Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 11:07:08 EDT
From:         MKLINE%VDH.BITNET@VTVM2.CC.VT.EDU
Subject:      Interview with Francis Schaeffer
X-To:         christia%asuacad.BITNET@VTVM2.CC.VT.EDU,
              bstudy-l%utarlvm1.BITNET@VTVM2.CC.VT.EDU,
              ivcf-l%ubvm.BITNET@VTVM2.CC.VT.EDU

Subject: Interview with Francis Schaeffer

    700 Club had Dr. Francis Schaeffer on the 700 Club today. He talked
about a ton of things we have and I plan to save the tape and post
several of the subjects from it. He talked about Christianity in every
day life, putting your faith into action, if we should get involved with
the government, and many other things. I found it quite illuminating.

     Pat: Dr. Francis Schaeffer, ladies and gentlemen, is a world renown
philosopher, theologian, and author. He's written 22 books which have had
a major impact on the intellectual world. His latest latest book is
called, not the Humanist Manifesto, a Christian Manifesto. Would you
please welcome to the 700 Club, from LaBree Fellowship in Switzerland,
Dr. Francis Schaeffer.                                   (February 1982)

     Pat: In your very monumental book that spanned the course of history,
"How Shall We Then Live?" concerning the foundations of western society
you talked about humanism, how it came to be. What are the roots of this
thing?

     Francis: Well you can think of it as having various origins. I think
of it back at the revolt of Satan against God, in a very real way,
because what it is is Creaturism. It's a creature putting himself or
herself in the place of God, and of course you have this thing coming as
a very climatic thing in the revolt of Adam and Eve.

     But modern humanism has come down especially out of the
enlightenment.  The humanistic elements from the enlightenment. And then
especially with the French thinking at that time, it even rooted back
before that in the renaissance, the humanist elements. It's gradually come
to the place where it's become dominant thought form, where man is the
center of all things.

     Pat: Well now there was a Christian world view in the Middle Ages, it
was absolutely a dominant thing. There was the Holy Roman Empire, and
there was 1 major united world center, supposedly around Christianity.
Now how did it break up? What caused the problem?

     Francis: Well, because at the end of the Middle Ages, like I show in
"How Shall We Then Live?", actually certain things had come in to the
church at the end of the Middle Ages, which in there own way was already
a humanistic emphasis. And Thomas Aquinas must be thought of here, as he
equated really the thought of ancient pagan thinkers along with and
especially Aristotle, along with Biblical thought.

     And then as the church of the Middle Ages had had these humanist
elements, you had two big branches coming out of that. The renaissance,
which led to the enlightenment, which led to the humanist world, and the
reformation that has given us, in this country, the basis of the freedoms
which we now take, unhappily, all to often for granted.

     Pat: Well, actually England and France then were the two models, if
you will. One went with Westley, and went into the reformation and
tradition, and the other followed into the enlightenment and the French
Revolution.

     Francis: Well I would just say the whole of Northern Europe, because
you have Switzerland, you have Holland, you have Scandinavian countries,
you had Germany, just as thoroughly as England. And the Westley revivals,
of course, came later, but never the less points up something to us. And
that is, where ever the reformation really went and the great revivals
took place, the great revivals not only called for individuals to accept
Christ as their Savior, and happily thousands did, but in every case,
also led to social action, which gave freedom to people, which stands in
complete contrast today to what humanism has brought forth.

     Pat: Well now we talk about world views, but what are the world view,
the humanist, what does he believe? Peter Mason, what is the world view
of the humanist versus the world view of the Christian?

     Francis: It all goes back to the question, the final realities, and I
wish the Christians, even beyond just using the word humanism, in reality
could think of what the real issue is. There is only one final
discussion. In intellectual thought, not just religious thought, but
intellectual thought, and that is "What is the final reality?"

     The humanist holds, he's really a materialist. The humanist holds
that material or energy has existed forever in some form, and that it's
present configuration is only by pure chance. Christian view, of course,
the final reality is an infinite personal God, who is the Creator of all
else. And that God has a character, so everything is not the same to God,
and therefore there's a real basis for both values and law. But on the
other side, the humanist viewpoint, with only material and energy shaped
by chance, we must realize that mathematically, it must bring forth the
concept that all things are relative, because this is, would be a silent
universe that has nothing to say about the meaning of life, the values of
life, and a basis for law. So we have to realize this other world view,
absolutely, mathematically, brings for the very things which are tearing
our society to pieces today.

     Pat: Let's get more specific, because it brings forth also a
annalism, it brings forth the existential thought which is sort of a
hopelessness because there's no way, you don't know where you come from,
you don't know where you're going, your existence is all you have. What
problems does it bring forth?

     Francis: Well it brings for first of all, the area of meaning. There
is no meaning to anything, therefore there's no meaning to human life.
Well humanists don't mean there's no meaning to human life, there's no
meaning to anything, eventually. Then, also in the area of values, Jaques
Manaut, the French biologist, wrote in his book "Chance and Necessity",
and he held this view, that on this view there is now way to determine an
"ought" from an "is". In other words, that is a silent universe, and it
means that with absolutely inevitability, that all we're going to have,
for values, and all we're going to have for love, is what finite man
thinks is for the good of society, or for his own selfish good, and the
good of the moment. These things are the absolute mathematical necessity
of the humanist world view.

     Pat: And that would, of course say that sexual restraint or any kind
of brutality would either be justified or excused one way or the other,
depending on the view of the society at any given time.

     Francis: Just purely arbitrarily, and the clearest illustration is
the way the Supreme Court, especially since Oliver Wendell Holmes has
been ruling, they have no basis for the law. All that law has become
today, in contrast to what it was with the founding fathers of this
country, all that law is is what a certain group of people think is for
the good of society at that given moment.

     Pat: Now let's take governments that are formed. If we have a group
of Christians who have formed our government, what kind of government
would a humanist make?

     Francis: The humanist will make a government that will be purely
arbitrary, and this always will lead to chaos, just as it is in the
United States, or England, or Holland at the present time.

     Pat: How would it lead toward chaos?

     Francis: Because there are no value systems. They have no absolute
value system, everybody does what they want to do.

     Pat: ...relative to any given point of time, so it always shifts.?

     Francis: That's right, and you can look at Russia today. The Soviet
Union, this is the way their laws are. And we must realize that the
humanist viewpoint, the materialistic energy chance syndrome, is as
dominant almost on this side of the iron curtain today as it is on the
other. And as they over there can oppress their people any time they
want for what they consider is the good of the state, we are moving in
the area where the Supreme Court can make its decisions as to what is
good for the society at any given moment including the killing of, let us
say, the unborn child with abortion.

     Pat: Is this the reason that so many of the elite of this country
don't really speak out against the Soviet oppression because they figure
there's a commonality between humanist in various parts of the world?

     Francis: Well, what we usually think of as liberals, whether it's
religious liberals or, and I would emphasize in passing, that religious
liberalism is only humanism using theological terms rather than secular
terms. That's all. So we should never be surprised that the liberal
church always finally comes down on the side of the issue that the
secular humanist holds. Then, beyond that, not thinking just to the
church, but in general, the liberal, and usually these would be related
to the same viewpoint, there would be exceptions of course, but in
general, they will always wear rose colored glasses concerning the things
on the left. But on the right, they can see them more clearly. And I
think this is the explanation of what's happened with the press, and the
media, in the past 40 years.

     Pat: One last question, do you see, is there any synthesis possible
between the Christian world view and the humanist world view, or are they
diametrically opposed?

     Francis: They absolutely stand in a total tension and a dichotomy. The
people who try to make a bridge, and that's especially the liberal
theologians, it's a complete failure. There's no possible way to make a
dichotomy between these two world views. It's either one or the other.

MAKS> Well, that about does it.If you didn't know, Francis has gone to
      be with the Lord, but this was almost 10 years ago, and if you
      didn't know, you would think, except perhaps for some references
      to Russia that it was today. Interesting how America seems to want
      to follow the same steps as Russia.

      He seems so much better able to handle, and as future posts will
      show that we should get involved in government and the like.  For
      those of you who don't get 700 Club, did you find this worth while?
      Other "sections" talk about the Christian in government, civil
      disobedience, who do we obey, and things like that. I presume this
      is the best of the sections of the original interview. This section
      I had to play about 3-4 times to make sure I had it.

      CBD has "The complete works of Francis Schaeffer". I may consider
      it. I liked how he puts his arguements together.

Maks
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU