Introduction
The work by C. S Lewis ‘Mere Christianity’ is a great manifestation of how the religious aspects in understanding life should be correlated with appropriate situations under various circumstances. In fact, the book is intended to describe the understanding of the author of what is called the universe and place of good evil sides in it. It is vital for everyone to become familiar with the idea of spiritual and moral factors in human beings. One cannot understand such truth without being involved voluntarily in the investigation of those who spent years for this. On the other hand, if people will talk and explain phenomena of the reality in different languages, then there definitely appear conflict situations. In this respect this paper is dedicated to make glimpses on how the author of Mere Christianity proves the idea of “Higher Power” and “Moral Law” in the context of contemporary diversification of views along with the phenomenon of multiculturalism and pluralism of opinions. The peculiarities of tactic use of “voice”, “tone”, or “persona” by Lewis throughout the book are those grounds on which the possibility to tell non-Christian people about Christianity becomes more compatible and effective with positive feedbacks of a supposed audience, as a result.
Discussion
A versatile and plain narration of the author promotes a clear understanding of what the author wants a reader to point out. This flow of thought is illuminated in constant addressing of Lewis toward the simple life episodes. In this case it is seen that the standards of Christianity are considered to be prior in the book. Looking at the difficulties of today’s interpersonal communication skills which are used in masses one may obviously claim that the religious themes are rather omitted in order not to touch upon somebody’s feeling of self-esteem. On the other hand, this theme becomes less popular in the society due to a total decline in moral aspects of life. People seem to lose a proper estimation of what is right or wrong in this world due to fast rhythm of life. Nevertheless, a witty sequence of facts and details composed in the book helps Lewis to make people listen to his evaluation of such right or wrong nature of everything surrounding a man in his environment:
Nowadays, when we talk of the ‘laws of nature’ we usually mean things like gravitation, or heredity, or the laws of chemistry. But when the older thinkers called the Law of Right and Wrong ‘the Law of Nature’ they really meant the law of human nature (Lewis, 2001, p. 4).
The author provides personal outlook on the things concerned with the history, sciences and other approaches which make his narration interesting and without one-sidedness in evaluation of Christian position about the points on morality and spirituality with specific clichés. This is presupposed with a correct key of argumentation in Lewis’s language. His ability not to promote empty words without logical background invokes in a reader a desire to follow the author’s development of thought. Moreover, Lewis in his book is deeply convinced in the prevalence of Christianity over other religions, which testifies his inclination to show a mere extent of radicalism in personal reasoning: “But, of course, being a Christian does mean thinking that where Christianity differs from other religions, Christianity is right and they are wrong” (Lewis, 2001, p. 35). Suchlike statements the authors uses in an ad absurdum key, so that to show the negative and mainly positive results which may be extracted when approaching toward this theme rationally.
The energetic and free voice of the author is felt when the issue of a dichotomy between the religions appears. In this respect the figure of God and his words and Commandments are perfectly transformed by the author into the notions of “Moral Law” and “Higher Power”. This idea presupposes the direct relation between such categories pointing out that “Higher Power” created “Moral Law” (Wielenberg, 2008).
Demonstrating the significance of the religion as it is Lewis pretends to admit that there should be no simple interpretation of the religion and views that it is something with which one can play. This idea supports the capacity of the author to use adequate tone and grammatical means, such as active voice, first person singular and plural to depict a respectful attitude toward readers, mentioning personal concernment in everything Lewis discusses in the book. Thus, the author proves the idea of complicated nature of Christianity according to its ideological and historical background: “It is no good asking for a simple religion. After all real things are not simple” (Lewis, 2001, p.40).
Conclusion
To sum up, the work by C. S. Lewis Mere Christianity provides a rationally developed and concerned structure of language taking into account the graphical along with the expressive means for denouncing the idea of the universal significance of Christianity as one of the major religions. In this respect one should realize the fact that the language of the author is rich in different intentions of his incorporated in kind or strict evaluation of aspects and factors closely related to the Christian teaching and its use for the contemporary society.
Reference
Lewis, C. S. (2001). Mere Christianity (3rd ed.). New York: Harperone.
Wielenberg, E. J. (2008). God and the reach of reason: C.S. Lewis, David Hume, and Bertrand Russell. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.