Certainty, Doubt, Faith, Mystery
We can't be certain about everything, but reality is real and so are we ... and we have to act in this world - where does that leave us?
View
I want to start with a statement of faith, of sorts - not because I want to interact with it directly, but because I want to start this piece with a touchstone for the discussion that will follow. I could use the Apostle’s Creed - an ancient statement that was a very early attempt to encapsulate the teachings of Jesus and the early apostles, but I want to use my own words in this case.
I believe that God exists, that He is personal, that He is real, that He is Spirit (and therefore the Spiritual is real), and that He has said some things about Himself to us - because He wants to be in relationship with us. I believe this God created us and all things to be in shalom - in harmony with Him and everything else. But we have, in ways large and small, gone our own way and rebelled against God’s good plan for us. God has reached out to us in many ways in order to restore this shalom. One of the ways is His Son, who lived as the incarnational (human) representation of this ultimate true Spirit - and who died in order to pay the ransom for our rebellion against God and who was raised to life in order to bring us peace (shalom) with God. This eternal, unique, perfect incarnational representation (image) of God, Himself eternal God, Jesus, calls us to turn back to Him. He has given us His Spirit to help us in this turning and in this transformation into who we (individually and collectively) are called to be - loving, joyful, peaceful, wise, faithful, and true.
I just typed the above statement in one sitting in about 5 minutes, so I don’t claim it to be a perfect statement of anything. It isn’t original in any sense, but it is personal. It is, roughly, what I believe. Here is my touchstone. As Rich Mullins sang, “I did not make it, but it is making me.” Here is where I want to start.
But what does it mean that I believe this?
What place does faith have?
Can I say the above with certainty?
What place is there for mystery and humility?
The jumping off point for this piece is a recent NY Times essay by David French, Pope Francis is Turning Certainty on Its Head. A couple of people have asked me what I thought of this article in particular and of David French more generally. If you don’t know, David French has become a symbol of … well, something - a heretic for some and a hero for others. Where am I on this continuum? My position is that actual people shouldn’t be symbols. We shouldn’t think of them or treat them as such. They are actual people (whom, it should be noted, we don’t know personally and probably never will). We should treat actual people with grace and respect, even when we disagree with them - and our disagreement should come from a place of humility. But humble, gracious, respectful disagreement isn’t the same as agreement, much less identification. This difference matters.
I respect David French, I read him fairly often and sometimes listen to him on a podcast he frequents - I agree with him sometimes and disagree with him other times. This should be a normal thing, but we seem to have trouble with it. When I am asked about someone like him - “What do you think of David French?” - I understand the question, but I am always tempted to answer, “I don’t know him. I agree with him sometimes, but not always.” This is (or should be) a truism and it is not what people are asking, so I don’t say this. I specifically don’t want to answer what might be an implicit question: “Is he one of us?” That thinking is, in my view, toxic. This is probably a topic for another piece as this one threatens to get too long. Instead let’s talk about an essay this actual person wrote.
In this essay, French responds to the reaction among some conservatives, Christian and otherwise, to two recent statements by Pope Francis.
First, during an interreligious meeting at Catholic Junior College in Singapore, he (Pope Francis) said that religions are “like different languages in order to arrive at God, but God is God for all. And if God is God for all, then we are all sons and daughters of God.”
The idea that we are sons and daughters of God is basic Christian doctrine. He is the creator, and we are his creation. But the pope’s statements go farther than simply recognizing God’s sovereignty. He indicated that other faiths can reach God as well. “But,” he continued, “‘my God is more important than your God!’ Is that true? There’s only one God, and each of us has a language, so to speak, in order to arrive at God.”
Then, in a news conference on his flight home, he addressed the American presidential election and criticized both Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. “Both are against life,” the pope said, Harris because of her stance on abortion and Trump because of his stance on immigration. Pope Francis would not choose between them. Instead, he said, “Which is the lesser evil? That lady or that gentleman? I don’t know. Each person must think and decide according to his or her own conscience.”
The backlash to both these ideas was immediate. Critics accused the pope of being “counter-scriptural.” The archbishop emeritus of Philadelphia, Charles Chaput wrote, “To suggest, even loosely, that Catholics walk a more or less similar path to God as other religions drains martyrdom of its meaning. Why give up your life for Christ when other paths may get us to the same God?” Partisans on both sides were incredulous at the pope’s application of Catholic doctrine and infuriated that he deferred to voters’ individual consciences.
Pope Francis Is Turning Certainty on Its Head - David French - NY Times - 9/19/24
French describes Pope Francis’ message as a statement of existential humility. I think it is better described as a statement of epistemic humility - humility about what we can know. French says that Francis claims we don’t know that other faiths don’t reach God and uses a much more, well, conservative Pope - John Paul II - as support:
“It will be in the sincere practice of what is good in their own religious traditions and by following the dictates of their own conscience that the members of other religions respond positively to God’s invitation and receive salvation in Jesus Christ, even while they do not recognize or acknowledge him as their Saviour.”
Pope Francis Is Turning Certainty on Its Head - David French - NY Times - 9/19/24
French also says many true things about the fundamentalist tendency toward certainty - in all things, including politics, and recounts some of his dreadful experience at the hand of some in the church who, frankly, have betrayed their professed beliefs. I agree with much of what French writes, but I think conflating Francis’ two statements seems to confuse his response to the first.
Are there other ways to God? That is the question that Francis seems to answer in a way that leaves open the possibility that there are multiple ways to God - although, as many of Francis’ statements appear (at least to me) to be - “each of us has a language in order to arrive at God” is fairly ambiguous. French engages this question with the notion that many Christians (particularly Fundamentalist Evangelical MAGA Christians) lean too hard on certainty - and that infects politics, and politics infects belief, and belief infects behavior, as French's unhappy experience illustrates. Yes. True. Hard to argue.
But I don’t think Francis was referencing the MAGA world or the American evangelical world (not everything is centered on our context) - he was making a statement about how we come to know God. How everyone over all times and places comes to know God. I don’t think French’s response serves this question particularly well. He quotes Archbishop Chaput’s reference to those who died as a penalty for clinging to particular beliefs (and one doesn’t press certainty much farther than that). But he does not answer the archbishop’s question - what about those people? His reference to John Paul II is also, I think, a bit strained - I don’t think JP2 and Francis are saying the same things here. French also references a few biblical passages that engage with the reality of mystery in life and faith - but I don’t think any of them apply directly to the question at hand.
My belief is that God is personal and particular, as all real persons are, and that He has said some things. He has a path to Him that He seems to lay out for us to follow. Others, for centuries, before MAGA, before American Fundamentalist Evangelical Christianity (there was such a world, children), have noted the path God seems to lay out in the things he said to us. My beliefs are based on this understanding, however imperfect it may be, informed by my community and the teaching of many who have tried to discern this path over the centuries. Others have different viewpoints of scripture and of paths to God, of course, and I respect other viewpoints. But it isn’t terribly surprising for people to expect the pope to express what the church has traditionally described as the Christian path to God.
It is a fair point that fundamentalist Christians are overly certain. But … are David French and Pope Francis and all those not in the fundamentalist Christian camp certain … just of other things? Are we really sure that we aren’t all just enamored with a different flavor of certainty? It is easy to see in others. Can I ask what am I certain of? It is a tricky question … can you be certain of the answer, certain of your own self-awareness?
About that path to God - much of the New Testament interacts with this question - what is the way (or way back) to God? Almost the entirety of the book of Hebrews stresses the unique and irreplaceable role of Jesus as the only One who can bring us back to God. One of Jesus’ disciples, Thomas, responds to Jesus’ message at the end of His life that He is returning to His Father -
Thomas said to him, “Lord, we don’t know where you are going, so how can we know the way?”
Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really know me, you will know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.”
John 14:5-7
As we read in Acts 17, Paul, in the early years of the church, arrived in the heart of the philosophical world - Athens - and saw idols all over the place. He did not respond with distress, though he was distressed, he responded with a loving, engaged, culture honoring and culturally informed call to a God they did not know about, referencing an idol to an unknown god that adorned the square among all the other idols. He walked through a door they opened in language they understood to tell them about one who died and rose to invite them back to God and called them to turn from their beliefs to a commitment to this path to the true God. Some believed, some scoffed, and some wanted to hear more.
All of these are very particular invitations to a very particular, a scandalously particular, path. And there are dozens more I could reference. This is a central message of the New Testament that has been believed by the church for many centuries. Again, others have a different understanding of scripture and the way to God - and I respect their views. But the church has taught this central message for almost two millennia.
Can God apply His grace, in Jesus, through His Spirit to those who don’t have all their beliefs in order? Yes, of course. At least I hope so. We all should hope so, because none of us has all beliefs in order, whatever that means. That is part of the central meaning of grace. God’s grace is God’s - He applies it as He sees fit. But he tells us something - something scandalously particular - about how He ordinarily applies that grace.
Faith is required, and faith isn’t certainty - but it is a knowledge and foundation for life and action, grounded in our understanding of what God has said to us. It is a gift of the Spirit, so we can be transformed and transformative. Is there a mystery here? Yes. We are not promised a life without mystery. And, God being the one who loves us best and knows what we need the most, we shouldn’t seek a life without mystery if that is the life He has for us. But acting in the world requires us to assume some belief about us, about God, about others, about the world - even if are not aware of these beliefs, even if we claim uncertainty about them, when we act, we live out some belief. We can say we want to dwell in the mystery, but acting requires us to express some belief - held in faith, with humility … but held. We are not quantum elements existing in a state of indeterminacy - when observed, we particularize. And we are always observed … called to act under His loving observation. One of the tragedies of our moment is that some cling to a certainty that binds them in angry, fearful, pharisaical concrete. Another tragedy of our moment is that others drift - lacking agency and purpose because all is mystery and nothing holds any particular meaning.
Here is a passage of scripture that I have always found paradoxical -
This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all people. This has now been witnessed to at the proper time.
1 Timothy 4:3-6
God wants all people to be saved, all to come to a knowledge of the truth, but there is one mediator between God and us. God does not force anyone to take this path, (so He, mysteriously, does not get all that He wants (I think?), but leaves room for our personal choice and integrity). Even so, He works to bring people to Him. He may do this in ways I can’t foresee or understand. He has provided a way - that way involves some particularity, but is always applied with grace. I don’t have to understand all of this, there can be mystery - but He has not left us completely shrouded in mystery. We may not claim certainty about everything, but we can have faith in God, which involves counting on His promises. And acting in regard to them.
Part of the mission of the church is to invite people to this path of faith enabled by God’s grace in Jesus by the power of His Spirit … to invite a response to this good news - this Gospel - as Jesus did, as Paul did, as the other apostles (who were all killed for clinging to these beliefs) did. How God deals with others interacting or not interacting with this message is something I trust to Him. How much of it do they need to explicitly understand? How does salvation work for those in these situations? I’m not sure, but God surely is able to reach those He wants to reach and we should display humility regarding His choices. This is what JP2, I believe, was saying. Those who seek God, truly, will be found by Him in ways God can handle without my parsing. That can be true alongside a particular invitation.
One more thing needs to be said, though I hate saying it. Because some may disagree with David French here or there, our current cultural moment will tempt these (many in the fundamentalist Christian camp) to question if Mr. French will be in heaven. There is no biblical basis for us to speculate as to the fate of others in general, and is not my call, but, yes, my goodness, I think so - and if not, well … crap. That is probably bad news for me because we appear to agree on a lot of touchstone beliefs, whatever his stance on this political or that theological position might be. And as far as I can see, he appears to be a genuine representation of the Christian faith. Of course, in response to God’s grace and forgiveness offered to me and His command to love others, I certainly hope Mr. French will be in heaven. (What a ridiculous thing to have to write, but here we are.) As such, he is a brother in the community of faith who I will, God willing, spend eternity with - those of us who claim to be a part of this community of faith probably should keep that in mind, as needed. Will I find people in this eternal community of faith that surprise me? Probably. Will some be surprised at my presence? Probably. But we can trust all of that to God and rejoice that God who is good will work all things out in a way that is good - and He knows more about good than we do.
In any case, my call, as I see it, is clear. How best to offer this invitation? How to embody it? How to lovingly engage our world? That is the work of a lifetime. But what the invitation is - that part isn’t up to me.
Links
Pope Francis Is Turning Certainty on Its Head - David French - New York Times - 9/19/24
Creed - Rich Mullins - Provident Music Group - 1996
