C.S. Lewis, one of the most influential Christian apologists of the 20th century, is renowned for his profound theological insights and literary contributions. Despite his broad influence within Christian thought, Lewis held specific theological positions that set him apart from other traditions, particularly Calvinism.
For instance, C.S. Lewis’s theology is often characterized by its emphasis on free will, human responsibility, and the moral nature of God. His writings reflect a deep commitment to the idea that humans are endowed with the freedom to choose or reject God, a perspective that fundamentally contrasts with Calvinist doctrines of predestination and divine sovereignty.
C.S. Lewis’ Disagreement with Calvinism
One of the core tenets of Calvinism is the doctrine of predestination, which asserts that God has predetermined the eternal destiny of every individual, choosing some for salvation and others for damnation. Lewis found this doctrine deeply troubling. In his seminal work, “Mere Christianity,” Lewis argues that God’s omniscience does not necessitate predestination in the Calvinist sense. He believed that while God may know the outcomes of human choices, this foreknowledge does not negate human free will.
Lewis’s disagreement with predestination is rooted in his belief in a just and loving God. He could not reconcile the idea of a God who dictated the evil in the world and who arbitrarily condemns individuals to eternal punishment with the God of love and justice he encountered in the Bible. For Lewis, the idea of predestination undermined the Calvinistic doctrine of Total Depravity, the moral responsibility of individuals, and the genuine nature of God’s love:
If God’s moral judgment differs from ours so that our ‘black’ may be His ‘white’, we can mean nothing by calling Him good; for to say ‘God is good’, while asserting that His goodness is wholly other than ours, is really only to say ‘God is we know not what’. And an utterly unknown quality in God cannot give us moral grounds for loving or obeying Him. If He is not (in our sense) ‘good’ we shall obey, if at all, only through fear — and should be equally ready to obey an omnipotent Fiend. The doctrine of Total Depravity — when the consequence is drawn that, since we are totally depraved, our idea of God is worth simply nothing — may thus turn Christianity into a form of devil-worship.
C.S. Lewis, “The Problem of Pain.”
C.S. Lewis’ Emphasis on Free Will
Lewis’s emphasis on free will is a significant point of departure from Calvinist thought. In “The Problem of Pain,” Lewis writes extensively about the importance of free will in the context of human suffering and theodicy. He contends that free will is essential for genuine love and moral growth. Without the freedom to choose, human actions would be meaningless, and genuine love for God and others would be impossible.
In contrast to Calvinism, which often emphasizes God’s sovereignty and control over all events, Lewis maintained that human free will is a necessary component of a meaningful relationship with God. He argued that God’s desire for a loving relationship with humanity necessitates allowing humans the freedom to choose or reject Him:
He would rather have a world of free beings, with all its risks, than a world of people who did right like machines because they couldn’t do anything else. The more we succeed in imagining what a world of perfect automatic beings would be like, the more, I think, we shall see His wisdom.
CS Lewis, The Trouble with X
God’s Nature and Human Responsibility
Another area of disagreement between Lewis and Calvinism lies in their respective views on the nature of God and human responsibility. Calvinism tends to stress the transcendence and sovereignty of God, often portraying Him as the ultimate cause of all events, including human actions. Lewis, however, emphasized the immanence of God and His desire for a personal relationship with each individual.
C.S. Lewis clearly considered Calvinism to be contaminated by Pantheism, as evident in some of his books and lectures. Consider, for example, his words in “The Case for Christianity,” and remember Lewis was a polite British gentleman:
If you do not take the distinction between good and bad very seriously, then it is easy to say that anything you find in this world is a part of God. But, of course, if you think some things really bad and God really good, then you cannot talk like that. You must believe that God is separate from the world and that some of the things we see in it are contrary to His will. Confronted with a cancer or a slum, the Pantheist can say, “If you could only see it from the divine point of view, you would realize that this also is God.” The Christian replies, “Don’t talk damned nonsense!“
C.S. Lewis, The Case for Christianity, page 33-34
Lewis’s portrayal of God is that of a loving Father who desires all people to come to repentance and salvation. This perspective is evident in “The Great Divorce,” where Lewis explores the concept of hell and the choices that lead individuals there. He suggests that hell is a result of human free will and the rejection of God’s love, rather than a predetermined destiny imposed by God.
Implications for Christian Thought
C.S. Lewis’s disagreements with Calvinism have significant implications for contemporary Christian thought. His emphasis on free will, moral responsibility, and the loving nature of God provides a counterbalance to the deterministic tendencies of Calvinism. Lewis’s theology invites Christians to consider the profound importance of human freedom in the context of faith and to grapple with the complexities of divine justice and love.
Furthermore, Lewis’s critiques encourage a more nuanced understanding of predestination and divine sovereignty. Rather than seeing these doctrines as mutually exclusive with human free will, Lewis’s perspective invites believers to explore the mystery of how God’s foreknowledge and human freedom can coexist.
Enjoyed the article? Consider the book! (please disregard the low rating; some Calvinists got upset with me and rated it low without even bothering to read it…)
