C.S. Lewis and the Catholic Church

[Charlemagne_II]

C.S. Lewis has always struck me as the Anglican equivalent of G.K. Chesterton. I admire much of his thinking, but am wondering why he went from atheism into the Anglican Church instead of the Catholic Church.

Does anybody have a clue, other than the fact that he was English?

After all, he said Chesterton’s The Everlasting Man was one of the ten most influential books leading to his conversion.

 

[Credo_in_Deum]

Unfortunately I believe this is a question only C.S. Lewis can answer.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Lewis was from Belfast, Ireland. Thus, he had an ethnic aversion to the Catholic Church. However, he was good friends with J. R. R. Tolkien.

 

[sparrowhawk28]

I’m a big fan of C.S. Lewis. Though I think only he can really answer that question correctly There’s a lot of speculation surrounding it.

 

[Trebor135]

C.S. Lewis has always struck me as the Anglican equivalent of G.K. Chesterton. I admire much of his thinking, but am wondering why he went from atheism into the Anglican Church instead of the Catholic Church.

Does anybody have a clue, other than the fact that he was English?

After all, he said Chesterton’s The Everlasting Man was one of the ten most influential books leading to his conversion.

There’s a Lewis quote I’ve seen once or twice that would seem to sum up well why he didn’t become Catholic. I wasn’t able to find it in a quick search just now, but someone else may have it in their files.

To paraphrase: “The Catholic Church doesn’t offer a previously compiled list of doctrine for the inquirer to accept; it instead requires him to convert pledging that he will believe any and all other new doctrines the Catholic Church might propose in the future.”

 

[christosdavid]

CS was already a member of the Church of England, as can be read in his book, suprised by Joy. He was returning to the position of faith not merely the denomination.

Mere Christianity demonstrates that he was happy with the practices of the mainstream Christian denominations including Anglican, Methodist, Presbyterian and Roman Catholic.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Trebor

**To paraphrase: “The Catholic Church doesn’t offer a previously compiled list of doctrine for the inquirer to accept; it instead requires him to convert pledging that he will believe any and all other new doctrines the Catholic Church might propose in the future.” **

How does that differ from Anglicanism?

I’m wondering if he wasn’t just not as savvy about the early history of the Church as he should have been. When Newman converted from Anglicanism to Catholicism it was largely for the reason that if you go far enough back in time, you have to recognize that the Catholic Church is the same Church as the early Church. Paraphrasing Newman: “To know history is to cease to be Protestant.”

I’m inclined to think there must have been some Catholic doctrines that he just could not accept. But I could be very wrong because there is so little literature about why he chose to stay Anglican. If he were alive today, would he still be Anglican?

 

[Charlemagne_II]

OK, I have just found a passage in Joseph Pearce’s book, *C.S. Lewis and the Catholic Church *where Lewis in a letter said to a Dominican priest that there was no issue more difficult for him to bridge than the infallibility of the popes.

Trebor, that would seem to tie in with what you just said about new doctrines.

 

[Gregorian12]

C.S. Lewis has always struck me as the Anglican equivalent of G.K. Chesterton. I admire much of his thinking, but am wondering why he went from atheism into the Anglican Church instead of the Catholic Church.

Does anybody have a clue, other than the fact that he was English?

After all, he said Chesterton’s The Everlasting Man was one of the ten most influential books leading to his conversion.

As the other folks on here have said, only Mr. Lewis himself could answer that question.

I’m a big fan of C.S. Lewis, and have studied his life and read many of his books. I think it’s safe to assume that Lewis was not an anti-Catholic. After all, a Catholic (JRR Tolkien, another of my favorite writers) helped lead him back to Christianity. I firmly believe that if he were here today, he would certainly not be an Anglican. The Church of England is extremely liberal now. During his lifetime, Lewis spoke out against the issue of women’s ordination. And he certainly didn’t approve of gay marriage and cohabitation.

Lewis’s secretary said that if he had lived longer, he believed he would have become Catholic. I too think this. His theology, toward the end of his life, was so close to Catholicism. He probably would have taken it a step further. So, to answer your question, no one knows why he became Anglican, but I’m confident he would be Catholic if he were alive today. He was, and is, one of the great Christian writers.

-Gregorian12

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Trebor

**To paraphrase: “The Catholic Church doesn’t offer a previously compiled list of doctrine for the inquirer to accept; it instead requires him to convert pledging that he will believe any and all other new doctrines the Catholic Church might propose in the future.” **
…?

One thing I tried to stress in RCIA is that you don’t become Catholic because you agree with Her doctrines. You become Catholic because you accept Her authority to proclaim them.

Charles Colson noted that each of us has a source which we accept as the final authority on truth. * The choices are God, authorities/experts, and self. If one chooses God he must find who God authorized to speak for Him. It cannot be what some expert thinks God says; that is relying on the expert. It cannot be ones own interpretation of what God has said; that is relying on self.

A Catholic chooses God as his source for truth and relies on Luke 10:16

16* “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.”

to provide God’s teaching.*

 

[Trebor135]

Trebor

**To paraphrase: “The Catholic Church doesn’t offer a previously compiled list of doctrine for the inquirer to accept; it instead requires him to convert pledging that he will believe any and all other new doctrines the Catholic Church might propose in the future.” **

How does that differ from Anglicanism?

Anglicans don’t believe in ecclesial infallibility, so any new teachings the archbishop of Canterbury could have proposed for belief before or during the 1950s would not have been binding upon the consciences of C. S. Lewis and the rest of the faithful.

I’m wondering if he wasn’t just not as savvy about the early history of the Church as he should have been. When Newman converted from Anglicanism to Catholicism it was largely for the reason that if you go far enough back in time, you have to recognize that the Catholic Church is the same Church as the early Church. Paraphrasing Newman: “To know history is to cease to be Protestant.”

Sincere and well-read people on CAF even today are divided on whether the Catholic or Eastern Orthodox Church is the one true original Christian body. If the historical case for Catholicism were a slam dunk, this wouldn’t make much sense, would it?–Unless some parties were less devoted than others in their prayer and less judicious in their research.

I’m inclined to think there must have been some Catholic doctrines that he just could not accept. But I could be very wrong because there is so little literature about why he chose to stay Anglican. If he were alive today, would he still be Anglican?

OK, I have just found a passage in Joseph Pearce’s book, *C.S. Lewis and the Catholic Church *where Lewis in a letter said to a Dominican priest that there was no issue more difficult for him to bridge than the infallibility of the popes.

Trebor, that would seem to tie in with what you just said about new doctrines.

Thanks for sharing that citation. Papal infallibility is indeed probably the most difficult of Catholic doctrines to accept (which doesn’t, of course, affect its truth or falsity).

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Trebor

Papal infallibility is indeed probably the most difficult of Catholic doctrines to accept (which doesn’t, of course, affect its truth or falsity).

In fact, I would find the lack of infallibility in any of the Anglican doctrines to be a bridge to nowhere so far as sacred truth is concerned.