The analogia entis vs the analogia fidei, I

One of the things I love about Barth is his math-like nature. Take Anselm, for instance. FQI does a lot of explaining why the analogia fidei is the proper basis for theology, and why the analogia entis therefore fails.

Matrix: ratio and necessitas squared with ontic and noetic.
Ontic precedes noetic, because the object precedes knowledge of the object.
Necessity is consistent with rationality (and v.v., I think).
Ontic necessity precedes noetic rationality; ontic rationality precedes noetic necessity.
Necessity is primarily ontic; rationality is primarily noetic.
Necessity precedes rationality where this is so.

The ontic path goes truth --> object --> knowledge.
The noetic path goes knowledge --> object || truth.
(Gap is only bridged in faith)

In this way, the noetic leads back to the ontic, as the noetic ratio is the comprehension of the ontic ratio. This is the model of intellectus fidei. We take the articula fidei and work back to the necessary and rational object to which they point. This object and our knowledge of it, as ratio, accord with the ratio veritatis, and therefore with the truth of God.

But all of this only works, and here's the caveat that makes the "ontological argument" disappear, when faith is presumed from the start. None of it can be proven to the one who simply will under no circumstances believe. None of it can be proven absent an understanding of the force whose effects faith and the articula fidei are.

Anselm's "unbeliever" is one subject to the determining action of God, which is faith, who does not credit the teachings of the church as reasonable. Mind you, not a heretic, who believes otherwise, though this too is faith, nor an atheist, who will not believe, but an incredulous believer. (L. says, "Oh. You mean a Catholic.") This is why ratio and necessitas provide valuable proof: it is not that they demonstrate the existence of God from unrelated externalities, but that they demonstrate the credibility/intelligibility of the articula fidei as they stand in direct relationship to their ultimate ratio, the truth behind the object of faith about which they speak.