On Pascal's Wager

When I roast coffee, one of the natural byproducts is CO2 gas, which escapes from the beans for about 18-36 hours of "resting." If one attempts to grind beans and prepare coffee from them before they have "off gassed" the flavor is ruined.

When one finishes reading a great book (or even in the midst of reading), a natural temptation arises to draw conclusions about the story or ideas the book discovers to the reader. The mind has been heated and agitated (sometimes positively, sometimes negatively) and wants to pronounce judgment in order to regain composure, or make good on the ideas through application.

The maxim "make haste slowly" (festina lente) applies in this moment of temptation. The mind needs to "off gas" for a period of time before its conclusions will have the flavor of wisdom. Unfortunately, traditions of misunderstanding can be built upon "off gassed" ideas, ruining the value of an author's work for those who do not encounter it directly, or who take up the work with a tainted palate.

"Off gassed" ideas have accumulated around Pascal's idea of "the wager," which is found in his posthumously published book, Pensées. The standard view takes the wager as a "proof" of God's existence offered to atheists, intended to induce them to belief through an intricate probability game. Here's a portion of it from Pascal:

Yes, but you must wager. There is no choice, you are already committed. Which will you choose then? Let us see: since a choice must be made, let us see which offers you the least interest. You have two things to lose: the true and the good; and two things to stake: your reason and your will, your knowledge and your happiness; and your nature has two things to avoid: error and wretchedness. Since you must necessarily choose, your reason is no more affronted by choosing one rather than the other. That is one point cleared up. But your happiness? Let us weigh up the gain and the loss involved in calling heads that God exists. Let us assess the two cases: if you win you win everything, if you lose you lose nothing. Do not hesitate then; wager that he does exist. (Pensées, p. 123 in 1995 Penguin Classics edition, from which all quotations are taken)

At first glance the wager seems a straightforward inducement to belief in God, but taken in conjunction with other claims Pascal makes throughout the Pensées, to accept it as a complete apologetic proof would be contradictory.

Instead, when viewed in the context of Pascal's view of man and how man comes to know God, the best The Wager provides is a goad toward seeking after God rather than remaining indifferent to Him--a propaedeutic to or preparation for faith rather than an inducement to it.

Consider the following aphorism:

Let us go on to examine the order of the world, and see whether all things do not tend to establish the two main tenets of this religion [Christianity]: Jesus Christ is the object of all things, the centre toward which all things tend. Whoever knows him knows the reason for everything.

Those who go astray only do so for want of seeing one of these two things [that there is a God, of whom all men are capable, and that there is a corruption in nature which makes them unworthy]. It is then perfectly possible to know God but not our own wretchedness, or our own wretchedness but not God; but it is not possible to know Christ without knowing both God and our wretchedness alike.

And that is why I shall not undertake here to prove by reasons from nature either the existence of God, or the Trinity or the immortality of the soul, or anything of that kind: not just because I should not feel competent to find in nature arguments which would convince hardened atheists, but also because knowledge, without Christ, is useless and sterile. Even if someone were convinced that the proportions between numbers are immaterial, eternal truths, depending on a first truth in which they subsist, called God, I should not consider that he had made much progress towards his salvation (141).

Pascal offers here (and elsewhere) his anthropology: Christianity teaches man to know God and to know himself--to know God as the aim of his humanity, but also to know his humanity as incapable of reaching God in its present state. Man can gain either of these propositions apart from Christianity, but it is only in the knowledge of Jesus Christ--as the object of all things and the center towards which all things tend--that man is able to know God or himself truly, that is, unto salvation.

Aphorisms 189-192 establish the same fundamental claim, that apart from knowing Christ, apologetic efforts are fruitless:

All those who have claimed to know God and prove his existence without Jesus Christ have only had futile proofs to offer (56)

The metaphysical proofs for the existence of God are so remote from human reasoning and so involved that they make little impact. . . (57)

It is not only impossible but useless to know God without Christ (57)

Knowing God without knowing our own wretchedness makes for pride. Knowing our own wretchedness without knowing God makes for despair. Knowing Jesus Christ strikes the balance because he shows us both God and our own wretchedness (57).

The Wager does not induce either knowledge of God (since it simply offers acceptance of His existence, not knowledge of it) nor knowledge of man's wretchedness, and thus not knowledge of Jesus Christ.  If offered as an apologetic, it would contradict Pascal's beliefs about proofs of God's existence and how man enters salvation.

However, Pascal offers a clue to understanding how the Wager might be understood. In the lengthy aphorism 427 in the section on indifference, Pascal chides those who make half-hearted attempts at Christianity before rejecting it, noting that God is as much the hidden God (Deus absconditus, cf. Is. 45:15) as the revealed God; a fact establishing:

[T]hat God has appointed visible signs in the Church so that he shall be recognized by those who genuinely seek him, and that he has none the less hidden them in such a way that he will only be perceived by those who seek him with all their heart, then what advantage can they derive when, unconcerned to seek the truth as they profess to be, they protest that nothing shows it to them? For the obscurity in which they find themselves, and which they use as an objection against the Church, simply establishes one of the things the Church maintains without affecting the other, and far from proving her teaching false, confirms it. (127-28)

In other words, Pascal believes the Revelation of God to be obscured from those who do not seek after Him with all their heart such that those who vainly reject God upon a whim are themselves a confirmatory proof that Scripture speaks truly. He goes on to say,

They think they have made great efforts to learn when they have spent a few hours reading some book of the Bible, and have questioned some ecclesiastic about the truths of the faith. After that they boast that they have sought without success in books and among men. But, in fact, I should say to them what I have often said: such negligence is intolerable. It is not a question here of the trifling interest of some stranger prompting such behaviour: it is a question of ourselves, and our all. (128)

From such sentiments, Pascal clearly does not consider the Wager to be the kind of thing one could venture his all upon in order to discover God and salvation. Yet he recognizes that many men are blinded to their own state, and many men fall into complacency, and charity demands some effort on their behalf:

Nothing is so important to man as his state: nothing more fearful than eternity. Thus the fact that there exist men who are indifferent to the loss of their being and the peril of an eternity of wretchedness is against nature. With everything else they are different; they fear the most trifling things, foresee and feel them; and the same man who spends so many days and nights in fury and despair at losing some office or at some imaginary affront to his honour is the very one who knows that he is going to lose everything through death but feels neither anxiety nor emotion. It is a monstrous thing to see one and the same heart at once so sensitive to minor things and so strangely insensitive to the greatest. It is an incomprehensible spell, a supernatural torpor that points to an omnipotent power as its cause. (131)

As for those who live without either knowing or seeking him [God], they consider it so little worth while to take trouble over themselves that they are not worth other people's trouble, and it takes all the charity of that religion they despise [Christianity] not to despise them to the point of abandoning them to their folly. But as this religion [Christianity] obliges us always to regard them, as long as they live, as being capable of receiving grace which may enlighten them, and to believe that in a short time they may be filled with more faith than we are, while we on the contrary may be stricken by the same blindness which is theirs now, we must do for them what we would wish to be done for us in their place, and appeal to them to have pity on themselves, and to take at least a few steps in an attempt to find some light. (133)

Perhaps Pascal's observations that many men are pretenders at seriousness and many others are earnestly indifferent lead him to contrive some simple means of goading them to awareness of the folly of their pretense and indifference? It seems to me that Pascal's Wager serves just such a purpose. When taken as a stimulus toward thinking about God and the afterlife rather than as a proof for the reality of God, the Wager might be the means by which the Spirit of God moves the heart of man to seek Him out rather than languish in blindness. At any rate, I think this view of the Wager does more justice to Pascal's work as a whole than viewing it as a conclusive proof of God's existence.

What Would Abbot Suger Say Today?

"The dull mind rises to truth through that which is material. And, in seeing this light, is resurrected from its former submersion." ~Abbot Suger

I'd like to thank you for meeting with me Mr. Warbucks, and I'm glad to hear that Peter, Edmund, and Lucy are all enjoying the school year so far. I enjoyed watching you quaff a pint of fresh brewed root beer with Peter at our Medieval Feast earlier this year--it is one of my favorite events of the year. 

As you know, our school hopes to renovate our downtown property, including a 120-year-old Gothic-style church honored with a state historical marker. There are many practical benefits the school hopes to achieve with this renovation, such as bringing our entire student body together in one building, reducing the burden on our local Church ministry partner, and returning a historic landmark back to its former glory in our city. But I want you to see the grander vision behind and beyond these modest aims, because I'd like you to be a cornerstone donor of this restoration project, contributing the first 15% to the $1.5 million budget; $225,000. I know that's a lot to ask, but let me put it into perspective.

Perhaps you've seen the Abbey of St. Denis in France, renovated by Abbot Suger in the 12th century? Suger raised an enormous amount of wealth to build the basilica of the Abbey--money that could have been allocated toward the feeding of the poor or the relief of widows or a host of other humanitarian needs surrounding him. Why did he build a basilica? He wanted there to be a place where Divine truth could be discovered and contemplated for generations--a symbol of Christ's glory and His glorification of His Bride. 

You and I both believe that the Classical Christian Education Veritas provides your grandchildren is the richest inheritance they could receive, and it is no less true for the other members of Christ's body and our neighbors in this county. Like the Abbey of St. Denis, the church we want to restore will serve as a symbol for our current families, and for their children and their children's children for generations to come--a symbol of the wisdom and virtue of men passed down through the ages and brought under the banner of aegis of Christ and His Church. The vision of Classical Christian Education will become more visible, more tangible, more glorious to those who are looking for something better for their own children, and I hope you can see the value of it too. Are you willing to set this first cornerstone of the vision into the earth?

My Attempt at Branding

In preparation for answering a hypothetical scenario, I wrote the following "sales pitch" to parents in the Bible Belt who might inquire about Classical Christian Education. Despite being a student of rhetoric for half of my life, I don't think persuasion is in my blood. 

Why Classical Christian Education?

 

Why do we educate our children? What do we hope it will make of them? If our education is for acquiring college scholarships, job placements, career paths, and stability for the future, what makes us different from the atheist who denies God, the soul, and life after death? If we make no distinction, our children won’t either, and when they enter a world where remaining faithful to Christ threatens the things we’ve taught them to seek they will jettison Christ for earthly success. Our children will gain the whole world and lose their souls.

 

Paul put it this way to the Corinthians, who were also tempted to seek the wrong things:

 

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written:

 

“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,

And bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.”

 

20 Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. 22 For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom; 23 but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness, 24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

 

Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 1:18-25 answer the question, Why Classical Christian Education?

 

Wisdom shows us how to live well in the world. Education offers wisdom to its students. At least that’s what education should do. Acquiring wisdom requires more than being around kind people who will keep us safe and provide us with facts and skills. Paul says the message of the cross is the power of God, power that “will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.” In other words, those who don’t learn according to the message of the cross will find their “wisdom” brought to nothing. To learn Christ’s message of the cross requires more than learning its truth. It includes learning how to abide in the truth. What is the message of the cross? In 1 Corinthians it is chiefly acknowledging that human weakness—a humble, poor spirit we might say—is God’s chosen vessel of demonstrating His wisdom and power. In one sense education according to the cross is a revelation of man to himself to humble him—I am a mortal, full of vice and corruption. We approach learning in the double darkness of sin and ignorance. In another sense education according to the cross is a revelation of God to man to glorify him—God became man to transform my mortality into immortality, my vice and corruption into incorruptible virtue. We approach learning in the hope of becoming divine.

 

Jews request a sign and Greeks seek after wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness. The Jews are the people of God who have rejected the message of the cross in hopes of earthly gain, though they possess the oracles of God. Greeks are those who long for knowledge and experience of the divine, but cannot submit their “wisdom” to the “foolishness” of God’s revelation in Christ, the God-man. Classical education, in its most basic form, is remembering; guarding the memory of man’s best efforts—honoring our forefathers that we may inherit God’s promise. We guard the people of God’s best efforts to preserve the Way of Christ against the temptations of the world. We guard the City of Man’s best efforts to “seek the Lord, in the hope that they might grope for Him and find Him” against the despair of pride. If we want to go further up and further into the wisdom and power of God, we must stand upon their shoulders. And isn’t this what we should want education to make of our children?

Gareth's Good Word

How does one recognize when one has fallen into idolatry? Though it isn't perhaps the only way, one good way is to examine one's liberty--am I free from guilt, anxiety, covetousness, discontent, wrath, vainglory, and so forth--in other words, am I living like a slave, or am living like a free individual?

Who should be King save him who makes us free?

Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin. “The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son does remain forever. “So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed.

In the second story in Tennyson's Idylls of the King, Gareth wants to join Arthur's knights, but his mother Bellicent wants him to remain home and hunt until he has grown older and stronger. At the end of one of his pleas, Gareth says, "Man am I grown, a man's work must I do. / Follow the deer? follow the Christ, the King, / Live pure, speak true, right wrong, follow the King - / Else, wherefore born?" Bellicent ignores the noble element of his plea and focuses on the tenuous nature of Arthur's kingship, since his claim to the throne remains disputed. The opening quote is Gareth's final word before his mother relents (with a condition).

Gareth's simple words strike at the heart of man's plight, reflected in the words of Jesus to the Pharisees in John 8, also quoted above. Those given over to sin remain slaves to sin, and have no sonship, no inheritance, in the Kingdom of God. But those whom the Son has set free, are free indeed--that is, they are no longer slaves to sin, but heirs of the household; sons of the Father. Elsewhere in John's Gospel, Jesus defines His sonship to the Father and the authority such sonship implies by His submission to the Father's will and commands: "I can do nothing on my own authority; I judge only as God tells me, so my judgement is right, because I am not trying to do what I want, but only what he who sent me wants;" "For I have not spoken on my own authority, but the Father who sent me has himself given me a commandment—what to say and what to speak." 

A Master and a Father both command and promise. A slave obeys his master out of fear, or because of some promised reward. However, the freedom of sonship is the freedom to obey the Father's commands willingly, in the knowledge that the Father's pleasure and future inheritance remain upon, and are entrusted to the son. Everything a master has belongs to the master alone, not the slave. Everything the Father has belongs to the Son, and will be his to command in the fullness time. The slave has no hope of inheritance, because he is a slave and not a son. The son has no fear of retribution or renunciation, for his mistakes are part of becoming able to command his inheritance.

Idols are like masters, but worse, for they make promises illegitimately, since only the Father possesses by rights all that He has made. An idol will make demands and offer rewards, but consumptively; not as the Father who commands His son to obey so that he might become greater and be glorified. An idol's promises are illicit--the idol has no power to glorify, no power to save, but only the power to consume and destroy. An idol "would be King," but cannot make his "slave" free. Only the King who can free is a King worthy of honor, fidelity, and worship. So what does it look like to be a son in the Father's Kingdom?

As expected, the Only Son of God shows us. The freedom of the Son is the freedom to speak as the Father would have us speak and do as the Father would have us do. Idolatry is characterized by the inability to live in this freedom. To cling to patterns of sin, to cling to identities that are abominable in God's sight, to wield worldly powers to coerce others (sex, wealth, fame, intelligence, physical strength, etc.), to live in despair of obedience--these are the rewards of idolatry.

In John 12, Jesus says this:

Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit. Whoever loves his life loses it, and whoever hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life. If anyone serves me, he must follow me; and where I am, there will my servant be also. If anyone serves me, the Father will honor him.

Shall we follow the deer? Shall we seek those earthly rewards that bring pleasure; those patterns of selfish desire? No! Let us follow the Christ, the King! Let us live pure, speak true, right wrong, follow the King -  else, wherefore born?

On the Use of Fairy Stories in Communal Education

Education in a diverse community introduces difficulties that don't exist (or exist less characteristically) within an individual family. Parents have particular convictions and affections, which they pass on to their children directly and indirectly. When parents collaborate with one another to educate their children, whether in a co-op or in a school, they bring not only the convictions and affections they share, but also those that differ. An important conversation involves discovering what differences are irresolvable, but that's a conversation for another time. Assuming that differences do not pose irresolvable difficulties:

What can families do to help one another stay united in the education of their children?

Sharing common stories offers a means for navigating differences, because shared stories can help people identify wise, virtuous principles and choices in the midst of their differences. In lived reality wise, virtuous principles and choices become confused by the naturally limited perspective of humans and by selfish desires that oppose wisdom and virtue. Fairy stories provide the kind of story well-suited to discover wisdom and virtue since they involve normal characters in abnormal adventures that put vices and virtues on display clearly and distinctly. Fairy stories do not involve ambiguity about what is right or wrong, virtuous or vicious, good or evil; and so the reader or listener knows which characters, motives, and behaviors are worthy of emulation, and why; and which characters, motives, and behaviors are worthy of renunciation, and why. Fairy stories inhabit an imaginative moral reality that provides a clear lens through which one may look at his own moral reality, which is harder to evaluate, but made easier with a "fabulous lens".

The Lord of the Rings may not be the greatest story ever told, but because it is a fairy tale accessible to people of all levels of maturity it serves as a clear lens through which to evaluate lived reality. For the sake of the following imaginative experiment, suppose the co-op or school requires all members of every family to read (or be read to) The Lord of the Rings each year as part of their enrollment and re-enrollment. Now suppose two parents differ on the amount of rigor a teacher requires of the students. Suppose as well that the rigor-loving parent and teacher have a wiser perspective than the rigor-doubtful parent. Further suppose the differences between the parents include expectations from within their families and churches, but the educational standards of the co-op or school favors the rigorous position. One could (and should) appeal to theological principles, and to hoped-for family outcomes, but since these are not closely shared, the appeal to a commonly shared story might serve better for understanding and agreement.

How might The Lord of the Rings provide a clear lens in this hypothetical situation?

The rigor-loving parent (or teacher) could remind the rigor-doubtful parent of the Scouring of the Shire. Gandalf, the wise and powerful wizard, leaves the younger, less experienced, and less powerful hobbits (Frodo, Sam, Merry, and Pippin) alone to defeat the numerous enemies who have taken over their homeland. The parent could recall that the hobbits make short work of their enemies--an impossible victory but for the fruit produced in them by the year-long journey to destroy the Ring of Power. One could ask, "What made the hobbits brave enough, temperate enough, wise enough, strong enough, and just enough to defeat their enemies without becoming evil themselves?" Of course it was the much greater trials they suffered together on the quest under the tutelage of more mature souls. If the purpose of education is to grow wise,  virtuous, and strong, then teachers should strive to provide to children with opportunities to do things that are beyond their powers to perform easily, perfectly, without the possibility for failure, or without the need to rely upon more mature souls to guide them.

It is not certain that such appeals would be successful, but where shared stories persist, and especially where they are loved and admired, fodder for such encouragement remains available in ways that transcend the differences within the community.