Obstacles to Divine Revelation: God and the Reorientation of Human Reason. By Rolfe King. Pp. x, 281, London and New York: Continuum, 2008, $130.00; and From Hermes to Benedict: Faith and Reason in Modern Catholic Thought. By Aidan Nichols, OP. Pp. viii, 254, $23.99.
The relation between faith and reason has been highly contested in history, and rarely fully understood. While these two authors do not claim to have the final answers regarding this relation, they both write about the relationship. In what follows, we shall cursorily examine each of the above referenced titles.
The first title, Obstacles to Divine Revelation, is written by Rolfe King (Honorary Lecturer at the University of Birmingham), and applies a philosophical approach, incorporating elements of both continental and analytic streams, to the topic of divine revelation, largely contending that revelation is no simple matter – either on the part of humans receiving it, or with respect to God giving it. Over the span of thirteen chapters, King explores various obstacles to revelation, including the inability to directly perceive God, the lack of direct cognition, the eschatological element inherent within revelation, divine hiddenness, and theodicy. Along the way, he also notes that whereas one cannot see the essence of God, they nonetheless can see the glory of God, and makes a distinction between major revelation and discreet revelation, with major revelation referring to a specific revelation intended to affect the vast majority of people around the globe (123), and discreet revelation referring to the giving of revelation to only a few people at first, thereafter to building the number up (128); notably, he seems to think that discreet revelation is the best strategy and is most coherent (138-39).
In an attempt to offer a case of revelation that overcomes all obstacles to the concept, be they modern or Humean, King posits that the narrative power of the incarnation Christ bridges the creator-creation gap, as well as the immanent-transcendent divide (49-52). Notable is his treatment of the problem of evil: he contends that God’s overall plan is to bring people to a deep implicit trust in him (233); while this is a laudable contention, his brief treatment of theodicy totally overlooks the fact that the most glaring difficulties of theodicy are not at all related to humanity, but to the helpless created order instead – hence I critique his anthropocentrism. His acknowledgement that he does not ‘have space for a detailed’ analysis of theodicy makes me wonder why he broached the topic at all, to be frank. This criticism aside, his concluding contentions that God must self-testify in some way to give revelation, and that God has limited options with which to do this, are stimulating thoughts, and worthy of further reflection (cf. 251).
Our second title, From Hermes to Benedict XVI, addresses the theme from a different perspective: that of confessional Catholicism, particularly with respect to modern thought. Adam Nichols is an English Dominican and is sub-prior of Blackfriars, Cambridge. Nichols acknowledges that the question of faith and reason is central to Catholic thought today. Nichols does not claim to be exhaustive in his coverage, selecting instead some able representatives from the English, French, and German-speaking worlds. However, he contends that the people who covered herein set-out the essential terms upon which development of the debate between faith and reason in Catholicism proceeds. Notably, he allows each participant in the proverbial debate speak for themselves.
Within the introduction, Nichols identifies three watershed periods during which historic Catholic thought focused upon the relation of faith and reason: the timeframe of Augustine, the period from the Second Council of Orange through Thomas Aquinas in the thirteenth century, and then finally the Council of Trent in the middle of the sixteenth century. Moving into the nineteenth century, Nichols notes that Georg Hermes onset the modern debate between faith and reason in the Church, incorporating the ‘fundamental project’ of Kant, grounding belief in revelation in practical reason (cf. 30-31, 42-45). Chapters three and four, respectively, discuss the contributions of Anton Günther and Loauis Bautain.
Nichols notes that the magesterium got involved in 1831, with Gregory XVI censuring Hermesian teaching on the relation. Pius IX assumed the pontificate in 1846 and laid the groundwork for the eventual condemnation of Hermes at the First Vatican Council (103). When Leo XIII became pope in 1878, he set-out a definite return to Thomistic views on the relation between faith and reason (cf. 122-125). Nichols chooses Etienne Gilson as exemplar of the Leonine project in the twentieth century, although he does mention Blondel and Balthasar as contributors to this position (chapters eight and nine). However, he contends that the entire debate – today – can be seen to center around John Paul II’s and his encyclical letter, published as the twentieth century drew to its close, Fides et ratio (1998). Herein John Paul II is decidedly Thomistic with respect to the relation between faith and reason. In closing out the volume with a chapter on Benedict XVI, Nichols notes that Benedict prefers to unite philosophy (reason) and theology (faith) in a single intellectual act (228).
In sum, King highlights a new theory of religious truth as part of a wider theory of knowledge which will be of interest to philosophers in both the Anglo-American and continental traditions of philosophy. Nichols is an potent guide through the various accounts of the faith/reason relationship available within Catholicism, and offers an approach which seems well-suited both to the demands of theology and to the philosophical needs of the present time. Upon analysis of these two volumes, Thomas may point the way forward for both Catholic and Protestant reflection on the relation of faith and reason, it may be surmised.
Bradford McCall
Regent University, Virginia Beach, VA