Did the Enlightenment KO Christianity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter GregoryPalamas
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This goes to the heart of moral theology. I wonder if someone would like to respond? Perhaps I’ve put this in the wrong forum?

CDL
 
*Excellent * article!

Thanks for the link, Gregory. I’m definitely going to pursue this a bit further. Any reading material you can recommend?
 
“To what extent have such attitudes permeated Christian ways of thinking? Christianity - as practised by most Australians - has degenerated into a form of Epicureanism, a sophisticated means of seeking happiness which is not confined to sensual pleasure. Epicureanism holds that through the exercise of wisdom contentment can be found. The wise person, realising that the unbridled pursuit of sensual pleasure can be self-destructive, instead seeks contentment through a limiting of desires and through the joys and solaces of friendship.”

Epicureanism, as described here, seems very compatible with Christianity as described in the Sermon on the Mount.

Anyone who seeks God’s kingdom before all else (“the excercise of wisdom”) and treats others as they would be treated (“seeks contentment throught … the joys and solaces of friendship”) is living a very Christian life. True Christian life is very utilitarian. Those who practice true Christianity build houses that will stand when the torrents come and the winds blow.

Perhaps the problem is that much of the “Church” before the enlightenment was engaged in very un-Christian activities. The pursuit of wealth and power, etc. Some followers of the enlightenment found fault with many activities of Church leadership, because the faults were certainly real, but they didn’t realize that the Church was not something to be abandoned but something to be reconciled back to God.
Practice the teachings of Jesus. That is what we are called to do. The church will survive and flourish

Jim
 
Well, the Enlightement is not a monolithic reality. My dissertation is on this subject. I’m right in the middle of researching it. The Scottish/English enlightenment, the German enlightenment, and the French enlightenment all have their particular takes on religion; the German being the most positive I think. So the question, did the enlightenment KO Christianity?

No, it did not. Did it harm Christianity? Some aspects of the enlightenment did and some did not. In fact, its possible to argue that some aspects of enlightenment were the necessary fruition of Christian teaching on the value and dignity of the human person. Our concept of natural rights, an enlightenment concept is Stoic and Christian in origin. The idea of the intrinsic equality and dignity of all people is Christian and Stoic in origin, but came to fruition in the enlightenment. Also, modern empirical science made some aspects of the old scholastic theology difficult to accept. So, a number of thinkers, in the name of enlightenment, sought to provide a new metaphysical grounding for Christian theology. Overall, I think that the principle error of the enlightenment was its excessive optimism. It was excessively optimistic in its view of progress and in its view of the capabilities of the empirical sciences. But that all persons should live as rational, autonomous persons with inherent dignity and rights is the great gift of the enlightenment.
 
While discussing religion and politics with my wife last night I reached the conclusion that just about any form of government works well when a sufficient number of the people involved are genuinely practicing and believing Christians/Catholics.
 
“Unfortunately, the Enlightenment has been so successful in undermining Christianity that Christianity itself has come to believe the criticisms made of it - hence the loss of “self-respect” noted by Ratzinger.”

The alternative way of looking at it is that the religious/magical paradigm started to crack under the weight of empirical evidence for cause-effect. Another paradigm, that proved very effective in the material world took root, and started to banish many problems.

At this stage it seemed reason and logic could deal with most if not all human problems, and given the obvious (by comparison) failure of religion to do deal with problems, or accurately describe the physical world, reason and thus enlightenment gained popularity.

‘Reason’ wasnt ready then, emergent proerties, chaos mathmatics were not present, and it was thought people were simple things. But focussing on the social engineering as opposed to the engineering of the period, misses the vital point.

Compare the rare miracle cures attributed to prayer or direct divine intervention, to the regular miracle of antibiotics and heart surgery.

And all this is leaving aside the actual content of the religions…just comparing success vs failure.

anyway…this is a short, stereotyped response, It’s not comprehensive, just the jist of an argument.
 
Perhaps a better question is: Did The Age of Reason force Christianity to be a better religion.
 
40.png
Digger71:
Perhaps a better question is: Did The Age of Reason force Christianity to be a better religion.
Click to expand...
No. Because human reason may err. While reason applied to Catholic Truth is good because the Church cannot err, other ecclesial communities have exchanged revealed doctrines for “reasonable” doctrines.
 
40.png
Genesis315:
No. Because human reason may err. While reason applied to Catholic Truth is good because the Church cannot err, other ecclesial communities have exchanged revealed doctrines for “reasonable” doctrines.
Click to expand...
I think you just proved my point.

Hubris.
 
No, I don’t think that the Enlightenment KO’d Christianity, but it did come close to laying a knockout punch onto Western civilization, and in the process, ironically, to KO’ing reason.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top