Category Archives: Culture

Arts, Christianity, Culture, History, Philosophy

Philosophy: Scholasticism and dogma

CHRISTIANITY AND PHILOSOPHY

Intro: Medieval European culture was dominated by the Church, and the classical philosophy of Plato and Aristotle was only gradually assimilated into Christian teaching

THE Church wielded considerable social and political power in medieval Europe, and also controlled access to learning. Education was provided by the Church and necessarily followed Christian doctrine, while institutions like libraries and universities were funded by the Church and staffed by monastic orders. Monks preserved and translated many ancient texts, mostly of Greek philosophy and latterly acquired from Islamic scholars and scribes.

Scholasticism was a method of tuition that used rigorous dialectical reasoning both to teach Christian theology and to scrutinise these texts. Clerics and academics used methods of reasoning developed by Plato and Aristotle to assess the compatibility of ideas with Christian doctrine. The theories of philosophers including Augustine and Thomas Aquinas were also carefully examined, and either adopted to defend Christian dogma or dismissed as heretical. Scholasticism played an important part in the integration of philosophical ideas into Christianity, remaining the prominent ethos for Christian education and theology until supplanted by humanist and scientific ideas during the Renaissance.

Existence of God: the ontological argument

With the rise of scholasticism and the Church’s embrace of Aristotelian logic in the 11th century came a renewed interest in reconciling matters of faith with reasoned argument. One of the founding fathers of the scholastic movement was Saint Anselm of Canterbury, best known for proposing the so-called ontological argument for the existence of God.

Anselm asks us to imagine the most perfect being possible. The logic and reasoned arguments pledged by him are difficult to interpret and understand, but it leads us to a conclusion that the most perfect being possible must exist – in Anselm’s words, “God is that, than which nothing greater can be achieved”. From that premise he methodically shows that if God exists in our imagination, then an even greater God is possible: one that exists in reality.

Yet, contemporaries of the time such as Gaunilo of Marmoutiers pointed out that the logic put forward by Anselm was flawed, because “his reasons could be used to prove the existence of anything.” Later philosophers, notably Thomas Aquinas and Immanuel Kant, showed that while the argument presented a notion of God’s essence, it was no proof of His existence.

Pascal’s wager

Today, it is generally agreed that there can be no logical proof either way for the existence of God, and that this is purely a matter of faith and belief. Philosophical speculation on the subject, however, continued well into the so-called “Age of Reason”. One novel take on the problem was raised by the distinguished mathematician Blaise Pascal in the 17th century.

“Pascal’s wager” examines whether, given that we have no proof of His existence, it is a better bet to believe in God or not. Pascal weighs up the pros and cons in terms of the consequences: if God exists and I deny his existence, I run the risk of eternal damnation; if He exists and I accept His existence, I earn eternal life in Paradise; but if He doesn’t exist, it will make no difference to me. Pascal devised a matrix in which different options are placed.

On balance, then, it is a safer bet to believe in His existence. Although Pascal’s wager is an interesting exercise in logic and rudimentary game theory, it is based on some unsound and shaky assumptions. For example, Aristotle’s idea of an “unmoved mover” or first cause is a direct challenge.

Creating Eternity

A major stumbling block for Christian philosophers trying to integrate Aristotelian ideas into Christian doctrine was Aristotle’s assertion that the universe has no end and no beginning. This contradicts the Biblical description of God’s creation of the world.

Thomas Aquinas, however, believed that since human reason and Christian doctrine are both gifts from God, they cannot be contradictory.  Using his ‘God-given’ reason, he argued that Aristotle was not mistaken in his concept of an eternal universe, but that God was indeed its creator: in the beginning, God created the universe, but could have also created a universe that is eternal.

Standard
Arts, Culture, Human Rights, Politics, Society

Book banning in the US is inspiring educational censorship elsewhere

CENSORSHIP

BOOK BANNING is spreading at an alarming rate in school districts across the United States. PEN America recently documented more than 2,500 books that have been banned stemming across 32 different states during the 2021-22 academic year.

These bans are not isolated incidents, but part of a coordinated assault on public education that’s taking aim at the teaching of race, gender, LGBTQ+ identities and US history.

Demands to ban books in American schools is not new. But book banning now has erupted into a national movement. Coordinated and highly organised activist groups have transformed school board meetings into political battlegrounds, threatening educators and undermining the freedom to learn.

These efforts to censor books are an affront to the core principles of free expression and open inquiry that US democracy swears by. Equally worrying, however, is the fact that these patterns of attacks on public education in the US appears to be inspiring similar efforts in other countries, even though such censorship campaigns haven’t had as much success there yet.

In the UK, officials are raising the spectre of critical race theory in schools – an issue that was not previously a topic of debate or concern – to try and stop the teaching of histories that explore systemic racism. That’s part of what authors have described as a mood ‘shift’ in the UK – a budding ‘culture war’ that is leading to the censorship and removal of books from school shelves. Books being removed are often children’s books that look at institutional racism, diversity and LGBTQ+ identities.

Echoes of US-based group tactics are also manifesting in Canada, with parental groups asking school boards to ban certain books – again with LGBTQ+ content – and seeking to change curricular topics that they see as being part of the teaching of critical race theory.

The book banning movement has also gained the attention of politicians. Australia’s Senate voted against the inclusion of critical race theory in the country’s school curriculum in 2021.

Of course, educational censorship laws and book bans, particularly aimed at silencing certain peoples, religions, or viewpoints, are tactics that have long been used by governments.

Click on page 2 to continue reading

Pages: 1 2
Standard
Britain, Culture, Government, Immigration, Society

A moral victory for the Anglican Church and the Archbishop of Canterbury

MORAL AUTHORITY

Intro: The message from the pulpit is not just for Christmas

THE GUARDIAN’S editorial on Friday, 23 December, was a necessary narrative on the cruel policies being exercised by the UK Government on refugee rights.

One of the Conservative Party’s reliably belligerent MPs, Jonathan Gullis, took exception to the Archbishop of Canterbury’s excoriation of the government’s plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda. Mr Gullis discerned a troubling modern tendency to “use the pulpit to preach from”. After a challenging year, the Anglican hierarchy were afforded some light relief with such comments, laughter elsewhere in society no-doubt. The Archbishop, Justin Welby, responded that he appreciated the feedback and looked forward to advice on more appropriate pulpit activity. Lambeth Palace can be forgiven for indulging in some festive humour at Mr Gullis’s expense, as a sobering 2022 draws to a close.

The editorial team rightly point to respect for the late queen’s devout faith which has meant that the Church of England’s established status has never truly been brought into question. In the post-Elizabethan era, however, serious scrutiny now seems inevitable – especially in the context of wider constitutional and House of Lords reform.

That will become a necessary debate for another day. Right now, the presence of the lords spiritual at Westminster has clear benefits. At a time when the government is attempting to sell performative cruelty towards migrants as a form of humanitarian intervention, the Anglican bishops, led by Mr Welby, deserve considerable praise for insisting on telling it how it is.

Earlier this month, the archbishop’s annual debate in the Lords was used by Mr Welby who attacked the “harmful rhetoric” that is allowing asylum seekers to be dehumanised, referring to the inflammatory language of “invasion”, expressed by the home secretary, Suella Braverman. This followed a scathing Easter Sermon at Canterbury Cathedral by Mr Welby in which he denounced the Home Office’s offshoring plans as unworthy of “a country formed by Christian values”.

It is unsurprising, of course, that some Conservative MPs have taken umbrage at the ecclesiastical onslaught, accusing the Church’s clergy of ethical grandstanding. The archbishop was accused by John Redwood of fomenting political discord while offering no solutions. But in his Lord’s speech, the Archbishop of Canterbury explicitly identified the danger of loftily moralising without confronting the complexities that politicians are required to face. The bishops have rightly highlighted the need to expand safe, legal routes and by accelerating the processing of claims. The need to balance generosity and compassion with efficient control of borders has been acknowledged.

Nevertheless, in a certain sense, Mr Gullis’s reference to preaching from pulpits identified something important. The way the Church of England has spoken about refugees has indeed been profoundly moral, in a way that has dangerously eluded the secular political debate. Over the past year – amid arguments about deterrence, logistics, the cost of accommodation and deportations, and the speed of the asylum application process – the humanity of the individuals arriving on our shores has been almost lost to view. The citing of the illegal, indecent squalor at the Manston asylum centre in Kent – and that it should ever have been tolerated – is an indication of where that can lead.

By reminding us that “recognition of human dignity is the first principle which must underpin our asylum policy”, and of the need to “see the faces of those in need and listen to their voices”, Mr Welby’s Lord’s speech highlighted what must be the starting point of all refugee policy. This is not mere naivety, at odds with the real world. It is to ground our engagement with that world on an ethical footing. The Archbishop of Canterbury has performed a valuable public service in pointing that out to a political class that has lost touch with the basics.

Standard