Customer Reviews

Reflections on the Psalms (Harvest Book)

5 star:		(15)
4 star:		(7)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

It's a shame that so many of the people who enjoy Lewis's theological works never read his enlightening discussion of the Psalms. This book does not have the polemic approach of some of his other works. This is (by Lewis's own admission) not a work of scholarship, being more like one schoolboy comparing notes with another in describing the difficulties met and joys gained in reading the Psalms. Lewis notes that the Psalms are poems, intended to be sung, and not doctrinal treatises on which to base a system of theology. He selects various psalms for his discussions, enlightening them with his usual good sense, using illustrations from daily life and the literary world. Lewis's approach is far more helpful than most others who comment on the Psalms and should be read with interest by those familiar with this part of the Bible.

The first time I read this book, many years ago, I was bothered by what I took as Lewis' disrespectful approach to the OT. One chapter of the book is called "Cursings," and in it Lewis forthrightly notes his initial impression that "the Jews are much more vindictive and vitriolic than the Pagans." While he finds something of great value (even refreshing) in their honest anger at injustice, (see Rene Girard's The Scapegoat for a fascinating perspective on violence and religion) some passages he still labels "diabolical." In the following chapter, "Death in the Psalms," Lewis frankly admits that most of the psalmists did not appear to know about heaven and hell. And in his chapter on "Scripture," he admits to the presence of "naivite, error, contradiction, even wickedness," in the OT.

I did not like this. Nor did I know enough about nature poetry and paganism, monotheism in other cultures, or Meditteranean cultures, to appreciate all his insights.

What I think I did appreciate, and still do, was the way in which Lewis explains the poetry of the Psalms, the "beauty of the Law," (as in Psalm 119), love of nature, "second meanings" in the Psalms, and most of all, the life-enhancing chapter called "A Word about Praising." John Piper developed this chapter into a whole theology. (See Confessions of a Christian Hedonist.) But the most poetic explanation lies here: "I had never noticed that all enjoyment spontaneously overflows into praise . . . I had not noticed how the humblest, and at the same time the most balanced and capacious, minds, praised most, while cranks, misfits and malconents praised least . . . Praise almost seems to be inner health made audible . . . The Psalmists in telling everyone to praise God are doing what all men do when they speak of what they care about."

That chapter is one of the most enlightening and enchanting (in the literal sense) series of marks that have ever been made on paper, I think. Lewis works a powerful counter-spell to the curse of the reductionists, whom he soundly defeats in argument, re-enchanting the world with the glory of God. I see Lewis' idea confirmed every day -- when my children call me to see a funny scene in a cartoon, or a beautiful sea shell on the beach, for example.

What I found on my first reading of this book remains with me, and grows as I learn more of life. I've also come to appreciate Lewis' take on Scripture, though I am not sure he is completely right. Lewis differs from both skeptic and inerracist in that he makes no a priori assumptions, either that there are no mistakes in Scripture, or that God cannot do miracles. This allows him to be frank and take a truly empirical approach. His conclusion is that the Bible is inspired not like the Koran is said to be, written word-for-word in heaven before time began, but as "the same sort of material as any other literature . . . taken into the service of God's word." Those who see only a human literature are like illiterates who see only ink blots on paper, and are unable to see a poem. Lewis also hints that the best pagan philosophy and poetry can be "taken up" into God's revelation in a similar, though less authoritative, manner.

If all that gives you the impression that Lewis covers a lot of territory, with little detailed discussion of most individual psalms, that's true.

Author, Jesus and the Religions of Man

With the sensitivity of a poet and the honesty of a scholar, C.S. Lewis delves into the Psalms. In doing so, he is not afraid to raise uncomfortable questions, such as how to understand the apparent self-righteousness and gleefulness of many psalmists; or the question whether God is an egocentric monarch who demands people to praise Him as if He needed such praise. Other issues Lewis deals with are the concept of Judgment in the Psalms, as well as their portrayals of death, nature, and the beauty of God. He also devotes two chapters to understanding the prophecies, or second meanings, in the Psalms

For me, however, the most interesting part was C.S. Lewis's view on the Bible as seen in the book. Except for some of his essays, letters, and recorded Q&A sessions, C.S. Lewis has been rather sparse on clearly stating his view on Scripture. This makes his Reflections on the Psalms a valuable resource to a Lewis scholar, since it shows his view on the Bible more clearly than any other of his books.

To summarize his view, he emphasizes that the Bible is not a Divine encyclopaedia. We cannot simply turn the Bible to the headwords stars, earth, animals, homo sapiens, and find a Divine exposition that explains God's perspective on the topic in a systematic manner. The Bible is a canon of various types of literature, to be approached in various ways. It is not an encyclopaedia but an anthology: God selecting a canon which, taken as a whole, portrays the history of the Incarnation, using myth, chronicle, poetry and prophecy to do so.

Many people would of course rather have a Divine encyclopaedia than a Divine anthology of human literature. The latter seems to be rather an "untidy and leaky vehicle," as C.S. Lewis puts it. We much prefer "something we could have tabulated and memorised and relied on like the multiplication table." But only because we wish the Bible were different, it does not mean that it is different. God does not necessarily share our opinion that a Divine encyclopaedia would be best for us. As C.S. Lewis says: "There is one argument which we should beware of using for either position: God must have done what is best, this is best, therefore God has done this. For we are mortals and do not know what is best for us, and it is dangerous to prescribe what God must have done - especially when we cannot, for the life of us, see that He has after all done it."

Even Jesus, the Word that truly was perfect, does not measure up to some people's expectations of the Bible. He did not communicate a Divine encyclopaedia to mankind. Jesus wrote no book. "We have only reported sayings, most of them uttered in answer to questions, shaped in some degree by their context." He preached and conversed rather than lectured, using thereby the whole range of human expressions such as we can expect from a carpenter: "paradox, proverb, exaggeration, parable, irony." If we took all of His sayings literally, they would contradict each other. One can therefore not reduce His teachings to a neat set of Divine principles. Bible teachers who do that lose the essence of the Word made flesh. His teaching "cannot be grasped by the intellect alone, cannot be `got up' as if it were a `subject.' If we try to do that with it, we shall find Him the most elusive of teachers. He hardly ever gave a straight answer to a straight question. He will not be, in the way we want, `pinned down.'" The attempt is, Lewis says, "like trying to bottle a sunbeam."

Neither does the Apostle Paul give us a Divine encyclopaedia. When it comes to lucidity and orderly exposition, Paul is a very bad writer indeed. His letters are a "turbulent mixture of petty detail, personal complaint, practical advice, and lyrical rapture." They are not a collection of treatises on systematic theology. But what we do get from the letters is an example of a Christian's life in action. "Follow me as I follow Christ" is Paul's maxim. We see "Christ Himself operating in a man's life" - which is more valuable than a simple set of dogmas.

If, therefore, even the Word made flesh and the great Apostle cannot be approached like Divine encyclopaedias, how much less the Old Testament? - how much less the documents which portray the history of the Incarnation gradually coming into focus? Indeed, "the value of the Old Testament may be dependant on what seems its imperfection. It may repel one use in order that we may be forced to use it in another way - (...) to re-live, while we read, the whole Jewish experience of God's gradual and graded self-revelation, to feel the very contentions between the Word and the human material through which it works. For here again [as in Jesus' and Paul's teachings], it is our total response that has to be elicited."

Thus far a summary of C.S. Lewis's view on Scripture. For a full exposition, and much more besides, buy the book. You will not regret it.

- Jacob Schriftman, Author of The C. S. Lewis Book on the Bible

C.S. Lewis points out some very interesting facts and shows you his perspective on the psalms. He uses several different aspects to review such as their view of death, afterlife, suffering, etc. He points out that the Psalms are songs and should be interprated with that fact in mind. That alone adds a new perspective to the Psalms. He also makes it clear that the Psalms are not neccessarily to be viewed from a Christian perspective because the writers were not Christians.

The only downside I can see in the book is C.S. Lewis' writing style. He supposes his readers know certain historical figures and are versed in numerous literary writings on certain subjects. If you are not a person who reads these types of things all the time it may come difficult for you. Either way you will still get something out of it. Many time Christians, such as myself, try to make something in the Bible what we want it to be, and I believe we have done that to the Psalms over and over again. Have a read!

In most, if not all, of Lewis' non-fiction works, he, at some point, refers and appeals to "real theologians", perhaps, in an attempt to distinguish the framework of his opinions, thoughts, and understanding from individuals that have been formally educated in theology. While Lewis certainly appeared to dedicate a great deal of his time to theology, he continually reminded readers that he was not a formally educated theologian, nor did he consider himself an expert. In Reflections on the Psalms, however, it can be recognized that his authoritative disclaimer is a little more direct, adamant, and deliberate than that which might be considered typical within his work. Having been written towards the end of his life and career, it almost appears as if Lewis is pleading with the reader to remove any preconceived perception of higher authority on the matter that he might maintain in one's mind. That is, it seems as if Lewis' purpose was genuinely that of sharing thoughts and resulting conclusions that he, as a layperson, had found himself reflecting upon. He goes so far as to compare this work with schoolmates sharing and comparing notes in an effort to better comprehend how a problem is worked out, as opposed to appealing to an instructor who might only offer a solution without ever actually explaining the intricacies of how a particular difficulty is overcome. Lewis claims that this work might be beneficial to the unlearned reader because he, considering himself equally unlearned in comparison to some, had only recently met these particular difficulties and, therefore, could still remember what it was like to not understand, in contrast to the expert that has known the answer for so long that they have forgotten the difficulty altogether. While the authoritative disclaimer might be more persuasive in this work, after reading it throughout, it will likely be difficult for many readers to swallow the reality of their own understanding if Lewis is, as he claims to be, lacking in comparative understanding on the theological spectrum of knowledge.

Reflections on the Psalms, as is the case so often with this author, is an enlightening undertaking for those that have experience similar thoughts and struggles as those outlined within. This work is not the comprehensive study on the Psalms that the title might indicate but rather Lewis' actual reflections on the Psalms. Not attempting to compose a comprehensive study, Lewis has selected topics based on his own interests and approaches them systematically, beginning with those topics which he found most difficult and less pleasant to contemplate and progresses upon those foundations. That which one might find most enjoyable about this particular work is that it is not apologetic and, as such, Lewis replaces what might otherwise be argument with fluid, acute, contemplation. In this fashion, Lewis, almost casually, sheds brilliant light on some of the most difficult issues that might arise in a Christian's mind.

Surprisingly, this, one of Lewis' lesser known works, might be one of his very best. What might be considered more surprising by the unsuspecting reader is the depth of truth and understanding woven into what, if literally judged by its cover, could be interpreted as a comparatively shallow study on the Psalms. Some, like this reviewer, might have had their interest directed after reading the essay published in Christian Reflections that anticipates this work, but very little comparison should be made. Reflections on the Psalms is exactly what it is in content, not necessarily in title. This work should be recommended, at least for consideration's sake, to any Christian.

"A man can't be always defending the truth; there must be a time to feed on it." - C.S. Lewis, Reflections on the Psalms

This is not a commentary on the Psalms - this is Lewis wrestling personally with the Psalms, around issues near and dear to his heart. But what better way to encounter the Psalms? They are written as a songbook, as lyrical poems from the heart of one worshiper to another. They aren't primarily doctrinal theses, they are artworks of exceeding skill and ability. Lewis is intellectually and devotionally equipped to engage with the Psalms at a deep level. I love reading his meditations on the Psalms.

In ordering this book, I had hoped Lewis would go into indepth reflections on the psalms; he does not. Instead he explore themes that influenced the psalms, he looks at certain misunderstandings, such as those people who are inclined to put pagan mythology and scripture on the same plane. He also draws out themes from the psalms, such as royalty, looks at what they meant in the ancient world, and what they mean in the Christian context. Additionally he does look at various passages from the psalms, and ponders the meaning of them, in particular I enjoyed his interpretation of the verse in Psalm 137 which speaks of bashing the heads of Babylonian babies on rocks, he really put it in quite an acceptable light.(to find out what it is, pick up the book!)

It had been awhile since I read any CS Lewis when I picked up this book. It is much different than others I have read, but it was quite enjoyable. Instead of analyzing specific Psalms in detail, Lewis takes a more thematic approach. This method allows him to connect the dots between specific Psalms, and other passage of Scripture as well.

Overall, Lewis does a tremendous job of making his points, and highlighting the fact that the Psalms are poems, and not doctrinal statements. Although I do not agree with all of his conclusions, Lewis really does make you think. I appreciate the fact that I felt like I had completed a successful journey through the book of Psalms after reading the book. It really opened my eyes to some new insights - which is refreshing.

If you like CS Lewis, or are interested in learning more about the Book of Psalms, then I highly recommend this book. You will see something there that you did not see before.

I consider this one of Lewis' lesser works, or minor works, perhaps because it is not on one theme, so it is not as cohesive as other books. Lewis admits, at the beginning, "I write for the unlearned about things on which I am unlearned myself." He writes as a schoolboy discussing the topic with classmates, not as a teacher who knows so much he doesn't understand the problem. In other words, it is not so much theology as reader's reaction.

The problem is how to read the Psalms, how to interpret some of the statements. Lewis starts with the difficult themes, such as expression of hate. For instance, the cursing of Psalm 109, verses 7-11:

When he shall be judge, let him be condemned: and let his prayer become sin.
Let his days be few; and let another take his office.
Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow.
Let his children be continually vagabonds, and beg: let them seek their bread also out of their desolate places.
Let the extortioner catch all that he hath; and let the strangers spoil his labor.

Lewis points out, for the contemporary Christian, this is not a justification for hatred. Rather we should recognize the sentiment to repent of, and the harm done - the hatred caused - by injustice. To quote Lewis, "Take from a man his freedom or his goods and you may have taken his innocence, almost his humanity, as well."

The next chapter, Death, emphasizes a recurring lesson: beware of reading the Psalms from the contemporary Christian perspective, take into account the context in which they were written. This relates to the chapter on death as Christians think of the eternal life that awaits. In the Psalms there is no eternal life after death.

There are two chapters on Second Meanings, which justify contemporary readings and the Christian perspective. Reading some of the verses as prophetic of Christ is not wrong. For instance, Psalm 45 anticipates the Nativity. But the Psalmist may not have known it was prophecy at the time of writing it. For Lewis it is not surprising that the words would take on more meaning with time as 1) he believes God guided the writers of the scriptures, and 2) he believes in the mythopoeic, a term he uses in other essays to describe the truths expressed in myths, including pagan and other religions. Christ not only fulfills Old Testament scripture, but the pagan by "transcending and abrogating it."

In the chapter, Scripture, Lewis writes a passage important to reading all of his works:

"I have been suspected of being what is called a Fundamentalist. That is because I never regard any narrative as unhistorical simply on the ground that it includes the miraculous. Some people find the miraculous so hard to believe that they cannot imagine any reason for my acceptance of it other than a prior belief that every sentence of the Old Testament has historical or scientific truth. But this I do not hold, any more than St. Jerome did when he said that Moses described Creation "after the manner of a popular poet" (as we should say, mythically) or than Calvin did when he doubted whether the story of Job were history or fiction. The real reason why I can accept as historical a story in which a miracle occurs is that I have never found any philosophical grounds for the universal negative proposition that miracles do not happen."

I bought this book because I wanted to better understand the Psalms. They are often quoted in the New Testament and seem at once to be beautiful and confounding. C.S. Lewis approaches these works in a way that may seem sacrilegious to some. But for, his honesty and insights came shining through. I will never read them again without thinking more deeply, smiling at his analogies and feeling a greater connection to God.