13
era. This may have been due originally to an apologetic concern. Greek and Roman culture so
valued human reason (and logic) that church fathers like Augustine would have wisely
emphasized instead the reasonableness of Christianity (against the Skeptics). Later, Aquinas was
of course much influenced by Aristotle (and the rules of logic he described). As a result neither
of these worthies of the classic tradition underscored the paradoxical form of some truths the
way some later Christians have.
In light of these influences, it seems surprising that they both so fully accepted and
worked on paradoxical doctrines like the Trinity, the incarnation, and the relation between
human freedom and divine sovereignty. Their solution (and that of most classical Christians)
was to refer to such topics as "mysteries," understandable to a point, but ultimately transcending
our ability to fully comprehend them.
40
Augustine presented Scripture on both sides of these
paradoxes and insisted that the Christian was bound to both.
41
In some places, he went so far as
to pit concurrences in God against each other in order to magnify the greatness of the God of the
Bible.
42
In some cases, Aquinas presented the logical problems in the Christian doctrine of God
as logical objections to what he was teaching and then offered formal solutions, demonstrating
that Christian truth is not opposed to reason.
43
While in other cases, he simply stated that the
whole truth in these matters was beyond reason.
44
Bonaventure likewise affirmed both sides of the same paradoxical truths as Augustine
and Aquinas.
45
Like Augustine, he also explored some of the paradoxes of the faith for the sake
of advancing our wonder and admiration of God. For example, in one treatise he movingly
points to paradoxes in the life of Christ, such as the contrast seen in the humility of God lying in
a manger and in the majestic God being overwhelmed by suffering on the cross.
46