The Logic of Christian Humanism
65
but, rather, as a test for theological thinking and speaking.“not far from each one of us” is only rightly conceived when any thought about God can withstand the test of perfection or, same thing said, unsur-We call attention to Anselm’s formula not as a proof of God’s existence,^12 The God who is
passability. This is true even of Anselm’s own claim, later in chapter 15 of the ProslogionJohn Clayton, “is radically other, dwelling ‘in light inaccessible,’ eluding our senses and our understanding alike (§§17, 16), but in whose dazzle we are , that God is greater than can be conceived. “Anselm’s God,” writes
made aware of an overwhelming greatness and fullness of being (§14).”This test or measure is how the Christian humanist avoids identifying God with thoughts about God, God with the self, God with the products of human imagination.^13
ask: Is that than which nothing greater can be conceived? The impulse is that only what is unsurpassable in importance of worship. The figments of the human imagination, the authority and pride Take any thought about God, any idea or story or belief about God, and and reality is worthy religious
of one’s community, the excess of political power or the abundance of wealth cannot withstand the test as right objects of devotion. The “proof ” is best seen as a test for interpreting religious claims, a way of criticism in order to understand and purify theological thinking and religious devotion and to
test distortions in belief. And in two ways, we can say. The “proof ” provides a way to of perfection cannot claim rightly to speak of the divine. In this way the proof might reduce us to silence and mystical awareness of God since, it criticize ideas about God, since any idea that cannot endure the test
would seem, every idea must always be deconstructed and surpassed. Yet the proof also shows, through degrees of imagined perfection. It shows us, what is more, the insep-arability between God and a highest good.constructively, the human longing for the divine in and
to God in terms of a discovery of self in God as light of the world. It has often been understood in this way. This is not quite right, in our judgment. Anselm’s test presupposes a monastic community chanting the Psalms and, It might seem that the Anselmic test is really just a version of the approach
accordingly, addressing God in prayer and also encountering the claim of the “Fool” in Psalms 14 and 53 that “there is no God.” Scripture, with its per-sonal image of God, paradoxically announces what cannot be accepted in biblical faith, namely, the possibility of the non-being of God. It is through
the encounter with that paradox inscribed in scripture that Anselm formu-lates his “proof.” God is indeed other, as heavenly deity, and yet God is also discovered to be the very presupposition of wisdom, the light of the world. Anselm’s proof functions as a test for valid theological claims that moves in