How is faith and reason best reconciled from the Catholic and Protestant perspective?

Question

Martin Luther, the Protestant reformer who broke with the Catholic Church simply declared the "just shall live by faith," Romans 1:17. The "Cathechism of the Catholic Church" does acknowledge in 157 that "faith is more certain than all human knowledge." However, 159 contradicts this by stating that "Though faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason." The latter teaching can by contradicted by Genesis 5, for example, in which numerous Old Testament figures in ancient times were said to have lived 969, 930, 910, 500 years and so forth. In advanced modern societies in 1900 the life expectancy was only about 40. Over a century later I am aware of no person who has lived over 120 years. Therefore, there is a real discrepancy here between our knowledge of the human body and Scriptures. Is not Luther's reliance on faith for such matters sounder than that of Catechism 157 and Catholic Scholastics, such as, St. Thomas Aquinas?

Answer 1

One must remember that using the Bible to support a contradiction of Catholic Doctrine is kind of stupid since the Catholic Church is more ruled by the Edicts of the Pope and the Catechism than by the Bible. That is documented in their Doctrines and makes them on the fringe of Christianity, thouhg not Christian.

Answer 2

*Is Catholic*

That is because Luther, like most of Protestantism, uses Aristotelian metaphysics as a hard and fast divide between the supernatural and corporeal sphere.

Aristotle said that because the gods are so different from corporeal reality, that communication cannot occur between the two. Humanity has no direct contact with the supernatural and never can. Luther used this metaphysical principle to say that all the activities (works sacraments etc) of the Catholic Church are useless because the corporeal world cannot interact with the divine. This got turned around by the Enlightenment philosophers (Kant Hume etc.) who said, if that is true, then God can't interact with humanity, or at least there is no verifiable means for us to determine who says they are interacting with God (as humanity cannot cross the divide). This brought about Westley and pietism which split faith and reason from the perspective of religion. In the middle was Deism. On the other side of things, the suggestion was made that if we cannot determine who has an experience with God, then why on Earth should we act as if there is a God. For all intents and purposes, we cannot be found guilty for sinning against a God that we cannot know, and there is no reason to believe in everything at the same time either as that would be a contradiction. The Faith and Reason was split. Logical Positive was developed, that is we can only know by that which we can sense and we can know nothing about God since he cannot be sensed or interacted with.

So anyway Luther's position of Faith Alone really helped lead to the mess we are in now in the West.

The Catholic Position -- First Faith is not trust. Faith is a form of knowledge developed though a living relationship with the person of God via the exchange of persons.

Now truth is true is truth. It cannot contradict. If something of Faith is true, then it is as true as a rational truth. Catholicism does not separate the material world from God.

Dogmatically, Catholics must believe that knowledge of God can be gained without grace through the rational observation and experience of the world around us. Mind you, this is not saving knowledge, but this knowledge can and does lead to salvation. For in understanding the world, one can live virtuously, and one can find Christ.

There is a difference in Certitude and Certainty and different truths are held in the mind at different grades of confidence. This is what I think you are missing whey you are confused about "faith is more certain than all human knowledge". This is not saying that faith is true and human knowledge is not or that faith is certain and human knowledge is not. It is simply saying that the knowledge gained in faith is more sure. For example, I am more sure about my hands typing this than I am about your eyes reading this. This is because my hands are mine and your eyes are not mine. In faith, one has a profound relationship with God at an extremely personal level, for God knows me more than I know me. Thus I am more certain about Faith knowledge than I am about the knowledge of my hands typing.

BIBLE NUMBER ---

At the technical level your argument does not work at all. What you know is this.
1. The life expectancy of modern man.
2. The life expectancy in statistics written down several centuries ago.
3. Some numbers written in scripture that describe a time where all written record, if it existed, has been destroyed.

Scientifically you cannot say scripture is wrong about those numbers because they are beyond empirical testing.

The best you can say is that it is unlikely. You cannot say that it is improbable because you do not know if a human body could live that long.

BTW Psalms 90:10 gives the normative age range of a human, which was much higher than modern man until recently.

Answer 3

Please show the entire paragraphs instead of taking things out of context:

157: Faith is certain. It is more certain than all human knowledge because it is founded on the very word of God who cannot lie. To be sure, revealed truths can seem obscure to human reason and experience, but "the certainty that the divine light gives is greater than that which the light of natural reason gives."31 "Ten thousand difficulties do not make one doubt."32

159: Faith and science: "Though faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason. Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth."37 "Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are."38

Answer 4

Human reason is the spark of the divine within us. It is our capacity to know the truth of things.

One thing that make us human is our ability to think our way through to convictions (or strong beliefs). So reason and faith cannot be in conflict.

True faith
+ Is reasonable faith
+ Makes sense
+ Can be proposed as reasonable to others

The Catholic Church does not take the stories of creation in the Bible literally. Catholics believe the book of Genesis tells religious truth and not necessarily historical fact.

One of the religious truths is that God created everything and declared all was good.

Catholics can believe in the theory of evolution. Or not. The Church does not require belief in evolution.

On August 12, 1950 Pope Pius XII said in his encyclical Humani generis:

The Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter - for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God.

Here is the complete encyclical: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html

The Church supports science in the discovery of God's creation. At this time, the theory of evolution is the most logical scientific explanation. However tomorrow someone may come up with a better idea.

As long as we believe that God started the whole thing, both the Bible and modern science (faith and reason) can live in harmony.

With love in Christ.

Answer 5

Faith and reason are on the same team. We don't have certain knowledge about most things, but we have enough evidence to act on them. For example, I don't have certain knowledge that my employer will deposit money in my bank account at the next pay period, but I'm willing to show up at work on time tomorrow morning.

Faith seeks understanding. The basic questions like "Why are we here?" and "What happens after we die?" and "What must I do to live with God?" were answered by Jesus, who punctuated his answers by rising from the dead. That is a reasonable basis for faith.

Answer 6

I would call into question Rome's claim to papal supremacy. It is based on Matthew16:18. Here Christ calls Peter by the name Rock on which Christ is apparently going to build his church. The Greek in this verse calls Peter 'Petros' but uses a slightly different word for the rock (petra) on which the church is to be built. Rome argues that 'Petros' is the masculine form of the feminine noun 'petra' and therefore means the same thing, Peter is that rock.
However closer examination of all relevant texts in Syriac, Aramaic and Greek, showing the usage of these words, indicates that the correct understanding of this verse is : “You are 'Petros' (a movable stone) and upon this 'petra' (a large massive rock) I will build my church".
The Church of Rome bases itself on a misinterpretation of Scripture and a falsely reconstructed Aramaic/Syriac text, ignoring the distinctions in the Aramaic language.

Answer 7

The most eloquent expression on faith and reason that I know of, I heard on the sci-fi TV series Babylon 5:

"Faith sustains us in the hour that reason tells us that we cannot continue. [Reason is] not useless, but it's also not enough. Faith and reason are the shoes on your feet. You can get further with both than you can with just one."

As to the Genesis ages, here's a link to a very interesting article: http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2003/PSCF12-03Hill.pdf
It's from the American Scientific Affiliation's journal "Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith". I have not myself researched this article further, but if nothing else, it is thought-provoking.

Hope this helps!
Christine

Answer 8

The phenomenon found in some Christian groups. It appears to work like this:


"if you don't believe that faith alone saves, then you must believe that you can work your way into Heaven (something Catholics are constantly falsely accused of believing),"
"if you don't believe in sola scriptura, then you are a follower of the 'traditions of men',"
"if you think we can cooperate in our salvation, then you're saying that Christ isn't enough,"
"if you believe that one can freely turn his back on God, then you're denying God's omnipotence," .
These either/or arguments consist of an "if" statement, coupled with an implied premise that amounts to a false dichotomy, and followed by an invalid conclusion.

Catholic rebuttals to these sorts of assertions often rely on the heavy use of prepositions:


"we are saved by grace, through faith and works inspired by the Holy Spirit's love,"
"the source of Christian Truth is the Church that is guided by the Holy Spirit and which is both the source of and is bound by Sacred Scripture,"
"we are saved solely by the grace of the Cross, with which we must co-operate,"
"God can do whatever He wants, whenever He wants, but He chose to give us free will with which we can freely choose Him," .

It's been said that the Catholic Church is a "both/and" Church; another way of saying it is that, when arguing with Protestants, we are a "Yes, but..." Church:


"Yes, grace saves through faith -- but a faith that works,"
"Yes, Christ is the only way to the Father, but we Christians co-operate with Him in His divine plan and therefore, in a real but limited sense, play a co-redemptive role in salvation history,"
"Yes, we must be born again, but 'born again' refers to Baptism,"
"Yes, Christ is the Spiritual Rock of the Church, but He made Peter the earthly Rock" .

Answer 9

I guess you never heard of Martin Luther.

Here is a quick road map: The bible is the sole authority is the Protestant position. Your arguments are based on another authority such as written and oral tradition.

If you remain biblical, you will find your answer.

Answer 10

strange to me. how is there anything certain about faith? faith in itself is the belief, in fact the steadfast belief, that what you don't see is actually there. the only certainty in that is that you believe it. so the reliance on faith, then, is completely uncertain except to the beholder. how does this supercede reason? there is a need for faith, it makes the world go round, but it is most certainly not certain.