{"agent_id":"anselm","agent_name":"Anselm of Canterbury","slug":"faith-and-reason","label":"Faith and reason: are arguments such as the Proslogion proof addressed to the believer who already trusts in God, or do they aim to compel the unbeliever?","topic":"Faith and reason","question":"Are arguments such as the Proslogion proof addressed to the believer who already trusts in God, or do they aim to compel the unbeliever?","position":"Faith and reason are not opposed but ordered. The right order, taught by Augustine and accepted by me, is that faith comes first — *tempore auctoritas prior est, re autem ratio prior* (in the order of time authority comes first, but in the order of reality reason is prior). Within faith, reason has two distinguishable but related functions. For the believer, reason articulates the *intellectus fidei*, the understanding of what is already held — making explicit what is believed, drawing out its consistency, deepening the believer's grasp. For the unbeliever, reason can function apologetically: certain truths held by faith can be defended by *rationes necessariae* — necessary reasons that aim at compelling reasoned assent. This is the explicit aim of *Cur Deus Homo*, which argues for the necessity of the incarnation \"as if I had heard nothing of Christ — that is, that it is impossible for any man to be saved apart from Him.\" The same argument that strengthens the believer can address the unbeliever, because the necessary reasons are reasons, not partisan badges.","paragraphs":[[{"t":"Faith and reason are not opposed but ordered.","n":[]},{"t":"The right order, taught by Augustine and accepted by me, is that faith comes first — *tempore auctoritas prior est, re autem ratio prior* (in the order of time authority comes first, but in the order of reality reason is prior).","n":[]},{"t":"Within faith, reason has two distinguishable but related functions.","n":[]}],[{"t":"For the believer, reason articulates the *intellectus fidei*, the understanding of what is already held — making explicit what is believed, drawing out its consistency, deepening the believer's grasp.","n":[]},{"t":"For the unbeliever, reason can function apologetically: certain truths held by faith can be defended by *rationes necessariae* — necessary reasons that aim at compelling reasoned assent.","n":[]}],[{"t":"This is the explicit aim of *Cur Deus Homo*, which argues for the necessity of the incarnation \"as if I had heard nothing of Christ — that is, that it is impossible for any man to be saved apart from Him.\" The same argument that strengthens the believer can address the unbeliever, because the necessary reasons are reasons, not partisan badges.","n":[1,2,3]}]],"texts":"*Proslogion* 1 (the *credo ut intelligam* formulation developed from Augustine's *Sermon* 118 on Isaiah 7:9); *Monologion* preface (the *sola ratione* programme); *Cur Deus Homo* I.1-3 (the methodological setup of arguing \"as if I had heard nothing of Christ\"); *Letter to Fulco* (Epistle 136). Reception: Augustine's *Sermon* 43 (\"believe that you may understand\") and *On Order* 2.9.26 (the *re* vs *tempore* priority of reason and authority) as the patristic background; Karl Barth's *Fides Quaerens Intellectum* (1931, the strong fideist reading); F. S. Schmitt's critical editions and introductory studies as the textual basis for resisting Barth; J. McIntyre's *St. Anselm and His Critics* (1954); A. Antweiler's 1933 study pressing the in-house-Christian interpretation; the modern Catholic reception in Eleonore Stump, Brian Davies, and others.","works":["*Proslogion* 1 (the *credo ut intelligam* formulation developed from Augustine's *Sermon* 118 on Isaiah 7:9)","*Monologion* preface (the *sola ratione* programme)","*Cur Deus Homo* I.1-3 (the methodological setup of arguing \"as if I had heard nothing of Christ\")","*Letter to Fulco* (Epistle 136)"],"reception":"Augustine's *Sermon* 43 (\"believe that you may understand\") and *On Order* 2.9.26 (the *re* vs *tempore* priority of reason and authority) as the patristic background; Karl Barth's *Fides Quaerens Intellectum* (1931, the strong fideist reading); F. S. Schmitt's critical editions and introductory studies as the textual basis for resisting Barth; J. McIntyre's *St. Anselm and His Critics* (1954); A. Antweiler's 1933 study pressing the in-house-Christian interpretation; the modern Catholic reception in Eleonore Stump, Brian Davies, and others.","status":"Defended in *Proslogion* 1, *Monologion* preface, *Cur Deus Homo* I.1-3, and explicitly against Karl Barth's twentieth-century deflationary reading. The *credo ut intelligam* formula does not say that reason is suspended; it says that faith is the precondition of the kind of understanding I pursue. The same arguments — the ontological argument of *Proslogion* 2, the necessity-of- incarnation argument of *Cur Deus Homo*, the necessary-being arguments of *Monologion* 1-4 — function differently for different audiences without ceasing to be the same arguments. I never thought that the truths of faith could be discovered from reason alone, nor that they could be dispensed with once discovered. I do think that reason can go further within faith than the antidialecticians of my day allowed.","era":"1033-1109","discipline":"Philosophy, Theology","refs":[{"n":1,"work":"Proslogium, Monologium, Gaunilo's In Behalf of the Fool, and Cur Deus Homo","page":"","canonical":"","quote":"How, along with our other weaknesses, he does not partake of our ignorance 260 XIV. How his death outweighs the number and greatness of our sins 261 XV. How his death removes even the sins of his murderers 263 XVI. How God took that man from a sinful substance, and yet without sin; and of the salvation of Adam and Eve 265 XVII.","label":"Proslogium, Monologium, Gaunilo's In Behalf of the Fool, and Cur Deus Homo"},{"n":2,"work":"Proslogium, Monologium, Gaunilo's In Behalf of the Fool, and Cur Deus Homo","page":"","canonical":"","quote":"Boso. You can speak so briefly with regard to these things, each in its place, that we may both have all that is requisite for the present object, and what remains to be said we can put off to another time. CUR DEUS HOMO. l8l Anselm.","label":"Proslogium, Monologium, Gaunilo's In Behalf of the Fool, and Cur Deus Homo"},{"n":3,"work":"Proslogium, Monologium, Gaunilo's In Behalf of the Fool, and Cur Deus Homo","page":"","canonical":"","quote":"Boso. But this simple fact, that God allows him to be so treated, even if he were willing, does not seem becoming for such a Father in respect to such a Son. Anselm. Yes, it is of all things most proper that such a Father should acquiesce with such a Son in his desire, if it be praiseworthy as relates to the honor of God, and useful for man's salvation, which would not otherwise be effected. Boso.","label":"Proslogium, Monologium, Gaunilo's In Behalf of the Fool, and Cur Deus Homo"}],"answer":null,"siblings":[{"slug":"the-ontological-argument","label":"The ontological argument: does the conception of God as that than which nothing greater can be thought entail God's existence?"},{"slug":"the-satisfaction-theory-of-atonement","label":"The satisfaction theory of atonement: why was it necessary that God become man to redeem human sin?"},{"slug":"necessary-reasons-versus-fitting-reasons","label":"Necessary reasons versus fitting reasons: when does a theological argument demonstrate, and when does it merely show consistency?"}]}