Friday, November 13, 2015

Lord of the World Study Guide

No Friday recap for today.  I totally forgot to record things.  I do know that some math got done, some science got done, some Latin got done, some Speech and Communications got done and a lot of history got done.  Best of all, we finally, FINALLY finished Lord of the World.  Woot!


Since there is no study guide out there for this book, I wrote up my own.  Nota bene:  This book is really too hard for high schoolers.  You simply have to have a larger and deeper context to draw from when trying to comprehend all that is in it.  It is a deeply flawed and yet brilliant book.

Here is my rinky-dink Study Guide.  It isn't really a study guide proper though.  I just wrote a bunch of questions and some comments to provoke discussion with our little book club.  Here it is:



Study Guide for Lord of the World:

When was this book written and what time period is it set in?

Imaging the future, what does the author come close to guessing pretty accurately and what does he assume to be the same as in the future?

What aspects of the novel reflect the author’s time period:  (my answer:  attitude towards women, women still wearing hats with veils, liturgy being in Latin and as elaborate as a high Latin Mass, communication is still by telegraph and newspapers, no A/C.)

What is futuristic in the book?   (my answer: volors, electric lights, living underground, placards on buildings that announce news).

In what ways does Mabel’s worldview parallel modern views on euthanasia, globalism, and 1st world dominance over other parts of the world?

Mabel and Oliver are both good people who are intelligent and idealistic.  What is it they lack that prevents them from seeing the truth?  Why does Father Francis leave the faith?  What do you think the author is saying about the power of cultural influence in determining our inner spiritual lives?

What does the role of the mother in law reverting to Catholicism and then dying play in the novel?

How does the author’s imagined future foreshadow things like the Soviet Union, the rise of cult personalities like Hitler and Lenin?  The Holocaust?

How morally consistent is Mabel?  Oliver?  Mr. Francis? Felsenberg?  Write a paragraph for each, explaining their reasoning.

There is a lot wrong with this book.  For one thing he hardly never mentions Africa once.  It is as if it didn’t exist.  Benson also seems to be anti-Semitic.  Why does he pick the name Julian Felsenberg? 

He also has a thing against the Masons.  What were the Masons at that time and why does the Catholic Church not like them?  Did you know there was an anti-Mason party at one time in U.S. History?  Here’s an interesting link:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Morgan_(anti-Mason)

 Are Masons still perceived as a threat?  Why would the Catholic Church be so against Masons?

Benson also seems to mistrust Democracy.  This may be related to his anti-Mason stand (just my own theory!) because many of our Founding Fathers were Masons.  The Church had a hard time switching gears from monarchy to democracy; (see this Wikipedia article:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relations_between_the_Catholic_Church_and_the_state                    

How do Benson’s views reflect this?  How is it that the Church can change in terms of political views and still remain faithful to her spiritual and moral teachings?

How does the author’s depiction of the adoption and corruption of so much of Christianity for the new religion reflect the defects of a purely humanitarian understanding of existence?

What is so ironic about having Mr. Francis explain Catholicism to Mabel?  Why is it that he is satisfied with his reason for losing his faith whereby Mabel sees in his explanation a reason to sympathize with the Catholics?

Compare and contrast the faith life of Father Percy Franklin with the faith life of Father Francis.  What makes Father Francis lose his faith and what makes Father Percy keep his?

Do you see a parallel between decision made by Pope John and decisions made by Father Percy (who becomes Pope Sylvester)?

What is the great internal contradiction of Humanitarianism?

Given all the flaws in this book, why would Pope Francis say it is one of his favorites and encourage people to read it?

Why does the author tell us the ending through the eyes of a new character, the Syrian priest? 

In my opinion, Mabel a better person than Oliver even though she killed herself.  What do you think?

What exactly happens at the very end?

What is the Catholic understanding of the end of the world?

You might want to check out some of the following sections in the Catechism of the Catholic Church in relation to this book:

Section # 676 – on the Anti-Christ and secular messianism

Section # 770 – the role of the Church in history

Section # 2425 – communism vs. free market





No comments:

Post a Comment