On the Relationship between
Philosophy, Religion and Theology
Prof. Horst S e i d l
(Lateran University, Rome)
Today, in Christianity and also in
Buddhism there are tentatives to unify religion and philosophy in a unique
spirituel activity of man. In Occident a so-called "Christian philosophy"
is built up which is not only inspired by Christian Revelation but proceeds
from Christian faith as premis of philosophical arguments. In the background
there is the sceptical motif that philosophy is not able to find solutions to
the actual problems but needs Christian faith to come to positive insights. In
Orient a Buddhist school at Kyoto (Nishida, Nishitani) combines Buddhist
religion with Western philosophies of Fichte, James, Heidegger and others whose
"pious thinking" is directed to some absolute principle, called divine
by the religious men, presenting itself, at the same time, as a philosophical
problem in terms of existential life experience.[1]
Now, it is true that philosophy in
Occident has originated in religious ambiance, as the Presocratic philosophers
show, passing "from myth to logos".[2] However, it is also true that from
this passage an autonomous philosophy has come forth with a new attitude quite
different from the religious and theological. Therefore, in the following pages
I intend to expose philosophy, religion and theology in their diversity in
order to explain, then, their reciprocal relation.
1) Short
characeterisation of Philosophy, Religion and Theology
a) Philosophy
In its specific form philosophy came up
in Ancient Greece, where also, for the first time, the term φιλοσοφία has been introduced. In Orient, in
the doctrine of Buddha philosophy appears as religious wisdom. In Kongzi (Confucius) wisdom is primarily moral, under political and
social aspects, but also the religious one. The same holds for Taoism. In Japan
(in the epoch of Meiji, with the opening to the
West) Western terms have been translated with neologisms, as philosophy with 哲学 tetsugaku, which does not correspond to the Greek φιλοσοφία, "love of wisdom", but signifies
rather – according to the characters – a science of divisions or analysis of concepts. The Chinese use the
same characters 哲学, zhexue, for philosophy, whereas
true wisdom (religious as well as secular) is expressed rather with the characters 智慧 zhihui, or 明智 mingzhi.
Only in Greece philosophy has been
established in the specific sense as contemplating reality on the whole and
looking out to a first principle (ἀρχή) or to first causes (αἱ πρῶται
αἰτίαι) of all things. Such a research, initiated by the Presocratics, is no
longer religious wisdom, referring to the divine sphere and the cultus, but
secular wisdom which endeavors to explain the phenomena of the natural things
and of man by certain first causes, as we can see in Plato and Aristotle.
Aristotle defines his "first
philosophy" (or metaphysics, in later denomination) as wisdom which is
theoretical science and has as object all things in as far as they are, that is
as "being qua being". Departing from this, metaphysics researches the
causes by which things are specifically what they are and arrives at certain
immanent causes in them, and finally at a first transcendent (supernatural)
cause on which the whole nature depends, including man. The essence of things
consists in their immanent causes. The first philosophy offers knowledge which
is no longer practical but "theoretical", having its value in itself,
without any practical utility. This capacity of man testifies that he is self-end
in himself. He may not be instrumentalized for other ends. His theoretical
activities (like in science, arts and religion) do not allow the question for
what they are useful; they are "useful" for man's life itself, for
its quality, perfection and happiness. In other words: Human life is more than
practice, according to the classical tradition, against modern pragmatism. Aristotle
begins his Metaphysics with the words: "All men are striving after knowing
by nature". They enjoy of theoretical knowledge which enriches human life.
b) Religion
Religion, in its original sense,
concerns the relationship between man and God, as also the etymology of the
Latin word "re-ligio" indicates which means: to be "bound
back" to God.
Cicero mentions[3]
also another etymology derives religio from re-legere, namely
re-reading old traditions newed of the
cultus rites of the ancients.
At base
there is the conviction that the soul has come forth from God
"Father" and has her destiny, beyond the death, to return to the
reign of God as to her "home-land". Therefore the cultus essentially
takes care of the veneration of the Divinity (in singular or plural), of the
community with God. To the cultus of God is added the cultus of the ancestors.
The Chinese word for religion,
宗教,zongjiao, leads us in this direction: 宗
means ancestors.
The
religious meaning of religion which regards the relationship of the soul to God
includes the task of reconciliation with God since this relationship has been disturbed
and offended by the sin of mankind. Hence religious cultus is engaged in the
expiation of the human guilt, by sacrifice, in order to gain the benevolence
and grace of God.
The cultus has as scope not only
riconciliation with the Divinity, but aspires also to a perfection in order to
participate at the perfection, even at the divine holiness. "Holiness"
is the perfection of God. Becoming holy means for man also to be dedicated to
God or to be possessed by God.[4]
In favour of the assumption of religion as
natural disposition of the human soul we can take the historical facts of the concrete
cults of the peoples, to which doctrines are added explaining the historical
events of the determined people with the Divinity. Further, moral doctrines
come in with divine commandments.
c) Theology
Theology, in its specific form, has been
developped in Christianity as "sacred doctrine" in order to explain
the content of the Divine Revelation of the Ancient and the New Testament. It
presupposes the faith in the Gospel of Jesus Christ as Savior of mankind from
the guilt of the sin against God. Christian faith has a double meaning:
1. to hold
the Gospel of Jesus Christ to be true,
2. to
entrust in the Divine Authority of Him and his Gospel.
However, Christian faith is based upon the
natural religiosity of the human soul. When Christ preached his Gospel He did
not begin with proofs of the existence of God, but presupposed already men who
prayed to God with religious experience of Him.
The Christian theology of the Church Fathers
intended to explain the Sacred Scriptures in a systematic and scientific way.
Therefore the Fathers applied the Greek metaphysics which offered the method of
distinguishing the supernatural sphere from the natural one. It distinguished
between the principles (mysteries) of the Relvelation and truths which are derived from them and refer to
their natural metaphysical base.
2) Comparison between
Philosophy, Religion and Theology
a) Comparison between
Philosophy and Religion
Comparing philosophy or metaphysics with
religion we can say that they distinguish in their objects as well as in their
method and their human attitude.
Whereas religion is dedicated directly
to God as its object of departure, metaphysics has as its object not God but
the things of this world, including man, that is: "being qua being".
Departing from this, it arives only at the end, by means of demonstrations, at
a first transcendent cause of all things which is, then, identified with the
God venerated in religious cult. One can say that where metaphysics ends
religion has always already begun.
With regard to modern criticism against
the "God of the philosophers", pronounced especially by Pascal, Kierkegaard,
Weischedl, Barth and Küng, I would like to make the following remark. The main
critical argument is expressed in the best form by Kierkegaard,[5] pointing out that he who lives his
religious faith has no need in philosophical proofs of God, and he who lives
without faith cannot even begin a proof, because he does not even know what to
proof. However, this criticism is unjust because metaphysics does not prove the
existence of God but that of a first cause which, then, is identified with God.
This identification is added to the metaphysical proof and does not make part
of it. Hence there is only a metaphysical cause of the philosophers and the God
of the Christian believers. The scholastic theologians have assumed the
metaphysical proofs, not in order to conduct people to religious faith but in
order to defend the faith against the objection of being irrational.
Also the religious method is different
from the philosophical one; indeed religion is based on faith dedicated to a
Divine Authority, whereas philosophy is autonomous in its own field of
knowledge and has as only authority human reason.
Finally, religion and philosophy are
distinguished also by their different human attitude: the religious attitude
aspires at salvation, reconciliation and community with God, whereas the
philosophical attitude aspires at knowledge of the causes of reality.
Besides these differences between religion
and philosophy there are also some common features, above all the realism with
which they are dedicated to the same reality which philosophy recognizes as
transcendent cause and which religion adores as God. Therefore philosophical
knowledge and religious experience complete each other.
Historically seen, there have been
philosophies which either substitute religion as doctrines of salvation (like
ancient stoicism) or critizising religion as superstitious (like the Sophists).
Also the marxist criticism on religion makes religion a question of knowledge:
as if religion in ancient and medieval times was a primitive endeavor to
explain the phenomena of nature, which was, then, substituted by the modern
sciences of nature.[6] To this criticism, however, one can
object that religion is an own disposition of man’s soul which cannot be
derivated from the cognitive disposition on which sciences are based.
For the rest, even modern sceptics like
D. Hume have recognized religion as a natural disposition of man.[7] However, they considered it falsely
only as a psychic phenomenon, taking away the realistic relation to the living
God. The same holds with modern psychology like in W. James[8] and C.G. Jung.[9] According to them religion assumes
in people often psychopathological aspects.
b) Comparison between
Religion and Theology
Religion and Christian theology have in
common the faith in God. One can say that the religious faith of the soul in
God is the natural basis of the sacred theology. But the latter is
distinguished from natural religiosity of man by the Christian faith in the
supernatural Revelation of God delivered in the Bible. Furtheron, theology is
distinguished by the scientific penetration of the content of the Divine
Revelation.
c) Comparison between
Philosophy and Theology
When we compare, finally, philosophy
with theology, we state above all that between both there is the same
difference as between philosophy and religion, because they depart from
different objects and proceed with different methods: philosophy proceeds
without faith, theology with faith. However, philosophy has in common with
theology, as also with religion, the same realism. The first cause at which
metaphysics arrives and the God of religion and of theology are the same
reality. Therefore philosophy or metaphysics can serve as natural foundation of
theology. To give an example: The theology of Christian Revelation teaches that
God presents Himself to mankind in three persons (Father, Son and Holy Spirit)
but nontheless – seen metaphysically – God, in his substantial being is a
simple unity.
3) Critical
Observations on the tentative to unify Philosophy
with Religion and
Theology
1) The tentative
As we mentioned above in the beginning,
there are today tentatives to unify theology with an existentialistic
(heideggerian) philosophy in such a way that they would form two parts of a
unique enterprise. Philosophy, as introductive part, would only raise problems
of the kind of "ultimate questions" about the world and the human
beings, asking what they are, about the sense of life or the final destiny
beyond death, and the like. In front of these questions philosophy cannot give
answer, if not with the aid of religious faith, illuminated by Christian
Revelation, and unifying itself with theology, the conclusive part, which
offers then the solution of the questions.
b) Conclusion
This tentative, however, is open to
criticism. The impossibility of metaphysics to develop itself autnomously, and
the necessity to unite itself with theology, proceeding with religious faith,
results from the error which overcharges metaphysics, from the beginning, with
"ultimate questions" which, however, in my view, are not metaphysical
ones but religious ones or those of "Weltanschauungen" (visions of
the world) which can be resolved only with the aid of religious faith. On the
contrary, traditional metaphysics has had its own questions about the causes of
being of all things and about their essence, and has developped solutions
without the aid of faith. In this way metaphysics presents itself as a
discipline conclusive in itself. Traditional theology, like the thomistic one,
raises its own questions, inspired by the wholy Revelation, without being contaminated
by partly secularised "Weltanschauungen" or by an existentialistic
philosophy. Rather it finds by itself the answer to the questions on the base
of Christian faith.
The tentative of unifying both, metaphysics
and theology, takes away their characteristic of sciences. Indeed, metaphysics is
a science in the field of natural knowledge, and theology is a science in the
field of supernatural knowledge. They proceed, as every science, in their
different fields from theirown questions and arrive to their own solutions.
[1] This topic is developped more in detail by my treatise: Über das Verhältnis von Philosophie und Religion, Hildesheim 2003 (Olms Verlag).
[2] This expression is the title of the
well-known book of Wilhelm Nestle: Vom Mythos zum Logos, Stuttgart 21942.
[3] Cicero, De natura deorum, II 4.
[4] Thomas Aquinas, Summa theol.
II-II-, q. 81 (De religione), explains religion as natural disposition
in all human beings, following a rich tradition which runs back to Plato’s Euthyphro.
He defines religion as habitus moralis with the end of cultus Dei.
[5] See Kierkegaard, Philosophische
Brosamen, Köln 21968; Cap. 3: Eine metaphysische Grille.
[6] See for instance: K. Marx – Fr. Engels, Über
Religion, Berlin 1976 (Dietz Verlag).
[7] David Hume, Dialogues Concerning
Natural Religion, from 1779.
[8] William James, The Varieties of
Religious Experience, 1902.
[9] Besides the remarks in his Grundwerk,
Carl Gustav Jung explains his psychological view on religion in: Antwort an
Hiob, Zürich 1952.