The Prophet Chesterton
As neat a summation of the differences in opinion between Catholics and Fundamentalists in regard to the evolution debate as one could ask for, and one which manages to neatly touch on (among other things) Church authority, the role of sacred tradition, and a key reason why Martin Luther’s false doctrine of sola scritura is…well…false:
…Catholicism, in a sense little understood, stands outside a quarrel like that of Darwinism at Dayton. It stands outside it because it stands all around it, as a house stands all around two incongruous pieces of furniture. It is no sectarian boast to say it is before and after and beyond all these things in all directions. It is impartial in a fight between the Fundamentalist and the theory of the Origin of Species, because it goes back to an origin before that Origin; because it is more fundamental than fundamentalism. It knows where the Bible came from. It also knows where most of the theories of Evolution go to. It knows there were many other Gospels besides the Four Gospels, and that the others were only eliminated by the authority of the Catholic Church. It knows there are many other evolutionary theories besides the Darwinian theory; and that the latter is quite likely to be eliminated by later science. It does not, in the conventional phrase, accept the conclusions of science, for the simple reason that science has not concluded. To conclude is to shut up; and the man of science is not at all likely to shut up. It does not, in the conventional phrase, believe what the Bible says, for the simple reason that the Bible does not say anything. You cannot put a book in the witness-box and ask it what it really means. The Fundamentalist controversy itself destroys Fundamentalism. The Bible by itself cannot be a basis of agreement when it is a cause of disagreement; it cannot be the common ground of Christians when some take it allegorically and some literally. The Catholic refers it to something that can say something, to the living, consistent, and continuous mind of which I have spoken; the highest mind of man guided by God.
Chesterton’s talent for guessing at the future also does not fail him: what could be called “Darwinian” evolutionary theory (that is, the theory as articulated by Darwin himself) has largely been swept away by later scientific inquiry into the inter-relationship and origin of species in the world.
Chesterton makes me feel like an idiot. It’s not that it’s complicated really, but I honestly had to read that twice just to come to grips with it. The more I read your posts the more I see the error of sola scriptura probably to the anger of some of my protestant friends in this community. I should say as much at the next Bible study from my church. To be fair though I believe Methodist don’t believe in Scripture alone either. I think it’s Scripture+Tradition+Reason+Experience = A recipe for more division most likely. I need to seriously pray about all this. I think God is leading me somewhere possibly and I’m afraid to follow.
It’s so hard to be a Christian with 4.3 million denominations (give or take) roaming around. And I grew up in the church. Everytime you post something like this it really gets me to think about my faith and everything else surrounding it. I love the brutal honesty though. I think I’d like Chesterton if I actually sat down to read his books. It would probably change me and we certainly can’t have any of that. All joking aside thanks for posting this I wasn’t expecting something so simple to be so complex and challenging. The people at GS would hate it.
On a unrelated matter I do realize that I’m quite comment happy today. Hope that’s not a problem.
I never mind comments. Besides, there’s been a dearth of them of late, so I welcome the increase in pace!
And you’re a pleasant guest besides.
Proponents of sola scriptura do well to defend the primacy of Scripture, but they err in conflating that idea of primacy with the idea of Scripture being the sole authority. The mere existence of the New Testament canon — which all Christian denominations agree upon, unlike the Old Testament — proves that an extra-Biblical infallible authority must exist; if it did not, then each of those 30,000 or so (the accepted figure) denominations would have every right to promulgate its own New Testament canon.
I entirely agree with Patrick Madrid: if I need to argue against the Biblicality of sola scriptura, the only piece of evidence I need is the Bible — the canon — itself.
To their credit, many Protestant denominations realize this as well, as you note that Methodists tend to do. I say “tend” to because I believe our mutual friend Lansdowne5 is also a self-identified Methodist, and yet is a propnent of sola scriptura. (I could be wrong on the first point, though.)
Yours is a common tension to feel: there are literally thousands of Christian denominations, many which make claims of exclusivity or near-exclusivity. It can be hard to persevere in faith in Christ, and in His promise that the Church shall be for Him a spotless bride, in the knowledge that we are so divided.
But that is what we are called to do: persevere in faith. And to follow where God leads. There’s nothing to fear if it is God that is leading you.
I think you would like Chesterton, Clonemenace. He’s a very accessible, very witty author with a real talent for anticipating where society will go with its trends and fancies.
The above is just one example, and was written in 1926. It’s interesting for two reasons above all: 1) it illustrates the remarkable constancy of Catholic doctrine, even in the face of a changing world, and 2) it did in fact correctly predict that Darwin’s initial theories would be mostly swept away by other theories and avenues of scientific inquiry. That’s not to say that the idea of evolution has been swept away, of course…but the idea of “natural selection” has given way to other hypothesis, for the most part.
If you want to start reading Chesterton, may I recommend his short work Orthodoxy? It’s an excellent primer.