Thinking of God
53
freedom of its proper motivation toward noble and true ends, even as it actualizes freedom. Conversely, theistic claims about “God” too easily thwart human freedom when they deny the challenge of critique. Religious authority and rational critique seem in conflict. Can one engage in unre-
strained critique while preserving conviction and commitment to God? Consider a possibility.ing understanding.”St. Anselm of Canterbury said in his (^43) In understanding something, I comprehend what or Proslogion that theology is “faith seek-
who something is by relating it to appropriate concepts. In believing some-one, I am open to and receive an image and feeling of who someone is when I hear her or his words. Understanding is the mind’s act of grasping an object as it is – understanding aims at truth (although we can often get it wrong!).
Believing is the act of responding to another subject as she or he addresses me – believing aims at traditional theology, “being” is the ultimate object which I understand in understanding anything at all: when I understand this tree or that place, trust (although we can often be deceived!). In much
I understand the meaning of “being” in particular existence. Similarly, in traditional Christian thought, “God” is the ultimate subject to which I respond (i.e., am open, believe) in being open to anyone at all: when I respond to this voice or to that presence, I am ultimately believing in “God.” (^44) The question
then becomes for traditional theology: What is the relation between “God” and “being”?God, considered objectively, is the power of being; being, considered sub-One possibility is to say that in some important sense “God is being.”
jectively, metaphor of God as light of the world. The other possibility is to say that God is between them. God is a heavenly deity or God is thought through claims notis the expression or act of God. This position collapses into the being. There is always a gap, an infinite qualitative distinction,
about the gift of love that exceeds being.ology is disagreement about whether God or being is the superior term. The dispute is intelligible: understanding and believing are two different forms through which humans relate to surrounding environments. It^45 Dividing these two lines of the-is pos-
sible to understand something without believing it, and it believe something without understanding it, although these forms are never completely independent of each other. The discourse of theology, past and present, spins around these matters. is possible to
human capacities for understanding and believing are always and intrinsi-cally connected in spite of their differences. Human understanding begins with a gift to the creative imagination: someone feels a sense of wonder For theological humanism, what is important is that human all-too-