?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Errantry: Novak's Journal
...Words to cast/My feelings into sculpted thoughts/To make some wisdom last
Personal/Theological Notebook: Re-reading (and listening, as it were) to "A Severe Mercy" 
17th-Feb-2007 01:19 am
Van & Davy: A Great Love
Shhhh.... Don't tell anyone, but on the sly, while chewing my way through leftover roast pork loin and potatoes, I've started re-reading Sheldon Vanauken's A Severe Mercy. Again. It's one of my all-time favourites, a strange, wonderful, powerful – hell, overwhelming – book: the memoir of an exceptional effort at love. (Winner of the National Book Award, yadda yadda yadda) It ends up also being intimately tied to Christian faith as the story goes on, but I've used it particularly as an avenue for talking about marriage with students. Rather than being Vanauken's autobiography, it is better described as the autobiography of the love affair with his wife, Jean "Davy" Davis: neither his story nor hers, but rather theirs.

What these two did in order to foster their own love for one another stands as a real lesson in what it can consciously take for love to work. It's an unwaveringly extreme approach, and makes no apology for it. Perhaps it shows the lack of conscious effort most people put into love, assuming somehow that love is supposed to feed itself, as though that principle holds true for anything else in the world. I'm finding myself imagining it in film adaptation – I'm almost kind of surprised no one has snatched at it, as it's the most astonishing love story I've ever read – but I suspect that it's strangely too true to be believable, at least by those who have learned to judge believability by the screen.

I would teach this text or that of another favourite writer of mine – Madeleine L'Engle's story of her marriage to actor Hugh Franklin, Two-Part Invention – when I taught either juniors Sacramental Spirituality or a class called Christian Thought for seniors, back at Saint Joseph's High School in South Bend. Most kids were going to get married, and their marriage formation was going to be pretty crappy, if the tendency held true. I figured it wouldn't hurt to try to get them thinking – and talking – thoughtfully about romantic and married love even in their high school years. Now, I'm not teaching it, but just picking it up again for the sheer pleasure of the text, which I was talking about recently with Julie, who had been doing some psychology work in the marriage/sexuality direction. Wanting her to read it so that I could discuss it with her, and alluding to it while discussing Thursday's Grey's Anatomy with Amy Lloyd, I've been tempted into picking it up again. This time, I have been struck (again, really) by not knowing some of the classical music references of pieces with which they were familiar and which held a great deal of meaning for them. So I've been downloading them from the well-stocked iTunes Store:
Mendelssohn's A Midsummer Night's Dream
Antonín Dvořák's Humoresque
"Will You Remember" from Romberg's Maytime
Tchaikovsky's Fifth and Sixth Symphonies, the latter one, the "Pathétique," being the only piece here I already knew and owned,
Prokofiev's The Love for Three Oranges
and Bruch's Violin Concerto No. 1
So that's adding a bit of a new dimension to my reading. I had picked up the "Pathétique" on my own a few years ago, and didn't remember that this was the piece he had mentioned in the story. The night before the attack on Pearl Harbor, with tensions already growing in the air, even though the next morning's horrors were utterly unforeseen, he and Davy had listened to a record of that with friends after dinner, where, after a silence, one woman finally said, "It sounds like the dirge of a dying world." How prophetically apt, no? So, reading and listening tonight, and noting online a story written at Walbash College, the undergraduate alma mater of Vanauken, about him and a faculty member who had been mentored by him.

You Always Felt Welcome
December 13, 2006

When Wabash students say they prize their relationships with their professors, new Dean of the College Gary Phillips knows exactley what they mean. His own faculty mentor was a Wabash man. — by Brandon Stewart ’08

IT WAS 35 YEARS AGO, but Dean of the College Gary Phillips still smiles when he recalls the times he and his fellow students spent with a professor who was always willing to engage and challenge them.

"He was very quiet…never personally forceful…he always had this wit about him, a kind of careful, easygoing British humor that he learned to refine and hone very sharply.You had to listen carefully to his voice."

The professor was Sheldon Vanauken, who taught both history and literature at Phillips’ alma mater, Lynchberg College.

"He had this just little ramshackle of a place.The bigger part of the house was the garage where he kept his MG parked. He had a great MG," Phillips recalls. "The house was a place where you could walk in and sit on the sofa. He always sat in this recliner, and he had coffee, and he would smoke and you always felt welcome, men and women alike.You always felt welcome."

Phillips couldn’t help but talk about his faculty mentor when he interviewed for his current position at Wabash last spring. When he mentioned Vanauken during a session in Lovell Lecture Hall, several professors began murmuring among themselves.That’s when Phillips learned that Sheldon Vanauken, in addition to his degrees from Yale and Oxford, was also a son of Wabash, Class of 1938.

PHILLIPS MET VANAUKEN while an undergraduate in the late 1960s, before the professor gained some fame with his book A Severe Mercy, which chronicled his correspondence with C.S. Lewis. "Van" taught one of Phillips’ first history courses at Lynchberg, and the dean recalls a particularly formative moment during a class discussion of the Gulf of Tonkin incident.

"I gave this not very thoughtful response," Phillips recalls, "When Van asked the question, ‘Why is there increased U.S. involvement?’ I said, ‘Because the North Vietnamese attacked.’"

Vanauken pressed him: ‘Well, what’s your proof of that?’"

With growing embarrassment, Phillips answered that the newspapers were reporting the attack, which led Vanauken to question the reliability of that information.

"As a recently graduated high school student, I wasn't really used to giving a thoughful answer," Phillips admits. "I was always right enough that teachers didn't press me harder and harder." His encounter with Vanauken was a powerful lesson on the importance of always seeking the truth.

"From that I learned that you just can't blow smoke. You've got to do the work; you've got to actually be able to think. The next time I answered a question, I had evidence.

IT WAS THAT LIFE-CHANGING MOMENT that Phillips recounted to the Wabash faculty during his interview last spring.

"I was identifying the transformative effects of working one-on-one with faculty or having a faculty member who has a sense od critical thinking and moral responsibility and how those two things went together," Phillips recalls. "I got my first taste of that in that American History class taught by Vanauken."

The experience also provided anecdotal evidence for Phillips that a college needs both "really good students" and "really good faculty."

"Because when those two things get together—a faculty person who is an expert and a student who has a hunger—sparks fly and magic happens," Phillips says. And the sparks that flew during those early class periods made Vanauken a powerful mentor for Phillips and many of his peers.

"Whether you agreed with his politics or not—and there were plenty of Lynchberg students who disagreed with his politics—he didn't withdraw that character of his engagement.

'Van's capacity to talk and to engage and to teach students from all walks of life, from all political persuasions, is a marker of what I think to be the desire on this campus as well," Phillips says. "Not afraid to press the hard questions. That was his style.

"I can easily see the Wabash influence there," he reflects, looking out his office window toward the mall and the Wabash Chapel. "He taught students—he taught their brains, he taught their hearts, he taught their souls.


SO ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN IN HIS FAITH

—by Brandon Stewart ’08

The man who wrote A Severe Mercy,a powerful narrative of love, death, and conversion to Christianity, once flew his plane above the Butler University stadium, dumping out cards with the words "WABASH ALWAYS FIGHTS!" emblazoned across the front.

Although he received a scolding from Dean Kendall at the next Chapel period and had his pilot’s license revoked by the FAA, he mentions in one letter that Kendall later admitted to being "secretly amused" by the prank.

It was at Wabash that Vanauken met Jean Davis, or "Davy," as he called her. Fearing the disapproval of their parents, the two eloped. For the rest of their time together, they would hone their great love for each other, building what they described as "the shining barrier."

After Commencement, Vanauken worked at various jobs, then joined the Navy and was stationed in Hawaii. In a letter to Dean Kendall dated April 5, 1942, he recounted his harrowing experience as an eyewitness to the attack on Pearl Harbor.

Vanauken went on to study at Oxford, where he met Lewis Salter, who later became a beloved President of Wabash. Vanauken claimed his prodding led Salter to come to Wabash.

He struck up another friendship at Oxford, this time with author/ professor C. S. Lewis. Through the transcripts of their letters published in Vanauken’s A Severe Mercy,we begin to see the bourgeoning awakening of Christianity in the Wabash grad. He and Jean began to explore Christianity more closely. "Thank God, if there is a God, we said, that we are at least looking seriously and honestly at this thing," he wrote.

"If our Christian friends—nuclear physicists, historians, and able scholars in other fields—can believe in christ, if C. S. Lewis can believe in Christ, we must, at least, weigh it very seriously."

Though Jean converted sooner than her husband, Vanauken was drawn to the Christian faith.

"I feel the nobility of the Christian story," he wrote, "I would like to believe it. I want to know God—if he is knowable."

Lewis provided comfort and guidance. "But I think you are already in the meshes of the net!" Lewis wrote to his young friend. "The Holy spirit is after you . I doubt if you'll get away!" Vanauken was "caught" soon afterward.

The couple bid farewell to their Oxford friends and returned to the U.S. and to Lynchburg College, where Vanauken would teach for the rest of his life. At one point, Dean Kendall asked him to come back and teach English at Wabash, but personal tragedy derailed those plans. Jean became ill, and she died in 1955.

Much of A Severe Mercy, focuses on Vanauken's struggle to come to terms with losing his beloved—a struggle aided by his increasing faith and correspondence with Lewis. He never remarried and eventually converted to Catholicism in 1981.

Upon his death in 1996, a colleague said of Vanauken's passing: "It is not possible to mourn a man who was so absolutely certain in his faith."

+++

Edit: Later addition 17 Feb

Remembering Van
New Oxford Review
October 1997
By David Hartman

David Hartman is the Minister of the Harrodsburg Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) in Harrodsburg, Kentucky.

The Little Lost Marion and Other Mercies. By Sheldon Vanauken. Franciscan University Press. (800-783-6357). 272 pages. $12.95.


Full disclosure of the reviewer’s relation to the author is a requirement. In this case that duty becomes a pleasure — becomes, in fact, a profession of love and a modest attempt at eulogy — for the author is the late Sheldon Vanauken, and I count it among my singular blessings to have known Van not only as a writer but also as a friend, and first of all as a teacher.

Many who studied under him at Lynchburg College thought him the finest teacher they ever had. Thousands were moved by the story of love, grief, and God’s abiding grace in his memoir A Severe Mercy, and many were tugged to Rome by reading its sequel, Under the Mercy. Those who read the books and sought him out, by letter or by pilgrimage to his little house in Virginia, found a wise and generous counselor and a faithful correspondent.

I first met him in September 1969. I was a new freshman at Lynchburg College, a conservative Southern school of middling academic status, and Prof. Vanauken was assigned as my acting faculty advisor. When I knocked on his door I encountered a man with the bulk of John Wayne, hair down to his shoulders, and an accent that I would later hear described as “mid-Atlantic.” He was the oddest middle-aged man I had ever met, and he spent a significant part of our conference railing against the Vietnam War, in language a sailor would have found congenial. Since my father was in the military and my family was conservative Presbyterian, I was, to say the least, taken aback. When we finally got around to filling out my schedule, he asked which teacher I would like for the required course on Western Civilization. Out of courtesy, I said it would be interesting to take it from him. “Interesting” of course is an all-purpose euphemism. But never has courtesy served me so well.

In the classroom Vanauken was magisterial. He spoke knowledgeably of “the glory that was Greece, the grandeur that was Rome.” While he lectured, he sat, and bivouacked in his chair he was as immobile as a stump. But the world he drew us into three times a week — a world far removed from my freshman fixation on cheerleaders, draft status, and getting hold of a six-pack for the weekend — was a transcendent and heroic place. To this day, I am liable to discourse at length on why Homer’s Iliad marks the dawn of Western literature, why Pericles was a statesman to be emulated, or why Aeschylus, Aristophanes, and Euripides rank with Shakespeare as the greatest of playwrights. Van once gave a lecture on Socrates that — so help me — cured my hangover. He made the very idea of civilization seem winsome and fragile, and he dispelled whatever notions I might have entertained about the romance of barbarism. Van was besotted by history, art, literature, and the manifold glories of the mind, and he enabled any student with the attention span of a higher mammal to be besotted as well.

In his classroom, the word “Vietnam” never came up; but on campus his antiwar stance made him well known and frequently reviled. Van was faculty adviser to the Southern Student Organizing Committee, a slightly more genteel version of the SDS. He invited me to attend a meeting at his home and, though I was no radical, I went. Van lived in a small, one-room house stuffed with books, and he held forth from a large bed jammed into a corner. He said that if any of us was arrested for antiwar activities — which at that time consisted of picketing the Lynchburg post office, the only federal building in town — all we had to do was call him and he would post bond: the mnemonic for his phone number was VIOLINS.

The students sprawled on his floor that night went into the usual 60s cant about the evils of the Establishment and the imperatives of dialectical materialism. It was only when one young radical launched into a soliloquy on how God had betrayed him that Van quietly interrupted and gave a most persuasive defense of orthodox Christianity. The room fell silent. If I had been taken aback by his politics, they were taken aback by his faith. His hair length and antiwar convictions allowed him passage through their barricades, but his profoundly unfashionable faith seemed to put him back beyond the pale. I loitered after the others had left, and mentioned that I was intrigued by what he had said about Christianity. He gave me a booklet he had written entitled “Encounter with Light” (in which I recall seeing for the first time the name C.S. Lewis).

In class and out, Van was intriguing. I learned he had been a naval officer at Pearl Harbor. (“Which side?” snarled one surly local.) In class, he passed around fading postcards of the Acropolis, of Oxford, of the Cathedral of Notre Dame. All contained brief inscriptions on the back that began “Davy and I...” (whoever Davy was). Once — only once — did I hear him use the phrase, “When I was married.” (Clearly divorced, I remember thinking.) In my sophomore year, I took a few more courses from him, and invited him to address a chapel service, which he did eloquently and authoritatively.

After that, I pretty much lost contact with him. I would see him occasionally on campus, but I had other concerns. In my junior year, I took an introductory Bible course from a smirking professor of religion and emerged, flushed and triumphant, as an atheist. In my senior year, the Vietnam War ended (at least for Americans) and even more consequentially (for me anyway) so did the draft. It is a fact about Vietnam-era idealism that many male collegians were considerably more exercised about the draft than about the war. Because Van was a former naval officer, decades past draft age, and had no draftable son, his own opposition to the war was free of self-interest. His public stance had precipitated veiled warnings from the college administration about the security of his tenure, and may have been the motive behind a cross that was burned on his lawn. It wasn’t until years later that I fully appreciated the depth of Van’s courage and the purity of his convictions.

Since I had spent nearly four years envisioning a postgraduate future that started with a letter from the draft board and ended somewhere in a rice paddy, the change in prospects, though welcome, was disorienting. After college, I drifted about a bit. I was finding my fellow atheists as unpalatable as I was finding myself. Though I believed Jesus of Nazareth to have been a sterling fellow, much to be admired, I thought Christianity intellectually indefensible. One sleepless night I was rummaging in a dresser drawer and came upon “Encounter with Light.” I read it again — this time I understood it — and realized that I had never ceased to possess the intellectual defense of Christianity that I had thought did not exist. I came close to dialing VIOLINS at three o’clock in the morning, but I didn’t; I didn’t call Van at all. Two years later, I went to divinity school. It was atheism, Van’s booklet had helped me to see, that was intellectually indefensible.

In my second year at divinity school, I received from Lynchburg an alumni flyer announcing the publication of A Severe Mercy. I ordered it, read it, and was transfixed as mystery after mystery was unveiled. The Davy of the postcards had been Van’s wife. C.S. Lewis had been their friend and spiritual mentor at Oxford. Before Oxford, Van and Davy had reveled in their private and pagan love, building a “shining barrier” against the world. But there, amid Oxford’s dreaming spires (abetted by Lewis’s wide-awake intellect), the Hound of Heaven had caught them. They became followers of Christ. After Oxford came his professorship at Lynchburg College, where, Van observed, “the students...were not only not students, they were semi-literate.” (Ouch.) And there in Virginia, after 10 years of marriage, Davy died of an undiagnosable illness. Her death was “the severe mercy,” the final collapse of the shining barrier that Christ had breached at Oxford. “Perpetual springtime is not allowed,” Lewis wrote to a grieving Van.

Within a week of receiving A Severe Mercy, I had read through it twice, and wept both times. Others have written — more eloquently than I — of the impact that book has had on their lives. I consider it the most beautiful book on love, loss, and grace I have ever read.

After div school graduation and ordination, I spent a summer working at a hospital in south London. One night, staring out at the expansive graveyard which provided the view from my room in Tooting (London’s equivalent of the South Bronx), I decided to read A Severe Mercy again. Once again, I wept. That week I wrote to Van, mentioning that a decade before I had been his student, and trying to describe how much the book had meant to me. By return mail I received a postcard from him, in minuscule script, in which he said that he had been in London the week before, and if he had known I was there he would have looked me up. He invited me to call on him in Virginia, and said I was now in an “apostolic succession” which included George MacDonald, Lewis, and himself, and that he had decided that if A Severe Mercy had been written for only one person, it had been written for me. I felt as Elisha might have felt on receiving his anointing from Elijah; nor was the effect lessened when a fellow worker, on reading the card, glanced at me and said, “Looks like the line of succession has pretty well petered out.” My gratification was not lessened even when I learned, some years later, that Van had expressed the same sentiments to many others.

Back in the States, I discovered dozens of people who had been touched by A Severe Mercy. Having been Van’s student endowed me with a credibility I did not deserve but exploited nonetheless, specifically with my prospective in-laws, who, loving Van through his book, had presumed that some of his qualities must have rubbed off on anyone who had benefited from his tutoring. Still, nine years after receiving his invitation, I hadn’t called him. A residual deference prevailed.

How much of the reviewer does one include in what is ostensibly a book review? I married; became the father of three; moved back to Virginia. A sequel to A Severe Mercy was published, entitled Under the Mercy. It was about many things, but it was primarily about Van’s conversion to Catholicism from the Episcopal Church. Whatever Van did, he did because he thought — not felt, but thought, rigorously and on the basis of evidence — it was the right thing to do. Could it be that on the issue of Catholicism, Van was right as well? In 1988, I was at a meeting on the Lynchburg College campus. I had brought along copies of the two Mercy books. On a break, I dialed VIOLINS and said, “Professor Vanauken, I’m sure you have no idea who I am, but I am a former student of yours who has been deeply impressed by your books. Would it be at all convenient sometime this weekend for me to run by and ask you to autograph them?”

“Why don’t you pop around now?” he said. I did — down the hill behind the women’s dormitory, to the small white frame house on Breckenbridge with the silver Morgan in the detached garage. Nothing had changed from 20 years before. When he opened the door, I thrust the books at him. “I’m sorry if I’m interrupting anything,” I said. “Why don’t you come in?” he asked.

The moment of his time I had requested stretched into a two-hour visit. He didn’t recall my having been his student, but when I produced the postcard he had sent to London, he turned to a notebook on a side table. “Oh, yes,” he said. “Here’s something from the letter you sent.” And he read it. I was astounded. Not only did Van answer every letter he received — and the volume he received was prodigious — he also recorded excerpts from many of them.

When the sun had passed below the yardarm, he offered Scotch and soda; throughout our talk, I (though a recovering nicotine addict) bummed cigarettes from him. We talked of a number of things, but mostly we talked of why he had become a Catholic. “Because I believe it’s true,” he said. He offered an article from a journal I’d never heard of, New Oxford Review. The author, James J. Thompson Jr., a semi-lapsed and grieving Catholic, recounted his encounter with Vanauken and told how Vanauken, through the good offices of his priest, Fr. Tony Warner, had helped bring him back into the fold. I eventually departed, reeking of smoke, tipsy from the Scotch, and exhilarated by the conversation. It was the start of many conversations, and many more letters.

In letters and in person, Van was encouraging, insightful, and full of good cheer. He criticized my article manuscripts, reviewed my screenplays, and appraised my novel-in-progress. He expanded my circle of friends: Fr. Tony Warner became a confidant; his “adopted cousin” Loring Ellis in South Carolina became a gracious correspondent. Again and again I encountered people who knew him by reputation. A couple in Virginia whose son was slowly dying mentioned A Severe Mercy. I yelped: “I know the author.” That evening, I wrote Van and asked if he would write the family. He wrote them immediately, a gracious missive which, they told me later, had consoled them greatly. No doubt there are hundreds of others who can relate similar tales of his kindness.

He could also be curmudgeonly. He was once invited to give a classroom lecture at Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University, and when the questions after the lecture showed no sign of abating, he lit up a cigarette — a shocking breach of Falwellian protocol. “What were they going to do?” he later growled. “Expel me?” He was fond of strolling into the sacristy while his long-suffering priest robed for Mass, lighting up, and offering suggestions on the upcoming homily. I once joined Van for Mass at Holy Cross in Lynchburg. He sat near the front, and while the congregation recited the newer version of the Nicene Creed, he boomed out the old. “Why did you do that?” I asked later. “I learnt the Creed in my youth,” he said, “and I’m too damned old to learn another!”

As Van aged, his predilection for unfashionable causes became more pronounced. He had always been a Southern sympathizer and a lover of Virginia: In his later years he became an apologist for the Confederacy. One hastens to point out that Van was not a racist. In the early 1960s he had invited black friends to worship with him among his genteel Episcopalian congregation. When the anxious vicar fretted that doing so might cause people to leave, Van retorted, “Let them! The Christians will remain!”

The one time I felt the force of his wrath was when, responding to a jeremiad against gun control he had published in the NOR entitled “Guns, Freedom, and the Coming Caesar,” I drafted for the NOR a jesting article which sketched Van as a romantic antiquarian who didn’t really mean what he said. I added that he probably didn’t even own a gun, but that if William Tecumseh Sherman should ever ride by he’d try to pot him with his typewriter. Van was furious. “It was shameful of you to say that!” he wrote. I withdrew my submission, and Van was effusive in his forgiveness.

I learned something important from that embarrassment: While he was indeed a contrarian — I had seen that at Lynchburg College — the values by which he lived were rooted deep within him: courage, love of freedom, devotion to the faith. He was an absolutely principled man. One could easily envision him as a knight in the Fourth Crusade, turning his sword against his fellows when they tried to sack Constantinople; or as a Confederate officer, valiant in defense of the South but missing no opportunity to denounce the evils of slavery. He was never a man of his age; he was a man for all ages. When I read Boswell’s Life of Samuel Johnson, I always find myself visualizing Johnson with Vanauken’s face.

I last saw him in September 1996, a few weeks before my wife and I separated. I had told him of our marital difficulties and asked for his prayers, and he assured me that they were ongoing. A few days after our meeting, he sent a letter in which he said that my sadness had caused him great anxiety: “Wd. it not be helpful,” he wrote, “to say to your wife, ‘Darling, what is in me that you would most like to change?’” I showed her the sentence. “He has a good heart,” she said. I asked her what I should change about myself; she asked me the same; we told each other; we had another in a series of arguments. We had a few more, and I moved out. The day I left, the mail brought from Van a copy of The Little Lost Marion and Other Mercies.

So — at last — to the book review. Little Lost Marion is a collection of essays and stories Van wrote over the years, many of them for New Oxford Review. It opens with an account of the child the unmarried Davy bore at 15 — the “little lost Marion” of the title — and Van’s quest to find her. Ultimately, though, this essay is about the sanctity of life, the sheer irreplaceability of each of God’s human creatures. It is the equal of the best work Van — or any writer of the 20th century — has done. There are also charming stories about sailing with Davy in the Florida Keys and on the Chesapeake Bay. There are powerful essays on home life, on the place of awe in the Mass, the theology of the Seamless Garment, and homosexuality, all of them apologetics for Christian orthodoxy, all of them written with a force of conviction and clarity of argument that cause one to recollect that Vanauken was an Oxonian, an acute student of history, and an intimate of C.S. Lewis. Other pieces in the collection are, well, mixed. “Guns, Freedom, and the Coming Caesar” is no more convincing now that it was on first, or second, reading. As for the science fiction story “New World Aborning” — science fiction was not his métier.

As I said, Little Lost Marion arrived the day I moved out. I intended to write Van and tell him of the separation, but I hadn’t the heart. It wasn’t that I feared confessing that my marriage had failed; I did not want him to know his counsel had not had its desired end. One day in early November, I visited a divorcing friend to give him a copy of A Severe Mercy, and returning to my apartment I found in the mailbox an envelope that bore Van’s return address but was written in an unknown hand. Inside was a card, with a drawing of a collie gazing at a tombstone, and the words:

Sheldon Vanauken

b. August 4, 1914

d. October 28, 1996

“But I just gave his book to someone,” I murmured. I brought the card along to the laundry room — grief is occasional, but dirty clothes are forever — and after loading the washer I looked at the card again. “Damn Van!” I yelled. “Damn him for dying! Damn him for dying just when I needed him most!” Can we forgive the anger of the bereaved at the deceased, and the utter self-absorption of the grieving?

That night, I stood outside and stared up at the stars, mourning the death of my friend. And then — an act of mercy on God’s part, no doubt — I remembered the destiny for which Van had lived: union with Christ, reunion with Davy, in God’s Kingdom forevermore. “He’s with Davy,” I thought. One trusts that God, through the grace revealed in Jesus Christ our Lord, does indeed have a home — and even a new role — for this faithful servant, this valiant knight-errant whose courage and charity illumined so many lives.

I miss him terribly. Many others will share my belief that he was the best, the wisest, the most generous of teachers, writers, and friends.

+++

Edit: 20 Feb 2007

From: http://www.willvaus.com/sheldon_vanauken

Sheldon Vanauken

Sheldon Vanauken is most well known to the world for his autobiographical book A Severe Mercy which contains 18 letters written to him by C. S. Lewis. I first read A Severe Mercy in the late 1970s. What impressed me most about the book was that it gave me the same experience of "joy" which I received from reading some of Lewis's books. The Oxford chapters were and are my favorite parts of A Severe Mercy. When I later spent time in Oxford on vacation, I recalled Lewis's words to Vanauken from across the busy High Street outside the Eastgate Hotel: Christians never say goodbye!

During my years at Princeton Seminary I wrote to Sheldon Vanauken and invited him to speak to a student group on campus. He wrote back a polite, hand-written postcard declining the invitation. However, at the end he said: "If ever you come down to the South, you will be welcome to stop by."

Years passed and I eventually moved to "the South". I decided to take Vanauken up on his invitation and so, on a whim, wrote to him again. He re-issued his kind invitation to come and visit him. So I traveled to Lynchburg and spent time with Vanauken on two occasions in 1996. We also exchanged about 17 letters or postcards between us that same year--discussing many topics--C. S. Lewis, Catholicism, Vanauken's books, etc. Part way through the correspondence Sheldon Vanauken invited me to call him Van. One of the highlights of that year was the publication of Van's last book: The Little Lost Marion and Other Mercies.

Sadly, my correspondence with Van came to an end with his death from cancer in October 1996. His last postcard to me was written just three days before his death. The highest praise Van ever gave me was the note he wrote in Davy's Edition of A Severe Mercy when he autographed it for me: For Will Vaus--a good correspondent. I had the privilege of attending Van's memorial service at St. Stephen's Episcopal Church and meeting a number of his friends.

Here is the obituary which Sheldon Vanauken wrote for himself and submitted to the Lynchburg News & Advance long before his death. . . .

Sheldon Vanauken of Lynchburg died Monday, October 28, 1996 at Lynchburg Hospital. He was 82. He was born August 4th, 1914, the day that England declared war on the German Kaiser.

As a youth he attended both Staunton and Culver military academies and subsequently Wabash College; he was a naval officer in WWII, being at Pearl Harbor when the Japanese attacked it. After the war, he won further degrees from Yale and Oxford, and was Professor of History and Literature at Lynchburg College, joining its faculty in 1948. He lost his wife, Jean ('Davy') in 1955.

Subsequently, he was the author of The Glittering Illusion: English Sympathy for the Southern Confederacy and of the award-winning A Severe Mercy, which had worldwide a million readers and was translated into several other languages. Subsequently there was a sequel, Under the Mercy, a novel Gateway to Heaven, and a volume of his collected poems entitled Mercies. In addition there were many essays and stories published in various magazines.

He was converted to Catholicism in 1981, but in addition to attendance at Holy Cross, he continued to be a part of his Episcopal Church, St. Stephen's at Forest. And his ashes will be scattered in St. Stephen's Churchyard where his wife's ashes were scattered. He put his faith in the Risen Christ.
Comments 
17th-Feb-2007 01:17 pm (UTC)
i read that book several times back in the '80s, liking davy very much. i do recall agreeing with what c.s. lewis told van (now i can't remember quite where it was recorded -- in the book itself?) that he had been selfish in not "allowing" davy to have any children. wonder if the story would look different to me now, given my circumstances.

oh, i liked flurry, too. i'm dimly remembering a sequel, telling of his conversion, and of how flurry would ride in the car with van to church. van's solution to his aching dilemma over conversion has always struck me as a good one, and helpful to me, since i experience much the same dilemma year after year.
17th-Feb-2007 09:25 pm (UTC)
You might be really interested in the final "sequel" to the story that he wrote, then, which had been an article in New Oxford Review, originally, about how Davy at 14, a bit lost after her father's death, came to be pregnant and gave the baby girl up for adoption. Van didn't include it in A Severe Mercy as the story was unresolved and he didn't consider it essential to the theme of the book. But he did spend a great deal of time trying to find her in later years, which finally happened in the last years of his life. Little Lost Marion (unfortunately, out of print) relates this story, and more of his thoughts on their early, pre-Christian decision to not have children.

I also have to say that you lost me on the conversion dilemma: I think I must be missing some reference....
17th-Feb-2007 09:30 pm (UTC)
i used to subscribe to the new oxford review but didn't see that article. how interesting. that certainly adds a dimension that was missing!

oh, he was anglican/episcopal, and when he came to want so much to convert to catholicism, it was the prospect of leaving his episcopal parish that seems to have been most painful. his solution was to go to morning prayer at the old parish (no communion service) and to mass at his new catholic parish. flurry the dog was a popular personage at both. i've been vacillating between the two communions for decades now and admire the gracefulness of how he went about it.
17th-Feb-2007 09:32 pm (UTC)
Ah. Gotcha.

The article appeared in the June 1990 issue, should you have that tucked away somewhere.
17th-Feb-2007 03:06 pm (UTC)
It was only two or three years ago that I discoverrf z'A Severe Mercy' and I loved it. Thanks for reminding me of the book. I hadn't thought of using it with students, but that is an idea. And thanks for the other articles you include in your post.
John
17th-Feb-2007 09:26 pm (UTC)
My pleasure: yes, the book is so striking and different that students seem to react fairly favourably toward it: the narrative provides plenty of opportunity to move past itself to the realm of "theory" and a broader application of principles.
17th-Feb-2007 05:04 pm (UTC)
I do want to thank you for recommending that book to me, but in all honesty, I can't bear to read it at the moment. I got it out of the library (and kind of stole it since I've had it since October, and they're sending the library mafia after me to get it back, haha), but every time I pick it up to read it, I get a page or so in and I just have to put it down. It hurts a bit too much right now to read about someone else's love affair when I'm still mourning my own, I suppose. I'll give it another shot a few months down the road, but I did want to think you for recommending it and for talking to my rambly ass that night. Haha.
17th-Feb-2007 09:30 pm (UTC)
That makes sense to me, Jenna. I saw it as a book that is an act of mourning throughout its own storytelling, as well as, later, especially, dealing with the faith questions you raised, and so I thought it might be a useful touchstone for you, listening to someone else who totally gets what you're going through.
18th-Feb-2007 08:20 am (UTC)
I read it to my wife during the first of second year of our marriage. (that is, when we were still married).

I recall the couple in the book scratched or nicked their new car on purpose so they wouldnt idolise it: I recall that after almost twenty years; for much more, I'd have to reread. I know the ending is saaaaaaaaad.
20th-Feb-2007 10:41 am (UTC)
It's most definitely worth the re-read.
19th-Feb-2007 09:04 pm (UTC)
I also love that book. Your sweet, sweet taste strikes again. :D
20th-Feb-2007 10:43 am (UTC)
I bow in your general direction. You might find the last thing I just added to the entry of interest. It includes the obituary he wrote for himself, and a letter in his hand.
(Deleted comment)
21st-Nov-2007 06:32 pm (UTC)
Hi Saila!

I'm glad to try to help, and that this entry is still of use to someone! My recollection is that this is a piece of music from their fun, youthful time back home on the family estate of Glenmerle. (Which, by the way, always drove me nuts in his refusal to identify where it was: even giving me a state, I thought, would help me imagine the geography and culture a little more vividly. Was it Kentucky? Tidewater Virginia? I finally figured out that it was actually just outside of Indianapolis! So I'm hoping that you're a person who appreciates that info, too, so I can feel all justified in hunting it down....)

Alright... looking this up.... Yes. It's mentioned (at least once, I shan't hunt for other references) in the middle of the second chapter, "The Shining Barrier," p. 40 of my edition. It's a bit more than halfway down the paragraph that starts with "Sometimes we had fights."

I hope your reading group enjoys the gift. I'd read the book several times, always thinking that it would be helpful to know the music cited better than I did, so I'm glad I finally caved and hunted it all down: it adds another dimension to a striking text that so captures, among other things, a cultured life at a particular time in history.

Peace,
Mike
This page was loaded Apr 20th 2018, 4:21 pm GMT.