But now consider, you will say, whether in religion we
Faith and Reason
less lack of reverence toward parents would necessarily follow, while a rashness in placing belief in those things which we can not see is seemingly avoided. CHAPTER 2
Therefore, when we do not believe what we cannot see, concord will perish and human society itself will not stand firm. How much more, then, ought faith to be placed in divine things, even if they are not seen. If this faith is not applied, it is not the friendship of some men which is violated, but the very essence of religion itself, so that the very depth of misery results. CHAPTER 3 (4)
5. On the Advantage of Believing
But now consider, you will say, whether in religion we ought to believe. For even if we concede that it is one thing to believe, another to be credulous, it does not follow that there is no fault in believing in religious matters. What if it be a fault to believe and to be credulous, as it is to be drunk and to be a drunkard? One who holds this view as certain, it seems to me, could have no friend. For, if it is base to believe anything, either he acts basely who believes a friend, or, in not believing a friend at all, I do not see how he can call either him or himself a friend. Here you will perhaps say: I grant that at times we have to believe something; now, explain how in religion it is not base to believe before one knows. I shall do so, if I can. Therefore, I ask you which you consider the more serious fault: to transmit religion to one unworthy or to believe what is said by those who transmit it? If you do not understand whom I am speaking of as unworthy, I mean one who approaches it with hypocrisy in his heart. You grant, as I think, that it is much more blameworthy to reveal whatever sacred secrets there are to such a man than to believe religious men who make some affirmation about religion itself. For no other answer would be becoming to you. So now, suppose that he is present who is going to transmit religion to you; how will you convince him that you approach with the right spirit, and that there is no guile or deceit in you as far as this matter is concerned? You will say with your own good conscience that there is no deceit in you, and you will assert this with what words you can, but still with words. For as a man you would not be able to reveal to a man the inner recesses of your soul so as to be completely known. But if he said: Yes, I believe you; is it not fairer that you also believe me, if I hold any truth, since you are about to receive and I am about to bestow a benefit on you? —what answer shall we give, save that you must believe?
But, you say, would it not be better for you to give me the reason so that I might follow, wherever it should lead, without any rashness? Perhaps it would be. Since it is so important that you must come to the knowledge of God by reason, do you think that all men are capable of grasping the reasons by which the human mind is led to understand the divine, or are many capable, or just a few? A few I think, you say. Do you believe that you belong to this number? It is not my place, you say, to answer this. Therefore, you think he should believe you in this, also. And this, of course, he does. Please remember that he has already twice believed you when you said something uncertain, and that you are willing not even once to believe him when he advises you on religious matters. But suppose that it is so, and that you are approaching with the right attitude to receive religion, and so are one of the few men capable of understanding the reasons by which the divine power is known with certainty—what then? Do you think that the rest of men, who have not been endowed with so serene a nature, should be denied religion? Or should they be brought gradually by certain steps to those innermost mysteries? You see clearly which way is the more religious. For neither can it seem to you that any man whatever, in his eagerness for so great a thing, should in any way be deserted or rejected. But you will agree, will you not, that unless he first believes that he will arrive at the [goal] which he has set for himself, and shows the aa | ee mind of a suppliant, obeying certain important and necessary precepts, and completely purging himself by a certain way of life, he will not in any other way attain to that which is pure truth? Surely you agree. What then about those (and I now believe that you belong to this class) who can very easily, with sure reasoning, accept the divine mysteries? Will it hinder them at all if they come the way which those who believe first of all come?
I think not. But still, you say, what need is there for them to delay? Because, if by so doing they will in no way harm themselves, yet they will harm others by their example. For there is scarcely anyone who has a just estimate of his own powers. He who thinks too little of himself should be roused, while he who thinks too much should be checked, the former that he may not be crushed by despair, the latter that he may not be carried on headlong in his boldness. And this is easily done even if those who are strong enough to fly are forced for a little while, in order not to incite anyone to danger, to walk on a way that is also safe for others. This is the foresight of true religion; this has been divinely commanded; this has been handed down to our blessed forefathers; this has been kept even to our own day. To desire to pervert and disturb it is nothing else than to seek a sacrilegious way to the true religion. As to those who do this, even if their desires are granted, they cannot arrive whither they intend. For, whatever kind of excellent ability they may have, unless God is present, they creep along the ground. And He is then present when those who tend toward God have at heart the interests of human society. No surer way to heaven can be found than this step. And I, indeed, cannot resist this reasoning, for how can I say that we should believe nothing without knowledge? For there is also no friendship at all unless something is believed which cannot be demonstrated by positive reasoning. Masters, without any fault on their part, often believe the stewards in their service. But in religion what can be more unjust than that the ministers of God should be willing to believe us when we promise sincerity, while we are unwilling to believe them when they issue precepts? Lastly, what can be a more healthful way than first to become fitted for the reception of truth by believing those things which have been divinely appointed for preparing and cultivating the mind in advance? Or, if you are already perfectly fitted, [what can be more healthful than] to go the round-about way where it is safest to enter, rather than to be a source of danger to yourself and an example of rashness to others? CHAPTER 10
Therefore, it now remains to consider in what way these men are not to be followed who promise to guide us by means of reason. For we have already said how we can, without fault, follow those who order us to believe; but to these sponsors of reason some men think that they can come, not only without censure, but even with some measure of praise. But this is not so, for there are [only] two [classes of] persons in religion who are praiseworthy: the one consists of those who have already found out, and whom one necessarily judges most blessed; the other, of those who are seeking very studiously and in the most correct way. The first kind, then, is already in actual possession, while the other kind is on the way, by which, finally one is most sure to arrive. There are three other kinds of men, definitely worthy of censure and aversion. One consists of those who have opinions, that is, those who think that they know what they do not know; another is made up of those who realize that they do not know, but do not seek in such a way as to find; the third, of those who neither think they know nor wish to seek. There are likewise three things bordering on each other, as it were, in the minds of men which are worthy of distinction: understanding, belief, and opinion. And if these are considered separately, the first is always without fault; the second is at times faulty; and the third is never without fault. For the understanding of deep and honorable, nay even divine, matters is a blessed thing. The understanding of superfluous things, however, is not harmful, but perhaps the learning was harmful in that it took up the time of necessary matters. And as to harmful matters themselves, the misery is not in the failure to understand them, but in the doing or suffering them. For, if someone should understand how an enemy can be slain without any danger to himself, he is not guilty through the understanding itself, but through the evil desire. And, if this desire is absent, what can be said to be more innocent? But belief is then blameworthy, either when something is believed — about God which is unworthy of Him, or when, in the case of man, such belief is too readily held. But in other matters, if anyone believes something, but with the understanding that he does not know it, there is no fault. For I believe that wicked conspirators were once put to death through the valor of Cicero, and yet, I not only do not know this, but I even know for sure that there is no way in which I can know it. But opinion is very base for two reasons: both in that he who has convinced himself that he already knows cannot learn (even if it were possible for the thing to be learned), and the very rashness is of itself a sign of a mind ill disposed. For, even if anyone thinks he knows that fact which I mentioned about Cicero, although nothing prevents him from learning it (for the matter itself cannot be held through knowledge), still, because he does not understand that there is much difference between grasping something by the sure reason of the mind, which we call understanding, and entrusting it, with profit, to tradition or writing for posterity to believe, he surely errs; and no error is without its baseness. What we understand, accordingly, we owe to reason; what we believe, to authority; and what we have an opinion on, to error. But everyone who understands also believes, and everyone who has an opinion believes, too; but not everyone who believes understands, and no one who merely has an opinion understands. Therefore, if these three capabilities be referred to the five kinds of men which we have mentioned previously, that is, the two classes deserving approval (which we put first), and the other three faulty, we find that the first class, consisting of the blessed, believes truth itself, but the second, made up of those who seek after and love truth, believes authority; in both these classes, belief is praiseworthy. In the first of the faulty kinds, that is, in those who think they know what they do not know, there is surely faulty credulity. The other two objectionable kinds believe nothing, that is, those who seek truth with no hope of finding it, and those who do not seek it at all. And this is true only of things which refer to some system of knowledge. For in other activities of life, I truly know not how a man can believe nothing. Although even among those who say that in practice they follow the more probable, they yet prefer to seem unable to know rather than unable to believe. For who does not believe what he approves of? Or how is it that what they follow, if it is not approved of, is probable? Truth, therefore, has two kinds of adversaries: the one consisting of those who oppose only knowledge, not faith; the other, of those who reject both; yet I truly do not know whether they can be found in the (normal) activities of man. We have said this in order to understand that, by retaining our faith in those things which we do not yet grasp, we have been set free from the rashness of such as have opinions. For those who say that we are to believe nothing, except what we know, are on their guard against the one name of opinion, which, one must admit, is a low and wretched one. But if they consider carefully that there is a very great difference between, on the one hand, thinking one knows and, on the other, believing, under the influence of some authority, what one realizes he does not know, they would surely avoid errors and the charge of inhumanity and pride.
CHAPTER 11
For, I ask, if what is not known need not be believed, how are children to be subject to their parents? And how are they to love with mutual affection those whom they do not believe to be their own parents? For this cannot in any way be known through reason, but is believed of the father on the authority of the mother; but, as to the mother herself, it is not she, for the most part, that is believed, but midwives, nurses, and servants. For cannot she from whom a son can be stolen and another substituted, having been deceived herself, deceive others? Yet we believe, and we believe without any doubt, what we admit we cannot know. For who would not see that, unless this were so, filial devotion, the most sacred bond of the human race, would be violated by a most grievous sin of pride? For who, no matter how crazy he were, should think one ought to be blamed for fulfilling his duties to those whom he believed to be his parents, even though they were not? Who, on the other hand, has not judged that man deserving of exile who perhaps loved his real parents very little, lest he might love counterfeit parents? Many examples can be cited which show that absolutely nothing would remain intact in human society if we should determine to believe only what we can grasp by perception.
But, now, listen to something I trust you will more easily accept. When the matter at stake is religion, that is, the worship and knowledge of God, those men are less to be followed who forbid us to believe and readily promise reason. For no one is in doubt that all men are either fools or wise. Now, I call wise not the gifted and witty, but those in whom there is, in as far as it can be in man, a knowledge, grasped with surety, both of man and of God, and a life and habits in accord with this knowledge. But others, whatever may be their skills or lack of skills, whether their way of life is approved of or not, I would count in the number of the fools. Since this is so, what man of average intelligence has not clearly seen that it will be more useful and healthful for the fools to obey the precepts of the wise than to live according to their own judgement? For, every deed, if it is not rightly done, is a sin; nor can one in any way do rightly what does not proceed from right reason. Moreover, right reason is virtue itself. For, to what human being is virtue readily at hand save to the wise man? The wise man alone, therefore, does not sin. And every fool, then, sins save in those acts in which he obeys the wise man. From right reason, then, such acts spring, nor is a fool to be considered, so to say, master of his own deed, since he is as it were the instrument and agency of the wise man. Therefore, if it is better for all men not to sin than to sin, surely all fools would live better lives if they were subservient to the wise. And, if no one doubts that this is true in matters of lesser import, as, for instance, in buying or tilling a field, in marrying a wife, in acknowledging and bringing up children, and even in the control of household property, it is all the more true in religion. In the case of human events, fine distinctions can be made more readily than in the case of divine; and in things more sacred and extraordinary, we sin so much the more impiously and dangerously in that we owe them greater service and devotion. You see, therefore, that nothing remains to us, as long as we are fools, if our hearts are set on a good and religious life, except to seek out the wise; by obeying them, we can become less conscious of and eventually escape altogether the foolishness which dominates us as long as it remains within us. CHAPTER 12
Here, again, a very difficult question arises. For how will we fools be able to find a wise man? Even if only a few dare to claim this title openly, yet many do so indirectly by so differing among themselves on those very things in the knowledge of which wisdom consists, that either none of them is necessarily wise, or but one. But when the fool tries to find out who that one is, I do not at all see how he can clearly distinguish and know him. For there are no signs whatever by which one can recognize something, unless he knows the thing itself of which these are the signs. And, of course, the fool does not know wisdom. For, though one is allowed in the case of gold and silver and other things of that kind to recognize them, at sight, without possessing them, not so can wisdom be seen by the mental eye of one who lacks it. Whatever we touch by bodily sense is offered to us from without, and that is why we can distinguish with our eyes things foreign to us, though we ourselves possess nothing of them or of their kind. But what is grasped with the intellect is within the mind, and having it is equivalent to seeing. But the fool lacks wisdom; accordingly, he does not know wisdom, nor can he see it with his eyes, for he cannot see it without possessing it, nor can he have it and be a fool. He does not, therefore, know it, and, not knowing it, he cannot recognize it elsewhere. Accordingly as long as anyone is a fool, he cannot be completely sure of finding a wise man through whom, if he obey him, he can be freed from so grievous an evil as foolishness.
For this immense difficulty in our search for religion, then, only God can supply the remedy. And, unless we believe that He exists and assists human souls, we ought not even look for the true religion itself. For what, I pray, do we desire to investigate with such great effort? What do we wish to reach? At what do we want to arrive? Is it to that which we believe does not exist and does not pertain to us? Nothing is more perverse than such an attitude. Though you would not be so bold as to ask me a favor (at least you would do so impudently), unless you believed that I would grant it, yet you come asking to find a religion, while at the same time you think that either God does not exist, or, if He does exist, that He has no care of us. What if the matter is so important that it cannot be found unless it be sought out diligently, and that with all our might? What if the extreme difficulty of finding is an exercise for the mind of the inquirer, leading to the full grasp and diffusion of the discovery? For what is more joyful and familiar to our eyes than the light of day? And yet, after prolonged darkness men cannot suffer or endure it. What is more beneficial than food and drink to a body worn out with illness? But we see that convalescents are restrained and checked so that they may not venture to give themselves over to the full plates of the healthy, and thus use food itself in such a way as to fall back into the disease which was depriving them of it. I am speaking of convalescents. Again, as to the sick themselves, do we not urge them to take something? In this, surely, they would not obey us at so great discomfort if they did not believe that they were going to recover. When, then, will you give yourself to this burdensome and laborious investigation?
When will you venture to impose on yourself as much care and concern as the matter deserves, if you do not believe that the object of your search exists? Rightly, then, has it been set down by the majestic teaching of Catholicism that prospective converts should be convinced of [the value of] faith before all else. CHAPTER 13