Between Babel and Beast
(America and Empires in Biblical Perspective)

The Glory of Kings: A Festschrift for James B. Jordan

Fyodor Dostoevsky
(Christian Encounters Series)

Athanasius
(Foundations of Theological Exegesis and Christian Spirituality)

The Four: A Survey of the Gospels

Defending Constantine: The Twilight of an Empire and the Dawn of Christendom

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 »

Literature Theology: Precision

Paul Fiddes (The Promised End: Eschatology in Theology and Literature (Challenges in Contemporary Theology), 7) repeats a truism when he writes, “Poetic metaphor and narrative rejoice in ambiguity and the opening up of multiple meaning; doctrine will always seek to reduce to concepts the images and stories upon which it draws. . . . . doctrine uses metaphor in an attempt to fix meaning, to define and limit a spectrum of possible interpretations. . . . literature tends to openness and doctrine to closure.”  Though Fiddes doesn’t use the word, the implication is that doctrine is more precise than poetry, precision being the opposite of ambiguity, multiplicity, and openness.

I don’t dispute the necessity for “defining and limiting.”  I do dispute that the common view that defining and limiting necessarily increases precision.  It may; it may not.  The assumption that limitation necessarily increases precision rests on the prior assumption that precision is equivalent to simplicity.  But perhaps what we want to say is comprehensive and complex; in such a case, defining and limiting involves not only a loss of content but a loss of precision.

Poets certainly dispute that poetry is less precise than prose.  Whatever we think of Eliot’s “objective correlative,” it’s standard practice for poets to search for exactly the metaphor, rhyme, rhythm, and range of allusion to convey precisely the layered truth and emotion they want to convey.  Theologians should stand with the poets here: Because of its rich multiplicity of implication, “I am the rose of Sharon” is not less but more precise than any prosaic explication.