Free thought; Modernism (Christian theology) -- Catholic Church; Religion and science; Teaching, Freedom of
Let no one say that faith is a _blind belief_ and blind obedience, and
that dogmatic Christianity, or, to use another phrase, “the religion of
the law, demands first of all obedience: it is true it would like, besides
that, an interior assent for its thoughts and commandments, but where this
is lacking the law itself furnishes the ways and means to compensate the
lack of this internal assent, if only obedience is there” (_A. Harnack_,
Religioeser Glaube u. freie Forschung. Neue Freie Presse, June 7, 1908).
Nor let any one say that free research has “at least this advantage over
dogma, that its claims can be proved, which is not true of the other’s
claims” (_J. H. van’t Hoff_, ibid., Dec. 29, 1907). These are
misrepresentations.
There is no obedience to faith which is not _internal assent and
conviction_, and there is no clinging to dogmas which is not based on
motives of faith, or which could not at any time be subjected to
scientific investigation. If the term “blindness of belief” were intended
to express only that the believer holds the revealed doctrine to be true,
not because he has discovered its truth by his own reasoning, but on the
authority of God, then we might suffer the misleading word. But it is
utterly false in the sense that the believer has no conviction at all.
Even though others have it not, the faithful Catholic, the believing
Christian, has it, and it is personal conviction. He has convinced himself
that God has spoken, and of the credibility and hence the truth of the
revealed doctrine, by his own reason, and this is why he assents.
Still greater is the misrepresentation of the real motive of
faith, if it is held to be the opinion of the Pope or of Roman
Prelates. _Wundt_ thus misstates the Catholic position: “Not every
one can acquire knowledge. But any one can believe. The
enlightened leaders of the Church, and the Church herself first of
all, have knowledge, and by dint of authority determine what is to
be believed” (Ethik, 3d ed., 1903, I, p. 342). According to the
popular scientific propaganda of unbelief, we have to deal in the
Church merely with “ignorant monks, Asiatic patriarchs, and
similar dignitaries, some very superstitious, who, for instance,
assembled in the third century and decided _by vote_ that the
Gospel is the word of God; we have to deal with men who have
proved their incapacity and incompetence” (_Masaryk_, Im Kampfe um
die Religion, 1904, pp. 22-23).
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account