[Lalwendë]

Presumptions and assumptions, that's all any of us really have to go on for what Tolkien truly felt about God. Applying theology isn't any different to applying psychology to his beliefs, how they were formed and how they developed; all we have to go on for evidence is the wealth of words written by and about Tolkien and none of us could hope to come close to understanding what he truly believed as the 'truth' of any person's relationship with God is utterly intangible.

Accepting that Tolkien's God is much more difficult and inscrutable than the kindly notions of God that many of us have come to know is not wrong. People of his generation were more likely to take the view that God could (and would) be cruel; my own Catholic grandmother used to tell me that God would smite me down and His way was His will. And you only have to look at a book of good, stirring Methodist hymns to see this view of God. Sacrifice and martyrdom has been, and is, a way of glorifying God.

Child expresses her belief in 'hope' through her post, and I too believe in 'hope', and through this I cling to the possibility that Frodo could have been healed too. But what the text lacks is any evidence that there truly is hope for Frodo. The great and the good contrive to obtain him a place in the ship to the West and judging by the evidence we have that Elves have powers of healing (e.g. Elrond healing Frodo's wounds at Rivendell) we might guess that he will at least receive some succour in the West. That gives us hope. But the cold hard fact is that the only thing that would truly heal Frodo is to turn back the clock and have none of this ever happen. When Frodo says "there is no real going back", then this is the truth; he will never return to his former state.

Frodo was indeed told that his task was dangerous, and he was given a choice, but do we know whether he fully comprehended that choice? I would say not, as it was not until Mount Doom that the awful truth dawned. Looking at this from real life, the servicemen who took part in experiments at Porton Down, and those who were involved in the atom bomb tests would have been told that their participation held risks, and though there may or may not have been choice involved, they would also have seen participation as their duty ("for the sake of my children and their children"). They would also end up hurt and would not be the same again, and though we can give them our compassion, it still does not undo the act or shut the Pandora's Box which was opened.

LotR, taken alone, has a very stark but modern ending. There is only a hope of succour, there are no promises and there is definitely no going back. I don't think it's only because the story is over that many people weep at the end of the book. Take LotR alone, without Eru, and the novel tells us that only the great efforts of human life can overcome evil, our hope lies with each other. Divinty is present, in the form of Light, but we do not know of Eru. Good and evil, Light and Dark are there but they are delineated through the actions of those who are 'good' or 'evil', not through reference to Eru.

But then take LotR in conjunction with the Silmarillion, and it becomes clear that there is a God in this world we are reading about, and it then becomes clear that this God is somewhat inscrutable, allowing suffering and we begin to ask why? Tolkien's answer as to why is that Eru just is, and it is his will. The Long Defeat is endless until Eru decides to bring about the End of Arda, as these people will continue to struggle and suffer against the evil which Eru allowed to enter into their world.