Fideism

The word and the thing

The word comes from the Latin fides, faith, with the suffix -ism designating here an exaggeration: making faith everything, and reason nothing^[6]. The fideist does not deny God; on the contrary, he wants to protect him from the attacks of rationalist philosophy by placing him beyond the reach of all discussion. But by declaring reason incompetent in divine matters, he obtains the opposite of what he seeks: a faith which can be neither explained, nor defended, nor proposed to whoever does not already have it^[7].

"Reason, left to itself, can prove nothing of the fundamental truths: it is faith alone which gives access to God." — Summary of the fideist thesis, from the condemned propositions^[8]

The error in one sentence

To grasp what is at stake, a simple image: faith and reason are like two wings of the same bird, the image is John Paul II's at the threshold of Fides et Ratio^[9]. Rationalism wants to fly with the single wing of reason; fideism, with the single wing of faith. In both cases the bird flies in circles and crashes: a reason without faith believes itself all-powerful and ends up denying mystery; a faith without reason believes itself very pure and ends up unable to say why it believes^[10].

What fideism is not

Three frequent confusions, to be set aside from the start^[11]:

• Believing without understanding everything is not fideism. Every Catholic believes mysteries which surpass reason: the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Real Presence. Fideism does not consist in believing mysteries, but in affirming that reason can establish nothing, not even the existence of God^[12].
• Preferring faith to philosophy is not fideism. Pascal, Newman and many saints exalted faith above systems: they never denied that reason can demonstrate the existence of God^[13].
• The Protestant sola fide is not fideism. Luther and Calvin affirm that man is saved by faith alone, without works: that is a thesis on justification, condemned on other grounds, but distinct from the fideist thesis on the powerlessness of reason^[14]. See the articles Lutheranism and Calvinism.

Traditionalism, the root of fideism

Fideism does not come from nowhere: it is the late and radicalized fruit of philosophical traditionalism, the system which, after the Revolution, made Revelation transmitted by tradition the unique source of all certainty, including truths which natural reason can attain^[15]. Lamennais and his disciples had thus wanted to answer the Enlightenment by turning its weapon around: since individual reason produced the Revolution, they said, only the authority of universal tradition guarantees truth^[16]. Fideism takes up this distrust and pushes it to the limit: not only is individual reason fallible, but it is radically powerless in religious matters^[17]. The history and detailed refutation of this system belong to the article Philosophical Traditionalism; only what sheds light on the two condemnations is kept here^[18].

Chronology of the facts

A philosopher turned priest

Louis-Eugène-Marie Bautain (1796-1867) was first a brilliant academic: professor of philosophy at Strasbourg from 1816, he went through a deep intellectual crisis before the powerlessness of systems, with both the sensualism of Condillac and the eclecticism of Victor Cousin seeming to him incapable of founding certainty^[19]. Ordained a priest in 1828, he kept his chair and taught there a philosophy wholly turned toward faith: having so often seen reason go astray, he ended up declaring it blind^[20]. His teaching drew crowds of students, but worried his bishop: can Catholic youth be formed by teaching them that their reason proves nothing?^[21]

The Bautainian system

Bautain's reasoning starts from a correct observation, that reason wounded by sin often goes astray, to draw a false conclusion from it: the fundamental truths (God, the soul, morality) would be inaccessible to reason left to itself and could be known only by faith, received in an interior experience^[22]. Philosophy would then serve only to prepare the heart, never to demonstrate: faced with an atheist, the Catholic would have no rational argument to offer, only the witness of his faith^[23]. That is exactly the opposite of the tradition of the Church, which always held that the existence of God can be proved: Saint Paul affirms it (Rom 1:19-20), and Vatican I would define it^[24].

Three Roman acts: 1835, 1840, 1844

Rome proceeds by stages, with remarkable patience^[25]. First act, 18 November 1835: after examination of his teaching, Bautain must sign six propositions recalling Catholic doctrine on faith and reason^[26]. Second act: the Roman examination of his Philosophie du christianisme (Paris, 1835) shows that the error persists; on 8 September 1840, he signs six new propositions, "differing but slightly" from the first^[27]. The first two and the fifth say the essential:

"Human reason is able to prove with certitude the existence of God; faith, a heavenly gift, is posterior to revelation, and therefore cannot properly be used against the atheist to prove the existence of God." — First proposition imposed on Bautain, 8 September 1840 (Ignispedia translation)^[28]

"The use of reason precedes faith and, with the help of revelation and grace, leads to it." — Fifth proposition imposed on Bautain, 8 September 1840 (Ignispedia translation)^[29]

These texts are referenced DS 2751-2756 in Denzinger, the official collection of magisterial definitions^[30]. Third act, 26 April 1844: in obedience to the Congregation of Bishops and Regulars, Bautain promises never again to teach that the existence of God, the spirituality and immortality of the soul, the principles of metaphysics and the motives which make Revelation credible would be beyond the reach of unaided reason (DS 2765-2769)^[31]. He kept his word: vicar general of Paris in 1849, professor of moral theology at the Sorbonne in 1853, he died in 1867 reconciled, an esteemed preacher^[32].

A review at the service of tradition

Augustin Bonnetty (1798-1879) founds in 1830 the Annales de philosophie chrétienne, a review meant to show the agreement of science and religion, an excellent project in itself^[33]. But to defend religion against the surrounding rationalism, the review slides down the same slope as Bautain: by dint of wanting to owe everything to Revelation, it ends up refusing to reason unenlightened by faith any capacity to prove God, the spiritual soul and human freedom^[34]. The reasoning meant to be protective: if reason can do nothing without faith, then rationalist attacks cannot reach it. In reality, it surrendered everything: a faith which no reason supports can be proposed to no one^[35].

The four propositions of 11 June 1855

On 11 June 1855, the Congregation of the Index requires Bonnetty to sign four propositions (DS 2811-2814) which re-establish the distinction, and the harmony, of faith and reason, while clearing scholasticism of the suspicion of rationalism^[36]. In them Bonnetty now admits, contrary to his earlier doctrine, that the existence of God, the spirituality of the human soul and the freedom of man can be proved with certainty by reason^[37]. The formula is clear:

"The existence of God, the spirituality of the soul and the freedom of man can be proved with certainty by natural reason." — Substance of the propositions imposed on Bonnetty, 11 June 1855 (Ignispedia translation)^[38]

Bonnetty signs and continues publishing his Annales until his death, in obedience^[39]. The case marks the end of militant fideism in France: fifteen years later, the First Vatican Council would give these disciplinary propositions the force of a universal dogmatic definition^[40].

God can be known by reason: chapter II

On 24 April 1870, the First Vatican Council promulgates the dogmatic constitution Dei Filius on the Catholic faith, the first text of an ecumenical council devoted organically to the relations of faith and reason^[41]. Its chapter II defines that God, the principle and end of all things, can be known with certainty by the natural light of human reason through created things (DS 3004)^[42]. The council relies on Scripture itself:

"Because that which is known of God is manifest in them, for God hath manifested it unto them. For the invisible things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made: his eternal power also and divinity." — Saint Paul, Romans 1:19-20^[43]

"But all men are vain, in whom there is not the knowledge of God, and who by these good things that are seen could not understand him that is, neither by attending to the works have acknowledged who was the workman." — Book of Wisdom, 13:1^[44]

In other words: the pagan who contemplates the world can rise back up to God, and if he does not, he is without excuse. That is the direct condemnation of fideism: to declare reason powerless is to contradict Saint Paul^[45].

Never any disagreement between faith and reason: chapter IV

Chapter IV draws the consequences (DS 3015): there is a twofold order of knowledge, distinct in its principle, reason and faith, but bearing on the same truth, which cannot contradict itself since God is the author of both^[46]. The Latin text is a summit of Catholic theology:

"Not only can faith and reason never be at odds with one another, but they render mutual help to each other: right reason demonstrates the foundations of faith, and, enlightened by its light, cultivates the science of divine things; faith, for its part, frees reason from errors, protects it and enriches it with manifold knowledge." — First Vatican Council, Dei Filius, ch. IV (Ignispedia translation)^[47]

The council adds (DS 3017) that this harmony is not optional: the Church, "far from opposing the cultivation of the human arts and sciences, helps and promotes it in many ways"^[48]. Fideism, which despises reason in the name of faith, is therefore doubly condemned: it is mistaken about reason and it disobeys the missionary impulse of the Church toward intelligence^[49].

The canons: the anathema

As usual, the council accompanies its doctrine with canons striking contrary errors with anathema^[50]. Canon 2 on Revelation (DS 3026) condemns whoever denies that God can be known by natural reason^[51]. The table summarizes the edifice:

What Vatican II confirmed

A century later, the Second Vatican Council takes up the doctrine without changing anything in it: Dei Verbum teaches that man can know God by reason (§ 6) and that faith is the free obedience of the intelligence to Revelation (§ 5)^[52]; Gaudium et Spes quotes Dei Filius to affirm the rightful autonomy of reason and the sciences (§ 59)^[53]. The continuity is total: on faith and reason, the Church says the same thing in 1840, in 1870, in 1965 and in 1998^[54].

A faith which can no longer be proposed to anyone

The first effect of fideism is missionary, and disastrous: if reason proves nothing, apologetics becomes impossible^[55]. Faced with an atheist who asks "why do you believe?", the fideist can only answer "believe first, you will understand afterwards", that is, demand precisely what is in question^[56]. Yet the Church always did the opposite: Saint Peter orders us to be "always ready to give an answer in defence of our hope" to whoever asks (1 Pet 3:15)^[57], and the Catechism recalls that miracles, prophecies and the holiness of the Church are motives of credibility, signs that faith is not a leap into the void^[58]:

"That the submission of our faith might be in accordance with reason, it pleased God that with the interior helps of the Holy Spirit there should be joined exterior proofs of his revelation." — First Vatican Council, Dei Filius, ch. III (Ignispedia translation)^[59]

A faith which can no longer be defended against error

The second effect is doctrinal: a faith without reason is defenceless against false mysticisms and sects^[60]. If no rational check applies to religion, then all "interior experiences" are equal, and the disarmed Catholic can no longer distinguish Revelation from illuminisms^[61]. That is why the Catechism specifies that faith is certain, more certain than all human knowledge, precisely because it rests on the authority of God himself who reveals, not on a blind feeling^[62]:

"Faith is certain, more certain than all human knowledge, because it is founded on the very word of God, who cannot lie." — Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 157^[63]

Three positions face to face

Sola fide is not fideism

The question is often asked, and the answer must be clear: the sola fide of the Reformation is not fideism^[64]. When Luther affirms that man is justified by faith alone, he speaks of the means of salvation, not of the power of reason. A Lutheran can perfectly admit the rational proofs of the existence of God while upholding sola fide; conversely, a nineteenth-century Catholic fideist rejected the proofs while remaining Catholic on justification^[65]. The two errors sometimes accumulate in the same author, but they never merge^[66]. For the Protestant doctrine of justification, see the articles Lutheranism and Calvinism.

Kierkegaard and Barth: Protestant forms of fideism?

On the other hand, certain later Protestant theologies do fall under fideism in the Catholic sense of the term^[67]. Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1855) makes the "leap of faith" a paradox inaccessible to all reason, with Abraham climbing Mount Moriah believing "by virtue of the absurd"^[68]. Karl Barth (1886-1968) digs an infinite gulf between God, "wholly Other", and all natural knowledge, refusing the praeambula fidei of Catholic theology^[69]. The Church sees in this the same error as at Strasbourg in 1840: to cut faith off from reason is to make it unintelligible to the world it must save^[70]. These developments belong to the history of Protestantism, however: they are pointed out here without being treated, so as not to encroach on the neighbouring articles^[71].

Paragraph 52: the parallel censure

On 14 September 1998, John Paul II publishes the encyclical Fides et Ratio on the relations of faith and reason, the first great magisterial text on the subject since Vatican I^[72]. Its chapter V recounts the history of Roman interventions, and paragraph 52 names the error by its name:

"Thus there was a parallel censure: on the one hand, fideism and radical traditionalism, for their distrust of the natural capacities of reason; on the other hand, rationalism and ontologism, since they attributed to natural reason what can be known only in the light of faith." — John Paul II, Fides et Ratio, § 52 (Ignispedia translation)^[73]

The formula is remarkable: fideism is condemned with its opposite, in the same movement, the two symmetrical excesses which break the unity of truth^[74]. And it is in the notes to this paragraph that the encyclical gives the exact references of the nineteenth-century censures: Bautain 1840 (DS 2751-2756), Bautain 1844 (DS 2765-2769), Bonnetty 1855 (DS 2811-2814)^[75]. In other words: in 1998, Rome endorses the whole chain, 1840, 1855, 1870, as a single continuous teaching^[76].

Paragraph 55: the fideism of today

But the encyclical does not only do history: it diagnoses the present. Paragraph 55 warns against "dangers of a resurgence of fideism" in contemporary theology itself^[77]:

"We must also consider the dangers of a resurgence of fideism, which fails to recognize the importance of rational knowledge and philosophical discourse for the understanding of faith, indeed for the very possibility of belief in God." — John Paul II, Fides et Ratio, § 55 (Ignispedia translation)^[78]

John Paul II names two present forms^[79]. First "biblicism", which makes the reading of Scripture "the sole true point of reference", to the contempt of Tradition and of the magisterium confirmed by Vatican II^[80]. Then "latent fideism": the little account taken of speculative theology, the contempt for classical philosophy from which the dogmatic formulations themselves drew their vocabulary^[81]. Every Catholic who neglects Saint Thomas in the name of a "purer" faith should reread these lines: contempt for reason is never progress for faith^[82].

The twofold order of knowledge

To fix ideas simply: God can be known in two ways, which neither oppose nor repeat each other^[83]. By reason, every man can reach certain truths, that God exists, that he is one, that the soul is spiritual, starting from the created world: these are called the preambles of faith^[84]. By faith, man receives in addition what no reason would ever have discovered alone: the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Redemption, the mysteries properly so called^[85]. Reason prepares, accompanies and defends; faith elevates, purifies and completes^[86].

What this changes in practice

This doctrine is not a luxury for theologians: it governs the whole missionary life of the Church^[87]. It is because reason can do something that apologetics makes sense, that one can discuss with an atheist, answer Protestant objections (see the article Doctrinal Relativism for contemporary forms of the refusal of truth), and teach the faith to children with reasons suited to their age^[88]. It is because faith surpasses reason that theology remains a wisdom, not a mere religious philosophy: it contemplates mysteries, it does not manufacture them^[89]. And it is because both serve the same truth that the Catholic never has to choose between being intelligent and being a believer: the most mystical saints, Thomas Aquinas, Teresa of Avila, John of the Cross, were also minds of formidable rigour^[90].

The reader who wants to go deeper will start with the texts themselves: the constitution Dei Filius of Vatican I (24 April 1870) and the encyclical Fides et Ratio of John Paul II (14 September 1998), both accessible on vatican.va, then paragraphs 156 to 159 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church on the motives for believing^[91]. For the traditionalist root from which fideism comes, see the article Philosophical Traditionalism; for the modern errors which are its cousins, the modernism condemned by Pascendi and liberal Catholicism, see the articles Modernism and Condemned Liberal Catholicism^[92].