Critique of Father Herbert McCabe OP the greatest modern theologian on what we should mean by God
ON GOD NOT BEING A THING
McCabe says God is the mystery that causes all things to be. He is not the
supreme being. He is not a big ghost. He is existence itself so there "is no
God who is a being, an item in the universe, a rival person; there is just
the unknown beyond and behind the whole universe itself, the mystery at the
heart of my being myself. In Christ, says St. Thomas, we are united to God
as to an unknown."
One thing he is careful to reject is the notion of talking about God as if
he were the most powerful or biggest thing in the universe. It is suggested
that seeing God that way is the worst mistake a theologian or philosopher or
anybody can make. McCabe says the person that does this falls into the most
delusional form of idolatry.
McCabe sees God as an objective reality. But he counsels against seeing God
as a thing or entity in the way anything in the universe is. "The only God
who matters is the unfathomable mystery of love because of which there is
being and meaning to anything that is" God Matters.
REPLY: McCabe sees God as a mystery of love who is real but who is not an
item in the universe. God does not have feelings but he loves for he only
does what is best for his creation. It is love in action. Nobody really
wants such a God. Believers at least privately do invent a God who has
feelings for them. What you worship outwardly says nothing about what you
worship inwardly.
Idolatry means the worship of a God who does not exist. If God is perfect
then it follows that to adore a God who does not exist is to worship a bad
version of God and will lead to bad principles and bad moral leanings.
Idolatry is bad for it means we worship a human construct and anything human
should not be elevated to divine status for that is making a god out of
errors and of course human beings are too dangerous too often and that will
be reflected in their man-made gods. What is human needs constant checking
out and correcting not adoration. It would be cruel for people to be led to
think they have a relationship with God and are putting him first when that
God is man-made. If you love what you think your wife is not what she is,
you cannot be inspired by her. So to become more loving like God you need to
have the real God and not a mental idol.
McCabe is severe against the "idolatrous notion of God as a very large and
powerful creature – a part of the world.” The reason this idolatry is so
terrible is that if God is the source of all and you see him as a creature
and not the source of all and upon whom even our power to choose depends,
you see yourself as largely independent of the divine and will take pride in
the good you do. This pride would be very mistaken if you think what is
coming from you in fact is not. It would be like failing to honour your wife
for giving you a gold bar and saying that you got it through a magic spell
and she was under your control so you really gave it to yourself. It would
get in the way of love.
McCabe sees idolatry as terrible because you are failing to see and respect
the love of God.
It is strange that somebody like McCabe would reject the idea of God as
having most of the power in the universe as idolatry when their belief that
God is the power that is the reason the universe exists instead of there
being nothing gives him in fact more power! The source of all things would
be a greater power than any super-god in the universe. If it is idolatrous
to think God is the most powerful being in the universe, it is more
idolatrous to think he is all the power there is.
McCabe would answer that seeing God as a power is not the same as seeing him
as the source that all things depend on thus meaning that he is the reason
they exist instead of nothing. But it is the same. It would be strange if
there was a difference to see the God of power as an idol and God as source
as not an idol. A source of all things by definition is power.
If seeing God as love is all that matters then we should not care about why
something instead of nothing. God being source of all is not the same as God
being love.
Seeing God as love suffers from the problem that everybody's view of what is
loving and how loving it is, is inaccurate. This is because we are not all
good, because we prefer what we want good to be to what good actually is,
because we are prone to error, because there is often a thin line between
right and wrong, because to judge what the best thing to do is a matter of
huge complexity for you have to consider the long-term for as many as
possible and because we are weak. We tend to give sympathy to people who get
seriously ill but we are secretly glad that it is them who suffer and not us
or our loved ones. We are good at using good as a mask. Also, you cannot
prove that anything you do is fully free. You could be partly programmed.
Thus the God adored will only be love up to a point. You cannot bring your
whole self to learn from the love of God. Your thinking and perception of
God are limited by the fact that you free will is incomplete. Your
perception of God limits what your perception should be of God for you are
so small and imperfect. If there is a real God of love he will not approve
when you honour a semblance of him not him. It is no wonder people like the
thought of a Jesus or a saint to pray to. By relating to a being like
themselves they deal with their inner sense that the God they have is in
their heads. But idolatry is a universal problem. And insurmountable. The
atheist sees that no God would want us to believe in him.
Also, people mistake the good they see in others for the activity of God and
that is where their "learning" about God ultimately comes from. People feel
that God is acting when people do good for them. This is a form of idolatry
for human goodness cannot mirror God's. And we are always being taken in by
good people who show their true colours. Their goodness was one dimensional.
Also, people can do a lot of good and we remain unimpressed but something
they so something that does impress us. We are selective in the good we want
to see and adore. So if believers claim find God in the goodness of others,
we atheists may find that amusing and arrogant.
God cannot be known like a human person can for God is hidden from us. Thus
to adore God is to risk adoring what you think he is or want to think he is.
Thinking is no use. If you have the right ideas of God, you could have the
attitude, "I just happen to be right. If I were not right I would still have
the perception of God I have." Thus you see that being right about God is
still no protection against idolatry.
We all have our delusions. That is why even if God has revealed a religion
to man, we cannot be completely sure that it really is from him. Man is too
imperfect to claim to be God so he has to pretend to speak for God for that
is the next best thing and will gain the best chance of fooling others. God
revealing a faith to me does not mean I accept it for the right reasons or
because he says so. And even if I do accept it because he says so, then to
what degree? Perhaps I think I do it mostly because he says so while in fact
I only do so because it suits me to accept it. And if God revealed the faith
to your religion, it does not follow that anybody in the religion cares that
he revealed it. They may follow it or look as if they follow it for their
reasons not his.
McCabe tries to get away from the God of power. It would be odd to worship
God as if his power does not matter.
What if a person wants to see God's love not his power? Why not worship your
cat or anything else you see as loving? If the power does not matter and the
love does then why not?
The notion that divine love matters and not divine power rules out anybody
adoring God because they think they will get a Heavenly reward or be kept
safe from all evil at some stage. Virtually all attempts to get the meaning
of life from the God concept presuppose that God has the power to make your
life important. Nobody wants to simply hold that their life matters just
because God loves them even if he can do nothing at all for them ever.
Nobody wants to hold that the reason our lives are important is that they
can please God - they don't want it to be all about valuing God. If you had
to suffer eternal agony in order to be moral you wouldn't do it.
If being loved is what matters even if people can do nothing to help you
ever then what do you need God for? You don't!
THE MYSTERY OF GOD AND OUR GOD-TALK IS ALL METAPHORS
McCabe says that our talk about God and what he is like is not to be taken
literally. The description of God as loving or compassionate is to be taken
as metaphorical. The love of God is not literal but an approximation. It is
an alternative to saying nothing. Talk about what God is not is that bit
more accurate than saying what he is. McCabe says that calling God Father is
better than calling him God. The idea that God is Father speaks of what he
is like better than the more difficult and abstract term God. McCabe says
that using terms for God risks mistaking the terms for God. There is a risk
of metaphor being mistaken for the real God. The risk is justified because
it is worse to say nothing about God.
REPLY: Few know of this teaching so most believers in God are really
idolaters. It is not God they adore even if he exists. A religion that fails
to stress McCabe's teaching is creating a disconnect between people and God
by having them adore a God who does not exist and thus who is not all-good.
It will corrupt them.
If people are idolaters, we will not respect or listen to them when they
tell us what God wants!