Abstract This article seeks to challenge what may seem to be an obvious assertion: that finitude is original in the sense that it must be presupposed that any possible meaning can only be thought beginning from this finitude. I do this through a rereading of Derrida’s epochal essay “Violence and Metaphysics,” which perhaps is the most decisive interpretation of the philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas. In the essay, Derrida demonstrates how Levinas is forced to betray his own intentions in his attempt to describe the Other as transcendent. By making use of a newly published lecture series, Derrida held at the same time as writing the essay, I show how Derrida’s reading of Levinas is intimately tied to his interpretation of Heidegger’s critique of the metaphysics of presence, and how both Levinas and Derrida end up in the paradox I call “original finitude.” I then show how new commentary literature on Levinas’ analysis of enjoyment gives us an alternative to Derrida’s notion of original finitude. I do not propose that this alternative overcomes Derrida’s problematic, but rather that it gives another option of how to relate to that which escapes the grasp of philosophy. The key difference will be whether transcendence is conceived as a failure of philosophy or its excess.
{"title":"Is Finitude Original? A Rereading of “Violence and Metaphysics”","authors":"Theodor Sandal Rolfsen","doi":"10.1515/opth-2022-0200","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2022-0200","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article seeks to challenge what may seem to be an obvious assertion: that finitude is original in the sense that it must be presupposed that any possible meaning can only be thought beginning from this finitude. I do this through a rereading of Derrida’s epochal essay “Violence and Metaphysics,” which perhaps is the most decisive interpretation of the philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas. In the essay, Derrida demonstrates how Levinas is forced to betray his own intentions in his attempt to describe the Other as transcendent. By making use of a newly published lecture series, Derrida held at the same time as writing the essay, I show how Derrida’s reading of Levinas is intimately tied to his interpretation of Heidegger’s critique of the metaphysics of presence, and how both Levinas and Derrida end up in the paradox I call “original finitude.” I then show how new commentary literature on Levinas’ analysis of enjoyment gives us an alternative to Derrida’s notion of original finitude. I do not propose that this alternative overcomes Derrida’s problematic, but rather that it gives another option of how to relate to that which escapes the grasp of philosophy. The key difference will be whether transcendence is conceived as a failure of philosophy or its excess.","PeriodicalId":42436,"journal":{"name":"Open Theology","volume":"8 1","pages":"173 - 190"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49641981","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 examines death’s symbolic role vis-à-vis life in cross-cultural perspective. It surveys various ways of suppressing, nuancing, or minimising death’s effects and different ways of assuming its non-impasse through a cross-disciplinary lens that combines ethnographic inquiry, philosophical conceptualisation, and a secular, religious studies approach to the sacred. Zoroastrian and pre-Rabbinic Jewish views on the resurrection of the body, Gnostic and Neo-Gnostic takes on the immortality of the soul, and ancient-Greek, Hindu, and medieval Peripatetic claims about the continuity of life beyond death are thus brought into discussion and confronted with the Epicurean dismissal of death’s relevance for us. Additionally, drawing on Heraclitus’s frag. DK B62 and Robert Gardner’s fieldwork among the Dani of Papua New Guinea, I argue that assuming death as life’s sacred and non-negotiable limit need not entail resignation before it, be it untroubled or despaired. For while life outlives us, life itself would be nothing determinate if our finitude were not to contain it, which shows that death is life’s final condition of possibility; and when humans do not lose sight of their mortality, they tend to reaffirm their aliveness so as to stress life’s sacredness before death’s terrible presence, which proves that death is not only life’s limit, but also life’s antagonist. I conclude by making the point that differences as to the exact nature of death’s role in life affect our understanding of what life is: momentary joy, boundless renewal, or tragic gift.
{"title":"Rethinking Death’s Sacredness: From Heraclitus’s frag. DK B62 to Robert Gardner’s Dead Birds","authors":"C. Segovia","doi":"10.1515/opth-2022-0194","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2022-0194","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article examines death’s symbolic role vis-à-vis life in cross-cultural perspective. It surveys various ways of suppressing, nuancing, or minimising death’s effects and different ways of assuming its non-impasse through a cross-disciplinary lens that combines ethnographic inquiry, philosophical conceptualisation, and a secular, religious studies approach to the sacred. Zoroastrian and pre-Rabbinic Jewish views on the resurrection of the body, Gnostic and Neo-Gnostic takes on the immortality of the soul, and ancient-Greek, Hindu, and medieval Peripatetic claims about the continuity of life beyond death are thus brought into discussion and confronted with the Epicurean dismissal of death’s relevance for us. Additionally, drawing on Heraclitus’s frag. DK B62 and Robert Gardner’s fieldwork among the Dani of Papua New Guinea, I argue that assuming death as life’s sacred and non-negotiable limit need not entail resignation before it, be it untroubled or despaired. For while life outlives us, life itself would be nothing determinate if our finitude were not to contain it, which shows that death is life’s final condition of possibility; and when humans do not lose sight of their mortality, they tend to reaffirm their aliveness so as to stress life’s sacredness before death’s terrible presence, which proves that death is not only life’s limit, but also life’s antagonist. I conclude by making the point that differences as to the exact nature of death’s role in life affect our understanding of what life is: momentary joy, boundless renewal, or tragic gift.","PeriodicalId":42436,"journal":{"name":"Open Theology","volume":"8 1","pages":"64 - 78"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43515569","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 theological turn provokes much debate on the nature of phenomenology but almost none on the definition of theology. I argue, however, that the theological turn not only enlarges the field of phenomenological exploration but also provides theology with a conceptual apparatus that can contribute to formulating rigorous theological positions. In the first step, I question the debate dominated by philosophers of religion which created a normative – restrictive – category of the theological turn. Instead, I argue that the full potential of the theological turn in phenomenology will only be revealed when we accept it as a descriptive category – a tendency that has always in fact been present in phenomenology. In the second step, I move towards theology to argue that the phenomenological engagements with the original theological thoughts are less de-theologized than they are transformed and in their new version offered back to theology, for which they can have crucial relevance. Hence, what is truly interesting after the theological turn is not so much the boundary between theology and phenomenology but their mutual and undeniable encounters.
{"title":"After the Theological Turn: Towards a Credible Theological Grammar","authors":"M. Kočí","doi":"10.1515/opth-2022-0198","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2022-0198","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The theological turn provokes much debate on the nature of phenomenology but almost none on the definition of theology. I argue, however, that the theological turn not only enlarges the field of phenomenological exploration but also provides theology with a conceptual apparatus that can contribute to formulating rigorous theological positions. In the first step, I question the debate dominated by philosophers of religion which created a normative – restrictive – category of the theological turn. Instead, I argue that the full potential of the theological turn in phenomenology will only be revealed when we accept it as a descriptive category – a tendency that has always in fact been present in phenomenology. In the second step, I move towards theology to argue that the phenomenological engagements with the original theological thoughts are less de-theologized than they are transformed and in their new version offered back to theology, for which they can have crucial relevance. Hence, what is truly interesting after the theological turn is not so much the boundary between theology and phenomenology but their mutual and undeniable encounters.","PeriodicalId":42436,"journal":{"name":"Open Theology","volume":"8 1","pages":"114 - 127"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44082286","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 aim of this article is to address the topic of death from a Luhmannian perspective. First, the article will introduce the general theory of Luhmann to provide a background for the way he is tackling sociological and philosophical problems and then will describe its application to religion and deduce various implications for the topic of death. For the discussion of death, we will refer to some of Hegel’s insights, as they motivated central parts of Luhmann’s theory, though he replaced the Hegelian notions with system theoretical ones. Even if it might seem like a further abstraction and mechanization, we assume that it significantly facilitates the combination of outside and inside perspectives on death. In contrast to philosophical existentialism, the system-oriented approach of Luhmann does not emphasize the situated character of human reason and its gaining authenticity by facing death and finitude. Instead, it points to the entanglement of society and consciousness, focusing on the former while providing hints to the otherness of consciousness. Here, authenticity is not achieved by writing about existential topics, but rather through some sort of parallax view.
{"title":"Death from the Perspective of Luhmann’s System Theory","authors":"Murat Sariyar","doi":"10.1515/opth-2022-0196","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2022-0196","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The aim of this article is to address the topic of death from a Luhmannian perspective. First, the article will introduce the general theory of Luhmann to provide a background for the way he is tackling sociological and philosophical problems and then will describe its application to religion and deduce various implications for the topic of death. For the discussion of death, we will refer to some of Hegel’s insights, as they motivated central parts of Luhmann’s theory, though he replaced the Hegelian notions with system theoretical ones. Even if it might seem like a further abstraction and mechanization, we assume that it significantly facilitates the combination of outside and inside perspectives on death. In contrast to philosophical existentialism, the system-oriented approach of Luhmann does not emphasize the situated character of human reason and its gaining authenticity by facing death and finitude. Instead, it points to the entanglement of society and consciousness, focusing on the former while providing hints to the otherness of consciousness. Here, authenticity is not achieved by writing about existential topics, but rather through some sort of parallax view.","PeriodicalId":42436,"journal":{"name":"Open Theology","volume":"8 1","pages":"205 - 220"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47195693","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":"8 1","pages":"261 - 275"},"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}
Abstract In the United States, the first decades of the twenty-first century have been marked by a worsening fatal drug overdose epidemic leading life expectancy to decline for the first time in a century. Often termed deaths of despair, this development is attributed to declines in civic life, including lessening religious participation, wrought by long-term deindustrialization. Despite this, civil society has responded by contesting despair and the conditions hastening fatal overdose trends. This article examines faith-based community responses to the American overdose crisis through an extended case study of a church-led campaign in Massachusetts. In the summer of 2017, the state of Massachusetts released its fatal overdose numbers to the public: 2,069 people died of fatal overdose in 2016. In response, Trinity Church of Wrentham, Massachusetts, launched the #2069 campaign resulting in over 2,000 billboards and lawn signs emblazoned with #2069 displayed across the state. The memorial project fostered conversation, but also forged new community active in its work of social support, public health outreach and nonpartisan political engagement. The article considers the role of faith-based public health efforts and the potential for further interfaith and interracial collaboration on public health issues and the role of public religion in contesting conditions of despair.
{"title":"Contesting Deaths’ Despair: Local Public Religion, Radical Welcome and Community Health in the Overdose Crisis, Massachusetts, USA","authors":"Emily B. Campbell","doi":"10.1515/opth-2022-0206","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2022-0206","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In the United States, the first decades of the twenty-first century have been marked by a worsening fatal drug overdose epidemic leading life expectancy to decline for the first time in a century. Often termed deaths of despair, this development is attributed to declines in civic life, including lessening religious participation, wrought by long-term deindustrialization. Despite this, civil society has responded by contesting despair and the conditions hastening fatal overdose trends. This article examines faith-based community responses to the American overdose crisis through an extended case study of a church-led campaign in Massachusetts. In the summer of 2017, the state of Massachusetts released its fatal overdose numbers to the public: 2,069 people died of fatal overdose in 2016. In response, Trinity Church of Wrentham, Massachusetts, launched the #2069 campaign resulting in over 2,000 billboards and lawn signs emblazoned with #2069 displayed across the state. The memorial project fostered conversation, but also forged new community active in its work of social support, public health outreach and nonpartisan political engagement. The article considers the role of faith-based public health efforts and the potential for further interfaith and interracial collaboration on public health issues and the role of public religion in contesting conditions of despair.","PeriodicalId":42436,"journal":{"name":"Open Theology","volume":"8 1","pages":"248 - 260"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47577219","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 Qumran Apocryphon of Jeremiah C (4QApocrJer Ca-d; 4Q390) provides reflections on the trauma of devastation, dislocation, and captivity at the time of the Babylonian exile as narrated in the book of Jeremiah. Yet, just as the Damascus Document (CD/4QD), its apocalyptic review of periods goes well beyond the biblical era. This article analyses the narrative discourses of the Apocryphon in comparison with the Damascus Document with the aid of modern theory about cultural trauma, cultural analysis of remembering and forgetting, and recent insights about theodical discourse in the Hebrew Bible. It analyses the recurrent trope of “God hiding his face” in Qumran Jeremianic traditions against broader biblical and early Jewish backgrounds. The article investigates the understanding of reciprocity in human-divine relations and explores how theodicy relates to forgetful remembrance of covenantal relationships. It contends that the Qumran Jeremianic traditions deal with cultural trauma in terms of lament, admonition, theodical discourse, and divisive memory against the historical background of the late Second Temple period, in particular the era of the Maccabean crisis.
{"title":"Trauma in the Apocryphon of Jeremiah C: Cultural Trauma as Forgetful Remembrance of Divine-Human Relations in Qumran Jeremianic Traditions","authors":"A. Hogeterp","doi":"10.1515/opth-2022-0220","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2022-0220","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The Qumran Apocryphon of Jeremiah C (4QApocrJer Ca-d; 4Q390) provides reflections on the trauma of devastation, dislocation, and captivity at the time of the Babylonian exile as narrated in the book of Jeremiah. Yet, just as the Damascus Document (CD/4QD), its apocalyptic review of periods goes well beyond the biblical era. This article analyses the narrative discourses of the Apocryphon in comparison with the Damascus Document with the aid of modern theory about cultural trauma, cultural analysis of remembering and forgetting, and recent insights about theodical discourse in the Hebrew Bible. It analyses the recurrent trope of “God hiding his face” in Qumran Jeremianic traditions against broader biblical and early Jewish backgrounds. The article investigates the understanding of reciprocity in human-divine relations and explores how theodicy relates to forgetful remembrance of covenantal relationships. It contends that the Qumran Jeremianic traditions deal with cultural trauma in terms of lament, admonition, theodical discourse, and divisive memory against the historical background of the late Second Temple period, in particular the era of the Maccabean crisis.","PeriodicalId":42436,"journal":{"name":"Open Theology","volume":"8 1","pages":"460 - 481"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41944455","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 offers a critical re-evaluation of the role of death in Christian theology, especially as it is viewed in light of the incarnation. It situates the problem of death as an extension of the problem of evil and analyses the classical responses to this problem in the Western Christian tradition. From here, it brings in the theological “minority report” on the role of death that runs through the Western tradition, ultimately using it as a springboard for a constructive repositioning of death as a potential locus of encountering the benevolence of God in Christ.
{"title":"God and the Goodness of Death: A Theological Minority Report","authors":"C. Hartin","doi":"10.1515/opth-2022-0209","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2022-0209","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article offers a critical re-evaluation of the role of death in Christian theology, especially as it is viewed in light of the incarnation. It situates the problem of death as an extension of the problem of evil and analyses the classical responses to this problem in the Western Christian tradition. From here, it brings in the theological “minority report” on the role of death that runs through the Western tradition, ultimately using it as a springboard for a constructive repositioning of death as a potential locus of encountering the benevolence of God in Christ.","PeriodicalId":42436,"journal":{"name":"Open Theology","volume":"8 1","pages":"276 - 283"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42494345","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 order to take the physical and incorporeal dimension of dance seriously in the context of Christian theology, we propose that it should be the neglected Christological Perichōrēsis (as well as concepts and ideas surrounding it) rather than the Trinitarian Perichōrēsis that is historically and traditionally relevant as a source of a dialogue between Christian theology and dance. First, we propose that the guiding metaphor should be Christ as dancer, historical examples of which already exist unlike with the notion of the Trinity as dance. Then, we look at St Maximus the Confessor’s Christocentric cosmology. With the human being understood as a “microcosm” of body–soul(spirit) unity placed at the center of the entire creation, his Christocentric cosmology could be a potential source for enhancing a dialogue between Christian theology and dance, while helping us overcome the dualistic separation between the body and the spirit and consequently between nature and culture.
{"title":"The Christological Perichōrēsis and Dance","authors":"R. Hikota","doi":"10.1515/opth-2022-0202","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2022-0202","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In order to take the physical and incorporeal dimension of dance seriously in the context of Christian theology, we propose that it should be the neglected Christological Perichōrēsis (as well as concepts and ideas surrounding it) rather than the Trinitarian Perichōrēsis that is historically and traditionally relevant as a source of a dialogue between Christian theology and dance. First, we propose that the guiding metaphor should be Christ as dancer, historical examples of which already exist unlike with the notion of the Trinity as dance. Then, we look at St Maximus the Confessor’s Christocentric cosmology. With the human being understood as a “microcosm” of body–soul(spirit) unity placed at the center of the entire creation, his Christocentric cosmology could be a potential source for enhancing a dialogue between Christian theology and dance, while helping us overcome the dualistic separation between the body and the spirit and consequently between nature and culture.","PeriodicalId":42436,"journal":{"name":"Open Theology","volume":"8 1","pages":"191 - 204"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43959586","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 explores the theological turn through the work of John Caputo, who famously transitioned from a philosopher of religion to a “weak theologian,” and later as a “radical theologian.” In so doing it argues that Caputo’s work as a radical theologian is an attempt at a practical performance of religion without religion: he inhabits the discourse of theology while radicalizing the tradition against itself. This article will show the value of this theological approach and how Caputo needs to directly inhabit this discourse as a theologian – confessing to be a theologian, becoming one of “their own” – to change theology’s trajectory. This trajectorial shift is felt both inside the academy and within the church itself. Caputo’s transformation from a philosopher to a theologian is a move from a (philosophical) description to a (theological) prescription. It is a transition from theory to praxis, and he could not do this without inhabiting that praxis’ context and its discourses. In doing so, and perhaps unintentionally, Caputo surprisingly respects critics like Dominique Janicaud, whose strident critique against the theological turn was at its apotheosis during Caputo’s transition: Caputo never ventures into crypto-theology nor does he sneak in prescription under the guise of a “phenomenology,” as many philosophers of religion are wont to do. Rather, he sees that one needs to embody the discourse to change it, which, ironically, is a position that would gain the approval of both Dominique Janicaud and traditional theology.
{"title":"Confessional Discourses, Radicalizing Traditions: On John Caputo and the Theological Turn","authors":"Justin Sands","doi":"10.1515/opth-2022-0193","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2022-0193","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article explores the theological turn through the work of John Caputo, who famously transitioned from a philosopher of religion to a “weak theologian,” and later as a “radical theologian.” In so doing it argues that Caputo’s work as a radical theologian is an attempt at a practical performance of religion without religion: he inhabits the discourse of theology while radicalizing the tradition against itself. This article will show the value of this theological approach and how Caputo needs to directly inhabit this discourse as a theologian – confessing to be a theologian, becoming one of “their own” – to change theology’s trajectory. This trajectorial shift is felt both inside the academy and within the church itself. Caputo’s transformation from a philosopher to a theologian is a move from a (philosophical) description to a (theological) prescription. It is a transition from theory to praxis, and he could not do this without inhabiting that praxis’ context and its discourses. In doing so, and perhaps unintentionally, Caputo surprisingly respects critics like Dominique Janicaud, whose strident critique against the theological turn was at its apotheosis during Caputo’s transition: Caputo never ventures into crypto-theology nor does he sneak in prescription under the guise of a “phenomenology,” as many philosophers of religion are wont to do. Rather, he sees that one needs to embody the discourse to change it, which, ironically, is a position that would gain the approval of both Dominique Janicaud and traditional theology.","PeriodicalId":42436,"journal":{"name":"Open Theology","volume":"8 1","pages":"38 - 49"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43807997","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：