If I am being completely honest, I don’t see the point of the reading for this week. To me, it just seemed like the reflections of a man in a cell, trying to provide some sort of comfort to himself. Boethius even acknowledges this himself (even though he probably doesn’t mean to) when he refers to the personification of philosophy as “the perfect comforter” and a source of “strength”. What Boethius desires from Philosophy is not knowledge or wisdom, but he asks for her to “show me quickly what true happiness is” (Boethius 37). This demand that he makes does not sound like a demand that would be made in a Christian text. While the majority of this writing focuses on the natural logic and reason of man, it is still considered to be a Christian text, but should it?
Throughout Boethius’ conversation with Philosophy, she uses natural logic and reasoning to help Boethius come to the conclusions that he comes to. In the writing, there were obvious influences of philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle. It seemed to reference philosophy and reasoning more than it did Christianity. In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle writes that “we conceive happiness to be the most desirable of all things” (Aristotle, 14). Then in The Consolation of Philosophy, Boethius writes “To true happiness, to the goal your mind has dreamed of” (Boethius 37). And I haven’t yet mentioned the writing style of Boethius’ prose. The dialogue of The Consolation of Philosophy closely resembles that of Plato’s The Republic in that one character (Philosophy and Socrates) propose thoughts and ideas from logic, then their listeners agree or occasionally ask a question for clarification (side note: this structure really bothers me as the author is just attempting to validate their own arguments). I don’t think that this should be considered a Christian text if it has more in common with philosophy than Christianity.
Some would argue that it is a Christian text because it was written by a Christian and is a reflection on God. Boethius claims that “we must agree that the most high God is full of the highest and most perfect good” (Boethius 55). While reading this through a Christian lens, one may find nothing wrong with this statement. However, I think that followers of other monotheistic religions would also find nothing wrong with it while reading it through their lens. For example, the Quran claims that “God is most compassionate towards you, a dispenser of grace” (Surah 57). Both of these quotes speak of God’s goodness and grace, but the difference is that one is just the reflections of a man, while the other is actually from a religious text. The later is about the Islamic God but the former is just a statement on whatever divine being exist outside of our world. The only piece of information that we have that would lead us to believe that Boethius is referring to the Christian God is the fact that he was a Christian. There is no actual evidence in the text itself.
*mic drop*
Okay fine. I’ll actually write some sort of conclusion. I don’t think that any text should be considered a Christian text except for the Bible. As Basil had pointed out, there is a place for pagan literature and we can still learn from it, but this text is not to be considered a religious text like the Bible is.
Landon,
ReplyDeleteOverall solid post this week. You made your opinion clear and supported it with evidence. Your logic made sense. And the title was... creative. Good job.
Scholarship 19/20
Depth 19/20
Grammar 10/10
Overall 50/50
I really admired the clarity of your honesty in writing this weeks post, and you didn't sacrifice anything from the rubric in order to do so. Solid work.
ReplyDelete50/50
Landon: thanks for the responses this week. They always raise good questions. One that I have is regarding your comment, "Both of these quotes speak of God’s goodness and grace, but the difference is that one [the Consolation of Philosophy] is just the reflections of a man, while the other [the Quran] is actually from a religious text." I'm wondering how you make this distinction? Would it be possible to imagine a society in which people came to read Boethius's text as a genuine account of Boethius having a conversation with Wisdom Incarnate, so that the words of Philosophy as seen as the words of God? For these people then, would Boethius's text move from being just the words of a man to an actual religious text? I guess what I'm getting at is, what are the qualifications to distinguish between the two? Belief? Because wouldn't many people believe that Muhammad was just a man writing his own reflections, that he did not actually hear the voice of God?
ReplyDeleteWhich raises questions about what constitutes a Christian text. You're certainly right to try to hammer this down to a specific definition, and it's fair to say Boethius might lie outside that. But-- to be very provocative-- what makes the Bible a Christian text? Certainly Paul's letters are "just" the reflections of a man (at times writing in a Roman prison cell). And can the writings of Moses and the Prophets be considered Christian if they were written hundreds of years before Christ's birth? I can think of at least two simple responses: that of course these Scriptures should be considered Christian because a) the early Church accepted them as the central tenants of their faith and declared they were divinely-inspired and b) because of the Holy Spirit actually divinely inspiring them. While lots of Christian texts might satisfy a) to some extent ("generally accepted" by the church) they certainly don't reach the level of the Bible in this regard. But what about b)? If all work of truth is inspired by the Holy Spirit, then can any work written by a Christian (even a book on history or science) be considered "Christian" as much as it reflects the truth of God in Christ?
I don't have any definite answers to these, just raising food for thought.