Theology, Phenomenology and the Retrieval of Experience: A Homage to Peter Kemp (original) (raw)
Related papers
This topical issue of "Open Theology", Phenomenology of Religious Experience II: Perspectives in Theology, addresses various aspects of phenomenological investigations in theology. An overarching unifying theme of the issue can be outlined as follows: Can rigorous phenomenological science serve theology in ways that turn theology itself into a system of knowledge in its own right and distinct from the natural and historical human sciences? It never hurts to remind ourselves that the focus of phenomenological research on subjectivity and consciousness, in European philosophy as it is understood by Husserl in "Crisis" and in his essay "Philosophy as a Rigorous Science", grew out of theological reflection if not out of the sense of immediacy in first-person religious experiences (cf. DeRoo paper in this issue). It is unquestionable that theologies of different kinds actively participate in shaping ideologies and play a central role in forming both religious and secular lifeworlds. However, there were hardly any reflections on the role of theology in constitution of knowledge in the history or sciences, and even less research on theology's relationship with deontic logic or the unity of motivation which defines the flow of history. Within theology itself, an outstanding problem remains a lack of methods by which theology can study itself or address its own unique and specific subject matter, which, in our understanding, would be the eidetics of a specific case of transcendence, between human being and God. While analytic approaches continue their longtime friendship with theology, and even gave birth to analytic theology, the famous theological turn in French phenomenology remained questioned by theologians with regard to its validity, largely because of the view that phenomenologists are not trained theologians but philosophers who do not know theology well enough to do theology proper and therefore replace it by philosophical investigations. Therefore, in this issue, we present papers which illumine the research potential of phenomenology within traditional theological terrains, but on the roads less traveled. Not surprisingly, many of these roads go through less known aspects of religious experience, or reveal a hidden presence of phenomenology within existing theological agendas.
Research Note: The Christian Critique of Phenomenology
Philosophia Reformata, 2000
This research note is penned in honour of Johan Vander Hoeven on his retirement as Editor-in-Chief of Philosophia Reformata. It is to acknowledge his helpful contribution to the critical exposition of phenomenology. I first read his work almost 30 years ago and it challenged me to develop a sympathetic Christian critique of this philosophical movement. This note is to offer some reflection upon the Christian interpretation of phenomeology. In particular, it raises questions about how some famous phrases, one by Dilthey, the other by Husserl, have been construed.
Phenomenology and Theology–Reflections on the Study of Religion
Zygon 35, 827–848, 2000
The academic study of religious belief and practice is frequently taken to debunk the content of religion. This attitude impedes the science-theology dialogue and causes believers to react defensively toward studies of religion. I argue that a large, although not unrestricted, domain exists in which phenomenology of religion is neutral with respect to content, that is, compatible with either belief or unbelief. Theology can constructively interact with secular studies of religion, in some cases even explicitly hostile ones. Three themes emerge that elaborate on this interaction: (1) the claim that a scientific study of religion is capable of refuting belief is a logical mistake; (2) religious practice, and to some extent belief, can benefit from secular scrutiny; (3) the entirety of religious expressions is richer than the content that can be captured by analytical study of the phenomenon.
The Myth of the Given? The Future of Phenomenology's Theological Turn
Philosophy Today, 2018
The theological turn in phenomenology continues to generate cross-disciplinary discussion among philosophers and theologians concerning the scope and boundaries of counts as a "phenomenon. " This essay suggests that the very idea of the given, a term so important for Husserl, Heidegger, Henry and Marion, can be reassessed from the point of view of Wilifred Sellars's discussion of the myth of the "immediate" given. Sometimes phenomenology is understood to involve the skill of unveiling immediate data that appear as "phenomena" to a conscious and wakeful ego. In conversation with Jean-Luc Marion's volume Givenness and Revelation, I challenge the assumption that phenomena are immediate in their givenness. The final remarks concern the "how" of the givenness of theological data, and in particular, the phenomenon of the Trinity.
The Curious Case of the Phenomenology of Religion
When Gods Spoke: Researches and Reflections on Religious Phenomena and Artefacts, 2015
Phenomenology of religion as a research project has fallen out of favour in the past few decades. Yet discussions about the feasibility and relevance of the phenomenological approach continue. In one way or another most of the current approaches in the study of religion rely on the disciplinary background of the earlier phe-nomenologies. This article analyses a couple of the more recent proposals that have reconsidered the relevance of the phenomenological approach, aiming to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of these proposals in relation to the goals of the study of religion. Based on this review and analysis of current discussions I argue in the second half of my article that the phenomenology of religion can still serve as an important part of the study of religion and avoid criticisms it previously invited if it is remodelled into an endeavour of 'typologi-cal analysis' in the sense explained in the second half of this article. In one way or another all contemporary approaches to the study of religion relate to the phenomenology of religion. The most prevalent way is certainly conceptual: many (if not most) of the conceptual tools, their meanings and their supposed universality have been taken from the ty-pological and categorical distinctions of earlier generalized phenomenol-ogies. This is apparent from postmodernist approaches, which strongly oppose the phenomenology of religion, to the modern cognitive study of religion that aims to analyse and explain religion as a general phenomenon by highlighting many of the same characteristics that earlier were central to the phenomenologies of religion. Aside from conceptual tools, there is also the understanding that one should maintain neutrality in
Continental philosophers of religion and the theologians who engage with them have recently began to blur the lines between the disciplines of philosophy and theology. This is particularly true after the so-called " theological turn " in phenomenology. I argue for an appreciation of their approaches but will also express that these explorations must remain interdisciplinary. Far too often philosophers and theologians alike appropriate freely within their interdisciplinary research with little regard for the presuppositions and methodologies latent within their appropriations. This article will demonstrate these appropriations through an exploration of Merold Westphal and Richard Kearney's use of hermeneutical phenomenology, and will claim that their use of this methodology falls upon two distinct discourses, a theological one for Westphal and a philosophical one for Kearney. The upshot of this exploration is an argument for a renewal of methodological restraint when appropriating from other disciplines and a respect for the difference between academic disciplines.
Was There A Theological Turn in Phenomenology?
This article examines the possibility that phenomenology was " always already " a theological enterprise, by outlining some of the foundational criticisms levelled by Michel Foucault and Louis Althusser. For both thinkers, the phenomenological stress on " lived experience " grants an undue primacy to the realm of " interiority " ; as a result, subjectivity is left, not just reified, but also deified. By contrast, both Foucault and Althusser will argue for understanding the subject as constituted rather than constitutive; philosophy's task, accordingly, is to delineate the broader structures (economic, ideological, discursive, linguistic, etc.) that create " lived experience, " rather than to hypostatize the subject as the privileged bearer of logos. As well as outlining the contours of this critique, however, the article indicates some of the shortcomings entailed in a total disavowal of " lived experience. "
During the last decades, two major and interrelated themes have dominated the study of religion: (a) the theme claiming that the long taken-for-granted so-called secularization thesis was all wrong, and (b) the theme of the so-called " return " or " resurgence of religion ". This global revival of religion has been chronicled in a number of important books, referred to in this paper. Nowadays, comparative religion can, very broadly, be carried out from two types of data: texts or actual living human beings. In this paper I will argue that the best way to conduct comparative studies of lived religion is the method of a Husserlian based phenomenology of religion in the sense of a "de-theologized" interpretative approach to religious consciousness and experience, which make no claims concerning the sui generis or the essential nature of religion.
Discontinuous Meditations on the Phenomenology of Religion
This paper argues the phenomenology of religion, which has come under attack from theorists of various persuasions within Religious Studies, remains a useful tool in the methodological repertoire of scholars researching religion. Particularly damning criticisms will be addressed with a view to demonstrating that phenomenology is a fluid, and far from simple theory, which has frequently been misrepresented by its critics, who themselves may have questionable motives for impugning or dismissing it. Specific criticisms addressed include: that phenomenology of religion privileges individual consciousness and denies intersubjectivity and language; that phenomenology of religion presumes that ‘religion’ has an essentialist, a-historical core, ignoring historical and social contextualization; and that the phenomenologyical approach results in a disguised ‘theologizing’ of Studies in Religion through its ‘sympathy’ with the believer’s perspective
A Justification for Phenomenology as Theology
Catholic moral theology is a discipline whose primary concern revolves around understanding the nuances involved in the interplay of reconciliation and intimacy with God via the treatment of the 'other'. Morality, as articulated by the Roman Catholic Church, has three dimensions: a universal call to moral goodness; the search for moral truth; and a commitment to act in a particular way. Each dimension weighs heavily on the notion of the human person being universally orientated in a divinely ordained fashion towards the other. A passage of New Testament text that the Church uses to assert these fundamental dimensions of Christian morality is found in the twenty-fifth chapter of the Gospel of Matthew. In this passage, Christ Jesus chastises those who saw the "nakedness", the "hunger", and the "thirst" of the other and utters the sacred words, "Whatever you did for one of these…you did for me" (Matthew 25:40).