Chapter 4 : 36-48 The Relationship between faith and reason
Important moments in the encounter of faith and reason 36. The Acts of the Apostles provides evidence that Christian proclamation was engaged from the very first with the philosophical currents of the time. In Athens, we read, Saint Paul entered into discussion with certain Epicurean and Stoic philosophers (17:18); and exegetical analysis of his speech at the Areopagus has revealed frequent allusions to popular beliefs deriving for the most part from Stoicism. This is by no means accidental. If pagans were to understand them, the first Christians could not refer only to Moses and the prophets when they spoke. They had to point as well to natural knowledge of God and to the voice of conscience in every human being (cf. Rom 1:19-21; 2:14-15; Acts 14:16-17). Since in pagan religion this natural knowledge had lapsed into idolatry (cf. Rom 1:21-32), the Apostle judged it wiser in his speech to make the link with the thinking of the philosophers, who had always set in opposition to the myths and mystery cults notions more respectful of divine transcendence. One of the major concerns of
classical philosophy was to purify human notions of God
of mythological elements. We know that Greek religion,
like most cosmic religions, was polytheistic, even to the
point of divinizing natural things and phenomena. Human
attempts to understand the origin of the gods and hence
the origin of the universe find their earliest expression
in poetry; and the theogonies remain the first evidence
of this human search. But it was the task of the fathers
of philosophy to bring to light the link between reason
and religion. As they broadened their view to include
universal principles, they no longer rested content with
the ancient myths, but wanted to provide a rational
foundation for their belief in the divinity. This opened
a path which took its rise from ancient traditions but
allowed a development satisfying the demands of universal
reason. This development sought to 37. In tracing Christianity's
adoption of philosophy, one should not forget how
cautiously Christians regarded other elements of the
cultural world of paganism, one example of which is
gnosticism. It was easy to confuse
philosophyunderstood as practical wisdom and an
education for lifewith a higher and esoteric kind
of knowledge, reserved to those few who were perfect. It
is surely this kind of esoteric speculation which Saint
Paul has in mind when he puts the Colossians on their
guard: See to it that no-one takes you captive
through philosophy and empty deceit, according to human
tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the
universe and not according to Christ (2:8). The
Apostle's words seem all too pertinent now if we apply
them to the various kinds of esoteric superstition
widespread today, even among some believers who lack a
proper critical sense. Following Saint Paul, other
writers of the early centuries, especially Saint Irenaeus
and Tertullian, sound the alarm when confronted with a 38. Christianity's engagement with philosophy was therefore neither straight-forward nor immediate. The practice of philosophy and attendance at philosophical schools seemed to the first Christians more of a disturbance than an opportunity. For them, the first and most urgent task was the proclamation of the Risen Christ by way of a personal encounter which would bring the listener to conversion of heart and the request for Baptism. But that does not mean that they ignored the task of deepening the understanding of faith and its motivations. Quite the contrary. That is why the criticism of Celsusthat Christians were illiterate and uncouth(31)is unfounded and untrue. Their initial disinterest is to be explained on other grounds. The encounter with the Gospel offered such a satisfying answer to the hitherto unresolved question of life's meaning that delving into the philosophers seemed to them something remote and in some ways outmoded. That seems still more evident today, if we think of Christianity's contribution to the affirmation of the right of everyone to have access to the truth. In dismantling barriers of race, social status and gender, Christianity proclaimed from the first the equality of all men and women before God. One prime implication of this touched the theme of truth. The elitism which had characterized the ancients' search for truth was clearly abandoned. Since access to the truth enables access to God, it must be denied to none. There are many paths which lead to truth, but since Christian truth has a salvific value, any one of these paths may be taken, as long as it leads to the final goal, that is to the Revelation of Jesus Christ. A pioneer of positive engagement with philosophical thinkingalbeit with cautious discernmentwas Saint Justin. Although he continued to hold Greek philosophy in high esteem after his conversion, Justin claimed with power and clarity that he had found in Christianity the only sure and profitable philosophy.(32) Similarly, Clement of Alexandria called the Gospel the true philosophy,(33) and he understood philosophy, like the Mosaic Law, as instruction which prepared for Christian faith (34) and paved the way for the Gospel.(35) Since philosophy yearns for the wisdom which consists in rightness of soul and speech and in purity of life, it is well disposed towards wisdom and does all it can to acquire it. We call philosophers those who love the wisdom that is creator and mistress of all things, that is knowledge of the Son of God.(36) For Clement, Greek philosophy is not meant in the first place to bolster and complete Christian truth. Its task is rather the defence of the faith: The teaching of the Saviour is perfect in itself and has no need of support, because it is the strength and the wisdom of God. Greek philosophy, with its contribution, does not strengthen truth; but, in rendering the attack of sophistry impotent and in disarming those who betray truth and wage war upon it, Greek philosophy is rightly called the hedge and the protective wall around the vineyard.(37) 39. It is clear from history, then, that Christian thinkers were critical in adopting philosophical thought. Among the early examples of this, Origen is certainly outstanding. In countering the attacks launched by the philosopher Celsus, Origen adopts Platonic philosophy to shape his argument and mount his reply. Assuming many elements of Platonic thought, he begins to construct an early form of Christian theology. The name theology itself, together with the idea of theology as rational discourse about God, had to this point been tied to its Greek origins. In Aristotelian philosophy, for example, the name signified the noblest part and the true summit of philosophical discourse. But in the light of Christian Revelation what had signified a generic doctrine about the gods assumed a wholly new meaning, signifying now the reflection undertaken by the believer in order to express the true doctrine about God. As it developed, this new Christian thought made use of philosophy, but at the same time tended to distinguish itself clearly from philosophy. History shows how Platonic thought, once adopted by theology, underwent profound changes, especially with regard to concepts such as the immortality of the soul, the divinization of man and the origin of evil. 40. In this work of
christianizing Platonic and Neo-Platonic thought, the
Cappadocian Fathers, Dionysius called the Areopagite and
especially Saint Augustine were important. The great
Doctor of the West had come into contact with different
philosophical schools, but all of them left him
disappointed. It was when he encountered the truth of
Christian faith that he found strength to undergo the
radical conversion to which the philosophers he had known
had been powerless to lead him. He himself reveals his
motive: From this time on, I gave my preference to
the Catholic faith. I thought it more modest and not in
the least misleading to be told by the Church to believe
what could not be demonstratedwhether that was
because a demonstration existed but could not be
understood by all or whether the matter was not one open
to rational proofrather than from the Manichees to
have a rash promise of knowledge with mockery of mere
belief, and then afterwards to be ordered to believe many
fabulous and absurd myths impossible to prove
true.(38) Though he accorded the Platonists a place
of privilege, Augustine rebuked them because, knowing the
goal to seek, they had ignored the path which leads to
it: the Word made flesh.(39) The Bishop of Hippo
succeeded in producing the first great synthesis of
philosophy and theology, embracing currents of thought
both Greek and Latin. In him too the great unity of
knowledge, grounded in the thought of the Bible, was both
confirmed and sustained by a depth of speculative
thinking. The synthesis devised by Saint Augustine
remained for centuries the most exalted form of
philosophical and theological speculation known to the
West. Reinforced by his personal story and sustained by a
wonderful 41. The ways in which the Fathers of East and West engaged the philosophical schools were, therefore, quite different. This does not mean that they identified the content of their message with the systems to which they referred. Consider Tertullian's question: What does Athens have in common with Jerusalem? The Academy with the Church?.(40) This clearly indicates the critical consciousness with which Christian thinkers from the first confronted the problem of the relationship between faith and philosophy, viewing it comprehensively with both its positive aspects and its limitations. They were not naive thinkers. Precisely because they were intense in living faith's content they were able to reach the deepest forms of speculation. It is therefore minimalizing and mistaken to restrict their work simply to the transposition of the truths of faith into philosophical categories. They did much more. In fact they succeeded in disclosing completely all that remained implicit and preliminary in the thinking of the great philosophers of antiquity.(41) As I have noted, theirs was the task of showing how reason, freed from external constraints, could find its way out of the blind alley of myth and open itself to the transcendent in a more appropriate way. Purified and rightly tuned, therefore, reason could rise to the higher planes of thought, providing a solid foundation for the perception of being, of the transcendent and of the absolute. It is here that we see the originality of what the Fathers accomplished. They fully welcomed reason which was open to the absolute, and they infused it with the richness drawn from Revelation. This was more than a meeting of cultures, with one culture perhaps succumbing to the fascination of the other. It happened rather in the depths of human souls, and it was a meeting of creature and Creator. Surpassing the goal towards which it unwittingly tended by dint of its nature, reason attained the supreme good and ultimate truth in the person of the Word made flesh. Faced with the various philosophies, the Fathers were not afraid to acknowledge those elements in them that were consonant with Revelation and those that were not. Recognition of the points of convergence did not blind them to the points of divergence. 42. In Scholastic theology, the
role of philosophically trained reason becomes even more
conspicuous under the impulse of Saint Anselm's
interpretation of the intellectus fidei. For the saintly
Archbishop of Canterbury the priority of faith is not in
competition with the search which is proper to reason.
Reason in fact is not asked to pass judgement on the
contents of faith, something of which it would be
incapable, since this is not its function. Its function
is rather to find meaning, to discover explanations which
might allow everyone to come to a certain understanding
of the contents of faith. Saint Anselm underscores the
fact that the intellect must seek that which it loves:
the more it loves, the more it desires to know. Whoever
lives for the truth The fundamental harmony between the knowledge of faith and the knowledge of philosophy is once again confirmed. Faith asks that its object be understood with the help of reason; and at the summit of its searching reason acknowledges that it cannot do without what faith presents. The enduring originality of the thought of Saint Thomas Aquinas 43. A quite special place in this long development belongs to Saint Thomas, not only because of what he taught but also because of the dialogue which he undertook with the Arab and Jewish thought of his time. In an age when Christian thinkers were rediscovering the treasures of ancient philosophy, and more particularly of Aristotle, Thomas had the great merit of giving pride of place to the harmony which exists between faith and reason. Both the light of reason and the light of faith come from God, he argued; hence there can be no contradiction between them.(44) More radically, Thomas
recognized that nature, philosophy's proper concern,
could contribute to the understanding of divine
Revelation. Faith therefore has no fear of reason, but
seeks it out and has trust in it. Just as grace builds on
nature and brings it to fulfilment,(45) so faith builds
upon and perfects reason. Illumined by faith, reason is
set free from the fragility and limitations deriving from
the disobedience of sin and finds the strength required
to rise to the knowledge of the Triune God. Although he
made much of the supernatural character of faith, the
Angelic Doctor did not overlook the importance of its
reasonableness; indeed he was able to plumb the depths
and explain the meaning of this reasonableness. Faith is
in a sense an exercise of This is why the Church has been justified in consistently proposing Saint Thomas as a master of thought and a model of the right way to do theology. In this connection, I would recall what my Predecessor, the Servant of God Paul VI, wrote on the occasion of the seventh centenary of the death of the Angelic Doctor: Without doubt, Thomas possessed supremely the courage of the truth, a freedom of spirit in confronting new problems, the intellectual honesty of those who allow Christianity to be contaminated neither by secular philosophy nor by a prejudiced rejection of it. He passed therefore into the history of Christian thought as a pioneer of the new path of philosophy and universal culture. The key point and almost the kernel of the solution which, with all the brilliance of his prophetic intuition, he gave to the new encounter of faith and reason was a reconciliation between the secularity of the world and the radicality of the Gospel, thus avoiding the unnatural tendency to negate the world and its values while at the same time keeping faith with the supreme and inexorable demands of the supernatural order.(47) 44. Another of the great
insights of Saint Thomas was his perception of the role
of the Holy Spirit in the process by which knowledge
matures into wisdom. From the first pages of his Summa
Theologiae,(48) Aquinas was keen to show the primacy of
the wisdom which is the gift of the Holy Spirit and which
opens the way to a knowledge of divine realities. His
theology allows us to understand what is distinctive of
wisdom in its close link with faith and knowledge of the
divine. This wisdom comes to know by way of
connaturality; it presupposes faith and eventually
formulates its right judgement on the basis of the truth
of faith itself: The wisdom named among the gifts
of the Holy Spirit is distinct from the wisdom found
among the intellectual Yet the priority accorded this wisdom does not lead the Angelic Doctor to overlook the presence of two other complementary forms of wisdomphilosophical wisdom, which is based upon the capacity of the intellect, for all its natural limitations, to explore reality, and theological wisdom, which is based upon Revelation and which explores the contents of faith, entering the very mystery of God. Profoundly convinced that whatever its source, truth is of the Holy Spirit (omne verum a quocumque dicatur a Spiritu Sancto est) (50) Saint Thomas was impartial in his love of truth. He sought truth wherever it might be found and gave consummate demonstration of its universality. In him, the Church's Magisterium has seen and recognized the passion for truth; and, precisely because it stays consistently within the horizon of universal, objective and transcendent truth, his thought scales heights unthinkable to human intelligence.(51) Rightly, then, he may be called an apostle of the truth.(52) Looking unreservedly to truth, the realism of Thomas could recognize the objectivity of truth and produce not merely a philosophy of what seems to be but a philosophy of what is. The drama of the separation of faith and reason 45. With the rise of the first
universities, theology came more directly into contact
with other forms of learning and scientific research.
Although they insisted upon the organic link between
theology and philosophy, Saint Albert the Great and Saint
Thomas were the first to recognize the autonomy which
philosophy and the sciences needed if they were to
perform well in their respective fields of research. From
the late Medieval period onwards, however, the legitimate
distinction between the two forms of learning became more
and more a fateful separation. As a result of the
exaggerated rationalism of certain thinkers, positions
grew more radical and there emerged eventually a
philosophy which was separate from and absolutely
independent of the 46. The more influential of these radical positions are well known and high in profile, especially in the history of the West. It is not too much to claim that the development of a good part of modern philosophy has seen it move further and further away from Christian Revelation, to the point of setting itself quite explicitly in opposition. This process reached its apogee in the last century. Some representatives of idealism sought in various ways to transform faith and its contents, even the mystery of the Death and Resurrection of Jesus, into dialectical structures which could be grasped by reason. Opposed to this kind of thinking were various forms of atheistic humanism, expressed in philosophical terms, which regarded faith as alienating and damaging to the development of a full rationality. They did not hesitate to present themselves as new religions serving as a basis for projects which, on the political and social plane, gave rise to totalitarian systems which have been disastrous for humanity. In the field of scientific research, a positivistic mentality took hold which not only abandoned the Christian vision of the world, but more especially rejected every appeal to a metaphysical or moral vision. It follows that certain scientists, lacking any ethical point of reference, are in danger of putting at the centre of their concerns something other than the human person and the entirety of the person's life. Further still, some of these, sensing the opportunities of technological progress, seem to succumb not only to a market-based logic, but also to the temptation of a quasi-divine power over nature and even over the human being. As a result of the crisis of rationalism, what has appeared finally is nihilism. As a philosophy of nothingness, it has a certain attraction for people of our time. Its adherents claim that the search is an end in itself, without any hope or possibility of ever attaining the goal of truth. In the nihilist interpretation, life is no more than an occasion for sensations and experiences in which the ephemeral has pride of place. Nihilism is at the root of the widespread mentality which claims that a definitive commitment should no longer be made, because everything is fleeting and provisional. 47. It should also be borne in mind that the role of philosophy itself has changed in modern culture. From universal wisdom and learning, it has been gradually reduced to one of the many fields of human knowing; indeed in some ways it has been consigned to a wholly marginal role. Other forms of rationality have acquired an ever higher profile, making philosophical learning appear all the more peripheral. These forms of rationality are directed not towards the contemplation of truth and the search for the ultimate goal and meaning of life; but instead, as instrumental reason, they are directedactually or potentiallytowards the promotion of utilitarian ends, towards enjoyment or power. In my first Encyclical Letter I
stressed the danger of absolutizing such an approach when
I wrote: The man of today seems ever to be under
threat from what he produces, that is to say from the
result of the work of his hands and, even more so, of the
work of his intellect and the tendencies of his will. All
too soon, and often in an unforeseeable way, what this
manifold activity of man yields is not only subject to
'alienation', in the sense that it is simply taken away
from the person who produces it, but rather it turns
against man himself, at least in part, through the
indirect consequences of its effects returning on
himself. It is or can be directed against him. This seems
to make up the main chapter of the drama of present-day
human existence in its broadest and In the wake of these cultural shifts, some philosophers have abandoned the search for truth in itself and made their sole aim the attainment of a subjective certainty or a pragmatic sense of utility. This in turn has obscured the true dignity of reason, which is no longer equipped to know the truth and to seek the absolute. 48. This rapid survey of the history of philosophy, then, reveals a growing separation between faith and philosophical reason. Yet closer scrutiny shows that even in the philosophical thinking of those who helped drive faith and reason further apart there are found at times precious and seminal insights which, if pursued and developed with mind and heart rightly tuned, can lead to the discovery of truth's way. Such insights are found, for instance, in penetrating analyses of perception and experience, of the imaginary and the unconscious, of personhood and intersubjectivity, of freedom and values, of time and history. The theme of death as well can become for all thinkers an incisive appeal to seek within themselves the true meaning of their own life. But this does not mean that the link between faith and reason as it now stands does not need to be carefully examined, because each without the other is impoverished and enfeebled. Deprived of what Revelation offers, reason has taken side-tracks which expose it to the danger of losing sight of its final goal. Deprived of reason, faith has stressed feeling and experience, and so run the risk of no longer being a universal proposition. It is an illusion to think that faith, tied to weak reasoning, might be more penetrating; on the contrary, faith then runs the grave risk of withering into myth or superstition. By the same token, reason which is unrelated to an adult faith is not prompted to turn its gaze to the newness and radicality of being. This is why I make this strong and insistent appealnot, I trust, untimelythat faith and philosophy recover the profound unity which allows them to stand in harmony with their nature without compromising their mutual autonomy. The parrhesia of faith must be matched by the boldness of reason. |