In C.S. Lewis’s novel That Hideous Strength, Mark Studdock is a paradigm for what conversion looks like in a post-Christian society. Mark is a soft, pacifistic, non-confrontational person who only wants to be part of Belbury (which represents Babel). Mark defaults to fear and cowardice. He is the sort of guy who sits silently in DEI training, pretending with all the rest that this isn’t insane. His life principle is not toward that which is true but to take the calculated path that earns passage into the inner circle. “The citizen and the honest man which had been awakened in Mark by the conversation, quailed a little; his other and far stronger self, the self that was anxious at all costs not to be placed among the outsiders, leaped up.”[1] To enter he has to abandon his natural humanity and follow cold reason. Rather than governing his emotions, Mark eradicates them. He is led along by Babel and becomes a spineless follower.[2] He justifies his wicked actions of writing media propaganda with the thought of “Nobody ever again having the least right to consider him a nonentity or a cipher.”[3]

Something begins to change in Mark but not all at once. Let’s call it the steps of pre-repentance. First, he is thrown in prison by the inner circle elites. “There came a sudden uprush of grisly details about execution…. Mere death…. as the object of attention. The question of immortality came before him…. The killing was the important thing. On any view, this body—this limp, shaking, desperately vivid thing, so intimately his own—was going to be returned into a dead body.”[4]

Second, after Mark confronts the possibility of death, he then feels “a strange sense of liberation…. The relief of no longer trying to win” the “confidence” of the cool kids. This produces in Mark “a conscious attitude of courage, and thence into unrestrained heroics.” The spell of the present course of the world, of what the NICE call “objectivity,” falls away. All of Mark’s passions congeal into a reborn love and ambition for his wife. The philosophy of the cool kids is no longer true. He can no longer live by lies. “The relics of such semi-savage versions of Theism as Mark had picked up in the course of his life were stronger in him than he knew.”[5]

Third, Mark’s captor, Forst, puts him in various rooms filled with intense psychological manipulation that is supposed to undermine Mark’s sense of reality. The goal is to reinforce “objectivity,” the purely materialistic belief that all thoughts and feelings are biochemical reactions. Instead, the propaganda has an unexpected effect. Whereas Mark once loved when the prophets prophesied falsely (Jer. 5:31), he now is “aware, as he had never been aware before, of this room’s opposite. As the desert first teaches men to love water, or as absence first reveals affection, there rose up against this background of the sour and the crooked some kind of vision of the sweet and the straight. Something else—something he vaguely called the ‘Normal’—apparently existed…. He had never thought about it before. But there it was—solid, massive, with a shape of its own…. He was having his first deeply moral experience. He was choosing a side: the ‘Normal.’”[6]

First, there was the awareness of death. Then there was the awareness of lies. And third, there was the awareness of “the Normal.” Through these steps, Mark is being prepared for repentance. Mark is a man, deeply affected by Original Sin. But there is something else true about Mark. He is also made in the image of God—the imago dei—and thereby has a dormant sense that the “scientific point of view,” makes people into dehumanized servants of unreality. If being in the inner circle means denying the “Straight” way, then the peer-reviewed ballyhoo of Belbury “be damned.”[7] Mark’s longing for the Normal overrules the allure of being in the inner circle.

What does C.S. Lewis mean by the Normal? It’s that the nature of things points to a Creator. Mark received natural revelation truths that, in accumulated measure, awakened him to the Truth, Jesus Christ. Why is the Normal a necessary part of the steps of Mark’s conversion? Because he was thoroughly “modern,” thoroughly secular, and thoroughly materialistic. “In Mark’s mind, hardly one rag of noble thought, either Christian or Pagan, had a secure lodging. His education had been neither scientific nor classical—merely ‘Modern.’…. He was a man of straw, a glib examinee in subjects that require no exact knowledge.”[8] Mark, in other words, has been trained to prefer Belbury over St. Anne’s, utility over beauty, modern over medieval, materialism over mystery, progress over truth, cowardliness over courage, evil over good.

Repentance requires unhitching from death and hitching to life. Mark’s encounter with the Normal helped him have eyes to see that he has been preferring the wrong thing. The Normal helped unhitch Mark from the limits of his God-forsaken enculturation to see the difference between death and life. Now he is prepared to be hitched to the Alpha and Omega. 

What does this mean for us?

Nineteen-nineties-style winsome evangelism shouldn’t prevail in 2024. Yet it plods along as if neutral people today are congruent with Christianity; as if all people need is a gospel track; as if all they need is someone to help them invite Jesus into their hearts. Winsome evangelism advocates a broad belief in what is now called “niceness,” which is defined as empathy for people’s inner truth, no matter the number of dark threads contained therein.  It approaches the lost by pointing out there are good and bad things in each political party, giving deference to those who champion “social justice.” It condemns the sins of one side of the culture while ignoring the sins of the other. It is an apologetics that softens biblical patriarchy, recites the warnings against ecological catastrophe, and finds a middle ground between pro-abortion and pro-life goals. Those who support gay marriage are reckoned as large-minded. Those alert to the danger of destroying the family are reckoned small-minded—given to idolatry of the family. It taps into the vast and vague ideology that pervades Hollywood, bureaucracy, and university. It’s a framing of the gospel that says “sinners” really don’t have much to repent of. They can keep their cherished gender theory, intersectionality, multiculturalism, and all the other kink they learned at college.

The recent version of winsome evangelism has taken a particularly pointy political emphasis, but that’s only part of the reason the recent books of Tim Alberta and Russell Moore[9] are beside the point. They are running an apologetic play that treats haters of a certain political candidate with deference, even adoration.[10] They argue that professing Christians should disentangle their faith from partisan politics, especially of a certain political candidate because of his hateful rhetoric.[11] The problem is this: The unbelievers most prepared for the gospel message are those looking for someone with the courage to stand up to Belbury.[12] They see the inherent instability of an argument condemning others for political machinations that itself is standing knee-deep in the very same machinations.[13] It’s just another stale maneuver of the cultural wasteland, the sort of power play that seeks power by saying no one else should have it.[14] It's cunning and ruthless. And also evangelistically sterile. Even when warnings against lust for power are obviously applicable, it isn’t particularly cogent in the hands of Alberta and Moore, who ignore a large number of Christians to whom their squabbles do not in the least apply.

If the strategy of whistling back the note of the bird ever worked in the 1990s, it certainly won’t work now. If there was a neutral world in the 1990s, there isn’t one now.[15] However hardened to the gospel the average unbeliever was in the 1990s, he is more hardened to biblical teaching today. The gospel should be preached to all. No one is without hope. Christ saved Paul, the chief of sinners, and Christ can save anyone (1 Tim. 1:12-17). Yet the cultural divide today isn’t really about a certain political candidate. It is between those who grasp for unreality and those searching for reality. There are unbelievers thirsty for moral sanity. Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s Christian conversion encourages glimpses and visions of the opportunity for gospel witness among those who seek the Normal. They are ready to learn the Transcendent framework for distinguishing moral ideas from immoral ones.

The Apostles preached the truth to god-fearing Romans. The “Godfearers” (theosebis) were attracted to Judaism and attended synagogue without becoming converts. Godfearers was a semi-technical term for Gentiles who revered Yahweh, incorporated Jewish customs into their lives, and had like-mindedness with the Jewish community. According to Acts, a number of these Godfearers (called phoboumenoi or sebomenoi tōn theōn) eventually converted to Christ (Ps. 102:15; Prov. 9:10; Acts 10:1–2, 35; 11:18; 13:16, 26; 17:4).[16]

Who are the Godfearers among us? Are we speaking the basic truth to them? The Godfearers in 2024 have been raised in a system of destructive lies. They’ve been told that boys are girls, girls are boys, and murder is “reproductive health.” They’ve been told they are irrevocably racist, that they shouldn’t tolerate intolerance, and they’re absolutely certain there are no absolutes.

Yet they spurn the lies of the ruling class. They know how reproduction works, so they know Obergefell isn’t love, but suicide. They know a tall tale when they see it, one that smells like civilizational ruin and tastes like revolution. Metaphysical truths are hiding in plain sight if only some preacher with access to the Truth-Maker would say them with a Jesus accent. It might be the first tolerably clear and convincing account of the world they’ve heard.

Just like Mark Studdock’s encounter with the Normal opened his eyes to the biggest truth, so can the Normal today catch the attention of the unbelievers who still respect reality. They know their Darwinian worldview doesn’t have the resources to resist the authoritarian power play of identity politics, whether it comes in the form of critical theory or Jewish-Scapegoatism. They know that those today labeling others as bigots are the real bigots; that those today labeling others as racist are the real racists.[17] They know that order and morality cannot sustain itself apart from the foundation of a vibrant Christian faith. They know that whatever else may be true of the theories of progressivism, they are not progress. They know that nature doesn’t hold all the answers. They see the blood sacrifice of abortion as a primitive and barbaric sacrament disguised in technocratic lipstick. They know that Roe unmakes the world by rendering life indistinguishable from death. They know there is supposed to be a distinction between the sacred and the profane. They admit that a Transcendent moral order depends on Christianity[18] and that it is common sense that children should be protected from sexual predators. These Godfearers are ready for the Messiah, for the Christ who can order the confusion without contradicting reality.

How will these Godfearers be converted to Christ? The doctrines of Natural Theology and the imago dei give every reason to hope that the days of unreality are numbered. That doesn’t mean there is only one paradigm of conversion. The Damascus Road is still open and ready for business. But in our post-Christian society, conversion will frequently involve the gradual pre-repentance steps of Mark Studdock. The Natural, as Lewis called it, may manifest the truth, goodness, and beauty of the Creator. But it is insufficient to give the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. For this, we need the Holy Scripture, the Word made flesh, and the inward work of the Holy Spirit to bear witness to the Supreme Judge, Jesus Christ, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, mighty to save the influx of Godfearers who are looking for living water (Jn. 4:1-26).

Other Articles

https://trinityreformedkirk.com/2020/08/18/reflections-on-the-great-commission/

https://trinityreformedkirk.com/2021/03/05/principles-for-distancing-or-when-do-i-stop-ministering-to-that-person/

https://trinityreformedkirk.com/2024/03/11/review-of-the-augustine-way-retrieving-a-vision-for-the-churchs-apologetic-witness/

[1] C.S. Lewis, That Hideous Strength (New York, Collier, 1965), 100.

[2] Christiana Hale, Deeper Heaven (Moscow, ID: Roman Roads Press, 2020), 197, 210f.

[3] C.S. Lewis, That Hideous Strength (New York, Collier, 1965), 135.

[4] C.S. Lewis, That Hideous Strength (New York, Collier, 1965), 244.

[5] C.S. Lewis, That Hideous Strength (New York, Collier, 1965), 267-270.

[6] C.S. Lewis, That Hideous Strength (New York, Collier, 1965), 299.

[7] C.S. Lewis, That Hideous Strength (New York, Collier, 1965), 299-300.

[8] C.S. Lewis, That Hideous Strength (New York, Collier, 1965), 185.

[9] Russell Moore writes, “Many evangelicals have traded the Sermon on the Mount for the sloganeering of political tribalism, and nowhere is this more evident than in the embrace of Donald Trump. The cost of this exchange is a crisis of credibility that has undermined our witness to the world” (54). He also says, “It's not just a matter of political differences; it's a matter of whether we are willing to be prophetic voices of truth and justice, even when it costs us something. Supporting a leader who embodies the antithesis of Christ-like humility and compassion is a betrayal of our mission” (78). Russell Moore, Losing Our Religion: An Altar Call for Evangelical America (B&H Publishing Group, 2023).

[10] For a refutation of the most stubbornly persistent cultural unreality of the last four years, click here.

[11] Russell Moore writes, “The hateful and immature rhetoric that has become a hallmark of Trump's public persona is not just a political problem; it is a spiritual crisis. When evangelicals excuse or even celebrate such behavior, we betray the very message of love and grace that we are called to embody” (91). He also says, “By aligning ourselves with a leader whose words are often cruel and divisive, we risk becoming desensitized to the destructive power of such language. The normalization of hateful rhetoric among evangelicals is a grave danger to our witness and to the health of our communities” (104). Russell Moore, Losing Our Religion: An Altar Call for Evangelical America (B&H Publishing Group, 2023).

[12] Which means, the good ole boy who hasn’t been to church in twelve years and votes for Donald Trump isn’t a problem for the church but an opportunity.

[13] https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/protestant-deformation/

[14] Tim Alberta has written, in the words of Aaron Renn, “a deeply hostile book.” Alberta fights the culture war by decrying those of different political opinions fighting the culture war. Tim Alberta, The Kingdom, the Power, and the Glory: American Evangelicals in an Age of Extremism. New York: HarperCollins, 2023.

[15] Aaron Renn, Life in the Negative World: Confronting Challenges in an Anti-Christian Culture (Zondervan, 2024).

[16] Trebilco, P., & Stewart, R. A. “Proselyte.” In D. R. W. Wood, I. H. Marshall, A. R. Millard, J. I. Packer, & D. J. Wiseman (Eds.), New Bible dictionary (3rd ed., p. 976). InterVarsity Press, 1996.

[17] Jeremy Carl, The Unprotected Class: How Anti-White Racism Is Tearing America Apart (Post Hill Press, 2023).

[18] Tom Holland, Dominion: How the Christian Revolution Remade the World. New (Basic Books, 2019).