RSS
Faith and/or Reason
or The truth is elusive
C.S. Lewis on Wishful Thinking said...
Surprised by Joy (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich: 1955), 170.
The two hemispheres of my mind were in the sharpest contrast. On the
one side a many-sided sea of poetry and myth; on the other a glib and
shallow "rationalism." Nearly all that I loved I believed to be
imaginary; nearly all that I believed to be real I thought grim and
meaningless. The exception were certain people (whom I loved and
believed to be real) and nature herself. That is, nature as she
appeared to the senses. I chewed endlessly on the problem: "How can it
be so beautiful and also so cruel, wasteful and futile?"... I was so
far from wishful thinking that I hardly thought anything true unless it
contradicted my wishes.
Surprised by Joy (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich: 1955), 206.
Here were gods, spirits, afterlife and pre-existence, initiates, occult knowledge, meditation. "Why — damn it — it's medieval," I exclaimed; for I still had all the chronological snobbery of my period and used the names of earlier periods as terms of abuse. Here was everything which the New Look had been designed to exclude; everything that might lead one off the main road into those dark places where men are wallowing on the floor and scream that they are being dragged down into hell. Of course it was all arrant nonsense. There was no danger of my being taken in.
C.S. Lewis on Paganism said...
Surprised by Joy (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich: 1955), 235.
With the irreligious I was no longer concerned; their view of life was
henceforth out of court. As against them, the whole mass of those who
have worshiped — all who had danced and sung and sacrificed and
trembled and adored — were clearly right. But the intellect and
conscience, as well as the orgy and the ritual, must be our guide.
There could be no question of going back to primitive, untheologized
and unmoralized, Paganism. The God whom I had at last acknowledged was
one, and was righteous. Paganism had been only the childhood of
religion, or only a prophetic dream. Where was the thing full grown? or
where was the awakening?
The God Who Is There, (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1968), p115.
A man like Sir Julian Huxley has clarified the dilemma by
acknowledging, though he is an atheist, that somehow or other, against
all that one might expect, man functions better if he acts as though
God is there. This sounds like a feasible solution for a moment, the
kind of answer a computer might give if you fed the sociological data
into it. God is dead, but act as if he were alive. However, a moment's
reflection will show what a terrible solution this is. Ibsen, the
Norwegian, put it like this: if you take away a man's lie, you take
away his hope. These thinkers are saying in effect that man can
function as man for an extended period of time only if he acts on the
assumption that a lie (that the personal God of Christianity is there)
is true. You cannot find any deeper despair than this for a sensitive
person. This is not an optimistic, happy, reasonable or brilliant
answer. It is darkness and death.
The God Who Is There, (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1968), p85.
Probably the best way to describe this concept of modern theology is to
say that it is faith in faith, rather than faith directed to an object
which is actually there. Modern man cannot talk about the object of his
faith, only about the faith itself. So he can discuss the existence of
his faith and its "size" as it exists against all reason, but that is
all. Modern man's faith turns inward. In Christianity the value of
faith depends upon the object towards which the faith is directed. So
it looks outward to the God who is there, and to the Christ who in
history did upon the cross once for all, finished the work of
atonement, and on the third day rose again in space and in time. This
makes Christian faith open to discussion and verification.
The God Who Is There, (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1968), p80.
"I do not ask for answers, I just believe." This sounds spiritual, and
it deceives many fine people. These are often young men and women who
are not content only to repeat the phrases of the intellectual or
spiritual status quo. They have become rightly dissatisfied with a
dull, dusty, introverted orthodoxy given only to pounding out the
well-known clichés. The new theology sound spiritual and vibrant,
and they are trapped. But the price they pay for what seems to be
spiritual is high, for to operate in the upper story using undefined
religious terms is to fail to know and function on the level of the
whole man. The answer is not to ask these people to return to the
poorness of the status quo, but to a living orthodoxy which is
concerned with the whole man, including the rational and the
intellectual, in his relationship to God.
The God Who Is There, (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1968), p79.
[T]he scientific symbol has become an important tool for writing
increasingly lengthy formulae with greater accuracy. In other words, it
has value according to the sharpness of its definition. But the new
theology uses the concept of symbol in exactly the opposite way. The
only thing the theological and scientific uses have in common is the
word symbol. To the new theology, the usefulness of a symbol is in
direct proportion to its obscurity. There is connotation, as in the
word god, but there is no definition. The secret of the strength of
neo-orthodoxy is that these religious symbols with a connotation of
personality give an illusion of meaning, and as a consequence it
appears to be more optimistic than secular existentialism.
The God Who Is There, (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1968), p65.
Christianity is realistic because it says that if there is no truth, there is also no hope.
From a speech given in Paris at the Sorbonne in 1910
It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the
strong man stumbled, or where the doer of deeds could have done them
better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena;
whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives
valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; who knows the
great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy
cause; who, at the best, knows in the end the triumph of high
achievement; and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while
daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and
timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.
Anselm on Discernment said...
Cur Deus Homo ["Why God Became Man"]
The intelligent creature received the power of discernment for this
purpose, that he might hate and shun evil, and love and choose good,
and especially the greater good. For else in vain would God have given
him that power of discernment, since man's discretion would be useless
unless he loved and avoided according to it
