XPost: alt.books.cs-lewis   
   From: dd@dandrake.com   
      
   On Fri, 7 Oct 2005 14:23:30 UTC, "AJA"  wrote:   
      
   > I can't comment on what Lewis would have said about Quakers, and others who   
   > don't fight out of religious belief.   
      
   My impression, and it's just that, is that he saw it as a legitimate,   
   defensible belief that was *wrong*. For the reasons he stated.   
      
   > Except a letter 23 april, '51 where he mentions having fallen into a new   
   > type: "bigoted & proselytizing Quakers."  ??  And 1 april, '52  "atrocious   
   > bigots whose religion seems to consist almost entirely in attacking other   
   > people's religions."  Discussing what the word 'Christian' means in a letter   
   > 8 september 1959 "..it seems to be more useful not to classify Quakers as   
   > Christians..."   
   > Lewis must have had a bad run-in with Quakers, no?  :))   
   > Just an aside, my experience of same, having attending a Quaker college for   
   > my undergrad work (during the Vietnam War) was distinctly different than the   
   > above.  Not that that means anything.   
      
   I've always wondered about the Quaker biz, too.  Perhaps Quakers are very   
   different in England from what one sees here? But I know people who have   
   dropped in on a Quaker meeting in Bloomsbury, for instance, and been right   
   at home. So I'm still curious about what CSL ran into.   
      
      
   --   
   Dan Drake   
   dd@dandrake.com   
   http://www.dandrake.com/   
   porlockjr.blogspot.com   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)