The Apophatic Tradition

[poliphilo]

Good article here about the New Atheism. What we need, says Madeline Bunting,  is a revival of the apophatic tradition.

"Apophatic".  It seems like I never came across that word before. But I must have done.  I can't have studied theology for three years without stumbling across it a few times- and I'm familiar enough with the concept. Maybe it didn't stick because of the way it chimes with apathetic. Why- it's almost a homophone.

Anyway, I'm hoping, if I keep writing it here- apophatic, apophatic, apophatic- I'll not forget it again.

Apophatic theology defines God in terms of what God is not. God is ineffable, unknowable, immortal. Another name for this way of thinking- Latin, rather than Greek- easier to remember, perhaps- is  via negativa.

The via negativa snakes through all the great religious traditions.

It's the way to the centre- to the very heart of the woods. 

Where it is so dark we can see nothing and so bright that we're blinded.
 
The New Atheism makes short work of the human, too human god of the religious fundamentalists. And a good thing too. But a God defined in terms of negatives is harder to dimiss than a God who has had His/Her lines coloured in. As Bunting says, "It makes the boundary between belief in God and agnosticism much more porous than commonly assumed." The apophatic God is elusive,- a mystery- enveloped in "a cloud of unknowing".

The atheist says, "I don't believe in God." The apophatic says, "I don't believe in any God that can be imagined or described".

Comments

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I agree. Sometimes the whole Dawkins thing strikes me as a little, local quarrel- a family quarrel, in fact. I wonder whether he and his allies realise that there is more to religion than the soft targets he mainly attacks.

[oakmouse]

I've tried to mention to atheists of my acquaintance that polytheistic religions don't hold the beliefs that they object to --- but the most common response seems to be a sort of colonialist "Oh, well, polytheism, that's something those primitive (ie non-white) people on other continents believe in. Nobody civilized believes in polytheistic religions."

I guess that makes me uncivilized, then. Better uncivilized than a patronizing wanker, IMO. ;)

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

The new atheism is very parochial. It defines religion in terms of the reactionary fundamentalism of small town America- and seems largely oblivious to all its many other faces.

I know- from experience- that polytheism can represent a very subtle approach to the mystery of the divine.