Week 6: Faith and REASON

There are two extremes to be avoided as we live our lives of faith. On the one hand, there is rationalism, the position that one cannot make an act of faith without being absolutely certain that what one is committing oneself to is truth and trustworthy. A wonderful example of the rationalistic position is the British atheist philosopher Bertrand Russell. Toward the end of his life, Russell was interviewed by the BBC and asked what he would say if, upon his death, he actually met God in person. Russell said simply, consistent rationalist to the last, “I would say: ‘Sir, why did you not give me better evidence!’” On the contrary Blessed John Henry Newman says that the act of faith, while never certain, is nevertheless the result of a number of converging probabilities. The evidence is never overwhelmingly clear enough to be self-evident, and yet as one reason builds on another reason, it would make more and more sense to take the risk of saying yes. On the other hand, it becomes increasingly unreasonable to continue to withhold one’s assent. Faith is not rational, but it is eminently reasonable.

A second extreme is that of fideism, or the conviction that one must not even look for reasons for making the act of faith. This was wonderfully expressed by the father of one of my students who, when told that his daughter was learning that theology was “faith seeking understanding,” exclaimed: “But faith doesn’t have to seek understanding—that’s why they call it faith!” Centuries before, the early Christian theologian Tertullian said much the same thing when he said about faith in the resurrection: “I believe because it is absurd!” Today, fideism expresses itself among fundamentalist Christians. These are often Protestant evangelicals and Pentecostals, but we Catholics have fundamentalists too among those who believe unquestioningly “because the Bible says so,” or because “the Pope says so.” One of the dangers of this year of faith would be limit our understanding of faithfulness to a strict interpretation and even mere repetition of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

The true Catholic position, as I have indicted before, is in the conviction that reason has a real role to play in our lives of faith. This was the position of Thomas Aquinas, and, as I quoted him above, St. Augustine, when he wrote that he believed in order to understand, but that he also sought understanding so as to better believe. As the letter of Peter in the New Testament challenges us, we must always be ready to give a “reason for our hope” (1Pet 3:15). Balancing faith and reason is one of the great accomplishments of the great theologian Thomas Aquinas, and is the name of one of John Paul II’s best encyclicals: Faith and Reason. He speaks of both of them as the two wings by which faith takes flight.

Questions for Reflection

1. What is easier for me—trying to find certainty, or believing without reasons? Why are both unworthy of faith?

2. Who do I know is a “rationalist”? Who do I know is a “fideist”?