This blog is my attempt to construct “A Catholic theology for the 21st century,” as the tagline indicates. On this page, I will explain what I mean by this phrase and describe my theological method, which I call Understanding Seeking Faith. I will also describe my intended audience and say a bit about myself as the author.
Let’s begin with the word “theology,” which I define generally as the discipline of applying reason to faith. Theology is the task of constructing a rational understanding of the beliefs, morals, and rituals of a particular religion from a perspective of commitment to that religion. And when I say “a theology,” I am referring to one specific product of this discipline. For example, we can say that Saints Augustine, Anselm, and Thomas Aquinas all practiced the general discipline of theology and that each saint produced his own unique theology.
When I say “Catholic,” I am of course referring to Catholicism, the religion of the Catholic Church. So to construct “a Catholic theology” is to construct a rational understanding of the beliefs, morals, and rituals of Catholicism from a perspective of commitment to the faith of the Catholic Church. While the truth of Catholicism is unitary and unchanging, Catholic theologies are as numerous as the theologians who produce them. So mine is just one new rational understanding among the wealth of theologies and thus should not be taken as comprehensive or definitive of the Catholic faith.
Now what about “for the 21st century?” By this phrase, I mean to emphasize two important challenges facing every 21st century theologian: (1) sorting out the proper relationship between religion and science, and (2) sorting out the proper relationships between different religions. So “a Catholic theology for the 21st century,” then, is one that deals with these two challenges from a committed Catholic perspective. The first challenge requires constructing a Catholic theology of religion and science by making sense of Catholic doctrines in light of 21st century scientific knowledge. The second challenge requires constructing a Catholic theology of religions by making sense of Catholicism’s relationships with other religions in light of insights gained from the modern academic field of religious studies.
In summary, my overall goal for this blog is to construct a Catholic theology for the 21st century, to construct a rational understanding of the beliefs, morals, and rituals, of Catholicism, both in relation to modern science and in relation to other religions in light of modern religious studies.
In the next section, I will outline my method for achieving this goal.
About Understanding Seeking Faith
In a sermon around the year 400 AD, Saint Augustine famously wrote, “Intellege ut credas; crede ut intellegas,” which meant, “Understand in order to believe; believe in order to understand.” With this maxim, he argued for the complementarity of two divine gifts: faith and reason. He described a sort of positive feedback loop in which the gift of reason enables us to understand human words, which can lead us to belief in God, while the gift of faith allows us to believe God’s Word, leading us to an ever deeper understanding of the truths imperfectly expressed in human language.
Echoing the second half of Augustine’s maxim almost 700 years later, Saint Anselm of Canterbury described his own theological method as “faith seeking understanding.” Writing for monks in the 11th century, Anselm started from an assumption of faith in God and guided his readers toward a rational understanding of Christianity. “For I do not seek to understand so that I may believe,” he wrote, “but I believe in order to understand.”
My historical context and audience differ from Anselm’s. Instead of 11th century monks, I am writing for 21st century intellectuals who doubt or reject Catholicism as inconsistent with a modern scientific-historical worldview. I will say more about my intended audience below. For now, suffice to say that my goal is not to lead a faithful reader to a rational understanding of Catholicism but rather to lead a rational reader to a new or deeper faith in Jesus Christ and his Catholic Church.
Because of this key difference, my theological method also must differ from Anselm’s. Whereas his method echoed the second half of Augustine’s maxim, mine must echo the first half: “Understand in order to believe.” This is why I’ve reversed Anselm’s famous motto, calling my theological method Understanding Seeking Faith.
This method consists of three logical steps:
- Assume and describe a 21st century scientific-historical worldview.
- Construct a 21st century philosophy informed by, and consistent with, this scientific-historical worldview.
- Construct a 21st century Catholic theology informed by, and consistent with, this philosophy and thus also with this scientific-historical worldview.
It may help to think of these steps as kind of like building a house. First we must lay a foundation. Then we must build a frame atop the foundation. Finally we must build the walls around the frame to complete the house.
So step 1 will lay the foundation for steps 2 and 3. It will often take the shape of brief histories (and possible futures) for the universe, life, humanity, religion, Christianity, the Bible, or the historical Jesus. Step 1 will also consider some scientific and historical questions that so far remain unanswered, such as the existence of a multiverse, a so-called theory of everything, the origin of life, the existence of extraterrestrial life, the historicity of key religious events and figures, and so on.
Step 2 will build upon the foundation established in step 1. Just as the frame of a house must fit the shape of its foundation, step 2 will be shaped by modern scientific and historical discoveries. But it must also go beyond scientific and historical inquiry to build a philosophical framework in preparation for step 3. It will explore the key questions of various branches of philosophy, such as aesthetics; epistemology; ethics; logic; metaphysics; political theory; and philosophies of language, mind, religion, and science.
Finally, step 3 will complete our metaphorical house. Just as the walls of a house must fit the frame and foundation, step 3 will aim to explain the beliefs, morals, and rituals of Catholicism with a theology informed by both the philosophical framework constructed in step 2 and the scientific-historical foundation established in step 1.
I want to clarify that that these three steps represent the logical flow of my theological method but not necessarily the chronological order of my blog posts. I will often write about whatever topics I happen to be interested in exploring at the time, and any particular post may cover one, two, or all three steps for the topic in question.
To summarize, Understanding Seeking Faith is a theological method whereby I seek to move the intellectual and rational reader from a 21st century scientific-historical understanding of the world to a new or deeper faith in Christ and his Catholic Church in three logical steps: (1) establish a scientific-historical worldview foundation, (2) construct a philosophical framework atop this foundation, and (3) construct the walls of a Catholic theology around this framework.
In the next section, I will describe my intended audience in a bit more detail.
About the audience
When writing theology, it’s important to know your audience. In the previous section, I noted that I am writing primarily for 21st century intellectuals who doubt or reject Catholicism as inconsistent with a modern scientific-historical worldview. Here I will describe this audience a bit more by breaking it down into four broad, overlapping segments.
The first audience segment that I want to reach is nominal or former Christians (Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant) who are losing or have already lost their faith because of what they have learned from modern scientific and historical-cultural studies. Some may remain at least visibly in the Church but wonder how much longer they can do so without feeling intellectually dishonest. Others may have left to join another religion or no religion at all. With this group in mind as my primary intended audience, I will often cite the Bible, the Catholic Catechism, and other Church documents to explain, defend, or critique Christian beliefs, morals, and rituals.
The second segment that I want to reach is open-minded agnostics and atheists. Some may be lifelong disbelievers. Others may have recently stopped believing. Nearly all in this segment value science over religious revelation and thus, to some degree, reject Christianity and other religions as inconsistent with a scientific worldview. To appeal to this group, I will strive to make sure that all of my arguments are grounded in empirical observation and reason.
My third intended audience segment is intellectual followers of other religions, such as Baha’is, Buddhists, Hindus, Jains, Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, members of Indigenous religions, and many others. Some may reject Christianity altogether. Others may embrace Jesus as a wise teacher, prophet, or divine manifestation but reject the Catholic Church’s interpretation of Christ and his mission. To welcome this diverse lot, I will often try to compare the beliefs, morals, and rituals of Catholicism with those of other religions in a way that takes them seriously and treats them with due respect.
The final segment that I want to welcome is faithful non-Catholic Christians who believe in Jesus but not in the Catholic Church’s teachings about him. Some may have left Catholicism to join another church. Others may not be familiar with the Catholic Church at all. Whatever the case, I invite all Christians of every denomination to consider new perspectives on their faith. To welcome them, I will often clarify the similarities and differences between Catholic and non-Catholic Christian beliefs, morals, and rituals.
To summarize, my intended audience includes modern intellectuals who either struggle to maintain their faith, such as nominal or former Christians, or who reject Catholic Christianity as inconsistent with a 21st century scientific-historical worldview, such as agnostics, atheists, and followers of other religions and non-Catholic Christian denominations. If you fit into one of these categories, I invite you to ask for clarification, point out when I have missed something, and offer your own ideas when you think mine are lacking.
In the next section, I will say a bit about myself as the author.
About the author
When reading philosophy or theology, it’s often helpful to know something about the author’s background. So here I will say a bit about myself so readers can get a sense of who I am and where my ideas come from.
I am a forty-something American man with a love for science, a lifelong fascination with religions, and a master’s degree in theology from an Ivy League school. Although I consider myself a Catholic theologian, I am not an official representative of the Catholic Church or of any other religious organization. So I will do my best to faithfully convey official Church teachings—and to be honest about when my own theology may be pushing against their boundaries—but I want to emphasize that any errors in this blog are solely my own and should not be imputed to anyone else.
I was raised as a Catholic and attended Catholic grade school and high school. I loved reading popular science books in my spare time, and I saw no contradiction between religion and science.
But I become curious about other religions and began questioning Catholic doctrines at an early age. In high school, I participated in a yearlong preparation for the sacrament of Confirmation but ultimately refused to receive it because I felt I could not “confirm” my faith in Catholicism—or even Christianity—until I had explored other possibilities. Over the course of several years, I studied and/or practiced Protestantism, Islam, Sikhism, the Baha’i faith, Indigenous religions, Hinduism, Judaism, Taoism, Buddhism, and Jainism.
I supplemented my religious journey with academic degrees in religious studies. In college, I discerned an apparent conflict between religion and science for the first time. I had some professors, classmates, and even close friends who were agnostics or atheists because they found the chasm between religion and science insurmountable. But others like me saw religion and science as complementary spheres of human life. We believed, as Einstein famously said, that science without religion is lame and that religion without science is blind.
In the course of my studies, the thoughts of many great philosophers and theologians from east and west have challenged and influenced my perspective. In confronting these great thinkers, and pitting their ideas against each other, I discovered that philosophy is the intellectual bridge that connects science and religion, as well as the key to unlocking the mystery of how the world’s diverse religions relate to each other.
Along the way, I also met and married the love of my life, who happens to be a Hindu. She joined me for much of this intellectual and spiritual journey, and I have benefited immeasurably from her insights over the years. I cannot imagine my life, or my faith, without her.
Eventually, I returned to the Catholic Church, bringing with me the experiences and insights I had gained studying philosophy and practicing other religions. I had developed unique relationships with each religion and a more nuanced appreciation for Catholicism’s relationships with science, philosophy, and other religions. With conviction, I received the sacrament of Confirmation and became, for the first time, a full participant in the life of the Church.
There are few things that I enjoy more than reading, writing, and conversing about philosophy, religion, and science. And I look forward to inspiring some more conversations with this blog.
Understanding Seeking Faith 