A priori I shd. have thought that a series which doesn’t sell too well once a year wd. sell worse if the tempo was speeded up: but I presume you think otherwise and of course your opinion on such a point is much more informed than mine. Of course, then, do exactly as you think fit. No author, on general grounds, ever thinks his book appears too soon!

Was it and his Boy or and its Boy?. I’m completely neutral on the point: print which you prefer.

Yours

C. S. Lewis

Your correspondence has contained no Latin verse for a long time!

TO SHELDON VANAUKEN (BOD):

Magdalen College

Oxford

22/4/53

Dear Mr. Van Auken

It was very nice to hear from you. I hope my interest in you both is something less blasphemous than that of a Creator in a creature (it wd. anyway be begetting not creating, see Philemon 10).¹¹⁸ My feeling about people in whose conversion I have been allowed to play a part is always mixed with awe and even fear: such as a boy might feel on first being allowed to fire a rifle. The disproportion between his puny finger on the trigger and the thunder & lightning wh. follow is alarming. And the seriousness with which the other party takes my words always raises the doubt whether I have taken them seriously enough myself. By writing the things I write, you see, one especially qualifies for being hereafter ‘condemned out of one’s mouth’.¹¹⁹ Think of me as a fellow-patient in the same hospital who, having been admitted a little earlier, cd. give some advice.

The semi-Christians (in dog-collars) that you speak of are a great trial. Our College chaplain is rather of that kind. I’m glad you have something better in your own church.

I feel an amused recognition when you describe those moments at wh. one feels ‘How cd. I–I, of all people–ever have come to believe this cock & bull story’ I think they will do us no harm. Aren’t they just the reverse side of one’s just recognition that the truth is amazing? Our fathers were more familiar with the opposite danger of taking it all for granted: which is probably just as bad.

God bless you both: you are always in my prayers. I hope we may meet again one day.

Yours

C. S. Lewis

TO NATHAN COMFORT STARR (W): TS

Magdalen College,

Oxford.

25th April 1953.

Dear Starr,

By all means give Masato Hori an introduction,¹²⁰ but don’t give him the illusion that I’m a mystic or an authority on mysticism. Dozens of things in your letter are exciting, but this is the first day of term. In haste. We both send greetings.

Yours,

C. S. Lewis

TO I. O. EVANS (W):

Magdalen College

Oxford

27/4/53

Dear Evans

I am really very sorry. The Devil you Say¹²¹ got put on a pile of ‘books received’-most of them (I don’t include yours) a major plague of my life–and I forgot all about it. I have now read a few pages: there was nothing to tempt one to go on. It certainly seems to be a gross plagiarism: I am writing to New York Macmillan to draw their attention to it. Thanks v. much for sending it. With all good wishes, and thanks also to your American friend.

Yours

C. S. Lewis

TO MARY WILLIS SHELBURNE (W): TS

54/53.

Magdalen College,

Oxford.

9th May 1953.

Dear Mrs. Shelburne,

There’s very little time today, so I must be short. I am afraid it is certainly true in England that Christians are in the minority. But remember, the change from, say, thirty years ago, consists largely in the fact that nominal Christianity has died out, so that only those who really believe now profess. The old conventional church-going of semi-believers or almost total unbelievers is a thing of the past. Whether the real thing is rarer than it was would be hard to say. Fewer children are brought up to it: but adult conversions are very frequent.

I’m so glad to hear you have had a more satisfactory talk with your daughter.

I enclose a copy of the only photo which I have at the moment; it’s only a passport one I’m afraid.

Yours most sincerely

C. S. Lewis

TO GEOFFREY BLES (BOD): TS

28/53.

Magdalen College,

Oxford.

9th May 1953.

My dear Bles,

Cunning man, you don’t say how long the MS is! If it can be read in a week-end and put up in a large envelope (I’m no good at parcels), I’ll read it. But I have honestly neither health nor leisure at present for more than very slight extra jobs.

All sympathy to Madame. I return Stewart’s letter.

Yours,

C. S. Lewis

TO RUTH PITTER(BOD):

Magdalen College,

Oxford.

May 12th 1953

Dear Miss Pitter

Or (to speak more accurately)

Bright Angel!

I’m in a sea of glory! Of course I haven’t had time to read it properly, and there’ll be another, more sober, letter presently. This is just a line to be going on with, and to assure you at once that the new volume is an absolute Corker.¹²² I had feared that you might be one of those who, like poor Wordsworth, leave their talent behind at conversion:¹²³ and now–oh glory–you came up shining out of the font far better than you were before. ‘Man’s despair is like the Arabian sun’¹²⁴-I seriously doubt if there’s any religious lyric between that one and Herbert on the same level. And then my eye strays to the opposite page and gets the ‘dying-dolphin green’.¹²⁵ And ‘What we merit–A silence like a sword’.¹²⁶

I wonder have you yourself any notion how good some of these are?

But, as you see, I’m drunk on them at this present. Glory be! Blessings on you! As sweet as sin and as innocent as milk. Thanks forever.

Yours in great excitement

C. S. Lewis

TO GEOFFREY BLES (BOD): TS

Magdalen College

Oxford

12th May 1953.

My dear Bles,

MS duly received: and end leaf returned with thanks. I had seen it, but forgot that end leaves naturally are’nt included in the paper-back proof, and thence foolishly wondered if it had somehow miscarried. Authors with book, like expectant mothers, have their wayward fancies.

Yours,

C. S. Lewis

TO RUTH PITTER(BOD):

Magdalen College,

Oxford.

May 15th 1953

Dear Miss Pitter

The brightness does not fade: appealing from Lewis drunk to Lewis sober, I still find this an exquisite collection. When I start picking out my favourites, I find I am picking out nearly all. Tree at Dawn is full of delight for eye and ear. Great Winter is extremely new and delightful in rhythm: and ‘storm of suns’¹²⁷ is wonderful. The Other has, I think, a few flaws (the second stanza on p. 15 seems to use words that precious poets have sucked all the juice out of) but also v. great virtues. The noises all through Herding Lambs-not only at ‘rainlike rustle of feet’,¹²⁸ tho’ that is the most striking single aural image–are wonderfully conveyed. Captive Bird is pure gold all through: so lovely fair my ‘sense aches with it’: and I still think as I did about World is Hollow (A v. tough undergraduate to whom I showed it thinks the same as I). Cedar is, I expect, extremely good in imagery, but I’d need a real cedar before me by which to judge. That’s the trouble about very visual writing. On the other hand the colours in Hill & Valley came through really well. Penitence is taut & accurate as a Yeats poem. Narrow but Deep & Aged Man to Y.M.¹²⁹ show you in a v. different vein: not the one I like best, but v. good. May is a fine meaty, yet not heavy, meditation. The Five Dreams do, I don’t know how, build up to a whole greater than the parts. The only one in the book I don’t much like is Father Questioned. I think Rostrevor Hamilton (see The Tell-Tale Article) wd. justly have something to say about the stanza at the top of p. 24.¹³⁰

I do congratulate you again and again. I hope you are as happy about the poems as you ought to be.

Yours most sincerely

C. S. Lewis

TO JOHN H. MCCALLUM (P):¹³¹ TS

218/53.

Magdalen College,

Oxford.

18th May 1953.

Dear Mr. McCallum,

I am greatly shocked at your news. My correspondence with Borst was so pleasant and even so intimate that I feel his death as, in some sort, a personal loss. I am sure it will be deeply felt by all of you in many ways. I will try not to give Miss Boxill as much trouble as I gave her predecessor.

Yours sincerely,

C. S. Lewis

TO ELSIE SNICKERS (P):

Magdalen College,

Oxford

May 18th 1953

Dear Mrs Snickers

No. I don’t think sin is completely accounted for by faulty reasoning nor that it can be completely cured by re-education. That view has, indeed, been put forward: by Socrates and, in the early 19th Century, by Godwin. But I think it overlooked the (to me) obviously central fact that our will is not necessarily determined by our reason. If it were, then, as you say, what are called ‘sins’ wd. not be sins at all but only mistakes, and would require not repentances but merely correction.

But surely daily experience shows that it is just not so. A man’s reason sees perfectly clearly that the resulting discomfort and inconvenience will far outweigh the pleasure of the ten minutes in bed. Yet he stays in bed: not at all because his reason is deceived but because desire is stronger than reason. A woman knows that the sharp ‘last word’ in an argument will produce a serious quarrel which was the very thing she had intended to avoid when that argument began and which may permanently destroy her happiness. Yet she says it: not at all because her reason is deceived but because the desire to score a point is at the moment stronger than her reason. People–you and I among them-constantly choose between two courses of action the one which we know to be the worse: because, at the moment, we prefer the gratification of our anger, lust, sloth, greed, vanity, curiosity or cowardice, not only to the known will of God but even to what we know will make for our own real comfort and security. If you don’t recognise this, then I must solemnly assure you that either [you] are an angel, or else are still living in ‘a fool’s paradise’: a world of illusion.

Of course it is true that many people are so mis-educated or so psychopathic that their freedom of action is v. much curtailed & their responsibility therefore v. small. We cannot remember that too much when we are tempted to judge harshly the acts of other people whose difficulties we don’t know. But we know that some of our own acts have sprung from evil will (proud, resentful, cowardly, envious, lascivious or spiteful will) although we knew better, and that what we need is not-or not only-re-education but repentance, God’s forgiveness, and His Grace to help us to do better next time. Until one has faced this fact one is a child.

And it is not the function of psychotherapy to make us face this. Its work is the non-moral aspects of conduct. You must not go to the psychologists for spiritual guidance. (One goes to the dentist to cure one’s toothache, not to teach one in what spirit to bear it if it cannot be cured: for that you must go to God and God’s spokesmen).

For this reason I am rather sorry that you have taken Psychology as a subject for your academic course. A continued interest in it on the part of those who have had psychotherapeutic treatment is usually, I think, not a good thing. At least, not until a long interval has elapsed and their personal interest in it, the interest connected with their own case, has quite died away. At least that is how it seems to me. All blessings.

Yours most sincerely

C. S. Lewis

TO NELL BERNERS-PRICE (W): TS

REF.67/53.

Magdalen College,

Oxford.

20th May 1953.

Dear Nell,

By all means rope me in as a reference to ‘the integrity of the family’: a subject on which I feel I can speak with conviction. I return the form. Court Stairs must be looking lovely now. Love to Alan and yourself. I’d write more, but there is the devil of a mail this morning.

Yours ever,

C. S. Lewis

TO RHONA BODLE (BOD):

Magdalen College,

Oxford.

May 20th 1953

Dear Miss Bodle

Your letter written on Good Friday reached me today. I was a little shocked at first to hear of a child who found The Pilgrims Progress boring:¹³² but then I remembered that the dialogue, of which there is a good deal, does interrupt the story with matter no child cd. be expected to enjoy.

The restraints imposed on you by ‘secular education’ are, no doubt, very galling.¹³³ But I wonder whether secular education will do us all the harm the secularists hope. Secular teachers will. But Christian teachers in secular schools may, I sometimes think, do more good precisely because they are not allowed to give religious instruction in class. At least I think that, as a child, I shd. have been very allured and impressed by the discovery–which must be made when questions are asked–that the teacher believed firmly in a whole mass of things he wasn’t allowed to teach! Let them give us the charm of mystery if they please.

It was v. nice to hear from you again. All blessings on you and your work.

Yours sincerely

C. S. Lewis

TO ROGER LANCELYN GREEN (BOD):

Magdalen College,

Oxford.

May 21st 1953

Dear Roger

A good many disturbances made me postpone reading the new story¹³⁴ and then (for much longer) writing about it. I enjoyed it thoroughly. It is best after they have left the Castle–the night in the cave is the high light of the whole story–but all enjoyable. My brother read it with such gusto that he was moved to go back & read The Luck of the Lynns and then the Lewis Carroll, all with great satisfaction.

It is a very odd fact that I enjoy a story no more, and perhaps even a little less, for having been at the scene of operations. It certainly isn’t your fault, for I have had the same experience with other authors: but certainly the memory of the real Beaumaris did not help me. I thought the way in which the malapropisms were slightly toned down in this book–appropriately, as the malapropist gets older–was v. skilful.

I’m not in the best of health at present but perhaps better than I was. The last Narnian story is complete & shall go to you when typed: my present leisure, such as it is, goes mainly on proofs and bibliography for the OHEL volume.

Love to all of you and many thanks for the book.

Yours

Jack

TO MARY WILLIS SHELBURNE (W):

Magdalen College

Oxford

May 30th 1953

Dear Mrs. Shelburne

Thank you for your letter of the 26th. I am particularly glad to hear that you had a ‘fairly pleasant’ talk with your daughter

Yes, we are always told that the present wide-spread apostasy must be the fault of the clergy, not of the laity. If I were a parson I shd. always try to dwell on the faults of the clergy: being a layman, I think it more wholesome to concentrate on those of the laity. I am rather sick of the modern assumption that, for all events, ‘WE’, the people, are never responsible: it is always our rulers, or ancestors, or parents, or education, or anybody but precious ‘US’, WE are apparently perfect & blameless. Don’t you believe it. Nor do I think the Ch. of England holds out many attractions to the worldly. There is more real poverty, even actual want, in English vicarages than there is in the homes of casual labourers.

I look forward to Martin’s¹³⁵ ‘appreciations’. Yes, we have the word ‘dither’-and the thing too. And our offices are in a dither too. This is so common that I suspect there must be something in the very structure of a modern office which creates Dither. Otherwise why does our ‘College Office’ find full time work for a crowd of people in doing what the President of the College, 100 years ago, did in his spare time without a secretary and without a typewriter? (The more noise, heat, & smell a machine produces the more power is being wasted!)

I’d rather like to see one of your hail storms: our climate is in comparison, v. tame. Have you read S. V. Benét’s Western Stan¹³⁶ Excellent, I think.

Yours sincerely

C. S. Lewis

The Coronation of Queen Elizabeth II took place in Westminster Abbey on 2 June 1953.

TO HELEN D. CALKINS (W):¹³⁷

Magdalen College,

Oxford.

June 3rd 1953

Dear Miss Calkins

Your yesterday’s cable was a gracious and cheering surprise. I can only reply, God bless Miss Calkin: God bless California! The weather was not what one wd. have wished for a Coronation, but it was lovely getting the news about Everest on the same day.¹³⁸ With heartiest good wishes.

Yours most sincerely

C. S. Lewis

TO HILA NEWMAN (W): ¹³⁹

Magdalen College,

Oxford.

June 3rd 1953

Dear Hida (is that right) Newman

Thank you so much for your lovely letter and pictures. I realised at once that the coloured one was not a particular scene but a sort of line-up like what you would have at the very end if it was a play instead of stories. The Dawn Treader is not to be the last: There are to be 4 more, 7 in all. Didn’t you notice that Asian said nothing about Eustace not going back? I thought the best of your pictures was the one of Mr. Tumnus at the bottom of the letter.

As to Asian’s other name, well I want you to guess. Has there never been anyone in this world who (1.) Arrived at the same time as Father Christmas. (2.) Said he was the son of the Great Emperor. (3.) Gave himself up for someone else’s fault to be jeered at and killed by wicked people. (4.) Came to life again. (5.) Is sometimes spoken of as a Lamb (see the end of the Dawn Treader). Don’t you really know His name in this world. Think it over and let me know your answer!

Reepicheep in your coloured picture has just the right perky, cheeky expression. I love real mice. There are lots in my rooms in College but I have never set a trap. When I sit up late working they poke their heads out from behind the curtains just as if they were saying, ‘Hi! Time for you to go to bed. We want to come out and play’

All good wishes,

Yours ever

C. S. Lewis

TO MARY VAN DEUSEN (W):

Magdalen College,

Oxford.

June 8th 1953

Dear Mrs Van Deusen

Yes, I think your position is the right one. If one is asked for advice, then, and then only, one has to have an opinion about the exact rule of life which wd. suit some other Christian. Otherwise, I think the rule is to mind one’s own business.

St. Paul goes further than this: it may even be proper at times to adopt practices which you yourself think unnecessary, and which are unnecessary to you, if your difference on such points is a stumbling-block to the Christians you find yourself among. Hence, you see, other Christians’ practices concern us, when at all, as a ground for concessions on our part, not for interference or complacent assertion that our way is best. This is in Romans chap XIV:¹⁴⁰ read the chapter and meditate on it. I am very glad you have seen the real point.

My ‘troubles’, thanks, are in abeyance, except that I am suffering from Sinusitis: but that too is better than it was.

Don’t doubt that you and Genia are in my daily prayers. Hasn’t what you are kind enough to say about our Coronation a wider relevance?—that nothing stirs us if it has the sole purpose of stirring us: i.e. the stirring must be a by-product.

God bless you.

Yours

C. S. Lewis

TO ROGER LANCELYN GREEN (BOD): TS

REF.162.53.

Magdalen College,

Oxford.

11th June 1953.

My dear Roger,

You have been having a time, have’nt you? I’m glad you are now in calmer waters. I shall be away on July 2nd, but am good for July 1st. Will you dine then? You can sleep too,* if that helps.

Yours,

Jack

TO MILDRED BOXILL (P): ¹⁴¹

Magdalen College,

Oxford.

June 14th 1953

Dear Miss Boxill

Thank you for yours of the 11th. I am sending off to you to day by registered post the corrected galleys, but retaining the carbon of the footnotes (for which many thanks) for later use. In the meantime I send you some corrections of the footnotes on the chance that they might reach you in time to be of use. If they do not I should [be] glad to have this list back again. Like an ass I have in it italicised all that is meant to be printed, which of course I ought not to have done: perhaps someone in the office can re-type it or you can explain to the printer.

In the general list of Contents (for which, again, thanks) I think the words ‘Books I-VI’ after Faerie Queene shd. be deleted. They are not, as you see from the Mutability section, quite accurate, and we are selecting from the whole poem: i.e. the Books of P.L.¹⁴² in Bush’s Milton section are not a parallel.¹⁴³

I put in references to Book and Canto at the head of each selection before the proofs of the notes arrived and showed me that it had been done thus. I suppose you will delete whichever is more easily deleted on technical grounds.

I have added a Headnote to the Epithalamion.

I have put in such cross-references as occurred to me in the margin of the galleys: not knowing where or in what form they will appear in the book. Some (not most) of their re-duplicate parallels appear already in the notes.

Accents, being given in the text, need not be repeated in the note: if this occurs anywhere, it shd. be deleted. I’m glad you agreed about having them all restored. Lor bless you, metre doesn’t guide the modern student, on either side of the Atlantic. He wholly ignores it. It is not a question of metre guiding him to the pronunciation: we are giving him pronunciation to guide him (‘tis a faint hope) to metre. Of course it’s a losing battle: but let’s fight for the ship till she goes down under us.

Yours sincerely

C. S. Lewis

TO HARRY BLAMIRES (BOD): TS

REF.307/53.

Magdalen College,

Oxford.

15th June 1953.

Dear Blamires,

Heartiest congratulations.¹⁴⁴ This is a most important turning-point: on the other line you would have been in danger of writing what was substantially the same book over and over again. Lloyd is a good man, and we have every reason to believe he is right.¹⁴⁵

How right you are to put the house first in your budget: it is ‘the bread and tea of life’ that really matter.

All good wishes.

Yours,

C. S. Lewis

TO MARY WILLIS SHELBURNE (W):

Magdalen College,

Oxford.

June 16th 1953

Dear Mrs. Shelburne

It was a kind thought on your part to send on these two little items. Whether it’s good for me to hear them is another matter! One of the things that make it easier to believe in Providence is the fact that in all trains, hotels, restaurants and other public places I have only once seen a stranger reading a book of mine, tho’ my friends encounter this phenomenon fairly often. Things are really very well arranged. I hope you keep well? With all blessings.

Yours

C. S. Lewis

TO VERA GEBBERT (W):

Magdalen College

Oxford

June 20th 53

Dear Mrs. Gebbert

The young gentleman looks already, as he should, fathomlessly American: not so much the current model as the heavy millionaire of earlier fiction and film (you’d hardly remember) who was always bringing his clenched fist down on the desk and saying ‘We gotta smash the Medicine Hat toothbrush combine.’ He clearly has a will of his own. From the height of your new technical expertise you will despise me when I say that the score of 6 lbs 14 oz. means nothing to me. I have no idea what a baby ought to weigh: you will not object to my assuming that he breaks all records within the memory of man! Yes, it must be strange and new for you: and for Charles Marion too of course: one is perhaps tempted to forget that side of it. You’ll bring him up v. badly if you start his reading with The Lion? Peter Rabbit & Benjamin Bunny¹⁴⁶ ought to come a long way before it.

Mal-de-Mère¹⁴⁷ is surely rather a good pun.

Blessings and congratulations to you all.

Yours ever,

C. S. Lewis

TO MARY WILLIS SHELBURNE (W):

Magdalen College,

Oxford

June 22nd 1953

Dear Mrs. Shelburne

Thank you for your letter of the 18th. I am very sorry to hear of your fall (that sounds sinister, doesn’t it!). They are very nasty things: even worse than the subsequent pain, I think, is the dreadful split second in which one knows one is falling and it’s too late to do anything about it. It always brings back to one vividly one’s childish days when a fall was one of the commonest catastrophes, and I think it really hurt then more than it does now: one of the many things that people forget when they wish they were children again! You and I who still enjoy fairy tales have less reason to wish actual childhood back. We have kept its pleasures and added some grown-up ones as well. One hasn’t kept the senses, though. What a comparatively tasteless thing an egg or a strawberry is now! Yes: I think the palate is the only part of me that need regret the early years

I am so glad you saw your daughter. I can’t understand that whole business. One is always told over here that America is a country where Women are on top: but the real evidence I have (and I’ve had a good deal by now) suggests a degree of male tyranny that is quite unknown here.

By the way did the reviewers mean ‘writes like a woman’ to be dispraise? Are the poems of Sappho¹⁴⁸ or, if it comes to that, the Magnificat,¹⁴⁹ to be belittled on the same ground.

You are quite right, I didn’t go to the Coronation. I approve of all that sort of thing immensely and I was deeply moved by all I heard of it; but I’m not a man for crowds and Best Clothes. The weather was frightful.

As you had forgotten what called for my remarks about WE, THE PEOPLE, so I have now quite forgotten what the said remarks were! That is one way correspondence differs from conversation. On the other hand neither party can interrupt! Oh–I’m often in a dither: usually when I’ve made two engagements for the same time in different places.

Yours

C. S. Lewis

TO HILA NEWMAN (W):

Magdalen College,

Oxford.

23/6/53

Dear Hila

(I never met this name before. What language?) You have got it right. No: the three stories you know are the only three that have yet come out. The fourth will be out this Fall (as you say: we say ‘this Autumn’). I am so glad your friends like the books. It’s funny they all began with the second one.

All good wishes,

Yours

C. S. Lewis

TO CLYDE S. KILBY (W): TS

REF.325/53.

Magdalen College,

Oxford.

26th June 1953.

Dear Mr. Kilby,

Thanks for your letter of the 24th. I should be happy to see you at noon on Wednesday 1st July in my rooms here, if that would fit in with your plans.¹⁵⁰

Yours sincerely,

C. S. Lewis

TO WARHELD M. FIROR(BOD):

Magdalen College,

Oxford.

June 27th 53

Dear Firor–

I was reminded of my sins (to you and to many other correspondents) the day before yesterday on receiving a visit from a coal-king called Hishop of (I think) Ohio, who turned out to be an old patient of yours. Apparently you ‘carved him as a dish fit for the gods’, and even proceeded, while his wounds were yet green, to the more drastic operation of lending him the Screwtape Letters. In spite of that he is your v. warm admirer.

I have been neglecting everything except the bare minimum of routine duties for many months, being worn to a ravelling by continued sinusitis in all its varying phases of much catarrh and little pain, much pain and little catarrh, and (sometimes) much of both. I have rejected the operation because I keep on meeting people who have had it and been no better afterwards. It now begins to clear. This disease has, however, one excellent quality: its pain, unlike all other pains I have known, always gets better at night. But I mustn’t spread myself on the symptoms since hearing symptoms is rather ‘a busman’s holiday’ (have you that phrase?) for you. One may perhaps add that the internal smell (‘bad smell in the nose’ like ‘bad taste in the mouth’) is rather allegorical: the world seems to stink, but (as often) the real corruption is in the observer.

I’ve just read S. V. Benét’s Western Star which I thought, as far as it went, even better than John Browns Body.¹⁵¹ Certainly more interesting and of more real value (so far as any comparison is possible) than any of the ‘modern’ poetry produced on this side of the Atlantic. I wish your bad poets weren’t so exportable! You sent us Eliot in the flesh and Pound in the spirit.

My brother and I are both ‘with book’ at present and read proofs all day.¹⁵² Mine is a big and (to the taste) dull, academic work.

I always hope to hear that you are coming to Oxford again. All blessings.

Yours

C. S. Lewis

TO MARY VAN DEUSEN (W):

Magdalen College,

Oxford.

June [2] 9th 53

Dear Mrs. Van Deusen

I never know what to say in cases like that of the sick child’s mother whom you mention. There seems plenty of evidence that God does sometimes, in answer to prayer, heal in miraculous fashion: sometimes, it wd. appear, not. No doubt there are very good reasons for both.

I wouldn’t quite say that ‘religious Practices help the search for truth’ for that might imply that they have no further use when the Truth has been found. I think about the practices what a wise old priest said to me about a ‘rule of life’ in general-‘It is not a stair but a bannister’ (or rail or balustrade–I don’t know what you call it in America), i.e. it is, not the thing you ascend by but it is a protective against falling off and a help-up. I think thus we ascend. The stair is God’s grace. One’s climb from step to step is obedience. Many different kinds of bannisters exist, all legitimate. It is possible to get up without any bannisters, if need be: but no one wd. willingly build a staircase without them because it would be less safe, more laborious, and a little lacking in beauty. Give my love to Genia. I am so glad all goes well.

Poprzedni 1 ...21 222324 25 ...30 Kolejny