Paradoxy and Catholicism

The small study group I am a member of has been focusing on G. K. Chesterton lately.   We just completed the chapter “The Paradoxes of Christianity” from his book “Orthodoxy.”  As one might expect, the chapter refers to the sometimes paradoxical nature of Christianity.

Indeed, one such paradox is so important that it is repeated – in paradoxical form! – six times in the Gospels.

In Luke 9:24–25 we hear Jesus say, “For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will save it. What profit is there for one to gain the whole world yet lose or forfeit himself?”

Again, later in Luke (17:33), we hear that “Whoever seeks to preserve his life will lose it, but whoever loses it will save it.”

Similarly, in Matthew 10:39 it says, “Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.”

And later in Matthew (16:25) Jesus says, “For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.”

In John 12:25, Jesus tells us, “Whoever loves his life loses it, and whoever hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life.”

And finally in Mark 8:35–37, we are told, “For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake and that of the gospel will save it.  What profit is there for one to gain the whole world and forfeit his life?  What could one give in exchange for his life?”

Not Contradictions

These are not contradictions as those hostile to Christianity might assume. They are paradoxes. The difference lies in looking beyond the simple phrasing to the deeper meanings involved. The Christian understanding of eternal life, as opposed to temporal life, strips these utterances of their cryptic nature and illuminates their salvific warning.

For instance, “Wine is arrogant, strong drink is riotous” (Proverbs 20:1) warns against consumption of alcohol.  Yet Jesus’ first recorded miracle is converting water into wine for a wedding.  And He made not just wine, but wine of superb quality.  The steward of the feast even remarks on how unusual it is to serve the best wine later in the feast.

And note, too, that St. Paul advises Timothy to “Stop drinking only water, but have a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent illnesses” (1 Timothy 5:23).  But St. Paul also warns against drunkenness in Ephesians and multiple times in 1 Corinthians.

These apparent contradictions are more moderating than contradictory.  One can clarify this by thinking of the difference between the right use and the wrong use of a thing.. A thing may be used correctly and hence either virtuously or at least in a morally neutral way.  Conversely, it may be used incorrectly and thus in a way that is morally wrong. There are many examples of this, beginning with alcohol as mentioned above, to any number of tools or objects – from axes to stones picked up from the ground.

Being Aware Of Paradoxes

There are good reasons for being aware of Christian paradoxy. Chief amongst these is so that we can avoid oversimplifying our lives with glib and facile evaluation of our circumstances. To make this error is to risk sliding into self-satisfaction and complacency about our own moral health and agency.

And yet this presents us with another paradox. If we succeed in avoiding the error of over-simplification, we almost necessarily risk the opposite error. We may over-complicate and introduce paralysis into our daily lives.

It may not be surprising to some to learn that my typical risk is over-complicating.  It should be equally unsurprising that I am sometimes beset with a great temptation to oversimplify. I do so for no other reason than to cut my way out of whatever Gordian knot I have woven about myself.

Paradoxes In Criticism

The history of the Church includes a history of people critical of the church for exactly opposite reasons.

St. Augustine, in his book “City Of God,” spends the first half of the book defending Christianity against the charge of being a weak and effeminate movement that caused the sack of Rome. Fast forward 1,500 years and you can find plenty of critiques of Christianity for being the bloodthirsty cause of the Crusades. In more subtle ways, it may have been responsible for any number of wars and conflicts.  One is left to wonder whether Christianity is weak and debilitating to civilization, or overwhelmingly strong and violent.

Or perhaps it is neither. Maybe it is only capable of being misunderstood and misused in such diametrically opposing ways because it is unavoidably paradoxical.

The Magisterium And The Sensus Fidei

Thank goodness we have the gift of the Magisterium. As expressed by the First Vatican Council (Dei Filius, Chapter 3, Par. 8):

“Moreover, with the divine and Catholic faith, all those things are to be believed, which are contained in the written or handed down word of God, and which are proposed to be believed by the Church, either by solemn judgment or by ordinary and universal magisterium, as divinely revealed.”

A gift from God via the Holy Spirit, the Magisterium represent the sensus fidei (sense of the faith) or sensus fidelium (sense of the faithful).  That is to say, it represents the collective acceptance of the teachings of the church  (Catechism of the Catholic Church: Part 1, Section 1, Chapter 2, 88-100).

This happens “when, ‘from the bishops to the last of the faithful’ they manifest a  universal consent in matters of faith and morals.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church: Part 1, Section 1, Chapter 2, 92).

This part of our Catholic faith rescues us from the perils of paradox, from whatever source it appears to arise. We have access to the scripture as well as the vast experience of our predecessors in the faith – the doctors of the Church and the saints. Their witness has stood the test of time.  It also comes to us from times significantly different than our own.  Today there are things which seem uncertain and unclear to us. In earlier times, things were seen clearly, without the particular biases which cling to us as residents of our particular time in history and position in geography.

Perspective

I have sometimes held the conceit that one way to talk about God is to say that He exists at that point of perception from. It is at this point which all paradoxes are resolved and all apparent contradictions are revealed as misperceptions arising from our human limitations. If this is so, then the Beatific Vision is not only glorious but revelatory in ways unimaginable to our feeble mortal perceptions. We are, after all, rooted in the limited perspective of human bodies rooted in a singular position in time and space.

It is at these moments when I can most honestly pray with Paul in 1 Corinthians 16:22 – Marana tha!