Hamann acknowledges that the formal work of metaphor mimics the primordial act of condescension as much as it proposes it. To say that God humbles himself for the sake of his creation is to use an analogy with the human world to understand something of the divine world, and the reason Hamann and others find it (or any Christological reading of kenosis) acceptable, despite its Catholic censure, is because it comes as close as possible to describing the level of otherwise unthinkable sacrifice which must attend any possibility of a God willfully dividing from a state of absolute fullness. And, once contracted, this image also helps to orient our (admittedly poetic) imagining of the ends for which such contraction was willfully enacted. Hamann takes it to be neither accident nor blithely poetic irony that when metaphors do their work, they succeed with the same symbolic action of condescension.
http://katieterezakis.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/is-theology-possible-after-hamann_final_1.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment