Letters to Malcom, Letter 4, Part 1

In our last post on Letters to Malcom we noted the questions asked of Lewis and then tooked into the Hebrew root of the word 'pray'. We saw that the reflexive conjugation of the verb means that whatever is done via prayer is done to oneself, and that the thing that is done is judgment or belief. This helps us address the first question. Lewis is asked how come so much of prayer seems to be telling things to God. But God is omniscient, he doesn't need to be told? 

The answer, of course, is that by explicity stating these things while standing in God's presence (though He is everywhere, during prayer we are aware that we are standing in His presence), changes us. Us, not God. In prayer we see ourselves as we truly are, powerless, weak, controlled by outside forces, and perhaps, not trusing in Him. We lay that weakness in front to God and say, we've judged ourselves and now understand Who is really running to world, Who guides our lives, and Whose will we must follow. And we believe in Him, and perhaps that enables us to believe in ourselves. We have changed and, therefore, our lot in life can change as well. 

Lewis says somewhat similarly, prayer enables us to be aware that we are known by God, and that we assent to be knonw by Him. Lewis needs the assenting because Lewis wants man to be on a personal footing with God with "God revealing Himself as Person." Judaism will reject the latter formulation. There is an infinite barrier between man and God. Prayer overcomes this barrier because God lets it through, but seeing God's face cannot is a logical impossibility. 

On Spring Between Blizzards

After several weeks of snow cover, yesterday I was able to see the grass in our yard. I wouldn't say it was warm, but you could almost believe that Spring was on its way. Today we have a blizzard. 

OK, reality check, thank God, I live in a modern country and a wonderful community. While we always pray to Him for our sustenance and safety, another 18 inches of snow, even with high winds, is unlikely to do much damage. And as long as there's power I can even work (thanks to modern technology). So, the last thing I should do is complain about the weather.   

Nonetheless, I was motivated to write as I was thinking about Narnia. As we know, in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, the Witch's winter transforms to Spring in a matter of hours, bringing hope and even confidence to the beleagured Narnians. But what if turned around? What if the transformation had started, but then the Winter returned?  

Actually, that seems to be what happened to the Children of Israel while slaves in Egypt. Moses and Aaron came promising freedom and dazzling the people with God's signs. They marched into Pharoah's palace to the cheering crowds, but when they came out, Pharoah made things harder and Moses and Aaron's credibility tanked.

Is this dampening of hopes part of every redemption? The Children of Israel, after a stunning victory in Jericho, lost the first battle in Ai. The Maccabees, even after recapturing the Temple, continued to lose battles to the Romans (in one of which Judah himself was killed) before gaining independence. Even Esther seemed to have partied with Haman rather then being immediately activated by Mordechai to block Haman's decree. 

Anyway, a bit of a rant but please do keep in your prayers all those who have already lost power and may need help. 

A Hebraic Inkling: Aims and Objectives

Having explained his motivation in writing on C.S. Lewis and his attitude towards Jews and Judaism, Brazier identifies his Aims and Objectives. A priori, given the last sentence of his previous section this should have been straigthforward. Recall that Brazier had stated, "But what did Lewis have to say about Judaism and the Jews, the ancient Hebrews and the Jewish Bible (the church's "Old Testament"), supersessionism, replacement theology, identity politics, and Israel, and therefore the status before humanity of God's chosen people?" While the inclusion of identity politics on this list may be a bit odd, this seems like a fine thesis statement for a book. Hence, one would expect Brazier's Aims and Objectives section to simply be an expansion of this sentence.

Of course, it's not so simple. And why it's not simple is what makes Brazier's book not just a study of Lewis, but a theological treatise on the proper attitude of Christianity towards Jews and Judaism. On the expected side Brazier's Aims and Objectives start with basically restating the last sentence of his Motivation though putting identity politics into a separte sentence. He then contrasts Lewis' view of Jews and Judaism with that of his academic contemporarites who are much more negative in their attitude. Brazier then makes an interesting sojourn into the importance of humor which Jews and Lewis readily see and appreciate within Scripture and in their religious outlook, while hell, Lewis' Oxford contemporaries, and the modern world of identity politics do not. Brazier ends the section noting that the current Christian West needs to be further balanced by the Hebraic witness and scriptures and therefore it is valuable to uncover and analyze such a seam in Lewis. 

So far so good. Except for the humor bit (which is never returned to in the book), it's not that different then we would expect. 

Except that I left out half of it. 

Brazier's Aims and Objectives are not a dispassionate outline of what he's trying to accomplish in writing this book. Brazier clearly takes a strong stance: he quotes Rev Giles Fraser asserting that Jesus was not a Christian but a Jew, he insists that Lewis (and certainly his detractors) did not understand what is meant that the Jews are "chosen" and a "created people", and he clearly states that in our times a balance is needed "between the Christian West (or what is left of it) and the Jews..." 

So, yes, we expect Brazier to analyze Lewis' views of Jews and Judaism, but we should not expect him to always agree. 

The Storm Before the Light?

I've been wondering about why the Dawn Treader hits a storm, especially so early in its journey. Perhaps it's so Eustace can hit rock bottom which is necessary before salvation. This would be similar to the Children of Israel in Egypt who are Sages say reached the 49th level of impurity and redemption became necesarry before they were to be assimilated forever. 

But I need to think this one out a little better. Feel free to comment if you have any thoughts on this. 

Letters to Malcom, Letter 4, Introduction

In Letter 4, Lewis addresses two questions concerning prayer. The first, which he characterizes as the question of an unbeliever but would not bother a believer, is why are we telling God things (such as what we want or need). God is omniscient, why do we need to tell Him? The second, which is practical for believers, is when is something important enough to offer it as a prayer before God. 

However, before looking at the answers to these questions, I would like to take a quick detour to look at what prayer means. The Hebrew word to pray comes from the root p.l.l. which is found in various forms throughout the bible. Even Shoshan gives three explanations of the root. (1) believe, foresee, or consider, for example Jacob after his reunion with Joseph says (Genesis 48:11) , "I had not thought to see thy face.." (2) beg, request, or stand in prayer, (3) judge. 

Sometime the midrashim will merge these translations. So for example, when the Psalmist (106:30) records, "Then stood up Pinehas, and p.l.l.: and so the plague was stayed." The Talmud (Berachos 26b) translates, "the verb 'standing' means prayer, 'And Pinehas stood up and prayed and the plague ended.' ” However, Pirkei d'Rabbi Eliezer (47) reads the same verse as follows, "He arose as a great spiritual leader and he judged Israel, as it says, "Then stood up Pinehas, and he executed judgment." This seems to be the more straightforward reading of the verse, because in the Torah we do not see that Pinehas prayed, but we do see that he killed the sinner. 

OK, so to this point we see that pray, has infused meanings of belief and judgement. But there's another piece we need to pay attention to. Despite the biblical verses, in almost all Jewish literature the verb 'to pray' is conjugated using the reflexive - doing something to yourself. Meaning when one prays, they are effecting themselves. To pray then means, to make oneself believe or to judge oneself. 

If all that is true, it would obviously incorrect to say that prayer does something to God. Rather, we must say prayer effects the person praying.

And I think this very much mirrors Lewis' answer to the first question. We'll look at that more closely next time. 

A Hebraic Inkling: Motivation

In Chapter 7 of, "The Great Divorce," Lewis meets the Hard-Bitten Ghost. A (now dead) man who beleived that the world was run by a cadre of Management, the World Combine. In his ravings to Lewis, he mentions, "or the same Firm, which is behind the Jews and the Vatican..." A friend of Brazier had apparently read this particular passage and assumed that this demonstrated Lewis was an anti-semite and (presumably) believed the canard of the Jews running the world. 

Of course, as Brazier quickly notes, such an association is the complete opposite of Lewis' intention. This man was in hell, and will always stay there, due to his beliefs that everything is just a set up. Everything is out of your control, you are powerless and since there is nothing you can do to build up, you are left with simply debunking everything else. Lewis addresses these people head on in Abolition of Man. These are people for whom truth is there own feelings, and one's feelings can never be wrong. Truth, wonder, and beauty are exactly the opposite. They demand the stirring of awe and reverence. They motivate man to do better, and they call on man to overcome his present problems because there is a bright future for those who walk in God's path. 

Brazier identifies the Hard-Bitten Ghost in the British Labor party of the early 2020s and, unfortunately, too many people today. People who, enamored with their own feelings, would rather find a scapegoat than address the very real problems facing them.    

Brazier contrasts this character with Sarah Smith of Golders Green in the same book who he identifies as Jewish (more on that later). She is a saintly figure who has achieved paradise but journeys down to continue helping others. Certainly Lewis, were he an anti-semite, would not suggest such a character could be a Jew! However, this mistaken characterization of Lewis is what motivated Brazier to explore further Lewis' views on "Judaism and the Jews, the ancient Hebrews and the Jewish Bible (the church's "Old Testament"), supersessionism, replacement theology, identity politics, and Israel, and therefore the status before humanity of God's chosen people..."

I would like to add, that throughout Brazier's treatment he demonstrates that Judaism directly repudiates the Hard-Bitten Ghost. Judaism forces the confrontation with the transcendent and divine and calls upon you to work to raise the level of the world. Judaism insists that you have the choice to be as righteous as Moses or as evil as Pharaoh. Most importantly, Judaism insists on truths in beliefs, in actions, and in an ultimate vision. God demands reverence, His Creation reflects His glory and call on you to feel awe and come to fear and love Him, and His seal is truth. 

With this motivation, Brazier goes on to Aims and Goals. We'll take a look at that next time. 

Letters to Malcom (Letter 3, Part 4)

Lewis returns to a few things towards the end of this letter that we have already discussed. So, the issue I would like to concentrate on here is the question of position during prayer. Lewis, rightfully in my opinion, places value on the position of the body during prayer since the body must pray as well. This the Jewish Sagesthroughout the ages (codified by Rama, Orach Chayyim 48:1) who invoke the psalmist (35:10), "All my bones shall say, God, who is like You?" to suggest that one should wave or shake one's body during the readong of the Torah and during prayer.

However, Lewis notes that there are more important aspects of prayer then kneeling such as concentration and that make sense. After all, the center of prayer is the heart and mind and while the body has a role it is clearly secondary. 

Not surprisingly, Judaism has a much more formalized approach to position during prayer which may take the form of sitting, standing, or leaning. Some prayers can be free form, others have preferneces or requirements (subject to capability). The need to stand might be due to honor or (as with the amidah service) an attempt to mimic angelic prayer. 

In summary, Lewis favors personal preference in time, position, liturgy, place and other aspects of prayer. The main goal is to have concentration on the prayers themselves. This leads to a very personal and (assuming the best of the person praying) meaningful prayer service. Judaism, though much of prayer was originally free-form, has formalized all of these aspects of prayer this has its own positive aspects as we've discussed in the past. Formalization also lends itself to being more apropos for communal prayer. I'll wait for a discussion of this to see if Lewis brings it up any point soon (I haven't read any further than I've written about so let's see where Lewis takes us next).