-
Recent Comments
JBG on If God is going to deify every… Christopher McGarvey on If God is going to deify every… Eric Jobe on If God is going to deify every… Robert Fortuin on If God is going to deify every… Marc on If God is going to deify every… Grant on If God is going to deify every… Coemgen (they/them) on If God is going to deify every… Robert Fortuin on If God is going to deify every… David on If God is going to deify every… Grant on If God is going to deify every…
Interview with Sørina Higgins about Charles Williams
This entry was posted in Inklings & Company. Bookmark the permalink.
Reblogged this on The Oddest Inkling.
LikeLike
Just got around to listening to this. Interviewer often comes across as a surfer dude with occasional moments of lucidity. This limits the value of the discussion somewhat, but it remains interesting.Sorina Higgins broaches the topic of the problem of Williams’ theology and Christian orthodoxy, but the interviewer did not probe the question much. Williams’ participation in esoteric mystical societies and odd sexual notions is well-known. I haven’t read the new biography, but I take it that it stresses adulterous love in Williams’ life. I am confident that Williams displays nothing like the polymorphous erotic perversity that one encounters with Eric Gill, for instance. Yet I think Eric Gill’s writing and art retains signifanct value as a witness to Christian understanding. Likewise, I believe Williams’ notions of Coinherence and the significant value of romantic love as analogy of divine perichoresis are relatively uncontroversial. Cataphatic assertions are kept from reifying into objective, univocal possessions by apophatic awareness. Something like Erich Przywara’s analogia entis or William Desmond’s metaphysics offer the proper ontological understanding to prevent analogy from turning into the kind of simplistic identity the interviewer appears to fear.
I agree with Higgins’ assessment of the importance of the Taliessin poems as exemplars of an “alternative modernity.” Even Lewis’ distaste for Eliot’s poetry was softened somewhat when he came to know him personally. John Milbank’s discussion of Sergius Bulgakov and thaumaturgy, as well as Marcel Mauss’ General Theory of Magic should be consulted as a counter to the general trend of viewing magic as merely a kind of tawdry occult practice.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is linked to his English Wikipedia article, but, has anyone translated it for us non-Francophones?:
http://classiques.uqac.ca/classiques/mauss_marcel/socio_et_anthropo/1_esquisse_magie/esquisse_magie.html
LikeLike
David,
There’s an English translation of Mauss’ work available. Unfortunately, my French is too rudimentary to translate.
LikeLike
Thanks!
LikeLike
John Milbank’s English Wikipedia article includes this reference: “Sophiology and Theurgy: The New Theological Horizon”, found in Adrian Pabst, ed., Radical Orthodoxy and Eastern Orthodoxy (Basingstoke: Ashgate, 2009), 45–85. Is that what you had in mind (or are there more or other ones, as well)?
LikeLike
That’s the one. I believe there are also some useful comments distributed throughout Milbank’s Stanton lectures. The later lectures are the most relevant as I recall.
LikeLike
Thanks!
LikeLike
You might find my review essay here of interest in this context:
LikeLike
Thank you for the link. When I have more time, I will give it a proper perusal. It looks to be quite helpful.
LikeLike