I thought long and hard about posting this here, as the subject of the page/podcast episode is a defense of the five points of Calvinism, and I’m not really interested in arguing that issue here. But what ultimately pushed me toward posting this link (below, at the bottom of this post) is that Piper puts his finger on an issue that’s bothered me about Lewis for some time:
I have read more of C.S. Lewis than any other author on the planet except Jonathan Edwards. I love C.S. Lewis. He has made a great difference in my life. But one thing you will look for in vain in all the writings of C.S. Lewis: careful, serious biblical exposition.
Lewis made a great difference in my life and my faith as well. It’s thanks to him that I see Christianity as something I can think about, reason about, debate about. It’s thanks to him that I see it as, first and foremost, a matter of truth, regardless of how I might feel about it. But when he writes things like (and I’m paraphrasing here, as I don’t remember the exact reference, and sadly Janine Goffar’s C.S. Lewis Index has let me down in finding it) “I find it’s best to take the Calvinist view of my own virtues and others’ vices, and the other view of my vices and others’ virtues,” while it may be good counsel in terms of humility and charity, it’s simply lousy theology (even ignoring the incorrect assumption that “the Calvinist view” does not hold men responsible for their actions).
Lewis, of course, was not a theologian by profession. But everyone is a theologian, and Lewis certainly presents the basics of Christian theology in Mere Christianity. He applies it in various ways in his fiction, and he discusses various aspects at length in a number of his non-fiction works (Miracles, The Problem of Pain, Letters to Malcolm, etc.). But his discussion seems to be much more from a philosophical perspective than an exegetical one.
Calvinism, like any other theological belief or system, is either true or false (or, more likely, a mixture of true and false in some proportion); it cannot be true for some and false for others. It may well have been that Lewis wasn’t particularly interested in the question; he didn’t write much about it, what he did write didn’t demonstrate much understanding of the issues involved, and indicated that he didn’t find the question very important.