Firemen battle the flames of a German bombing attack on London, 1941.Origins of the Book:
"THE CONTENTS of this book were first given on the air, and then published in three separate parts as Broadcast Talks (1942), Christian Behaviour (1943), and Beyond Personality (1944). In the printed versions I made a few additions to what I had said at the microphone, but otherwise left the text much as it had been. A 'talk' on the radio should, I think, be as like real talk as possible, and should not sound like an essay being read aloud. In my talks I had therefore used all the contractions and colloquialisms I ordinarily use in conversation."
C.S Lewis: 'Mere Christianity' Page VII of the Preface
These talks were made during the hardship of World War II.
One author reflects:
" The original setting of Mere Christianity was some of the darkest days of World War II. London was bombed every night from September 7, 1940 to November 2, 1940. On the night of November 14th, 30,000 incendiaries and 500 tons of bombs and landmines dropped on Coventry. It was a time of blackouts, bomb shelters, shortages, and rationing—and a time of personal searching, wondering, and questioning." [1]
It was a time of struggle and confusion.
The British Broadcast Corporation asked C.S. Lewis to give a series of radio talks to discuss Christianity.
"Mere Christianity was originally four series of radio broadcasts on the BBC between 1941 and 1944. Rev. James Welch, Director of Religion for the BBC, had read C. S. Lewis's book The Problem of Pain (1940) and, without ever hearing Lewis's voice, approached him about doing a radio series."
"During the war, programs had to be cleared by a censor before airing. In addition, the timing had to be exact, as the BBC feared that a German transmission could break in if there were an extended pause or silence. This forced Lewis to write scripts for each talk that filled a precise amount of time (usually 10 or 15 minutes), no more, no less. Moreover, a radio listener cannot flip back a page to re-read a point missed the first time, the way readers of a book can. This meant Lewis's message had to be simple and clear so the audience would grasp it in a single passing." [2]
Lewis discussed the thought behind his selection as an emissary of Christianity:
"It’s not because I’m anybody in particular that I’ve been asked to tell
you what Christians believe. In fact it’s just the opposite. [The British
Broadcasting Corporation] have asked me, first of all because I’m a layman
and not a parson, and consequently they thought I might understand the
ordinary person’s point of view a bit better. Secondly, I think they asked me
because it was known that I’d been an atheist for many years and only became
a Christian fairly recently. They thought that would mean I’d be able to see
the difficulties – able to remember what Christianity looks like from the
outside. So you see the long and the short of it is that I’ve been selected for
this job just because I’m an amateur and not a professional, and a beginner
not an old hand. Of course this means that you may well ask what right I have
to talk on the subject at all.
Well, when I’d finished my scripts I sent them round to various
people who were professionals: to one Church of England theologian, one
Roman Catholic, one Presbyterian, and one Methodist. The Church of England
man and the Presbyterian agreed with the whole thing. The Roman Catholic
and the Methodist agreed in the main, but would have liked one or two places
altered. So there you’ve got all the cards on the table.
What I’m going to say isn’t exactly what all these people would say;
but the greater part of it is what all Christians agree on… One thing I can
promise you. In spite of all the unfortunate differences between Christians, what
they agree on is still something pretty big and pretty solid: big enough to blow
any of us sky-high if it happens to be true..." [3]
This book is literally a series of radio talks converted to text form. These talks were given by a layman. He was selected precisely because he was a layman It would do our study harm to focus too much on the theological defects of the work. It is my desire to accentuate the positives. I will discuss the negatives as they arise, but to a lesser degree. I pray that each of us will find this study to be fruitful.
RC
