This forum was closed on October 1st, 2010. However, the archives are open to the public and filled with vast amounts of good reading and information for you to enjoy. If you wish to meet some Wardrobians, please visit the Into the Wardrobe Facebook group.

Gay Marriage Editorial, Washington Post, quotes CS Lewis

The man. The myth.

Re: What does God say?

Postby Guest » April 13th, 2005, 11:34 pm

Ok, ok. You've all caught me- I'm a horrible speller, a writer of run-ons, and a maker-upper of words. Please bear with me- as far as I can tell this blasted post thing can't be spell checked (I don't know anything about computers either). I agree with Bill on not all homosexual relationships being wrong just as lots of heterosexual relationships are... Paul was man of his time, just as I think Lewis was. Who knows what he would have actually thought about it but my guess is that he would be horrified to think that excerpts from his novels would be quoted in support of the issue. Half a century ago you didn't need to be Chrisitan to be conservative... I think the jury is out on the issue, Lewis' opinions on the issue, and even what to do about it. I'm spent.
Guest
 

Re: What does God say?

Postby robsia » April 14th, 2005, 12:30 pm

User avatar
robsia
Wardrobian
 
Posts: 3732
Joined: Aug 2004
Location: Incognito no longer

Lewis to Government: Butt Out!

Postby larry gilman » April 15th, 2005, 1:01 pm

larry gilman
Wardrobian
 
Posts: 233
Joined: Jul 2004
Location: Sharon, VT

Re: Lewis to Government: Butt Out!

Postby magpie » April 15th, 2005, 3:26 pm

Actually, homosexuality was one practice which Lewis deliberately chose not to comment upon. In Surprised by Joy at the beginning of Chapter 7 he writes, "the sin in question is one of the two (gambling is the other) which I have never been tempted to commit. I willnot indulge in futile philippics against enemies I never met in battle."
"Love is the will to extend one's self in order to nurture one's own or another's spiritual growth."
M. Scott Peck

Member of the Religious Tolerance Cabal of the Wardrobe
User avatar
magpie
Wardrobian
 
Posts: 1096
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: Minnesota

Re: Lewis to Government: Butt Out!

Postby Guest » April 15th, 2005, 5:01 pm

Guest
 

Lewis, Tolerance, Cliques, Turing

Postby larry gilman » April 15th, 2005, 7:41 pm

larry gilman
Wardrobian
 
Posts: 233
Joined: Jul 2004
Location: Sharon, VT

Re: Lewis, Tolerance, Cliques, Turing

Postby Guest » April 16th, 2005, 1:48 am

Guest
 

Re: Lewis to Government: Butt Out!

Postby larry gilman » April 17th, 2005, 12:54 pm

larry gilman
Wardrobian
 
Posts: 233
Joined: Jul 2004
Location: Sharon, VT

Re: Lewis, Tolerance, Cliques, Turing

Postby larry gilman » April 17th, 2005, 1:00 pm

Very interesting. So the audio text of The Four Loves differs from that of the printed book, eh?

Larry
larry gilman
Wardrobian
 
Posts: 233
Joined: Jul 2004
Location: Sharon, VT

Re: Lewis, Tolerance, Cliques, Turing

Postby Guest » April 18th, 2005, 7:32 pm

The audio text and the book text are pretty close. I just preferred the precise way he put it on audio. When one considers Lewis's "phenomenological" description of "falling-in-love" (above), it would seem unjust not to consider the possibility that that description could also apply to homosexuality. It seems, from how it's worded, that he's inviting us to make the connection. In our day and age, I don't think one can ignore it.
Guest
 

Re: What does God say?

Postby Paul_Burgin » June 25th, 2005, 9:17 am

Paul_Burgin
Wardrobian
 
Posts: 160
Joined: Jun 2005
Location: Baldock, Hertfordshire

Re: What does God say?

Postby magpie » June 25th, 2005, 4:43 pm

Thank you for your insightful and compassionate post. This is a difficult issue which will not be resolved with slogans and labels. I also know several devout and committed Christians who happen to be homosexual (both male and female), and have come to understand (albeit secondhand) the terrible struggles which they encounter.

I have far less sympathy for the Vicar whom you have described who, in his violation of a pastoral confidence, committed a serious breach of clerical ethics, one which in some denominations would be considered a "chargeable offense."

When it comes to the issue of gay marriage, I have long been ambivalent. However I have recently come to the conclusion that for persons of all orientations, I would prefer commitment to promiscuity.
"Love is the will to extend one's self in order to nurture one's own or another's spiritual growth."
M. Scott Peck

Member of the Religious Tolerance Cabal of the Wardrobe
User avatar
magpie
Wardrobian
 
Posts: 1096
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: Minnesota

Re: What does God say?

Postby surprisedbyjoy » July 20th, 2005, 5:47 pm

Contrary to popular opinion, Lewis did in fact comment on this issue. In a letter to Sheldon Vanauken, published in Vanauken's book A Severe Mercy (there's a discussion of it going on elswhere on the forum) he wrote:

"I have seen less than you but more than I wanted of this terrible problem. I will discuss your letter with those whom I think wise in Christ. This is only an interim report. First, to map out the boundaries within which all discussion must go on, I take it for certain that the physical satisfaction of homo¬sexual desires is sin. This leaves the homo, no worse off than any normal person who is, for whatever reason, prevented from marrying. Second, our speculations on the cause of the ab¬normality are not what matters and we must be content with ignorance. The disciples were not told why (in terms of efficient cause) the man was born blind (Jn. IX 1-3): only the final cause, that the works of God shd. be made manifest in him. This suggests that in homosexuality, as in every other tribula¬tion, those works can be made manifest: i.e. that every dis¬ability conceals a vocation, if only we can find it, wh. will 'turn the necessity to glorious gain.' Of course, the first step must be to accept any privations wh., if so disabled, we can't lawfully get. The homo, has to accept sexual abstinence just as the poor man has to forego otherwise lawful pleasures because he wd. be unjust to his wife and children if he took them. That is merely a negative condition. What shd. the positive life of the homo, be? I wish I had a letter wh. a pious male homo., now dead, once wrote to me—but of course it was the sort of letter one takes care to destroy. He believed that his necessity could be turned to spiritual gain: that there were certain kinds of sympathy and understanding, a certain social role which mere men and mere women cd. not give. But it is all horribly vague— too long ago. Perhaps any homo, who humbly accepts his cross and puts himself under Divine guidance will, however, be shown the way. I am sure that any attempt to evade it (e.g. by mock- or quasi-marriage with a member of one's own sex even if this does not lead to any carnal act) is the wrong way. Jealousy (this another homo, admitted to me) is far more rampant and deadly among them than among us. And I don't think little concessions like wearing the clothes of the other sex in private is the right line either. It is the duties, the burdens, the characteristic virtues of the other sex, I expect, which the patient must try to cultivate. I have mentioned humility becausemale homos. (I don't know about women) are rather apt, the moment they find you don't treat them with horror and contempt, to rush to the opposite pole and start implying that they are somehow superior to the normal type. I wish I could be more definite. All I have really said is that, like all other tribulations, it must be offered to God and His guidance how to use it must be sought.
I heard you had been troubled with the old spine again. I hope the silence on this topic in your letter does not merely result from selflessness but means that you are now well. Remember me to your very nice wife. You both keep your place in my daily prayers. It is a sweet duty, praying for our friends. I always feel as if I had had a brief meeting with you when I do so: perhaps it is a meeting, and the best kind. Pray for me to be made more charitable: we're in the middle of a Faculty crisis wh. tempts me to hatred many times a day.
P.S. I'd nearly forgotten your other point. I presume God grants prayers when granting wd. be good for the petitioner & others and denies them when it wd. not. Might there be cases where a. The worthiness of the petitioner made it bad for him to have
his prayers granted: i.e. might lead him to think there was
an element of bargain about it. b. The unworthiness made it bad: i.e. might lead him to think
that God did not demand righteousness. c. The worthiness made it good: i.e. might free him from
scruples, show him that his conduct had been right after all. d. The unworthiness made it good: i.e. produced humbled
compunction -wide hoc mihi?
All v. crude. The point is that worthiness might easily be taken into account tho' not in the way of direct earning and reward."

That's the full letter as published. Hope this clarifies some of the discussion as regards Lewis' opinions. Sorry it's a little rough; I scanned the test onto my computer, which does some weird things with em-dashes and punctuation. It seems to have done a pretty good job overall, though.
Want to bury your Beanie Babies? Visit:
http://beaniemortuary.tripod.com/

"Surprised by joy--impatient as the Wind."
-Wordsworth
User avatar
surprisedbyjoy
Wardrobian
 
Posts: 151
Joined: Mar 2005
Location: Buried beneath a pile of textbooks

Re: Gay Marriage Editorial, Washington Post, quotes CS Lewis

Postby Kolbitar » August 1st, 2005, 1:00 am

User avatar
Kolbitar
Wardrobian
 
Posts: 667
Joined: Feb 2000
Location: Exile

Re: Gay Marriage Editorial, Washington Post, quotes CS Lewis

Postby robsia » August 1st, 2005, 12:59 pm

User avatar
robsia
Wardrobian
 
Posts: 3732
Joined: Aug 2004
Location: Incognito no longer

PreviousNext

Return to C. S. Lewis

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered members and 20 guests

cron