Introduction -- In this paper I will examine the relationship of reason to revelation, as held by Thomas Aquinas, then as modified by Erasmus and finally as transformed by Martin Luther. Thomas Aquinas -- Thomas Aquinas was the great systematizer of Church doctrine. To this day, Roman Catholic teaching is based principally upon his Summa Theologica. As our text (Building the Christian Academy,) points out "Moreover, God illuminates the mind by the light of reason, so it may know some truths about him without any special revelation. It can, for instance, discover first principals of the faith, such as God's existence, and something of his unity and goodness or other essential attributes. .. In no way are revelation and reason either opposed or mutually exclusive. On the contrary, Thomas reminds us, reason is by its nature adapted to knowing truth, including truths of faith (p. 54-55)." Thomas Aquinas was able to support through his "reasoning" all sorts of "truths of faith", that appear unscriptural (or perhaps super scriptural) to many Protestants. Through reason, he proved the seven sacraments, the existence of purgatory and the perpetual virginity of the Virgin Mary. Clear teaching in the New Testament seems to have taken a back seat to reason in that scholastics did not refer to original texts, but relied upon the conclusions of earlier church fathers and upon Aristotelian logic. The author points out "the light of revelation and the light of reason are both God's gifts (p. 55)". However, what did the term "revelation" mean to Aquinas? From what I can gather, revelation was not limited to the 27 books of the New Testament, but included all of the encrustations of dogma as accepted by the Roman Catholic church up to the 12th century. I agree with Thomas Aquinas that reason and revelation lead to one truth and that reason and revelation cannot be contradictory when properly understood. There is indeed a unity of truth. I disagree with Thomas Aquinas in his concept of "revelation". From my vantage point, revelation stopped with the death of the Apostle John. It also seems to me that Thomas Aquinas put the cart before the horse. He knew his outcomes (Catholic teaching) and then he "persuaded" reason to arrive at those predetermined outcomes. Erasmus of Rotterdam -- Erasmus of Rotterdam was the father of Humanism as it flowered in Northern Europe at the beginning of the 16th century. He stretched the patience of Catholic dignitaries in such writings as In Praise of Folly, but in the end he died a faithful son of the Church. Like Thomas and the Scholastics he believed in the power of reason, but unlike the scholastics, he emphasized original sources (i.e. the New Testament) and de-emphasized Aristotelian logic. He agreed with Aquinas that human reason could be applied in solving theological issues, but he contended that reason could be better applied in improving the human condition on this earth. This "humanism" set him apart from theo-centric Scholasticism. Erasmus was a transitional figure between the pure Catholic tradition of Aquinas and the pure reformation figure of Martin Luther. As our text points out, "So while Erasmus depended on linguistic tools alone, and submitted to church authority in other matters, Luther relied on an inner certainty of faith based on the Bible alone, whatever the church might say. (p. 61)" As he submitted to church authority, he tacitly agreed to an expanded definition of revelation that included doctrine as revealed to the Catholic magesterium. Martin Luther -- Martin Luther began this theological career as a disciple of Erasmus. He did not intend to establish a rival to the Roman Catholic Church, but events propelled him in that direction. As his thinking developed, Luther expressed the relationship of reason to revelation in his "two kingdom theology." As our text explains it, "Human reason, he allowed, can show that God exists and that he is able to help us, but it cannot reveal who he is or that he is willing to help. Its main functions are in temporal affairs rather than in contemplating eternal truths in the mind of God or tracing the unity of truth. (p. 64)" Luther believed in "sola scriptura" that is, that the Bible is the only source of revelation. In opposition to Thomas Aquinas and Erasmus, Luther did not count church teaching as "revelation". Luther also contended that human reason is equipped for only earthly affairs, and he did not attempt to integrate reason and revelation. Conclusion - In an interesting way, the move from scholasticism to humanism to Protestantism, is a study in the changing relationship of reason to revelation. The chart below may illustrate this changing relationship.
It must be noted that John Calvin moved the extreme of Luther back a bit toward the humanist point of view. It is also interesting to note that the church is still trying to balance the two (reason / learning / science) versus (revelation / scripture / faith). Recently Pope John Paul II issued a encyclical letter entitled "fides et ratio" which begins as follows: "Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth; and God has placed in the human heart a desire to know the truth-in a word, to know himself-so that, by knowing and loving God, men and women may also come to the fullness of truth about themselves." It sounds a bit scholastic to me, but the 108 points make interesting reading. |