Rowan Williams deconstructs Narnia

Rowan Williams, when asked his thoughts on C. S. Lewis’s Narnia books, declared that he finds Aslan to be “on the knife-edge of the erotic.”

One wonders what C. S. Lewis would make of Rowan Williams and his ideas; Williams himself provides a clue in the same interview: “”Lewis thought most theologians were gutless liberals who didn’t care about the truth enough.”

And Aslan would almost certainly say: “Oh, Adam’s son, how cleverly you defend yourself against all that might do you good!”

From here:

On C S Lewis and theology: “Lewis thought most theologians were gutless liberals who didn’t care about the truth enough.”

On the sensuousness of Aslan the lion: “on the knife-edge of the erotic.”

On the Aslan resurrection scene in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe: “I think it is such an obvious parallel. The more interesting thing is how does Lewis convey a sense of what the religious climate, the religious sensibility might be in another world? That is the teasing thing.”

On his first response to C S Lewis’ Narnia books: “When you’re 14 or 15, as I was when I read some of those books, you think, wow, we’ve got a clever man on our side! Isn’t that good!”

Of a pagan who gets to heaven: “Here is someone with total courage, passion and generosity who’s giving all that to a mistaken target. But the heavenly postman knows better and delivers it to the right address.”

A nudist tests his constitutional right to public nudity in the courts

Although some seem to think this is a nudist blog, it isn’t, so I’ve closed the post for further comments.

Brian Coldin is a nudist – a Christian nudist, apparently. I’m not sure what part Christianity plays in his nudist exploits, but I imagine he could easily find an Anglican church willing to offer a generous pastoral response affirming him in his chilly calling.

He is about to assert his constitutional right to public nudity in the courts. This should dispel any lingering illusion that Canadian judges and lawyers engaged on constitutional issues are busy doing much of anything that is other than frivolous; particularly if Coldin makes his court appearance in his preferred state – as he should since he is obviously serious about his vocation.

From here:

Prominent defence lawyer Clayton Ruby was expected to argue current laws in Canada prohibiting nudity in public places, or on private property exposed to public view, are overly broad — thus they should be struck down and the laws under the Criminal Code updated.

According to the Federation of Canadian Nudists, these laws are archaic because they define nudity as generally “indecent” and intended to cause “harm” to those who witness it.

The challenge is being launched on behalf of Ruby’s client, Brian Coldin, a nudist resort operator in Bracebridge, Ont., a small cottage country town about two hours north of Toronto. Coldin, who has been arrested numerous times over the years for public nudity, was charged last year with five counts related to incidents between April 2008 and May 2009 near his resort and at drive-thus at both Tim Horton’s and A&W restaurants.

The criminal trial, which began last fall, heard testimony from one of the workers at the fast-food burger restaurant who cried on the stand when she described how Coldin and two others drove up to the pickup window completely nude. She testified Coldin and the driver of the vehicle both pretended to reach for their imaginary wallets to pay for their orders, causing their genitals to sway back and forth.

What further evidence of causing harm to others could possibly be required: fast food is hard enough to digest without being subjected to the uninvited spectacle of  spontaneously swaying genitals.

Neither Brian Coldin, nor the courts would care, but C. S. Lewis, in The Four Loves, makes the interesting point that nudity is not the natural state of man:

“Are we not our true selves when naked? In a sense, no. The word naked was originally a past participle; the naked man was the man who had undergone a process of naking, that is, of stripping or peeling (you used the verb of nuts and fruit). Time out of mind the naked man has seemed to our ancestors not the natural but the abnormal man; not the man who has abstained from dressing but the man who has been for some reason undressed. And it is a simple fact-anyone can observe it at a men’s bathing place-that nudity emphasises common humanity and soft-pedals what is individual. In that way we are “more ourselves” when clothed. By nudity the lovers cease to be solely John and Mary; the universal He and She are emphasised. You could almost say they put on nakedness as a ceremonial robe-or as the costume for a charade.

The Voyage of the Dawn Treader

We took a few of our grandchildren to see the film a couple of nights ago. Although it strayed from the book here and there, the important thing is that God and Jesus – played by Aslan – are still recognisable, even though Liam Neeson, whose voice Aslan borrowed, couldn’t quite see it.

A gaggle of teenage girls sitting behind us didn’t get it either, a fact I discovered while overhearing one of them trying to explain the plot of the first two films to the others. I told them to read the books.

Worth seeing and very enjoyable.

Lebanese TV stations scrap Jesus show

From the Jerusalem Post:

Controversial program describes Jesus from an Islamic point of view.

BEIRUT  — Two Shiite Muslim television stations in Lebanon canceled a controversial program about Jesus on Friday, saying they do not want to stir up sectarian conflict in the country.

The 17-episode program, which was produced in Iran, describes Jesus from an Islamic point of view. Muslims believe Jesus was a prophet and a teacher, but not the son of God.

The cancellation is supposedly out of respect for Lebanon’s “religious diversity”. There is a much better reason: the contention that Jesus was merely a great prophet and teacher is illogical and clearly untrue. Either Jesus was who he claimed to be – God incarnate – or he was a nut case. C. S. Lewis said it best:

I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: “I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.” That is the one thing we must not say. A man who said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to