Summary of “Escape From Reason” FRANCIS SCHAEFFER

IMG_20170722_102913Escape from Reason  is the second book of the first volume “A Christian View of Philosophy and Culture,” by Francis Schaeffer.  In this volume, Schaeffer goes into more detail in how man, by denying Absolute Truth, and becoming the measure of all things, has been swallowed up into the “river of despair” seen in its philosophy, music, art, general culture and the new theology.

Schaeffer argues that the Christian view of man not only gives man meaning, but it also has a rational justification which is grounded in being created in the image of God.

Hence, the need remains for believers to diligently understand the present “Thought-forms” in order to preach Christ effectively.  For, to “Escape from Reason” is the most tragic madness—for it (in many ways) keeps us on the road that leads to destruction.

Book Summary__ TECHNOPOLY: The Surrender of Culture to Technology By Neil Postman

513n3rqG8WL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_

Whether or not it draws on new scientific research,

technology is a branch of moral philosophy, not of science

PAUL GOODMAN, New Reformation 

Prescript

It’s no secret that western civilization and the global community are enamored with and have benefitted much from the many technological advances from the last century.   The most popular technological marvel is that pocket computer we carry around called the “smart-phone”.   To call an inanimate machine “smart” seems ironically “stupid” because persons, not machines design the input and output of the parts.  People think and do, machines just do.

Historically, man-made machines (tools) always attempt to make life better, safer, and the unthinkable (to most of us) possible.  While there is much good that comes from human ingenuity, it’s also accompanied by a great down side most of us don’t consider.

The late critic and communications theorist, Neil Postman who chaired the Department of Communication Arts at New York University in, TECHNOPOLY: The Surrender of Culture to Technology, considers how historically the inventions of man have shaped the rise and fall of empires, changed the ways in which commerce is conducted, and how society has been positively and negatively impacted by them.  The wisdom in this book is as applicable today as when it was first authored in 1992.

INTRODUCTION: Pgs. Xi-xii

Postman in his introduction explains that most people think that technology is a staunch friend because first, it’s made life easier, cleaner and longer, and secondly because of its lengthy, intimate and inevitable relationship it has with culture.  But technology is a friend that asks for trust and obedience without inviting a close scrutiny of its consequences.

The fact is that this friend has a dark side where its’ uncontrolled growth has resulted in the destruction of the vital sources of our humanity.  Technology has created a culture void of a moral foundation; it’s undermined certain mental processes and social relations that make human life worth living.  In a nutshell, technology is both a friend and foe.

Available Now in Summary_”A HISTORY OF APOLOGETICS” by Avery Dulles

images

Available now in summary form is A History of Apologetics by Avery Dulles who deftly provides a view into the great minds of Christendom’s past so that we may presently be more faithful to our generation with the real Gospel of Truth that alone rescues sinners from eternal peril.

There’s a treasure trove of wisdom the church has at its disposal that is too often neglected either through: ignorance (i.e., people don’t read Church History), or perhaps through spite (i.e., Protestants and Catholics refuse to appreciate one another’s contributions), even a lack of evangelistic urgency (i.e., Believers don’t really care to share their beliefs because of fear, indifference, etc.), perhaps because of an unbiblical view of the life of the mind as it informs our daily living (i.e., a Fideistic bent).  This book is one more aid to remedy the 21st century plague in the Church of anti-intellectualism.

Summary of Chapter 5: 19TH CENTURY_ CATHOLICISM_[Pgs. 158-201] With PostScript

images

CATHOLICISM IN FRANCE: 1800-50 [Pp.171-179]

Cardinal César de La Luzerne (A.D. 1738-1821) in his Pastoral Instruction on the Excellence of Religion; lays down the principal of showing Christianity’s beauty because its knowledge was so odious to non-Christians.  Here, the Cardinal focuses on the aesthetics of religion.

Francois René de Chateaubriand (A.D. 1768-1848) in his Beauties of the Christian Religion uses aesthetics as a means to do apologetics.  He held that Dogmas and Doctrines find their beauty in their mystery; Christianity stimulates the poetic and drama; Fine arts and literature are depicted in the music of the Gregorian chant, seen in the art of Raphael and Michelangelo; and the liturgy is also beautiful.  Through his use of the arts, Francois used this apologetic as an attempt to reach his culture.

Vicomte Louis de Bonald (A.D. 1754-1840) a French nobleman; held that the essential truths needed to live a human life are beyond the reach of rational inquiry, but have been revealed by God since the dawn of time.

CATHOLICISM IN GERMANY: 1800-50 [Pp.179-181]

Johann Sebastian von Drey (A.D. 1777-1853) was the founder of the Catholic Tubingen School.  In his Apologetics as a Scientific Demonstration of the Divinity of Christianity, he understands apologetics to be a mixed discipline of philosophy, philosophy of religion especially, and it’s material contents from the history of religions.  In this work he focuses on the General philosophy of revelation; the Tradition scope in revelation; and the relationship between Christianity and Judaism.  His work is valuable for its recognition of Christianity’s historicity, the multi-facets of the revelation, and the organic view of tradition and the Church.

CATHOLICISM IN SPAIN AND ITALY: 1800-50 [Pp.181-183]

ENGLISH SPEAKING CATHOLICS IN ENGLAND: 1800-50 [Pp.184-189]

 John Henry Newman (A.D. 1801-90) was the leading Catholic apologist of the 19th century and one of the greatest of all times.  A cautious and critical thinker, he was at all times concerned with the criteria of religious knowledge.

In his An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine, Newman gives reasons for why the Roman Catholic Church is the successor of the early Church.  Newman seeks to show that the Catholic Church has followed an organic development that is proof of its continuity with the past to biblical revelation.

In his An Essay on the Development of a Grammar of Assent, Newman seeks to diagnose how man comes to his convictions of knowledge and understanding especially in religious matters.  Understanding the subjective element in all religious inquiry, he casts his apologetic in an autobiographical scheme.   He approaches the Christian evidences with a whole set of presumptions and hopes to provide the clue to complex materials of religious history.

ENGLISH SPEAKING CATHOLICS IN THE U.S.: 1800-50 [Pp.189-191]

CATHOLICISM IN CONTINENTAL EUROPE: FRANCE AND BELGIUM; VATICAN COUNCIL1850-1900  [Pp.191-195]

Vatican Council I (A.D. 1869-70) took up the relations between faith and reason, where primary focus was given to the conflict between science and religion.

Abbé Paul de Broglie (A.D. 1834-95) was professor of apologetics at the Institut Catholique at Paris.  In his Positivism and Experimental Science, he dealt with the theory of knowledge.  While affirming the contributions metaphysics made to the apologetic enterprise, he understood that it was the most difficult of the sciences and as such, he avoided that approach.  Instead, Abbé used purely inductive arguments that were universally recognized historical facts where he argues for Christianity’s transcendence and it’s divine origin.

CATHOLICISM IN CONTINENTAL EUROPE: GERMANY 1850-1900  [Pp.195-196]

PROTESTANTISM: GERMANY 1850-1900 [Pp.197-198]

Albrecht Ritschl (A.D. 1822-89) was a liberal theologian who understood that the kingdom was a communion of love, as the heart of Jesus’ message.  This message is self-authenticating and therefore needs no apologetic.

Julius Kaftan (A.D. 1848-1926) in his The Truth of the Christian Religion, Julius uses a teleological approach to his apologetic for Christianity and that if we have not revelation, it’s hard to make sense out of human history as a whole or even understand the questions of origins.

Hermann Schultz (A.D. 1836-1903) in his Outlines of Christian Apologetics, Hermann rests his defense of Christianity on ethical grounds.  The purely ethical content of the Gospel could never be overthrown by scientific discovery.

PROTESTANTISM: THE ENGLISH SPEAKING COUNTRIES 1850-1900 [Pp.198-201]

J.B. Lightfoot, the English scholar who wrote Essays on the work of ‘Supernatural Religion, and used his massive understanding in the area of origins to decimate his British opponents.

Darwin’s: On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection brought about many conservative pens in response to his views; Charles Hodge the theologian form Princeton, Mark Hopkins, William Gladstone who wrote The Impregnable Rock of Holy Scripture, Princeton’s President James McCosh who penned Christianity and Positivism.

Alexander B. Bruce (1892) wrote Christianity Defensively Stated, where he

sketches out the Christian worldview of origins and compares them to other systems.  In it, he deals with Wellhausen’s theory of the Old Testament and with the authorship and historicity of the New Testament Gospels.  His approach is more Biblical than epistemological.

CONCLUSION

During this period apologetics came to the forefront as a distinct theological discipline.  Moreover, the relationship between apologetics and philosophy cannot be separated, and the rise of the scientific era brought about new challenges that had to be met head on.

MY THOUGHTS_POST-SCRIPT Sergio R. Tangari

There’s a treasure trove of wisdom the church has at its disposal that is too often neglected either through: ignorance (i.e., people don’t read Church History), or perhaps through spite (i.e., Protestants and Catholics refuse to appreciate one another’s contributions), even a lack of evangelistic urgency (i.e., Believers don’t really care to share their beliefs because of fear, indifference, etc.), perhaps because of an unbiblical view of the life of the mind as it informs our daily living (i.e., a Fideistic bent).

To the believer, remember that the Great Commandment to Love God and neighbor includes the Mind, not just the Heart.  If you don’t get better at thinking, you are neglecting what Jesus clearly modeled of how to love God with thought, argumentation, and wit.

To the skeptic, remember that you just like any other creature will decide to ultimately believe and obey someone’s word.  Because of the claims of Christ (I.e., the uncreated Creator, who is the self-existent One who took on humanity so that God’s wrath would pass over us, the only redeemer of humanity and all others are imposters), and because of the stakes that naturally flow from his claims, it seems prudent and to your advantage to consider out said claims.

How is this done?  First begin with reading the primary source documents (the Old and New Testament) and give primacy to the eyewitness accounts, rather than those who many years later claim to know, but are ignorant about the Man Christ Jesus.

Second, find believers that appreciate your skepticism and won’t be afraid to consider the questions raised, but instead these people engage honestly, cogently and recognize they too don’t have all the answers.  These persons have a knack to be both logical and visceral, clear headed and tender hearted.

Third, understand that your time like everyone else’s is limited, so consider if on your journey time is being wasted and remove said obstacles (e.g., endlessly listening to social media forums that are given to ad-hominem attacks, rather than arguing about ideas).

Fourth, if you think these people are hard to find, or don’t exist when it comes to talking about ultimate issues…they do, and they are out there.  But please don’t kid yourself through the empty rhetoric of the day that separates reason from faith, religion from science, the private from the public.    Those paradigms are bogus, irrational and keep you enslaved to actual lies that are parroted in the hallowed halls of academia, media, and pop-culture by people that don’t care (really) at the end of the day, to consider the God question, the meaning of life question, the life and death question, the Jesus of Nazareth question.

Summary of CHAPTER 5:  THE 19TH CENTURY_PROTESTANTISM    [pp.158-201]

 

imagesAt this time in history, it appears that man is most in touch with his individuality and subjectivity.  Contact with the higher world was sought not through abstract reason, but rather through feeling and the movements of the heart.

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) led the way for this new apologetic.  In his Critique of Pure Reason (1781) he understood that:  Reason is nothing but a calculating machine with the ability to organize data of sense experience.  It nevertheless is not able to rise above the empirical, nor able to deal realistically with the divine.

In his Critique of Practical Reason (1788) Kant saw it necessary for moral obligation to postulate the existence of God, freedom, and immortality.  He made room for faith in a new sense where belief rests not simply on external authority but also on personal motives.  This is subjectively compelling but objectively insufficient.

In his Opus Postumum Kant identified the voice of conscience very closely with the divine presence within man.  In his Religion within the Bounds of Reason Alone (1793), Kant gave a secure philosophical status to several fundamental Christian doctrines, even though he severely criticized the notion of historical revelation.

PROTESTANTISM: GERMANY 1800-50 [Pp.159-164]

Friedrich D. E. Schleiermacher (A.D. 1768-1834) was raised among the Moravian brethren, he retained a strong pietistic leaning.  For him the thoughts of antiquity concerning religion are a hindrance to epistemological progress which led him to re-define all key concepts of religion (e.g., miracle, revelation, prophesy, God, etc.), revising Christianity to his tastes so that it would be palatable to his times.

In his The Christian Faith, he attacks arguments from miracle and prophecy and held that these signs are not probative (i.e., having the quality or function of proving or demonstrating something) in order to bring conviction for the non-believer.  To be Modern, Schleiermacher held that dogma must be reinterpreted. Hence, to fit into his sitz em leben, he reconstructed a new epistemology, thus redemption by Jesus of Nazareth cannot be verified outside of faith which is purely subjective.  Thus, there’s no room for an objective body of knowledge.

In his Brief Outline on the Study of Theology, Schleiermacher sets forth a new apologetic where he states that biblical, historical, and practical theology should be prefaced with a new discipline—philosophical theology—which is both apologetical and polemical.  Where apologetics seeks to generally view Christianity in relation to its communities, polemics seeks to detect and correct any deviations within the Christian community.

Karl Heinrich Sack (A.D. 1789-1875) was a disciple of Schleiermacher who wrote Christian Apologetics.  In it, he seeks to do his apologetics as a rational grounding for the Christian faith based on demonstrable divine facts.  He demonstrates that God’s self-revelation finds its zenith in Jesus Christ by using OT texts.

Georg W. F. Hegel (A.D. 1770-1831) sought to make his philosophy a rational appropriation of the Christian patrimony.  He sought to show how the principal Christian dogmas (Trinity, Incarnation, Redemption, etc.) were a symbolic projection of rational truths set forth in his evolving pantheistic system.

David Friedrich Strauss (A.D. 1808-74) reinterpreted Christian theology by subordinating traditional orthodoxy to the new evolutionary philosophy.  In his book Life of Jesus, he maintained that the finite and the infinite are realized in the whole of humanity, not in one individual (Jesus Christ).  The Christ of the NT was mythical, not actual.  This work devotes its energies to showing the historical unreliability of the Gospel stories.  The positive results from the writings of Strauss are that he helped NT scholarship hone their skills at historically verifying the NT.

PROTESTANTISM IN DENMARK: 1800-50  [Pp.165-168]

Søren Kierkegaard (A.D. 1813-55) is seen by some as the greatest eristic (one given to argumentation) thinker of the Christian faith within Protestantism.  He viewed rational proofs to be out of place for theology, because faith does not need them.  He was fideistic at the core.  For him, to defend something is to discredit it.  Moreover, he rejected all demonstrations of the divinity of Christ, which he sees as the central fact of the Christian faith and insisted that there can be no access to faith through objective rational thinking.  An apologetic of sorts can be made from the apparent absurdity of faith (i.e., Incarnation of Christ where the infinite One became finite,) which is itself a miracle.

In his Sickness unto Death, he affirms that sin is despair before God, that despair is failure to have faith, but it’s also the first step to faith grounded in man’s pursuit of God.  Thus for Kierkegaard, Faith is ultimately irrational at the core, but simultaneously he is giving an apologetic for his view.

PROTESTANTISM IN GREAT BRITAIN: 1800-50  [Pp.168-171]

Samuel Taylor Coleridge (A.D. 1772-1834) in his Aids to Reflection, he castigates the evidential school for forgetting that Christianity is not just theoretical but spiritual and living.  Coleridge saw faith as preceding understanding like Augustine.

Frederick Denison Maurice (A.D. 1805-72) in his What Is Revelation, Maurice maintained that documents could never lead to any religiously satisfying results.  In faith, one knows God, as He existentially imparts Himself to man, which for the believer said communion is proof.

Thomas Chalmers (A.D. 1780-1847) a Scottish preacher wrote The Evidence and Authority of the Christian Revelation.  In it he makes his demonstration mainly on miracles, prophecies, and the historical reliability of the NT.  Chalmers held that for the Biblically and morally oriented person, Christianity’s truths are evident.

Thomas Erskine (A.D. 1788-1870) wrote Remarks on the Internal Evidence for the Truth of Revealed Religion (1820) and stresses the moral influence of the gospel and avoids the usual arguments from miracles, prophecy, and eyewitness testimony.  He had a strong appeal to natural religion but philosophically and empirically was anemic.

Summary of Chapter 4: FROM THE 16TH TO THE 18TH CENTURIES_Part 2

images

SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY HOLLAND [PP.133-135]

Hugo Grotius (A.D. 1583-1645). Jew Baruch Spinoza (A.D. 1632-77) set forth his pantheistic philosophy and launched his attack on the Bible’s inspiration.

ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH AND EIGHTEENTH CENTURIES [Pp.135-147]

Edward, Lord Herbert Cherbury (A.D. 1583-1648) best represents deism.  In Edward’s On the Religion of the Gentiles, he held that: 1st, Mankind is an infallible index of truth and that God had impressed certain common religious notions.  2nd those who subscribe to natural religion are members of a church that really should be called “Catholic”.  3rd, He doesn’t totally dismiss the notion of revelation, but denies that it communicates additional truths.  These views forced apologetics to come up with creative advances.

Edward Boyle (A.D. 1627-91) was one of the earliest opponents of deism.  In his book The Christian Virtuoso (1690), Boyle defended the truth of Christianity through focusing on: The sublimity of Christian Doctrine; the Testimony of miracles, and History’s witness of the benefits of Christianity for mankind.

Richard Bentley (A.D. 1622-1742) a classical scholar who through his The Folly of Atheism and What is Now Called Deism, even with Respect to the Present Life, argues against: Hobbes Leviathan; the evil consequences of atheism for the individual and the society; and seeks to prove God’s existence.

Isaac Newton (A.D. 1642-1727) endorsed Bentley’s apologetic.  In his Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse of St. John, he asserts that to reject the prophecies contained in Daniel equals rejecting Christianity.

Samuel Clarke (A.D. 1675-1729) an Anglican who wrote A Demonstration of the Being and Attributes of God, in response to Spinoza and Hobbes, he uses metaphysical arguments to establish God’s necessity, eternality, etc.

John Locke (A.D. 1632-1704) known for his Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689), found fault with the theory of innate ideas and sought to base religious knowledge through man’s sense experience of the world.  For Locke, there is natural and special revelation.  In his Discourse on Miracles, he maintains that the criteria of revelation: 1st, must deliver nothing derogating from the honor of one, 2nd, it must not inform man of things different; and 3rd, it must be confirmed by supernatural signs.  Locke takes for granted the historicity of the Biblical miracles.   

John Tolland (A.D. 1696) published a treatise Christianity not Mysterious, where he rejects Locke’s idea that there could be a revelation superior but not contrary to reason.

Matthew Tindel (A.D. 1730) published Christianity as Old as Creation, where he argues that the Bible is nothing more than a republication of the religion of nature.

Joseph Butler (A.D. 1692-1752) the Anglican clergyman who became Bishop of Bristol, in his book The Analogy of Religion, Natural and Revealed, to the Constitution and Course of Nature (1736), he holds that the religious empiricist asserts that there’s an author and all-powerful governor of nature.  He confronts:

1st, the issue of the Scriptures reliability and affirms that all men must search for themselves to see whether or not they can be trusted.

2nd is the issue of a priori presumptions against miracles and revelation on the grounds of their singularity, since nature itself is full of irregularities and singularities.

3rd, Butler’s empiricism forms the thrust of his apologetic seen by his commitment to empirically known facts, as opposed to metaphysical notions.  He is able to accept the obscurities in the evidence and accounts for them.

David Hume (A.D. 1711-76) did much to attack miracles.  In his book, Dialogues on Natural Religion, he criticizes the traditional arguments for design.  Contemplating the universe, one can conclude that all that exists is a blind nature, not a governor of the cosmos.  In his Essay on Miracles he concluded that human testimony could never be sufficient to establish a miraculous event.

William Paley (A.D. 1743-1805) in his Principals of Moral and Political Philosophy, he proposes a Christian utilitarianism.  Paley’s apologetic is very moralistic and utilitarian in the theory of revelation.

First, Revelation among other things has the purpose of warning men of the punishments and rewards that await one according to his life on earth.  Paley, while a skillful advocate, did not probe deeply into metaphysics or criteriology and thus failed to justify his extrinsicist view of revelation or on the evidential value of miracles.

 

Summary of Chapter 4: FROM THE SIXTEENTH THROUGH THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURIES_Part 1

imagesThe sixteenth century saw primarily religious controversies within Christendom.  Protestants and Catholic controversies were over the Mass, indulgences, purgatory, the sufficiency of Scripture, etc.  The primary apologetical issue was the credibility of the Faith.

The seventeenth century saw much skepticism and religious indifferentism largely due to the Christian disunity.  The main apologetic focus (for Protestant and Catholic) was to show Christianity’s importance and relevance.

The eighteenth century manifested blatant attacks contra Christianity due to the Enlightenment’s appeal to the sciences in history to prove their case.  Hence, Christian’s apologetic focused on scientific historical evidences and also on the role of metaphysics in the debates.

THE PROTESTANT REFORMERS [Pp.113-116]

Martin Luther (A.D. 1483-1546) constructed no formal system of apologetics, although polemicized with the Jews.  Saw reason in two spheres.  The first sphere: reason is a a proper guide when used properly to sharpen man’s natural prudence and might even lead to a sort of civil righteousness.  In the second sphere: reason is incompetent and arrogant when concerned with divine things, it’s “the devils whore”.  Luther understood that reason prior to faith can only be used to raise objections and engender doubts.  But if it was submitted to faith, then reason was a useful handmaid to faith.  For Luther, the problem of faith and reason was not epistemological (i.e. how we know what we know), but rather soteriological (i.e., how one can be saved and know it).

Philipp Melanchthon (A.D. 1497-1560) was Martin Luther’s Systematizer.  In his Loci communes (A.D. 1521) he adopted a negative view of the autonomous use of reason and philosophy.  But philosophy was not only a great servant of the faith; it is also a propaedeutic device (I.e., preliminary instruction) for leading men to the gospel.

John Calvin (A.D. 1509-64) was the most systematic of the sixteenth century reformers.  In his Institutes of the Christian Religion (completed definitively, A.D. 1559), he saw several things:  First, by contemplating creation, man could arrive at the knowledge of God’s existence, wisdom, life, power, etc.  But man’s inherited depravity, unless aided by positive divine revelation, leads him only into idolatry.  Second, the witness of the Spirit is the primary and sufficient reason for admitting the origin of Scripture.

THE COUNTER REFORMATION AND BAROQUE SCHOLASTICISM [Pp.116-120]

Whereas those responding to Luther were mainly in Germany and the Low countries, Catholic apologetics in a more traditional style continued to be in Italy and Spain.

Gian Francesco Pico della Mirandola (D. 1533) in the footsteps of his uncle Giovanni inveighed the philosophical errors of the Epicurean Aristotelians.

St. Robert Bellarmine (A.D. 1542-1621) was an Italian Jesuit and the greatest Systematizer of Catholic polemics against the Protestants. He wrote Disputations Concerning the Controversies of the Christian Faith against the Heretics of this Age.

Cardinal Caesar Baronius wrote Ecclesiatical Annals, intended to offset the propagandistic of the Lutheran account of Church history.

Francisco Suarez s.j. (D. 1617) wrote on the motives of credibility, putting primary emphasis on the inner qualities of Christian doctrine, its purity, and its efficacy in leading men to a higher moral life.

FRANCE BEFORE 1650 [Pp.120-123]

The chief apologetical questions focused on the dangers and values of doubt, tolerance, and religious indifference.

Philip du Plessis-Mornay (A.D. 1549-1623) was the leading Protestant apologist and Hugenot of the sixteenth century.  In his treatise On the Truth of the Christian Religion, he specifically emphasizes as method; one must find common ground by arguing from principles that are accepted by your adversary.

Moise Amyrut a Hugenot author, wrote A Treatise Concerning Religions, in Refutation of the Opinion which Accounts All Indifferent (A.D. 1631).

Catholic apologetics after Montaigne combines skepticism and fideism to pave the way for faith by exposing the feebleness of reason.

J.F. Senault in his L’ Homme criminel (1644) grounds his apologetic from an anthropological stance and prepares the way for Pascal’s existential logic of the heart.

FRANCE IN THE SECOND HALF OF THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY [Pp.123-133]

Blaise Pascal (A.D. 1623-62) after making breakthrough discoveries in mathematics and physics, he became convinced that the certainties of faith are unattainable, except to the heart that loves.  In his Pensées he covers many issues.  First, the psychological fabric of man mingled in a paradox of our pride and feebleness.  Second, he makes no effort to ground the faith metaphysically.

He thought even if one can prove God’s existence, all these arguments at best leads one to deism.  He instead proved the existence of God by referring to man’s unhappiness until he finds happiness in God (a la Augustine).

Third, Pascal makes an inventory of the various philosophies and religions, profoundly analyzes the relationships between faith and reason, and as Augustine, he finds a unity of the two in diversity.

Fourth, his biblical apologetic is profoundly Christocentric, arguing from miracles and prophecies.  For Pascal prophecies are the greatest proofs of Jesus Christ.  He also demonstrates a keen understanding of the human heart and a deep Christian spirituality in his apologetic.  His apologetic work outshines most in helping unbelievers come to the faith.

Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet (A.D. 1607-1704) in his Discourse on Universal History, he relies heavily on historical apologetics, specifically using prophecy.  He uses a more questionable approach were the desolation of the Jews is an apologetic strategy. He also impugns Protestants for their lack of unity and stability in his A History of the Variations of the Protestant Churches (1688) and concludes that Catholicism’s constancy in doctrine, is never contradictory, and thus built on the rock.

Pierre Daniel Huet (A.D. 1639-1721) was an erudite man who became Bishop of Avranches.  He wrote several philosophical works on faith and reason.  His major apologetical work,  A Demonstration of the Gospel to his Highness, the Dauphin.  He viewed that all the Biblical books were written at the times to which they are attributed to their commonly supposed authors.

Jacques Abbadie (A.D. 1654-1727) was a Hugenot pastor who wrote Treatise on the Truth of the Christian Religion, where he demonstrates extensively God’s existence, the necessity of religion, the truth of the Jewish religion, and the truth of the Christian religion.  He displays a defiant attitude toward all those who oppose Christianity in his Treatise on the Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, especially towards Mohammedanism.

Summary of Chapter 3: The Middle Ages_Part 3_MISSIONARY APOLOGISTS A.D. 1250-1320 [Pp.94-98]

 

images            Raymond Martini (C. 1220-C. 1285) was a Catalan Dominican who wrote several works.  There’s Explanatio Symboli Apostolorum (A.D. 1257), where he sets forth the basic articles of Christian belief and holds that discursive proofs for God’s existence are superfluous.  Then there’s A Muzzle for the Jews (A.D. 1267), which is a polemical work impatiently exhorting for the Jews to embrace Christianity.  And lastly there’s The Dagger of the Faith (Pugio fidei) (A.D. 1278) which is a treatise dealing with—God’s existence, the end of man, the immortality of the soul, the creation of the world, God’s knowledge of creatures, and the resurrection of the body.

Another missionary apologist was Raymond Lull (A.D. 1235-1316) a Catalan who is famed or ridiculed for called ars compendiosa inveniendi veritatem (the great art) is a brief technique for finding truth.  He authored Book of the Gentile and the Three Wise Men (1273), an allegorical disputation involving a pagan philosopher, a Jew, a Christian, and a Saracen.

SCHOLASTICISM AFTER ST. THOMAS    [Pp. 98-103]

John Duns Scotus (A.D. 1266-1308) was an English Franciscan who gave greater weight to the extrinsic evidences in supporting the judgment of faith.  He gave ten reasons for the credibility of the Scriptures: Fulfilled prophecies, the Concordant teaching of the texts, the Writers spoke on God’s behalf, the Church’s careful discrimination in drawing up the canon, the Immorality of those who reject the Scriptures, the longevity of the Church as predicted by Christ, the Miraculous conversion of the world to Christianity, the Harmony of the Scripture’s teaching with reason, Josephus’ testimony to Christ, and the comfort experienced by those who become believers.

Nicholas of Lyra (A.D. 1270-1349) was a Franciscan Biblical commentator who made interesting use of the extrinsic signs of credibility in his two apologetic works: In his Proof of the Time of the Incarnation, he uses Scriptural apologetic proofs although they are not altogether clear.  He also wrote An Answer to a Certain Jew Who Denounced the Gospel According to Mathew.

Henry Totting of Oyta (A.D. 1397) provides a view of apologetics that distinguishes between intrinsic and extrinsic evidence.  The human mind seeks to grasp things through intrinsic reason.  However, many elevated truths can only be known through divine revelation and hence are not susceptible to inner demonstration. When an internal necessary reason is absent, the act of faith requires for its rational justification external reasons giving at least a well-grounded probability.  Miracles and prophecies were the extrinsic evidences heralded.

FIFTEENTH-CENTURY APOLOGETICS [Pp.103-111]

Catalan Raimundus Sabundus (A.D. death in 1436) wrote “Book of Creatures”, whose main goal was contemplative, not apologetic.  It was a: “Natural Theology” treatise aimed at stimulating devotion by allowing the mind to reach to the various stages of the ladder of being to God.  His work demonstrates exceptional confidence in the power of reason to prove almost all of the Christian faith, such that one need not appeal to the Bible or the Church.

He saw that there were two books: From nature, And from revelation.  He exalted natural knowledge excessively and minimized the supernatural of divine revelation that his book was eventually placed on the Index in 1559.  He was not a heretic, but a man of piety.

Denis the Carthusian (died in 1471) wrote on Scripture and scholastic theology.  In his Dialogue Concerning the Catholic Faith; the contents are somewhat Anselmian and covers topics such as:  The relationship between Faith and reason, Denis Demonstrates that reasonable faith is grounded in God’s words and deeds via the Apostles.  He is however grossly incompetent in historical criticism.  In His book Against the Perfidy of Mohammed is a refutation of the Koran.  Among other things, he shows the general truth of Christian Faith.

He also argues from the miracles of Christ, fulfillment of OT prophecies, the destruction of Jerusalem, the purity of the Church and its doctrines, and Christianity’s expansion despite persecution.

Marsilio Ficino (A.D. 1433-99) was an Italian who first headed up the Platonic Academy at Florence.  His main philosophical work was Platonic Theology, which focused on the immortality of the soul.  His main apologetical treatise is On the Christian Religion.  In both works he uses ratio platonica to argue for Christianity.  He held that what separated man from all the other beasts is the natural desire to contemplate God.

He saw that all religion is preferable to irreligion.  Christianity is the most perfect religion because of the worship it renders to God.  That grace is necessary for true blessedness; that the Incarnation of the Word not only raises human nature to the divine, but all of creation can be brought together as a result.  Man is a microcosm.  His work breadth, depth and width theologically and philosophically are truly remarkable.

Girolamo Savonarola, the Dominican preacher who wrote an apologetic work titled The Triumph of the Cross.  In it, among other things he addresses the issue of man’s destiny that can be shown by reason.  As opposed to heavily emphasizing proofs from prophecy and miracles, Savonarola argues from the wisdom and goodness of Christ and how the gospel affects one’s life as a result of accepting its truth.

Conclusion: issues of faith and reason were a tension for medieval apologetics but there were also those who advanced and compared religious studies.  The difference between the patristic and medieval apologists was that the former chiefly capitalized on the success of the Church, whereas the latter profited from the reverses of Christendom.  

Summary of Chapter 3: The Middle Ages_Part 2_THE TWELFTH CENTURY [Pp.81-85]

images

            Peter Alphonsi (A.D. 1062-1110) [P.81] was a Spaniard converted Jew who became a Christian at age 44.  In his Dialogue with the Jew Moses, he ridicules the Talmud and mounts a rigorous attack against Islam.

Rupert of Deutz (A.D. 1075-1129) [P.81] writes in his Dialogue between a Christian and a Jew, an apologetic that focuses primarily on the miracles of Scripture.

Peter the Venerable (A.D. 1094-1156) [Pp.81-82] is the most eminent 12th century apologist and the last great abbot of Cluny.  In his Against the Inveterate Obstinacy of the Jews, he aims at converting Jews by demonstrating that the divine Messiah, his humiliations, and his establishment of a spiritual kingdom are grounded in the Israelite prophets.  In his treatise A Book Against the Sect or Heresy of the Saracens, he addresses the Moslems through; reason, not hatred, by words, not force, not in hatred, but in love.   He appeals to them from the Koran and affirms that; their book commands them to look to the Christian Bible as divinely authoritative and it is this Bible which points to Jesus rather than Mohammed as the true teacher.  Hence, in following the Bible one is to reject Mohammed.

Peter of Blois (D. 1202) in his Against the Perfidy of the Jews, he warns Christians of the diabolical tactics by which the Jews evade the evidences.  He also used arguments from the Incarnation, virginal birth, Passion, and Resurrection of Christ in his apologetic.

Peter Abelard (A.D. 1079-1142) [Pp.82-84] gave considerable clout to reason in the area of religious conviction.  He maintained that human reason (unlike the Augustinians), making use of objectively accessible evidences, could achieve some kind of initial faith.  For Abelard, the “blind faith” of Abraham is an exceptional grace, and thus not normative for ordinary Christians.

In his A Dialogue between a Philosopher, a Jew, and a Christian, Abelard discusses the rational grounds for faith and highlights the moral superiority of Christianity, with its’ ethics of charity over every religion including Judaism.

In his Christian Theology, Abelard deals with the divine Logos doctrine, and tackles the Trinitarian implications of the Neo-Platonic doctrine of divine emanations.  Abelard’s enthusiasm to build bridges from Christian orthodoxy to alien religions and philosophies, coupled with his attempt to close the gaps between faith and reason, brought on opposition by Bernard of Clairvoux who distrusted dialectics.  This tension between Abelard and Clairvoux symbolize the struggle of every generation.

Richard of St. Victor (1155) [Pp.84-85] wrote a treatise On the Trinity where he combines the traditional insistence on external signs of revelation with a serious quest for necessary reasons.  He also justifies his initial faith by appealing to the extrinsic evidence of miracles.

Alan of Lillie (D. 1202) [p.85] convinced that Moslems could not be won over through arguments from the Scriptures, vied for using intrinsic arguments for the truth of various Christian doctrines.  In On the Catholic Faith against Heretics of His Time, Alan sought to demonstrate Christianity’s faith by using a few simple truth maxims.  In The Art of the Catholic Faith, Alan (supposedly authored) directs his arguments specifically against Moslem tenets.

THOMAS AQUINAS (A.D. 1225-74) [Pp.85-94]

Augustine’s spiritual theology was declining, while Aristotelian philosophy was coming to the forefront of popular thought.  For the first time since the Patristic era, Christians were being offered a scientific vision of the universe that depended not on the Bible.  Through the Spanish Arabic philosopher Averroes (A.D. 1126-98) the teachings of Aristotle became available and the penetration of Averroes precipitated a major spiritual crisis in the European universities.

Combating Aristotelianism could be realized by simply erecting Christian Aristotelianism.  Thomas wrote a series of philosophical commentaries on Aristotle.  On certain points he conceded with Aristotle.  However, Christian revelation had corrected and completed Aristotle’s deficiencies.

In his Summa Contra Gentiles, (either authored in 1258-1264 or 1270-1272), a work understood by many as addressing Christian missions and the university scholar.  This word has no equal in its field.  The aim of the Summa is to be an apologetical theology confronting the new challenge of the scientific Greco-Arabic worldview.  Among other things, the work deals with:  First Book: Chapters 1-9 deals with all things that make one a wise man in light of the supreme truth (first principles) from which all reality derives.

The theologian who contemplates reality in light of divine wisdom has the task of refuting errors in religious teaching, as well as making known the truth of the Catholic Faith and confuting her opponents.

He understands that if the scriptures are not taken to be authoritative, it is appropriate to argue from reason rather than authority.  This does not mean that Aquinas viewed reason as limitless, but he understood that the human mind could discover the divine.  For him, some truths of God are revealed in nature, whereas other truths can only be known through revelation (i.e., Trinity, Incarnation, Sacraments, resurrection).  Aquinas sees that the chief end of man is to find his felicity in the contemplation of God.

The following are some of His Apologetic Arguments: [Pp.91-92]

Miracles were a sign of being God’s messenger, which are stressed in the prophetic writings.  Aquinas defines a miracle strictly as a work that only God could perform.  Moreover, he argues from the impact of Christianity in the world as a proof of its veracity and he indicts Mohammed’s testimony as that which seduced people with carnal pleasures; it taught no sublime truths but those which are common to man; the Koran is mixed with fables and errors and those who trust Mohammed’s words believe lightly.

Augustine and Aquinas’ Differences: [P.92] His Summa Contra Gentiles is a masterpiece and is considered in the Middle Ages as a work comparable to Augustine’s City of God, of the Patristic era.  Thomas used Aristotelian philosophy, whereas Augustine used Neoplatonic philosophy.  Thomas argues from a metaphysical angle, whereas Augustine argues through interpreting history. Thomas uses dispassionate reasoning in his persuasion, whereas Augustine uses rhetoric as his persuasion.

Concluding Remarks:  In his Summa contra Gentiles towers above all previous apologetic works in its clarity, perfect coherence, balance, economy, and precision.  Aquinas like Augustine responded to the challenges hoisted against Christendom with the tools they had a developed.

Summary of Chapter 3:  THE MIDDLE AGES Part 1_[PP.72-111]

 

images

The apostolic struggle during this period was not with old pagans or young barbarians, but with other races that had a rich cultural heritage.  Among these were Jewish and Moslems.

DISPUTES WITH SARACENS AND JEWS: 600-1000 [Pp.72-76]

JOHN DAMASCENE (d. c. 754) is often designated as the last Father of the East. He was born in Damascus.  Among his works the following obtain: In 727, he wrote his first apologetic piece defending the veneration of images contra the Iconoclastic emperor, Leo the Isaurian.  In The Source of Knowledge and The Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith (around 745), in the monastery of St. Sabas, near Jerusalem, he composed these masterpieces and from the latter argued that: All men naturally know God through creation; that the Biblical revelation is however the zenith of God’s self-disclosure; and he addresses the controversy between Christians and Jews over the Sabbath.  In his, Dialogue between a Saracen and a Christian, he considers the problem of evil and points to Christ as not avoiding it but rather experiencing its hardships.

THEODORE ABU QURRAH (c. 740 to c. 820) [Pp.73-74] a disciple of John Damascene, became the Bishop of Kara (Haran) in Mesopotamia.  He is best known for his Arabic treatise God and the True Religion, where he analyzes and confronts the problem of choosing among the various religions that claim to be revealed (E.g., Zoroastrianism, The Samaritan religion, Judaism, Christianity, Manicheism, Sects of Marcion, Bardesenes, and Mohammed.

After examining the similarities and differences, Abu Qurrah concludes that Christianity: first, presents the most plausible idea of God; second that it exhibits the fullest understanding of man’s actual religious needs; third that it prescribes the most appropriate remedy and that miracles and the expansion of Christianity point to its truthfulness.

ABD AL-MASIH AL-KINDI (10th century) allegedly wrote an Arabic apology titled The Epistle of Abdallah ibn-Ismail al-Hashimi to Abd-al-Misah ibn-Ishac al-Kindi, inviting him to embrace Islam; and the Reply of Abd-al-Masih, refuting the same, and inviting the Hashimiteto to embrace the Christian Faith.  In this work he considers the prophecies and miracles of Jesus as reasons that testify in favor of Christ, not Mohammed; he contrasts the methods of spreading the message of Christianity and Muslims, where the former by the apostles won people through miracles, their example, and preaching, as opposed to Mohammed’s message was spread through the sword.

ISIDORE OF SEVILLE [P.74] composed a work titled Against the Jews: On the Catholic Faith from the Old and New Testament.  The aim of the treatise was to educate believers on how to converse with Jews, rather than on how to convert them.

CARDINAL PETER DAMIAN [Pp.75-76] (1007-72) composed two polemical opuscules (i.e., a small or minor literary or musical work) against the Jews.

In his, A Reply to the Jews, Peter contends with his monks that it is better to war with the flesh than with the Jews who are but extinct.  Moreover to protect the faithful, it is admonished that vain disputes be shunned and with the Jews to show the most evident prophetic texts concerning the Christian faith.  In the book, Peter also deals with: The Trinity, The Incarnation, and The Sufferings of Christ.

In Peter’s, A Dialogue between a Jew Asking Questions and a Christian Responding, he addresses the non-observance of the laws such as: Circumcision, the Sabbath, the Dietary laws, and Animal Sacrifices.  Unfortunately, in concluding this treatise, he impatiently scolds the Jews for their incredulity.

            ANSELM (A.D. 1033-1109) [Pp.76-81], known as the great Benedictine Abbot who became the Arch Bishop of Canterbury in (A.D. 1093).  Very important to the apologetic enterprise is the thought Anselm disclosed concerning the relationship between faith and reason, which impacted greatly the High Middle Ages.  In his classic, Cur Deus Homo, (started around A.D. 1094 and completed around 1098), Anselm stands in the tradition of the Jewish-Christian polemical dialogues of the Middle-Ages.  This treatise deals with the reasons for the Incarnation of Christ Jesus and the theology of Redemption tied to it.

            In Anselm’s Proslogian (A.D. 1077-78) and the Monologion (1076) he deals both with the existence and attributes of God.  There’s a similarity with the three works:  First, Anselm begins in faith in order that he may ground his understanding in both the Scriptures and in the creeds.  Second, Anselm is far removed from the rationalism of the Enlightenment, for although he uses reason to discover and understand the depths of God, there remains our faith in redemption that keeps us persevering.

Third, for Anselm, to understand is the grasping of objective reasons that underlie and illumine the data of faith.  Fourth, Anselm sees man’s image as effaced, not erased through the fall and as such, man is not fully rational. [P.78]

Theology for Anselm must therefore be conducted prayerfully and with divine aid.  But it must necessarily be conducted sola ratione.  He understands that circular reasoning must be avoided when doing exegesis (Monologion).

Fifth, He does his apologetic partly for the benefit of believers (1 Pet.3:15) thus doing his theological reasoning to equip believers to deal with non-Christians.  Anselm sees theological knowledge as a single science, which operates by reason under the leading of faith, but arguments, as long as they were cogent reasons, could be understood from those who have no faith.  Anselm has a high view of reason.

Concluding Thoughts: Anselm’s ominous contribution to the history of apologetics is seen in his raising so clearly the question of the intrinsic demonstrability of the Christian faith.