(Fides et Ratio, in other words Faith and Reason. It could be science and religion, or could be the mind and the heart. I wrote this years ago as a ‘pure thoughts’ on one of PJP II’s encyclical letter Fides Et Ratio.)
Their was once a story of a meandering Arabian who was having a respite in his tent, when a man happened to ask him. The man asked, “how do you prove that God exist?” The Arab blatantly answered, “how do I know that a camel or a man passed by my tent last night?”
Obviously what does this peculiar man (Arabian) mean? – it is but a rational notion of the existence of God. That God’s existence is overshadowed in the splendor and majesty of his creations.
Now, what is the noble connection between rational proof and faith? Let me quote for sometime the philosophical ideology of Rev. Fr. Michael Moga as has been clearly stated in his book, In Search of True Religion. I quote…
To affirm that there must be a supreme cause to account for the order in the world does not mean that I have faith, that I commit myself to this supreme cause in trust, obedience and love. Rather, the conclusion of these proofs is a calm, intellectual affirmation that, based in reason, a transcendent cause must exist.1
Clear and bright enough, that reason is not a vain word when we call for the proof of the existence of God. Natural Theology emphasizes that we can know God in two ways; ‘natural’ and ‘supernatural’. The natural knowledge of God gives weight to the “light of reason” (lumen rationes), while the supernatural on the “light of faith”(lumen fedei) and the “beatific vision” (lumen gloriae). By virtue of escalation, the light of reason appears at the last (not bad), primed by the beatific vision and seconded by the light of faith. Further, according to Pope John Paul II in his encyclical Fedis et Ratio, faith and reason are like two wings which enables, say for example, a dove to hover and be in balance while on its wings. Such so, that we cannot stifle any of them in search of God. We cannot put off the light of faith to give way for the light of reason to shine, and vice versa. We cannot put the other into inertness in order for the other to subsist. Rather, without the other (or any of them), it is an absurd attempt to know God. We both need faith and reason to know God. Reason needs faith to withstand the awe in standing in front of the Supreme Being. The same is through with faith, it needs reason acknowledge faith in logical sense.
I believe in the indissoluble and in separable marriage of faith and reason, or, of rational proof and faith. Since, after all, what is reason for but to know and to love God (according to the natural theology), as it is the purpose of man’s being. I believe that the purpose of reason is to remind us that we are indebted to know, to acknowledge and love Somebody. Else, we have nothing to be proud of in this world but a demeaning level of beasts. Though reason works in a limited fashion, as the agent is evidently limited, faith, on the other hand, strikes the other side of the balance to perpetuate their noble purpose – to know and to love God.
At my end, I would like to quote Soren Kierkegaard when he said, that the fullness of my (ones) being is defined by the way I stand before God.
I was caught in surprise when, upon arriving at the place were we are suppose to have our weekly “Buklod” (a sort of prayer meeting) meeting, our Buklod coordinator was already conducting her or their own “buklod” meeting themselves; together with her tong – 8 chums.
