By Nick Gier| FāVS News Columnist
Philosophers of religion such as myself have high regard for Catholic theologian Thomas Aquinas. He supported the role of reason in all human discourse, and he had great respect for Greek and Arabic philosophers. This knowledge came to him from Muslim Spain (720-1492) where Muslim, Christian and Jewish scholars came together to preserve much of ancient thought.
In Aquinas’ “Summa Theologica,” the Greek philosopher Aristotle is referred to as “the philosopher” and the Arabic thinker Averroes is called “the commentator.” This grand synthesis stands as one of the greatest achievements of human thought.
Aquinas wisely insisted on a strict division between faith and reason, a distinction lost on far too many conservative Christians. Doctrines such as Trinity and Incarnation are articles of faith, and they are immune to rational analysis. These beliefs come under the heading “revealed” theology.
Using “natural” reason common to all humans, Aquinas was convinced that he could prove the existence of God and several of the divine attributes. These arguments are part of what Aquinas calls “natural theology” or more generally “natural religion.” This would be a system of belief open to all regardless of religious confession.
Jefferson’s deist vision of ‘Nature’s God’
Using reason may not of course necessarily lead a person to religion. In a famous letter written on Aug. 10, 1787, Thomas Jefferson offered this recommendation for his nephew Peter Carr: “Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a god.” Jefferson did believe in God, but he wisely gave his nephew the freedom to come to a different conclusion.
Significantly, Aquinas believed that reason could tell us right from wrong and that divine revelation was not necessary for morality. (Revelation, however, is necessary for salvation.) For Aquinas this solved the problem of the “virtuous” pagan, and the respect for, but hesitancy, about their destiny is best shown in Dante’s “Divine Comedy,” where the good pagans reside in Limbo, along with unbaptized infants. Many medieval theologians though still tried to get them into heaven.
Aquinas’ rational morality allows me to understand what our founder John Adams meant when he declared: “I believe that all honest men among you are Christians.” Adams joined Thomas Jefferson and other founding thinkers in reducing the Christian religion to morality. This is clear in the title of what we now call the Jeffersonian Bible: “The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth,” in which all references to Jesus’ deity and the miracles he performed are excised from the text.
Mention of Jefferson brings us to the Declaration of Independence where we find, in the first sentence, the odd phrase “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” Given Jefferson’s background and beliefs, I submit that this is a reference to Aquinas’ natural theology. It is also deism pure and simple.
The phrase “Nature’s God” may indicate pantheism, the belief that God is in all things. However, in my research of the founder’s writings I did not find a single reference to the identity of God and nature. Deist and anti-Christian Ethan Allen once wrote that “to suppose that God is all things would be to exclude his creation.” Deists believed that God created the laws of nature as sufficient for all knowledge, but they rejected the idea of any divine intervention or divine scripture.
The word “Creator” is indeed in the Declaration as one who “endowed us” with our rights “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” This is not necessarily the orthodox Christian deity, because Jefferson, Adams and even deist and anti-Christian Thomas Paine believed in a divine creator apart from nature.
English and American deists are the source of the phrase “laws of nature and nature’s God.” Deist Lord Bolingbrook was a profound influence on Jefferson, and he once wrote that one discovers “divine truths” by following “nature and nature’s God; that is, one follows God in his works, and in his word.”
Christians have pounced on “his word” as a reference to the Bible, but this is not necessarily the case considering deist Bolingbrook as the source and lack of an upper case “W.” In his controversial “Age of Reason,” which is a scathing critique of Christianity, deist Thomas Paine states that nature is the “only word of God,” and it reveals “to man all that is necessary for man to know of God.”
In a July 4th column for The Hill Myra Adams states triumphantly that “the founders put God at the center of the Declaration of Independence,” but it is clear from my analysis that this is not the deity of orthodox Christianity.
Delightful! I also recommend Spinoza to Christians (through Einstein, for the convenience of “relativity” — lol).
‘Revealed theology’ is an oxymoron! Founded upon the earlier, false presumptions of Thomas Aquinas that natural reason is capable of comprehending the mind of God through scriptural interpretation. Since the FAll, natural reason has been bared from any insight into the nature and reality of God. That natural ignorance, embedded within human nature self and called the stain of original sin, cannot be removed by any human intellectual construct. Only the second coming will reveal the means that God has chosen to remove the stain and return man to the grace and favor of his creator.
Interesting article, thanks! It’s great to see Deism being mentioned. Far too few people are aware of Deism.
I have been developing thoughts on the difference between faith and knowledge from John 7:17. The doctrines we can do we can know. Those that we cannot do we must accept or reject by faith. The doctrines we can do are “natures law”.
Humanity would much rather debate the doctrines of faith that we cannot know than to do the doctrines we can know. We cannot “do” the trinity. We cannot “do” the future. But we can do generosity. We can love. We can rest on a Sabbath. We can perceive God in His dealings with His people through His Word IF we look for what He approves of and disapproves of, how He would have me act and NOT say “that is for them”. It is for me.
God’s Holy Spirit has been given to all to “know” right and wrong, John 1:9, and that without the Bible. We learn right by doing it, but the consequences are what the Bible declares humanity to be and not what we desire. So, we have the hardening of the heart against the Holy Spirit and God’s Word.