C.S. LEWIS AND CATHOLIC CHURCH

[everlastingthur]

And I would also like more specific data on the following:
On a Chesterton site, I read that reading GKC’s “The Everlasting Man” was a watershed moment for CSL, the beginning of his embracing Christianity. Citation?

The effect on Lewis of reading The Everlasting Man was staggering. Ever since discovering Chesterton, Lewis had continued to read his works, and those of George MacDonald, enjoying the charm of their goodness but refusing to be charmed by their Christianity" Joseph Pearce C.S. Lewis and the Catholic Church pg 29.

" Then I read Chesterton’s Everlasting Man and for the first time saw the whole Christian outline of history set out in a form that seemed to me to make sense. Somehow I contrived not to be too badly shaken. You will remember that I already thought Chesterton the most sensible man alive ‘apart from his Christianity’ …But I hardly remember, for I had not long finished The Everlasting Man when something far more alarming happened to me. Early in 1926 the hardest boiled of all the atheists I ever knew sat in my room on the other side of the fire and remarked that the evidence for the historicity of the Gospels was really surprisingly good." C.S Lewis Surprised by Joy pg. 223

 

[Demerzel]

Hello Carl,

Thank you for your kind reply.

I was just pointing out there are some questions that automatically rise when one reads those passages.Paul wasn’t only grumpy in this case he was also correct in his actions.

I don’t think Paul and Peter had any animosity between them. They both love Christ and preached him. I do think Paul called Peter on the carpet causing Peter to rethink how he was being perceived.

As an aside, do we know that Peter was in Rome before Paul? Not that I think it matters. I know some Protestants think Peter may never have been in Rome.

Thanks for your comments…

Demerzel

Carl:

Demerzel

Paul also states in Galatians that God has no favorites…

I hope you’re not offering this as an argument against the primacy of Peter. It was only the apostle Peter whom Christ addressed as the rock (petros in Latin) upon which he would build his Church. If Christ had no favorites, this would refer specifically to his love for all of us. Yet all of us would not have the same role to play, nor the same gifts to give, as Paul himself testified.

Yes, Paul could be grumpy. Is there a difference between being grumpy and having an “attitude”? As was pointed out in an earlier post, it was Peter, not Paul, who had the last word on circumcision at the Council of Jerusalem. In his role as administrator of the universal church, he had to be fair-minded with both parties. Not only fair minded, but friendly. This irked Paul because his own dog was in the fight. He relaxed, of course, when Peter came down on his side. And he shared Peter’s ministry at Rome. If he really had an attitude, Paul would not have gone to Rome to work with Peter.

 

[Carl]

DEMERZEL

The time frame for Peter’s Roman period is fairy thoroughly discussed in the *Catholic Encyclopedia * web site:

newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htm

This is the 1908 Edition, so you might want to read the most recent edition to see if it adds or takes away from the earlier one.

CE also deals forcefully with the Protestant objection that Peter may never have been to Rome.

 

[ohca]

I heard Peter Kreeft give a good “big picture” explanation for why Lewis never became Catholic.

Kreeft (a HUGE Lewis fan) said that many, many evangelicals have come into the Catholic Church through the reading of Lewis’ works.

Lewis is something of a “bridge” between Protestants and Catholics (both sides generally love him). Kreeft’s theory is that God withheld that last bit of grace Lewis needed to become Catholic, in order that he would be that bridge.

Protestants would not be likely to read the wisdom Lewis had to impart to the world if he had been writing as a Catholic.

I thought that view of Kreeft’s, that Providential view, was quite wise.

 

[Genuflecter]

ohca:

I heard Peter Kreeft give a good “big picture” explanation for why Lewis never became Catholic.

Kreeft (a HUGE Lewis fan) said that many, many evangelicals have come into the Catholic Church through the reading of Lewis’ works.

Lewis is something of a “bridge” between Protestants and Catholics (both sides generally love him). Kreeft’s theory is that God withheld that last bit of grace Lewis needed to become Catholic, in order that he would be that bridge.

Protestants would not be likely to read the wisdom Lewis had to impart to the world if he had been writing as a Catholic.

I thought that view of Kreeft’s, that Providential view, was quite wise.

I went to a Peter Kreeft lecture on J.R.R. Tolkien and the “Lord of the Rings” and someone asked a question to the effects of:

“Tolkien tried to convince Lewis to become Catholic didn’t he and why didn’t Lewis ever become Catholic?”

Kreeft replied that Tolkien approached Lewis quite often on this matter and finally Lewis said something like “Look you weren’t there in Northern Ireland, you wouldn’t understand!” After that Tolkien stopped asking him about it.

Anyone who’s read Joseph Pearce: does this sound like something from Pearce? I don’t now, because I haven’t read him. I’m just guessing “maybe” that’s where Kreeft got it from.

 

[ohca]

Genuflecter:

I went to a Peter Kreeft lecture on J.R.R. Tolkien and the “Lord of the Rings” and someone asked a question to the effects of:

“Tolkien tried to convince Lewis to become Catholic didn’t he and why didn’t Lewis ever become Catholic?”

Kreeft replied that Tolkien approached Lewis quite often on this matter and finally Lewis said something like “Look you weren’t there in Northern Ireland, you wouldn’t understand!” After that Tolkien stopped asking him about it.

.

Yes, that is what Kreeft said when I heard him years ago, too. It was probably one of the temporal reasons that Lewis remained out of the Church. But after offering the temporal reason, Kreeft then followed up by giving his (Kreeft’s) opinion on God’s possible reasons for it. I like that big picture, providential reason. Lewis really has been such a bridge for so many to find their way to orthodoxy and the Catholic Church, especially now since Anglicanism has really gone out into left field in so many ways.