It is a wonderful piece! I'd just add that is essential to Christian doctrine that God can be experienced, that we can talk directly to God, but that doesn't reduce God to human reason or mean that belief in God is irrational or inconsistent. God is supra-rational, above human reason. That is not to say sub-rational, below human reason, like the passions or vices. St. Thomas Aquinas is necessary in addition to St. Anselm. If God is too transcendent then you get the early errors of docetism or apollinarinism.
Excellent comment, my friend, and thank you for taking the time to read the piece! A very fair point, and I actually last night started comparing Chapter 2, Chapter 3, and Chapter 15 in the Proslogion, which seem to all be repeating the same idea, but some subtle differences seem present:
God is something than which nothing greater can be thought. (Chapter 2)
God cannot even be thought not to exist. (Chapter 3)
God is greater than can be thought (Chapter 15)
These all seem to be restated the same point, but they actually come together in interesting ways. If God is “the greatest possible thought” and yet we cannot think God, it’s tempting to say, “Well then, God doesn’t exist,” but Chapter 3 makes that not an option. Also, this means we “must think of God as existing,” and yet whatever we “think God is” cannot be God, meaning we have to keep trying. This runs risks of “hard negative theology” that Aquinas rightly critiques, but we consider 2, 3, and 15 together, this suggests that we “must” think of God as existing but can never “fully think God,” and yet we must always keep trying to know God more. This creates a critical “forward motion” in Anselm that I think helps Anselm being aligned with Aquinas, but I agree Aquinas brings out point that are missing in Anselm. We “must” know and experience God to some degree in Anselm due to Chapter 3, but that knowledge is only valid to the degree it keeps “moving forward” in humility and in realization that it cannot finish its pursuit. But why would it want to? Love is meant to move.
I might add a paragraph to the paper inspired by all this, so I’m grateful for your thoughts! Keep up the awesome work!
It is a wonderful piece! I'd just add that is essential to Christian doctrine that God can be experienced, that we can talk directly to God, but that doesn't reduce God to human reason or mean that belief in God is irrational or inconsistent. God is supra-rational, above human reason. That is not to say sub-rational, below human reason, like the passions or vices. St. Thomas Aquinas is necessary in addition to St. Anselm. If God is too transcendent then you get the early errors of docetism or apollinarinism.
Excellent comment, my friend, and thank you for taking the time to read the piece! A very fair point, and I actually last night started comparing Chapter 2, Chapter 3, and Chapter 15 in the Proslogion, which seem to all be repeating the same idea, but some subtle differences seem present:
God is something than which nothing greater can be thought. (Chapter 2)
God cannot even be thought not to exist. (Chapter 3)
God is greater than can be thought (Chapter 15)
These all seem to be restated the same point, but they actually come together in interesting ways. If God is “the greatest possible thought” and yet we cannot think God, it’s tempting to say, “Well then, God doesn’t exist,” but Chapter 3 makes that not an option. Also, this means we “must think of God as existing,” and yet whatever we “think God is” cannot be God, meaning we have to keep trying. This runs risks of “hard negative theology” that Aquinas rightly critiques, but we consider 2, 3, and 15 together, this suggests that we “must” think of God as existing but can never “fully think God,” and yet we must always keep trying to know God more. This creates a critical “forward motion” in Anselm that I think helps Anselm being aligned with Aquinas, but I agree Aquinas brings out point that are missing in Anselm. We “must” know and experience God to some degree in Anselm due to Chapter 3, but that knowledge is only valid to the degree it keeps “moving forward” in humility and in realization that it cannot finish its pursuit. But why would it want to? Love is meant to move.
I might add a paragraph to the paper inspired by all this, so I’m grateful for your thoughts! Keep up the awesome work!