Faith and Certitude

Rating:
Summary: Some regrettable flaws, but well worth a read all the same.
Review: Although this book can be repetitive and hard to follow, overall it gives an excellent overview of the causes of unbelief. In fact, I learned more about the moral responsibilities of unbelievers and dissentors from the Catholic Church than I did about how I can be certain of the faith.

The simple way to describe his argument is that many disagree with established truth because they don't like it, not because they have any basis for unbelief. Fr. Dubay describes unbelief as a matter of the will, not of the intellect.

I recommend this book to any Catholic who has concerns about unbelievers.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent discussion of the problem of unbelief
Review: Although this book can be repetitive and hard to follow, overall it gives an excellent overview of the causes of unbelief. In fact, I learned more about the moral responsibilities of unbelievers and dissentors from the Catholic Church than I did about how I can be certain of the faith.

The simple way to describe his argument is that many disagree with established truth because they don't like it, not because they have any basis for unbelief. Fr. Dubay describes unbelief as a matter of the will, not of the intellect.

I recommend this book to any Catholic who has concerns about unbelievers.

Rating:
Summary: Some regrettable flaws, but well worth a read all the same.
Review: As one reviewer says, "The simple way to describe his argument is that many disagree with established truth because they don't like it, not because they have any basis for unbelief. Fr. Dubay describes unbelief as a matter of the will, not of the intellect." However, this is a rather unsatisfactory method of arguing, for this reason: it becomes easy to say, in effect, "You atheists are atheists for non-rational reasons." The implication being, that atheists need not be taken too seriously. To his credit, the author does not fall into thids trap all the time. Are there really no worthwhile intellectual arguments against theism? "Worthwhile", is, admittedly, not the same as "insuperable". The book would have much more convincing, I think, and much fairer, if he had not used this approach at all; for, it does not deal with the reasons that people are atheists, but treats them as though - in essence - there were no reasons. This is not good enough. It is an example of the "ad hominem" fallacy - that is, you attack your opponent, instead of dealing with his argument (or lack of it). The result is, to annoy, instead of illuminating. Which is a pity. A second fault is, that he points out that there are serious weaknesses in the case for atheism. Well and good. But, he does not show that his own case is more reasonable - only that the atheist case is flawed. The problem is, that showing atheist arguments are weak, does not *of itself* show, that his are strong. Must all atheists be dogmatic? If they beccome theists, what sort of theism are they to embrace? Equally, I may have misunderstood him. A further problem: he discusses the universe, and the variety of existing things. Fair enough. The universe *may* show that there is a god - it does not show, that (if there is, a god, and but one god), that god is the god of the bible and of Christian revelation. Is the "god of the philosophers" , the "God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob"? The notion the two are the same, cannot be taken for granted, as it is not evident. It may be so - or, it may not. Perhaps that question belongs to a different department of theology. On a point of method - he uses several arguments from mathematical probabilities. But, is this method of argument valid? Can one use mathematics, to support an argument based on metaphysics? Formally, these are two distinct disciplines, and so it seems that, to use arguments from one discipline to back up arguments from the other, is illegitimate. Each *type* of argument should be used within its own discipline. It is as though he were to say, that a man six feet tall, is more important that a man of five feet. That, is the sort of fallacy which appears to invalidate the arguments offered in chapter 13. He does on several occasions make the point that that we are not swayed by reason alone, just as the review quoted above suggests - that we are also swayed by other factors in our make-up. His noting this is a strength of the book, for this reminder helps one to be more truly honest in one's beliefs and attitudes. What is not welcome, is an occasional tendency to suggest that non-theists are unhappy. One retort might be, that plenty of religious people are too. Which leaves us where we are. Perhaps it would be a good idea if those who disagree could listen to each other courteously, without unfairness, prejudice, or caricaturing each other's beliefs. If this book can help toward that, so much the better. These are flaws, and they are not unimportant. But, all the book is not like this. They detract from it - but there are many observations which well repay a careful reading. Therefore,in view of the importance of the subject, I would strongly recommend this book, despite those reservations. That way, people will make up their own mind on these issues. I cannot give it five stars, much as I would like to. I hope I have not been unfair.

Rating:
Summary: Clear Thinking and Cogent Arguments
Review: If you are searching (as I was) for a book that presents a clearly thought out analysis of problems (or difficulties, as I have learned in reading this book) regarding faith encountered in a relativistic secularism, and that analysis being securely grounded in the Western Judeo-Christian traditon, then search no more! Fr. Dubay is nothing if not clear thinking and comprehensive in his analysis. Remember the priest you had in college that would go on and on (and you saying to yourself - "Alright already, I get the point!") And now, years later, you realized that you should have been paying more attention? Here is another chance to see what a well thought out and studied argument should look like! "...a secure certitude in ultimate religious matters is possible." (p. 77). Here is a book that can help you get to that secure certitude.

Rating:
Summary: Review of Dubay, _Faith and Certitude_
Review: Review of Thomas Dubay, S.M. _Faith and Certitude_

This excellent discussion of the certitude of faith - the very possibility of which may be surprising, even shocking, to many modern readers -- is primarily aimed at a Roman Catholic readership. The main concern of the book is religious belief, although human belief in general is dealt with as background, a practice that has become more or less standard since Newman. "This volume is not a defensive polemic. It is the rendering of an account of the confidence we have in God and in his revelation." p 22.

The first two chapters (The Empty Ache; Do We Need Certitude?) are introductory. Chapters 3 and 4, which Fr. Dubay says he was tempted to omit because of their negative nature, are a summary of obstacles to religious belief in the present age and even in the present Church. The meat of the discussion begins with Ch. 5 (Clarifying Our Concepts), which deals with definitions. Ch. 6 (The Causes of Error) regards error chiefly as extending our judgments beyond the available evidence - both in the secular world and in the Church -- and posits some reasons why we do this.

Ch. 7 (How We Attain Certitude) offers essentially Newman's "cumulation of probabilities." In spite of my great admiration for Newman I personally do not see as yet that we have a method of cumulation of probabilities that leads to the Christian faith that could not also lead to rejection of the Christian faith. If evidence for belief is cumulative, then so is evidence for unbelief. It is especially important therefore to note Fr. Dubay's warning (p 115 and elsewhere) that he is dealing only with the natural aspects of religious faith, not with its supernatural aspects.

Ch 8 (Scholarship, Doubt and Certitude) is an especially important one. In most popularizations of science and scholarship, an impression of unanimity is conveyed. The average person has little idea of the actual state of affairs. As ever, the rational response to both science and scholarship is "Stay Tuned!"

Ch 9, Biblical Criticism and Theological Certitude, deals with major attitudes that are taken toward Christian disunity after the Reformation. While the criticisms here are not new, it is clear that there are rumblings of dissatisfaction with 19th- and 20th- century establishments.

Ch 10, Biblical Criticism and Pastoral Practice, asks how the non-expert might react to all that has been discussed in the last chapter. The role of the Church and her liturgy in biblical interpretation is stressed.

Ch 11, Attaining Truth, emphasizes holism: the quest for truth requires not only reasoned argument ("Life is not long enough for a religion of inferences," wrote Newman), but also philosophical realism; moral integrity; intellectual, ethical and religious conversion; vision; love; and above all, exercise of the will. This latter idea is developed in the next two chapters.

Ch 12, A Case in Point: Atheism. This chapter refutes the cardinal implications of atheism: chance origin of the universe, the absurdity of human life, nihlism. The case is essentially that atheism is humanly abnormal.

Ch 13, Another Case: Theism. Here we have an eloquent defense of theism grounded on radical trust in reality, human longing, human transcendence, the material universe, conscience, experience of the transcendent, miracles, and the Person of Jesus. At the end of this chapter is the only discussion in the book of the Problem of Evil, and it is brief: Fr. Dubay makes these points: (a) evil is a difficulty like other difficulties -- human knowledge cannot be perfect; (b) evil is a problem only for the theist; (c) most importantly - the Incarnation solves much of the Problem of Evil (as well as the other great problem of theism, the transcendence of God). This is the essence of the Christian religion; unfortunately for dialogue, knowing this requires a much greater grasp of Christianity than an outsider can possibly have.

The valuable final chapter 14 was added as an afterthought. It is called Letters to An Atheist. There is also a short epilogue.

_Faith and Certitude_ is somewhat repetitive and loosely organized, but I can recommend it heartily as an up-to-date treatment of the contemporary defense of the Faith.

Ken Miner