The Arminian Theology of C.S. Lewis

C.S. Lewis is one of the most widely read Christian writers of the last 100 years.   Although he doesn’t seem to have ever directly referenced Arminius or Wesley in his writings, his theology is nonetheless generally consistent with Arminain thought. Below are some quotes from Lewis that indicate his Arminian leanings.

Lewis did not hold to “irresistible grace”.  He believed that God limits his power and will not unilaterally change a person.  From The Trouble with X, Lewis wrote:

God has made it a rule for Himself that He won’t alter people’s character by force. He can and will alter them – but only if the people will let Him. In that way He has really and truly limited His power. Sometimes we wonder why He has done so, or even wish that He hadn’t. But apparently He thinks it worth doing. 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.

Lewis expanded on this in the Screwtape Letters, when the demon Screwtape comments on the character of God:

You must have often wondered why the Enemy does not make more use of His power to be sensibly present to human souls in any degree He chooses and at any moment. But you now see that the Irresistible and the Indisputable are the two weapons which the very nature of His scheme forbids Him to use. Merely to over-ride a human will (as His felt presence in any but the faintest and most mitigated degree would certainly do) would be for Him useless. He cannot ravish. He can only woo. For His ignoble idea is to eat the cake and have it; the creatures are to be one with Him, but yet themselves; merely to cancel them, or assimilate them, will not serve. He is prepared to do a little overriding at the beginning. He will set them off with communications of His presence which, though faint, seem great to them, with emotional sweetness, and easy conquest over temptation. But He never allows this state of affairs to last long. Sooner or later He withdraws, if not in fact, at least from their conscious experience, all those supports and incentives. He leaves the creature to stand up on its own legs—to carry out from the will alone duties which have lost all relish. It is during such trough periods, much more han during the peak periods, that it is growing into the sort of creature He wants it to be.

Lewis approached the problem of evil from an Arminian view – that evil came about by God giving freewill to creatures.  Lewis also argued for the typically Arminian view of libertarian free will (A person can choose either A or B), rather than Calvinistic compatibility (A person always follows his strongest desire, and can’t do otherwise).  And Lewis argued for an Arminian view of God that is a relationally based.  Mere Christianity book 2, chapter 3:

Is this state of affairs [evil]  in accordance with God’s will or not? If it is, He is a strange God, you will say: and if it is not, how can anything happen contrary to the will of a being with absolute power?

But anyone who has been in authority knows how a thing can be in accordance with your will in one way and not in another. It may be quite sensible for a mother to say to the children, “I’m not going to go and make you tidy the schoolroom every night. You’ve got to learn to keep it tidy on your own.” Then she goes up one night and finds the Teddy bear and the ink and the French Grammar all lying in the grate. That is against her will. She would prefer the children to be tidy. But on the other hand, it is her will which has left the children free to be untidy. The same thing arises in any regiment, or trade union, or school. You make a thing voluntary and then half the people do not do it. That is not what you willed, but your will has made it possible.

It is probably the same in the universe. God created things which had free will. That means creatures which can go either wrong or right. Some people think they can imagine a creature which was free but had no possibility of going wrong; I cannot. If a thing is free to be good it is also free to be bad. And free will is what has made evil possible. Why, then, did God give them free will? Because free will though it makes evil possible, is also the only thing that makes possible any love or goodness or joy worth having. A world of automata-of creatures that worked like machines-would hardly be worth creating. The happiness which God designs for His higher creatures is the happiness of being freely, voluntarily united to Him and to each other in an ecstasy of love and delight compared with which the most rapturous love between a man and a woman on this earth is mere milk and water. And for that they must be free.

Lewis also had an Arminian understanding of the existence of hell.  Some end up in hell because of their choice to reject God’s provision.  In The Great Divorce, Lewis writes:

There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, “Thy will be done,” and those to whom God says, in the end, “Thy will be done.” All that are in Hell, choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no Hell. No soul that seriously and constantly desires joy will ever miss it. Those who seek find. Those who knock it is opened.

Lewis also seemed to lean towards Arminian understanding of apostasy – that it is possible for a person who was formerly saved to cease being a Christian. In The Screwtape Letters he writes (again, from Screwtapes view):

I note with grave displeasure that your patient has become a Christian…There is no need to despair; hundreds of these adult converts have been reclaimed after a brief sojourn in the Enemy’s camp and are now with us. All the habits of the patient, both mental and bodily, are still in our favour.

And again Mere Christianity, book 4, chapter 10:

The world does not consist of 100 per cent Christians and 100 per cent non-Christians. There are people (a great many of them) who are slowly ceasing to be Christians but who still call themselves by that name: some of them are clergymen. There are other people who are slowly becoming Christians though they do not yet call themselves so. There are people who do not accept the full Christian doctrine about Christ but who are so strongly attracted by Him that they are His in a much deeper sense than they themselves understand.

—————————————————————————————————–

For a nice detailed essay on the Arminianism of Lewis, check out C.S. Lewis: Calvinist or Classical Arminian?   by Rev. Zach Dawes

Advertisements

7 Comments

Filed under Arminianism, C.S. Lewis

7 responses to “The Arminian Theology of C.S. Lewis

  1. Gary B

    There’s no doubt that Lewis was quite Arminian, at least when it came to his philosophy. But, like every Arminian who is also a Christian I’ve ever talked to (because, of course, one may hold to an Arminian theology and be unregenerate, just as an unregenerate person may hold to a Calvinist theology), Lewis was an Arminian only when speaking philosophically and about other people. When he spoke of his own conversion, on the other hand, he talked as if it was all of God. He was as monergist as the strictest Calvinist. After all, what Christian would say “oh yes, it was MY choice to choose Jesus, and the only reason that I am saved and Hitler (for example) was not is that I made a better choice”? I’ve heard my own thoroughly Arminian Calvary Chapel pastor talk about “God seeing something good in Jacob that made him choose Jacob over Esau.” Again, what Christian would say “God saw something good in me”?

    Here is my fuller thought on the subject, including a very revealing quote from Lewis:

    http://cajoneador.blogspot.com/2008/03/cs-lewis-calvinist.html

    Blessings,
    Gary

  2. Hi Gary, thanks for the comment. I think the “Surprised by Joy” quote you provided is consistent with Arminianism. Interestingly, the quote refers to his experience in 1929 of converting from from Atheism to Theism. At that point he was not yet convinced that Jesus was Christ. The experience was part of God’s drawing (preveneint) grace, yet Lewis didn’t actually became a believer until two years later in 1931. He writes that this happened when he was riding to a zoo in a motorcycle side car with his brother Warren. “When we set out I did not believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and when we reached the zoo I did.”

  3. Jeff

    Here is a quote from “The Problem of Pain” concerning depravity. “This chapter will have been misunderstood if anyone describes it as a reinstatement of the doctrine of Total Depravity. I disbelieve that doctrine, partly on the logical ground that if our depravity were total we should not know ourselves to be depraved, and partly because experience shows us much goodness in human nature.” Lewis is affirming Arminianism by saying that life experiences plus a dose of God’s prevenient grace allows a person to see good in order to choose it. If a person was totally depraved, there would be no hope for him or her at all. He or she would be destined for hell since birth. In my opinion, we are only totally depraved in the sense that we cannot be saved apart from God’s grace.

  4. Sal

    Predestination ? What about what God said : “The only sin tha there is no forgiven for : is the Blasfemy against The Holly Spirit . So if be belive in Jesus Christ and follow Him trying to do our best in our lifes and ask for forginess when we sin ; How anyone that does this , will go to heaven .
    We chose to give our heart to Jesus or reject Him .For does who believe in predestination forget everythig tha God is : Love ,”Just “, mercifull etc….
    Yes ,we do not deserve anything but God made a provision for all as He did for Adam and Eve. Finaly God does not contradict Himself or go agaist His nature. So to me to believe in predestination the way Calvinist is to go agaist His Nature and virtues . God is not limited to time and space , he can be in the present , past and future at the same time .The Bible talks aout predestination but also about free will ; could it possible be that God foreseing the future draw His plan (predestination) . Anyhow He is Omnipresent ,Omnisciente and Omnipotent ; “he can do it all ”
    At the end no one should boast becouse is the Blood of Christ how we obtain Salvation . If you are of the belief of predestination becouse the blood of Christ , fine you will go to Heaven if you are armenianist becose you choose the blood of Christ you to will go Heaven also . As long as Christ ( Father ,Son and Holly Spirit) is the center in our life , our exjemple our guide, the one who we worship (trinity) . Why all this division? as if we know and understand everything about God .Again is His blood nothig else.

  5. Sal

    I made a mistake tiping : i meant “how anyone will go to hell”

  6. Pingback: Minority Report: Unconditional Election and the PreCrime Department | Dead Heroes Don't Save

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s