From Behind the Veil: The Epistles of John

Deep Exegesis:The Mystery of Reading Scripture

Jane Austen
(A Biography)

Solomon Among the Postmoderns

The Baptized Body

1 & 2 Kings
Brazos Theological Commentary

The Promise Of His Appearing: An Exposition Of Second Peter

A Great Mystery: Fourteen Wedding Sermons

Deep Comedy: Trinity, Tragedy, And Hope In Western Literature

Miniatures & Morals: The Christian Novels of Jane Austen

The Priesthood of the Plebs: A Theology of Baptism

A Son To Me: An Exposition of 1 & 2 Samuel

Against Christianity

From Silence to Song: The Davidic Liturgical Revolution

Ascent to Love: A Guide to Dante's Divine Comedy

Blessed Are the Hungry: Meditations on the Lord's Supper

A House For My Name: A Survey of the Old Testament

Heroes of the City of Man: A Christian Guide to Select Ancient Literature

Brightest Heaven of Invention: A Christian Guide To Six Shakespeare Plays

Wise Words: Family Stories That Bring the Proverbs to Life

The Kingdom and the Power: Rediscovering the Centrality of the Church

« Previous Post | Next Post »
« Previous post in category | Next post in category »

Theology: “Religious” language

Turner corrects a widespread misunderstanding of the Pseudo-Dionysian view of religious language.  For the pseudo-Denys (Turner’s designation), everything comes from God and thus “every creature retains within it a trace of its divine source, every creature in some way reflects, or is in some way an image or ’similitude’ of, the divine nature from which it flows.”

At some point, for the pseudo-Denys, all language fails, but “before anything we say of God fails it leads us some part of the way back up the ladder of language to that exact point at which it fails.  All language about God has to be stretched before it snaps.  But everything we can truly say about something God has created can be stretched out towards the representation of God.  And this is because in its creation each thing is the stretching out of God towards it.”

In other words, the pseudo-Denys doesn’t say we cannot say anything about God with ordinary language.  On the contrary, all our language is fit to be used of God: “language about God is truly unrestricted in range.”  For him, “religious language” is “simply ordinary language stretched to the limit of its significance.”  “God is a rock” is not meaningless; it fails because God is so far transcendentally rocklike that our conception of rockliness doesn’t encompass His rockliness.

Turner warns that the current fashion for Dionysian apophatic theology can go wrong: “The renewal of interest in the pseudo-Denys’ theology in our own time rises predominantly from his exposition of the via negativa, the recognition that when all talk about God has been exhausted, the rest is silence.  There are no doubt very good reasons for this – but we misconstrue the point of the via negativa if we tear it out of its context of relationship with the via affirmativa and represent it as an independent or even as an alternative theological strategy – or, more paradoxically still, as an independent avenue of knowledge of God.” The silence of theology doesn’t come at the outset; it comes at the end, when language exhausted itself, and fallen short.