Still Beginning the Journey

Before we actually hit the road with Lewis, I thought it might be a good idea to take the advice of another English writer and "begin at the beginning." The edition of Mere Christianity that I will be using for this trip is the HarperCollins 2001 edition. All my citations will be from this text, so if you're following along in another version, I'm sorry the page numbers won't match. I won't always cite every quote I make, especially when I make several in a row that are from the same page. I'll try to cite the first quote from each page, so you can follow along. Mere Christianity begins with a preface from Lewis himself, stating the history of the book, his purpose in writing it, and a hint to the reader of how he hopes his thoughts will be applied. After reading it through again, I think it might be a good idea to hit on a few of Lewis's points before we get into Chapter 1.

n discussing the history of the book, Lewis mentions that he originally presented the material as a series of radio presentations. They originally aired on BBC in 1942-1944. I am amazed at God's provision that in war-torn Britain, there was a hunger to hear about His grace and He provided just the man to deliver it. The edition of the book that I have is slightly edited from those original broadcasts, but what we will be reading is not substantially different from what those huddled in their homes during times of war and unrest.

ewis's purpose in writing is made very evident over the ensuing pages. He has no desire to convert anyone to his own position (a not especially high nor especially low layman in the Church of England, if anyone's keeping score), but merely to "explain and defend the belief that has been common to nearly all Christians at all times" (VIII). Lewis wishes to avoid any debates on high theology or church history, because he doesn't feel qualified but even more because he realizes that such issues only keep those outside Christianity, outside. I agree completely with Lewis here. While I love a lively debate, intramural squabbles between Christians hardly make us attractive to those who do not know Christ. In other blog posts, I might get into issues of "higher theology", but for now, we will confine ourselves to the same avenues Lewis does. He quotes the 17th century pastor Richard Baxter to narrow his scope to that which Baxter called "mere Christianity." Clearly Lewis does not mean to reduce the gospel to a "mere" anything, but rather he wants just to focus on those central ideas that unite us as Christians.

Before we go further, I would like to follow the rabbit-trail Lewis chases. I will give a few quotes, interspersed with some commentary.

Far deeper objections may be felt - and have been expressed - against my use of the word Christian to mean one who accepts the common doctrines of Christianity. People ask: "Who are you, to lay down who is, and who is not a Christian?" or "May not many a man who cannot believe these doctrines be far more truly a Christian, far closer to the spirit of Christ, than some who do?" (XII-XIII)

Let us not dismiss these theoretical objectors too quickly. Lewis rightly observes that "this objection is in one sense very right, very charitable, very spiritual, very sensitive."(XIII) However, his very next sentence puts the objectors in their place: "It has every available quality except that of being useful." Heh. Well. Not much to say to that, huh? I think Lewis touches on a good point though: words have meanings, for a good reason. He discusses how the word gentleman use to refer merely to a person who had a coat of arms and some land. It was not a compliment, merely a statement of fact. Over the years, the definition of gentleman expanded to include an idea of "true gentlemanliness" that was deeper, more spiritual. As such, to call someone a gentleman no longer conveys information about that man (i.e. owner of some land), but now it tells you what the speaker thinks about the man. We already have words to tell you if we think someone is honorable or brave or kind or chivalrous, so co-opting the word gentleman just robs us of a word that used to have a unique, historical meaning. In the same way, if we allow the word Christian to be deepened and broadened and massaged to mean those who act kindly or selflessly or who are "nice people", we "will never be able to apply it to anyone" (XIV). To do so puts us in the place of judging hearts, and we "are indeed forbidden to judge...that any man is, or is not, a Christian in this refined sense." If, however, we restrict ourselves to the historical sense of the word, we can join Luke and use the word to mean disciples of Christ, those who accept the teachings of "mere Christianity."

inally, Lewis ends his preface with a word-painting. He asks us to imagine ourselves standing in the great hall of a house, with many doors leading off to other rooms. "Mere" Christianity is that hall, where all who are disciples of Christ enter. Eventually we will find ourselves opening one door or another and entering the rooms of Congregationalism or Presbyterianism or whatever. Lewis's purpose is merely to get us from outside the house into the hall, which door we enter is up to us. Given that many of the readers of this blog are likely to have opened and walked through different doors, I conclude this post with his plea to his readers.

You must keep on praying for light: and, of course, even in the hall, you must begin trying to obey the rules which are common to the whole house. And above all, you must be asking which door is the true one; not which pleases you best by its paint and panelling...When you have reached your own room, be kind to those who have chosen different doors and to those who are still in the hall. If they are wrong they need your prayers all the more, and if they are your enemies, then you are under orders to pray for them. That is one of the rules common to the whole house." (XVI)