Bird Books

As I continue my path through Eiseley library’s children’s picture book section, I become pickier and pickier about children’s books. So much is monotonous pages of empty words accompanied by bright splashes of illustrations that are equally empty. The rhythms start to grow old, the archetypes tedious. I get worn out.

So when I discover a book that is sweet without being saccharine, educational without being pedantic, and illustrated artistically without trying to be avant-garde, I get excited.

Dianna Hutts Aston wrote two such books that I thoroughly enjoyed coming across this month.

Mama outside, Mama insideMama Outside, Mama Inside tells the story of two mamas preparing for their coming children. The mama outside is a bird, preparing a nest, sitting on the eggs, bringing her hatchlings food, and teaching them to fly. Mama inside is a woman, preparing a nursery for her baby, knitting a blanket, feeding her baby, and taking her new baby to the window to see the baby birds learn how to fly.

The illustrations by Susan Graber are soft and realistic. I was excited to see that Gaber chose to portray Mama inside breastfeeding her child (discretely) while Papa brings a pillow. The image of an infant being fed a bottle has become iconographic–but I’d much rather have the normative image portray breastfeeding! Artists like Gaber deserve kudos for subtly working towards re-establishing breastfeeding as a normative practice.

An Egg is Quiet

The Second Dianna Aston book I was impressed with was An Egg is Quiet, illustrated by Sylvia Long. The book starts with the simple words “An egg is quiet. It sits there, under its mother’s feathers…on top of its father’s feet…buried beneath the sand. Warm. Cozy.” And on it goes, telling about the features of different eggs–their colors and shapes and sizes and patterns and textures. The main text is in large script, with only a short sentence or phrase per page. The bulk of the page is composed of naturalistic illustrations of different eggs, labeled for easy identification, and more detailed descriptions of whatever principle the main script is discussing in smaller (but still not small) print.

This is a delightful book that is sure to have children pouring for hours over its illustrations and dreaming about seeing all the different birds (and a few reptiles) and eggs. Parents could easily read just the large script to their youngest children, while exploring the smaller print in more detail with their slightly older children. I can see this title holding the attention of preschoolers all the way through middle-elementary school children. (It held my attention pretty well too–and I had to go back to check out Sylvia Long’s illustrations in better detail.) This is the nature book I wish I had in my home growing up.

Reading My LibraryFor more comments on children’s books, see the rest of my Reading My Library posts or check out Carrie’s blog Reading My Library, which chronicles her and her children’s trip through the children’s section of their local library.



Does the cross promote pacifism?

Notes on John Stott’s
The Cross of Christ
Chapter 12: Loving Our Enemies

Those of you who’ve been following me for a while know that I’m in a book club that’s reading Greg Boyd’s The Myth of a Christian Nation (our last meeting is tonight, boo-hoo.) Well, Boyd, who appears to be from an Anabaptist tradition, seems to be a pacifist (I’m reading the last chapter, about violence, right now).

If you’re at all familiar with my family, you know that I have two brothers in the Marines (currently, they’re “poolies”.) John leaves for training in October. Tim’ll leave in January.

And a few of you know that, over the past year, I’ve developed friendships with several people who ascribe to a basically pacifist or nonviolent position on the basis of their faith–in Christ.

It’s been an interesting process, sorting out my own thoughts in relation to pacifism and the cross and how the two relate–or if they relate.

I definitely don’t have it all figured out. I don’t have any problem with personally being non-violent (I don’t have any desire to join the military, etc.)–but I’m not sure if I’m ready to suggest that others should also subscribe to non-violence, or that I should promote non-violence as national policy, etc.

Of course, those are merely side issues compared to the big question that I’m wrestling with, that is: How does the cross inform a Christian’s involvement or non-involvement, support or opposition, approval or disapproval of war and other acts including violence? Or, to put it more simply: Does the cross promote pacifism?

Many of those within my book club (who tend towards non-violence) have said that they do believe in some concept of justified violence–that states have some authority to “wield the sword” (a la Romans 13) which results in violent acts of justice. The question, then, is whether Christians can and/or should be participants in this just violence. This has been my primary struggle.

John Stott addresses Christian involvement in state administration of justice (including via violent means) in The Cross of Christ:

“It is important to note that Paul uses the same vocabulary at the end of Romans 12 [‘do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath’] and at the beginning of Romans 13 [‘he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath’]. The words ‘wrath’ (orge) and ‘revenge/punishment’ (ekdikesis and ekdikos) occur in both passages. Forbidden to God’s people in general, they are assigned to God’s ‘servants’ in particular, namely officials of the state. Many Christians find great difficulty in what they perceive here to be an ethical ‘dualism’. I should like to try to clarify this issue.

First, Paul is not distinguishing between two entities, church and state, as in Luther’s well-known doctrine of the two kingdoms…

Secondly, Paul is not distinguishing between two spheres of Christian activity, private and public, so that (to put it crudely) we must love our enemies in private but may hate them in public….

Thirdly, what Paul is doing is to distinguish between two roles, personal and official. Christians are always Christians (in church and state, in public and private), under the same moral authority of Christ, but are given different roles (at home, at work, and in the community) which make different actions appropriate. For example, a Christian in the role of a policeman may use force to arrest a criminal, which in the role of a private citizen he may not; he may as a judge condemn a prisoner…and he may as an executioner (assuming that capital punishment may in some circumstances be justified) kill… This is not to say that arresting, judging, and executing are in themselves wrong (which would establish different moralities for public and private life), but that they are right responses to criminal behavior, which however God has entrusted to particular officials of the state.”

~John Stott The Cross of Christ

This makes a lot of sense to me–but still leaves the question open in my mind: But should a Christian seek out “official” roles in which they must perform actions that are not permissible to them in their “personal” roles as private citizens and members of the body of Christ?

The Week in WordsSince bulk of this post is an extended quote from Chapter 12 of John Stott’s The Cross of Christ, I’m linking it up in lieu of my regular Week in Words post. Collect more quotes from throughout the week with Barbara H’s meme “The Week in Words”.

(See more of my notes on The Cross of Christ.)

***I’d also like to clarify that we should attempt to keep our comments Christ-honoring. I know that this is a topic that can get people riled up (I do, after all, belong to a military-ish family, and you know those pacifists :-P) But let’s try to be respectful.****


Self in light of the cross

I’m three chapters from the end of The Cross of Christ–and I’m going to get it finished! Not that the book isn’t engaging. In fact, I’ve already finished reading the book–and have my notes all on paper. It’s just getting them on the computer that’s the problem. That and trying to figure out when to post them without loading you down with too many “thinking” posts. But I want to get them done by next Wednesday–so here goes!

Notes on John Stott’s
The Cross of Christ
Chapter 11: Self-Understanding and Self-Giving

The ways worldly people look at themselves can easily be divided into two broad categories: self-love or self-loathing.

The cross leaves room for neither.

Rather, the cross calls believers to a life of self-affirmation and self-denial.

It’s strange, isn’t it, to put those two together?

The world’s attitudes, self-love and self-hatred, are mutually exclusive–but they are both rooted in pride. The cross’s attitudes, self-affirmation and self-denial–despite their apparent contradiction–are complementary. Both of these are rooted in humility.

The cross’s self-affirmation is different than the world’s self-love. While the world encourages unconditional acceptance of self (both the good and the bad) as “self-esteem”, the cross affirms both the fallenness of self and its worth to God. The cross says that I have value, not because I am particularly special, but because God has valued me.

“As William Temple expressed it, ‘My worth is what I am worth to God; and that is a marvelous great deal, for Christ died for me.'”
~Quoted in John Stott’s The Cross of Christ

The cross’s self-denial is also different from the world’s self-hatred. While the world loathes itself and engages in self-destructive behaviors, the cross calls us to recognize and identify with Christ–and to “reckon [ourselves] dead to sin” (Romans 6:11).

The world’s view of self leads to self-centeredness. Either one idolizes self, placing self as lord and following its every whim, or one villifies self, making self the enemy and focusing energy on self-destruction.

The cross’s view of self, on the other hand, leads to others-centeredness. One’s self is affirmed–but not in such a way as to inspire self-worship. One’s self is denied–but not with self as its object. Rather, the affirmation of self leads to worship–and the denial of self to service.

It is in the cross that we lose our lives in order to gain them (Luke 17:33).

I love how C.S. Lewis describes the effect of right relationship with God on “self”:

“The more we get what we now call ‘ourselves’ out of the way and let Him take us over, the more truly ourselves we become….It is no good trying to ‘be myself’ without Him. The more I resist Him and try to live on my own, the more I become dominated by my own heredity and upbringing and surroundings and natural desires…It is when I turn to Christ, when I give myself up to His personality, that I first begin to have a real personality of my own….Give up yourself, and you will find your real self. Lose your life and you will save it. Nothing in you that has not died will ever be raised from the dead. Look for yourself, and you will find in the long run only hatred, loneliness, despair, rage, ruin, and decay. But look to Christ and you will find Him, and with Him everything else thrown in.
~C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity

(See more of my notes on The Cross of Christ.)


Bad news masquerading as good

After making a flippant but completely uninformed remark about Joel Osteen (with whom I had no familiarity except a short video clip), I was convicted that I ought not criticize things/people I know nothing about. After all, one of the charges against the false prophets in Second Peter is that they “speak evil of the things they do not understand”.

I rescinded my flippant remark and said I would look into Osteen more before making an evaluation. Thus, I traveled to my local library and picked up one of Osteen’s books–Become a Better You.

What I found shocked me and troubled me deeply. In some ways, Osteen is just another prosperity preacher of the Word of Faith tradition. He confuses the promises of the gospel with the idea of self-fulfillment and turns God into a vending-machine in the sky. The so-called prosperity gospel is a disturbing corruption of the true gospel–but I’ve known many who ascribe to a version of the prosperity gospel who still maintain at least a degree of faithfulness to the true gospel: that Jesus Christ died to pay the penalty for sins, on our behalf, thus reconciling us to God.

I see no evidence that Osteen has maintained any modicum of the true gospel of Jesus Christ.

Instead, Osteen has replaced the gospel with an “I’m good, you’re good, we’re all good” self-esteem talk. He tells his readers that “God has already put in the talent, the creativity, the discipline, the wisdom, and the determination. It’s all in you.” “We have to believe that we have what it takes.” Over and over, he states that “God has placed the seeds of greatness inside of you”. He emphasizes the goodness of creation–but completely ignores the fall.

I almost thought he was going to address the fall when he refers to Adam and Eve hiding after eating the forbidden fruit. “Great,” I thought, “Now he’s going to tell them that the created goodness has been warped and twisted by sin, but that Jesus died to redeem us from that twistedness, to reverse sin.” Alas, it was not to be. Instead, Osteen uses God’s response to Adam and Eve (“Who told you that you were naked?”) as “proof” that they weren’t actually naked, that they were believing a lie from the enemy. Except that wasn’t a lie. They were naked. They had something to be ashamed of. They had something to hide. It wasn’t a lie. It was the truth.

Now, this might sound like a huge downer. Osteen’s got good news, I’m bearing bad. But am I?

You see, Osteen’s message of self-esteem and “you’re all good” is a cheap substitute for the truly good news. The good news is that while we were completely worthless, God endued us with worth by sending His Son to die for us. While we were incapable of helping ourselves, Jesus Christ made us new. The good news is that while we were yet dead in our sins, Christ died for us.

Osteen’s message skips the fall–and thus sees no need for the cross. In the first seventy pages of Become a Better You, Osteen mentions the cross exactly never–unless one considers this gem on page 35: “God gave His very best for you, His only Son.”

In ignoring the fall and the cross, Osteen leaves out the essence of Christianity. As Charles Spurgeon points out (HT: Justin Taylor):

“Yes, it is Christ, Christ, Christ whom we have to preach; and if we leave Him out, we leave out the very soul of the gospel.”

You do not really preach the gospel if you leave Christ out; if He be omitted, it is not the gospel. You may invite men to listen to your message, but you are only inviting them to gaze upon an empty table unless Christ is the very center and substance of all that you set before them.”

Want to become a better you? Osteen can’t help–he can only try to convince you that you’re actually not that bad. Only in Jesus Christ can bad become good and sinners saints. Denying sin will not make it go away, it will only lead us into delusion. Only by recognizing our sin and by faith receiving Christ’s work on the cross can we be made righteous.

The gospel that Osteen shares is not good news at all–it is bad news masquerading as good.


Community of the Cross

Notes on John Stott’s
The Cross of Christ
Chapter 10: The Community of Celebration

In our discussion of the cross thus far, Stott says, we might be tempted to consider the cross to have only individual and/or cosmic effects.

This is not true.

Christ did not die merely to save individuals but to secure for Himself a people.

“…who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself His own special people, zealous for good works. ”
~Titus 2:14

Nowhere is this communal aspect of the cross better seen or understood than in the one sacramental celebration that Christ Himself instituted: The Lord’s Supper.

In the Lord’s Supper, we remember Christ’s sacrifice on the cross.

“and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, ‘Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me.'”
~I Corinthians 11:24

In the Lord’s Supper, we partake of the benefits of Christ’s death on the cross.

“The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?”
~1 Corinthians 10:16

In the Lord’s Supper, we proclaim Christ’s sacrifice on the cross.

“For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes.”
~I Corinthians 11:26

In the Lord’s Supper, we are unified by Christ’s sacrifice on the cross.

“For we, though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread.”
~I Corinthians 10:17

Finally, in the Lord’s Supper, we give thanks for Christ’s sacrifice on the cross.

“Therefore by Him let us continually offer the sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to His name.”
~Hebrews 13:5

Conclusion:

“The Christian community is a community of the cross, for it has been brought into being by the cross, and the focus of its worship is the Lam once slain, now glorified. So the community of the cross is a community of celebration, a eucharistic community, ceaselessly offering to God through Christ the sacrifice of our praise and thanksgiving. The Christian life is an unending festival. And the festival we keep, now that our Passover Lamb has been sacrificed for us, is a joyful celebration of his sacrifice, together with a spiritual feasting upon it.”
~John Stott, The Cross of Christ

(See more of my notes on The Cross of Christ.)


Narnia Wrap-Up

Chronicles of Narnia

Tomorrow is the last day of July, which means Carrie’s Chronicles of Narnia Reading Challenge is coming to a close.

Last year, I read and made notes on The Magician’s Nephew. This year, I decided to continue on with the next in the series (chronologically), The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe.

I intended to explore the Biblical/moral principles found within The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe as I had with The Magician’s Nephew. Alas, I was swamped with dozens of other books, one of which I was writing notes on.

I didn’t end up having time to think or write an in-depth analysis, but I still did end up getting a chance to take a look at some of the allusions found in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe thanks to a nifty little read-along called Inside “The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe”.

What’s more, the book I was writing notes on (John Stott’s The Cross of Christ just happened to remind me of a couple of scenes in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, so I included those scenes as part of my notes (1, 2).

And finally, I did take the time to sit down and write a post about one of the things that stuck out to me (for the first time) this time around: the question of how to evaluate the trustworthiness of a person or piece of information.

In summary, these are the posts I’ve written about Narnia over the last month:

Please take a look and leave some comments (even on the older posts)–I absolutely love it when people engage my ideas. I might even respond in the comments and go back and forth with you if you’d like (even though I haven’t yet responded to Carrie’s comment on that last post–consider that a primer for future discussion :-P).

Thanks for dropping by and don’t forget to take a look at Carrie’s conclusion page for links to other people’s comments on the Chronicles of Narnia!


Book Review: “Inside the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe” by James Stuart Bell and others

View my disclosure statement for more information on how I choose books to review.

Chronicles of Narnia

When Carrie’s Chronicles of Narnia Reading Challenge rolls around in the month of July, I relish the opportunity to go back to Narnia. I don’t often give myself the luxury of re-reading books, since I’ve got a bazillion books to read in my quest to read every book in my local library. But I make an exception for C.S. Lewis and re-read one title for the challenge. I’d already read all seven of the Narnia books (since September 5 of 2006 when I began the quest), so I assumed that there was no way I could continue to make progress towards my goal while I completed the Narnia reading challenge.

But then Carrie posted a collection of books about Narnia (and a second list). I had an “Ah-hah!” moment and quickly opened my library webpage to see if they had any books about Narnia that I could read. They did.

Since I was just finishing up The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, I figured that Inside “The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe” would be a good title to start with. Inside is a paperback novel sized book intended as a children’s read-along or study guide for The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. The writing style reminds me somewhat of the popular “For Dummies” series, in that unfamiliar vocabulary is defined and the authors speak directly to the reader. But even though it might be easy-to-understand, this book is definitely NOT for dummies.

Inside “The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe” is stuffed with information about the allusions found within the iconic Narnia title. The authors take the reader through the book chapter by chapter, explaining the London air raids, Turkish delight, Father Christmas, the background on the many strange creatures found within Narnia and more. While I’m relatively well-read, I learned plenty from this book. For instance, I already knew that the wolf Maugrim’s British name was “Fenris Ulf”, but I didn’t know that he may have been modeled after the mythical Norse wolf “Fenrir”. This book describes literary allusions that I didn’t know existed–but which make perfect sense upon reading them. They’ve got me wanting to read some of the fairy tales and mythology that seem to have inspired Lewis!

Of course, some of the most evident literary and historical allusions found in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe are allusions to the Bible. Bell, Pyykkonen, and Washington address these in the same way as they address the others. They explain the reference to “sons of Adam and daughters of Eve.” They describe the correlations between Aslan and Jesus and between Edmund and Judas. They discuss Cair Paravel as a sort of “Promised Land” or “heaven”. The authors aren’t over the top with their Biblical references (that is, they don’t make it the emphasis at the expense of explaining other references), but they are thorough in their coverage of the Biblical allusions found in Narnia.

Some other fun features of this book (in addition to the information that it’s JAM-PACKED with) are the quizzes and call-outs that can be found at odd intervals throughout. You can take a quiz about the differences between beavers in Narnia and beavers in our world. You can read a quick “profile” of Peter (and numerous other characters) that lists his name, age, nicknames, likes and dislikes, and the gift he received from Father Christmas. There’s a logic puzzle to play and a closing “Oscars” in which you can vote for the best leading “actor” in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. Kids interested in discussing Lewis’s book with their friends (or homeschooling mothers interested in assigning writing exercises to go along with their child’s reading) might enjoy the discussion questions found in the back of Inside.

All these features combine to make this a great resources for anyone (late elementary school on up) who is a lover of Narnia. Homeschooling parents (or parents looking for a project to do with their kids for next year’s “Chronicles of Narnia Reading Challenge”) may want to use this book as a springboard for a unit study for younger students (While the title doesn’t specifically give activity suggestions, it wouldn’t be hard to come up with some of your own–they’re practically jumping off the page in anticipation for you to do them.) All in all, this is a book every lover of Narnia (and lover of children’s literature in general) should pick up.


Rating: 5 Stars
Category: Literature Study-Guide/Read-along
Synopsis: An easy-to-understand yet in-depth look at the literary and historical allusions found in C.S. Lewis’s The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe
Recommendation: This book is a definite keeper. Find it, buy it, peruse it, lend it to your older children, and find a way to share the information found within with your younger children. This is a fantastic resource.


Moonbear by Frank Asch

Moonbear is an imaginative little bear who loves the moon more than anything else in this world.

In Moondance by Frank Asch, Moonbear dances with the clouds (fog), with the rain, and with the moon (via its reflection in a puddle). In Mooncake, Moonbear wants to take a bite out of the moon and tries a variety of means to capture the moon so he cake take a bite. In Happy Birthday, Moon, Moonbear climbs a mountain to get close enough to the moon to have a conversation. In the conversation (held via echoes), he discovers that the moon has exactly the same birthday as him! On their birthday, Moonbear and the moon exchange gifts via an odd fate.

Moonbear books

In other Moonbear books, Moonbear puts out a sky-fire (a rainbow), raises a pet fish (who turns out to actually be a tadpole), and “dreams” that a kangaroo jumped through his yard.

While my descriptions might make it sound like the moon is animate in this little series, it is not. Rather, a variety of coincidences lead Moonbear to think that he actually is talking to, eating, dancing with, or exchanging gifts with the moon. Moonbear’s misinterpretation of natural phenomena such as reflections, echoes, rainbows, and tadpoles turning into frogs can make these books a great way to start a conversation with your preschooler about some of these scientific facts.

Reading My Library

Besides their potential as a teaching tool, these little books are worth reading because they’re just plain fun!

Other books by Frank Asch that you and your child might find enjoyable include Baby Bird’s First Nest, Baby Duck’s New Friend, and Good Night, Baby Bear. I do not recommend The Earth and I, which is rife with earth-worshiping animism. Thankfully, none of Asch’s other works (that I’ve read) exhibit this characteristic.

For more comments on children’s books, see the rest of my Reading My Library posts or check out Carrie’s blog Reading My Library, which chronicles her and her children’s trip through the children’s section of their local library.



Evaluating Trustworthiness (In Narnia)

Chronicles of NarniaWhile re-reading The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe for Carrie’s Chronicles of Narnia Reading Challenge, I was struck by the theme of trustworthiness, and the question of how to determine who and what to trust.

It seems as though Peter, Susan, and Lucy instinctively know who to trust when they enter Narnia–and know which side is the right side. Edmund, on the other hand, is a skeptic–and when he does trust, he trusts the wrong side.

When all four children make their way into Narnia and discover that the faun’s home has been destroyed, they encounter a bird that appears to want to lead them. The children follow the bird, fearing nothing until Edmund whispers a word of caution to Peter.

“…Have you realized what we’re doing?”

“What?” said Peter, lowering his voice to a whisper.

“We’re following a guide we know nothing about. How do we know which side that bird is on? Why shouldn’t it be leading us into a trap?”

The robin, of course, leads the children to the beaver, who all the children initially distrust, but eventually warm up to. All but Edmund are quickly convinced that the beaver is a good guy. And they end up being right. Mr. Beaver is a good guy. The witch was a bad guy. Lucy and Susan and Peter were right. Edmund was wrong.

But this assessment, this black and white view in which Edmund is wrong and the others are right, breaks down when we consider the faun.

Lucy trusted Tumnus implicitly, visiting him in his house after just meeting him in the woods. She trusted that he was a good guy. And he was a good guy, right?

Not actually. He was a bad guy. He was in the employ of the witch. He was a kidnapper. He was the gentleman with candy inviting Lucy into his car, just as much as the witch was the lady with candy inviting Edmund into her sleigh. He couldn’t be trusted, shouldn’t have been trusted.

Lucy was only saved because the faun’s conscience, smote by his grandfather’s picture, got a hold of him and forced him to confess his crime and repent. His repentance turned out to be total–a fact that is confirmed by his letting Lucy go a second time despite the threat of imprisonment.

Yet the point remains–Tumnus was not all good, and should not have been trusted, at least at first.

And what of the witch? How could Edmund have known that she was wicked? In truth, how was Edmund’s response to her different than Lucy’s response to Tumnus? It wasn’t. Lucy entered Narnia, met someone she knew nothing about, at his food, and enjoyed the comfort he offered. She believed every word he said. Edmund did the same.

One situation turned out badly, one turned out well enough. What was the difference between the two?

Really, I’m inclined to think that the difference was sheer luck. Lucy trusted someone who intended evil towards her but repented before he carried out his evil scheme. Edmund trusted someone who intended evil towards him and who never repented of her evil plan. The rest of the children trusted the beaver–who just happened to be good.

None of these situations can be taken as a positive example of discovering whether someone or something is trustworthy.

That’s not to say, of course, that Lewis does not offer suggestions on how to determine who or what to trust. In fact, Lewis includes a little scholarly lesson on just that under disguise as the professor.

Peter and Susan go to the Professor, concerned about their sister’s preposterous tale of having entered another world.

“How do you know,” he asked, “that your sister’s story is not true?”

“Oh, but–…but Edmund said they had only been pretending.”

“That is a point,” said the Professor, “which certainly deserves consideration; very careful consideration. For instance…does your experience lead you to regard your brother or your sister as the more reliable? I mean, which is the more truthful?”

“Madness, you mean?” said the Professor quite coolly. “Oh, you can make your minds easy about that. One has only to look at her and talk to her to see that she is not mad.”

“Logic!” said the Professor half to himself. “Why don’t they teach logic at these schools? There are only three possibilities. Either your sister is telling lies, or she is mad, or she is telling the truth. You know she doesn’t tell lies and it is obvious that she is not mad. For the moment then and unless any further evidence turns up, we must assume that she is telling the truth.”

Lewis offers three interconnected means of determining trustworthiness of a character or statement: Character, Evidence, and Logic. First, he asks what one knows of the character of the speaker–is Edmund or Lucy generally more likely to be truthful? Second, one must evaluate the evidence for or against each option–is Lucy likely to be mad? Finally, one must evaluate the evidence logically–There are only three possible explanations and having ruled out two, they must assume that the third is correct. Of course, the Professor includes another caveat “unless any further evidence turns up.” It is wise, the Professor says, to delay making conclusions and to continue to evaluate the evidence even after drawing conclusions.

This last bit of wisdom, of course, is perhaps the most useful for the Penvesies in evaluating the beings they meet in Narnia. Having no knowledge of the creatures’ characters and little information regarding how that world worked, they could have done with a bit more caution. They could have reserved judgment, not made a decision to trust until they had more evidence. That much is true of them all. Edmund, especially, could also have been more open to evaluating new evidence as it “turned up” (take, for example, how the “Queen” destroyed Tumnus’s house.)

Really, though, all four children made their decisions of what people and what information to trust based on their guts. True–Lucy, Peter, and Susan escaped virtually unscathed–but all of them could have done with a bit more logic, practically applied.


Nightstand (July 2010)

On last month’s nightstand:

On my nightstandOn my nightstand

What I actually read this month was…
(Click on the titles to see my reviews.)

Fiction

Nonfiction

Juvenile

  • Children’s Picture Books author ARNOLD-ASBURY (42 titles)
    including two books without words by Jose Aruego
  • The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe by C.S. Lewis
  • The Secret Panel by Franklin Dixon

Currently in the middle of…

On my nightstand

Nonfiction

  • American Gospel: God, the Founding Fathers, and the Making of a Nation by Jon Meacham
    Read some quotes from the introduction. I’m currently about halfway through and am definitely enjoying this title.
  • The Cross of Christ by John Stott
    I expect to be done with this title by the end of the week. Be sure to check out my notes on chapters 1-9.
  • Dug Down Deep by Joshua Harris
    My ladies’ book club is still moving slowly through this title.
  • Inside The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe by Bell, Pykkonen, and Washington
    Reading this as part of Carrie’s Chronicles of Narnia Reading Challenge. Carrie doesn’t like the “For Dummies” titles, but this book reminds me of the “Dummies” genre–except that it’s intended as an introduction to The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe for younger readers (late elementary school, probably?)
  • The Myth of a Christian Nation by Greg Boyd
    Still working on this with my Monday night book club. We’ve had some AMAZING discussion so far.

On this month’s nightstand:

On my nightstand

Fiction

  • Love Comes Softly by Janette Oke
  • Love’s Enduring Promise by Janette Oke
  • The Quest by Nancy Moser
  • Second Time Around by Nancy Moser

Nonfiction

  • Founding Faith by Steven Waldman
  • The Narnian by Alan Jacobs
  • See What I’m Saying: The Extraordinary Powers of our Five Senses by Lawrence D. Rosenblum
  • Dozens of craft/decorating books

Juvenile

  • Children’s Picture Books author ASCH-?
  • The Animal Shelter Mystery created by Gertrude Chandler Warner
  • Beyond the Wardrobe: The Official Guide to Narnia
  • C.S. Lewis: The Chronicler of Narnia by Mary Dodson Wade
  • The Phantom Freighter by Franklin W. Dixon
  • The Thief Lord by Carnelia Funke

Drop by 5 Minutes 4 Books to see what others are reading.
What's on Your Nightstand?