It is impossible to find in the writings of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger We do not find any reference, or at least, it does not come close to the question about the conflict between "faith and reason"; the incessant search for harmony between these two elements marked a whole experience of reflection on God, what he does, what he is and what he means.
To put this in context, recently in my theology school one of the theological subjects was revitalized around some of the writings of Joseph Ratzinger. I must admit that it filled me with enthusiasm and I took it as a challenge to enter a little more into the thought and the person of the German theologian of the twentieth century.
Thus, with the help of the work The Church and scientific theologycontained in the Theory of theological principles (Barcelona, 2005, p. 388-399), a particular itinerary began, a path to the truth from the hand of one of the most iconic preachers on the Truth -in capital letters-, and its meaning in the Christian life. For Ratzinger "faith must never and under no circumstances be opposed to reason, but neither can it be subjected to it"; a distinction that constitutes him as the central axis on which all the thematic development of his lines will run. Contrary to the above, he insisted on many occasions on the close union and link that must exist between faith and reason, without the intention of promoting a reduction of this reality to the methods of modernity.
Theology, science and Magisterio
Now, in the fragment that concerns us, we find a brief exercise that should make us think about the place of the Church and theology in a world that is more and more based on reason than on the criteria of faith. theologythe science and the Magisterio. At the same time, he discovers in his letters a theology capable of recognizing the limits of science, but, in spite of this, a clear conviction that dialogue with science should not be renounced, and he takes a step towards recognizing the importance of a faith that is not reduced to a simple adherence without content, a simple closeness or adoption of ideas and concepts that do not link the vital experience with the Risen One.
Without prejudice to the foregoing, it is curious that the many comments on the interpretation of Sacred Scripture, or that the definition of the doctrinal elements depends to a large extent on the intervention of the Church, especially those who exercise an important role in the interpretation of Sacred Scripture, are dealt with in its lines, or that the definition of the doctrinal elements depends to a large extent on the intervention of the Church, especially those who exercise an important role in the interpretation of Sacred Scripture. work docendi in the ecclesial reality.
This tension is not something new, it is not a reality that the Church has had to face in modern times, since the Middle Ages we know of a multiplicity of cases where the intervention of the Church, in the person of its pastors (bishops), has been necessary, despite the fact that the general criterion is that, under penalty of of the justification of the autonomy of the sciences (adducing its own logic and method), the generalized position of an entire collegiate body, such as the Magisterium (Pontifical Biblical Commission), is to be set aside, Biblical interpretation in the Church1993, n. 32. 3b).
The autonomy of science
But what does this autonomy of science imply? Ratzinger himself, in another of his theological commentaries, questions the idea of the complete autonomy of science, pointing out that science is generally marked by prior interests and values; in fact, the very conclusions that each of these offers in various areas are conditioned by data that are already pre-existing. This is the so-called neo-Marxist critique who pointed out the close relationship between science and power.
The comparison he makes between other religions, in particular between Hinduism and Christianity, is curious. Kraemer expresses that while Hinduism lacks a strict orthodoxy and is based on common religious practices without the need for a shared conviction, Christianity, on the other hand, depends on an orthodoxy, a common conviction that is capable of articulating essential beliefs such as life, death and resurrection; thus, the knowledge of truth in Christians is not only symbolic, but realistic, it is a historical truth-, and on the other hand, the diversity between the concepts of truth, revelation and religious knowledge.
As a Christian - personal commentary, if I may - just these brief lines in a sort of comparison and contrast, have aroused in me an inner feeling of gratitude for the gift we undeservedly receive, having this reality that surpasses us, that embraces us without exhausting us, that we assume without corrupting it, with which we unite without losing our personal being, our individuality.
Community dimension of faith
Now, we go a step further, we cannot remain in the experience of faith lived in individuality, but we must enter into the community dimension, and in community we are able to receive a particular and fundamental impulse in the life of Christians: the mission, a mission that arises from the certainty that the Christian revelation is something real and concrete, and not just a set of empty ideasIt is not an interpretation that is diluted in the midst of other religions "similar" to this one, that is not the point. It is a project that was born in a specific subject, which has had its own history, its own process of foundation and institution.
Christianity attempts to understand and develop revealed truths within a coherent framework, focusing attention on producing a theology capable of dialoguing with reason and philosophy, making it inseparable from faith itself.
However, in spite of the greatness of the Christian faith experience, it is curious that since then there has been talk of a crisis of theologyIn other words, of reflection. The root of the root is to have manipulated Sacred Scripture, coining a series of historical and literary methods, reducing it in every sense of the word.
Revelation, in itself, does not depend entirely on the data that Sacred Scripture can contain, although it does correspond to what the sacred book offers. The entire content of faith cannot be justified by what Scripture indicates, without taking into account the other fields of Revelation, namely Tradition and the Magisterium.
The faith of Christians is based on a living community of faith that is capable of giving meaning and context to Revelation, that assumes it, that shares it; it is a community that not only interprets the texts, but lives them through the sacraments and catechesis, which no longer depend on the will of the Church, but on its very nature.
Finally, taking up again the idea raised by Ratzinger, I would like to echo an element that has attracted my attention, and that is the fact that it is affirmed that faith is a "Yes" to a concrete Truth, a Truth that demands to be announced and understood, a Truth that is proclaimed, or at least should be, by Christianity, a Truth whose identity has a concrete face: Jesus of Nazareth.. A Jesus who is not a symbolic element of faith, on the contrary, is real, an authentic historical event with real implications for the whole of humanity, which is why he cannot be interchanged with other accounts of religions that preach about divinity.
