| Abstract
|
:
|
How ought one talk about a God who is, strictly speaking, ineffable? Even further, how could one ever dare to speak with dogmatic authority about such a God? This essay takes up one recent exploration of these topics— Richard Kearney’s Anatheism: Returning to God After God. The essay argues that while Kearney expresses legitimate concerns about the ethical and epistemological pitfalls of what he calls “dogmatic theism,” these dangers are not equally present in all iterations of religious dogma. Further, in some instances dogma might even contribute to the project of hospitality to the Other that Kearney commends in Anatheism. Thus a finer hermeneutic is required, which could distinguish between dogmas that are dangerous and helpful, reckless and responsible. How ought one talk about a God who is, strictly speaking, ineffable? Even further, how could one ever dare to speak with dogmatic authority about such a God? This essay takes up one recent exploration of these topics— Richard Kearney’s Anatheism: Returning to God After God. The essay argues that while Kearney expresses legitimate concerns about the ethical and epistemological pitfalls of what he calls “dogmatic theism,” these dangers are not equally present in all iterations of religious dogma. Further, in some instances dogma might even contribute to the project of hospitality to the Other that Kearney commends in Anatheism. Thus a finer hermeneutic is required, which could distinguish between dogmas that are dangerous and helpful, reckless and responsible.
|