Nov 29, 2005 ... The reconciliation of faith and reason is a philosophical subject that has been
confronted by intellectuals since philosophy began.
Reconciling Faith and Reason: The Philosophers Eli Hersberger Medieval Foundations of Modern Society
Professor Mark Angelos November 29th, 2005
2 The reconciliation of faith and reason is a philosophical subject that has been confronted by intellectuals since philosophy began. Etymologically, philosophy means, “love of wisdom.” The battle between reason and faith attempts to consider just where this “wisdom” originates, whether true wisdom is bound in faith, whether rationality should take the preeminence, or whether there might be a balance. According to Steven Naragon, philosophy is “concerned with the justification of fundamental beliefs” (Naragon, 5). This is obviously at the heart of the reconciliation of faith and reason. My colleague will be identifying the nature and main principles of this vast philosophical theme. My objective will be to approach this topic in the context of the most important philosophers during the Middle Ages. Their thoughts and ideas shaped how everyone else perceived religion in their own lives. We must begin at the feet of St. Augustine of Hippo (354-430). A neoPlatonist in his earlier life, he advocated the existence of perfection in areas of truth, justice, beauty, etc. He joined the Manichaeans, who believed that reason alone could lead a person to absolute truth. No longer satisfied with their doctrine, Augustine made a 180-degree turn to skepticism. This, too, he eventually tired of, because he understood that at least some truth was available to the human mind. “Disjunctive propositions” found in mathematics and “subjective knowledge” found in personal conviction were truths that convinced Augustine that some religious of metaphysical truth may just be possible to obtain (Rist, 28). It was then that Augustine was converted to his mother’s Catholic Christianity. He argued that the problem in the search for truth lied in the
3 person. Authority, particularly of a divine nature, could only guide sinful beings into an understanding of absolute truth. He stated, Often it seemed to me that truth could not be found… but often again, as I reflected upon how lively was the human mind, I could not believe that the truth must lie undetected. Possibly the manner of seeking truth might be hidden and would have to be accepted from some divine authority. (De util. Cred. 8.20) Through Christianity at that time, reason and discussion were part of the faith building process. However, as we will see with our other philosophers who made the same claim, it was St. Augustine’s view that belief must come before understanding. According to St. Augustine, humankind, since Adam’s sin, has had a limited capacity to reason, and he believed that we should be aware of these limitations and use the authority of God in scripture to find truth. Reason’s role then is two-fold. Its first objective is to identify which authority is worthy to be believed. With Augustine’s motley background, we can see why he held this in such high regard. Reason’s second objective is to translate spiritual truths into their participation in moral living. In other words, an individual uses their reason to apply what they believe. Around the end of the fifth century, four works with an unknown author surfaced which would consequently affect our current discussion of faith and reason. Stemming from Greece, it was believed until the 16th century that the author may have been Dionysius, a converted Christian in Athens found in Acts 13:34. Now simply referred to as Pseudo-Dionysius, this author’s treatise on the problem of evil provides a great example of the use of reason to attempt to justify a belief in an all-benevolent God. Using logic, his first proposition was that all
4 had stemmed from a “Good” being. Therefore, evil in itself, could not exist in reality unless it concerned itself with some part of the Good. With these two premises, Pseudo-Dionysius concluded that men, creatures, devils, destruction, our bodies, our souls, and matter were not inherently evil. Lastly, he identified evil as simply weakness and deficiency of the Good. “And, in a word, evil is weakness, impotence, and deficiency of knowledge, faith, desire, or activity as touching the Good” (Pseudo-Dionysius, 69). We may not have the Dionysius documents above if it were not for an Irishmen fluent in Greek in the ninth century. He would translate the four works into Latin, making them available to the clergy of Western Europe. Johannes Scotus Erigena (John the Scot) would not only contribute his rare ability of translation, but because of his superior Irish education, Erigena would become a pivotal voice in shaping the Church’s views of the ninth century and beyond. Most likely not a member of the clergy, Johannes was still able to provide insight to this ongoing conflict of faith and reason. He argued “that man with his reason has been in three successive states with regard to truth” (Gilson, 113). The first began at Adam’s sin and ended at the coming of Christ. At this moment reason was clouded by error and was waiting for the revelation of the truth. When Jesus appeared, so did the second stage of reason. This is the stage we are currently in as well, a stage where the truth has been revealed and placed in an infallible source, the Bible. Johannes contends that all reason can do is accept the truth as revealed in God’s Word, thus now placing faith before reason. Reason, according to Erigena, is to apply one’s beliefs to a moral standard of
5 living (like St. Augustine) and to explore one’s faith to renew the mind, [Romans 12:2]. The final state will occur at a later date when faith will become sight and Truth will be seen directly. The presence of authority in both Augustine and Johannes’ works create the condition that faith must come before reason. One must now ask, how can one gather the spiritual meaning out of the Bible without first using reason? Johannes argues that when God speaks, we must first believe him, and then make the effort to understand his words. He sums up his position by stating, “It is therefore certain that true religion is true philosophy, and , conversely, that true philosophy is true religion” (On Predestination, chap. 1; PL, 122, 357-358). So far, all of the philosophers listed have started with at least the acceptance of the existence of God. Atheists have always been present in societies, and up until the eleventh century, there had not been an argument expounded quite like the argument St. Anselm presented to prove the existence of God. It would come to be known as the “ontological argument,” an argument solely based on logic and dialectics, coincidently St. Anselm’s area of expertise. He was born in 1033 in an Italian town called Aosta. In 1068, he was made Prior of Bec, and would be commissioned by Bec monks to write the Monologium, a work to prove the existence of God based upon reason alone, without the use of the Bible. Most notably, he was appointed Archbishop of Canterbury in 1093 and continued to hold this position until his death in 1109. His philosophy was deeply influenced by Augustinian doctrine. He, like St. Augustine and Erigena, maintained that one must believe the words of the Bible
6 before reason can play a role. His emphasis, however, upon the important use of reason to appeal to one’s beliefs is a definite distinguishable attitude. In fact, he felt the tool of reason was so powerful that he presented what he called “necessary reasons” to support mysteries of faith without the use of religious text. The ontological argument, as noted above, can be found in his most famous work titled, Proslogium, translated as “discourse.” This proof of the existence of God rests upon the definition of the word “God.” In chapter three he notes, “God is that, than which nothing greater can be conceived (aliquid quo maius cogitari nequit)” (Anselm, 111). This being “cannot even be conceived not to exist;” it therefore must exist and inevitably be God (Anselm, 111). He approaches this proof by claiming first that God does not exist in reality, only in the mind. He then explains that something, which nothing greater can be conceived, would be greater if in reality. Therefore, God must exist in reality. This proof has baffled the minds of many college students who have read it, and while it has some significant problems with a few of its premises, it continues to be a shining example of a proof of the existence of God without scriptural intervention. Peter Abelard (1079-1142) was destined to be a military leader, according to his father. However, like Anselm, he loved to study and use dialectics and therefore received an education from the most knowledgeable men in France. Eventually he opened up his own school in Melun. Moving to Corbeil and finally to Paris, Abelard became one of the most famous philosophers of his day. He taught until a year before his death, when he was accused of heresy by St.
7 Bernard. Pope Innocent II then prohibited Abelard from teaching anymore. He retired to Cluny where he died alone. Around 1113, Abelard immersed himself in the study of faith and reason. In his textbook Sic et non (Is It or Isn’t It?), Peter begins a section with, “Should human faith be based upon reason, or no?” (Abelard). It was at this time when he answered one of the most asked questions by those who critique Christianity and contend for a natural religion, a religion based on reason alone. The question posed is this, “What if a man in a secluded land never hears about Jesus? Since it is not his fault that he was born there, does this mean that God will condemn this person? He defends Christianity by stating that those who do not hear the Gospel are indeed damned. His reasoning… “This unbelief in which these men die is sufficient for their damnation, even though the cause of that blindness, to which God abandoned them, is not apparent to us” (Gilson, 162). While many consider this answer unacceptable, it is at least found through the path of reason. He also made the case for those philosophers who lived before the Gospels came into existence. He defended his role models, stating that since they followed the natural law, which the Gospels would fulfill, not only would they be saved, but they should also be admired because they were able to discover the correct way to live without the Gospels. Concerning other faiths, he insisted that all religious principles could and should be consolidated under a more perfect Christian faith. He also created a complicated, yet attractive solution to the philosophical problems of the concept of the Trinity.
8 Probably the most highly regarded philosopher of the Middle Ages, save St. Augustine, was a man who shunned his noble birth for his desire to become nothing more than a poor monk. His six brothers once placed a naked prostitute in his bed, of whom he hastily forced out of his room with a firebrand. He was called the “dumb ox” after joining a Dominican order because of his weight and supposed stupidity. However, fifty years after his death he was canonized, and six hundred years later, in 1879, he was proclaimed the Roman Catholic Church’s official philosopher. He would write two huge works, the Summa Contra Gentiles and the Summa Theologia. The former strived to save souls; the latter’s objective was to systematically unravel theological concepts. Considering the fact that he would not reach fifty years of age (1225-1274), one could conclude that St. Thomas Aquinas was one busy monk. He declared in his Summa Contra Gentiles… There is a twofold mode of truth in what we profess about God. Some truths about God exceed all the ability of the human reason. Such is the truth that God is triune. But there are some truths which the natural reason also is able to reach. Such are that God exists, that He is one, and the like. In fact, such truths about God have been proved demonstratively by the philosophers, guided by the light of natural reason. [Summa Contra Gentiles, vol. I, ch. 3, section 2] It is evident that Aquinas believed that reason played an important role in the search for truth in religion, known commonly as theology. He first argues that whatever God says, it is true, and therefore must be believed. However, to know that it was God who revealed truth to us and to even claim that God exists is something not based upon faith, but upon reason. Thomas therefore places a lot of credence upon the power of the intellect simply because these two claims
9 (God’s revelation and God’s existence) are absolutely pivotal in any monotheistic religion. God’s revelation, he believes, can be primarily substantiated through the effectiveness of the Christian faith. Its power to change a worldly man into a hater of lust and concupiscence could only be divine in nature. His proofs for the existence of God, in which metaphysics (the study of being) plays a significant role, have become commonly known as the “Five Ways.” The first four proofs make use of the cosmological argument, an argument of beginnings. In Aquinas’s first way, he applies the concept of continual change in the world. He contends that since change causes more change and change cannot change itself, there must be an “unchanged changer,” also known as God. The second way, similar to the first, refers to God as the uncaused cause. The third way states that since everything is contingent (could fail to exist) and yet things do exist, there must be some being that is the source of its own existence, i.e., God. In Aquinas’s fourth way, God is the primary and perfect example of things in an imperfect world. To know that things are imperfect, one must have an idea of perfection, which is God. His final proof strays from the cosmological aspect of philosophy and moves to the teleological argument. This argument asserts that all things have a purpose, and for inanimate objects to have a purpose, there needs to be an external mind to guide their actions, i.e., God. My colleague will attest to the fundamental impact these theorists had upon medieval life. Karl Popper once said that “the impact of our philosophies upon our lives is often devastating. This makes it necessary to try to improve our
10 philosophies by criticism.” The criticism and conflict between faith and reason still continues, and, undoubtedly, more philosophers will emerge to tell the population just what they should believe.
11
Bibliography Abelard, Peter. “Sic et non: Is It or Isn’t It? (c. 1135).” Bibliobase. editors Angelos, Mark and Charles Crouch. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2005 Anselm of Canterbury. “Proslogium.” Medieval Philosophy. Editor Herman Shapiro. New York: Random House, 1964. Brower, Jeffrey. “Trinity.” The Cambridge Companion to Abelard. Editors Jeffrey Brower and Kevin Guilfoy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004 Erigena, Johannes. On Predestination. Retrieved November 28th, 2005 from the University of Notre Dame Website: Gilson, Etienne. History of Christian Philosophy in the Middle Ages. New York: Random House, 1955. Naragon, Steven. “A Book is a Machine to Help One Think.” North Manchester, 2004. Pseudo-Dionysius. “Divine Names and the Mystical Theology.” Medieval Philosophy. Editor Herman Shapiro. New York: Random House, 1964. Rist, John. “Faith and Reason.” The Cambridge Companion to Augustine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Wippel, John. “Metaphysics.” The Cambridge Companion to Aquinas. Editors Norman Kretzmann and Eleonore Stump. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
