Bridging the Divide Between God and Man

Theological epistemology is that discipline within the broader field of theology that concerns itself with how we can come to have knowledge of God.

As with the other biblical faiths, Catholicism asserts that God is entirely transcendent. Such a theology stands in stark contrast to the pantheon of gods known in the ancient world. It also stands in contrast to the gods of our own devising. The problem most vexing for theological epistemology is that if God is indeed utterly other (Isaiah 55:8-9), how can human beings have any understanding of God?

In attempting to answer the question, Christian theology has ordained two fundamental, and possibly contradictory, positions. In this essay, I will examine and attempt to reconcile the concepts of analogia fidei and analogia entis.  

It goes almost without saying that both analogia entis and analogia fidei presuppose the existence of God. Such a theological first principle means that the question is not whether God exists, but in what ways human beings can come to comprehend God.

Analogia Entis

I begin with Analogia Entis or Analogy of Being. The Analogy of Being is the theological epistemological position generally accepted by the Catholic Church, having been formulated by Thomas Aquinas. (Aquinas, Saint Thomas. The “Summa Theologica” of Saint Thomas Aquinas) and (Aquinas, Saint Thomas. Aeterna Press. The Summa Contra Gentiles).

Analogy of Being begins with the concession that there exists a great metaphysical and ontological gap between God and creature. This gap is reflected in language. Take the term being as an example. Being can be applied to both God and humans in a way that is neither purely identical (univocal) nor entirely different (equivocal), but rather analogical.

Because the Analogy of Being posits that creatures have being by participation and God is Being itself (the cause), the Analogy of Being theory allows for a structured, non-anthropomorphic understanding of the divine.

Thomas Aquinas observed that if we use the term “good” of God and man univocally (identical meaning), we reduce God to a creature. If equivocally (totally different), we cannot know God at all; God’s transcendence becomes an insurmountable obstacle. Analogy of Being provides a middle ground.

The Analogy of Being suggests a rather ordered relationship between God and creation. For example, “healthy” is primarily predicated of a person and secondarily of their diet (both related, but in different ways). Similarly, “existence” is predicated primarily of God (who is) and secondarily of creatures (who exist by participation).

The ordering of the relationship between God and His creation further explains how attributes such as wisdom or beauty are found in creation to the extent that they participate in the existence of that which is Wisdom and Beauty itself. Moreover, the Analogy of Being distinguishes between God as esse (the act of being itself) and creatures as ens (things that have being from God).

As indicated above, there exists a metaphysical and ontological divide between God and His creation. This divide is frequently evidenced in our language about matters transcendent. The Doctrine of Analogy enables meaningful, true speech about God (e.g., “God is just”) while acknowledging that God’s infinite nature exceeds human comprehension. 

While the Analogy of Being offers a bridge between human reason and God, one of its fiercest opponents, Karl Barth, viewed this bridge as a tower of Babel – a human attempt to storm the heavens.

Analogia Fidei

The Swiss theologian Karl Barth’s primary criticism of the Analogy of Being centered on the claim that it significantly overestimates human beings’ epistemological capacity to know God. Indeed, Barth referred to the Analogy of being as an “invention of the Antichrist” by rendering the Cross unnecessary for knowing God.

At least part of the reason for Barth’s vitriol is his concern that if we could know God through nature and reason (Analogia Entis), then we could eventually co-opt God into our own political or cultural ideologies (a major concern for him in 1930s Germany).

Not surprisingly, therefore, a pessimistic view of the human condition informs Barth’s position. For Barth, any human effort to bridge the divide between God and man was doomed to failure owing to the damage caused by original sin.

The solution to the divide could only be effected by God “lowering” Himself in a kind of divine condescension. Simply put, God would need to “come down here” and tell us who He is. The Incarnation of Christ was exactly that.

Instead of an Analogy of Being, Barth proposed an Analogy of Faith (Analogia Fidei). Humans can only come to know God through His self-revelation in Jesus Christ, received by faith. The primary advantage of an Analogy of Faith is that it more effaciously allows God to remain entirely transcendent and other.

Having examined the Analogy of Being and the Analogy of Faith, is it possible to reconcile these two apparently contradictory doctrines?

An Attempt To Synthesize The Analogies

One way to obtain reconciliation is to find common ground. I want to suggest two points of contact that can facilitate a theological reconciliation of the Analogy of Being and the Analogy of Faith.

The first point is the Bible. Perhaps it is more accurate to imply that the Bible is the locus for both Analogies. Scripture is not like other books, since in and through Scripture it is God who speaks as from a living source, like the voice of another person turning his face toward us and speaking. Therefore, God is manifested in a determinative and pre-eminent way in the activity of the Word of God, where the Word of God is proclaimed, read, taught, or preached.

While the Bible is composed of a collection of distinct ancient texts, it is also one in that God inspires it so that it speaks to the Church and the apostolic community, which is continually given the grace to hear and understand the revelation communicated.

The second point of contact is to recognize the primacy of grace for both the Analogia Entis and the Analogia Fidei.

“Everything is grace,” observed Saint Thérèse of Lisieux, and so it is. This includes the two Analogies. While it manifests in many ways, at its most elemental, grace is the presence of God.

If the Analogy of Being is an “ascending” epistemology (the creation seeking its Creator), then the Analogy of Faith is a “descending” one (the Creator showing Himself to His creation). Nevertheless, both Analogies are reliant on the primacy of grace.

As it pertains to the Analogy of Being, grace illuminates the human intellect so as to allow one to become cognizant of the metaphysical realities that make natural theology possible. Similarly, grace makes faith possible. As such, grace is the foundation upon which the Analogy of Faith is formed.  

Conclusion

Analogia Entis suggests that because God created the world, there is a “likeness” between the Creator and the created. Reason allows one to look at a beautiful sunset or a logical truth and infer something about God’s nature. There is, therefore, an ascendant quality of the Analogy of Being in that by seeing God in things “below,” we reach for God who is “above.”

Analogy of Faith provides the descending counterweight to the Analogy of Being. Where the Analogy of Being is man’s effort to reach up to God, the Analogy of Faith is God reaching down to man.