[Raynor]

This is where I would argue you are completely wrong & factually wrong too

I don't see how the fact that Tolkien intended "once upon a time" to make such a body of connected legends to dedicate it to England refutes the religious aspect of his writing. Moreoever, I believe he called this initial endeavour as absurd.

One cannot use the letters (written after the event in most cases) to prove his 'good' intentions.

I see this rather often; do you accuse him of hipocrisy?

Tolkien's statement that the Secret Fire 'is' the Holy Spirit is not something that should simply be accepted without question.

Why? Does contradict any part of the story?

Tolkien also referred to men using chainsaws on trees, & in one case a young man riding a motorbike, as 'Orcs'

I don't see why he can't use terms of his mythology to reffer to real life situations, esspecially if his terms are widely known and understood.

Many elements, from Christianity, Paganism, botany, biology & many other things were taken up into the secondary world but once there they took on new & unique forms & were no longer the same thing.

Not in form, but that is something we agreed from the begining: Tolkien is not writing allegorically.

I have to say that the whole thing about Eru entering into Arda to heal it felt completely false to me

I really fail to see what other power could remove Melkor's marring.

So now we have context.

First, do you accuse him of being a hypocrite? Second, does anything in your second quote of that paragraph somehow refutes the religious essence of his work? Because I fail to see; I agree with you that Christianity is present in an un-allegorical fashion (though in a much stronger manner than you seem to imply - that being our difference), I present some more quotes to that extent:

Originally Posted by Letter #131

For reasons which I will not elaborate, that seems to me fatal. Myth and fairy-story must, as all art, reflect and contain in solution elements of moral and religious truth (or error), but not explicit, not in the known form of the primary 'real' world. (I am speaking, of course, of our present situation, not of ancient pagan, pre-Christian days. And I will not repeat what I tried to say in my essay, which you read.)

Originally Posted by On Fairy-stories

The stories of Beatrix Potter lie near the borders of Faerie, but outside it, I think, for the most part. Their nearness is due largely to their strong moral element: by which I mean their inherent morality, not any allegorical significatio

According to Tolkien, one can write a fairy story which is moral (or religious/christian/catholic) in essence without being moralistic (or allegorical). I believe that interpreting his work in such a way is accurate and does give him due credit.