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. 

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. 

A Hebraic Inkling: Chapter 1

In Chapter 1 of "A Hebraic Inkling" Brazier reviews Lewis' spiritual biography until the time of his conversion. Lewis biography is well known and I will not repeat it here. However, unlike other biographies of Lewis (of which there are many), Brazier tells Lewis' story in the context of the antisemitism Brazier asserts is inherent to the British Empire. Having conquered the world, the British had, in their mind, become the Chosen People, and thus Jews and Judaism had no place in Britain. Lewis himself, when a self-described atheist, was especially dismissive of the Jews calling them "class A primitives," and wondering aloud why one would waste their time reading the Hebrew Bible. 

However, God had other plans for Lewis. From the time he was a child Lewis had experienced sehnsucht, stabs of longing and beauty, what Lewis himself would later call Joy. Brazier states that these are times when the Holy Spirit (the divine presence) touch Lewis, though Lewis himself did not understand their cause. At the point Lewis came to understand, thanks to reading George MacDonald's Phantastes, that these experiences were not an end to themselves, but a mean reach their source, he found God. Lewis thus becomes a theist. 

This is not yet a full conversion to Brazier's Judeo-Christian God, that would wait until after his famed conversation with J.R.R. Tolkien and Hugo Dyson. However, later in life, Lewis would be thankful he was "permitted for several months, perhaps a year, to know God and to attempt obedience without even raising that question [that of future life]. My training was like that of the Jews to whom He revealed Himself centuries before there was a whisper of anything better (or worse) beyond the grave than shadowy and featureless Sheol" (Surprised by Joy page 179). 

Traditional Jews may disagree as to when the concept of life after death entered Judaism, but what is important for us at the moment is that Lewis accepted theism before Christianity and claimed (at least in one respect) that his conversion process followed that of God's revelation to the Jews, His chosen people. 

Brazier will further expand on this theme in the next chapter. 

A Hebraic Inkling: Introduction

A Hebraic Inkling with a long Introduction. The Introduction can be broken into three parts, (1) Brazier's first assertions supported by evidence that Lewis is not antisemitic, but was (positively) Hebaic. (2) A series of definitions of relevant terms. (3) A short synopsis of each chapter. In this post will concentrate on the first two. 

Already in the first part of the Introduction Brazier demonstrates his fearlessness in criticizing anyone he may disagree with, including current cultural attitudes and opinions and even Lewis himself. He quickly identifies the antisemitic character at the beginning of The Great Divorce with the British Labour Party of 2020. He later points out that Lewis did not properly understand God's choice of the Jewish Nation. Brazier correctly chimes in that the Jews were not chosen but were formed by God through the selection of Abraham. 

Some other issues of note that Brazier addresses in the Introduction are the thread of humor found in the Hebrew Bible and the important influence it had on Lewis (something I would like to see expanded a bit). He notes Lewis disagreed with many of his colleagues as to the centrality of Judaism and Jews for Christianity. 

In the second part of the Introduction, Brazier looks at some definitions including elections, defining the importance of names, revelation, and identity politics. Election is especially important for Brazier's thesis as a Hebraic must certainly believe that the Jews were elected by God to guide humanity in its fallen state. However, as asserted by Paul, Gentiles maybe enfolded into the election of the Jews. In the same way, Brazier is quick to differentiate between modern day identity politics and the selection of the Jews by God. The former, says Brazier, is rooted in pride and vanity and is used to achieve special treatment. The latter is a position by God which comes with duty towards others. There is only one race of humanity, says Brazier, and all we can claim in front of God is that we are merely human.

In the final part of the Introduction, Brazier summarizes what he will try to accomplish in each subsequent chapter. We'll skip this for now and address each chapter as it comes. 

A Hebraic Inkling: (My) Introduction

The aim of this book is to examine precisely what C.S. Lewis believed and wrote about the ancient Hebrews, their scriptures their status as God's chosen people and about today's Jews.

Is C.S. Lewis a Hebraic Inkling?

That's the question that P.H. Brazier attempts to determine in his recently published fascinating book, "A Hebraic Inkling: C.S. Lewis on Judaism and the Jews." 

As I mentioned in my last post, I had the opportunity to discuss this work on the podcast Pints with Jack. However, the work deserves more attention than one podcast can provide, so every once in a while, I'll write something here. 

By way of introduction, I want to muse upon the above question. 

That Lewis was an Inkling, as in the literary discussion group at Oxford, is historical fact and needs no further comment. The real question is whether Lewis can be described as Hebraic, and that is what Brazier seeks to prove.

Now, of course, Lewis was Christian not Jewish and so Brazier must first define what it means to be Hebraic (but not Jewish) and then determine whether Lewis fits that definition. 

At least that's what I would think the book should be about. but it's not quite so. 

Brazier's stated aim is the above quote which is a necessary endeavor should we try to determine whether Lewis is Hebraic. However, this work is not a disinterested analysis comparing a sample (Lewis) to a theoretical construct (a Hebraic).  Instead, it is a work of Christian theology, and I might even say polemics, arguing passionately that all Christians must be Hebraic and that Lewis in general fulfills this imperative. 

A couple of additional points. First, Brazier's stated motivation to write this book was being told by a friend of an encounter with someone who branded Lewis an antisemite. However, Brazier clearly wanted to go further than that. Lindskoog believes that Lewis demonstrated anti-antisemitism but my guess is that Brazier (properly in my opinion) did not like that description either. Brazier sets out to demonstrate that Lewis is much more than anti-something, he is positively for something. What Lewis is for, according to Brazier, is a vision of Christianity in which Christians see themselves as, "Grafted... onto a cultivated olive tree. Romans 11:24)." And this entails: a recognition of Israel as elected (and crafted) by God, a need to respect the Hebrew Scriptures, a realization that Jews are spiritually senior, among other theological truisms. Lewis does not always meet these standards, but he reaches towards them. 

Second, Brazier passion for his topic sometimes gets in the way of organization. Nevertheless, that should not lead one to think that imperfect organization echoes lack of rigor. Brazier has clearly done his homework delving not only into Christian sources, but also into Jewish ones.   

Bottom line up front: Brazier has convinced me that the moniker 'A Hebraic Inkling' fits Lewis pretty well. For me, that was quite revealing especially as I felt that "Till We Have Faces" (a work that Brazier does not reference at all is this book) completely ignores a Jewish stage in the evolution from paganism to Christianity. But what Brazier has convinced me of without a doubt, is that he is 'A Hebraic Inkling' (or he would have been had he been alive at the right time, in the right place). Brazier knowledge is expansive and deep, and his writing is (generally) engaging. I think the Inklings would have welcomed him with open arms. 

We'll continue soon...