Diego Fernando Bedoya Bonilla, Carlos Arboleda Mora
Abstract Juan Antonio Estrada, a Spanish philosopher and theologian, proposes the search for meaning in life as the theological place for a valid experience of God. The “achieved” or fully realized life, to which every human being aspires, is the proposal of salvation that Jesus makes possible with the proclamation of the Reign and that opens a hopeful future with Easter. By bringing reason and faith into dialogue, Estrada contributes to fundamental theology by talking about God, not from the traditional concepts of classical theology, but from the human experience related to the search for a deep meaning for existence. Although this author emphasizes the elements of a problematic faith with unresolved issues and doubts – including the timeless challenge of theodicy – his agonizing and perplexed position is full of confidence in the certainty that God’s salvation plan will inevitably come true. In this contingent life, everything remains incomplete; yet God in Jesus gives the ultimate meaning for life that all human beings grope for. This fundamental issue of human reflection will be developed by going deeper into Estrada’s philosophical and theological work.
{"title":"Talking about God from the Meaning of Life: Contributions from the Thought of Juan Antonio Estrada","authors":"Diego Fernando Bedoya Bonilla, Carlos Arboleda Mora","doi":"10.1515/opth-2022-0226","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2022-0226","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Juan Antonio Estrada, a Spanish philosopher and theologian, proposes the search for meaning in life as the theological place for a valid experience of God. The “achieved” or fully realized life, to which every human being aspires, is the proposal of salvation that Jesus makes possible with the proclamation of the Reign and that opens a hopeful future with Easter. By bringing reason and faith into dialogue, Estrada contributes to fundamental theology by talking about God, not from the traditional concepts of classical theology, but from the human experience related to the search for a deep meaning for existence. Although this author emphasizes the elements of a problematic faith with unresolved issues and doubts – including the timeless challenge of theodicy – his agonizing and perplexed position is full of confidence in the certainty that God’s salvation plan will inevitably come true. In this contingent life, everything remains incomplete; yet God in Jesus gives the ultimate meaning for life that all human beings grope for. This fundamental issue of human reflection will be developed by going deeper into Estrada’s philosophical and theological work.","PeriodicalId":42436,"journal":{"name":"Open Theology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47798041","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The present work analyzes the interface between Quimbanda and the digital environment in the daily life of a Quimbandeiro. Quimbanda is an Afro-Brazilian faith that has grown in the virtual universe through consultations and other uses of digital media. In addition to analyzing the Facebook, WhatsApp, and Instagram pages of these religious groups, we interviewed and followed the daily life of a teacher and also conducted bibliographic research on the subject. In their daily practices, Quimbandeiros use the internet as a space for interaction, quotidian practices of care, and the manufacture of spells. We analyze how digital interaction presents this religious belief in the virtual public sphere and the interconnections between religious and technological narratives. Quimbanda, a somewhat stigmatized religion, expands its boundaries in virtual mode. In the case analyzed in this article, Quimbandeiro work is directly linked to the movements of Exu, the entity who controls the crossroads. Through the mediation of the production of religious images, Exu expands his spiritual and technological presence offline, flooding online communities with meaning.
{"title":"If You Have Faith, Exu Responds on-line: The Day-to-Day Life of Quimbanda on Social Networks","authors":"J. Bahia, F. Nogueira","doi":"10.1515/opth-2022-0227","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2022-0227","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The present work analyzes the interface between Quimbanda and the digital environment in the daily life of a Quimbandeiro. Quimbanda is an Afro-Brazilian faith that has grown in the virtual universe through consultations and other uses of digital media. In addition to analyzing the Facebook, WhatsApp, and Instagram pages of these religious groups, we interviewed and followed the daily life of a teacher and also conducted bibliographic research on the subject. In their daily practices, Quimbandeiros use the internet as a space for interaction, quotidian practices of care, and the manufacture of spells. We analyze how digital interaction presents this religious belief in the virtual public sphere and the interconnections between religious and technological narratives. Quimbanda, a somewhat stigmatized religion, expands its boundaries in virtual mode. In the case analyzed in this article, Quimbandeiro work is directly linked to the movements of Exu, the entity who controls the crossroads. Through the mediation of the production of religious images, Exu expands his spiritual and technological presence offline, flooding online communities with meaning.","PeriodicalId":42436,"journal":{"name":"Open Theology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43800402","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article addresses the topic of hymnal revision in the context of liturgical churches by proposing a methodology that takes into account both historical developments in the field of hymnology and recent concerns regarding the Liturgical Movement and theological considerations that have arisen in the last few decades. The text proposes, in practical terms, a methodology and a structure for developing and/or revising hymnals in the context of ecumenically minded, contemporary, liturgical churches.
{"title":"Developing a Methodology for Hymnal Revision within a Contemporary, Multi-Ethnic Framework: A Proposal","authors":"L. C. Teixeira Coelho","doi":"10.1515/opth-2022-0233","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2022-0233","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article addresses the topic of hymnal revision in the context of liturgical churches by proposing a methodology that takes into account both historical developments in the field of hymnology and recent concerns regarding the Liturgical Movement and theological considerations that have arisen in the last few decades. The text proposes, in practical terms, a methodology and a structure for developing and/or revising hymnals in the context of ecumenically minded, contemporary, liturgical churches.","PeriodicalId":42436,"journal":{"name":"Open Theology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136302346","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract In this article, I study how symbolic theology can be advantageously utilized in the resistance against oppressing structures and ideologies. Studying two sermons of Paul Tillich and two speeches of Martin Luther King, Jr. and the symbols used herein as a call to resistance against injustice, I wish to show how theologically grounded symbols have been used to resist injustice and in the call for justice. Furthermore, I study how the symbols used by Tillich and King can be utilized and reinterpreted in the various struggles taking place today against old and new oppressing structures and ideologies. The resistance against injustice must, however, also be undertaken intersectionally. And finally, I propose to bring the understanding of theology as symbolic engagement from Robert C. Neville into conversation with intersectional symbolic theology. I believe an intersectional symbolic theology can be successfully applied to feminist theology, queer theology, and other liberative theologies today.
{"title":"Symbolic Theology and Resistance in the Theology of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Paul Tillich","authors":"Margrethe Kamille Birkler","doi":"10.1515/opth-2022-0229","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2022-0229","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this article, I study how symbolic theology can be advantageously utilized in the resistance against oppressing structures and ideologies. Studying two sermons of Paul Tillich and two speeches of Martin Luther King, Jr. and the symbols used herein as a call to resistance against injustice, I wish to show how theologically grounded symbols have been used to resist injustice and in the call for justice. Furthermore, I study how the symbols used by Tillich and King can be utilized and reinterpreted in the various struggles taking place today against old and new oppressing structures and ideologies. The resistance against injustice must, however, also be undertaken intersectionally. And finally, I propose to bring the understanding of theology as symbolic engagement from Robert C. Neville into conversation with intersectional symbolic theology. I believe an intersectional symbolic theology can be successfully applied to feminist theology, queer theology, and other liberative theologies today.","PeriodicalId":42436,"journal":{"name":"Open Theology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45383392","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Carl Schmitt’s well-known declaration that “all significant” modern political concepts are “secularized theological concepts” has sometimes been treated as hyperbole: a metaphorical axe aimed at the frozen sea of legal positivism, a provocation rather than a thesis. In this article, I demonstrate the fecundity of this thesis by applying it to secularism, a concept undeniably central to the Liberal state; crucially, however, I do so in the context of early modern South Asian history and ongoing debates over the secularism of premodern Mughal polity. As I argue, Jalāl ud-Dīn Akbar (1542–1605 CE) – a monarch of the Mughal dynasty often cast by South Asian secularists as a precocious emblem of the neutral state – was, in fact, an ideal type of Schmittian sovereign, who nonetheless stands equidistant from both Schmitt and his Liberal opponents in his stance toward religious pluralism. The theological correlate to Akbar’s “secularism” was an Islamicate theology of religions, which provided a contentful religious justification for religious pluralism, very different from contemporary “post-metaphysical” arguments. The final section of the article takes a critical turn, as I examine Akbar’s legendary reputation in the present, my intervention into his “secular” mythos, and the special difficulties involved in applying Schmittian concepts to an early modern, non-Western sacred king.
卡尔·施密特(Carl Schmitt)关于“所有重要的”现代政治概念都是“世俗化的神学概念”的著名声明，有时被视为夸张:一把指向法律实证主义冰冻海洋的隐喻性斧头，一种挑衅而非论点。在这篇文章中，我通过将其应用于世俗主义(一个不可否认的自由主义国家的核心概念)来证明这一论点的丰富性;然而，至关重要的是，我是在早期现代南亚历史和关于前现代莫卧儿政体的世俗主义的持续辩论的背景下这样做的。正如我所言，Jalāl ud- d . n . Akbar(公元1542-1605年)——一位莫卧儿王朝的君主，经常被南亚世俗主义者视为中立国的早熟象征——实际上是施密特君主的理想类型，尽管如此，他在宗教多元化的立场上与施密特和他的自由派对手都保持着同样的距离。与阿克巴的“世俗主义”相关的神学是一种伊斯兰教的宗教神学，它为宗教多元化提供了内容丰富的宗教理由，与当代的“后形而上学”论点非常不同。文章的最后一部分出现了一个关键性的转折，我考察了阿克巴尔在当代的传奇名声，我对他的“世俗”神话的介入，以及将施密特的概念应用于一位早期现代的、非西方的神圣国王所涉及的特殊困难。
{"title":"Secularism as Theopolitics: Jalāl ud-Dīn Akbar and the Theological Underpinnings of the State in South Asia","authors":"Justin Smolin","doi":"10.1515/opth-2022-0232","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2022-0232","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Carl Schmitt’s well-known declaration that “all significant” modern political concepts are “secularized theological concepts” has sometimes been treated as hyperbole: a metaphorical axe aimed at the frozen sea of legal positivism, a provocation rather than a thesis. In this article, I demonstrate the fecundity of this thesis by applying it to secularism, a concept undeniably central to the Liberal state; crucially, however, I do so in the context of early modern South Asian history and ongoing debates over the secularism of premodern Mughal polity. As I argue, Jalāl ud-Dīn Akbar (1542–1605 CE) – a monarch of the Mughal dynasty often cast by South Asian secularists as a precocious emblem of the neutral state – was, in fact, an ideal type of Schmittian sovereign, who nonetheless stands equidistant from both Schmitt and his Liberal opponents in his stance toward religious pluralism. The theological correlate to Akbar’s “secularism” was an Islamicate theology of religions, which provided a contentful religious justification for religious pluralism, very different from contemporary “post-metaphysical” arguments. The final section of the article takes a critical turn, as I examine Akbar’s legendary reputation in the present, my intervention into his “secular” mythos, and the special difficulties involved in applying Schmittian concepts to an early modern, non-Western sacred king.","PeriodicalId":42436,"journal":{"name":"Open Theology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135954316","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article focuses on the evangelical theology and revival practice of Charles Grandison Finney, popular in his time yet critically under-explored in American philosophy, specifically regarding his role in the emergence of American pragmatism. Spearheaded by American philosophers like Charles Sanders Peirce and William James, pragmatism argues that the significance of abstract concepts lies in their practical consequences in lived experience, as opposed to their internal logic or conformity to intellectual traditions. Whereas this philosophical method is often seen as predominantly secular in its origins, this article approaches pragmatic thinking and practice from the point of view of the spiritual conversion strategies of Charles Finney and antebellum evangelical culture more broadly. I expand on what Leonard I. Sweet has called Finney’s “pragmatic philosophy of revivalism,” addressing his theology and revival practice to disclose its latent pragmatic tendencies and those within antebellum evangelical culture. I argue that by looking at Finney as an early practitioner of this method, we must reappraise his and evangelicalism’s role in the emergence of philosophical pragmatism, challenge its putative secularity, and – as Charles Taylor has recently demonstrated – reassess what academic disciplines mean when they cite the presumed distinction between the religious and the secular.
本文主要研究查尔斯·格兰迪森·芬尼的福音派神学和复兴实践，芬尼在当时很受欢迎，但在美国哲学界却没有得到充分的探讨，特别是他在美国实用主义产生中的作用。以查尔斯·桑德斯·皮尔斯(Charles Sanders Peirce)和威廉·詹姆斯(William James)等美国哲学家为首的实用主义认为，抽象概念的意义在于它们在生活经验中的实际后果，而不是它们的内在逻辑或与知识传统的一致性。尽管这种哲学方法在起源上通常被视为主要是世俗的，但本文从查尔斯芬尼的精神皈依策略和更广泛的战前福音派文化的角度来探讨实用主义思维和实践。我对Leonard I. Sweet所说的芬尼的“复兴主义的实用主义哲学”进行了扩展，阐述了他的神学和复兴实践，以揭示其潜在的实用主义倾向以及内战前福音派文化中的那些倾向。我认为，通过将芬尼视为这种方法的早期实践者，我们必须重新评估他和福音派在哲学实用主义出现中的作用，挑战其假定的世俗性，并且——正如查尔斯·泰勒最近所证明的那样——重新评估当学术学科引用宗教与世俗之间假定的区别时，它们意味着什么。
{"title":"A Pragmatic Piety: Experience, Uncertainty, and Action in Charles G. Finney’s Evangelical Revivalism","authors":"Shawn Welch","doi":"10.1515/opth-2022-0210","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2022-0210","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article focuses on the evangelical theology and revival practice of Charles Grandison Finney, popular in his time yet critically under-explored in American philosophy, specifically regarding his role in the emergence of American pragmatism. Spearheaded by American philosophers like Charles Sanders Peirce and William James, pragmatism argues that the significance of abstract concepts lies in their practical consequences in lived experience, as opposed to their internal logic or conformity to intellectual traditions. Whereas this philosophical method is often seen as predominantly secular in its origins, this article approaches pragmatic thinking and practice from the point of view of the spiritual conversion strategies of Charles Finney and antebellum evangelical culture more broadly. I expand on what Leonard I. Sweet has called Finney’s “pragmatic philosophy of revivalism,” addressing his theology and revival practice to disclose its latent pragmatic tendencies and those within antebellum evangelical culture. I argue that by looking at Finney as an early practitioner of this method, we must reappraise his and evangelicalism’s role in the emergence of philosophical pragmatism, challenge its putative secularity, and – as Charles Taylor has recently demonstrated – reassess what academic disciplines mean when they cite the presumed distinction between the religious and the secular.","PeriodicalId":42436,"journal":{"name":"Open Theology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41494009","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The linguistic method of the New Rhetoric and Argumentation (developed by authors such as Chaim Perelman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca) seeks to persuade an audience utilizing logical and practical arguments, in order to achieve adherence to a thesis that wants to be effectively communicated. This method can be applied to biblical texts to convince about an issue and produce a performative (transforming) effect. This article aims to apply some elements of this method to the parable of the Good Samaritan in Luke 10:25–37. Jesus, with the argumentative force of metaphor, not only answers the question “who is my neighbor?” but also reveals an eventual attribute of God: closeness. In the Samaritan, who is moved with compassion to care for a wounded man, God’s proximity is revealed. In the Samaritan’s mercy, God is manifested as an event of closeness.
{"title":"From Persuasion to Acceptance of Closeness: La Projimidad as an Essential Attribute of God in Luke 10:25–37","authors":"D. Bonilla, C. Mora","doi":"10.1515/opth-2022-0195","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2022-0195","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The linguistic method of the New Rhetoric and Argumentation (developed by authors such as Chaim Perelman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca) seeks to persuade an audience utilizing logical and practical arguments, in order to achieve adherence to a thesis that wants to be effectively communicated. This method can be applied to biblical texts to convince about an issue and produce a performative (transforming) effect. This article aims to apply some elements of this method to the parable of the Good Samaritan in Luke 10:25–37. Jesus, with the argumentative force of metaphor, not only answers the question “who is my neighbor?” but also reveals an eventual attribute of God: closeness. In the Samaritan, who is moved with compassion to care for a wounded man, God’s proximity is revealed. In the Samaritan’s mercy, God is manifested as an event of closeness.","PeriodicalId":42436,"journal":{"name":"Open Theology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49493117","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
“Nobody trusts theology and, in fact, for a very good reason;” John D. Caputo, one of the contributors to this special issue of Open Theology, once shocked the audience of theology students and professors at the Catholic University of Leuven. Caputo intended to criticize and challenge the partisan thought of theology which often result in self-referential debates without relevance, sometimes even without rational rigor, and almost all the time without credibility. However, there was also a bit of apologetics in Caputo’s statement: When theologians failed, philosophers are here and ready to take the initiative in exploring the fecundity of theological concepts. And indeed, despite certain forms of theology becoming less and less relevant, the questions of the late theological importance find their way back to the academic as well as public debates even stronger. The field of philosophy has experienced a return to the religious and some do not hesitate to talk directly about the theological turn. As a result, the discourse on religion, naming God, religious experience, faith, and so on, has undergone a great reversal. It is no more theologians who seek to employ the contemporary critical consciousness of philosophy to re-translate, re-read, re-interpret, and re-conceptualize Christianity to make it more comprehensible, more rational, and more attractive. Now, myriad philosophers, religious and secular philosophers alike, do not hesitate to draw inspiration from the sphere of religion and theology in order to interpret the structures of existence in the world. The motivations for such philosophical reconsiderations of religion vary, but a general perspective suggests that the religious allows for thinking excess, and exploring the impossible; religious thinking offers the possibility of criticizing metaphysics; it provides an alternative to modern objectivism and represents the other of autonomous reason. In short, religion appears as something beyond total control and mastery and yet the questions related to the religious give us much food for thought. Whatever the motivation, the result is obvious: we are confronted with de-localized Christian concepts and even de-theologized theologies that open new horizons for understanding. Perhaps the most interesting part of the whole movement is the audacious and spirited repetition of Christianity outside the exclusively defined ecclesial body. Nonetheless, there are still theologians among us; even theologians who take Caputo’s exclamation that “nobody trusts theology” seriously and who, at the same time, engage with the plethora of philosophical literature on the questions which used to be once the domain of their discipline. The trained eyes of a theologian cannot but see that the philosophical (re)turns to the religious provoke –whether they intend to or not – a radically renewed sense of theology; a sense which must be, however, uncovered and tested. This topical issue of Open Theology aims to explore
{"title":"After the Theological Turn? Editorial Introduction","authors":"M. Kočí","doi":"10.1515/opth-2022-0216","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2022-0216","url":null,"abstract":"“Nobody trusts theology and, in fact, for a very good reason;” John D. Caputo, one of the contributors to this special issue of Open Theology, once shocked the audience of theology students and professors at the Catholic University of Leuven. Caputo intended to criticize and challenge the partisan thought of theology which often result in self-referential debates without relevance, sometimes even without rational rigor, and almost all the time without credibility. However, there was also a bit of apologetics in Caputo’s statement: When theologians failed, philosophers are here and ready to take the initiative in exploring the fecundity of theological concepts. And indeed, despite certain forms of theology becoming less and less relevant, the questions of the late theological importance find their way back to the academic as well as public debates even stronger. The field of philosophy has experienced a return to the religious and some do not hesitate to talk directly about the theological turn. As a result, the discourse on religion, naming God, religious experience, faith, and so on, has undergone a great reversal. It is no more theologians who seek to employ the contemporary critical consciousness of philosophy to re-translate, re-read, re-interpret, and re-conceptualize Christianity to make it more comprehensible, more rational, and more attractive. Now, myriad philosophers, religious and secular philosophers alike, do not hesitate to draw inspiration from the sphere of religion and theology in order to interpret the structures of existence in the world. The motivations for such philosophical reconsiderations of religion vary, but a general perspective suggests that the religious allows for thinking excess, and exploring the impossible; religious thinking offers the possibility of criticizing metaphysics; it provides an alternative to modern objectivism and represents the other of autonomous reason. In short, religion appears as something beyond total control and mastery and yet the questions related to the religious give us much food for thought. Whatever the motivation, the result is obvious: we are confronted with de-localized Christian concepts and even de-theologized theologies that open new horizons for understanding. Perhaps the most interesting part of the whole movement is the audacious and spirited repetition of Christianity outside the exclusively defined ecclesial body. Nonetheless, there are still theologians among us; even theologians who take Caputo’s exclamation that “nobody trusts theology” seriously and who, at the same time, engage with the plethora of philosophical literature on the questions which used to be once the domain of their discipline. The trained eyes of a theologian cannot but see that the philosophical (re)turns to the religious provoke –whether they intend to or not – a radically renewed sense of theology; a sense which must be, however, uncovered and tested. This topical issue of Open Theology aims to explore","PeriodicalId":42436,"journal":{"name":"Open Theology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46092856","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The book of Ezekiel may be effectively understood in terms of Jeffrey Alexander’s theory of cultural trauma, in which catastrophic events take on a wider cultural significance because they are perceived as having consequences for group identity. The book of Ezekiel develops a new master narrative of Israelite history and identity, in which the catastrophes of 597 and 586 BCE are the culmination of generations of moral and religious offences against Yhwh, the God of Israel. Ezekiel’s narrative constructs these events as having profound consequences for Israel’s identity. Those taken to Babylonia are identified as victims of divine violence; as victims, they are the ones whom Yhwh has chosen as true Israelites. The book distinguishes this new Israel from the remnants of the old one still in Jerusalem, rejecting the claim that the latter are still members of the house of Israel. According to Ezekiel, to be an Israelite means to be a deportee. Although few texts outside Ezekiel are quite so overtly negative regarding Israel’s history, its reckoning of the significance of Jerusalem’s fall for Israelite identity resonates throughout the canon. With rare exceptions, the experience of deportation and life in Babylonia became the sine qua non of Israelite identity: only those who had it could count themselves true members of post-597 Israel. As a construction of the cultural significance of trauma, therefore, Ezekiel was remarkably successful. Thereafter, the events of 597 were construed not simply as practically and politically catastrophic, but as traumatic: the new master narrative placed them front and centre, with indelible and profound consequences for Israel’s self-understanding.
{"title":"Ezekiel and the Construction of Cultural Trauma","authors":"C. L. Crouch","doi":"10.1515/opth-2022-0221","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2022-0221","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The book of Ezekiel may be effectively understood in terms of Jeffrey Alexander’s theory of cultural trauma, in which catastrophic events take on a wider cultural significance because they are perceived as having consequences for group identity. The book of Ezekiel develops a new master narrative of Israelite history and identity, in which the catastrophes of 597 and 586 BCE are the culmination of generations of moral and religious offences against Yhwh, the God of Israel. Ezekiel’s narrative constructs these events as having profound consequences for Israel’s identity. Those taken to Babylonia are identified as victims of divine violence; as victims, they are the ones whom Yhwh has chosen as true Israelites. The book distinguishes this new Israel from the remnants of the old one still in Jerusalem, rejecting the claim that the latter are still members of the house of Israel. According to Ezekiel, to be an Israelite means to be a deportee. Although few texts outside Ezekiel are quite so overtly negative regarding Israel’s history, its reckoning of the significance of Jerusalem’s fall for Israelite identity resonates throughout the canon. With rare exceptions, the experience of deportation and life in Babylonia became the sine qua non of Israelite identity: only those who had it could count themselves true members of post-597 Israel. As a construction of the cultural significance of trauma, therefore, Ezekiel was remarkably successful. Thereafter, the events of 597 were construed not simply as practically and politically catastrophic, but as traumatic: the new master narrative placed them front and centre, with indelible and profound consequences for Israel’s self-understanding.","PeriodicalId":42436,"journal":{"name":"Open Theology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49411802","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Given panentheism, when trying to offer a plausible solution to the problem of evil, what is the most promising way forward? In this article, I argue that a panentheist who wants to answer the problem of evil by using the “only way” argument should embrace the metaphysics of process theism. In other words, she ought to be a process-panentheist. Process theism is a version of panentheism, while panentheism generally need not to imply process theism. I shall use the terms “process-panentheist” and “non-process-panentheist” to differentiate adherents of these two forms of panentheism. I examine the “only way” argument as a possible theodicy for panentheists and conclude that it is only a convincing theodicy for the panentheist if (i) she is a process-panentheist, or (ii) she thinks this is the best possible world. If she is a non-process-panentheist or does not think this is the best possible world, the “only way” approach fails to be a coherent theodicy.
{"title":"Process-Panentheism and the “Only Way” Argument","authors":"Lina Langby","doi":"10.1515/opth-2022-0203","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2022-0203","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Given panentheism, when trying to offer a plausible solution to the problem of evil, what is the most promising way forward? In this article, I argue that a panentheist who wants to answer the problem of evil by using the “only way” argument should embrace the metaphysics of process theism. In other words, she ought to be a process-panentheist. Process theism is a version of panentheism, while panentheism generally need not to imply process theism. I shall use the terms “process-panentheist” and “non-process-panentheist” to differentiate adherents of these two forms of panentheism. I examine the “only way” argument as a possible theodicy for panentheists and conclude that it is only a convincing theodicy for the panentheist if (i) she is a process-panentheist, or (ii) she thinks this is the best possible world. If she is a non-process-panentheist or does not think this is the best possible world, the “only way” approach fails to be a coherent theodicy.","PeriodicalId":42436,"journal":{"name":"Open Theology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47911856","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：