Charles Walter Stansby Williams (1886-1945) is the unjustly neglected third member of the Inklings, after C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien. He was a British poet, novelist, literary critic, editor, lecturer, biographer, Anglican Christian, and occult master. This strange mix makes him The Oddest Inkling, and this blog exists to discuss CW’s life, works, ideas, oddities, and excellencies.


There is no other literature quite like that by Charles Williams: his writings are startling, convoluted, beautiful, unpredictable, and obscure. Their obscurity is partly due to his love of esoteric allusions, partly to his creation of a layered mythology, and partly to his sinewy syntax. Thomas Howard calls his sentence structure “agile”; I call it “labyrinthine.” Every sentence is thrilling, dangerous, sinuous, and demanding. Here is my Readers’ Guide for Beginners to help you decide what to read first.

By all accounts, Williams himself was like his writing: charismatic, saintly, loquacious, and inspiring—but complex and confusing. He was a passionate teacher, explicating texts clearly with enthusiasm and reciting massive passages of poetry from memory. According to C.S. Lewis, everyone who met Williams fell in love with him—including many young women who became his disciples and with whom he practiced semi-sexual, semi-magical rituals of transference to heighten his creativity. Yet he also motivated many people to practice their Christianity more seriously and founded the Companions of the Co-inherence in order to carry one another’s burdens.

300px-Rose_Cross_Lamen.svgThe strange combination of Christian and Magician in Williams’ personal life is hard to reconcile. He was a member of A.E. Waite’s occult secret society, the Fellowship of the Rosy Cross, for ten formative years. He rose high in the ranks, leading initiates in practicing alchemy, astrology, Cabalism, conjuration, divination with tarot cards, and meditation on the Sephirotic Tree. Yet he remained a committed Anglican all his life, writing works of lay theology. For the last six years of his life, he was a member of the Inklings, whose qualifications, according to C.S. Lewis, were “a tendency to write, and Christianity” (CSL letter to CW 11 March 1936).

This unusual combination of Christianity and the occult finds expression in a bizarre, exciting mix of the everyday and the supernatural in his writing. He pushes his fantasies further than either of the other famous Inklings by setting his metaphysical stories in ordinary, 20th-century England rather than in Narnia, Perelandra, or Middle-Earth. This makes his spiritual thriller plots feel more uncanny because they are closer to home.

His signature doctrine, co-inherence, is also an odd blend of the natural and the supernatural. Co-inherence is the idea that Christ’s risen life inhabits believers so that they share the divine interrelationship of the Trinity and live as members of one another. This is based in the Trinitarian theology of perichoresis, the mutual indwelling and love of the three members of the Godhead, from which all human love and co-operation are made possible. Williams’ own order, the Companions of the Co-inherence, voluntarily carried spiritual, emotional, or medical burdens for each other and anyone else—living, dead, or unborn—by Substitution or Exchange. He was fascinated by the mystical body of Christ: he believed that sex is an act of co-inherence and that every romance corresponds to Jesus’ earthly life. In his Arthurian poetry, he carried the simple doctrine of Christian unity into a multi-layered symbolism infused with occult significance.

Triskel_type_Tonkedeg..svgFurthermore, Williams held a kind of skepticism about his own faith that also made him the odd man out in the Inklings, compared to the staunch “Mere Christian” Lewis and the solid Roman Catholic Tolkien. He may have had more common theological ground with the Anthroposophist Owen Barfield, the fourth important writer in the group. But Williams’ brand of mysticism made for some hot debates among the group: a minor Inkling, Charles Wrenn, at one Inklings meeting “almost seriously expressed a strong wish to burn Williams, or at least maintained that conversation with Williams enabled him to understand how inquisitors had felt it right to burn people…. Williams is eminently combustible” (letter of C.S. Lewis to his brother, 5 Nov. 1939). If even his best friends occasionally wanted to burn him at the stake, it is no stretch to say that his ideas were the oddest among them.

All these factors, then, make Williams “The Oddest Inkling.”

lionAnd they make his works absolutely riveting: even before you read any further in this blog, you should start reading his writings! You can start with his most popular works: the seven “metaphysical thrillers”: War in Heaven, Many Dimensions, The Place of the Lion, The Greater Trumps, Shadows of Ecstasy, Descent into Hell, and All Hallow’s Eve. They are available online. In each novel, sacramental objects or occult adepts unleash spiritual forces that threaten destruction. Preservation is achieved by the imperial mastery of a person surrendered to divine will. Williams’ progressive narrative technique resembles stream-of-consciousness, and anticipates (but far surpasses) contemporary Christian thrillers. Then, if you are an intrepid reader, you can move on to the Arthurian poetry, then the theology or literary criticism, as your taste guides you.

TTLIn my opinion, his two greatest contributions are his Arthurian poetry—of which much, much more as we proceed in this blog—and his interpretation of Dante in The Figure of Beatrice, which brought Dante to many people for the first time and inspired Dorothy Sayers to learn Italian and translate Dante afresh. A recent resurgence of interest in Williams has led to imitative fiction, analysis of his life and work, and a wider readership. His virtuosic poetry and brilliant insights should earn him a place among the greatest literary masterpieces of the early 20th century.

It is high time to dig more deeply into the works of Charles Williams, The Oddest Inkling. Please tune in each Wednesday (and sometimes more often) for a discussion of each of the points mentioned in this post, and many more.

13 Responses to Intro

  1. Jo Ann Kulberg says:

    If I was to sit at the table with these masters of words and though, I would indeed choose to sit beside Mr. William Wrenn. Although rash and violent in his expressions toward Mr Williams , I do wonder why history and the sovereignty of God spared . Mr. Williams from a fate like that of Joan of Arch


  2. Pingback: Magus of a Saintly Cult: Charles Williams' Personality | The Oddest Inkling

  3. Pingback: My Life For Yours: CW's "Co-Inherence" theme | The Oddest Inkling

  4. David Llewellyn Dodds says:

    You say (near the end) that a “recent resurgence of interest in Williams has led” – among other results – “to imitative fiction”. I’m intrigued! Could you give an example or two of whom and what you are thinking?


  5. David Llewellyn Dodds says:

    It has just struck me that this sentence (a version of which also appears in your “About” section) might unintentionally mislead someone (in a couple different ways): “According to C.S. Lewis, everyone who met Williams fell in love with him—including many young women who became his disciples and with whom he practiced semi-sexual, semi-magical rituals of transference to heighten his creativity.”

    The part up to the dash relates something Lewis said. And the next part, up to “disciples”, corresponds to something Lewis knew and said something about.

    But I have never found any evidence that Lewis knew anything about the subject of the last part of the sentence.

    I do not think he would have written about Williams in just the way he did, had he known. It is, indeed, an interesting question, how he would have written about him, if he had ever known. I think all his published writing about Williams appeared after Williams’s death (including the BBC radio talk on his novels broadcast in February 1949, which Walter Hooper first published in written form in On Stories (1982) ).

    Another interesting area of questioning is, who did know? Not Williams’s wife, apparently, until some sort of deathbed confession to her by Williams. But who, for example, at the Oxford University Press, where he worked for decades, knew (including, what he got up to on the premises after office-hours)?

    In this context, it is worth noting that his “Companions of the Co-inherence”, unlike A.E. Waite’s occult secret society, the Fellowship of the Rosy Cross, did not have meetings where members came together, to take part in rituals or otherwise. I am not sure which members knew who else was a member. (I think Williams rather jokingly discussed the possibility of perhaps all having a sherry party together after the War, with at least one of them.)

    Similarly, when you write of “many young women who became his disciples and with whom he practiced semi-sexual, semi-magical rituals”, this might give a mistaken idea of the ‘overlap’ between “young women who became his disciples” in some sense of that word, and those “with whom he practiced…”. He certainly did not practice rituals with all; it is quite possible that most did not know he was practicing rituals with any.

    Again, among the circle of his friends and/or ‘disciples’ who were neither co-workers nor Inklings, it is not clear who came to know what, when. The first really public knowledge of any of this came with the publication of an autobiographical volume by Lois Lang-Sims in the early 1970s. The first widespread public knowledge came with Humphrey Carpenter’s The Inklings (1978). And some of the most shocking details to date, were only published in Alice Mary Hadfield’s 1983 biography of Williams.


  6. Pingback: The Oddest Inkling (Sørina Higgins) | Essential C.S. Lewis

  7. Pingback: The Oddest Inkling (Sørina Higgins) | Essential C.S. Lewis

  8. I don’t know if it’s the sort of thing you’d want to mention in your blog, but in case it is, you might mention our upcoming discussion of Ben Utter’s paper in progress and Williams’ poetry towards your upcoming anthology–for anyone reading your blog in the Twin Cities, MN area.


  9. Pingback: The “Eminently Combustible” Mr. Williams | Book Geeks Anonymous

  10. Bertrand Caso says:

    Hello. I recently have come across the novels of Charles Williams and found this site. Thanks for all of your work. I had a couple of questions. First, in your summary of his fictional work you recommend possibly skipping “Shadows of Ecstasy”. Why is that?

    Also, I found the guest post articles on “The Place of the Lion” which I found very informative. Do you have these for all of his novels? Specifically ones on “All Hallows Eve”?

    Thanks so much


    • Hello there! Here is my post about “Shadows of Ecstasy”: I think it will give you some idea why I recommend that first-time readers of CW skip it. But of course, that depends upon your taste, reading experience, etc.

      I do not have those guest posts for all the novels, alas! As you can see, I stopped my chronological blogging at 1939 — because I started a PhD program. I hope to pick up the series again when I have time. Thanks for asking!


Comment in the Co-Inherence

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s