As I think I tried to get across in the previous post, “faith” and “reason” should not be viewed as polar opposites that are engaged in some kind of war with each other. Reason and rationality are good things, but they will always, inevitably, be rooted in some sort of relational faith. Simply put, contrary to Immanuel Kant, reason and rationality are inevitably subordinated to faith—not the other way around. Any objective facts one might learn through one’s reason are just that—facts. In order for them to be interpreted and given meaning, one must root them in faith…in something or someone (but that is another topic in and of itself). As Vardy says, “The objective approach makes the individual irrelevant, as nothing is staked on objective facts—they need not affect an individual’s life. We can study science, history, theology, psychology or philosophy and may build up much objective knowledge but this does not really get us very far” (24).
Faith, Reason…and Yankee Stadium?
And so, we would do well to admit the obvious: faith goes beyond reason; it is higher and deeper than human rationality. It does not negate reason or war against it; rather, it is the “playing field” on which reason and rationality play and compete. To equate the two as equal competitors would be a categorical mistake, like equating Yankee Stadium with Babe Ruth. Without Yankee Stadium, Babe Ruth would have never accomplished all the baseball greatness he accomplished. Without Yankee Stadium, he would have just been a fat orphan who never amounted to much. And as great and big as Babe Ruth was, try to use him as a baseball field and play a game on him—it just isn’t going to work! And if you limit your field of knowledge to only the person of Babe Ruth, then you won’t know the game of baseball, the existence of any other ball field, or the greatness of the many other ball players throughout the history of the game.
Faith, Reason…and Mathematics?
But my baseball analogy only goes so far. And since Kierkegaard knew nothing of baseball, perhaps we should move on to precisely what his take on “Faith” is. But let’s first do it in sort of a mathematical equation. First, in regards to Reason: Reason = Facts = Objective Knowledge. Reason takes no consideration of the inherent relationality of human beings, and it assumes that “truth” is only found in “facts.” By contrast, in regards to Faith: Faith = Relationship = Subjective Knowledge. Faith sees relationality as supremely important, and it claims the ultimate “Truth” concerning human beings is found in a person’s personal, subjective relationship with God. Faith, for Kierkegaard challenges a person to stake his life on a claim that reason would reject, namely “that reason itself is limited and there is something bigger, something Eternally True. It is not a single decision, it is a commitment to living and thinking differently, it is the beginning of a relationship, and relationships are essentially subjective. Faith cannot depend on tests or be affected by arguments. It is a subjective state of being” (23-24).
Faith: An Existential Act, not a Rational Proof
And this leads to another thing Kierkegaard emphasizes. The person who says, “I am logically convinced that there is a God,” is not, on the grounds of that statement alone, making a “Christian proclamation.” For to claim that you believe God exists is really nothing more than saying you believe a slug exists, or that London is a real city—you are just making a statement of fact. That is not faith; for the Christian faith is an existential act, not a rational proof or fact. Much like the famous “leap of faith” scene in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, where Indiana Jones has to step out into what he perceives to be a giant chasm, only to find that there was a land bridge there all along, the Christian faith demands that we step out into what our reason cannot sense or understand.
It’s not that the land bridge wasn’t there—it was that Indiana’s limited senses forced him to reason that there was nothing there…and if he had not taken that step, he would have never known that there was something more; his senses and reason would have never been opened up to a whole new, and “more real” reality than he would have remained in, had he not taken that step. And what, by the way, was his reason for taking that step? Was it not his love and the relationship he had with his father? That is precisely what the Christian faith describes and demands: stepping out beyond what our senses can reason out, being urged on by that love and relationality we find in our very souls to a deeper and “more real” reality—that is where Eternal Truth and Life is found.
