Dickens and Dostoevsky are both non-Catholics who nevertheless weren't super far away from the Church (despite their occasionally making it seem as though they were). Something like David Copperfield (substitute Great Expectations if you want a more "serious" work) or the Brothers Karamazov would both be pretty neat lenten reads, though maybe Dickens is too much fun for the season.

Dostoyevsky is great for penitential reading.

Don't worry...I was agreeing with GKC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 Never read the Archbishop one.

The first two volumes of the Space Trilogy are certainly not boring, especially Perelandra. It is splendid.

I'll go to the other obvious one--Flannery O'Connor.

^ This goes for Walker Percy too.

I slogged my way through Crime and Punishment. Not sure I ever managed to finish TBK, despite multiple attempts with different translations.

I have read, or tried to read, everything I've disrecommended, BTW.

I have never cared for any of Lewis's fiction except for Narnia. His non-fiction works are where it's at.

Loved them both, and also the Idiot. I think I did not finish the Devils (or whatever its current standard English title is).

One good penetential read might be the Plague. A hard look at a world without Divine Providence. I've always liked Camus, and wished very much that he hadn't died when he did. But he can surely be entrusted to the mercy of God.

(That's for O'Connor. I've never read any Percy.)

(No, I'm not building a SR pyramid. I'm saying that goes double for me. I love Russian fiction, but I will admit that War and Peace was too slow for my liking.

I approve. Have read Campion and Helena books.

It was his favorite until he wrote FACES. Then it was his 2nd favorite.

Otherwise,

I agree with gherkin.

Whatever the merits or demerits of War and Peace be (and I rather liked it except for the endless and repetitive historical theorising), one can hardly blame them on Dostoyevsky.

ETA: Actually,I ought to mention that there were other things apart from the historical theorising which I disliked and actually found more than a bit disconcerting. However, apart from eventually being worn down by the harping on along the same vein about his views on that, I wasn't on the whole left with the impression that the book was 'too slow' after having read it, though I now remember I thought it too slow when I began. But I do think there can be real danger in the positive portrayal of freemasonry in Pierre's involvement with it, as well as some other things. But there were other parts I really liked and I can't remember thinking it too slow once I got into it, though it took me a while to care as he took a while to get to the stories I cared about. Anyway, I do think there ought to be some caution with regard to it, which had rather momentarily been brushed to the back of my mind - perhaps by the shock of poor Dostoyevsky being so harshly treated.

Out of the Silent Planet is really good, but Perelandra is a bit thin (literally as well as figuratively).