Faith is a belief in that which is not seen directly. It can be spoken of with regards to a fact (faith that something) or a person (faith in someone). It is this second case which I wish to discuss today.
Why might God want us to have faith in Him — particularly, in His revealed Word? One common answer is that it is for our own good: as finite creatures, we cannot know everything about ourselves, our world, or the purpose of our lives. Therefore, if we rely entirely on our own understanding of things, we are bound to make mistakes now and then. In contrast, by relying on God’s limitless and perfect understanding of things, we can achieve the best possible result in every case. Therefore, it makes more sense to rely on the one who has the better knowledge and perspective.
But is it better to always, in every case, rely on God for the answer? If we do, and if God gives us all the answers we are looking for, we will get everything “right”; but is this the best case scenario? Is the goal in life to do everything the right way, and to make no mistakes? Is it not rather to learn the way that is good, and to deepen our love for the good and our disdain for evil? Put another way, would God be more pleased with a perfectly obedient child who had no understanding of evil other than that God did not want it, or with a mature adult who had learned, and understood, the good for him or herself? Opinions go either way, but to me, the latter seems much more preferable (as when J.S. Mill asserts that it is better to be an unhappy Socrates than a happy pig); but the Scriptures, and our Christian teaching, seem to endorse the former. Those who sin less are generally held in a higher esteem by the sacred authors than those who have committed greater sin, even if they grow to become wiser and more zealous than their more innocent counterparts. The idea seems to be that, if the end goal is right behavior, it is better to come by that right behavior sooner rather than later, with fewer mishaps along the way. It’s just more efficient. Those who have to learn for themselves have chosen the “hard way.”
Does God therefore prefer an obedient faith to a developed conscience? Is it better to have faith in God about what is unseen, or to see it oneself? Certainly arguments could be made in either case, but the latter seems to have the stronger argument. However, the more developed one’s conscience becomes, the less important one’s faith becomes. I can take it on faith that a certain practice (say, adultery) is wrong, but if I see for myself why it is wrong (either through reason or through experience), I will believe it is wrong based on my understanding of it, not based on my faith in God’s teaching. Which is better? I would say, whichever way relieves the most suffering in the long run. If I will only have one or two chances in my life to commit adultery, it is better to believe by faith that it is wrong than to discover through experience. But for something like lying, which I have many experiences to commit, it may be better to discover through direct experience why lying is wrong, because it will decrease my likelihood of lying in the future. Therefore, I may actually lie less if I have discovered for myself why lying is evil.
This brings up the point of P/PC balance (I took this from Stephen Covey’s book The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, p. 57): P (production) versus PC (production capability). By focusing entirely on production (in this case, commission of good and elimination of evil), and neglecting production capability (one’s ability to choose good over evil), one will actually end up with less overall production than if one had given PC its proper care. Every business owner understands the value of taking time to clean the machines, give the workers breaks, and research better methods of doing the business. Likewise, we must be mindful to take the time to educate and strengthen our conscience, so that it may better do its job in the future. (Students, is not this why you are spending your time and money on school, so that you can make more money and have more time later on?) Keeping the P/PC ratio in balance is essential to maximizing long-term productivity. Would it not also be so with one’s conscience?
There are two ways to make decisions: to make them yourself, or to decide to follow another’s decisions. I believe that this falls into the P/PC analogy. If doing good is P, and making one’s own decisions is PC, then one can maximize one’s goodness (if defined simply in terms of works) by taking time away from P and investing in PC. But, one may counter, could a Christian persist forever in P? That is, if one is absolutely committed to following God’s command in every moment, could one survive by never developing their own conscience — never learning to make their own decisions? This seems to be the kind of Christians that many people want to cultivate: Christians who lean on God’s eternal Law and not on their own understandings of morality. Assuming one had the faithfulness to stick with this in every circumstance (or at least the vast majority of them), this would doubtless lead to an extremely holy life, excelling in the production of good. But though this person would do more good and less evil than the average man or woman, is such a person therefore more virtuous? more praiseworthy? more holy??
Unfortunately, the “right answer” is not always clear in every situation, even to the most faithful of believers (or so I believe). God does not give us an answer to every question in life. And it is for these scenarios that we must be prepared — by having a well-formed, functioning conscience.
