Yesterday, as I was troubling over which book to pick up next, I decided to explore Peter Rollins' new book (that just arrived from Amazon - ah, the joy of a new book). It's called The Fidelity of Betrayal. I've now devoured the first third of the book and I'm very excited.
Do you know the feeling of reading a book and recognizing the vague outlines of thoughts you had but were far from speech? That is my experience of the first third of this book. So, I thought I'd leave you with a quote this morning.
This deep eschatological wound within the text [of the Bible] must not be confused with the Word of God but rather is a hint of this Word's occurrence, much as a crater is the sign that a volcano once erupted there.
[snip]
In this way the Word of God refers to what the believer encounters as a presence exploding from the heart of the text, a presence that can never be captured in some confession of faith or creedal formation, no matter how beautiful or profound it may be. It's energy cannot be reduced to some liturgical chant or rendered into a three-point presentation. The Word, if it exists at all, if 'existence' is even the right word to describe its mode of dwelling, is not then the patch of meaning that covers over the wound of our unknowing but rather is that which causes the wound itself. The result of this divine wound is sadly hinted at in the formation of vast industries set up by those who would eagerly carve out a living by providing religious patches. To truly approach the Word is to be confronted with the rupture of Revelation....
...in so much of the Church in the West today, there is an attempt at closing over this traumatic rent in the text in one of two ways:
1) By attempting to do away with the central antagonism, affirming one narrative expression over others.
2) By endeavoring to cover up the antagonism by attempting to create a master interpretation derived from molding together the various available interpretations (55-56).
Comments