Sacredness and Aesthetics
Kearney and Desmond on Prayer
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20458808 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Dennis Vanden Auweele (0000-0001-9042-9086, Department of Philosophy Katholieke Universiteit Leuven Kardinaal Mercierplein 2 3000 Leuven BELGIUM, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2021 |
| Volume | 37 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 3-22 |
| Publication date | 2021-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Modern Theology (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0266-7177 • E-ISSN: 1468-0025 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/moth.12589 |
| OpenAlex | W2994476687 |
| Language | EN |
Heidegger famously asserted that one cannot pray to the God of onto‐theo‐logic. God is here made into a determinate concept, the highest idea of reason, and thereby loses its constitutive transcendence and personhood. To think of God appropriately after Heidegger means to think of God in a way amenable to prayer. It is widely recognized that deconstruction does not fare well on this score as it turns prayer into some form of meditation/contemplation. In response, one ought to look for something between onto‐theo‐logic and deconstruction. In this article, I explore and assess two attempts to do so, by Richard Kearney and William Desmond respectively. I argue that Kearney does not manage to escape the trap of deconstruction because he does not allow for an intimation of God in prayer. This is achieved in a more metaphysical register by Desmond
Contemplation · Epistemology · Meditation · Metaphysics · Prayer · Theology · Karl Barth and Christian Theology · Philosophy · Philosophy, Ethics, and Existentialism · Theology and Philosophy of Evil
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |