Shift's command living like a Narnian? Is not the imaginary Narnia in which Narnians are free from human subjugation (as the old Bear argues for) so much more so much better than the Shift's version of Narnia? 

There are some challenges to this. God does indeed send His people into slavery, but to atone for their sins. And even in exile there is a need to 'Live like a Narnian,' to refuse to accept the world as is but to strive to create the world that Puddleglum perceives. God's chosen people may be slaves, exiled, discriminated against, but it's irrelevant if the people themselves refuse to believe it. 

This is lesson of the just observed holiday of Passover. Our Sages insist that the Children of Israel were redeemed early as they were in danger of complete assimilation...

This probably needs some further thought as well, but hopefully it's coherent enough... 

The Jealousy of Venus: The Task (Part 1)

I don't usually like writing my ideas when they are only half-baked, but with Purim and Pesach I haven't written in a while so here goes...  

This is about Till We Have Faces (TWHF). Elsewhere, I've explained my general contention about this work that Lewis calls his best work, but now I'm attempting to come to terms with the following challenge which I think may help demonstrate the purpose of this work. Let me quickly note that I am in no way an expert on Greek and Roman mythology so I may be way off here anyway... 

Venus is the goddess of love and beauty. No doubt this is very important to Lewis who, as we've spoken about, enables the half-gods to take their place when the true God is ascendent. If, as Lewis believes, God is Love (as explained, for example, in Mere Christianity and The Problem of Pain) then of all the half-gods Venus must be the most important and that's why it makes sense that it is Venus/Aphrodite/Ungit who is the god of Glome. 

However, the story of Psyche presents the following question, how can Psyche be worshipped at the expense of Venus? Can't Venus just ramp up the beauty leaving Psyche's beauty in the dust? Can't Venus just make everyone love her? How can it be that people turn to Psyche's beauty and ignore the source of all beauty? And how does getting beauty from the Underworld help at all? 

I think the questions are in some way, self-answering. Of course, Venus could do all of that, but the problem isn't Psyche, it's the people. Just like the problem isn't God, but that people don't recognize God. So, Venus strikes out with vengeance against the object of people's worship, just like God struck out against the idols of the Egyptians (as we read about in the Passover Haggadah). Psyche must work for Venus to make Venus lovable. 

In truth, God is love, even if He is not always beloved. It is the task of His Nation to demonstrate His love and beauty to humanity.

OK, that's a start... not great, but we'll continue and see where this takes us...   

Letters to Malcom, Letter 4 Part 2

Now that we've determined that prayer effects and transforms us, the one who prays, we can turn to the Letter's second question, "how important must a need or desire be before we can properly make it the subject of a petition?" Perhaps we should just ask God for big things, like that you should always be healthy and that your kids should be well behaved, or global things, like world peace and to remove hunger. 

Lewis pushes back on this. First, he notes that this is inauthentic. If you don't speak your mind, you're not standing before God in a true and vulnerable fashion. It's like you're trying to hide something from Him. Second, laying it all out in prayer is transformative, and will help you understand what is most and least important. 

As it happens, I am currently reading R' Yehuda Amital's "L'Olam yehai adam, - Always one should be man," and in his section on prayer he says as follows. If you were sitting right next to R' Aharon Lichtenstein (R' Amital's co-head of Yeshivat Har Etzion), and needed a pencil, you would never ask him to borrow one. Not because R' Lichtenstein wouldn't let you (of course he would!) but because you would think it's too trivial a request for someone of such great stature. God, however, should be approached with any request no matter how small. 

I might push even further and say that it's especially important to put the little things before God. It's obvious that no one has complete control over their health, and few people are brazen enough to think they have complete control over their wealth, or that they will never sin. It's obvious to everyone that those looming issues are in God's hands and must be put before Him. However, sometimes we might trick ourselves into thinking we can control the smaller thing: the test we've really studied for, the work presentation we know we've mastered. Perhaps, God forbid, we might think we can do those without His help. By formulating them into our prayers, we force ourselves to recognize that we have no agency whatsoever without Him. Even things we think we have in control are completely in His control. 

So I would suggest that especially the small things, the things we don't consider much of a need, should be put into prayer to enable us to realize Who is really the one who determines and fulfills our needs.