Pints With Aquinas - 26: What does Athens have to do with Jerusalem?

Episode Date: October 4, 2016

I answer that it must be said that gifts of grace are added to those of nature in such a way that they do not destroy the latter, but rather perfect them; wherefore also the light of faith, which is gratuitously infused into our minds, does not destroy the natural light of cognition, which is in us by nature. For although the natural light of the human mind is insufficient to reveal those truths revealed by faith, yet it is impossible that those things which God has manifested to us by faith should be contrary to those which are evident to us by natural knowledge. In this case one would necessarily be false: and since both kinds of truth are from God, God would be the author of error, a thing which is impossible. Rather, since in imperfect things there is found some imitation of the perfect, though the image is deficient, in those things known by natural reason there are certain similitudes of the truths revealed by faith. Now, as sacred doctrine is founded upon the light of faith, so philosophy depends upon the light of natural reason; wherefore it is impossible that philosophical truths are contrary to those that are of faith; but they are deficient as compared to them. Nevertheless they incorporate some similitudes of those higher truths, and some things that are preparatory for them, just as nature is the preamble to grace   If, however, anything is found in the teachings of the philosophers contrary to faith, this error does not properly belong to philosophy, but is due to an abuse of philosophy owing to the insufficiency of reason. Therefore also it is possible from the principles of philosophy to refute an error of this kind, either by showing it to be altogether impossible, or not to be necessary. For just as those things which are of faith cannot be demonstratively proved, so certain things contrary to them cannot be demonstratively shown to be false, but they can be shown not to be necessary. Thus, in sacred doctrine we are able to make a threefold use of philosophy: 1. First, to demonstrate those truths that are preambles of faith and that have a necessary place in the science of faith. Such are the truths about God that can be proved by natural reason—that God exists, that God is one; such truths about God or about His creatures, subject to philosophical proof, faith presupposes. 2. Secondly, to give a clearer notion, by certain similitudes, of the truths of faith, as Augustine in his book, De Trinitate, employed any comparisons taken from the teachings of the philosophers to aid understanding of the Trinity. 3. In the third place, to resist those who speak against the faith, either by showing that their statements are false, or by showing that they are not necessarily true. --- Read Fides et Ratio here http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_14091998_fides-et-ratio.html --- Follow Emma Fradd here! https://www.facebook.com/EmmaFradd/ SPONSORS EL Investments: https://www.elinvestments.net/pints Exodus 90: https://exodus90.com/mattfradd/  Hallow: http://hallow.app/mattfradd  STRIVE: https://www.strive21.com/  GIVING Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/mattfradd This show (and all the plans we have in store) wouldn't be possible without you. I can't thank those of you who support me enough. Seriously! Thanks for essentially being a co-producer coproducer of the show. LINKS Website: https://pintswithaquinas.com/ Merch: https://teespring.com/stores/matt-fradd FREE 21 Day Detox From Porn Course: https://www.strive21.com/ SOCIAL Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mattfradd Twitter: https://twitter.com/mattfradd Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mattfradd MY BOOKS  Does God Exist: https://www.amazon.com/Does-God-Exist-Socratic-Dialogue-ebook/dp/B081ZGYJW3/ref=sr_1_9?dchild=1&keywords=fradd&qid=1586377974&sr=8-9 Marian Consecration With Aquinas: https://www.amazon.com/Marian-Consecration-Aquinas-Growing-Closer-ebook/dp/B083XRQMTF/ref=sr_1_4?dchild=1&keywords=fradd&qid=1586379026&sr=8-4 The Porn Myth: https://www.ignatius.com/The-Porn-Myth-P1985.aspx CONTACT Book me to speak: https://www.mattfradd.com/speakerrequestform

Welcome to Pints with Aquinas, episode 26. I'm Matt Fradd. If you could sit down with St. Thomas Aquinas over a pint of beer and ask him any one question, what would it be? In today's episode, we'll ask St. Thomas the question, what has Athens to do with Jerusalem? welcome back to pints with aquinas this is the show where you and i pull up a bar stall next to the angelic doctor and discuss theology and philosophy and those are the two topics that we'll be addressing today. Why do we need philosophy if we have divine revelation? We'll speak a little bit about that. But before we get underway, I wanted to let you know that I've decided, thanks to my sister, to play one of her new songs at the end of this episode. So many of you have written to me and said, what's that fantastic music that you play at the beginning and end of Pints with Aquinas? Well,

it's my sister, Emma Fradd. Look her up. But she's just released a new song and I think it's really cool. And she said that I could play it for y'all. So instead of the typical outro music that you're accustomed to hearing, you'll be hearing that. So look forward to that. Okay, what has Athens to do with Jerusalem? Now, unless you've studied theology or philosophy, that might not make a lot of sense to you. Well, that was a question that came from Tertullian,

who was an ecclesiastical writer in the second and third century. And by that question, he meant, what does Greek thought and philosophy have to do with divine revelation? I mean, if we have divine revelation, why do we need philosophy? What do the two have to do with each other? So, we're really talking about faith and reason, theology and philosophy. And throughout the history of, well, the human race, ever since man believed he received divine revelation, I suppose, there's been this question, this tension, you know, is truth one? Is there a unicity to truth? Or do faith and theology and philosophy, is that just, does that have to do

with two different realms, you know? Well, maybe that's a question that sounds like it has a rather obvious answer. You might be listening to this thinking, oh, I didn't know people thought that. Of course, truth is one. Truth can't contradict truth. Well, if you think that, that's largely due to St. Thomas Aquinas, because prior to him, there were some serious questions as to whether or not truth was one. For example, there was an Arabic philosopher by the name of Averroes who wrote many commentaries on Aristotle, and Aquinas benefited from them greatly. He actually refers to Averroes in the Summa as the commentator. But Averroes held to this idea

that what is true in philosophy may not be true in theology, and what is true in theology may not be true in philosophy. And Thomas says that this is nonsense. So, here's what I'll quote from. It's St. Thomas' commentary on Boethius' work De Trinitate. It comes from question 2, article 3. And Aquinas is responding to the question, is it permissible to use philosophical reasoning and authorities in the science of faith whose object is God? Aquinas says this, I answer that it must be said that gifts of grace are added to those of nature in such a way that they do not destroy the latter, but rather perfect them.

that they do not destroy the latter, but rather perfect them. Wherefore also the light of faith, which is gratuitously infused into our minds, does not destroy the natural light of cognition, which is in us by nature. For although the natural light of the human mind is insufficient to reveal those truths revealed by faith, yet it is impossible that those things which God has manifested to us by faith Let me read that again, okay? Just that last line because it's key. that those things which God has manifested to us by faith should be contrary to those which are evident to us by natural knowledge. In other words, faith cannot contradict science. If it does, you've got like bad faith or bad science. And this isn't something that was just talked about, you know, in Tertullian's day or Averroes' day. It's something that's even advocated by

contemporary atheist Stephen Jay Gould, who talks about NOMA, which stands for non-overlapping magisteria, right? The idea that science and religion each represent different areas of inquiry, fact versus values, but the two aren't one, that sort of thing. Aquinas continues, in this case, one would necessarily be false. And since both kinds of truth are from God, that's the key, God would be the author of error. All right, you see what he's saying? So, if faith could contradict reason, if science could contradict divine revelation or vice versa, and both, you know, be legitimate sources of inquiry, and they both come from the same source, then God would be the author of error. thing which is impossible. Rather, since in imperfect things there is found some imitation of the perfect, though the image is deficient, in those things known by natural reason, there are certain similitudes of the truths revealed by faith.

Now, as sacred doctrine is founded upon the light of faith, so philosophy depends upon the light of natural reason. Wherefore, it is impossible that philosophical truths are contrary to those that are of faith, but they are deficient as compared to them. Nevertheless, they incorporate some similitudes of those higher truths and some things that are preparatory for them, just as nature is the preamble to grace. If, however, anything is found in the teachings of the philosophers contrary to faith, this error does not properly belong to philosophy, but is due to an abuse of philosophy, owing to the insufficiency of reason. Okay. In other words, if what we know by divine revelation contradicts what some philosopher has said, or what we think we know by natural reason, then the problem isn't philosophy per se, but it is rather the abuse of philosophy,

which is owing to the insufficiency of reason, Aquinas says. He continues, there also it is possible from the principles of philosophy to refute an error of this kind, either by showing it to be altogether impossible or not to be necessary. For just as those things which are of faith cannot be demonstratively proved, such as the Trinity, etc., so certain things contrary to them cannot be demonstratively shown to be false, but they can be shown not to be necessary. And then Aquinas says, thus in sacred doctrine we are able to make a threefold use of philosophy. So if you're one of these people who likes, you know, points in a presentation, here are three points that Aquinas wants to give us. Okay. In sacred doctrine, we are able to make a threefold use of philosophy. What are those three things? Well, we'll get to those three things right after this short break.

those three things right after this short break. My name is Gomer and I'm the co-host of Catching Foxes. I would like to tell you about something more important than my podcast. Pints with Aquinas. Matt Fradd actually wrote a book on 50 plus deep thoughts from the angelic doctor. Pints with Aquinas. Here's the deal. Beer is easily lovable, but medieval monastic philosophers, they can be quite intimidating. Yet in this short pithy book, and I don't use that word often. In fact, I never use the word pithy, but I'm going to use it here and you're going to agree with me. Matt Fradd made the greatest mind in the history of the church

as easily accessible as your favorite beer. You'll laugh, you'll cry, well, you won't cry, but you'll laugh, and you'll discover that this old school philosopher's wisdom is just as relevant today as it was back then. So do yourself a favor. Get a copy of this enlightening, pithy little book

from Amazon right now. And when it arrives, pour yourself a frothy pint and dig in. You'll be glad you did. That always makes me laugh. Thanks for that, if you haven't listened to Catching Foxes, I'd suggest downloading it and listening to it now. It's a fantastic conversation that Gomer and Luke have every week. All right, back to the show. Here are the three things that St. Thomas talks about, okay, when saying what can philosophy do to aid theology? Well, here's the first one. He says, first to demonstrate those truths that are preambles of faith and that have a necessary place in the science of faith. Such are truths about God that can be proved by natural reason, that God exists, that God is one. Such truths

about God or about his creatures, subject philosophical proof, faith presupposes. So, Aquinas is saying, here's one way that philosophy can aid theology or aid faith. Well, reason can show, Aquinas thinks, that God exists wholly apart from faith. If you're interested in learning more about that, check out episode 19, which is called Give Me an Argument for the Existence of God, if you'd like to learn more about Aquinas' first argument for the existence of God. But if we can show by philosophy that God exists, then it becomes a whole lot more probable that God reveals or has revealed himself in a special way to humanity. Because, I mean, it's a big leap from atheism to theism, but it's not such a great leap

from theism to the belief that God has revealed himself. So, if philosophy can help someone come to believe that God exists, then all of a sudden Christianity doesn't look as ridiculous as it did when one did not even accept the existence of God. Here's the second reason Aquinas gives. Secondly, to give a clearer notion by certain similitudes of the truths of faith, as Augustine in his book De Trinitate employed any comparisons taken from the teachings of the philosophers to aid understanding of the Trinity. Okay? So, the Trinity is a truth of faith. All right? It's something that we could not know about unless it was first revealed to us by God. But Augustine is saying that we can use philosophy to help people understand these things that we can only know via divine revelation.

Let me give you a little example here, okay, when it comes to the Trinity. How might we try to begin explaining the Trinity? Well, it's obviously a very difficult thing to do, and I think most analogies that we use, like ice, water, steam, the three-leaf clover, I think these are usually problematic. But here's a way I do it. I was chatting with my son about the Trinity. And I said, okay, Liam, you see that statue over there? And he said, yes. I said, that statue is a being, right? It exists. It's a being. But that statue, even though it's a being, is zero persons, right? It is no person. Okay. You, Liam, you are also a being like that statue, but you are a being, right,

who is also a person. God is being, and this God is three persons. Now, that doesn't get anywhere maybe close to helping convince somebody about the truth of the Trinity, but if someone has already begun to accept divine revelation, then you can use little sort of analogies like that or philosophical explanations to help people have greater insights into the truth, which has been revealed by divine revelation. Here's the third point Aquinas makes. In the third place, to resist those who speak against the faith, either by showing that their statements are false or by showing that they are not necessarily true. Okay, so this is another way in which philosophy can aid theology, all right? And of course, we've discussed a lot of these

issues throughout the whole series of pints with Aquinas, haven't we? For example, in episode 13, we responded to the issue, does evil disprove the existence of God? And how do we do that? Well, we did that by giving a philosophical argument. We did that by showing that the argument put forward by atheists to show that God doesn't exist due to evil doesn't work. All right. So, that's just an example. We could use many more of showing how we can use philosophy, as Aquinas says. He says, either by showing that their statements are false or by showing that they are not necessarily true. If you would like to learn more, I would recommend two things. One, read the encyclical Fides et Ratio by John Paul II. Faith and Reason.

That's what Fides et Ratio means in Latin. Excellent. I'll put a link in the description of the podcast so you can click through and read it if you want. And also, as always, I put Thomas' words in the description of every podcast. So you can go back and read Thomas for yourself in what he has to say in the excerpt we just read. Okay, well, that does it for today. Thanks for listening to Pines with Aquinas. Remember to rate the show. That would be cool.

All right, are you ready to rock out to my sister's brand new song? It's called Perhaps I Killed a Tiny Stunt Double. So, you know, self-explanatory probably, or not. Anyway, enjoy the song. Look her up. Emma Fradd, talk to you next week. They never found the body They never found the body I wish I never went To you for the more I wanted She'll knife a sergeant

When time permits I'm waiting Tiny stunt double gets all the boys Navigating while bleeding out Never happen, I'm full of doubt Tiny stunt Don't forget, soul boys, soul boys I love my imagination more than you I wish, I wish

If I wasn't, if I wasn't late They never found the body I wish, I wish, if I wasn't, if I wasn't ready I feel not ready They never found the body I wish, I wish, if I wasn't, if I wasn't ready They never found the body I wish, I wish, if I wasn't, if I wasn't ready

I'd feel the pain They never found the body I wish, I wish, if I wasn't, if I wasn't ready I wish, I wish, if I wasn't, if I wasn't ready I'd feel naïve I wish, I wish, if I wasn't, if I wasn't ready They never found the body I wish, I wish, if I wasn't, if I wasn't ready They never found the body I wish, I wish, if I wasn't, if I wasn't ready

I feel nothing They never found the body They never found the body They never found the body They never found the body They never found the body They never found the body They never found the body They never found the body They never found the body They never found the body

They never found the body They never found the body They never found the body They never found the body They have done for me They have done for me