Search

This article is divided into two parts. The first responds to the earlier critical essays from Schwoebel and Callaway, in both cases challenging their methodology. In the former case objection is taken to the principle that even in dialogue with others one should start from one's own perspective rather than first make an effort of imagination to enter into the position of one's interlocutor. While with Callaway there is agreement about God working outside Christian boundaries, there is divergence over how easy it might be to proceed to empirical testing. The second part then seeks to expand the discussion into the wider context of the relation between theology and the arts more generally. After noting two reasons why they should be seen as closely allied and three cases where the arts might even provide some corrective to theology, the essay ends by offering a more internally addressed, theological account. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After briefly noting Geoffrey Rowell's interest in both themes, this article proceeds to examine Balthasar's equation of beauty and glory, beginning first with glory and beauty as found in the created order. Here the contention is that whereas notions of beauty spring ultimately from a Greek emphasis on proportion and balance, the Hebrew idea of glory is concerned with what overwhelms in its majesty and splendour, and is therefore more naturally equated with the eighteenth-century notion of sublimity. In addition, it is argued that, particularly in a modern context, it should not be presupposed that the arts are necessarily concerned with the creation of beauty. The second half of the article then turns to consider God in act and in internal life. With respect to the former, a critique is offered of the modern practice of describing the crucifixion as in itself beautiful. Finally, the author suggests that Balthasar's attempt to revive accounts of God as beautiful disguises major differences from the earlier tradition where simplicity rather than a rich complexity was taken as the defining criterion for such beauty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article uses a comparison between Durham Cathedral and the Temple at Jerusalem to argue for the ability of sacred buildings to exercise a religious role in their own right. Although obviously initially dependent on human action for their existence, when built they can then, it is argued, take on a life of their own. While negative influences are frequently noted, here it is positive dimensions that are stressed: first, in respect of experiences of the divine; then, secondly, of their ability to encourage learning from outside the specific faith context; before, thirdly, note is taken of their potential to encourage appropriate moral and political action. Finally, a response is offered to the common objection to such positive evaluation based on the alleged indifference of the early church to sacred buildings. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]