Abstract
In the never-ending discussion and output of literature concerning the nature of faith as a response to the revelation of God in the Old and the New Testaments, two sharply opposed concepts of faith have appeared and come to dominate the discussion. The scholastic textbooks of theology have, in their logically precise manner, crystallized the opposition under the names of “trusting faith” (fides f iducialis) and “assenting faith” (fides ut assensus). In trusting faith, confidence in God holds the first place; dogmatic truth is secondary. This faith is first of all affective, an act of the will, a personal commitment to a person. It is the confidence that we see agian and again in the New Testament, which Our Lord demands before He works the miracle.1
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
See, for example, Mt 9: 2, 20–22, 27–30; but these are only a few among many. For a detailed study, see Edward D.O’Connor, C.S.C., Faith in the Synoptic Gospels, Notre Dame, 1961.
See, for example, Mk 16: 15–16 and Lk 8: 12. Examples of this kind of faith are rarer in the Synoptics. But they are found with great frequency in John and in Acts. See, for example, John I: 48–50, 2: 22, 3: 32–34, 5: 24, 25, 31–33, etc. and Acts 2: 41, 3: 22–23 4: 4, 8: 12–14, 35–37, ect.
In the New Testament, see, for example, Rom 1o: 9, I Cor 15: I-17, Phil 2: II, Hebr II: 6, John 8: 24, 17: 20–23, 20: 31, I John 4: 15, 5: 5, etc. For early Symbols, see DB 16, 18, 39, 4o, etc. Vatican I is quite clear: DB 1789, 1791, 1792, 1814, 1815. (If there be any reader unaware of the meaning of DB, it refers to any of the editions of Denzinger-Barnwart’s Enchiridion symbolorum.)
This has led theologians to insist on the necessity of an explicit belief in the propositions that God exists and that He rewards and punishes, according to Hebrews 11: 6, as the minimum essential for salvation. Others go further and require an explicit belief — by, if necessary, a special revelation — in the Trinity and in the Incarnation. But it is possible that some distinction can be made between the state of a Christian and the state of a non-Christian; that a non-propositional mode of assent in an adult non-Christian may suffice to replace the propositional mode of assent demanded of an adult Christian. This will be considered in Chapter VII.
See the decree on justification by the Council of Trent (DB 798, 8o8, 822–825, 837, 838). The emphasis of the Council was especially against trusting faith as carrying with itself an assurance of justification and salvation. But this does not mean that every form of trust is to be excluded from the Catholic conception of faith.
Roger Aubert, Le problème de l’acte de fol,3rd ed., Louvain, 1958, 223–787.
See S. Harent, S.J., Dictionnaire de théologie catholique (DTC), t. VI, coll. 98–122, 469–512, and Aubert, op. cit. Although there is some overlapping, Aubert supplements the historical treatment by Harent and brings it nearly up to date.
John L. Murphy, in “Two Theories of Faith,” The American Ecclesiastical Review,CXLVII, 1962, 31, points out this turning toward the Thomist view, at least as regards the essential point of the psychological effect of divine faith, and gives a few recent references (1948–1960) as supporting evidence. It is particularly interesting to note that this trend exists among Jesuits. The names of De la Taille, Hocedez, Malavez, De Broglie, Alf aro, and Vignon need only be mentioned in this connection.
DB 797–798, 814–817, 819.
There are many sources to draw from to see this doctrine. It seems unnecessary to give a wealth of references. One can consult Harent’s Foi in the DTC, t. VI, coll. 55–514; Straub’s De analys ifidei,Innsbruck, 3922, and Aubert’s Le Problème de l’acte de foi for a general view. Here it will be sufficient to point out only some instances.
Aubert, Le problème,234, n. 14; Murphy, “Two Theories of Faith,” 27; Harent, “Foi,” DTC, VI, 142–144.
Aubert, Ibid., 232; Murphy, loc. cit.
Aubert, Ibid.,z33; L. Molina, Concordia,q. 14, a. 13, disp. 38, ad 3.
Ludovicus Lercher, S.J. — F. Schlagenhaufen, S.J. Institutiones theologiae dogmaticae,5th ed., Barcelona, 1951, I, 399; F. Stentrup, Praelectiones dogmiticae: de tide,Innsbruck, 1890, 143–145, 205–225; etc., etc.
I have passed over the role of the judgment of credentity (of the moral obligation to believe) in this brief account. It seems to introduce an unnecessary complication at this point. Let it suffice to say that this judgment of credentity should not require grace in the system which is being considered, since it can still lead to an act of merely natural faith. It will require grace in the Thomist system, since it there refers, not to a faith specified by the same formal object as natural faith, but to a faith supernaturally specified by the Prima Veritas as such.
Ludovicus Billot, De virtutibus infusis,4th ed., Rome, 1928; see also Aubert, Le problème,241-255.
Maurice Blondel, L’Action,Paris, 1893.
P. Ambrose Gardeil, O.P., La crédibilité et l’apologétique, 2nd ed., Paris, 1912.
Pierre Rousselot, S.J., “Les yeux de la foi,” Recherches de science religieuse, I, 1910, 241–259, 444–475.
Max Scheler, Der Formalismus in der Ethik und die materiale Wertethik,Halle, 1916, and Vom Ewigen im Menschen,Leipzig, 1921.
Karl Adam, Glaube und Glaubenswissenschaft im Katholizismus,Rottenburg, 1923. 81 This “school” of theologians is described in Aubert’s Le problème,585–615.
Jean Mouroux, I believe,trans. by Michiel Turner, New York, 1959.
See my Inquiry Into Being Chicago, 1965, 149–154, and The Christian Intellect and the Mystery of Being The Hague, 1966, 74–90.
Jacques Maritain, Existence and the Existent, trans. by G. Phelan and L. Galantière, Garden City, 1956, 74.
Maritain, The Degrees of Knowledge,trans. directed by G. Phelan, New York, 1959 436-439.
See, for example, Position et approches concrètes du mystère ontologique,Paris, 1949, 57–62; The Mystery of Being,Chicago, 1951, I, 1979; Man Against Mass Society,Chicago, 1952, 67f.
See, for the first, Journal métaphysique,Paris, 1935, 328 and Position et approches,56–59; and for the second see Journal métaphysique,315f. and Position et approches,56f.
Metaphysical JournalChicago, 1952, Author’s Preface to the English Edition, p. viii; Journal métaphysique 355f.; Position et approches56f.
The Art of Loving,New Yotk, 1956 8 f.
See The Spiritual Canticle,first redaction, XI, 6 in The Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross,transi. by E. A. Peers, London, 1953, II, 65.
Denz. 1794: Ad solam enim catholicam Ecclesiam ea pertinent omnia, quae ad evidentem fidei christianae credibilitatem tam multa et tam mira divinitus sunt disposita. Quin etiam Ecclesia per se ipsa, ob suam nempe admirabilem propagationem, eximiam sanctitatem et inexhaustam in omnibus banis foecunditatem, ob catholicam unitatem invictamque stabilitatem magnum quoddam et perpetuum est motivum credibilitatis et divinae suae legationis testimonium irrefragabile.
Denz. 1795:… praeter ea, ad quae naturalis ratio pertingere potest, credenda nobis proponuntur mysteria in Deo abscondita, quae, nisi revelata divinitus, innotescere non possunt.
Denz. 1799:…fides vero rationem ab erroribus liberet ac tueatur eamque multiplici cognitione instruat.
Denz. 1791:… nemo tarnen “evangelicae praedicationi consentire” potest, sicut oportet ad salutem consequendam, “absque illuminatione et inspirations Spiritus Sancti, qui dat omnibus suavitatem in consentiendo et credendo veritati.”
B. Beraza, S.J., De gratia Christi,Bilbao, 1929, n. 434.
R. Lombardi, S.J., The Salvation of the Unbeliever, London, 1956, 240.
De Gratia II, Lib, IV, c. XV; De peccatis,disp. 2, sect. 8.
Schiffini, De gratia Divina,Friburg, 1901, 549, n. citation from St. Thomas, Ad Rom.,c. Io, lect. 3. See also I—II, 112, 2, C.
A. Gardeil, O. P., La crédibilité et l’apologetique, Paris, 1912.
M. M. Labourdette and M. J. Nicholas, O. P., “Théologie de l’apostolat missionaire,” Revue Thomiste 46, 1946, 575–602. These authors, however, take note of the ideas of Maritain which will be considered below, and suggest what I hope to show, that Maritain here has achieved a significant development in Thomist thought on his problem.
Y. Congar, O.P., “Salvation of the non-Catholic.” Blackfriars 38, 1957, 290–300.
Y. Cougar, op. cit.,292–293.
Maritain, The Range of Reason,New York, 1952, 66–85.
C. Journet, l’Église du verbe incarné,Paris, 1951, II, 792–795.
One should also note the most interesting presentation by P. A. Liege, O. P., “Le salut des autres,” Lumiere et Vie 18, 1954, 741–769, similar in many respects to those of Maritain and Journet.
A similar view has recently been expressed by Fr. M. Eminyan, S. J., in The Theology of Salvation, Boston, 1960, 197–204.
Dialogue with Trypho,chapter 8. Translation from The Ante-Nicene Fathers,Edinburgh, I, 198.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1970 Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, Netherlands
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sikora, J.J. (1970). Faith and Intersubjectivity. In: Theological Reflections of a Christian Philosopher. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-9576-8_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-9576-8_3
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-011-8726-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-011-9576-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive