Study Guide

Study Guide
Affection:
1. In each paragraph on pages 32-5, Lewis discusses a distinct characteristic of storge. Explain at least three of these characteristics, and on the basis of these features, attempt to construct a definition of this form of love
Affection includes the satisfaction of being together, almost anyone can become an object of it, it ignores the barriers of age, sex, class, and education. It can exist between a clever young man from the university and an old nurse, though their minds in inhabit different worlds. It ignores even the barriers of species. Definition: Affection has no limitations. 2. What is the virtue or excellence of storge, discussed on pages 36-7? What would be the opposite vice or deficiency?
The virtue lies within in the recognizable or the “old”. Affection is the humblest love. On the opposite spectrum, pride and hatred could never be forms of affection.
3. Research the terms cosmopolitanism and tolerance. What does storge have in common with these ideas, and in what way is storge distinct from them?
Cosmopolitanism means to have a respect for cultural diversity. This compares to storge in that true storge is compassionate for everything that is recognizable however storge implies that it cannot be affectionate to those that are not (strangers).
4 . Lewis discusses four perversions of storge. Two are corruptions of the human need for affection (King Lear and the ‘Domestic Rudsby, pp. 41-45), and two are corruptions of gift-affection (Jealousy and Ms. Fidgit, pp. 45-51). Describe each, and how each vice could frustrate or destroy a healthy affectionate relationship.
Those who are unlovable still desire to be loved and insist that if “that person loved me, they would buy me an engagement ring”. The insatiable demands made by the unlovable are sometimes made in vain, but that are so often met. Sometimes one sees a woman’s childhood, youth and long years of her maturity up to the verge of old age all spent in tending, obeying, caressing, and perhaps supporting, a maternal vampire who can never be caressed and obeyed enough. But old clothes be ill-bred if we took them with strangers. But old clothes are one thing: to wear the same shirt till it stank would be another. There are “rules” of good manners. The more intimate the occasion, the less the formalization; but not therefore the less need of courtesy. It’s bad manners to show public your private “face”. Jealousy of Affection is closely connected with its reliance on what is old and familiar. Change is a threat to affection.

Friendship: 1. Lewis argues that the Ancient and Modern worlds think and evaluate friendship very differently. Describe the difference, and explain two reasons Lewis gives for it (57-60).
Very few Modern world views think friendship a love of comparable value or even a love at all. To the ancients, friendship seemed the happiest and most full human of all loves; the crown of life and the school of virtue. Friendship is in sense not at all derogatory to it, the least natural of loves; the least instinctive, organic, biological, gregarious and necessary. It has lease commerce with our nerves; there is nothing throaty about it; nothing that quickens the pulse or turns you red and pale. Friendship—in that luminous, tranquil, rational world of relationships freely chosen—you got away from all that. This alone, of all the loves, seemed to raise you to the level of gods or angels. He stresses that friendship is the least biological of our loves. Both the community and individual can live without it.

2. On pages 63-6, Lewis carefully argues that friendship is distinct from “companionship,” but grows out of it. Define what companionship is, and then describe what is added to companionship that turns it into friendship.
Companionship is when two or more people are associated with each other and have a mutual respect towards one another for the sake of the shared activity they are involved in. They cooperate with one another because they are either pushed together under work or family circumstance. Companionship turns into friendship when those same people choose to associate with each other outside the realm of companionship; friendship exists when those people have similar and unique interests and choose to experience those same interests together. They both agree to hang out together because of those unique interests.
3. Because friendship is primarily an Appreciative love, says Lewis, it is the least necessary of the four loves while perhaps being (perhaps) the most valuable (68-72). What is his reason for believing this? Does this belief reflect an ‘ancient’ or a ‘modern’ view of friendship?
A good and true friendship is to be appreciated but is not necessary because one can survive without it; friendship is not essential to living. With that being said, friendship can be the most valuable because a person who enjoys company with another can truly be themselves in their company. They become fully capable and loyal to that person. This belief reflects an ancient view of friendship because it’s more rational.
4. Lewis argues that presently, and in most of the past, the sexes “will have met one another in Affection and in Eros but not in” friendship, for they lack the “companionship in common activities which is the matrix of friendship” (72). Putting aside whether you think men and women ought to be friends, what kinds of conflicts does Lewis think this arrangement can cause between the sexes? How can this arrangement be healthy (72-7)?
The conflict arises because back in Lewis’s time, women did not go to work along with the men so they were not in the same social circles as the men. There would be no way for them to build a friendship if they have nothing in common. They might be sexually compatible but not friendly in terms of having unique shared interests. It can be healthy if the two sexes appreciate each other for who they are or what they are interested in.
5. On pages 78- 90, Lewis discusses three ambivalent characteristics of friendship, features that can be good or bad depending on how they are realized in different circumstances. Describe each.
The three characteristics include: friends who share unique interests that do good together, or those who share interests that go against what is good. When two people share an interest that aims to harm others, friendship is dangerous. Also, friends who bond over a particular hobby like fishing can be good as it can lead them into socializing with others who also enjoy fishing; the danger lies in becoming outcasts of society, possibly harming others or alienating themselves from others. Friends encourage each other during life’s experience and friendships can be rewarding by having loyal subjects who care; the danger comes when a friend is so shielded from the outside world that they don’t hear or accept anyone’s criticism of themselves, preventing them from evolving as a person.
6. In what ways can friendship either rival God or be a revelation of God’s love (89-90)?
Friendship can rival God if it takes the place of our need for God’s love. Friendship is revealed by God who allows people to see the likeness in others. God opens man’s eyes to them.

Eros:
1. Lewis draws a distinction between Eros and Venus on pages 91-2. Try to define each term using English synonyms. Then give one example each of Venus without Eros, Eros without Venus, and both together.
The distinction is that Eros refers to being in love or falling in love and Venus only refers to the physical act of sex between two people or animals. What Lewis is trying to convey is that people, or animals for that matter, can have sex and not experience love and quite oppositely, people can experience love without thinking about the sexual desire but doesn’t mean sex won’t come later on.
Examples for Venus without Eros: A man who goes into a bar looking for sex.
Example for Eros without Venus: A man looks at a woman and adores who she is as a person.
Example for both: A man adores a woman for everything she is and also enjoys sex with her specifically.
2. Compare Eros and Venus using three criteria: need vs. appreciative pleasure; whether its object is general or particular; and whether its value is a claim about the object or about you as a subject.
Need vs. appreciative pleasure: Eros is an appreciative pleasure and Venus is a need pleasure
Object- general or particular: The man at the bar looking for sex is looking for a general object to fulfill his temporary need for it (Venus). The man who adores the woman, for who she particularly is, adores that specific person (Eros).
Claim about the object or about the subject: The claim for Venus is about the subject because of the selfish tendency to satisfy one’s self. It really has nothing to do with the object, only that the object temporarily satisfies the desire. The claim for Eros is about the object because the desire comes for something specific which can only be found in that particular person who is desired.
3. Lewis seems to think that human sexuality is inherently humorous, and that this is a healthy antidote to the modern preoccupation with sex. Which of the three views of the body discussed on page 100 does this humorous view represent, and what are the alternatives? Why think the humorous view is better than the others? Better how?
Lewis suggests that the sexual part of us plays a cat and mouse game. In general games are usually played for humor and fun. St. Frances’s “brother ass” description seems to represent the healthiest of the three views because happy lovers act like buffoons or mere children, who can laugh at stupid jokes or make silly comments at dinner. The other two alternatives view the bodies as dirty or empty and as celebrated creatures. The first alternative implies that our bodies are filthy and incapable of being truly happy. The second alternative implies that our bodies are only meant for suffering. This would mean that sex entails suffering, which it does not. So the humorous viewpoint is better because naturally, people do not intend on suffering or feel like their bodies are filthy.
4. What consequences should this have on how we think about sexual ethics? Would Lewis agree with the liberal view that so long as an act is ‘private,’ it cannot be bad? Why or why not?
Lewis would argue that sexual ethics does not rely on whether the acts are in private or in public—they rely on the purpose of the sexual desire; adultery or rape are sexual acts that are dangers of Eros if one is not careful thinking about the purpose of sex.
5. Lewis clearly argues that “Eros does not aim at happiness” (106). To see why, try to explain Lewis’s argument that the “ total commitment” characteristic of eros (107-8) can be, on the one hand, a “paradigm” of Charity (110), and on the other hand, a tyrannical love that justifies or excuses immorality by appealing to “love’s law” (112).
Lewis argues that the total commitment means to love the other like God loves us. He compares a person loving someone unconditionally without any boundaries—it is better to have loved, miserably, then never to have loved at all. Love is a choice, not a feeling. On the other hand, the danger lies within those who love unconditionally to the point they would do almost anything (even break the law perhaps) to see their loved ones happy. This is what he means by appealing to love’s law. People “in love” would be so moved by their own love they would commit crimes against others or themselves for love’s sake.
Charity:
1. Describe Divine Love (126-7). What consequence would conceiving of Divine Love differently have on the natural loves, do you think?
Divine love is unconditional, given by God which allows us to love that which is not perfect, but choose to love it nonetheless. God gives us gift love and need love in which we choose what we want to give to others and we choose what we need or like (in a person or a thing); divine love allows us to experience true love in its natural state. If God only gave conditional love, we would not know forgiveness, there would be an excess of pride, jealousy, and ultimately no one could be happy.
2. What is the difference between ‘natural’ gift-love and ‘divine’ gift-love? How is divine gift love expressed towards God and others (128-9)
Natural gift-love encompasses loving something or someone because it brings joy or comfort to the person loving. The divine gift-love encompasses loving something or someone regardless if it brings pain or suffering to the person loving. Divine love loves unconditionally. Divine gift-love is expressed towards God by way of giving either to God or to others in need, asking for nothing in return.

3. How does grace transform our natural need of God and others into acts of charity (129-33)? How does this combat the sin of pride?
Our human desires and needs are innate and grace allows us to understand these desires and embrace them for what they are; without grace, we would still have desires but not know how to address them. We may think that we are absolutely lovable, but in actuality we are imperfect beings; however, we are loved by God unconditionally which is what charity is. Knowing that we are imperfect and are almost unlovable, our pride and egos will subside as humility takes its place.
4. On page 133, Lewis argues that grace transforms and perfects the natural loves rather than substitutes for or destroys them. Try to explain why this is necessary, and why it is difficult for us, in terms of the tendency of the natural loves to rival (pp. 120-5) or resist this transformation.
Grace transforms and perfects the natural loves instead of destroys them because natural loves are born in us—which God gave to us to enjoy and embrace; natural loves are results of the divine love that God gives us. We are not meant to forgo natural loves—it isn’t how we were made. Charity incorporates the natural loves and moves through them. People might find this difficult because they feel guilty about needing or wanting something or someone, instead of solely relying on God for all of their needs (which is not what God intended).
5. Aquinas has words for the Appreciative-love of God that Lewis mentions on the last page of the book: worship and adoration. In your opinion, why are these forms of love best understood as Appreciative rather than Gift-loves?
Worship and adoration does not provide anything to someone else (God) for their own benefit which is a characteristic of gift-love; instead however, we are worshiping and adoring for our own benefit, appreciating what has been given to us, admiring the creation that is us, an image of God.
Letters:

6. Male and Female-He created them
We are made in God’s image, after His likeness. Humans are the only species that He created in this way. A father and mother portray the likeness to a family and as a community; a community is created with the man and the woman together each contributing to the common good of humanity.

7. The Marital Covenant
The first social circle is found in the family. The family is a community by living together in communion. The covenant is that the man and woman give themselves to each other. The bible talks about not letting others get in the way of this covenant of marriage. Motherhood cannot exist without fatherhood as both are needed to create another being which was started since the beginning according to Genesis. The concepts of communion and community are similar yet different. Communion joins people into a personal relationship while community broadens into a society as a whole. Therefore, the communion of two people starts their own community with children. To have children is to fulfill one’s destiny which is both a task and a challenge. As long as parents strive to turn to God and draw from God to raise the children, they will be fulfilled and their children will be fulfilled. This is the proof of love which runs deep. The love that is given is preserved through the Holy Spirit. Love is a promise.

8. The Unity of the Two
Marriage is a free choice which is depicted by the free will of man given by God. This is the first truth and love, that men and women need which opens them up to the love of God, other people, and to marriage and family. Family originates from the love of a man and a woman which is given by God. Because of the union of marriage, they are now acting as one entity that creates a different life (together) which leads them to create a new life, another human being made in the likeness of God.

9. The Genealogy of the Person
God is the source of the image and likeness that is in humans. Humans are biological creatures but are also created for their own sake and for God’s will. The will of God wants the human to live. To be human is to accept a gift. The question raised is that “if man was created for divined life, can man truly exist for his own sake?” The response is that God created man in order to build relationships and join a unity in order to fulfill in the sharing of God’s life. The will of God is eternal and therefore man is destined to be with God upon conception.

10. The common Good of Marriage and the Family
There is a commitment required to become a communion that eventually forms a community; a man and woman commit upon marriage that they will accept the children God gives them and raise them to be Christians. They share a responsibility that is both physical and spiritual. Their union lasts for generations through prayer.

11. The Sincere gift of Self
Human existence serves the truth in love. Love helps man find fulfillment through the gift of self. Loving means giving and receiving something spiritual, not physical--it’s irrevocable. A man and woman are obligated to protect this gift through the promise of marriage; the gift of self becomes a part of their life. Through conception, the gift of children is passed on to parents which is the first gift by God. This is the gift that starts a new community (family). Man is a common good of the family and of humanity.

12. Responsible Fatherhood and Motherhood
Parents have a responsibility for the common good; it is demanding as it is a duty. One cannot have marriage without procreation for it defeats the purpose of marriage.

13. The Two Civilizations
Civilization is human culture or culture of love, answering man’s spiritual and moral needs. The splendor of truth is important in promoting the dignity of marriage and the family. Without this truth, it doesn’t allow a man and woman to feel secure individually which endangers the family.