Relationship between Faith and Theology According to Joseph Ratzinger

By Jacques AGBOKABULO Bayaa/ Mccj

The human mind is characterized by an endless search for truth, something on which
one can rely on without any doubt or being deceived. And among several spheres which are
questioned and preoccupy human mind, are concepts such as “Faith” or “Belief” and
“Theology”. These two concepts – faith and theology – have been, are and will still be a real
concern of human beings. This for the simple reason that, they are intrinsically, if not
ontologically, part of the “all” and “whole” man. They engage man in his relationship with
the Absolute, the Transcendent, with God.
Many scholars, both philosophers and theologians, have devoted their time and
intellectual finesse to argue on them. We have people such as Martin Heidegger, Karl
Jaspers, saint Augustine, saint Anselm, saint Thomas Aquinas and of course Joseph
Ratzinger. In fact, this short reflexion focuses specifically on the Address or speech of Joseph
Ratzinger on “Faith and Theology”, given on the occasion of the conferring of an honorary
doctorate in theology by the Theological Faculty of Wroclaw/Breslau. In his Address,
Ratzinger gives some insights on faith and theology, which seem important for me and
relevant for us today in understanding what faith and theology are.
What is “Faith”?
To understand this expression, Ratzinger starts with the analysis of the very meaning
of the concept “faith” “belief” in German. He says that, the word “Glaube” from German,
has two quite different meanings, as it could also be in any other language. There is the
common or the everyday meaning that people usually associate with the word. This can be
heard in a case where someone could say: “I believe the weather will be fine tomorrow. Or, I
believe that this or that piece of news is not true.”1 Here, according to Ratzinger, as we can
all realise, the word “believe” is equivalent of “think”. This implies actually an imperfect
form of perception. And thus, “People talk of believing when the status of knowing has not
been reached.”2 This is at the level of uncertainty of something which is somehow out of our
control.
In this perspective, Ratzinger notices that, “Many people probably think that this
meaning of believing is also applicable in the realm of religion, so that the contents of the
Christian faith are an imperfect, preliminary stage of knowledge. When we say ‘I believe in
God’ – he continues – this, they think, is just an expression of our not knowing anything
definite about the matter.”3 Indeed, this is not what Christian faith means. The truth is that, in
reality, for the Christian believers, the words ‘I believe’, do not actually express a lack of
certainty, but articulate a particular kind of certainty – one that is in many respects a higher

1
Joseph Ratzinger, Pilgrims Fellowship of Faith: The Church as Communion. (San Francisco: Ignatius Press,
2005), 18.
2
Ibid., 18.
3
Ibid., 18.

1
degree of certainty than that of science yet one that does indeed carry with it the dynamic of
“shadow and image”, the dynamic of the “not yet”.4
Christian faith, in its nature, cannot then be built on a kind of supposition or on a
“perhaps”. This is because faith does not come forth as a result of a logical analysis of
scientific experimentations based on observation, but from hearing. Thus, “in contact
between God and man there is a certainty of a quite different kind from the certainty of
objectivizing thought. We live faith, not as a hypothesis, but as the certainty on which our life
is based.”5 To widen this understanding of what faith is, Joseph Ratzinger uses the insights of
Saint Augustine borrowed by Saint Thomas. This is the notion of faith as “thinking with
assent”.
What is faith as “thinking with assent”?
In his De Veritate Q. 14, a. 1. Corp. Thomas Aquinas, following Augustin, defines
believing as “thinking with assent”. And according to Ratzinger, “this coexistence of thinking
and assent is something faith has in common with science. It is a characteristic of science for
thinking to result in assent. Anyone following its progression ends by saying: Yes, that is
right.”6 Indeed, in science, the truth or the evident reality is affirmed as it is after a process of
trial, success and failures which end up asserting the credibility or incredibility of the fact.
This process can also be found in faith, because assent is as well part of believing. However,
faith is not an act of abstention, but a matter of decision, of certainty. And “being eternal
open, [to changes as science is], and keeping oneself open in all directions, is exactly what is
not.”7 Thus, faith is not rooted in the influence of sight or mere observation, hypothesis, but
rather in a full conviction – which is far of being an illusion – but certainty. “It is hypostasis,
the Letter to the Hebrews says (11:1): taking one’s stand, and standing firm, on what is hoped
for; being convinced.”8
From this view, Ratzinger argues that “the relationship between assent and thought is
different in faith from what it is in science, in knowledge in general. In the case of scientific
demonstration, the obviousness of the business forces us, by inner necessity, into assent.”9
This is because from what we perceive, observe, analyse, we are brought forth to a common
fact that “Yes, that is right”. We cannot, but say “yes” to the seriousness of the process which
led us to the result obtained. And in this perspective, Thomas Aquinas says that the certainty
attained ‘determines’ our thinking. Thus, in the insight obtained, the movement of thought
comes to rest; it finds its conclusion. Is that also the structure of faith? Actually, not. The
structure of the act of faith is quite different. Let us look at it.

4
Ibid., 18-19.
5
Ibid., 20.
6
Ibid
7
Ibid
8
Ibid
9
Ibid

2
The “ex aequo” Notion of Faith
While in science the assent comes from different evidences presented to our
categories of knowing, the assent of faith comes from an act of “will”. Here the thought
processes and the assent balance each other, they are “ex aequo”. This expression – which
comes from Aquinas – according to Ratzinger “means that in the act of believing the assent
comes about in a different way from the way it does in the act of knowing: not through the
degree of evidence bringing the process of thought to its conclusion, but by an act of will, in
connection with which the thought process remains open and still under way.”10 This brings
forth the clarity of what Christian act of believing is. It is not a matter of our reason pushing
us to assent, but actually an act of love, an experience of being touched from within by God.
Does this mean that faith excludes reason? Actually, not. Reason and faith are not opposite to
one another, but they are neither the same thing. What they are is basically what Pope John
Paul II said in his Encyclical Fides et Ratio that, “they are as two wings” which in fact lead
us to the same truth, the ultimate One. They support one another. Reason clarifies faith and
faith completes reason. However, faith goes beyond reason.
Taking from Aquinas this conception of faith as “an act of will”, Ratzinger makes it
clear that, “we must first be aware that in Thomas Aquinas’ terminology the concept of will
is more far-reaching than we understand it to be today. What Thomas calls the will
corresponds roughly to what in the biblical language is called ‘heart.’”11 This understanding
shows how greater will – heart – is compared to reason. As Blaise Pascal noticed with
diligence that, « Le Coeur a ses raisons, que la raison ne connaît pas. », which means, the
heart has its reasons; it has its own rationality, which reaches beyond ‘mere’ reason. Thus,
Ratzinger asserts, “we are able to give the assent of faith because the will – heart – has been
touched by God, ‘affected’ by him. Through being touched in this way, the will knows that
even what is still not ‘clear’ to the reason is true.”12 This understanding, changes undoubtedly
and completely the dynamic of faith from thinking with assent to assent with thinking. And
that is actually what theology is.
Theology as an “Assent with Thinking”
In its very broad sense, theology is a discourse, a study or a science of/on God. It is a
human investigation on the divine reality. From the Christian perspective, theology stands in
relationship with the revealed truth of God, who has made Himself known through and in our
Lord Jesus Christ. It is not a vague investigation, but a precise one which tries to ponder the
mysteries of God. Christian theology is basically a pneumatic action. This is because, it is the
Holy Spirit alone who illumines both human faith and reason to enter step by step into the
“bright darkness” of the Mysterium Dei. Hence, the words of Jesus, “He is the Spirit who
reveals the truth about God.” John 14: 17; “The Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my
name, will teach you everything and make you remember all that I have told you.” John 14:
26.

10
Ibid. 21.
11
Ibid.
12
Ibid.

3
 Theology comes forth here as a result of what we have already believed though still
not yet fully understood. It comes as a faith in search of its understanding. Hence the famous
definition of saint Anselm “Fides quaerens intellectum” or the one of saint Augustine
“Crede ut intelligam”. According to Ratzinger, when we begin to understand that structure,
that procedure, it also becomes clear why the Christian faith produced theology and did so
necessarily. In fact, the nature of theology can be understood only on the basis of the nature
of faith.13 The obedience of faith14 to the revealed truth founds from the very bottom of what
we know as theology. Faith, being an assent with thinking, becomes itself an endless journey
of human beings who struggle day after day to understand the “already settled and founded
truth of God.” That truth which, through his heart, man has already accepted, found as his
happiness. This is because, “When the heart comes into contact with God’s Logos, with the
Word who became man, this inmost point of his existence is being touched. Then, he does
not merely feel, he knows from within himself: that is it; that is He, that is what [he] was
waiting for.15

This appears as a kind of recognition or discovery of what has been object for
happiness, which though already discovered, but still “not yet”, because is still ahead of us. as
saint John the Evangelist would say, “See how much the Father has loved us! His love so
great that we are called God’s children – and so, in fact, we are. […] beloved, we are now
God’s children, but it is not yet clear what we shall become.” John 3: 1-2. To show the reason
why it is still ahead of us, Ratzinger argues that, “the process of thought is not completed; it
has not yet come to rest. Here it becomes particularly clear – he continues – that believing is
a pilgrimage, and also a pilgrimage of thought, which is still following the way.”16 From this
perspective, we can come to understand that, because the process of thought has not attained
to assent on its own way or effort, but on the basis of the will, it has not yet found in this
sense its rest; it is still reflecting and is still in a state and stage of seeking (inquisition).17
The truth here is that in our relationship with God, the will – our heart – precedes our
reason once it is touched by God. In this process, God takes first our hearts before
illuminating our reason, before we enter in an intellectual process of understanding what is
actually going on. Reason, in fact, comes to give sense, to make understandable what we are
already living from within us.
This is where comes clearly the relationship between faith and theology as an “assent
with thinking”. This is based on the fact that, “within faith, however firm the assent [is], a
contrary motion (motus de contrario) can arise: struggling and questioning thought remains
present, which ever and again has to seek its light from that essential light which shines into
the heart from the Word of God.”18 Theology, in seeking how to clarify the dark zones of
faith, has not to seek the light from elsewhere, but clarification and answer to a struggling

13
Ibid.
14
Dei Verbum no. 5.
15
Joseph Ratzinger, Pilgrim Fellowship of Faith: The Church as Communion, 27
16
Ibid.
17
Ibid.
18
Ibid.

4
faith should be found in the Word of God itself. This Word has in itself both what it reveals
and what it means. And in terms of relation, faith always comes before theology. “Faith is an
anticipation that is made possible by the will through the heart being touched by God. It
grasps in advance what we cannot yet see and cannot yet have. This anticipation sets us in
motion. We have to follow that motion. Because assent has been anticipated, thought has to
try to catch up with that.”19 And consequently, this is what believing is, a constant pondering
of the revealed truth. That is why, according to Ratzinger, there must always be theology to
accompany faith throughout its pilgrimage. Theology is thus above all, a means which, based
on the Word of God, is guiding us into walking on the way of thought towards God.
Theology should therefore help us to fall more and more in love with God.
Can we thus conclude that the understanding of Ratzinger’s relationship between faith
and theology is the only one? This could have been a very false affirmation. There are many
other theologians and philosophers who have a quite different view of this subject matter. Let
us look at some.
Different Views from other Scholars and Theologians Contrary to Ratzinger’s View
We have more than four currents which suggest a quite different approach of relation
faith-theology. Such are, Liberal theologians, Protestant perspectives, Secular and
Postmodern critiques, and Feminist and Liberation theologians. Before going briefly through
these currents, we want to mention the theological understanding and approach of the two
contemporary aforementioned philosophers. That is Martin Heidegger and Karl Jaspers.
a) Martin Heidegger and Karl Jaspers View on Faith and Theology
Both, shared a common view regarding the scientific or philosophic seriousness of
what theology is. Taking on account the subject matter of faith as based on the “revealed
truth” – which is supposed known already – they argue that “Faith excludes philosophy, real
research into and seeking for ultimate realities. For faith supposes it knows all that already.
Its certainty leaves no place for questions.”20 And according to Karl Jaspers21, anyone who
believes has already failed as a philosopher. This is because “all the questioning is merely
apparent; it has to come up at the end with the answer that has already been given.”22
And consequently, Jaspers argues further that, theology cannot at all be a genuine
scholarly discipline since it argues only in appearance, having its results already given in
advance. And in the same view, Heidegger, in his book Sein und Zeit – Being and Time –
criticizes the Aristotle’s Metaphysics reducing it to a mere onto-theology (meaning, based on
an exploration of an illusionary God placed as ultimate Sein, Being, Truth), which
unfortunately hinders the true investigation on ontology, the path to the true Being. 23 Thus,
theology, which claims having the truth on the ultimate Being, is lowered to a pure illusion.

19
Ibid.
20
Ibid.
21
These Ideas can be found in his book, Philosophical Faith and Revelation, translated by Ashton, 1935.
22
Joseph Ratzinger, Pilgrim Fellowship of Faith, 20.
23
Martin Heidegger, L’Etre et le Temps, Paris, Gallimard, 1927, par. 1, 25.

5
These two philosophers had as main concern, removing theology from the sphere of scholarly
discipline. Let us now see the contrary currents to Ratzinger’s view.
b) Liberal Theologians
Here we have scholars such as Hans Küng and Edward Schillebeeckx.24 Starting with
Küng, a contemporary and sometimes critical counterpart to Ratzinger, he argues for a more
open and historically critical approach to theology. While Joseph Ratzinger puts more
emphasis on faith as an “assent with thinking”, Küng takes an opposite direction stressing the
need for reason to challenge dogmatic formulations of faith. This means, questioning how
genuine and truthful are some doctrinal principles on which our faith is based. He is critical
of Ratzinger’s more traditional and hierarchical view of doctrine.25
Edward Schillebeeckx, a Dominican theologian, on his side, takes a more experience-
based approach to faith. He emphasized that theology should actually emerge from lived
experience rather than primarily from doctrinal formulations, contrasting with Ratzinger’s
more intellectual and dogmatic approach. He says, “Christianity is not a message which has
to be believed but an experience of faith which becomes a message. Then, as an explicit
message, it seeks to offer a new possibility of life experience to others who hear it from their
own experience of life.”26 However, it seems important to me to clarify here that, the
intellectual and dogmatic approach of Ratzinger is not far of being an experience-based
theology. This is because, Ratzinger takes as theological starting point, the Scripture, the
Bible. And looking at it closely, we can realize that Bible comes forth as the inspired Word of
God which is grounded and rooted from people’s experience with God.
c) Protestant Perspectives on Faith and Theology
From this current, we can as well mention two scholars: Karl Barth and Paul Tillich.
In fact, while Karl Barth, as Ratzinger, viewed faith as a response to divine revelation, he
was, however, highly critical of any attempt to merge theology with human rationalism. He
rejected natural theology, whereas Ratzinger integrated elements of philosophical reasoning,
particularly from Augustine and Aquinas. On the other side, Paul Tillich’s concept of faith as
an “ultimate concern”27 in his work Dynamics of Faith (1957), understands faith as centered
movement of the whole personality toward our ultimate concern, which is God.
This conception differs from Ratzinger’s more Christocentric and ecclesial approach.
Tillich saw faith in an existential way, whereas Ratzinger understands it as deeply rooted in
teachings of the Church. Thus, for Ratzinger, “faith is the encounter with what I cannot think
up myself or bring by own efforts but what must come to encounter me.”28 One receives or
makes an encounter with faith that is professed by the Church. And thus, faith becomes

24
Because of the limit scope of this reflection, we shall not present here a full development of their theological
understanding, but only some few points which are different from Ratzinger’s.
25
Infallible? An Inquiry of Hans Kung quoted by August Bernhard Hasler in, How the Pope Became Infallible:
Pius and the Politics of Persuasion. (New York: Doubleday & Company, 1981), 3.
26
Edward Schillebeeckx, Jesus: An Experiment in Christology. (London: Collins, 1979), 2.
27
Paul Tillich, Dynamics of Faith. (First Happer Torchbook, 1957), 1.
28
Joseph Ratzinger, Church, Ecumenism and Politic, 10

6
something that is common, though also personal as professed by an individual who is part of
the community.
d) Secular and Postmodern Critiques
In this current, we have philosophers such as Jürgen Habermas, John Caputo and
some postmodern philosophers like Jacques Derrida. In fact, Habermas, a philosopher rather
than a theologian, engaged in dialogue with Ratzinger in Munich 2004 29, on “the future of
religion”, arguing that faith must be subject to rational discourse in secular societies. He
challenged the idea that faith provides an absolute and radical foundation for truth, preferring
a model where religious belief must be tested in public reason. This position of Habermas
suggests an openness of faith to the secular world, allowing itself to be challenged from its
very foundation by secular thoughts.
On the other side, John Caputo, a postmodern theologian, was actually influenced by
Jacques Derrida. He critiques Ratzinger’s strong emphasis on doctrinal truth and certainty in
faith. Caputo, for instance, sees faith as more fluid and deconstructible rather than something
firmly established in objective truth. This is, of course, based on the theory of the
“deconstruction” of Jacques Derrida, which shows how metaphysical truths (or dogmatic
truths) can be emptied of their content through a serious scientific analysis. Thus, if faith is
deconstructible, then its truth can be taken as illusory or contingent.
e) Feminist and Liberation Theologians
From this last current of our analysis, we also have two theologians: Leonardo Boff
and Elizabeth Johnson. Starting with Boff, who is a key figure in Liberation Theology. He
argued that Ratzinger’s theological approach was too detached from social and economic
realities. He engaged in discussion with the Congregation of the Doctrine of Faith when
Joseph Ratzinger was by then its Prefect. He criticized highly the structure and governance of
the Church which, Ratzinger as Prefect, was supporting. He writes criticizing the Church that,
“It is strange to see that the Church institution has developed into exactly that which Christ
did not want it to be.”30 He emphasized more that theology must be engaged in the struggles
of the poor, whereas Ratzinger was more critical of Marxist-influenced theological
movements. In fact, the Marxist influence, as philosophical and sociological theory, can help
theology to be aware of different situations of people. However, it can also be a danger to the
right understanding of Christian faith, in the sense that, it can foster violence and hatred
wrongly supported by a wrong interpretation of the Word of God.
Elizabeth Johnson, on her side, being a Feminist theologian, has criticized the
hierarchical and male-centered perspectives in traditional catholic theology, including
Ratzinger’s. she rather advocates for a theology that includes diverse experiences and voices,
something Ratzinger’s works are often accused of neglecting.

29
Michael Welker, Habermas and Ratzinger on the Future of Religion. In “Scottish Journal of Theology”, Ltd.
(Cambridge University Press, UK, 2010), 456.
30
Leonardo Boff, Church: Charism and Power: Liberation Theology and the Institutional Church. (USA,
1985), Quoted in “120 Banned Books: Censorship Histories of World Literature.” 2nd ed., Editors, Nicholas J.
Karolides, Margaret Bald and Dawn B. Sova, (Checkmark Books, USA, 2011), 212.

7
These are some of the critics addressed to Joseph Ratzinger’s approach of the relationship
between faith and theology.
On our side, the exposition of Ratzinger’s relationship between faith and theology
sounds actually relevant. Faith is basically, as he has said, the foundation of theology. And
Christian faith is the one that is based on the Word of God, on the revealed truth of God. And
according to Joseph Ratzinger, it is a received faith; something that does actually not come
from our own effort; but given to us by God through the Church. Though, we agree with
Ratzinger, however, we can, as well, read faith from the very wide sense as a predisposition
intrinsically rooted in our human nature which enables us to receive or enter into a
transcendental encounter with the Absolute, with something greater than us. Thus, it means,
apart from being received, faith constitutes the very nature of our being. We are made to be in
a constant movement towards our completeness.
From this perspective, we can understand faith as an expression of the
incompleteness, an ontological-void, an ontological-emptiness that affects human being. This
void, emptiness makes man to seek day after day how to fill this gap. His soul, heart remains
restless if he/she has not yet found God or the Ultimate truth. “As the deer longs for streams
of water, so [his] soul longs for you, o God. This was as well expressed by saint Augustine
when he said, “To praise Thee is the wish of man who is but a part of Thy creation, man who
carries about with him his own mortality, who carries about the evidence of his sin and the
evidence that Thou resist the proud. […] Thou dost bestir him so that he takes delight in
praising Thee: for Thou made us for Thee and our heart is unquiet till it finds its rest in
Thee.”31
Furthermore, taking into account some critiques addressed to Ratzinger, we also agree
that Christian faith and theology should also be grounded in people’s experience of life, in
addition to being rooted in the Bible and Tradition. This is because God meets people in their
daily experiences of life. And in conclusion, despite those critiques, I agree with Ratzinger
that faith is not an illusion or a “ perhaps”, but certainty based on the revealed truth of God;
that it is an “ assent with thinking” which makes of it an endless journey, pilgrimage towards
the full understanding of the Mysterium Dei, where we shall end up to meet and to see God as
He is (1 John 3), when He shall finally be Omnia Omnibus – that is to mean – when He will
be All in all (1 Cor. 15: 28).

31
Saint Augustine, Confession, (The Catholic University of America Press, Washington, 1966), p.4.