Quote of the Week: Henri de Lubac
First and foremost, then, it is suggested that Christians should take cognizance of the spiritual situation of the world in which they are involved. It is recognized that positivism is an immense edifice of scientific philosophy and practical politics; that Marxism, which has received its Summa if not its Bible in Das Kapital, is a vast and powerful system of political and social economy; and that Nietzsche’s ideas offer and extraordinary profusion of pedagogic resources (in the profoundest sense of the term). There are many elements to be found in all three on which a Christian, as such, is not required to take a stand; there are many others, often mutually contradictory, that he would have the right to claim as his own, after rescuing them from the synthesis that has warped them. They contain many audacities that do not frighten him. And, even at their most blasphemous, they advance criticisms whose justice he is bound to admit.
These three systems, of course, are not three cast-iron constructions. In the real life of the human mind many dissociations take place, so that not all those who call themselves positivists, Marxists, or Nietzscheans are necessarily atheists. Some, for instance, leaving the metaphysical problem open, join the Marxists only for the sake of their social program or, without even examining the details of that program, because of their own aspirations for society; they are, in some cases, more Christian than those who oppose them; and often they have a clearer insight into history. Certain maxims of Comtist origin have served for the expression of what is soundest in conservative circles. Many ideas of a more or less Marxist, Nietzschean or positivist stamp may even find a place in some blueprint for a new synthesis, and neither its orthodoxy nor its value will be called in question on that account. In the Church the work of assimilation never ceases, and it is never too soon to undertake it! Nevertheless, all systems, as shaped and held together by their underlying inspiration, have their own internal logic; and not to see this quite clearly from the outset is to run the risk of going dangerously astray. In the threefold case engaging our attention, this inspiration and this logic are very forcibly thrusting mankind away from God and at the same time urging it alone the lines of a double bondage, social and spiritual.
– Henri de Lubac, The Drama of Atheist Humanism. trans. Edith M. Riely, Anne Englund Nash, and Marc Sebanc (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1998), 12-13.
Comments are closed.
Excellent quote.
I especially enjoyed this exact summation of Marxist fellow travelers:
Some, for instance, leaving the metaphysical problem open, join the Marxists only for the sake of their social program or, without even examining the details of that program, because of their own aspirations for society; they are, in some cases, more Christian than those who oppose them; and often they have a clearer insight into history.
Nothing like a bracing dip in de Lubac to help rouse oneself from the torpor of contemporary American catholic thought.
We Americans–Catholic or not–seem to have a particularly rough time with objective self-appraisal.
Apparently I ought to be reading this guy instead of the stuff I have had my nose in lately. He makes the kinds of distinctions (not even subtle distionctions, just clear-sighted ones) that ward off polarization and demonizing the other side.
I have known atheists who are atheists for all the right reasons, i.e., the God they reject, all thoughtful Christians reject too. But these people too have fallen into oversimplification and polarized thinking.
But how does a thinker like de Lubac get a radio show that reaches millions every day?
Nietzsche was right about one thing: Being stupid has certain payoffs–like having a salable product in the “marketplace of ideas.”
David,
One of the best examples I’ve ever heard about how “being stupid” is “salable” is with the Book of Revelation. The more you know, the less money you can make on it (if you are honest).
150 years ago, religion was “das Opium des Volkes.” Today, consumerism and the entertainment industry arguably deserve that title. So discussion of Lubac’s ideas on any of today’s mainstream media is about as likely as Leo XIII inviting Marx to speak at the Vatican. I tried googling “Lubac EWTN” and there are a few hits; maybe his ideas have a chance on EWTN radio.
“In the real life of the human mind many dissociations take place, so that not all those who call themselves positivists, Marxists, or Nietzscheans are necessarily atheists. Some, for instance, leaving the metaphysical problem open, join the Marxists only for the sake of their social program or, without even examining the details of that program, because of their own aspirations for society; they are, in some cases, more Christian than those who oppose them; and often they have a clearer insight into history.”
This is the type of honesty and openness necessary for a worldly engagement that would be truly beneficial to all parties involved.
How much this differs from the intellectual and spiritual dynamics of many of the self-appointed Catholic apologists who abide on the internet.
Mark
I know. This is how Catholicism has been for 2000 years. It always looks for the good, and realizes it can be “abroad.” But there has always been those fighting against this; we need only look to the controversy around Aquinas before he was canonized…