— JEAN-LUC MARION Religion and Postmen Aseties edited by Mark C. Taylor God Without Being Hors-Texte ‘Translated by Thomas A. Carlson With a Foreword by‘The Une f Cag rs, Cen 60557 "he Umer of Cag Pre a onda ‘oot byte Unerty of Chan ‘alight een Pb 191 Piper eon 1995 owpomorososotosarer 43678 ss 0226505618 pape) vin pubes Dw sans Pe Horse iby of Congres Cope aes Dae Maro Jeane 1986- {Dicer re gh) ‘Goa wats Deg oetee Jeane Mb tated by ‘Thoma Coen wth evo by Da ch (go and pst) eo Ok Por es 1H Briaznas9 1991 © Te paper wed ithe pubenin ees the mimi requcement of he To GrégoireCONTENTS ml des nd minds we nt cw one Fresond ‘movement fre cary hs peste, fan Transters Acknomedgments xi pee peeriecat ores) Preface tthe English Fao xix tac urn ttre yet to rea hn —t0 whi matin fet icinethen the word ng cal atone Fah does atthe eu of ene Heeger God without Being. the Kd andthe eon Stracctone Retrt V4 4 cncepuial tel 16 Set of eve 17 > aie starnef the vshle 20 re lon ne Coe 22 2H Dowble hlokiry 25 1 The huncren ofthe hdd 28 2: meinen of te Concapnal Idol 29 Monts end she bd 38 4 the See Deng 37 5 Siw ae diene and Reed Sabet 49 aa “The Cersing of Heing 53 1 The Senco nf he Kel 54 2 the dhanle npn {Deno Bee Git) 78 The tlienonete te 8S 5 rie meet Ree Tus Fs 21. Stinson 18 2 Bordon 198 Stone of antes 119 Asif 126 5 Sotanchotir 132 <5 OF the Eucharistic Ste of Theology 139 1 Let iiSold 139 2 The Forecosed Bom W44 5. The Bucharse Hermenctic 4 Whore We ak 155 5 Me Delay 0 tegration 15%, Me Hors-Texte See The Preseatand the Git 161 One or be Other olay 68 2 conscious and he tmmete 67 5 Metapnscal er Coie Tomporatty 169 4 De stenonal V2 5: Rpohase 173 6 Brom Dayo Day 174 7 Theihof Preece 76 8 The Urgencvof Comempition 178 =a ee The Ls Rigor 183, 1 Preeaton 183 2 Pojurmance 16 3. Cameron 18) “4 Merton 195 Nes 199 Engllshanguage Edtions Cie) 233 ‘Sources 237 Toes 259 FOREWORD Ie fsa please tint fea ae Ma fined Witt cing 4 a Aner faigoce, Much of sat aience area Knows Marons deep influential works fom the inerpetaton of Descartes as well tshis work vs Huser an! eee He insane Drea Morconer. Maron pret te uo this Fish ein ice Focsex fn his etka relations to these coo plex philosepbical fluences. cn his thought Hs original preface abso caries his readings of Nietzsche, Witensen, lac iy respi thereto Aor speak kss ofthe philosophical ian of the theological contest of Marion’ work For Gnd Waton etn clearly beth philosophical nda theological text ‘Chrisian theology to & marked by 1 great ule The traitional historical tickles within Clriianity-Protestn (Cali, Orthoxkox-—remais intact but Irae econ far less significant than they Ime ben isa aer, a peculiarly tmealeen conic rw roses all the major CGyastan theological traliions, whether Catholic, Presta, o@ Onhodn. Since Schteicrmachcr and Hegel, Christian the ‘ey ashe nts aera comic liver fis proper espoase to mernity (Gel mere even, it Marion, £0 post tmonderity There are many ws 1 de line thi pensive madera theological Conf or present purposes, We my tame it cfc ere to basi Hoel sates on the proper Christan response to nariOne clase modern theological sgt lose gaan ence the clams of reason and the dncses of revelation The ete tay bles ht rex anions es aa by developing rixrous concep dene ln te vk unin retin ih se sine relation alone shed foutt an aten Conifer mike at ot a eng {0 domestica the realty of God by mean ores brine Ashe ee God Wont Hea es Pec itn embraces the secon, revels sratey hoe Che tian theo father dnctnson ofeach wrt be on Ht sen motion beeen them soul help erent the rer ioe ler theologeal conten athe conten hs meng ad roe poe bok ang he sate of “correlating” reason and revlon Many thon in iy to the early mer tee clas ber thololes, ele tha te pra ek fm temporary Christan theo to core an ieretaon ofthe Gstineradion wth an rpc oth eigen ‘questons oF eligious dimension ofthe corscimporay si ‘fn hen this peally modern stacey othe ee lion is confident abou both Chest and mar tos ‘nib Protea thcologe and Cathe moderns tev 8) the inerpreations af he meaning meaningless {ith of odh the wadiion andthe contemporary ston wl fin prove lam 18 vr ery mean ee Gstnay and modernity In tnt fos for, Chasity ean then be vewel thea on’ now ining ts proper concep sel underarm ‘the “absolute knowledge” available to modernity (Hegel ‘ ‘hon hse orion ewes mea insuch great "eorelatona” or "median theogiane “lich Protestant helo oF Ral Ratner n Cal: et co), the “correlation” eecen reson ia reve” il chim far fever vinta ienies Between the een eth ings of moder and Christy ar sent . x something Te Peete et of rakiesinliecence ren sets tin phenomena ‘When tis same Kind of eoreltanal sate hecanes hss. hope about one or another side ofthe cortelation, then the vine of crc lng ierpreitions of msi ard Chie That wil close mone a more nnidentities,elerences, Cipritions inerruptions. confrontations, TH cea ee eerste crics of eer” wl turn 939 fron "ene er peas’ in vaemprary political, beratn, sn enn tees Tiree biter theoleges. de baseally corcatonal sates cf meatern Chri theo evtinucs Hessever, modernity team ical tl smc spicing a6 hope, al Cheistianity ‘Renee mone eschatolygal even apoeaie ints more aroernptie essence tha exoneling ofall reaby {0 iin uu correlational thoes, the selFeonindence of troderniy andthe Furacenisn of Cristian ber theologies Teed ant ines exphadd into sce confrontational Fhe Hgelian reconetiton te abandoned i ee of ayo Herat fen the oppression a uncanscons but stem ita aa secur Pen ers eis cle that Ans kl fo tere Joes partake ohn tan of ts one tani coreanal tance st sha tm doles Haren hes is ret nese! and react en or hs comelaona Tecan bke Pree teal Mion. vibrant sik moves al Mestad see hs Mavs fen, ee the STR peasy founda ofan theo wos STAND ne Hevelan cue forme bly. cm Cine nts for ho For ron, acon, gh ei ‘eetisetepunerigenens piso ote eocen fo ce ects ven seven of Goxsauchsure sea at apts om i Wess ats cable af dining Resin, But essen et eaable Aftcnia Inches except wi the confines of Hy ar Marae tg fos! ena on Ges cee slfreclaion as tan nea 19 anon al the eum ier wee define nraerni: Ge Michie nes sean wel He nto Aen wc hn ence Twas Aina ke Mis rerntcot eng Cosemnpevsey pesphi stanttheology for Marion needs new thought fal concepts its ex ‘ces fice, con) to understand with conceptual rig the reality Of Goxls selkdislosure a Loe. “True theology needs, therefore, "Goa without Heng "Thea ‘ogy needs (0 cease being modem these in ar to De ‘come sein theology (like the deoages of such ancient and ‘medieval Christan Platoni as Pseud Dionysus a on centre) Marion has clearly forged a new a bilant posted fern version of the other grew alternative for theo 4 ‘evliton centered, soncorrelaiona, poxmetaphysieal the Of Like his great predecessoe in Cathie theology ans Ves on Balthasar, and like hs natural lly in Protein theclo Serta Haron tas dled tee es ees theological srategy Focused on the reality of Goals revelation 1 pure git, ied as excess. This new strategy, in Marion ale philosophical and theological ands yiclls series pes found theological or, as he Wold prefer. the loge ee tons on eategores, tendencies, snd tenses ia ema French postmodern thought. The reader will witness Maris hight original reflections on such categories athe “ice ex es “gi "ido “icon, “agape” “ontology and "goed fess" over “Boing” Here and elsewhere in his most character ‘sic moves, Marion yields are kin of thaluflnes on the |question of Get forall theology and philewphy: a vere ‘on God without Being Readers familar with contemporaey French philosophy Inewtably familiae with Marion fntlental readings of Descartes) wil also find how accurate Mato ft describe the “horizon of his own thought as Nietzsche, et egg, and Witigensein—meining, of course, contemporary French philosophical appropriations ofthese thinkers Hest anlar withthe work of Levinas aed Derrida wil ind Marion in a Ocasionlly explicit but peresvely impli critical erm ‘ersaton with them teoughoot ths book. But throughout ths, strangely compelling eres of highly reece medations «0 seemingly familie themes. ar questions of pesinnckem though, Marions voice i distinctive Foe Markoni the ener ‘who raises ane, in this borin of dhought the question God, esurpised io fi rench rheoloia reas pera bes * eaten pip ects fearing ch ani Sanat wig tence oy ee setter fete fr sentonporary Chen tecnsarcd all oxher understandings Fe fT de esi Ba i mean the sue, but tron shows how thelr ilerences TM ane nes space of reflec. once pened Oe ta fo Marko, to ny male tuna eos ecto aa anon ta ace ht nec tom an ape the Sole ration of cme being Le iMletheng Gee Hone or moe ety and lee ash 8 ee See cain fen) wu ote thet ate we ce tne Hewes at moe ating at oe eke tonne (Tha thet ee Be mer eee ei esa tent Re a Wa he Contnecs Sp ape thea nest the hk 0 Te a ng te qs ot He so sp ines se es He he gest of Gol an Ferman commu beng even om a ae ses tapsce foe ee Kale F Corey Bit sete Man ot hme sci aig aay gers see catia Gra in ar esa funders gestion of Gd, hh Teidees, ony ppvoal the lesion of ingest Sor THnene erga prea nhs of Mas chsrigorous book present the cade, ine after time, with relent lessness that comes fom genuine philosophical thon ess The reader will need 15 face asin, ard peta i he the fis rime, the question of God fre from our sal pile sophical reflections on the God of reason (Kan the God Being (Aquinas) othe God of morality (Nica). This Bok forces the reader at one and the same time ito tw stall ‘with thee that Saint Thomas assigns wd Chey Gra So iy thesis does nat oppose butte, coi eats ‘between the Thomistic ess andthe “Bean” of els fy dis qualiyng the claim of the late to thik God” On the vier feand, we have Being such as Heidegger understnds h yt Phenomenological horizon, and then av Exes nash Ces ‘he enusasicnaiveté ofthe Denning has csv among the theologians, to great caution. Heider cl in ‘eal an the risk a ghost ci ewen af “ont whose famous “God alone who cin sie as” Ha al the smbiuiies. Within ths pespective, Gent War Peg won «afer earning danger sil one tale Ateneo Chan Eh Te he tah spk. pe et genni sage ht ee nese ikaw Gea ore ae en ses sh St Tne tinea oni ook il Tove hoe estate Shu the Hoc ee he dine me Tonalin He ea of xs eae On Die Noes ontery er mest specs hci Sane Boa CGrure an well aso sera fs sce ing Duns Tins nc sis eve for deve thom, sae domme fs cv: nan This hnwiabe ot Sle {Side ty crn ye ft ote ed me tion hh oar amp hy hc he pa at Son nama tt then ny Sess th ath a Mis tah Team falls a even tic he tne Gal aspen Them reese ne chun Go een Heng orto meopins He ds ne chat alo Being hese te Utne ese mena rns (aay nen yagi wih) eomeonnincof cere, ich ae character he re anion fete eve an har sence, wheres Go Thal Habe, aeenet meres ence wih exe Goa ex presse ae, hut vee B espessed en of Gx ne of fe eis carta Tn pense ety ds erect Shih ene i ces ica ne capley asus reat raat pi phe is promt sn er nn prin ie daa IUomurheleng womens cin ej te tirerseme m metaphysis nee pt fp Chen exes th tag sb sckea se tiga ries sles terwcen meas oh a ‘Sv cen Bet) ae Ge en, een a es eer Sn Tem es tne wth nts ut Mheraon, Gm pnp seen the sb of pits bimeil sag sane the sabeslosoply belong to Boing, we must ta sofa to enchaetha thet cause, God, also causes Heing sel" Deus es catia us crsals totus ese" But if God eases Being, wont we have ‘o admit hat, for Sain Thomas himself, Geel can be expressed without Being? Ar the very leas, we shoul have to gra at ‘Thomism does no amount o the Wenaiiation of theese com ‘mare with Ged, anh fese characterizes Gos in Thomism, ‘se ise mut be understood divinely thus having 0 ‘on measure with what Being can signify in metaphysies—and especialy the ontoheo logy of modeen metaphysics. These debate, animated as they may have heen, neveate: less do not get a the heart of the question, where something ‘entirely diferent sake: ean the conceptual thought of Gosl Aconcepzul, oF eaional, and not intuitive of "mystical in the vulgar sense) be developed outside ofthe doctrine of Being inthe metaphysical sense, or enen in the nonmetaphysia sense)? Does Gin give hime to be komm accent the Iori of Being on accoring toa mone radial bein? Goad Wao tang barely sketches an anemer,bt s sketch God gives Himself to be known isola a He gives sel according tothe horizon ofthe git sell. The it consaes at ‘once the mode and the body of his reweacion tn the end the sift gives only scl, but inthis way egies absolutly every thing. The approach and reception of the pit are only de scribed here with diiculy: First ina negative way the exper fence of winity indicates that even that which fe finds Rec “Usquaified a fe were no, long. a8 does not have aed torfis situs a6 being the dignity ofthat which fs Hse loved, Next ina dogenatic way: Tatempe a pure and simple de scription of two emblematic Figures of the gi, which Cristian theology offers thou being able or having to justify them — the Eucharist andthe confession of faith, We descr these as two fics that are absolutly irreducible 10 Being and to as Tog facts that are only ineligible in terms of the it In co clusion, agape appears only a a pave given, wath peer de ‘duction nor legtnation. But in ths wy the sen pps all the more asa gen to give pe ging 0 ehhh esr set hon wat ke i Bes dhotak om fre shies, expect of the work of many ‘abers res tis Jantar 191ENVOI “one mus ai that shel Fall writ ing, certain causes the greats pleasure Precise tthe please ofthe ext, ut the pleases ae £0 wth Jor —of transeressing at from worl the ‘Word, fon the Wor to word, incessily an in thle alone, since there alone the WK finds the sels nothing ess than a bod The hod ofthe text dees not helen tthe txt butt the One who § cna i Th, cecil stn uegreses Hell just then lone tal speech fords on the silence nec Tan peaks corre In eter wor ey ones hand a thookegy requires no fir pstiicton than the extreme pl sure of writing The oa it this ple “une nf, fn the condition of exer ‘ise oe the pl fran ons tthe Woe lnplies that helo writing played in tistance, whi unites well as separates the man writing and the Word a hand— the Ching, Theo always writes starting fro an exer than ase He lve the a tho rom isl (hus ape ean indeed speak of vers fem plop wih Ait yo aoe canes i eo ie fousile oF hime, even atinst hse Soce he wast wate ot of what ei on ‘sae knows, sn veo what he as, Fr fr, aad that wie he rece ad in no cae sens, They eres As athe Iepceicalin a Reast F909 was, special he common sense: pretending to spel of holy dhings—"Iol tings othe ly” he ‘cannot but tnd himself, wo the poine of wert, uno: tn jpure—in a word, vile This experience, homer, is neces Sy thats enefcisry rows eter than ase ahs tunsworiness al the meaning tat weakest i tues he deceives himself ss th anne in a he there is 10 hypoeei at al the author kno ne than a accuser He remains hypocritical in another, moe paral sense: i authenticity (remembered with hurron) eons in speaking of oneself ands saving onl hit fr which ene can answer, no one, n'a Theological corse, can orden. pre tend 10 it For theology consists precisely in saying that kor ‘which only another can answer--the Other abe all the {Gist wo himself does not spe in his nin ame, ht in the fame of his Fater Indeed, theological discourse ers is surage jubilation oly to the sit estent that pestis sn slangerously, demands of is workman that he speak ew his mein, precisely because he dows not speak of himsell. Henke the danger of a speech than a sense, speaks against the ome who lends himself 0 it. One mus obtain forges for every cesay in theology In al senses, Twill be necessary however, 0 asf few pons in wha follows. Under the ite God Without Heng we doe mea insinuate that God is noe, or that Gad ise truly Gav. We a tempt to mediate on what EW Sctwlling called "the freed ‘of God with regard to his own existence Pata liferent ws ‘Be atemp to reader prblematc thar which seems ols, shout which the philosophers descending ron mictphses anrce with the theologians descending rom NeosThoms God, before all else, has t be. Which means a one al the ‘ime time that before other beiogs, be woul! have to et that before every other initiative, fe wold have aot ake tht of being: Bur does Being ete, more chan anhing, #0 God! Does God have anything t gain by being? Can Hei — which whatever i provided that fis, manifess—even acon moddate anything of) Gex? Jus approach this question, render it conceivable al aa, one mst ret eng ar ing from that iatance whieh prewokes ll odazle mens an nae them appear insimenntae, dhe kl Thus we temp Mesvcrmtit the ant hto, oe renkriete ber meant aa ian esas he es RSS Inputs vals se tee spunea: ess eae Maem hectic tile teva we on tet spend Hence, Heth tvs new ances ee an oping Gra de fun ant ae comers Ta And hat Gad il 0 Shae see ea en ewer nr Na Asencio et oh whan Ihchoviam ot eng at aber anges nrsees 0 FS Tie eto ran emer remains ees acu wot the sansn sht delvers Ga fom Being fccomes fete or son in sree spet—the vant extn haters the wr Bg eve Der Tenticeapermentl riers seen br cha Ieee nee ape te ‘Bon nn an ts oer: he exprence ent Hh rena enpertones i acy he Pt incr tatty acs ne ‘een Cea des mil win the dona of eng he comes tots mand ead ho soe, bur who sme the fone poet speaks iret, th ce lg eran Ela es te preci sntas he neta des {intnobe fer thetabes rane ite att ae ct inn es ses a ee Fang te ing. he tn Hen cs By Ripon on te ite ngs ns The Highest (quinn ew, wanes re same tg Monty kta remans eo ns unqucane al ek Ste Whee, however dhe this fo Obit oe 6 male snore an anced One way pedi a Gad rComcered wens fm she arnt the Wor ees fhe wears De ma sh. Dae he te oes es Mion thay atelberanee, sc Tl eet op Stee fone makes the fx Graber ta he verse) Techarac consists nthe fc han i efron x tts our body And the Word also mad x sel Gur box ean speak the Wor The enreme rg of chat fetlores seo speech thas ral rate “he book ht follows wre In ste. tnt alone: A thes ern om guesfons dan an ere al pacicular creucinees Tliceallysurmundeal by cahers) they ove to those who ocatone dhe te ony oy fret and 1 hope thet igne Tam therefore vey aware Of retiring herewith slg editing se to tne-inthe mode of nquiy Tere again ce a precede ficof being. win to acknowledge my dee to the sence of Maurice Clare in making me ack headeon the wre Struggle of Being wh the crs, What fllonscomatutera way a keeping my promise wihotrulyfalilng vows ed ikea to recopize, mong many ars reds wit thom ts booked many eter shings well fave scent lig of the Jean Duchesne aa Robes Rae sant AS for Rm ago wo, wh Is pil poy referred corect ur prot ae han ser find {any ers, oer bi all my grade The iene, dre yown an enone hin hers a awa of hem as, March 25, 1982 God Without Being,11) THE IDOL AND THE ICON That the iol ca be appre ny i the anions that nfaliy uns wi the eon fe cena unecessary’ tare ‘The two concepts men cerns belong testi, and an many ways competing hisioral moments elon presuppoees the Greek splendor of the visile, whose ppolkcheome jgtvs rise to the peltser Ft the lcs, hemes een, enews from the Hebrew By the New Testament and eheorizd by patric and Byrantine Though, concentrites aad with i the Dailance ofthe vsble—on te sole figure fof the ane shin Hoklerin named Dor Finzige, The Only One, only by comparing sa nals: eating ly sth Dionysus and Heracles. But such conic unfolds in 2 cimensom ir more essential than any posse porn between “pana” ad ‘Cristian ar ater, his ery fore tio comers Cane! dissin in eden Fala mch mone essential iste For the historia succession of two model of ar permits one 4» disclose a phenomenal 2 confit ~a confit harween two phe romerslogies The idol doesnot init,” any more tan the icon, 2 parole eg for even class of eins, Feo anal ol in texte 2 manner of being for beings, oF at Teas for sane of hem, Idee, eter rato that wi Tn sft opposingthe “true God” (icon) to the “ale oud” in extending the p> lemic ofthe veerotetameniary prophos, soul not he se able here, For the Chistian iconnc lis ofthe eit contr sve the name "ko" to that wid had been concen ‘ened son ofthe te God, ae Jews athe Ol an enaot ejected al representation 38 hola, even represen tation of the God of the Canenant (le “Gaon Cae hae ben argued, perhaps only personal he Godot the Cone ‘ant and the very Temple of Jerusalem con hie heen le serted by the divine Sbokinah ony insofar nulered lola). Fortney every effort to ake serio the destin momentum (Gescbic) and inkl support of Greece implies thata moe receptive interpretation dmissesthe acai of re and simple idolatry, and ties in vin ve sucess, hardly maters hereto acknowledge the authentically divine dignity of hac which, nthe mene of hat apes et for veneration (Hegel, Schelling, Holder) In shor the ad he iol até ey all determin as eins against er beings, sie the sume beings (ties, names et Fc pase fon one rank othe ther The icon and the Mol deterring ‘mo manners of being for being, at clases beings ‘Thc interference thus become all the more problematic and seems to demand tention ll he more urges But re a eighty cbc, even if eran begs cin pass fom he to the icon, of Tro the icon othe id, al changing ths ‘Sus when venerated noe every bein sale oda need, not js any beng cin vere, xl evs dma enero ven ithe number of tage that demsand veneration a the ‘mode ofthat vei ¥08 8a al imi eerie to certain common, minimal characteris tt questa see cen cerning the divine. Sig: he Latin txm means meh here. The only works that an pretend to the contradictory sas of ol andor kon ae those that art as so worked hie they no longee reset tele silky to themselves (a in what are so ily called the pleasurable ars” [ats agrémenn, a such a by thas ‘emaining absolutely immanent in themselves, that the ea Jndisolaly toma another, sll unten term. Mere speci his referral ds not sia toward ava stance than that which the work of ar itself eneseitates, Comin terenerdeterne the wok fan the ease by somes thc ence the cnn. feral onsite the st So gn ie thew Sing ec ol sng that he wo hes fe sn” al tg he {heute ona dnt ny so thes Stenberg hi sha cach makes use of seal nts he erty of hese was ma eng sn a, oe dees er hither the olan the ke Ste hu concern the ne wot een pretend sng apy ne nest extern dit on he eng theese vis ons syn bale sal trent oxher he in sl del aloe te mst at fet me thatthe nie comes play Here on wih the ented tay ta hye ete cies ingen wr vars rea nein tmode of ws lca rans in he de of appre SUnsrin diese ma ofa an Shyer th ine, ot mints ith he dsne “rons and nites consete eae the manner a serge te cen, a ast near de {kes what in any ee could abe perce of the ivine Thonn the emparv aemamenolo ofthe land ancien teers scon cape 94) pa tle materi ae oat sory, to modes of RPE tes of eae vcs Of apc, oa. o> dou of exept |—Fiest Visible “The Kol never deserwes to he denounced a illusory since, by tft Is Seon eon at which seen Ce ideo) even consists on in de fact hat t cane seen, that tone cnt hut see Ht And see it 0 ssl hat the wey fc ena soc kon Seng toi to kn i= fo, sha whic the fat trae has sev Code the we presen sel to‘mani gze in onder that representation, and hence knee can seize nol oft. The iol is erected there ony that ne sce it the monumental statue of Athena shone fromthe Ace listo the gaze ofthe sao ofthe Piraeus, and the darkness ‘ofa aos shaded the chryselephaotine atu, flowed that in onder © divine it, he worshiper experienced thit much more of fascination when, appmoaching, he eld Kl i his eyes to it The ido fscinater and captivates the ave pe cisely because everything init mus expe sell tthe gave, trac, fil, and bold. The domain where it reigns uns cedy—the domain ofthe gaze, hence ofthe erveabe regard able|—sufces as wel for reception captivates the ave only inasmuch as the gaveable comprises , The idol deren on the ze chat tsi, since ifthe gaze didn este soi tse in the idl the idol Would have mo eignty fort. The mes ‘common criticism of the Idol asks with amazement han one can adore asa divinity that which the hands that pray Be fst forged, sculpted, decorated —in a word. fabric “Delete! from ols” Claudel acknowledges inthe kolo more than the aberration of the atige who builds hina canoe an who ‘with the one supertuos board fabecates Apo This ei, ‘tim, however, mises the essential: forthe fabricate thing be ‘comes an ido, that oa god, only fram the moment when the faze has deccedo fal on has mae ofthe prep fined Polat ofits own consiceration: an hat the fabricated thing ex Faust the gaze presupposes tht this thing i self exhausted Inthe gazeable. The decisive moment nthe erection af ah kl ‘stems not from Is fabrication, but fom is investment se able a8 that which wil ila gaze. That which characterizes the idol stems from the grze. It dazzles with vsilay ely nay ‘much a the gaze looks on i with consideration caw the ‘ze oniy inasmuch as the gave has dawn woe ita the azeable and there exposes and exhiss The eve sone Inakes the ido, asthe ulimate function of the gazeable Since the gaze alone characterizes the ido, hw are we to anders the mulipeny of ly tei varie iin eit contingent figures, thelr disparate dignity? The jive ‘makes the Idol, not the ido dhe gaze—which mans thatthe ol wth vse fle tention othe ave, ants — we shin ote than to se: The gaze reeds the ido ease Smoove an pense a Pi cee ae ti king up ne el of he moet tne nan eet the bag ass Men taten whch wllseqasgane. Tosoptie pie we ele ca eerstan ws ao 9 et (Sk a mo ep en Me ec tamer ble hig emer Pane Inte slender ten aoe ac cen pans tm one epee is Psjancn. iam wie sown fy Thad ea lx one nly eset ela lesen Fam coh bw nt ate xp fll Wns ale el fetch ean he eure Smsupe ts wb Korth are ig pce? Wha thease xb ene? 2Hnvisible Mirror fore peseotng she kbs chorcterie wis and THe ec swe nee He ery pearance: en thes apes sepa he lees th etre thee te save tame nye thevtahle Ta ewe thee kl none the seine {Wie gases tren to ease piecing Se fie spect even tat cp teahe pester eyes eemme he les da each ie thea co nag The kok eros Wh xs fv he fe an ue. he ve ong res hth He pe re ee outs, tsa eae othe spectacle eee iru te sing beg ema i fiche Tre Fiat evel of Gdisk diesel of mt seeing ard Metitng imate ue acorns sl ine‘contained, held back by the visible. The visible finally ocomes tile the gaze besa, agin eral the vble dies these Theol the fests, fu the ogi tates 4 ye unl the Yaa The Kd fers. ier ne poves onthe tare. eben he, i than, seman ee goa Rut csc ial fave sexs st is, Saconers te tha se Ay Spewack own Hint and proper place Asm al tarsi ends ck wate an ncn the taster Cation elton oth sa, the Me eur he ge tel nding to how many beings. tore te th traaperce ths also wht keel it ta hich for {i sim stad 3 ire vb above all The ol th acs tnliror, nots a port 3 mior ht rele the ges mae Ore eye age oS of Spe oa aim The tol na fonction othe pin eflestie ecserope faut te abt es not atone mets de alse a tre orth ol. pny ene aes el he iia ie toe of shes mache lance by efnton el ies) to wha ths ore an sce since the dl ils he get strates with ish ere duals the mror function bce ae! pecs by tue ofthe spectacle anton The aol masa the mir be {cuseifb the ze The meres i fection he oie bye glare o he gavel, wich ily vile Because ales to he gave rt vn the sel resin an ni tbe micron That the miro remains ibl sine the ie duals the gue, makes iso tha te ltr never apes no finds himself duped: ne oly remuins-—ravs "The iol sme miro pes there Sopp and measures ous scope But the Wo wo ot ye able cbt he gaze Dy self cd now cere The Iie like the sn dt Vlery ewes Gn ay vray el of Ar tole) can be fie n-thowa and ce sls we senor tis reteted Yes gga se dlium mee Panther hid, cng fled wih kes By those sr zg le ae Tut, jn onder for an idol to appear and, fixedly, draw the at tein of yove. the relktion fa Sable aro mst ACC ovale i Inset the eon along unstable waves of ene. the se perpetaly renewed aN present use Ha shies ere mortal snl a8 rng blood: ne ont cv is wad sie cengates (Une tae) ty omer thar the lo may fH che waz ms Fs freeze Ths the invisible anes thatthe Hirst visible ofers (nest on cate the gave howe fis mst stan testes ur ever what ant ev nt hve in view When the fave freer, sans stiles (49 the sense sak when wee ees i aan maturity, axl hence the notaimedt at ds pears If he Klar gaze exercises no ert of ol, This hecause it no Tenge Is the mies to do 0 sai tule in poston thatthe aol smumeditehy cups ind where every air extunnte fut the whi serene foe nen rem a ast ab Kis, ai em a ec howe reveals sor escort Lge Tae gaze sees Satyam sf res fromthe wet of upholding he ‘Suit of anim thot tere, es, oF end: Wo sleep wit he Ne otthe cath” Wath the first sshle and the invisible mit: Tor, the idol offers the ge as eath—the first earth upon toil wo rest nthe ok the gave tured. The kdl wou be ss a rselton, oat all ecase i quae thes, Awol fer the gave a letimate spectacle, bur fist ease Frauen to he gare sere to res (ase) Wat ce el the Tnwiule mirror admits no beyond, ecase the size cannot fe he sight sat hse ier thus macs, new feichy he omen. he an erly ae irae “The wile bern where ta stops The inese miro i Cleat inthe fist bk. Ms marks the arse ‘The idol lows no nti est hecruse i concen thon anise meron. he byliance of it Tight, and then Thecase, hex eve soe tsa he aise he ree (erm Frater cases oy For an nelle wok inp fis tora yet obscure am sels lead it in ader to ope ‘sneer the gerund the Kits eb ean Fae tne in he i tbe ls ay comes the isbility for whieh human gazes wateh; Buc this auhont 6 me sure by what the scope of particlr human exes ca Sapp by shat each aim can require of ws in order 4 am elf fll. In sho, the advent ofthe divine sfx! ny iol only ifthe human gare frozen and thus. opens teste ‘ofa temple. The idol is messurale Py the tein wih, in the heavens, he gare of man each ine delimit teens mec sure—'deus cus tempi ex one i qa : that God, whose cemple i everthing ta yo sce" Ta a whose space of manifestation is messed what portion of aguecanbear—preehely anil 3—Daraling Return, ste Wl oni he ie de mene an se Invisle miro mare the nee, tm Be ape ec falling tc nclon su rte sc ope ofthat neon. Onl then chs hee ne hat the mater gree othe oly nn at ep tesens what reserbes Te anne that epee nothing bi presets certain leaner mah ofthe tie resembles what he human gaze has experince hee The dl such aay arc honoris cs can to reproce any price gd since te fers he oth material be orignal of Bu conse othe one ma tele ofthese els ma ee trad by ods een ofthe god he hs se was ale dae sve, an this whi he attest bong n hismacra he want fcin sone srt ay sea sel, ory of th pee hs ve oe hk Spel wren sy wth ne Ing the ema tht th ae ma ee ie he stone a Hives the gare ofthe egos ai Th he spectator pov that teehee eins al inthe material xed idl the Pine the fs vue swhse splendor ees the gare. Tt is ate sol he ome else mein that, tothe rile tel by the se ‘al idol, the scope of his jaze ext comrespnus a hence tsar, witht biliace, lreeive The ist splendor that Igo il and freeze The Ko eons aa consenses {mes materi the brilliance where a wt roe. fn the expecta thon tut aer eyes wall acknessedge the brilliance of a fist Giable tan fees them in abe alginate scope. The idol Spratt fied rb ete ilferent branctes Frctoced the ame vest hecomes the conerete is Fry of the al andthe memory oF thar mien hy dene egy Tr his very reason, fone, noe even a modern of ee tage of esren, remains sheltee! from an aol, ee Tes or natin oer forthe lol 19 feach him i suicient thac he recognize, hes upon the fice ofa sate, the splendid pailance ofthe ise vse where, one dy his ave ws frozen Tite scopee Robert Waker recorded this threat and descebed he cata nf he divine si csclinical precision 1 an AMntaaamatte prise yan! Revise te ol aiows the divine sss an vn cs the es tovoceur ons 4020 perce tata ths ep taccesue, for Wallan Mumes at len to the worshipers ofthe god. and as tong as the pd et he Aet a mone prohaes te ol han the ld procioes the gze The ae. freeing marks the place phere the ie vse arts i splendor a aemyps hen, qcorsgn material on second lve ana what one hab tll calla id ae blanc of he go Tht ey ths il Thane st meet he nae of idols prove y the necessity Inder to recent iiance on he material fae, oF 2 harespondinge gave hence als fa gaze wba aim sees an freercy wh sly fie vise hy set the fx that os clo se coinende wh thea pre aoe snp sates is pwed Be these wath whit we skeet ary when mr ae take TRamoork fone 4 pict temple oe museum —t0 he ex fen that these vst Lak the nn Ghose expectation could et tee flied an hence fozen, the signs ofsent and color fn ai, sre izes, fe some animated eyes fo reac theman he zz see gsi hy the sil-confined rilianee ffien we da not have Foner hae. she meas Ko seh spend ada4—Conceprual Idol Ih we occidental dated (ard endowed) by the competion of metaphysics. lack the aesthetic means 0 rasp the ol oders remain or even open up for us. Thus the gncept The concep ‘onsigns roa gn what at fis the mind grasps wth Cee pee, caper. but sucha grasp is messes re mich hy the amplitude ofthe divine a bythe scape of « capcitay. whi can fx the divine in a specific concept only atthe mement ‘when a conception of the divine ills hence appease, st and freezes it When a philosophic thought expresses com cept of whut ten names God this concept hnctins exact a8 an idol It gives iself oe sce, bt ths al he eter con eis ise asthe mieror where though, ins has is hr ‘ward point fixed, so thatthe sms fos self with a any suspended by the fixed concept, lpi ax arlene though feezes, and the Wolarus concept ol “Gea! appt where, more than God, shout fale HselE The concep ‘dls of metaphysics culminate in the casts as Neier indicates)” only insofar asthe figures of cattery hae all undertaken to consign toa concept the limite hse mark of their advance toward the dine (Plato Arison) a! alter that toward the Chestian God thas the cme el the "monalischer Git the Gexl malty” Melee limits the horizon. ofthe grasp of Gea! by Kan—'the presi Position of moral author of the world" just asses that ‘ofthe death of God since, by the very admision af Ntsc Jhmsef “Im Grunde ist ja nur der mocilsche Gut her sen, At bostom itis only the moral Goa tht fis been emer ome" In both eases, that of thei i that of scale! abeis, the measure of de eoncepe comes vt Geel ha From te am of the gave. So ere as Hees ern ‘sand: itis ma who the orga move of his bol he haps we could then glimpse why i belongs constitutive to The ‘otto prepare its twilight. We could han experienced this ligheiwice firs aestatcally once the oracles were silenced the period when the brilliance of the Enlighten ubfis ate that ofthe signa forge y ancl al ex, when in the Diack sun of nihilism we seem delivered, oF sin leprivel and disioherited, “of hooks and of Meas of las anu of heir priests" 5—teon of the Invisible pe ow des ot lt fom aon ut pees oe The Feet thar appear menial cen, ks ee pa rte Mn set cle a eu fore ie a 248) rete tt oe et he sens he 4 ne tee io. spo oe aoe eet a wat eu re th ass entice Whee He een ane oe om sn SH sans ree ear ey le Seti ep sc appease Sane ta wu se we ets he a Coe stekenal wa te se arom he se ae toa mn ee tat eae amet pete ens a Pee tm he ele rea ae Men cena hewn el and te se ee a ecg th hes st tn wl one ht dee he rane asec te Fi les oc seta ruc eae foes fe Sree nt =e tat er a ton be unre or ee 0 sa hehe merece wl ce) m4 et er vhe eTewe oh ies ha ‘Sines inthe se sara wi 7 sible this invisible Py fra ease st meter of rennin dsauch the unentsageable. That the invisible shuld remain i hat it shou econe ise amos the sumething, namely, fo the ido, whose precise fusion consis in living the invisible int one pat that is relat the vise and one par that obfuscated as rele The Kon, the ‘ootrary atemps 0 rerle visbe the vse as shy hence toallow thatthe wsible not cee to zeer tan ahr tha tel twathout, howewer, hat her exer being reproced in the vs ple. Thus the icon shows, sly speaking, aon, not even {nthe mae ofthe productive Finbldung teaches the pare thas does not cease to correct i inorder tha go back from wisible to visble as far asthe end of fino fl in infinity ‘something new The icon summons the gaze to sep self ever freezing on visible, since dhe visible only presents Ks here in view of the inusble, The ve can newer ns or settle ‘it Tooks a 29 con, alas mast rebourk! upon the sis, fonder to go back ni up the iin stim tthe inven this sense, the icon makes vise only hy gio ise tan nite gaze 6—The Face Envisages ‘But shat does it mean «0 ender visible the invisible ss such? Unless the concept of the icon simply fas 6 ths wt fst & great deal of verbal clter taking the place of a cance? The invisible as such could oat render itself sb, out ifthe invisible and, above al, the divin athe gis oof Goa ae “understood in (metaphysical) terms of ona ether oni he comes visible (easile, intllgble which for our purposes are one) oF it des 20 al the Kol, which self peace the {ichotomy, can decide It remains that ons, at Ket fr the ‘ogy, doesnot exhause what ean occur Indeed the cna de Intion, definvely confirming the sheokgat sats of the ‘con, bates the fon hupostas. "THe wha vencraes te wenerates ini dhe hypostiss of the one who ss inched In ie" Reverence conveyed to the leon conceens i ithe hy lass ofthe one from whom the tact ice arisen. potas hich the Lain Fathers transl fy persona, des 1 stp any substantial presence, cirumserihd he 4 2 i HS ‘upokeimenon (anu this as oppesed to the subsanial pres fence of Crs in dhe Huhuars) the pursue atete spe fence only by that which itself mst property characterizes i {team an cio sean Hage ses in ame iach tec the mal wet a pn ste Setter pears nse he nero of eansptercng abies sr nc a we ting the tam ees an stent hee By terme ma cece exact he traf he inition Pi ets na ey ee ers te eins lnger ens hee tothe man ans a a5 he ede neta ar seve re elon the Cosine ee the en hermes sl nero ‘Ghent team itm y jee rere the lp afro enepin te we ean, teed ait concen nc allem herein othe ‘etic se Maren a oes Mintle ic hes gen Teekntic ato scen sees in ea fae whee nile en Tre Sige tn The ke pense wee ans ruins hinge ge infin fom te le ‘imate the roe the wn tel ise fhe Kane mre te sete human pare Bk el lone deere hele the lo opens a fae ta acs star ars in oer sani hem dah One een eee teste he ern hon 3 fe Mrs thc every fie en as rm) Fra ae ap re a amc athe pret al pd opty ot a oses up implies nothing, Maree rece th ee op em i ee meant er cet amram Them nes ee aches ep in eal sble t te n saree esting yen m he tment be ae ee tee rere fae perense eee ei foresummons ne nel teh Wena me autsemer soto spe heer re seene cys tune fae srg pope of asin ahi unibte west Fhesele ne eure oes neds he ope oa ee Teanga ee asec snsle‘The human gave, fr from fing the divine in 3 fenton as frozen a isl, des not cease, envisaged By the ken. there to watch the tide of the invisible come in, sak on immense vs ile shores th the ido the gave of msn fen ns mon in the icon, the gare of man és kt the lve ee tha sly envisages him ‘7AVisible Mirror ofthe Invisible ‘The possiblity of rendering vise the invisible as sly em Ihecomes conceivable: in te io he reflex of the mir ie tinguishes the visible from thar which exces the in. hein visble because oseale, inthe con, the vise 6 eepeneal Infinitely in order to accompany 3s one mays ach pt of the invisible by 2 point of light. But vse and insists coexist 19 infin daly insofar athe iss wv epponed > the vst, since consis ony fa enti. The eile ‘ofthe eon consists ofthe intention of the ae ke me th face becomes wsible, the more the inssle ination whose ‘gaze envisages us becomes viable. Rete: te visit othe face allows the invisibility that envisages ¢ gre Oh ts depth, that ofa face that opens to eaisige permis the kom to Join the visible wih the invsble and this dep i joined elt ‘wih the imtention. Hur the intention here ste fem iy hence it implies thatthe icon los self oie traversed a Infinite dept. However, whereas te iol i aways termine a8 reflex, which allows I come fom fix pt an nal fom which fundamentally tetas (the Ko 38 specter on revenani—Gesponst indeed cowees certain ses ot eh fony—tbe icoa 1s defined by an origin sth origi Origin itself infinite, which ovis acl out or pies Hoel throughout the ttnte depth of de con, This why is depth withdraws the icon from all aesthetics. only the kl ean and ‘must be apprehended, since i alone result fm the oman sare and hence spposes an ace that precy impores ‘measure on the ido. The con can he measure only on he basis ofthe infinite dep ofthe face; the tention a ents ages inthis manner depends only on sll for atest a stud an apocaspsethe invisible disengage sel nthe vs Tanda en ke cinta ome tower yea he pcp ee he sible{and impossible as wel) even to outline a commentary Let us briefly point out the reversal: here or ave acs ne designate by is alm the spectacle of first vii, since, mers the ‘sion, no visible is discovered fp oi face sell. which, nouncing all grasping (athe) submits an ayexalye osu; t becomes sel ily Lald out the pen. Wn? He fuse, a8 opposed to the idol thar 16 offered in an ise ‘miror— invisible because dazzled mach as dz/lng for an! Dy eur aim—here cue giz becomes dhe optical err of tha at which iclooksonlvby nding sell more rails kel a swe become a visible mirtor ofan invisible ize that ules ts sn the measure of ts plory The lavstle samnwins ts fice ce, person to person” (Coe 1812), though the patel is ibility of ws incaenaon and the fctal visibility of out Hess ‘no longer the visible idol as the susuible mito of en ave, but ur fice as the wsble mirtor of the inv Thus posed tothe iol which delimited the low-water snk for aim, the icon displaces the haus of our siiity othe mee ste offs owas ploy Iran ts nts ry bale ing this glory to shine on ou face sits mieoe—ut # mittor consumed by tha very glory; ranfgured with invisibility nd by int of being saturate beyond ise rom tha glory, econ Ing, strictly though imperfect the icon of ke vst of the invisible as such ‘ste Icon in the Concept Holding its qualification only feom the distance of infin epeh, the icon is not the cancer, anymore than fs dee that here a east ic confirms, ofthe arstie domain The panier resents one of the posible media—the perceptible the ‘pening ofa face, jst asthe sculjxor, who consign to stone the brilliance of the god—the frst isble--mobiizes the ‘memory bya percepuble medium Tht athe kl an excrete is measure ofthe dvine by concep, since the gave as well can lnvisilyeflect sown amy ana in sms de pale the fon also can proceed conceptual, provid at leas that the ‘concept renounce compeciending the invomprehensible attempt wo conceine it, hence ako to recelse Hin Hen exces siveness Tht precisely cr sach concepts be concensed? The Gils coe de can seve an tell mec oF the toon ene that ts tle eared the cress the undue hat ees vty tr ite dy, Heneethar else penne this inte ea tree heeled cee sequined. Wha Descartes eal ht th de De al eR A ester nuts sera mlm et cops Teal nia tps xsi ete oh inn commer he test ht at ke iar thei oblige concee wr mccime the diac ine Cha cms ths vane fl oy tite, hence ircverminae by concep, Have He not a questo thing roncept tv determine am eee Du SR I de- termi am interiion th of te nse adoring 0 the ‘aes ns rin sl seein by He ery erence mech em tas ae hotles The hermetic of he ovum the vse Peces the sy of He Sv Gly evens sno, short les, a8 en fin, tle; the viable eines the) onl in pesing he vl ace) wheres the vile nly presen sight asain psig othe ese as intention). Vee ve ow tometer and a such their ahvolute dlisincon inpies the rac commerce of theiraserences Wei in, a wor the en. con {epee dance hu union increases the mew of distin tion and repro Wau here aking ante Sie relation ofthe on to dance dr panic sone fhe perspectives tha ne ope ae Be (NK icon ithe concept rcp of conc hat rene the titincem ofthe ie salts tes wean ain, Hey ha inte hone sl hae mt a HN tar Faery pretension ate knoe heretre be teste ey of te A.) The an stele stats the reference of the vse acetate etn tha cise cng erent Cis ehe ar foe ml ei vo or oncom He Crist tegenkl ean pcan wat ese thatapplication ofthe ican among oer. fe} AS mac i dolar bpecause it measures the divine according othe scape of te that foezes, can nevertheless atin to an actual experience of the divine daly atthe cost of beg reac 40 one he falled ous” (eng Char! x9 theo, sn §ty—sricly—contemplition in distance, could not It exer. abundaely subser! every ol of the fen ze—in sho, ‘open te eves ofthe frozen gize (as one opens aod wt knife), open it exes upon a face. The ldo places is center of fray n-a human ge, ths, eazed 2s maybe by the hil Tiance ofthe dv, the gaze sill emns in porsession of dhe of ts solitary mastee ‘The idol always mows, leat peters tds ew light, since already in ctw the ko gathers on foreign bllance. The icon, which balances human sight in onder to engl iin iafine depth, marks sich an adeance of Goa hat {even in times ofthe woes tress iiflerence ence rah oR, to ge HselF 9 be seen the eon nes cin se ‘This is why ined can demand, patiently stone rece itsahandon, DOUBLE IDOLATRY 1 The Function ofthe Idol ‘ne would hae west, ofcourse, wh skye with Nita, ad with dhe ms ‘man of Brbliche Wisenschaf, hence frst hy # more esential concept of the idol “Tis ware essential coeept of te eh fact clevelypeat n t hat At ny rghle scomimodte the intllec tual representation ofthe clive aml offer the framewenk of a interpret, et tee, ofa rekerprctaton, of the “deal oF Goal” One therefore aust eae, a Teast 0 fling, the contours of a figgre of the fdol—tguee the figure. scheming the chem This recoubling, whic cones quite nuraly anda if estab to the Pen, betrays in advance the fct that the Fl sommes he ambwalence of 5 tin of appkaion, percep aa el Tighe or rer “aestse"andconeep ta Tes figure the ions re im ply returning to it the carcaune with tshich one so tess repeated Ht fr im posing on the dine? Bu the idl has foshing caricaural, decedl, or lusory bout It shoves oy wharf ees that: ideton eomains destty inves by. and tied ed, des et samp incite to ‘nent oe nsican etymologkeal Bh,ut exactly reflects founding paradox. THe le shows what foes T shows that which, indeed, cxcupics the fil ofthe vs ble, with nether deceit por dllsinn, hut hich isola Jnvest only on the bass of vision el The idol supplies ision with dhe inige of wha isees The Wo prnfnces sel) fn actuality (3s) that at which vision invenisely aes. Freezes in figure that which usin asa in a lance, Tis does the mirror close the horiean, in order to oer sight the ‘nly object at which sgh aims, namely the fice of very al the gaze gazing at itself gazing, a the rk of seeing no more than is own fae, without perceising int the gare that izes nce, forthe idol, no mirror precedks the gare, noe, a ciel, encloses is space of vsion ta bereft sd upon {self alone, idoltrous vision moulizes meer instance than tee In the farure of as aim, at certin point that nothing could foresee, the ane lenge sims eyo, Bu reads lupon a mieror—hich othersise never would ise ap pearet—towae asl this invisible mir scale te al fe not invisible sn that one cannot sce, snce to the contrary ‘ne sees nothing buts invisible because # mass the en ‘ofthe aim starting withthe il, the aim no longer preresses, but, no longer aiming, returns ype sleet Wel and bs this refles, abandon as unbearable wo lie—ort vise be ‘cause either almed st noe evable—ehe tvisle ‘The invisible mirror therefore does act produce the reflex Ine return of the aim upon sell, ress fom aon ors, so 0 speak, the trace othe bounce the imprint ofthe abso tion ofthe aim, thes of is takeo, in rent, upon set TS ‘wooden boa, dhe iol, has dhe pus aie «sping foc vision that, having advanced sf, reer rom oa ise As the sediment in wn fiat aati ad the fact chat no farther change is posble, so the sel consiautes ‘only sediment of the aim of the visite and ofthe Vine, hence what remain once the amis topped by is reflec: ‘on: Inthe idl, 26a statue or painting the aim seules The Jnwersion of the aim determines the pet of insti al the reflection gives se to the mirror The invisible mifeor is fot so much the unscen Guise of de reversion HS this reversal of vison that fixes, on a in, the vise Ts the iol only freezes itself i the firmness figure starting from the instance ota aera the tigre results fom te re eral upennhetire te ise, al not the sere. The kl Aref appears svete on he al sto sea the rate hata a certain i he ay, ext Upon set reflected pen ser Ha oer es leat as infil tha a wil tr enger can any The anise i define by the reflection whe defetion shandons the ssl asin isahle, hence ot ssle—in short sine So the lol all the more masks the invisible when a6 ard with vs Tse mre mises y deka the oe il, the more i can he remarked as vse. The sate of one ‘of hese vst, ve iron oh: National Re ines, sil awervome us wih their powerful and wel: balance spend ined hears the sign ofthe dine Noone ths the aor to elon tt the de marked he sac rel sites temples, ant states. Ahowe all one ha the power to {os Th Ect tha the wl retry, te a foewater mark Signals aise the wer level certain adeno thei the dune, © the point x cemtain reflection and defection, “The testimony of the ols ded may have los its pertinence for us but is not deel cise 36 such, nae 38 ck vine, bot simply struck with insignificance. For H the Kdols Forged bythe Ginko longer shows The sine, the al fault ned be nde) comes ack neither tothe divine noe tithe Grocks Simp among a there arene Tener a Greeks fe whom fone these seme figures could diate by their nvisihe mitrort reflection apo the ints, whee vs lle foncwater mark nell coprespance tt rica expe lence of the alsin ata only by the Greeks The wos of the Greeks Feta stent vnpenst a able aca experience of de din, bar an experience that wee alized ons fortes. Wt renders the Delphic Oracle me ems, fom any ead finally expenedt (Fontenelle, but From be dipper the Giocks The als seks true ana genine experience the dine ht or this sere reso ayn sin asa experience ates, sae Iga his way wath Heel ams ie the eles in whl, tea dhe acon tga Us sm asks and‘mars its defection with rear to the ins, the ol aban ‘mus be tead on the hass othe ane whose experience of the Uisine takes shape thre. Inthe idol the dine indeest has presence, and indeed ofers itself wan experience. hut oa aruing fom an aie al slats. rv wor, the vine i ured i the idol only indirectly, reflected acconing 10 the ex perience oft tha i fixed bythe human aso divine, Actually experience, s Figured, hewevet, oni the mere ‘ofthe human aurorcy that puts sels much asic, to the test In the iol he divine function of Dae is hus bese and calteated Which means that the iol newer reac the vie a such, and tha for this very reason, newer deve, eludes, or mises the disine. Asa divine fenton of Pet, ‘offers the index of an atways real experience of Daset Only Tooishnes conle debt that the wlol reflects the die, and the in wap may yet Incite us to evoke for ourselves Me experience of which it remains the sediment. But for tis wait dry and this imnocesce, the idl pass ae price fs Hina {isan experience ofthe divine in the mere of 3 ste of ase. What tenders the idol problematic does sem from a Tare (e, that offers only an illusion”) ho the con teary, from the conditions of is ality ical nim rence t0 the one who experiences i, an experiences i righty so, as impascable, To each epnch corres figure ‘ofthe divine that is xed, each time, ai. In Fe, isnot by chance that Hossuet risks te term «poh i 3 univer his tory that, tom one end to the othe. medittes on the sees sion of idols" Oni the getuineness ofthe Ado. asa lime and hence real (eal because limited) way of aking the dine lito ew allows one to conceive the fern Haein recognizes hetmcen Heracles, Diss, al Chet! The wel Indeed textes to he divine, fom de point of ve of he ae that produces t 25 reflection. Bch time, therefore. dhe ko testifies to he divin, or each dine the divine that starting. from i ain limite! 4 wri scope hy ase Theron ‘he ol alas cumanates ina “selF dla. to spk ike Ht dla * The idol: less fille or untrue image of dhe asin ‘hana rel limited and deity wrtable hte of Pest ‘considered ins aiming a de divine. The wl the ae of the divine et Dae forms, ese ar raul ess God than, ina moe ral wat igure of the alsine For ao wage othe dls? ge sel Ss "Forman ide of eal this be because, preeminent the len wo sense the culmina on ofthe kl 2—The Ambivalence of the Conceptual Mdot The concep when kas the dine in Sok aad hence ames "Gexl> deine iI dines ae thereon aks mea res tae ncn os hak Ths the cacao is Pet cs tea nn de esr charactersics oF the “aes thetke” dob hecnise st apprchends the dine on dhe bast of Daaein. it mesures the divine ea Tinton of he mis of the dine experienceal Prscon prove a elton that ons ‘away fr singe sel eon the ale and allows torfoere the cise aa cee ah nssle mitre. Nowa the “deals of Gan” espe determination of Ged the formulates inn arise cece pies Hn, 2 est fp of the vine that ks hime and for that ese sel faible -One therefore ns ac on marks sha ss Puan! Geo" andieate lst suspicion dane limitation the “sea Gea” presuppnes &comeey ee Tener that wich Wapprelends ander the tame of Goa Cis fom the has of his crept tat se crique exerts ts polemic A Goat” asl alent 59s concep ewes, Senee, Mara) or indie fre of the salts power (Mtscbe then it allt the psa of absolteelesppearance—andergo the fomeypiences Of this concep Whi Hmplies, sows the fexuivalence of Gand ot ence genera. For sa thse lone renters "GaaP operatce av ance Which micans Ha fan ahetsn (concepsa, patra; and not every aheen— ‘een though thee hetero acs aa sco teal acim may be of emsecquence) is went oa as much 3 the concept that contin He And. a6 His concept of "Gea i operative onl hy seeds 0 the precision thal reer renainng inte, ene nist Sa tat t concept aessm can Pine its rr, demonic, ana pertinene enh be Sanne of Ws rhino ite of ide base of1 regionalism indicaes that forthe ter, hy definition wade fined, of God, te concept subsites some precise etn, "God, over which, trough the determining definition, er standing will excreise ity logic. Thus the concep eins Imp the sustain for Gin of wise regional vaeey called "Goa therefore they bear only cencepis eal tae fostering this “Gos! that they announce. The "wpa! gine (René Char) substitute for God the “sexs” that, concep ‘we are limited to expressing This "God that a concep slices expres, nevertheless has nothing Mlsory at i helen exposes what Dascin. at tbe moment of a parla epoxy, ex periences ofthe divine and approves as the deinton of ts ‘God Only such an experience ofthe divine sve fourel ‘much in God asin man’ al. as everbach says ext: "man isthe orginal of his dol'—man eemainn te oil oso hisidolazous concepe ofthe divine, becaisete cane tb the extreme advance, dhen dhe mefetat retin, ta that renoumees venturing hey eal nt the ne the visible Tenow becomes possible 1o ask whi concept rigs bes cause regional—alfers the "death of Gea! olan si Por, To this question, Nieusche hiself,explihy and I advance, responds: "Does moraty: make imposible thi pantheistic alirmation ofall things to? At etn crrae, ‘cis only the moral god tha as ben overcome, Does t make ‘sense to conceive a "pod eyond goed ark! evil?" On the ‘moral God" candle or even he discnered as ala ea Fhe alone, 8 “moral Goa vanvnalle Wo the lg lee at pees ands capt cs ne asin of Values of morality as coumernaire; hus des he hl han directly hit the moment tat, wth iis," highes ales sare devalued” Nilsen Would ie no old ence Grae ‘moral God"he were not exhaust it the mya domain. sel taken a the ultimate figure of Platemien” Recpiing, a {ordi to the very leer ofthe Nictscean text. that ons the ‘moral Goa” dies, doesnot aman to lig te raitiy bis argument, hur onthe contrary dsengaine ts cmon of possibilty This condition oF possibilty presupposes. ious: he equivalence between God nd nal he reo _we concept here the “mora Goa” Hence a dale vein tr) ‘Wha scope ame we to sekrledge inthis) What oii saree toate i "We can fx ts scope, poise, fy seer ts what i dns sot exh the “eat f Goa” as oe Gea?” Keawes fit even mere specs ponies, te coming ee fork winoce aiative faction pis is work, which becomes the only work. Thus even within dhe Nctschean a omen he death of Gea salon a fF athe ol that Fenlers i thikable sim, since, ene tls Gazendamme rng. there ana datof te ine. AS for he sata this new sing ofthe dine, aks Later can We covadact an ex amination of 1 Ast de origin of ths ido. ei easily loc Feverhach, i construing the whee of phidosopa of eligon as a idolatry oot in rer to denne is hankeuptey bot indealconser ate nly Keine appre rena tut Wer deploy al of He ge i i ‘Goa orale" al ais eich eerste assigns Gan, shat whl in religion, and especially the Chas tian religion, has the preeminence Is moral perfection. But Gos morale pert hein seating else than the realised fe, the Failed Le of meaty... The mol Ges rapes sma to be a he hase is Hah, hee as een, Feuer Foal wll except ae rela in the direction of Kang, who e plc thinks of Godas“a noe alin ofthe world To she thar this enuvlence acts ava A the sit sense hac we Sefined shies not presen, tess one sense an ical The appechenston a “Goal” as tal ate he week plies an acta experience of Gea Cub sul sk doubsing the reigios authentic of Kant practical pena?) Pat founded on a finite determination of "Gexd (rom the sole pratical point of view) arting nat rom the natare—if there {Sone Gos, but ike from human Dae experince cf This lst characterise Kant explicely antodaces. "This ‘lea of a rnoral Genernor of the Sok I ask presented 69 foe prt eso I cncerns ws not so ach to keow what Glin His in His nature) as what He fo ws. moa beings thus indeed it uniquely for us, witout regard fe Tse ature that “Gea” can be eyyesed as minal essence” “moral eng” Even more than Kary, Fchte brutal oe rulates the idolatrous reduction ofthe "moral Gals ing and effective moral order silent with Gout We ub ve and cannot grasp any edher Goa" Ths, either Netzshe has nothing precise in view and his angument sexreses fam con ceptual rigor foundering in pate one might elle {o spare a any mre ambiguous quater, else he ae rounees 36a crepuscular i the Kaan Can hereby “Pa tonic") identiicaion of Gea withthe “oral nl” Shh Idersitication calls for tn ers ‘One is develope by Niche’ whale argument—namely that cis idea is equivalent an ol itzendkimmerran that as according to Schelling statement, "Goal ie sameting mach moe real than a simple mera ener of dhe wl then the crepuscular idol releases, by ts disappearance the space of an advent of the divine ether than the moval figure ecause by is idoltrous disposition it hol seth teow validity, concepual atheism eren more wld here 4 liber ation ofthe divine. The true que, concerning Nie does concern his soci (an vl atheism sks i the liberation ofthe divine, wich i temps. aeceules tue beratio or ls along the wy However another snintely more alcal critique arises here—it no longer asks simply whether cmey tl atheism, since it hs rigor only in remaining regions neces be recognized 29 idolatous, hence to be rete wonders whether idolatry doesnot afet as mich, oe mote. he concep wal discourse that pretends 0 ace postive to Goal Ih the end Kant and Niewsche equally alt the equience of Gea ‘with the “moral God” x0 th the sane key aes the thinker of the categorical merase asic ate thinker the “death of Gait” Hence the suspicion that late: elon characterizing conceptual atbeism,afecs thie apologetic at temps tha claim to prove, a5 one used to Si the existence of God. Every proof, n fit, demonstative 3 t may appear can Jead only to the coneepe it remains for ie then tor en ‘tse so o speak, and 0 identity ths one with Ga him self. Saint Thomas implemenss sch an kentiaton hea ‘quod omnes nomiaunt- reps atteen ot ea lv otis {stun thevlogica ta 224.8) Arise conchade the dem: tnt A= yg tenets thejoa 110-224, ln neal ei a a prin cao akin Secat pea i whieh he ft lone st ot lal Con Pauses Saco anaes gene a ene sl eee to comes anormal ny Ge: noone ofthe inne epson salad jas nfsheses man de inne detcines Goa The operon cermin theme drastic deni, cs stg them #6 mich thr common presppenton Hes the tha emai nigh cece ea Ges tence mit conc concep sma dt wold tie pen sel name a exerting isms Te iit oeks neste mt or cong 5 orp 3—Metaphiysies and the Idol The tiny Alay came sah gain Inctplasks thc ete tha see depen on ong fat aierence. dagen sy sich edger) Te tes that hae Rs ane ee, eH ery aa eso iat delicate ene aber We went fom kl airy ncomcepual ah node org ithe Mc tous presuperton of exer cnc ase on tre te peti: Bt in sirmng enc em oe soe thing tn extern he sso of Mary uo very or epaal enterprie covering the divine, oe oe the tik of Atspaliing ths very signe The loan of iar can as lis ny ih tate iain a pee el ale, sue tha sur ld tine ew cra Piles univers crater of rsa og uch Seven cures taht that makes # ape a ‘ers mei exdoger ws ale to bint charac Terai Ih onto difernce, Me adm therefore thn atuingor een exp ee trai antere ty ct ngoleyl diene ath dg and hic te Gest Wong len gs. eno at eeesaves a withdrawn proximity: We also alt that ontlloicali ference is operative in metaphysical ought onl in the forge. ful Figure ofa though of Being (hoe summoned tary ein) ta, cach time, keeps onic cern nt as such; “The thinking of metapnysis temas inne te erence which 2s such & uaa"! This Being new Finds #self thoughe a6 suc, hut alsys ane an as the thought of being das Seends| and is condiion of pes Such thatthe thought of Being ohscured even inthe question “Ht0.0n7" where the on hon inates moe the heingnes of beings (Setendbor, onsia, esontia) than Being a soe eng ress thus transforms the question of Heing as well nt ‘question ofthe ens sypremum,aself understand peste Staring fom the requirement, decisive for ingot foun dation. In this way. the two questions lead the iotrgation tsoncering Being hack to the assaf the fount “The onto theological constitution of metaphysics stems fom the previlence of that dieence whicl Kec Feng a8 the ‘ground, and beings as what is gavuned and whi es Count, apart from nd related to each other” The divine a pears thus only 18 ontologialdiference unhought te such, Fence also in the figure ofthe founding ands requige forthe securing of beings, funds having o be placed i security, hee ‘0 found. Omosteology disengage, of fel a func al hence a site for exer itervendon ofthe divine tht wade constituted as metaphysical the theo logical pole of metaphyw tes determines, as early asthe setting ito operain of the Greek beginning, 2 ste for what one later wall rime “Goat Such tha “Goel aa come so pilasophy only insae 6 ph losophy, of ts own accord and by sens mate. reir ant determines tat al how Gea enters in ‘The advent of something like "Gouin pkey therefore arises les from God himself han ram metaphysics a dest figure of the thought of Being, “Grad” i determina starting from and tothe profit of dha of which metaphysics is cape, ‘har which it can admit and support This anterior instance, which determines the experience of tae dine taming fam supposedly unavoidable condition, marks a primary ceriter. Isic of idolatry Nevertheless, acs ut et sali inert aH the theological discourse of ante thes fogy as an koatey Bor suitable also to determine the spe, limited hut peste, tae concep tht ley ser expan wth "Ged To Perf ak so ell at with Heeger ut aso asa Corian of poset aes ene inde ante Fema Tato in mxkerny tDaseanes, Spor, Lesbiz. but aso He pel, wih the eats The Helo of heings 16 represented fanaiamentali.n he sense ofthe ground, onl 36 cae This is the metaphyseal concept Of Gnd The case Sache) as canst si Thisisthe righ ame for the xl ofp pli” in hing Gal cna metaphysis vessel eoncept of "Gina at once maeks the indisputable experi {ence of im an is equals incontesae imitation by dn ing “Gad” as an ficency 8 absolutely an universally Foun dhtional thar cin be concewed only starting from the Foundation, a fence inal the waa ofthe fon tion ito sal, metaphysis indeed constructs For itself an a prehension ofthe eeascerionce of God, but unde dhe figure imply of eficieney. ofthe cs, and ofthe foundation. Sch fnapprehiensin cn cla legtimaes only on contin of aso recognirng its Hin Hekdeyer eaws out this iit wery x etl Man can neither pray aor sterifie 1 tis Goa. Before the cast se ma can nee ill his kes in ae nr ca he play asic and cance before his po “The ges thinking whit mus abandon the Go of phi loopy Gost a cat i thus pean closer othe divine Ga Here his cans ol x Tes Thinking Is more open to Him chan onthe wd ike wo admit" The eae fers ony a i of Ga” ime that can ner aspire towne an aleraton str even flere he tbe sy mediately etraing its msuicenes The eas says wo le Shout the “vine Goat asia eth the late. even Irth the apeeygetic interion of Turoishing a suppese poo Zounts to speaking cradely,evea tn basphensy a God wh inust peri his existence ta be prowl nthe fs paces ult imately avery onggaly Giont The best sich pros of exten fam yi Magpie Msphenn, here, barely conettes the dbwerse ofan lobes of wie coneeptual atheism wold preset the reverse: fn Poa ccs, Goel i seca 19 "Goxd thatis,t0 a concept that is limited—to the cause a foundation — and, at this cos only, operative atthe hear of metaphysics Klo fay atempe to speak the good side ofthat of which blaghemy speaks the ba ofthat which blasphemy speaks Pay ilatry imagines self to speak well Each fils to see that they speak the same name; well of adly hardly matters, since the whe ‘question consis in deciding whether a proper name ca ap propriate Gai! in a "God", the unconscious blasphemy of ido acy thus canbe denounced authentically only hy also unveling the thoughtless idolry of blasphemy. Only on the bass of a concept will Goa” be, equally efvied or promed, hence als considered as 2 conceptual ill homogenous with the con ‘ceptual eras in general. ‘What have we gained! 0 ir Have we net simply come Back to our point of departure, the suspicion of idole apie the concept? We have come back 0, but with a determination thie characteris it in a decisive manner the conceptual iol thas a site, metaphysics: a fonction, the thew logy in ont theo ogy and a definition, casa su. Conceptual loa does ot remain a universally vague suspicion but inscrbes sellin the Global strategy of thought taken a 48 metaphysical Figure Nothing les than the destiny of Being —or, Peter, Beings destiny—mobilizes conceptual idolatry and assires ita precise function. We therefore end up, in reading of Heidegger in verting word for word the imprudent and hasty formula of Sart, speaking of the Ens causa sul which the religions name God" Now: only metaphysis i willing and able to name the Ens causa Sui bythe name of God, because to begin with only ‘metapysics thinks and names the casua su On the contrary, “the religions,” or, t0 remain precise, the Christian religion, ‘doesnot thin: God starting from the causa tu, ecause oes ot think God starting fom the cause of within the theoretical space defined by metaphysics, or even starting from the con ‘cept but indeed! starting from God alone, grasped ithe extent that he inaugurates by himself the knowledge it which he Yields himseli—reveas himself. Bosset says some very wise things under the deliberately nonelaborated tality of his ‘marks he sates that Your Goud. is infinitely above that fist Cause and prime mower known by piilosphers, though they -6H di not worship it”2"To reach a nonidolarous thought of Goel, ‘hich alone releases "Goa! om his quesation marks by ds Engigng his apprcenson fom the conditions posed by ont theology one nuk we to manage 10 think God outside of metaphysics insofar as mtaphysics nally lead, by way’ of blasphemy (proof) the twilight oF dhe idols Ceonceptua sthelsm). Here again, hati te ame of something ike God dnd no longer of something like Being, the step back out of Ietapysicy seems an uigent task, although nota nosy one. ut tn view of what, this ep back? Does the ewercoming of ‘dba summon us to retracele oat of metapysis, the sense that Se rnd Ze anempss a tep back toward Heng as Soc by the mediation of is essential temporality? Does ee {roceding from metaphysis, supposing already that doing so there arrives the though clevoted 0 Being as Being sufie 0 free Gox from kbolary-—for does klokey come to completion ‘sith the career of on the censrary, dacs the Katy of he ve si tee, 8 ict ny 0 anor idolatry more dlctet, more presing, spd therefore all the more Aeatening? 4—The Screen of Being “Thus far, in what way have we advanced? Have we not simp taken up the Heideggerian mediation on the figure that the tlvine assumes inthe onto theology of metaphysis, 0 den tif with some violence, swith our own problematic of the idoP Does not this perhaps forced iendcain simply offer 2 new cise of a deplorable but persigent mania—tat of taking Lup within a theological dlecourse inspite of them, the mo iments the Hekdeggertan dacourse, na game where one and the other party Kine itinitely more than they gain? Precise ‘ve must now indicate how the problematic of oly fr feo felling here Into disuse, nds the tre terain of a radical ds- ‘casion when it encounters the atempe ofa thought of Being as Being, Homever, hefore outlining this paradox, and in order beter to take ito sie et us lok ack wo Nietche The “death of God," as death ofthe "moral pea” confras the cig ofandol; but, just because it has 19 do with an idol, the collapse ntl, even more essen han run, he clearing ota nee spice fee for an eventual apprehension, eer than Molton, (of God, This why Nietsche announces "new gous” as an a thentic possibly’ that their ardent expectation renders fore seeable: Bu these new gods cin never be rendered visible un les their apprehension fs submited tothe wil to power, which controls the hortzon ofall being, asthe einges of helngs— Tchste Machi—das gen” Free fom moral idolatry, the ‘gus nevertheless remain subject o other instances, to another unique instance of which they are the function, the wll power; fo hey constitute, purely and simply states and figures ‘ft, The new gods depend on the relight it sy 20d forming (gonbildende|insint”® Ths, one kloatous appre henson succeeds another: the manifestation ofthe divine aly passes from one (moral) condition to ancher (Wille sr ‘Macht, without the divine ever helng freed as sch, ust a we ‘were able to venture that Nietzsche, because he caries met [ysis o completion, consiutes ts Es memento mae we Suggest that Nieusche renders the twght ofthe idole crucial only by himself consummating 2 new (ina) development of the idoltrous process, The will o power forges "js at every instant there is nothing, inthe mocern sense, oe hana han god", we newer stop seeing ourselves 10 the pote of obses sional disgust, surrounded by them: each instant not only ue nishes them bur even demands and produces them. For, (0 4 Universal domination of the will i power tha ives the seal of the eternal to becoming, there must correspon, according 10 the rigor af onzo-heo ogy the triumphant beilance of 3 ni Fed figure ofthe divine, hence of the maximum hecome actual ofa state and ofa figure ofthe will to power The hacharous surging forward of terrible and trial “Klos” (for we very rightly name them "idols), of which our ailstie age cease lesly increases the consumption, marks the exasperation of Sdolacry and not, tobe sure the survtalof some natural—then Selinguent—desie to see God, does not suice to go beyond an idol in oder to withdraw ‘oneself fom idolatry Such a reduplcaion of idolatry, which leven Nietzsche cannoe awd, we can suspect in Heidegger in 8 way cven moe it ad hence nore dangerous than in Nit tthe expectation for Neth the "eth of Gn opens tis, ads thug endure wl omer acces to frie praton of ne gods The es fence of technology culntng naming ese), com pics ly, btn sich ay hat ls ope othe fossbity of asain Ina y cag the inerpretcon Ive Be eins preset al presence nus tous inormovnnble end, hence by dein the peg of beings overt engness an a by geting a, on flop ference, wit docs at cee be forme pe Geely Reng Eran cares nol iference fos hese manifesting hall the more deny does ne ik tatauch Where danger ines leon cee a En taming poses onto ifeence a3 prblom by the ct that wa ase alegre atk peace an a force a Taran hea does cease imate sven of-new gn and ina sence ones that ‘vere wh tn cn of plenty cng ao a Iscrd bx in tansiion to anther Begining he eer be oning emt thik ook ferences sic, hence {Btink beings ein ister oni Helder designate rei function ad ake. open oo Top dren and does nc hrden we any problematic Gharacer ure or fic. The “new begin” whichis ompeled to ink Beng ax sich and hence sccomples 4 cp back from piksopty ese i hn tnd at tents am The ner Beinn” kee new gos Belongs no tre, ice canon pen a tre maha prespea ta the epee preteen ofthe pre dose Srmediey govern Ins, led ot eo Ws nd, ne mist Hope wh Arlt, the one Deli ta Breaks with iho oneal derence, hence wath the {a foto ogy eenatesaconcete the “dine fe ort es doce nox clne elo is yo Dees Spe he thereforeconclae thatthe "new being Farge of Heng. Being teres to aprcach te Rod a fod Tence the delve deaaon, which wah i hamencs Semen hear Only te uth of Belg can the essence ofthe holy be thought. Only from the essence of the holy Js the essence of divinity tobe thought. Only in the ight ofthe essence of divinity can be thought or sd what the word ‘God isto signify... Being “tn such nearness, if a all 2 decision may be made as 10 whether and how God and the gods wahbold their presence and the night remains, whether and how the day ofthe holy ‘dawns, whether and how in the upsingence of the holy ant epiphany of God and the gods can begin ane: net heginnen| Bat the holy, which alone is the esential sphere of civ, Which in turn alone affords a dimension forthe pls axl Gs, ‘comes 10 radute only when Being iself beforehand a afer ‘extensive preparation has been illuminated and i experienced in ts ruth"® Each ofthese texts obeys astrily eogulated sa erpastion of conditions tat imply each ther and interwexe ‘wth one another Thus does Being determine bets by the clearing ofits een; the advance of beings, which Being (das Hele) maintains itact, owns 4 as ware the most preteted among them by the ory ofthe bol (das Hedge}, et ony the brilliance of the holy can assure the opening of something ke A divine being (das Gotoh) and only the vue of the divine can cater and suppor the weight of beings, 3 this pont no table because one muse recognize on their countenance the face ofthe gods (die Gtter). Finally, onl the ibe of the ols ‘cn yield and guarantee a sufcendy divine abode so that someone like the God of Christianity of another (only the the exquisite sll petro vie) bon siti tom Being, Hence that he he: ons els can aim at Gil acing fran asin toca ‘That whi fer can By deli, feter tnt he form of praise tut an order to pase Gd 3 Feil soma, goades, the petitoner le rena fra no needa fe since the absence of all perfection, fever oni ale designates the place ad tbe instance oa tad desire The less te noting has of perfection the mene ftw desie perfection, Atthe exirome, in order dest. i rally less than swing resglred the Tes thy nothing tse can ales petition the Respite under the denon tion of gales, can pase bi 48 adness. Ontology con cerns being nf teches apn onc, ass ew of ompeiensting nan ae precable hein The eisconese of Prise is righty implemented wt neneing a sel, ince Frail perfection fel oflers The matiating Fores of de Sire witha view toward gndnese The Fes a nothing aims atthe Requisite seu saber desire elf the speiicity ‘fh sn attested fr the spicy of the denomination br tril he Tes than noting prises the Rese: as the hea Fifi anal od, an tas eng se denomination chara tetizal by antier prise and avsher situation, dat of eings {andor ontokgy, psi an asim ones), Nobels as such praise the Requisite Py sn absolutely singular praise, trredacibe tha eiplone, gv one example anon ah erst beings ‘The exten commentaries (and Saint Thomas) eve ad vance dhe same revit sexpert: by: oH none Ing. anul ont ont nonheings ems wen ave onl mater Shthow fon the peat of form, and ino wa absolete Tm eing Suppering thst sch shoul he the ample doe: ftine ofthe Parnes conf ane sill would have to wonder vty Dens cline the “Petani” terminology, arel not another that wll hive permit in toad ling to ens the hypothesis-detkane, Wo the Teast m@ om ond tai st of nating set wo the marked oF of tAconversely one would hive to wonder why Sint Thomas holds so firmly 4 hinting the theological question a the Held ese? ‘enti. Be tata may, the concepeal series ths Fe fon is atested by its consequence: the Dianystan noneings fare no more (and, let us concede, nls) ecb to ter ‘without form than the praise tht they profier—GY4d soe can be confused withthe pease tat heings peer — (Gas Being isl IF wih the Dionysian nonbcings nd Being i were only a question of lexical imprecision, Sint ‘Thomas doubless would have experienced nether sich in terest nor such a dificult n refting the Dionysian pricy of the good over Being. Therefore, iis 0 a9 examination of ts refutation that we now must commit the rig ofthe dete ‘On at leas ro occasions Saint Thonsis eneannters the Dio rysian thesis ofthe prtmacy, among the dane ames, ofthe food! over the ens frst in the Commenter A Setences (had gad then in he mame Toeologc (1,4 Teh Sic argumentation does nox vary Denys preers the wood he ‘cause it carries beyond beings even to nonbeings But tis pr macy over the ens comes only fom the fat tha the gout “adds” the consideration ofthe caus, o eather takes "Geat Imo view not only a ecient cause (hich makes him a crea tor of beings) uras final cause, hence as inde sia als by what is not aa The good therefore i imied wading” the consideration ofthe final cause othat ofthe ecient ctse, Fence of the enc This reasoning, obvious: proses nosing Fist justifies nether the redistrbtion of te diem be tween the ens and the good acconding tothe four Arslan “causes” nor the seange assimilation ofthe ens to eficiency. ot finally the untenable reduction the Ai, of the equine ‘of goodness, ofthe Dionysian beautiful snd god, tthe na row inal cause. But these insuicencies mater lite hefore an centteycliferent incoherence: if the consideration of halt 6 limited to second, if pot secondary, adlition make 19 the ons ‘whose primacy would appear only inset ak that ton, how ist to be waderse tn ake enght thas he Ake to a primacy? Either the gow uk, a one ust cede primacy to oF adds othing. an one mist etal positively the primacy fhe ens shot ifthe ns ries fis this priatey caine then he oben! 2 subtacten “Ths, aint Thoms constrain by the necessity of the ding five dnes the fst anal Feeble argumentation ha pos five and nce sication fhe primacy ofthe ens ‘oer the ont Why, ne, ies Hh ee ea ts prioacy ‘of whe bc sre hy cower of the goa ray? rue whit lawn does the eecenertrn the uncond tioned anterior jess ta even nonbelngs praise? Be fanve a ne point few enters ao pa es point of view ‘whose newts consis preci in he fet hat designates 8 particular point sting. rn whieh ene view engaged. The Primacy of cess depended on de pase ofthe Recusite by all he petitioners, even these ho are not: where Rood nesiransrssa Hig hy defiult—the deft of the les than pothinge aval hy excess hyperbole of the Reqs cconling in st sondern commerce a exteemes.n deface Sronlinary Heine as ofall representation Bor ere, comme hon exceeds info shi ing clin as the como enomiinaior, since 1 represeniaon, finite hy definiion tek reac the sepa the Requisite or the abysses oH Tt Condescensions Thus inner to ethlish—by restriction =a Situation for the en al for the commnanty the ic delineates, fe i oblige! ase Ke, hence a pot of view hn at Shine Thoms cs nor estate 0 esi the primacy ofthe fone bythe primacy of point sew that ims ones we ty the messement of the es, the point of view: only a cern taking ivi pores plating the poston of dhe ens. mak ing the vr 4 sola pont One therefore wil proceed in this ‘way "ln the simple td abate sense, dhe ons anterior © the ators sme: ranscendentale: goo, one. tue] The te fen for this tha the ens Rs self comprehended in their feomprchesskon snot reciprocal or the fist teem that fall within the tga of ondertnying isthe ens. with ‘out which the understand can appre exh [promen ion rend eit tana ileus et ens sine qr fn ets apenas tet” Or agi" the est thing concenee by the nelle is ean [ee ens becaase‘everything #8 knowable only inasmuch as it és in actualiey Hence being [the ens] isthe peeper object ofthe intellect, aad is primarily intllgble [imo i comcepone tntllecs cat m objecumt pullers et se prinon eligs fle Here the pow of departure, for Sant Thoms Can ot foe Duns Scotus alone) remains Avicenna: “being the ens] i ‘what i frst conceised by de intellect, as Avicenna Sys" The fens appears ist at least 9a cnation tha one tes the point fof view of human understandings the primacy ofthe ens de pends on the primacy ofa conception of the vnderstnding land of the mind of man. The primacy’ of dhe ens has nothing absolute or unconditional bout itt relles on another peimacy. ‘which remains discreetly in the background. Bur i his we ‘ond primacy that one must question, since it alone ges ‘domination othe ens tothe detriment ofthe go and ot the Dioaysian tation Tn fac 10 define the ent as an object of human ade staang seems neces imply teres ean sting from representation, indeed, Saine Thoms explicitly sir duces the conception, the apprehension, and the ination ‘of understanding. Hence of man: dhe ens is presented the Fst counterpart that man might apprehend! ai je. As intend o remain src theologian ou reat, we wl et Insist here on the diticulty and the importance of this submis sion ofthe ens othe essence and tothe marvels of represen tation. Bu, theologically, a question immesiately presents i se Ithe en is defined a the object est append by the human mind, before every other specifica, inka of fvery measure other than that of human vnklersriding, ee can the ens support the effort and the deviation vfs anakgy? From this paston, mast one not, on the contrary draw the Seotist conclusion thatthe en result ofa concept heeause fst (of human (in a) apprehension, remains unsoeal for “Gext as well as forall ther beings; would the nomination of Gx! as ‘such consequendy be the concer of an enterprise other than the discourse of the en? The legemdary oppo of the ‘Thomisic school(s and the Seotst schol prohibits, of course, Droceeding with such a question. Bur we Would keto bring ‘pan unavoidable erangeness:the Thomisicappachenson ot Gel a8 ps ese, hence his denomination stating from the fs, intervenes, in the oer of reasons, hore the oceine of Give names, hence of analogy: scompesed. Indeed, dhe end less aificlies eased the fimulation afer the fat of a ‘Thomistie exten of analogs” erferes nore than a ite swith hi imfalance At he isk of sop it ve wll resume ites 3s by definition and intention, every doctrine of aivine names strives "sini (in the Heldeggerian sense) the tk Irons primacy oa human poi of ew supposed to be un snvoidable nthe principle 0f the nomination a Gif a8 in inkl the prunes ofthe ens oer the other posse di tine names re on the primacy of human conception, Sint ‘Thomas sntemptest—concioiy or nt mares hile to ric the ons rom the decrine of divine names In concrete Terms, he invert the primacr of goodness over Being that De ms klein his reanive on the Date Names From the poim afsiew of heunadersanding qprehendang a0 objet the ons feconne Hrs Hen the pita wee dhe Reese thar gives sel without li madness remains fest One most doo hogs proceeds by the apprehension of concepss, Sarvscience then, fr also the em wll he frst, and mans pine of view normative fa eae according to dhe metho: hor metho, in science. decides ever ing) theo ill tel to he dene ill shit al of Hs concep, whout ex cepting the ens, 40 a “vestcton” by the doctrine of divine fsames, at he sk of having o enounce any Matus cance tual Science” inorder, devils nonobyectisting. 0 pease by infinite pettions Sie a choge-—by a formidable but ex cemplary ambiguity Sait Thomas kl noe make, the Sint “Tnmas why pretend to asian at ance a doetrine od vane names an the primacy of the ene ais conception of the human understraling Bor su pores, the bison Toa inal beste ofthis cision mater ileal ha counts is ‘vat pokes the cai tha the ens aah dined tar Ingo a umn conception. sol be vali asthe firs name ‘of Gj. Ths lam des not easily escape the suspicion of kb ur as son asthe ens, hus efereel w CA engendered oe ‘nl: conception iets bo als 7 faaaationintel Tec it maginaton of the derstanding, hence inthefaculty of forming images, hence idols For “the imagination foems for tse an idol of an absent thing, or even of some thing never seen [25 imagination forma sb aliquot soon rel absent el etiam mumguam visae|" I the imagioacion can produce the idol that takes the place of he absent, adi the ens falls largely i the conception of smaination, can one not hazard that, according to what Sant Thoms hese Feely Insinuates, dhe ens, elated 1 "Gen! a his fest name, esd ‘ould determine him asthe ulimate-—idol? ‘The provocation of such a question has authing gravitous about it. For iis only ater the great confrontation surronding the ens and goodness and opposing Denysto Sain Thomas that the question (despite Duns Scons) concerning Being ited definitively othe question concerning the Go ess Christ Hencefoeth theoloy wil have to place the inchs of Gy in exe atthe cercer ofits work, tothe pent of “comprehen Ing” "God! inthe objet of metaphysis (Sauer) The eisine ‘cerainly did not avas Saint Thomas wo enter ins matali ‘ut is ont with Sain Thomas thatthe Gl exes i Fess ‘Christ under the name of chart finds ham summoned 40 ‘enter the role ofthe divine of metals, in assuming ese fens a5 his proper name. Henceforth the necesiry ana sl ent conditions come together so tha, with the destin of the “God ofthe philosophers an the learned the reception the “God of Abraham, of Isaac and of Jacob” sao at stke. Des cartes, deciding lof subsequent metaphysis, ll termine thatthe one who remains for him the Goth Christians wil be not only the idea ofthe infinite hut also the caves Thus the aporia ofthe causa su will be able, di the interne. date sage ofthe “oral God to engender a ceith of Gout Where the metaphysical idol of "God Is positively accom Dlshed, bur where the loltros character ofthis kl ‘ally cssimulated. Tis cisimalaton infact i de tothe in aly of theologians sine the eee preva 2 divine name, to envisage a properly Chrisian name ofthe {Gye who i revealed in Jess Christa name anterer to the Being of beings (accosing co metaphysics) ence also t every ‘thought of Beings such For single path can yet pen: Gos 's charity, gap John 48), can egypt ranges Ben? In tther sors ean it no longer appear as one of the "ways” of being (even this ing as te mame Pasen ? Can it anes fixe wilot posing thrash Being, an, Hf cannot deter mine Beings ne of s—enan— ws” can iat Feast mark ts distance from Being? For in order tree Ged fom Being i tdoes nox sifice to nk, by means of 3 highly suspect and insufficient return 4, ancer divine ame, for example, fvulness One sil at show concretely bow the God who faves himsel! as aie thus marks his divergence from Being Fence fist fv the neepy of ens a such, 4—The Indifference to Be ‘The liberation from Hing does not at all mean abstracting from it precisely hecasse abstraction sretly renders posible ‘ope of the metapinsical mks ofthe Being of eings, the ob jective concept of en Nor ks beraton Foes Hei signs Irv ones nl tei away frm since ths wery ev son opers on penn, ene remains within the eninion OF the ekg of eng. Hal ihertion from Beng does not mean that one claims eritcize or ewok s-—for that di ‘our sil sappases egos ana site ror whi et into “operation hence prerogatives of ling. Liberation from Being thr without abstraction, ease, oF revocation, might appear 28 mal a it does impusale--ynkess the words “hberation from feng” first he wnalerstoe! not as an emancipation with regard to Being (emancipation tha confirms its author inthe seta ofa being) butasfvedom rendered to Being To iberate Beings hat passing eon a cape theft fo free Might can Tiherate its pi. berate elf a player wh finally iets bis Cow mes ocr instinctively witha unforeseeable ard me teks presi shay, at fhe ca Ft impo How fee order fr Teng to iberate ite in this way, und fly must be capable of ean enssage: not to he ensiaged Sartng from a ein prised or no, mater ile ere), Fence als string Hm, an for sel, ny chaege of the centite jamie dong whit he wer renders eings stocky but to envisage (the) Heng Co heingy an some of seas 80 property so thot cou not ASH discern them in anyInvisible miror, and which only a view instituted at anl tn certain distance would be able to accom Wold not bers Jing Being as such be lke liberating oneself wath respect 10 Being? In one sense, this indeed 8 the cise t envisige Hein as it cannot envisage self What des we mean by thi? Dev we not isk mistaking the citer of words fr the rigor of concepis? ‘What game are we playing inthe end? Answer: we ae temp Jing to play at/upon Being according (0 ancter em than that fof Being, Or again: we ae attempting to make sport of Reng by outwiting the rues i fixed foe its own game. OF fall ‘outwit Being by makings playa game er tn ts oe. Pe ‘sey the game of Being (and thus of the Being of beings) played according to ontological diference, thought un ‘thought as suc, ence inthe gap between eins and Heng, ‘of a the very eas, inthe incasion of beings within an ont ‘ogy indeed scence ofthe om, The ot. ken 38 being ex pressed inthis game only according to diference that eas back, as being, 10 the on, taken a Beng 50 that en ony envisages Being, which, through i always enviiges sell An ‘merpay f ontological diference as fo pli, but expecta a6 ‘withdrawal [epi of Beingbeing int i Inve spectacle — ‘do again? this is how the game splayed, what wo iim ply to outwit? Without any dub, 0 play bon onto tal difference Such game wibout ontologcil dierence dees ot coincide, we should sires, with the metiphysical un ‘thought of ontological ference; fr to think within onto cal ference wiour thinking that diference self, fll the example of metaphysics, obviously implies that one thinks staring from i Only inthis way cam ne undertake «0 0 from undhougit entologeal diference back wa dieres: Tiated thought of Being 28 such, since feu Jol i the ole ontological ference: Here the case que dierent to play ‘on Being sthout ontological diference, ia ordee to out Fequies dislodging i from ontological ference Now spy in order to outine this Retire, one especialy mis not co inue to reside within ontological difeence, even when con ‘ealing i from oneself by the forgetful unhouglt. The game ‘an be outst ony by finding ane rue, merely ny the fist neither outwis nor Hberates, but cancels se game Tis 4 play within (the le of ontological lilerence sould imply that ante sake can iersene sender to ensure te rules of the game, an, onl tha to wi A To our however Andates more thant ne the eles oa james to our fen iinates pli agaist he quarterback, to kar ck gaint him the pl by ewhich he tensed to pla us To cat twit Heng hue woh! regere mre than the reoeation of an Tole ference in favor of anther dfrence Thus i neces that hein pla acorn oat ule suc that tiller fence dees ot efer st al 0 Being or even that being be ds Posed and interpreted acorn 0 seh ference that 90 longer pert ligt rene ise n bei. permits being tole ff ack wo Being so that the ply of heing ean exeane Being, which mm hanger sould appear therein —noe even Under dhe figure ofretrew or ofthe uethought. Through this tlffrence that sndiferey hy antologica ference, how all na to being one wo hae totum the py of being vith Being ay rn sel tha the) Beng ing) Spear wh he features that a ofers zo no wwe ier ad hence which sll wouk! be incapable of seeing or telling ‘The ether lifeenve wold dlstort his pla of Being with being tha ontological ference renesed tflexse and hence, ia sense, chne—in expectation of # release, Ontologies die: tence feas-even in the case of he utiougat—Deing back eng, winks Heng hesngs) in der wo perc the reflex: Ine eve ofthe one tthe ener, ns pated f no not ws bly apparent whereby; even and especially n its decided re tees, Being presen elf 36 the reserved idol, because sis feflenve of elf one On the sere of Hein, dough eae being Helgi pense! pon sel Te cso ene dere by aster outwats (the) Teng (oF being) by rela 2 being tha Toner eles 4 Heng hn obvions (eh ‘nol ele, but to another instance in rebstion to whic anuther ferences reed ierence nore esental to being than ole elerence sel ‘We have fisted a sienry da, bur ona deat of he liberation of Heng. To pu dhe draft ico operation oe ‘revel al sexi the ersten oan stance 3s mach thinkae ay foreign to ontological difereace, thoggbt oF usthoughe, And no doubt we would think inmmedttelsof hb revelition to play tis role fort "the miso thatthe Grek Seek” Hence tothe always sought on of Aisle it opposes the "wisdom of Gos! (1 Gor 1.22, 128) Dat the opposition of the ro seedoms does not suce to outset the phy athe Hing of being, since—at leas the evidence seas to be ad mite everywhere without question —hiblical ewhaion des rot saya word about Being. Thus does one immediately rely ‘upon this sence to lima the biblical woed ta elievsng. var lant of being, Hu does this silence relly eae exer ston? ‘One mast distinguish, in ft, herween two extremely eliferent Doin, ncontesably biblical revektion is unsare of onto eal iference, the science of Beingyeings 2 such, and hence ‘of the question of Being, Bur nothing i Tess agcurate than t0 Drctend that does net speak 3 worl on being, nonin ad Feingness. We wall ow encouter dee tes tt eect three words about being, spoken ia Greck and in conformity ‘with at least the Tesicon ofthe Greck pllewphers This hom ‘nny (iit more) wl allows to mesure concretely how t diilrence thas iiferent to ontologialiference can. atthe tery least, atempr to curt the play of being with Heng He fore becoming indignanc with this incongetous pretension, 1 hope the amazed reader wil be patient fora while—in oer simply co ead ‘The frst teat canbe read in Romans 4:17; a sue I the Fath ofthe frst believer, aban; according othe Apel Pl he | mace “the father of us all a ts writen,‘ ave made You. the father of many nations cig Hin in wom he elie, the God who gies Ile to the dead and who calls dhe non beings as beings, aluntes ta mona bd ta” wht -srtenremaias writen, one must understand what ists ‘The verse i inxmediately placed si fh ony bese Abraham believed but because rom this paternal al origina {ah come the one wha writes and those wh rea im. In a tion, faith recognizes that He in whom belies comfile ves life to the dead themselves. Hence a fist formu, scl tice eliewe in the Gen who gies (hack) He. Bat — and sarting now the tet amazes us the here ater 's redoubled by second formula, obvious constructed ol Jone ts plan bur with ne: exen Seange,feicon, Int Pal speaks like the philesphers of a transtion hetwoem a me ‘na sent ey one. he wong an de ekg. Ne mht think atest sigh of what Arson themarizes under dhe name ff etal eae soa esteemne fren of laa tat lea res the een fn ene tthe est ine ao herself ka at Arse eb tha such a change coll ever really come about, since a mater lays remne89sustaram Hoe then, according Pal Cain sich a radical transition be conceit? The response be ‘ones pons only we immed correct the vers oes Tato of his lst queso for the transi, here hoes depend ur any way on the conception of Paul —as be ca Fae a he Test dctrinal nore of since tis qe tion of discourse hel abe faith al on the bss of fh Fintierinore, fee transition can he conceives! eiier ie Paul by Abeaan, sor by ny gua wonsver his ees from ane asl tis tsi dese ase Et the (me) onta that fe newerilew affects mvt itty The ‘omta ky no aspese exe of any "principle of change win themelses, "of any teins potential that would requiee fr prepare i completion. The transition bets he from the fuse: the transition from soning t being pes right {hough tent sing from this side and proceeding beyond the transition esabliscs them as ont by 4 wholly extrinsic ‘establishment inthe sense tat, elsewhere, one speaks of ex trinsic ustiicaon, Why ay extense ransiton from ening to beings? beings remain without reason or function i this transition, the text clearly gies the nee sis ransion dees ‘ot depen on (rin) ins to Time tw eas them, Wha tes this call signify” Noahelngs are not (or 90 longer) This rothingness fas es reas, wll rere just ad pes sable, death, The weil leaves these men dead —nanbess, then nthe word there iso sakstion at all for them, And the ‘world fo longer Tall them, or anes them, cr alle thes The ‘ontiedference here hein and nonbeing als 9 peal the wre acs ire thot appeal From ele Ihre than dhe wed, shen, Gg ims edges an appeal. Ne anes this rn inilerence aginst the elference herweenboeing and nonbeing. He appeals to his oni all. And fis cll sees this indiference into lay x9 thatthe all st only calls ‘nonbeings to becnme beings Us ont ere can ea have tis consecative andor final meaning), but he ells the nonbeangs asifthey were beings. The call doesnot ake into consideration the diference bersteen nonbings and eins the noes ae called inasmch as they are not beings, the none a peas by vive of the ella they ene and als has his verbal sense, tanga x quae su, sys the Vulgate) The Fundamental otic dierence beeen wh sad what not ‘ecomes indliferent—for everything becomes snliferent be fore the diference that Gl marks sith the world This sa Indiference of ontc diference an net, one should Ke, as destruction. For nonbeings are rewale a heings only by ve tue ofthe cal of God the as i does nota all weaken the power oftheir zanstion,ireocably marks ht this eaten Fema exinse to them, as much 2s the ell hat Res He Ie This san nderence w one difeence dat, futer mo alone explains thatthe GY who calls Sukd have consered the dead as md ona, hile nal rgoe they are x eshin but bodies without life then cadavers thot Kem an inal logical materials destined to materialize new forms. Bt, fm the point of view of Him who call 0 fa dw charity, the fontie distinctions internal to death hecrte inlilerent and hence ac asf n death, absolute corruption were at stake Lec us ie things together: the ontc dference herween being and nonbeing indeed intervenes, located in the shadow of he kerygmay however, i no longer functions according 1 the norms of being bu to those of operators Jaith, el a6) ha, far from slipping int this nti ference, make appear i ddferent, though leaving intact That one diference should thus be struck with indiference, as when a Kamins contrast hitherto quite visible sefaced ina general hedazzlement, fers back to another diference, sill anonyme, ht ready at work: Among the (Hon) beings intervenes a iference that, making use ofthe being that itmost certainly alls as sach, dr vers ieom the ont diference where beings and nonlings ate divided, We mst still demarcate, wil a firmer stoke, ths ‘other posible diference. And we must decide whether indi ference nthe ifernce betwen logs cou let on tea erence ts ‘i "Along the pata mak ot hy these questions second exe ance oar ang. 1 Gorithias E28 f state. we shout rt rig as fn the sme chapter th afew vers ane (ig 2 eppmeti theweckom of the Kk whan Gea” and sacs erence hee them sea tha Phocomes a cori where ea ten ca appear On as foolishness in es the ther One mt tat thik text an autor ll dhe reer since Heidegger—hence wth Im the hat of Being-mvekes etermine theo in insta wth psp”? Hts ie ns mec em text or conskler sa cal. etre, blir Paro aml tha there are not fam ou man We acorn to the Mesh, noe mane power. nor many well Donn But Gox! cise he oh thi othe wl Gaal cose them 0 on faa ewe ad he wes hing of The wok Gat set confound the sone Goal hue the ble things of the ‘ll ene the Vogel te rep things, and also the non beings. in onder to annul the beings (bt, bie tener tara) one th n> Aes shout lon nse hee Gaal 1 ioe 126-299" ‘What we fae iene seca a dierent the a ference here beings sad monbengs fs mmc reco neal: Gk se none nol te aa a fen beinge The hclierence fre manifest dat in choose that which & not A HTH were, wherens ATH Ba {question och which, in ft ok there shod emo hee Tht fr Get which thing ea wee. The fratference manifest ct 4 secon fashion that wich Com fr Gel vere eth atc ga Of remaining sich, Ka fs nok a questhon hereof destruction, bucofannulment*—in now isires against the nothing a noning once chase, scene a it were. eg ‘once annul is dnconeresl a fk were not The ef pans from the noting wen ce Dreden) ana fo sing tothe rating the wr) Thus, wie Romans 17 lead oy 2 sie form of nliereace to oni diferenve fof nonbein te eng this eat hows at wk shasta thrections: rom nonbeing 10 being ftom beingto nonbeing. The indiference thus establishes 4 idiference 10 the #6) pes sible transgressions of ont diference (absolute peneaten, Absolute coeruption), thus ates caberence and ts gor ‘Nevertheless, ths first point sted, the very confirmation of the indilerence tothe diference herween being and nonbeng ‘causes a disquieting dculy to appear suddenly sn paying so Strongly with (non) beings, ard in tx easily consi the tame and the thing, these two Pauline texts lose perhaps more than they gain; would thei indiference to the diference he trveen (noe) beings not simply betray the absence of rigarous thought, rhetorical exces, athe very least the unserypulos idstortion of the philosophical acepttion of the terms? ‘would etry a distortion, 0 doube, uc his diszorton could result from neither chance nor pasion but feom 3 measured land coherent intention. The reweribiy ft me one a ea ‘ta results frm an anne (128, Retr) 108 3 {confusion or from & mistake. This annulment repeats snvAber ‘operation. caried cura few verses earlier inthe Same chapter pee oieercs levmest we ee ‘world and drives ito distraction, “ditrads 311720) 36 mag ret istracs compas, in depriving sal reference wo afsed Dole, Bur who exercises this now distracted ssn? The re Sponse removes allambiguity-alone and chaacterisicaly “the Greeks seek wisdom, sophian sétosin (1:22) the Useaction fof the Greeks hence reflects on what their wom pots ito play; but this wisdom, according 0 the ast Greek among the Greeks who love wisdom (heretore the philosophers). pre sented asa goal “aivays sought, at zétormenon, and alvays missed, the question, whit hen is being 0 07, oF which {the same, what then lsousia?”~ Nothing conseepent Ke coherent or more useful forthe Pauline discourse than verify the distraction not only of the pilosophial “wisdom of the Gree, but even ofthe target a which Kceascles als, 25 the nee ofa compas docs no cease to any a pos hat 8 quite unattainable; the love of wisn (of the world) i dis acted, because the si shat guides theo, fs and prima Thy distracted. Tobe distrcted to hecome mad or 0 havea screw Ine; to heconie loose asa dle wheel or a plley he comes loose vy lost one's pon eat, fece to al tual hold on the axle” mad. unlunged. hence oof te Beings ae distaced case, stead of marking direction or meanigg they hove fre ofall directo meaning, mad, alienated fom al by a-diection cf meaning not onl an ‘known, ut abuse all, nenisgee,unthinae, The et by definition ines the fold of ontological deren, since es implica implica st hence 4 orentel accoRN 0 Ben vnght or not sch ws coves mater ere The ont br detintinn and ontological diference tient Heng heels to Being in that #6 unfolded according to the fold Beingheigs One orients oneselt to Hen the needle cents sel the noth, for he Orient. ef found ony doesnot lose the no helio o which eis dined: thus being spreas cr fe kad ony hy yelling to the fold fonvolgiea alilerence shar implies Being. Tis distract hein bance eval sity reli ess tan rising to dso by eeering i fre from Beng, ug fe Hein Sociating i feom Heing In her wes sailing the Fol ee heads heingt Beans, remvving beng ron that thr sich iis eng, spreading or unolling ein ous i ts unk and ynisers meaning i Reset ein kl consist (of defining a6 such in way that nonetheless never ap frcaches it bongh what as ct pee that sand bs ‘nly that_—dhat sich without any her specification o ap fpraach eang as such, ignoring thar which Ls i ot uch tleing. The distraction of the “wiskom of the work (phils) by he "wis of Gad” saccomplshed nats tortion ofthe fof ein eing hat deteraineseing with four recourse 0 Heng iference to cane eiference, but as tocomolagcal dierence Lets sce, then, hn the Paine text owtits Heing by se ting engin motion a were nor en ote Fok OF Bein For i Paul merits etn called “even Conger” ane must take ths ina nse more alia thi Nietzsche himel! in fenced, i the sense, very precisely extrumoal of « ertin disionion of hein ‘Whit designed fare by nonbeings, tm? ante? Obously, paradoxically but incontestable a queso of what ‘common sense sould name beings, oF hing isa question fof meo, Chistian, i Corinth, why are there—wery much there, 26 their confusions and quareels pane. Neverbeles, Paul names them nonbeings Ths, mus one conclide that for Paul nonbeing does not mean sonbeing. that nomen des rot designate that which ise, alta titre depen ently of deployment in and according to ing? Let ws veri before explaining. In onder wo grasp Pauls ines, le us frst rote the consiructon of the text Al the star we haw the “brethen” (1 Cor 126), a the end, "the nonbeings” (1 Coe isa question ofthe same, bo athe beginning are a, athe end, are no longer (even though in ft they sll ace, ‘What happens between these tau moments? This if one ap proaches and intespret the brethren not a what the aren themselves —namney beings as everything ane anvinge—bat ‘as what infact, they ae "according to the flesh” (1 Cor 1261, in other words, inthe eyes ofthe “world” (1-Coe 127. 128), then they are undone, defeated This deft deepens in #0 ‘momen n the fist the brethren remain human though not very gited: nether wise, nor powerful, nor of god birth; in shor they are “no big deal” (1 Cor 1:28) ta second moment they are undone infinitely more, for their isuficiencies inthe exes the “world po oly render tue weak, mad contempt thle, and ignoble but go 30 far ast deny them humanity: the atrbtes turn feom masculine plural to newer plural ‘the ‘World takes them, asi takes slaves, for impure and simple "ings, it clearly does not recognize them as brethren. or ‘even humans, bt only as Tes than ong fess da nn, below the threshold of recognition, where aterity appears ‘ther because itil presents 3 minima of recognizable real. ity This lee than nothing, this lege less han ert whic the work no longer even gives a name, because ini the world sees nothing proper and exbing common (ith el, aul names, be name ofthe “world! nonheings. 1a me ont (neuter) This name beneath every name arises the ed of reduction opected by "the work” In the name of wha dacs “the world” take for a nonbeing the which, atthe least is ure being In order to respond, ne mus ake a step hack a ask oneself i the ame of what Pal an recize as “beet ren tht (neuter!) which the “world” Inks upon a hess dha roth. the respense 4 Found a the beng oF the tet ‘Genie toe ell. btn” (1 Co 1.26), Pl es no ‘onsker yourselves, for in considering themsehes only Under thew on gare (tery Dlepete, look"), nan elemeo: tary exit, they woul sce thernelven a6 the world sees they "lest nothin” Po asks them on the conta to Teo ta they are nt eter a wha es not depen ‘onthem or on thet brute beingness orn the wore namely “their el” he all he all at 6 hei, bt te cl a dress 0 them (4 Ai Ini 1 Coe 26). Which al is ‘hs thres atthem? We ae enone is al sled Romans 417, 4 «uestion ofthe eal of the Gye who gives Ie and “ells nonbeings 36 [if hey wore hes, tet Ds ones” Tag thecal of Ge Tess dat noth” a pet tf their ens exes oF I the eyes oF the “wee” as Deans; but taversch whom against wen, oll nt falas soning. Hence a secona thing evi: the det sion on beingness depend nether on the cteories ofa phi ‘opi discourse or on Being deploring self n onto talliferce, hut om instances separated by the hit between "the woe” and the “ell ofthe Ge who gs ife- And curt ‘ously fan informed readingat es, the nonteingness ofthat which nevertheless resus fh dhe “omnis sshereas Gel furs thesworld prompts the helagness of nonhengs. tn this fee, how ae we we ceed tha “the A” Bos so FFAS refs eines tunis sho dn themsehes are? Ra sour le “the work follwing is wise which Heals Dilosoph- sul have wy kro what elng sd eecognize beings everewhere where what isi Why, accent Pal at techies go ack pt Hs i, wy ces sot the fine currecly concep wage oF the terms font me ‘nna’ Response: ecru “the sol” ts ang ds 0 helong tthe domain of ontologicildiference oF of the fol ein eng ns func es founds on HSE, 0 HS ‘works an eas ds“ gli elf before God” CL Coe 129), The "world by gel stots the usage ta tart me ‘nna ani, Tess a tinge de mg eh aFutey i no hut that on which t cannot foun iself in oder to loi self before Gyan thus i rain ont what at thar poin is and is importany” enough that i an Fond se In as upon is appropriate Fund, 10 gly self hetore GX ‘The distortion of Beingness therefore i614 de 19 Paul Paul limi bimse v beinging to light a distortion that character: igicof the “world” which, n correctly philosophical discourse. dissimulates funding now the Foundation of the discourse fl the "world" doesnot consist nthe calm marugement of be ingress but in te acquistion of funds against Gif Before the ilference between beings, before the conjunction of being Being, before the fold of ontological diferenc, the “work! holds the discourse ofthe aequistion of funds—10 glorify one selfbefore Gad, And moreover, n extreme eases, before Chris tians chosen among the people of litle means. foe example the ord” spontaneously admits the distorting its «nn Ta guage. Under the isle light shat dazzles from ouside of the world” the "world" dstacted to the point of ise Fea ing being fray ouside of the pa of Hein to the evi futwiting the Being in beings, of disaticuaing ential ‘iference- The world” under the light of Gf reseed as Foeger of ise. acknowledges that its faring does not he in ontological diference, hut in the pretension 0 “glorify sell before God’ ‘Thus to look on the brethren as nonbeings proves tha the ‘world in funding does not at all belong to the: domain of ‘ontological diference, In Ut event, wha does Gd answer? He answers that sation does not come “Tom weks jl ex ‘ergén),s0 that no one should be gloriied by husel (ep 210) fr “my loniation T haven Chest” (Rom, 15.17 "your $lorficson, broers, have in hei” (1 Cor. 15:31). i shor “may he who is plored be gloriied in the Lord (1 Cor. 131) ‘The debate between beings and nonbeings is played out in complete inference 1 the onic and omtologtal ferences ‘only because here the contradktion of glonfications alone ‘makes diference Eveething—even and especially the ier ence (non) being Being —fovnders ia indifereace efor the Alfering of pris, of rather ofthe ewe sources of glory and of ‘location: ehe funding of the "woekE oe the call of Crist Cn this iferig alls the transition fm Hein to none: irs forthe “nek” not sat 1, ot wht pms founding appears 6 Behn ado tt which at, bu that which does nor oer any funding disappears as a gonbeing. Fo Chis thar whiel doesn appt ast eng ne te at ‘which lew ithe al an that wich Hs ces ot is appt a¥a nonbeing, ut eater that which helewes self ae to foun self cn ts oe Trdg Thus, becase 8 Ook ‘question hereof an beige hough onthe bass of Being, the inversion by Gif ofthe "wr clos nm, Om, any ‘onic desis Gf eos dest, he abrogates (er args) the jlgrnet ofthe wnt abrogate, lok upon decree or Te land wok. o lok pon as othing wth fout even fang to ele a Tine, along which the “woe ves insets enticing that cm hich Ht san ford sel, crosses aneterline, along whic the al weet. Tine bes sd ont de mesure of thee fh The rons of thee ton ines decal distorts the play of being hy within fr ety, by ning ro the rule fof Heng This crossing traces a cross oer ontological ier fence, # russ that abwlishes witout deconstructing i ‘eed 1 without evercomig , annuls without annilating it distorts it wthentcxtesting its right. ln the sme way 8 window: eens the sew to an inmense space that i neverthe less measures by a enashar, his crossing opens ontological ei ference wa cifering that renders indierent only by excess ad that places tn reverse only dat preserves fon cemtcy ferent denne. ‘We now see then, hes hein an! nombeing ca be ve accomling i something enher than Being, But this something, although working sever varias names (cal, glorcation work” Gia, retains 40 he dscovered-—if it can be done encore as, a what game des being play when i ont tts the liference that inseribes an Being? This question leads us to: thi ex, that of the parable ofthe prodigal 0, Intake 1512-82. This ext nelucably demands nue attention, since itofers the only usage inal tne New estament of the pllosophical tem par excellence, ste (lke 1512-13) ‘A raat ss. Ar the sug he tS isther Father, ive me the share of ora that i coming to me! [uo epiaon meres ws uses, portionenn sulstanniae que me Contig) te ater shared bis goals bn, sae tuum) between them And, witout wating many da, ger ing everthing, the youngest ofthe sons et fora reat re [es kere mura and be dissipated bis gooss in the feof A bertne desborpien fon oustan aun, dispar sian ham san (Lake 1511-13) In view of tis stg, 4 peci rary question becomes unavoidable: oni undoulvedl ap pears on ew occasions (tanslated by sultan, which alr Appears to transpose om bion), bat cn one ts legitimately tstiblish the least comparison herween this use, abwioasy ronphilosophical, andthe concepeual use of oa in pile phy? Can one approach ousia here a if it were a question of the concept chosen by Aristotle to delimit dhe inquiry concer ing fo on? Can one proceed as ithe New Festment afer hi ing employed on, also mae use of erase epi, conding 10 a divergence as ining 6 this simitde of Sequences the Anstotclan relation between on snd ens CCerinly not inthe strict sense, But oust also s,s, of 2 prephilosophical acceptation that shares wh is properly philosophical turn the indication of a present digwraity ‘usa indicates that which, here, andro remnant he sf for... shor, dispose goods, dist comavan tothe 18 accepttions of ous, which Heidegger underlined in his ‘course at Marburg,” has to do with the disposbiliy of "pos Session” (Best) which thas assures 2 “power” (Mrmegen ‘The translation ofthe text Hy Lther indeed insists on this a renders 0 gallon meras 18 onsias by “das Te Gite. das ‘mir gohan, te shace ofthe [disposable] goo hat helongs me” Doubles 1 st at all a question here of ous a the definition ofa specific being. accorling 1 the ctegoris, ind and species, 8 opposed to the atibutes; bu, as this ousa ‘ofthe philosophers is deployed always aun according t dis posable persesion—each thing "posseses some stability of 1,” says Plato””—in this precie relation, the onsia af the Prodigal sm can resonate legimately ta cr ere les, with the echo ofthe ovat ofthe philosopher: esr rein, His ‘oncusions, wil cal For nang more than Hs weak ixerpre ‘ation of era: the goods isposable for possession and power. In fac, here, with feat nt, en pension a tke, the parible concerns onls this point—the entrance of on forthe logic of posession, of more exact of possession the mode par excellence of the placement of ovis at ones disposal Lee then be Rood, the ota commen to the Fah And the tse, gens the sense tha ane has some prop fre” seme “Tone! pent ™ The son, inthe roe of Bet although the younge, aly ad the use and enjosment of them son of rhe master, hei Dri, he was able to lok on these pels a his own, or rather this enjoyment di strictly coi with pssessbm, ro this usage oh disp Balt: betwen one andthe other term intervene! aire thle arts. the ier New that he Father abusise al tiny ‘would usilirit hiss on bei hata 500028 the share Isak! for, he gives with nether delay nor discussion The Father ge ane immedvey ges wht ene asks hi, the sure the oni the younger son therefore des not ser feo not ving te enorme ofthe ort a om we to atacand imprescepale pl frm his er. Therefore he sks not so much for his share of oneit—since he has ales fenjoved tht tae ee that share of eto sais denunds less the ora han the share ofthe ota hat 'Scoming toi” as our and vor property—nos the ousia ut posessin af the oat Ulinately one even wend base ay ttt he asks hat one deprive him of something te already as he fas the enjorment of che ona as gave, he asks for the ‘usa wut the concession the ont Tess the the ona teen concession stat Ising concede hi ones term fy gracious concession The sn requests that he Toner have trees rate, that he no Tengo have to ee vive the aster asks dat ne ean that he no Tonge have to receive any precisely, mo kanger have to receive the usage aks to poses it dispose of eno wth ‘out passing through the gif and the recepion he gift The Son ams one nosing ois ther, al above all oto omse Fi a ithe aks to ase a Fhe 0 Tonger-—the oa with ‘our the Laer or the gi ho he vei hus posses censre tence the lt fon ahi the aaa ses. Teens he‘comes the fll possession ofthe son ony othe extent that is fully dispossessed ofthe father cispossession ofthe fier. ‘uliment of the gif this is what the possession of ones implies Hence an immediate consequence: in heing disposes! of the father, the possession that censure the i lnexrtes within Hse, massoluby the waste ofthe gl possessed wi fut git, posession cannot but continue fo eisposses ise Heacefoah orphan ofthe paternal gif, ows finds itself pos: sessed inthe mode of disspation with a view to an expen ture: possessed by the son inasmuch as disponsesse ofthe pt ternal git, no Tonger “holds” im him. Landed propesty. nem without ground, becomes liquid money, which, by definition, seeps and trickles berween the fingers. the son dissipates his [goods na fe ofcissipation (Lake 1513, dlestorasen)\* the Feason isnot the sudden immoral ofan hee seize hy de baucher. The reason forthe coneretedispation wf on is found ina frst and fname dissipation: the translarmeion ‘ofthe ora iin lil (money), which Hslf reals fom the abandonment ofthe paternal gf as place, meaning and le macy ofthe enjoyment ofthe ousia roe gut received, cuter ‘becomes proper’ appropriated without the gt-—ahandoned by the it because frst abandoning the wlt—to be lest si persed liquid Famine (Lake 15:15) symbolically marks eis ds. Dersed disspation—dispersed in a great “region” oF rather hra, an empxy and undetermined space, where meaning ‘even more than food, has disappeared. fa at, sot the aban ddoned onsia alone that fl the son hl gamble his liston Tor i he anon hs ition in order oan the ota 36 ‘possession; he had exchanged, as the exh his bie for some leis, his fllation fr the possessed 1st; now be has dlisipated the ousia and no longer has fllation. The abandon ‘ment staves him, but above all makes “hireling” of him, less ‘wel fed than “swine (Luke 15:15} abandonment deprives im ‘of ousi,filiavon and even humanity Thas he no longer even hopes for filiztion, but ony forthe food of swine oat est, the lweatment of a hiteing when he woes back to his Fae, he longer even has the idea of asking hit fora hlkaon of whi the very notion doubtless escapes him (hut, previous: ha he limpsod i Surely ne). Lan not woth of the name of soe son” (ake 1519, 15:2). Abandonment 6 played out inthis ssa Fly, the monient of pardon comes the father recom izes is on fron a. eraces in a fe im ha Ades te fater se an Rrve? No cae fe ets hu ‘eat (i wong leing) bat awe al he rts iito "pecs hen ry son se Tl dean wh Tes ae ake 15:24 the father ns hack the son hilo, wih the eng ad the fared elf. he gles him at de son did not coven think Wo sk fo the pater io ition the en I ‘what dees thie pi const? Here the eskns ick of eligence ofthe eke son-— wh urilerstands the paternal gas ithe as foes his younger reer enlightens us Recoming indignant for ro benefiting from as much gener ‘sity a does his younger brother and deploring not having anything “of my own” hake 15:29) 10 bave a pany wath “my (1529) fries the ckder bosher thas tani admis sharing the tna aif his slings to consider he paternal sends fnly a6 concession awaiting ull possesion. Hs Ee’ sce ht, Et tealressed ao wo the yong son ar Provides as. conelisinn that which, when forgotten, had serve to open the para "Win son, yo are ales seth me, andl thats mine is yours 60" (Luke 151) The faher does not se the ons asthe sens see tn abe ater ead accord ing to desi, the object of & possesion when concessin ‘which abundhons every trace ofa paternal pt The father sees in i the at cemcesly regen at a new cost (eventually 18 forgiveness) Or rather, the ther does nor sce the ons ant feed the tent appears only an the speeel ofthe sens, the father des rae his pave ws ee on a aster, ‘if clat not Eie careh the exctearge of whi ico stttes nthe mei the sgn, een the reside. The her fst fixed on the ons eciune with his eve he transpires all that is oot insert! in the eigor of a pi, gving reel sven: gous, common by deinen and eitclation, ae pre sented 36 the Iniferene stakes of those who, thang them, sve themeches to eat oer, eireion that mee es Servi than whan H exchanges The onsta 6 waabe tw hi ‘onlyas he cverene ina exchange of whic ican mark, at the ‘ery best bur a moment an exchange was solemnity infnite generosity most olen is masked by the tle of paypers: Under the tdolatcously charged guze of the sons, currency ‘obfuscate exchange; the profoundly iconic ave ofthe fa ther, ousa never siops the aim ofthe exchange or cielo ‘oft it ll hac i ine s also yon, ther wor neti becomes ust (as request for paweskin without) anid that which’ ie woven by the snvsle ss of sms that themselves exchanged inthe glances that they eas and Feuer to each other without 1s, en of weariness as a Sn ofthe pits the “that which” has neither the occasion nor the tempts thon fo make a possession of self, usta separated, deleted, and given tothe possession of a solitary individual. Ont is fispossesed of ite In the infinite exchange of possessives (yours, mine), so poorly named by grammy, since here they indcute only perfect cispossession Ota appears as Sach on? to the gaze that abandons the admieable exchange of aims ‘enought freeze on one point tha, thus Fixe isforedinto.an Hol On the contrary, rake dissipates the marvels of dhe kl fn sell as scan as the communi of sims that intersect ‘rough i displace the ousia in such elusive moveenents tha Jnstead of tcp te gaze lt seers the gaze to the infinity of ‘ther gazes that envisge Thus, usa i inscribe inthe play (of donation, abandon, and pardon that make ofthe curency ‘of an entirely otbor exchange than of beings. Bat, precels have we not just seen these beings themselves ake up dis placed, and disorted according toa rigor ether than the ogc Of Being beings? Would one have to conclude thi oe, ust 38 much a 1 (eon, finds Hse taken wap tna aN Fl tally foreign to Being? No doubt. And from now on one can ‘elimi ever more closely the game tha, nillerent to ent fea diference, thus causes being to clude Being: called the Bf. The pi thar gave sero the operations of prveding rea Ings—eall,ghe Ife, aif, father, and 89 ones Bein beings. and morcoser, when Paul addresses himself to the ‘Abenians, Greeks par excellence, be not only finally an ‘ounces of God that "in him we live, an move, and ave or ng” (Acs 1728), but owe all he ist species that this, God °° us (17.25). Pal does not main shat we re by, be ‘Aue of after Gd who woul mse sh fe a eng he 109 imei us, inasmuch as we at, living i the moe of pase (ahat which “wee mse” now), within GS, GK compre: ends or Being of eins, ithe sense ta he exter ex cee the ero alae that the erstaning is com Fused withthe unert—in shot tha te comprehending diverges frm the comprcbenled. Thi divergence es not Ihe the function of esishig an snferoety whatsoever, hat of clearing the space, precsels the csc, where the gilt is spread our Would! Beingrheings befall us asa it? No. Walfects risa ap, which ca a8 well be cece sy asta delies val fa ahundoncd ws Hel cspated outside of originar i ing" As to specfing fw distance determines Being beings ethont homer afleting i tins that woul demand noter sole study home city stops Tess important to pointcut here ths unique attainment ib lial revelation ars, in some rare texts, the emergence of ‘eran inference being te Heng eang thus makes sport ‘of fick on in toting ontolial deren ens ‘only masini 8H i fst ra yar nance, the pai The yt esses Hein cing H meets sehes i wits 8 mark, filly opens i 6 4 sialon casement opens mn A ‘nsance that remains unsjekale according tothe language of Being—suppsing shat arvnher lange might conceived 7 open Neing eng tothe stance of a gf implcs then, at the leat tha the gilt my dlecide Beingtbeing. In her sons, the it is oot af all lak! nt according to Bog eng, but Beingreing is piven accent the a The gift delivers Beinn MW eivrs tt He sense fs thatthe it gies Beingeing al ynes tito play pens ic ts sen 4 fore iain Tne levers lint Ierates ein fm Heng orp abe Hay, He from ntologil iference, im rendering being free trom Deing. in lstorting being nt of subjection to Being in sort {in undoing the oindng of Being eng he fold undoes sw folding, berg plas rel: ings, nt of toe wth Heng as 2 froe whee! tims ml around As ae, Being hein trates! Hy thet hat preeses a that aan ote Cal lillerence to ies that est ann The i Heras Hinge det dhe ser inliereice whi atsThe gl, io bberating Beingbeing. n Hidecing being fom Being is Wet finally bented from onto clference— ‘oe ly the sending oe onl the distor, tthe freeing oF the fis instance, charity Forte gift els Mberated onl in itsexertion staring from and in che ame ofthat wich, preter thant comes bebe shat which ges ave expresses tel 5 sf chanty alt. Charity delivers Bean en 5—the Inessential Name Thus Flest {would remain only to go back to our inital questi, how ‘vera very pertinent abjction did not sand at, We have as pointe aut the excellence ofthe git sf, necessarily wert beyond Beingibeing, deiveced and distorted #. But, on the ‘contrary, must ve not envisage the hypothess that the it des hot strcly deploy ing being as sich? Or exen more hat Et from taking up che play berwcen ling and heing from a phan tsmagoceal elsewhere” the pt doesnot rather deliver thi phy as such? In short the git sill sok belong w Beso! being, precisely in thatthe it would release i very opening No one more than Hexdegger allowed the thinking uf the eit ‘idence of the gift wth Being being, by aking leally the Ger tan es git, wherein we rocogeize the French #4 there superposing one and the other, we wold understand the Bt tha there should be (ofcourse being) a ths Eat that es, a donne. Yeiog tse is delivered in the mode of gising— from one end to the eter along the pa of his though fom Sen tnd Zett 0 Zeit und Sen, fom 192710 1982 Newer ‘dk not cease to meate on tis equialence™ Do we not de lade ourselves, then, by elaiming eo discover inthe ian in stance anterior Being/eing hi distr the oteleeal de ference of Beingy/being? Does 0 that whic we appetiend as “otherwise than being” constte precisely is mot adequate and most seeet thought? Indispurably— unless “Ri” and" ing” can aid must be understood in ferent was. unless "il and "ping" are not determined here, always, despite the ap- pearance, starting from Beingchetng In faa, the gift can De Tunderstood in own so radically lees says that sil ute tooutline them here. On the ope hind there isthe sense ofthe si thar Teas, nthe Meno 0 the accentuating ofthe gee szarting fom the gcing sel, hs satin rom giving Ins ae doesnot cease to he Hel yn his case the that 89 poved pve doesnot proide—any moe than ds the im Persona inthe threshold of the i y-a—any piled sup Pon Fie coul apes, f though hegan wth ony asa sa SOF ean sith eepand tothe engematie He eal one weak fend wp secking what ineterminae power” tna, and one would mis precisely the whole take ofthe git, bya grass on tieand even eal regression, We therefore must leave the _ver in suspension, even the very ea hata ger is necessary torte #1 pes. in order to fnteeoyee the sel "in Hi of the kin of ging that belongs to giving (Gefen) as destin, sing a clearing poeretion, das Gabon as Gesell, das Ge bem als licences Reseben The git concetse as ging, and not fist starting from any giver whasoever: he giving insur is unalerstval ae the destin sending. What destin seniling” The ciniicstion of “porrecomy a a Recher: pe rection hy what author” OF the elaficaion rendered ‘ble hy the clearing What clearing? "The gig inthe there {5 [tr ques] manifested sell 35 the clearing portection of the four-dimensional region, des eYerdimensionale Bereihs"* ‘The denon (Rocher), wich unfold ts clearing, vnfols asthe four-dimensional, ae Furfold. The fourfold joins the “vines andthe meas as well asthe sky and the earth The sing which seizes the pis. eg ves throu a iver no more than the Foto admits of transgression outside of Beingsbeing, The giving a sense, haste fnction of insti ing 3 deat fme doe] (Geshic, any in cispensing oF ery anterior an exterior “prinipl" in porrectinn he a Ing pero that “i ges” actor tothe Feorfokd-—in the sense tha, when she painter ok his eae to 200 “what aes ce ge get one, he does nt sek in bwin, x fer oF the motive, or himself be seeks to sce wht he cana elf "aves fe does nt even sive asell reas, since the cansses thar present themes cho rot al gis something fame themselves. H fro a canis “pes seeing” A faves ny te cass, il ress fram thei fem prc Suking i dhe cans sets liseeed in the mide ofthe ging: itive in the sense that a sound, a vie, color es icappears. Or eather, i disappears asa cans, an nis place and spr, "i" appears a 9 (rst) seule. Inthe Four. the fing gives” wih newher ghee nor sven. in a pure gi ng The it here i ofa plece with the Fao andthe Bene his: the gi arises from the appropeieion of Time 16 Beir Thence also of being to cing 8 appropeution, witout any dscance. ‘On the other hand the git can be understood starting rom ‘giving —at leas, a itis accomplished bythe giver The it mus. be understood according co giing, bu isn donation] must not be understood asa pure and simple ging {dooter| Gv ing must be understood by efecence to the per Between the sft given and the giver giving, giving does no open de (Quade) dimension of appeopration, but preserves dance. Distance: the gap that separates definieely only a uch 36 ‘unifies, since what distance ives consis in the gap self" The ving traverses distance by not ceasing to sna He gen ate, toa ever, who, dhe Bs dispenses the given as sucha send ing clestined toa seniing back, Disa Tas out the Anite sap berween the giver and the gif 0 tat the self dal ‘Ofte giver in the gift ay he read on che gt, nthe very fat that i refers back absolutly to the giver Distance opens the tntangble gap wherein cieculae the terms that accomplish ging in inverse directions. The giver real on the lh, the fxtent thatthe git repeats the giving of the ntl sending by the piving ofthe final sending back. The git ives dhe pier co be scen, in repeating the giving ceward Sending wih sends itself bac, sending back which sends—it 9 # estes lay of ging, where the tems are united all the moe in tht they are never confused. For distance, in which they are ex changed, aso constitutes that which they exchange. Distance fan be exchanged only n being ravers This ther mel of the gi, since unites only to the exten that Hastie, can, precisely, distor’ Beingyheing hy disapproprating in ‘shat the Brejgns appropriates; being remains in its appropri tion to Being—how vould get rid of Da cance sh dudes itso nether apparatus, in axle circulation, va other giving Beings, hence Beingrheing, hence ase. on, <4 ‘over an ahose wha is gen to then the pre ad simple tring of he Fregis disconer themes ake up a as Unies to then and fromthe pin of view another aim, Here one cold ojert cies this mchision of Meigen in inane sppening tha ull have some timc Che tne age tha ces have ta wha vole), the kes passiily? Are we na condemned egressng 0 the point ‘where she ether tem of disance wll appear fot a6 a cme, atest as being, which, i the capacity of creator woul fave Hing ein? What 4 be gained by such a eradeness ‘which elie skelfapologevie while atally foundering #6 fofioaghe? Hot this objection comes apn tan, onl 0 the extent that doce not tae the trouble to dink distance Distance implies an ereducle gap specially, dsappeene toni dentin, stall septs the tem th, prety for this nso, can lero ftir sein an retry therfore, with the ast of he pagal s,m es tn PBeingtheng enters ants dance an! ging the vier term, enigmatic will reins erewer-—even more din accra ingt Heider Doubles ill not he named "ing ince Being is kind eh being tue of entoloeal dference propmated ese hehe Pres Doles il he recngized in any heing (and espectally not a being “par tecellence. since eine belongs to this sie of distance Doubles we wl name GH, but in ees Ge wah the src hat eevee him nh fn the disappearance of his death and eesurretion Fe sheer teeny of stance, Ci, sit {es at awe te, noe therefore to even the name of Thing htever it may be: Cakd oes The giving in allescing to be livin home" ges” ging offers the on accesible trace of He wh bes Being eng ike everthing a, ewe! a6 ging, ee tere the trace Of anor iE 0 be isin AI thas matters hee #8 dhe git meal tha one eps appropriation or distance In the fist, tral the fn stance of Gl cil nt inervene, since the gig since inde Forel a she sce but what then sores re lacing invent a ote epreson?——the ka stance bene Beingbeing (of whatever mae ta this kes tale my he), can rights ener in distance witha instancethat must remain unthinkable i order presse to exerese the pif: we say, Gd who crosses Being/being only in submitting the ise to the ross by which the hyperbolic agape which sor passes all knowledge" (Eph. 3:19) makes the sign ofthe ess {nthe distance, omy agape can put every ting on ean, sn heave, and in hell n ging, Because agape alone, by defn tion, not koown, is not—but gies (itself. AV the heart of ‘agp, following is fax 35 one follows 2 current tat Is too ‘lent to go bac up too profound for one to ken is source ‘or valley, everything flows along the giving, and, by the wake traced in the water, but without grasping anything of, every thing indicates the direction and meaning of Ustance. Even, eventually Being/eing—like the res. Hence it follows that GXd is expressed neither asa being noe as Being, nor by an essence. We have learned again ty be msazed that metaphysics should have heen able, staring with Descartes, 0 think Gia on the basis of ena (efiient moreover) and 1 impose caus sl upoo him asa fs name ‘We are In the process of discovering, as much through Denys the Mystic as through Nietasche, tha i ace sl-evideor that tous orthat «concept should be able to determine in what ay this might be Gia W remains w be glimpsed, fet wih Heidegger, atleast in eeading bir, and, a really neces. against him, that GX does not depend on [eve de Being! being, and even chat Being/being depends on Uiance. Ke Jive neither abolition, noe coetinuation, but a resumption tha surpasses and maintains fn other words. amang de divine names, none exhausts G4 or offers the grasp or hold of acon pretension of him. The divine names have sirtly no other Function than to manifest this impossibility, More postiely, they function 9 manifes the disance that separa (and Thence nies) all the names of Gall. for in distance allan merit the qualifier divine. Here, prediction mast yield to prase—which, self alo, maining a discourse. We ques Toned our silence on Gd. We asked our silence acceded to a dignity great enough tobe able wo claim ro cnacer, with, nether blasphemy nor ridicule, something ike Gl. This out ney. at once long and summary, which led usw the pin of limping the amplitade of what distance places n giving, a = 105 lanes us oun 2 reponse ery silence tht remain in scribe! in hanazy in metaphases, ancl even i Being tcing Idee ina Theol forget ot the divine names ers only bute cel remain silent does at slie in der to escape ‘drs since, preeminent the characteristic a the kl > emu silent, al hence eet men remain sen when they Fonger hte anvthing 9 ay-—not even blisphemies. The s Fence that is stable tothe Gk wh reveal incl as agape in Chri consis weaning sent through and for ape once tha if Gil gies, to say GA respite receiving the sift and—since the it occurs any i distnce—retuning 4 eeu the a uo ply reandany the undhinkable dona tion this esa hut done Lae sot spoken. inthe end, ‘made. Only then cin disconrse he chon, but as an enjoy mest ublhtion, a prake More nates. the silence sale to Gel rex cng bone to emai len, ent a fustician (the ple san of fps ates) or ea of Inuit, Int simply ont of respect. Despite anesell- one nas ecognize that if we de st lve agape enough to pale A we nus at fet preserve this imporeace a the trace of possibility We mus guard ou skene ike a tear, sl hel Ince gage tat obtuscates splendor, but nonetheless pr tects as fare Dyillince This silence, and no ether, kows where a hom i ences, an why aus, fr yet atime, preserve a'maute decency free self from Alay He succeed in gimpsing nl he online of that by which agape exceeds everthing and Beingeing) then our sence could levusbecme somes, messengers ane he4 RSE OF VANITY THE 1—Suspension “The crossing oF Being’ up to this point we ‘only glimpse Gy who may acpi i [And hence, because GY alone could omplish it, and because at est, we can flimpse GXA only in ee intermittent alt times of ou idoatis, athe meantimes of four miro games, ithe margins he se Tar bedazzlement in which our gares cul mira, we perce this erssing. only fom time to time, For that which cross Teing, evenly, has the name agape. Agape sarpases all krowlede, with hy Perbote that defines i ad, nissoluhly prohibits accessto The crossingof Being 5S played in our horizon, Fit because Being alone opens the space where eins apes, and then ecause agape does befong to usin tll. We fall the apa ity of beings—under the onernment of ‘Being, We do not accede—in the capacity ff "sinners" agape The crossing of Bing therefore exceats a esapes uson two aecoums. From the point of view of Philosophy, we hold the value of hein, ‘which the opening of Being governs their deployment, a fortiori, f we amit land recngnize ourselves in the ste of Dat Sein which ontological diference Thor ‘oughly and most datumately determines sve ae exhaust in anal hy the pee lain that Hein akresses to us. Thus from the point of vw DF thoy, we must recone that the conliion tha a tc inte as it 16S situates us ata anit cstance from aman a ony wih sin ca aecennuate omy nasouct a, ogi bs, a6 fase nthe constitutive dstance ofthe renter, snc the ceture, hich # ase an i al Senses. concer From this point on, simple sinsation may Ihe exalt. eng vain, wet entering ino cea foul be described in this way finde, onic and bene all ‘nologies csermined,eliseosers (itself ia) the openness of Bing, whic ches not ene ts hen abt heigs ponsilis: to the point of being gen in forgetflness isl nohing hu ran breaks forth ethers than nthe openness of Being. This inalienable ste governs exery posible Wold Theology would Add 1 governs every world a created. in short, the finde accel tech, essential, ig epee inal for Thing, cence th te fk the reat creation indicates nts eine bt ee Big, snce ng py inthe esse file fondest ther as ree) the crossing of Heng woul not have any mci othe kas possibly of finding self wally thought, hence secon plished, On the conte, rom the radially other ether 10 the print of rangers point of view of Gx egape woul find sell granted! the power to cross Beng fous understand Beinweing plasing #9 insu Prawn, self «werner rete sens creo OF this crossing we ul kaon nat ing. n shatever sense tis nghing should he expressed, since Finke, a8 well 4s the ste of creature an the nonance of ‘gap plied by the conalion of sinner forbid us acces 0 The crossing of Being could be admited on condition that remain tally envpy an senseless from the pnt of view 3s nc of phason as of he (sinfal “economy” ofthe eres ture. th wold be the concern of the adele unbinkable ‘which, besoin even disine names, s deployed secretly as lence whone very racy remains horrf}ingi0 us Tn this simple station, violence mest certnly eveses the Heideygerian topography: the gap between creature and ‘reor #9 Tonger inscribe nthe sole one region onthe eons, all of onto lierence sol Rind sel ei a_ietibed Inthe fed of ereation: the erate, bile remain, neutral, would go beyond the ssc da oF the ens (er tum) %6 comprehend as well though in cliferent capac Being taken as “neural tatu Bt this ever il ms tains the option, for us decisive, ofthe Heidegger wpe hp fom the pont of view ofa though acta thinking, bere fd now, nothing would be unwed! tht rt epoca 2 being according to the openness arranged hy Being. the ‘unique and inssble screen where the aim ops gaze—di ‘covering in iti this very top, being s0 that “Goa” hime ifhe ms be should be—a being Whereby; chou in. dtler ent way, acces 0 the icon, which envises ov very am rr As ivinte give, isl closed: the kon of agape would remain for us inaccessible, ewe i no longer necessarily follows that fs posslty may be envisaged curse of Reingbeing, But of ‘what importance is poss that, by rigs, woul appear 19 {isto be decidedly impossible? In other word f He crossing ‘of Being and the district of onolaildilorence: oul e onceined only fom the point of vew of GX as aay the analyte of man as Dasein sould remain, for 1s, nypasale, ‘ontological difereace, for us, unawoidahle-—hence the screen ‘of Being would be instperable One therefore must ttempt—and i indeed a.question of an attempt whose succes 6 not pecjudged—to aed, from the very poin of view of our situation defined by finde, the crossing of Being. Hypothetical this tempt would cin Sis of investing an iterspace, a space undetermined hecause belonging to the domain neither of the ido! noe a the same ‘ume of the ion. Indeed, more than of space. one must speak haere ofstitucle(in the Husserlan sease ofthe term}—e an nude characterize! neither hy the iolatous gaze noe Py the feonie face. Let us speci In this atte, 8 a question of challenging. what the screen of Being can afin of ils (beings by lending ther sown olay (as sereen, hence of Aiscacting ontological diflerence. Hur chi atte eu and even should not, for all that, real the ios for the ie begins to play, we have verted, aly a the momen when agap® envisages er gave; henceforth, te ze alone eae pretend tothe icon exeepe by decently, sce 10, sear dey it depend on our ue tha a ice envy that FRenvisged ve cstance thn egy dispenses anuteravceses From ovr real paint 3 ve: dhe agp that envisages remains rinerwisgeable (sine, preeisely the icon inervenes ony sec aks the iene ens as tl eos oy such an jnversion of the gaze). We are looking for an amide ‘where the gaze no hanger wool eeze a fist (and st Ae ul ot et se envised by the ansible, whose nice sil escapes nt, 86 are looking Fr a at tive where the gaze no longer wuld se ay iM hough il ‘peter to the smposile agape. yave.deretore, that ‘would see noting that Ie does not immediately tanspierce, and that nothing sould come wo envisie eve, in he en that souk sce nothing and that swt! not discover Ase eta geve that secs nothing, Hu that thing hoes, with nether bl no case The analysts of sh an atid presents prude il ‘ly: can ever be ez ft? e cn th Ei Therary ton hac en described this type to us with more ‘eu than Tae’ sages. rom among the numerous ex amples aailale, et ss take M. Testes sketched by Valery A eness of hiss Tete in ct cannot atest any ido oF be teste any gape No ido bok up er his ze, "some ‘eh larger han al hat se This ae awa looks be ‘nel har aos at i alas poes beyond as spectacle, as bea of the wile ecause more Foncamental ahead of Self The "frightening purity" of ts aim always owes Finge ff fice light hewseen the wile spectacle an the borin ‘wich fs abe sil pen, ewer cody, the orion alas Feels like st inde lapel car that, come from elsewhere, appeal agains the eaening idole ofthe wsble, and. 03 Dull of wind, afoases the air toward a new vise, infinite “This eve newer sees what veher gaze, iis place, woul see to the point of freering iasead of seeing the vile imme dae spots ante part ta snot ile the rable hr dn the spectacle. I sees what A not presente 38 vse the eampay spare betwven the able and the sive, this pice susie forms an emir spt efor ssc oul the vs Anes ake an empe pace othe wale an, rangpencingitor bypassing i, makes the snus: makes the tnsisbe, as ‘one makes a vac this ze, by dot of alas an farther than is visible, ales aig farther than the endl of ts nose: takes 2 journey tothe end af dhe cay: Nodhing no wsible— Stops i just ts etn sons a armored vat Tat eke breakthrough as nothing Mops a Tilback who “mks “opening” as nothing stops the gave in a fla Lascape or a ‘equally Ra, Sshionable salon. IF nosing stops this save, how ‘ever one must not infer that neither encenmters nr ses ae thing; onthe contrary, precisely because nothing stops i ca, Dy tha very fc, see an traverse everything th Hh exo the proprietor Nothing tops precisely because a reduces 10 hothingness everything ofr 0 igh: "The objet his eves Fix upon maybe the very object that his ind means to reduce tw nothing” Testes gare pus tothe tex what it behoks ase holds an enemy tothe ron, sn order ta sey is Te fare hammers objects, nota scutor who senses the ay Figure fom them, but 53 mad person so isan sae for fear of having to venerate Ror even a6 a thinker wh phe losophizes “with a hammer” in order to desteoy the oldest ‘ols. For this “sranger’s way of looking things, the exe of ‘man who doesnot recognize, who ishevond this work the eve as frontier between being and non being—helongs to the thinkers Pensivey Tete destroys every spectacle wh pare land simple gle, or ether, in transpcrcing exery sible boeing with his gaze, he does not annie i 0 much a he elsqualifes fs pretension to oer the idol, which preciely would have fixed tus gaze No violence, 9 reftion. mt speech even, but only the advance ofthe gave, Hf neti ‘were. And, i Tat, jexmediate nosing any longer is— mesh tng, atleast in the sense of an il, since everthing remains exactly as before. Teste detest ete in the sense of an cath In reverse (detesar’), (0 repulse hy an oath he abjures the world, presents himself as wines (ets) for tbe prosecitions change against it oF eater a a witness wb discharges i from all Kolatrous dignity, wines whe dsmanses al its ign bility, splendor; a ates eho deprives i, 80 10 speak, of {he eight ese for isl, wh iter a! gis ‘The detestton thst Teste exercises depeses the wel ofall ceontidence—the world no longer meds confidence and fae tur, Tones al confadence a He I he ight of this a clastic giz, the werk! bevonnes the inliscermile an tens cent shah of fet ence they: wat det ems ean, wil this ave beable wy atest? Tato sa sae pose thi pestis Indicated I he fact ha Tete ne fl msl as We SA Theyond this ward ener ein and pon etn” He tins hinslf on the boner seen sors being ae that which, inf. jgoes bend it since he ransperces the ure in which ing cine, the hkl that captivates sight Outside of te tls egies are we fo ste the gaze that Fete Dees? UUdoutved: ne cnr Nok ick i ay dl whatsoever, sine even seltidoltry-—"T made a idol of my mine Forces the question, fr from apelin [Fm mind merits Icening st unimeebale center, this his privilege be ‘ounce of repress aeatenes that detest te Woe, bt Te oul the principle of sch izing disaster Het be cme that shih a renders spasile—a kl As nach os seolstry seemed! to ete rte ofthe Molton gaze 30k appenes rom now on untenable toa gaze dened by its poser to teunpierce every id Ths the alternative no longer con sus im deciding betwen an external Gol and sel lt. ak Ferweca te icon par excellence aa sel: "Wil he fn ie ‘ole atthe extent of his expectant wishes —Wl this he Gol or some tering sensation of encountering, in the depuis of shoul aly the pale ealiance of his ow and erable mac” ether sons, cn Teste present te hated of the iol destronal erase sen =" denise wha 1 ge — ‘what 1 can oh from flowing hack on the gave self whic thus, order not a fll way, wo ve te deoyed by a haved when i onl appraes self? "With rouble at all fount thin aye all twas eve hate mse" an nt up cae ever tne Fink am tpi ty mse Ail sell that whieh permis Test’ je tyes everthing vse without ever fing on a a idole tesaion ae its hin fom exer encountering. the sworkd gave eer than his ee, rae to envisage HAS nothing bolls unter fete gave, ning bal p this re‘eter To hold up the gaze: to resis it, most certainly, bat also, in cesisting it, 10 balance the first pressure by another, equa pressure, so that the shared tension should save one ad the father gaze from collapse No face comes to envisige Tese, Thence to od up his ze. HY dine of ang eyes ile oo wide, Tete no longer sees anything if not the smpossbility NF ‘exer being able to stop his give. Like Oxlipns who Holden lssures us had one eye 100 many, Teste sees that by dint of Tucidty Cbeinging to light) he destroys every vise, to he point tae nothing wil xis gaze, thats, oshing that might ‘come from the vsisle or tat might occur init The radicalty ‘ofthe detestation of idols puss into question the possibility of an icoa, whose gaze would be able o spare Teste from don ing in fis on Gbiousness. Each ido hat collapses marks he recesity of an icon, but alo the impasiiity of ever sein ‘at lea from this point of views Ths, fe cs uns ave, which sees (00 mach 10 he enssagel, suspended he fren the stil falling tight of the las ols and be eee ‘deferred dan of anion, a gaze 10 Fixed no aceasion the suspicion ofits dea ‘This tension, which indeed seems 1 go as far 36 contrac tion, nevertheless does not indicate any exicentalimpossibi fay. Texe imaginatively manifests a situation that is exh pos sible and actal every day ur em. For we can go Hen he fdols, wrthout howeer reveling the fon that envisages us. Tese brings tis situation of intolerable suspension fo 18 most perfec version; dhs he shows us on the rigor of our osm Situation. And indeed, dis writing ken tral. is inseriedt In tis uneesable bur trampled interspace: we, oF rather I. do ot cease to Work Up momentum in order not to ix mel a given idol and, the more this momentum leads me where | ‘wang the more enigmatic to me becomes the nese appeae ance ofa gave that envisages me—the icon. Since the opening (Of hs wetng, {stand inthe position of Teste, and may readers ou, reading here, ow) a well. We must ask, less of Teste therefor, than of ourselves, how we mange inthis way to ‘mainain gaze that does ace ee and dey mt Tet self he see, neither idoatros nor icone: in shor, of what Use, tally, this gaze? Inner wor, when we see He Teste ith ne ve ton man, we undoubyedly see nothing (a regards the ido, and we Fe outseles be envisied by nothing (as regards the icon); bat this nothing. once ain, does not mean exh, ‘Whur then ic cfetesl inthis ze that Is lind! hy is very uci? This ee pease in he crying oof Horedom, Boredom defies an atu ad 4 manne of looking that are perfectly letinahle frst be contraption with eer modes of the ze, sen ash 2—Horedom ‘The Ze of boredom, abou disqualifying the idols, never theless can he confused with anniaton, nism, or ane tery Let us indicute these three distinctions. (a) The gaze of bored dees not annihilate, or destroy, oe even deny On the Conia, the muemen of dearoying precisely hevase dit tmowement piesa norinliference that honed sharater cally places in parentheses Bored does not have any in terest sn vasoeser may he, and hence his no more neatine Interest thn pve: never desiroys, hu always taens ama more exact is sole quastdestrvcion enc with the dismissal impli by the mere fae tha its gaze turns away, even Iss, redo doesnot have to nien az aay in order to ie ris the thing fom all (eventually earns) cigs This sve, othe contrary: in peestng self, urs digit far aia From ts spectacle, hy smmidatelyspeting the Hae fis ity thr begins to anpene (aureole and inverted glory) around ‘he ws By nor paying tention athe very moment when ses el on the bse, the gaze abolishes the vse, hs misses 4 from any pretension to erect elf as fst visible (dl), art twit ing 9 arma e.(b) The gaze of bored cannot he enfied sith 3 nie atu etter Nii begins withthe destin ofthe highest vas; this dlevaltion self follows front the asconery that every vale, even posite ses its digi simply hecaie # recees sch lignin oi evan, eat ofthe ilo power) trey rahi, as rch passe a6 active, asst every being new way of Being evaluaon Py the Willer” Mah Moreorer, onl this els futon ofthe Beingness‘being allows one to understand howe nism self completes (Grd ence continues as mach 38 flls) metaphysis Nils furdamentally implies the impartial instance of the Wille zr ‘Macs, for lack of which, obmiousy; passe slim ead lead to active nibilism any more than te fable of the "ie "world" could be abolished in she fsa (and inal) hs tinction Berwin the “trae” world and the “apparent” work Nihlism dsengages the Wille zur saclw as the esence ‘Gounder without foundation) of being, But boredom n 0 way founds being, not even in disputing i ts own fae. Foun tion, forthe gaze of boredom, in disqualifying the ols of the visible, does not esis self 2s ultimate idk test hi raveré Tong. ago-—in hating itself 10 the povnt, evra, of| taling seit Boredom renounces, without ay raged wt fay "met or "courage the very intenuion of any Wolsey wwhasoover. Any fulfilment of the gaze by the visble repulses it its righening party” would be disused with if the ‘hance the dager he tempeaion append to present ise Tat the gaze of boredom Joes nor concern lle, oF txercive ill therein, 8 confimed by the gap between Teste land reative thought. Reacve tough hates self, ax hates that which isnot tall hateful, only inorder to uiseipne sel, tostaighten self and finaly to be set straight gain—In shor, paradoxically but inexorably, order to firm (ise. and this, because precisely, a bestom, i rensins Wile 2 Mach, fn search of afrmation, Teste, on the contrary, does ne ret any more than he acts, doesnot deny any more chan earns. He etches everthing from the idols dignity, he detahes himself, with nether arceticism or eft, from his own afi ‘mation as froma lst impurity, an impurity of tbe gaze one speaks ofan impurity in a stone, whi inthis sense becomes truly precious only by suberation. The ge of borelom net thee denies nor aims t abandons, so fra abandon ise, ‘wid neither lone noe hate, though pure indiference (¢) Fi tals boredom must not be confused Wath anaiety: hy ansety fone understands the "undamental morn” hematite ‘egg one mus read in tthe phenomenological operation tha accomplishes rection of beng in iene. the end ‘of which there emains, as a hreaening obsession n ace of and arn Dusen, only the NeshingnessNothing: the sepa Sion [ronro of enges ialcates ara enon wel the INovingness Revie, which, mote timate than thee inh vidal essences, asses hen in paesences hence te heingess ‘offing wih Feta sen cn, sot ge the manner ‘theing Repo (Alesina gesture cress a lew Pres siento hear the cain thar Beng adresses 0 i tha Paso should be made st “shephen of eng a lest ‘sete! of Nexhingness Nothing” Anse hols place as Jrandeonenna neon ls fons the lainn wel thus exper fences on the prt of Nhe Nothing a Being. ANN in agurnes a complex press, nf which the claim of Being A sgruch de Sens conse te sunita ie stake. Te etre of beings cont only tthe exact degree ta i sen sages the horizon where eng axbsances, ander the species of Rothingnese Norling Here, tha which pone anwety 10 redo cleaey appears, certain. one and the eer share the Frightened eeeat, ar toot erie anubilaon. of eis Ie, this desert, sce sill erie out am appeal for ans fees the clan tha tensile ters, oreomy on thecom trary. hear nothing here, not even the Nothingess Nothing For boredom, atleast uersoral an ats essential acepetion, femains deaf ven to what i hears, IFthere wn prester de res thin in dhe ene seh dest ant te then 99 dea perso ears less than Horedony Wha hears ives no ten: tion 1 no tention, 0 retention. is characterise Function Indeelconsis in paonoking inlifecence ever prensa, expecially ya anon prosewation, especially (oan exert in ociion, Beton stapes he ela, and ane all that Being: tecase is fant or deinen eer this ery suspension. We must ake anaes ep. Anviet, src Dlosophical kts, rps semen wa the amazement {aeaanazen) that opens the sa for te though (metas calor fe maters ie fee othe eng eng this Bos toshone the the Anh es ems the lain thie eng makes hear thmgh as “ive cscs ito experience "the marvel fof al pnarvels: har what Iss"! Ansizemen spo Heal ment whic sha asthe sk wie” Being > make lef ear awe tc ith heft eh cng ven thepure dascthat of being mobilizes Daset to the pein of pt {ing through i thought nko mosement. Bur boredom doesnot heat anything, does not war 0 hear anything, any more chan its gize can, oF wants to, let self he filled by a fist vibe, radiating with the dignty of an insurmountable iol, efore the fact that being i, boedom does 1 bualge does ne ‘does not respond. Boredom does not suifer any exception to ins erepuscular ize, and the being purely thee forms no ex ception. No idol before Boredom, na exen the insurpascble spectacle of given being But, a8 nothing more essential than sven being’ (las: NothingnessNohing, Being) ci ever a pear boredom wil never manifest self more absolutely than fis unineres for the gen being Boredom, whch lends no fiverext 10 given being, 1s accomplished absolutely abso Tukey, which means in absolvng sel from ever tie and every limit Boredom dissolves, nthe end, given being sel and un does sell from that which gives given ein Hein. which here sets in motion onto ference, nthe ope Tn comparing boredom mith anxiety, 6 ue Pot spy axdded a thied negative pointtorwo esers, We have secured the ‘moar decisive gesture of horedom—1o stray, this time neg tively, ontological diference As such, horedam becomes di feverested in everything. I cere ise in nothing, Before whatever may be, hence before everything to te extent that ‘everyting, at leas, boredom is ot interested: nut non tere that does Not concern me, nor iit for me, Lam nox a stake in that which, here, 6. Boredom wahdrans fom every fngerest that would make it enter amon (inter) beings (inter fst) Telsengages sel from then, eaves its pice among ther empty not among them for ansbody or for any being. Bore ‘dom withdraws fom being and from its sakes, as one with “raw from an alae, as one withdzaws funds fom a bank, 28 ‘one gets out of scrape, Henceforth fee from everything even land fis from given being, absolute boredom deploys sii ference Stith, encefoa, nothing any longer makes der: tence, including ontological iference. Even viewed according to the marvel har iti, being does not make the diference, for the Being that speaks in no longer manages“ make itself Interesting” Instead of anxiety prowokingdiference, because ‘the lao of Hing that speaks nological ference meres it bocedeim sees eierence thi The inlierence to por ticular possible ko ia particular vse being eninge! the dimension of worl exerts seo the fact that ein 4 given, fence on thing Fess than onli clerence sich ns at ay The gave ere st ae enka thereore of aca mon existent anahss i constites 4 Tandamental deer sata ses anit. tn toll nner sense: se fof charaetering man as Peseta fom ological ci ference, ciqualities ontokealdifereace ty exces, na ‘prance aed hence displaces mani least in pata ‘oF ssa as Pa. Man, pein hat he see withthe ay solu gaze of bored, otis Paso she dsiterests Tinsel n onvoligeal eliference. This indierence, ase thought tangential distacts emtslogial difeence, Mas eer tainke noe tn depwing evape—which Teste mone ty sy fete as to he Ina tthe very anna when ‘ben perfec minis Ht bya sore retreat hich. paxil the gazes advance and exces of hci assice Beyond the al (ewer te imate iol tha in? hing gives), short of exer aan) where agape wink ens age us—s0 waters, decide! ul suspension, the save of Doredon 3—Vanity of Vanities What does this gave see? I ses nothing, since tdsaites the pretension of everbieg sie to coneite Hel as bt Te secs all sre Hs lsgpeaiicition i wesc al §5,whatewee that might be. Ht secs all and nothing al a xx Ingy all har 6a were no Under the inference of bce ‘dons gaze. the ont ference herween being an nonin Ihecomes indlifernt, ecase fis entoloacal diference be came so-—that being 6 Horedons does nt smpose anni ton om wha it ses, but rather ndliferentiation ete the stanis of being ad nonbeing The suspension of orextoms ze tears ts spectate from Being. This tearing away ea be expres ith the worl vant” Harem gaze sikes bengfn general with vanity Just as ansery, in dsmising being in general, designates Nthingress Nothing Being s0 xed Frings on being in general the warty that renders exif to ontological difeence. Bored, in disengaging tl Fo ‘ological ference, undoes beng em ls es heangness, abolishes the very name of be ‘Non sah wai il eves Doig nr the ets orem places beeen idol al con, oer tet for ‘out mealttion inthe inauguel phrase of ene ofthe Peeks the Old Testament, the Qohelet (or Feces). Thistext he longs, we shoul immediately note, to the wea siting, {do J, the Proverbs, and the ook of Wisdom, hawexer, the notable diference that fis also one ofthe five scroll (megifon) tat were proclaimed publicly for the five prea Jewish holidays, it shares this big dignity withthe Hook of uth, the Song of Songs, Lamentations, andthe Hooke Fer, ‘sical mar rest joy ona great seri experienced Israel along ats inussolubly hori sad spel tinea Hence, despite is strangeness, one canst hak pon te ub cleth a marginal oro eser authority. No this text reves ls the sentence that, 20 doubt, hest sstins the mament reached by oir meditation: "anit sanities” ss the Que Feth. "Vanity of vanities, and al (is vanity? Whar aumnagenus llerence for man in all he hho by whi he bors der the sun? (Eecles 12-3)! ‘We mus sill ead. We are looking for an unaerstanding of sanity. of which we Sil know nothing, nota would yesuT fom the gaze of boredom. fn what sense cans pres Hat ‘what appears here, under the sil undermined ie of an ity" coetesponds Correa to what the gave of boredom pri wokes—the disaction of onologcal ference dh allows the ‘marvel “ar bein "to appear Let us proce with cemarks tft external nity Hell, a) What the vanity in question touches has imi: vanity alfecs “alin eter woes, nothing escapes a another verse Soon wil sy: Snorhing new under the sun” (Feces. 19}; ane ‘us ee here the curious cansicion, rare acct he tenets which woul hve tobe translate! Healy ‘Nathing—all ne wader the su” a eer swords, by un Imo account the stan juxtaposition of eeteanes, “nothing se in all the nes therefore all the neat does eset ase the conse Te das a ears = fac has fnocolee ew novelty: The wai of things thas nas be unde stool not on spc ba—especiall—n ime ee is sues of all. na smn hat empl posse Ta actu notte eyes a eri comscemtens, eS tte ses of the ze awed svt, tthe pave of ih rear, horedkon. This gatering of all hevonel he powers ‘of clea an common coscousnes, scott mation 0 he tury formu “wn of eaten tht prove trades the a” Cal [svat ustapsastion bene indicates the super tise shat the Gree anal de Latin. for exaaype, formate byt sali, or which the Hebrese kone etal al which replaces Dy repent; this inthe “sang oF sons” whieh of course nse De anaersinxl "he son pa excellence” This femurk,raher Inna phiolgieahy nevertheless eers mere thant if onset a the weal sek we an, tome ns each usta; ear, ker thar the “al” sh lander ats poser, vanity Hast exvome ahsolite, widhout Innit or reserve, superative Hence a com parison, trl aide: boredom can eg vanity om thet fal, fas a6 angers gee rise 4 “eings a6 awe This ‘comparison, hunwever inet Kale to new question {Can the vty tha Dee dom stekes with vanity be eons ‘vith einen tsa hort, wth he wtf en ’) Hence a second remark despite the neces I whl translations in dhemweles constinel tase ee cop the Quieter, Hse des not use all anit” Without enter fig # complex, amigas, alto creme discus, one tha, Mcrae Hebe oer a ict extent The” and from this we wil daw only ane molest conelasio that which Poveda strikes ith tani Bo expressed! a6 being This ots the re tha ist sie Qobekth wal review Ife, dea, ved, Howe, passer, goons, es, cee —in shoal ha ts without exception. Buc he exakes these, he a1 way evokes them as henge, he wel oma tv ena he totaly of then a Ie aero their cnc station as ponies. He can escapeindefinite enumeration only from a point of view other than ‘niveesal and positive presence, here and now The way ap pears in fac, both as such but ls 2 an, aly because it st [ype as ceaton: “creation was subjected 0 vanity mataio says Pal (Rom, #20), Insofar sits created the whole is tisengaged as an absolte whole; not 28 being but a eae, the world appears asa whole ft, e60 frais (or tala tions) ente to compesiion, he one tat interprets the work {being in its diference fom Being, and the ser that p> proaches the world as vain its sats of creation, Creation Tindoubeelly does no coincide eniely with wait, but un ‘doubwedly also the realty could not appear as vain te point ‘Of view — sil enigmatic—that designates tas creation di not Srise. What common fesuin reunites them, then, st least in fare Vanity marks the srorld sah inlilerence. but in the {forld the dference seems lage between living al Foner Ting, enoving and suifering, sng and not hving, knowing, and erring, even (despite the lexicon. here faltering ofthe He. ine) being and not being the difeence does nt at all seem tobe an appearance, hut a fealty. de realy Vanity can su pend this iference, to which nobody inthe workd can remain easonahlyiifeent, only from a post of view that mado ‘terior tothe world. Moreover, fom the point of vew ofthe ‘porld this extenonty very precisely seems to be folishness Such an exterionity is masked by the concepe of cretion, One Should aot be surprised this concept Joes no arise i the {Quheleth, and if we must hoeeow it om a text in the New Tes tment the imix concep, de concept othe limit, creation can ‘become ineligible only tothe sect degre sat though ap proaches i keeps clase tH that abowe alan act manifests Fr anspressng i creation becomes posible, ina sit sense, ‘nie theeugh incarnation, as moh ashe is Alam can Be se flyin the billance ea on him by the second Adam. Inthe Tack of this advent, thoughts rstricied 0 walking toward the Timi, without, for that very reason, beng able to name Along, ‘his pat, the Qobeleth marks a decisive step—acceding to cre lon though consideration ofthe vanity by which the wold is marked on the bess ofa yet obscure ie Fighted cats ofthe Stork The black light of van already tesiies to the fac ea ever sn ean he tly a sis sors souk emer anes ne testa at thieek ans am oats ae sre theta son a reat and ase, th erence. Now thi remark can conten Te main weave aang conte wha second ese “Wha havens cece ker man all the Tor By chit ery dc sn" Tequesta ie faced rhe ten here teed (roa Hsia the simp the prof few tn vest a hor andar sil an ihe quan col he undersea "We bere {ibe gaat” ree Homes: ener et Sie exe nace eh wh ee tase tthe tinge gestion ere pop rly defines edn an ee ces 4 cea tine gor ay ir he Hk Stn wy ing mmr: te Lor of sa ne longer trates ny erence rte te lee that men wr fas tyro cre ke ere fo ths few ta ers it on hee se in eredures:eres fl tn no 83 teres an Hem anger feck imeresed in ere sine eaiy vender ale teery ference pela nie work an era The tet le we are reading now fers constction hat lesa hgh spring since expr an persion tinny according uote revere nero Rea moments eft ring theorem amen wn ta Ferns see trestle 1 en we tee tha neh a sl cv ata at ser iva eof cream 12 fale we accede to he eats tse spears exten ea ee Inert wl Cine 12), ang ot hee tte ge nusches the meant conlide fy and th the he firming Fence co ase when vant srtes, wha das sec Pisin Ahsan Wha des signi? i what low es she net. we peste one dace nt nate or re hice mngess tet which W sents sires ha iy esto sce. nh ha inca songssain preciely because hey appt crac: he ks on humana before thy capper He sould 2c erin ee lt whieh cepres Qo fo bj apes 0 Git only ater hang ot is wd an for stn them {Ghat he bemoans having ove them a ods alse for hang lst complet terest apes he des cht he odes of his apne ft thease sha eps bore seri om a sic hee from ain good. Qoeleth deca on the ema Fant feral ofwhac be would have fox or desired nei, ut tar he poses for he has al ip wetland non goo, much forthe spi eve a cans Sum ef wisdom ates 116) sor mater sats a te ‘ewes fm eye: Tmefised my Hea no plure eves Soy hat whch he sie wath any consis inthe Sery hi darn Rene in goods ta has enone and that he wl Contre ee does not deplore hr ene ut he sts hm wth any ng very pene any it snk tte wry extent ta they vr pes a es SER Ih copamene One undone hve 0 Sha vat can ait wbasoever aye, ects tame athe presence tg sks eer thee pres fc ace fre and col ot anal om eto Ile good The rave of bored rics wth Sa Pes fe uch in the angler of permanent dN ‘Seren Jb ac sues and spo (he) erence the {ren ht which and hat whieh sn hetsen he san js), Quel nk he pin an ny moe {eau sense of perfect an seen pees, eh Se alent inal nd impercepie low alps Socom bya cola hat eesti pls ie fre he mane for nox nee os titer tha nsngabout wich ones afer at of 8 iy ct was maine” Nou een the nothing sr sh ftterer One need nt be ctr the low that res wth ity since takes sings ein Boe Sire does nr ince the nnng since # spe te thfcrece beeween beng athe tng ha a shite ame ting mans he paene een preset being (the presence of being) and the nothing anit eners ontolel liereice ferent therefore os end dhe nothing as muchas beyond Being. trdoes oe anit, nor dos i have toy eth the nein fe oe than with presen Ding We no" ca mate ta fact, he term we tration renuler by “ss the Hebrew fe, cannot be rans hinges ft saygeets the image of seam, 2 conlens tion, Theat fat sf remains mobile the atmosphere, remmans ander the save like a gemine spc tacks the same capacity aa eifice, an animal or ae, i faceupies the horiznn, eves eventually: dnsestng 10 the point ‘of closing ie presents self to the gaze asa ealiy—tha Thur this eal wihouk cestucton oe anniiaion, can eer eles csappea i light breeze Disappear? Io eat the ‘word ie nnt sia, since thi which consttates the mist fo ser ne dsruction the droplets in sspension wil re than tn the ror reste inane state. Hence na realy hs appear, ar ona certain aspect of the reality: the cobesion, the canine opus compactness whi, with is fle lplets ana eninne particles, erecta an enc are of space Condensation, mis, sean disappeat-—sathorr desu Nona soni as anther sand, stronger andl more olen, Dicks ap. One Dre vields to another breath, rua, hence Spin A vei disipres wh the spit heeaes The sist tide ever ret ny suxpension, issipates ery sespen Son that appeared, hefore land Dy igh ae "Waits therefore cin define whasrewer may Be nl inasch 3 all that is can Ucn, lke 4 mi uncer a perf rem it, previsl can everyting thus dispute, ant wha spirit can Feat this we? The Psst Had anced ea that xan ke Ines Pde i a, hike sha tha et res” CS. Fee ie he recta ener ler pte Uys of man dissipate, ost a the hlade of gras les ae 36 toes the te an even the abe, the wi come astra ‘One therefore mst ai thatthe mone vole the spit cues, be more being eerie the ssn af se Hes sal clsipates ts permnent subsistence Before the vis lence of the spre that breithes, man, fence ala of his works, ca, wht ing eine sala, simpy neFonger hold—man, pated up by the eath of dhe spit, lets Inimself be carried avy, a8 IC he hie no wih abd ‘alory). Man does not weigh a Tot under dhe brea ofthe spit, be fes 0 pieces, dispate, is undone. What the Maimis, proclaims; "Nothing buta each feb al! men who stand, hothing but a shadow, dhe human who walks, neg but a breath fede che ices that he heaps wp, ad he Unes not Know who will gther them... Nothing hot a bre Vel all uamans” (Psa, 396-7, 12) Al, here again, becomes of fan become a pufedup breath, without any welght the works ‘of san (bis labor), as man himself, dsipate ike “ti aa vapor” (Saint Jerome)” Man does not hold under the wind, ‘man doesnot hl the spi his presence Neus. in suspension, in dhe Mu that comes tobi from elsewbere "You are in fet 2 breath, which appeats for a litle while, and then disappears (lames 4:14) Man appears and disappears, enters int» pres tence o exits from 0 the shythm ofa wind or breathing that ‘Sis hm up or set hi down, allows him eo rentin o carries him aay hie "vanity" does a stem from such an aeration (a which iis only a quesioa ofthe simple contingency ofthe Fine), nor docs wt stem fromthe ralical exteriorty of dhe breathing that provokes the alternation (a which «could only bbe a question of domination) t stems from the fact tht a> solute external alternation nether annihilates nor deeroys but simply disperses, loosens, undoes. The spirit does and um ‘oes, man finds himself eared aay by the breath of his own defeat or Fhe eemain, be knows that he mes this cal that has come, tel, from elsenbere, and which therefore no less foreign soar Siriking with vany therefore ames to placing in suspen ‘sion, 10 leaving the case (of all) in suspension. Not thatthe Spirit drops everything siace on the contrary i cares exery thing away and les eveything est Bue aspension ise marks ‘everything with the indication of caducty—all becomes cx uke" Nov that al spears ofall bt lca fall al is fppear, this great propensity cannie he summed 40 hl and irrenwedable moment # sures eal asta ana each Tiber ot pesminence mr prescre: de possi falling pe ‘arate the ouike self ese axl expecially whe it des nat fal appeews eaduke precisely hocase foes fl in that insane col a wl hase ts presen permanence is saat! with as abolionsnot ling Et eves se fer tt manifests mit as Being ake Cand ing) fall dhe sinpernen the tinge rests it lsapperance ens ‘one bere to indicate har the very pass of aspen dlesines tse Bt of residing des nt contradict the possbty ‘of dsppearanee, hut a acta thas ect posted (the fice of hit which forthe moment—andinicates ty its suspension that which reneins—for atime. Tha which emuains inmate becomes whic does trem, hat Ishich bold coincides wth that which fs uoxkane all or noth ing, ont a erence. This illerece, he he en tan as "= places the bw fies of suspense fn ct tse. “Tel yom, Baers he wat ars in Hee remain herent ep | ha hose wl se wives shale afte als whe, that te wb sk be) as hey swe nor erring Hie these Whe reac [sol be) as if thes were not relokcing hat those who have com rece sot ef ther cl at poses, and tha these whe make use nt tbe wl shoul be a fhe di noe make use oF ft For the figure ofthis welds passing aay” (1 oe 729-81). ‘Thar whic iain become cadoke hectase sack hy van sas if were non ot that ts not or lange but Because appears indent to being oe not hein te oF notte, thats no the question, to be ort te there sche precisely case hetwwen the tw terms vanity une the Alerence. The “fine of the wow” ppeses away newer Simple nor (0 hein wth because i final deacon ap proaches: for i adit tthe Fact hat his final pei co omplet ess san annihilation dh ast aca oxication (1Gb 1552), ream occur only nasa ist the "world sume 2 gun Hat might alata eee comple tion, Whi figutc? We hae encountered i already makes of the wed “creation seesthe wth oe ae the assure ub stvence ofa (self) presence hats saturated (sth sell, btasa suspension, suxpended by that which goes beyorst—our Side of space as ouside of une—the world For vanity only strikes the "gure othe werkt” when the Jater compares iselfro pole that rants cutse fe, unseat, al disables i "We too ean very ex ince themselves the sy the earth, the ea, a all things eomtned fa this small ice; bus, once compared (9 Ged. they are as nothing [snd ad Det comparaia ese pro uo). anite oF ‘antes all vanity” (Sain erome) Fog, contioues ferme, small light shiing in the hight indeed rewals herein all os ble and real vst no one woul doubt hit gies vs he Tight. Nevertheless, i lights absolutly only wntl the sunese, ‘whose brilliance renders the frst luminous source src ‘sible, The sun does noe extinguish the aera, des nat hide Teor swallow ip sip annul sing fom ebewhere i relieves the first ight offs function, noe heough a struggle be tween the light andthe daskoess, but throug a slow suber. stom of igh by light The fs Ugh csappees witht hei destroyed, without the night trdmphing, without even eg femtingushed. does not even dkappear—tt sues vanity “Thus the world sulers vanity only by comparison wah aneer san, “the lack sun of melancholy” (Gd ere which ius itp and invades i from an absoltely exeawcraly Oren an ‘which, atthe very moment of ising over the work, remains m9 less extratertoril by a0 inadmissible and urinkable pris lege. Over the world rises a gaze thax comes roi from ese ‘where because [tallows the exterior of the world to appear: the ‘world ints own eves, recognizes no exterior, imis orca iy; is exterior appats only sf the obverse & turned ne, in fonder to present the reverse, only ifthe world finds shelf tured tomsrd the exterior, What, then, would urn it? Only the pave chat strikes fet vay (OF his gaze ser ase on the tworld as asranger a stranger’ gave, which endees the work Stange, deranged, 2 sranger 1 tell. The world no longer ex ‘ceeds this ze of horedons (no longer surpasses it m0 her fexasperates fon the contaty, henceforth ican exces! he ‘world —take io ts breaking point and go beyond. The ae ‘of boredom thus exceeds the workd onl by king nto view fom another pole—GRd, say strikes the worl a soon 3s the world finds itself take ine we —enssagenl—by anher fate shin sone, under the seve, impracticable 1 man, of (fe er seen this ave and the world distance is estab, “gap har unites as mac a separates ap lene fst erm canaot but compriend! the incomprchensiiiy of the se ‘nya ap therefore, that lees sell Fess to be conceived or redhead thin 1) be avers an inhabits. Thus when Qohe let ies seve of boredom one “all? to dscener therein sworkd ruck hy vane sees from the point of sews not of the world, bu of the exteriors ofthe soe etween work and Ge sces the sl nto esr, Gf sce a as seen by Gifs hated 4 aver hig transfined by ex terion; suspend! ear bret. fv short, the wll ddiance ‘The cibservation that vanity wrikes the worl only at sen trance ine distance permit i concetsng thee coolest) sana paste stn te wo eesti, sue ing it 2 gare that comes rom cheater, te placement fh suspension cnt tonct onl some Reingsasa desertion OF comming defini strikes al the world the word 6 auwhole, the whole ofthe world We can exer specify al hat ‘sic challenges she exteiorit of another gave exceeding the world at one recognizes tis eve (in aiming distance, ‘only to deny if ax es nt reeganize Hin esing to eface set eto thi ave cnn oneself to dst, witht Ding abe we dra ncy fen wha characterizes the ol ‘which ean one spotted the moment wen, ala ancien sare confine ts becuse transperces te Vanity fist Feces the vanity ft el a the seo tha tho, hi refuses to ris the work under eevtan com tition. could glimpse its exert (anise distance, he te fered ut itr does not evenypis this excess were dis eel exceed, ts thughs sank inte, Hecate Ahern vance Sint Paul forvalates this precisely “The i vibe things of Go. since and byte Fact ofthe eeation ot the work, can, stating om gh, be sen i the ake spittin ve wes as orks one ant als he eternal poser and divinity of Ged stl dha thee: mea, cannot plead the feuye, sine having knew Goad, ew al oe gay em asGod, aor did they render hin thanks, on the conteary [and eon sequent] they went up in smoke hy their thous, a their ‘intelligent heart was darkenesl. Pretending tobe wise. dey Frecamefals—wene lsraied” (tym. 120-22) What we taste by "wen up sto smoke,” the Lai ena che sen by Sant Jerome, exactly reers efit yo al diss pute like smoke or steam under an overs stony Dees of Spin; the original Grock, emataididem, sll eorreyponkl ch rectly to the other quivilent of fe rom the lel Greck Cin the Septuagi), mates, therefore one ale cold tense ‘without contradiction, by-were stuck wih vanity! wih cx ‘duke insignificance” The distraction of men therefore comes from a situation tha a5 untenable asi common: their thoughss are viewed by the invisible gare of GHA, why sees them as creature, and ofles himsct the receyized a ere tor tobe lorifed as Gt Intent of respondinyte thst injunction by "making use of the word ast making use of ren deny, by thoughts that are Wola and het hack upon themselse is insisble miro, the dsance where the srk isset in motion as creation. Creation, not recognize a Sich, lunmedaely finds tel struck with vat, and though. with stration, This satus—dlistance known ad noe recognized, suspension-—marks with eaducity, hence with idolatry, ever ‘thing and anything “thoughts” (Eph 417-18), pursuts,26 (28 (Titus 39), the "thoughts of the wike™ Cor. $20), an even “religion” understood as pies (James 1:26) Vanity Sikes all—the world —a soon i thoughts are distracted Dy not recognizing stance as such Dstraction consis, sh a ‘Sense, not in the alienation, but inthe refs of the ber The ‘Norld is allenate! from ts exterior, i aliene from dis tance feller from vanity because i pretends solide 1b) Te fact that vanity sees the worl only ts eneance Into distance implies thatthe world by self cannoe—exeepe in recognizing distance as such (in glosfing, Gy #5 Gif) ‘limpse its own vanity. “That something obo a the san fy ofthe world should bes litle recognized tha people hn ‘tad and surprising to be tod thats foolish to ek pra ‘ness that most cemarkale” (asa 2" uc nota al I eanty sakes the world only in distance, i eacies onl from the =) sole point of view tht bw definition, the world eannot, ats srl produce or even suspect Bydetinition, the arnt lo sure of the world on Hse closes to access yt i Fane bit the sere ssp if ise vanity So that pr die, coe hy ety KE sANple "he lack HT ‘melancholy tha dle te light of the weld, already com tutes tagresson of the world, sketch of an eacess the ‘online of cstnce Hence a justin in reading the Qoheleth ‘ve though that ve were confronting the eificulty of simply conceiving saniy—thit dhe wor in its entiety SU he feome cilake under anor gave Hutte stakes the Qohe leh and of te theoretical nsment that desigpates, cou Bo further since vanity alread” implies qlimpsing distance through one of is poles, sari permis acces fa One Cation immetiaey eatin i de etal sentence, "Wai of ‘ries Alanis sich mars tek wath cal ers and aplicates the wl of the creator pronnnced one cretion 2¢ the openiny oF He: “and Gea se Ha [8 Denil an! gowal™ The stow ustance desea the same world 36 an eas heautl and goed acconting wo whether the gare perce the distance thm one pole ne the ober from the werd, the fang tha pens Ht the excess of stance, the ttaty appease struck be eaity rom the inaccessible point of view of Gf a he extremes of deta, the same work! can eevee the blessing dat cartes it Asst dig (€) Such an ambalence pees ane o specify the situation fron which Qoheeth speaks and where he inaboces whe sees the ork suspendeat hy the breath of sanity only Hosotir a8 he hinnell we siwated ah untenable suspension. The ‘world if 10, and fa ize ot boredom appechrus i, sallers vanity hecane the give of oreo acces to distance wih fot geninely riersing ie hut only Qoheeth—we, there fore experiences horn, becase he experiences distance only in the degree nf his as inaeqacy Fa anther pre which would beable to tiverse itance-—the gize of Gel oreo ne Tener arses the sie that can ne kes no longer wth ants ux prompss orale” Vanity cgalfies the workl ke for the gave that acces distance threboredom, without charity vanity arises from a gue thit ex. ceeds Being being witht et acceding to char gaze that tlscovers the wrk! as being beyond eingeing witht Seving fk Gl. The gave of Qubleth ese tery in distance wathout traversing ike the WoHT wih ‘sanity without covering i with char: Vandy comes from the boredom of mit, not From the hore of GX: for Ck! ee, ad from the ge of charity comes the oxides ofthe gazed at. Boredom designates the suspension ony ofthe human ave beyond Beingbeing, but shor of chart fost as want dey ses the world in ts beng in the absence of ts euaiiction through charity: Qohelth trans ower the wold ze thats ‘one than human but noc yet sine. He enters at the site where charity becomes the requisite of at which is, and ‘where that which is exceeded, thot however Deg or tented in charity The ea ed of an asentlore.the worlds presente! as deserted 10 the gave of horeskm, whe 4 fence to iain charity can potr out ant the sword en ae Iny-—the reverse of charity Ths ste, betwen Heing an che ity is called melancholy S—Melanchotia Melancholy or rather Melancholia, sf me stick wo the tile of famous engraving by Ddver2 Lec us look a i Let us Wk a since I Tooks, al even consists omy aa lok Hea. siting ‘down, his head weighing on his et hand, a map gazes. Nota rman. but an ange, a ls wings indicate, 2 an nevertheless, fofher characterises demande human fniude i betrayed by the siler, which swells a purse at his helt, by the eros of eaves that circles fis forehead a poets, al eve time shown bythe hourglass stusted diet ae his thought and frozen head. Nether ange nor man—cin one imagine UUndoubedy beating la mind the figure of Fee, we envi age the possibility here exemple, ofa gaze, ere idl and icon, that looks everything without seeing anthing. pe ceive cverything without recognizing tel in anna, oF Dpnizing anhing ether than se absence, fe under the seine of melinchols, what presents elas spectacle? Alle vile: Direr displays m the horizon the splendar of lin seape: composed of water nit, city A forest. AN a matt bee complements these inaninate beans bene ricer og ine he oregnunn, These spect hy fot however. capsiate the ve a metal hic, visi does no stop in Them as ts fet vse: Bu Dae, himsel. sugges mre toe seen: al thea men 4 preset the ‘ve. with the sanious ois of the capenter, oF the mason. the pessiat (he mailheone), al so of a mre ye sie time. nomeras, geometrical figures, even compass hl Aer The gave of melancholy ger stops a tem. OF ans xem Finals There remains bern the sete, bey the dats and sciences in shoe, est the demain ofthe finite that hie incites wansyessi of the ine the seal hat cen tral gure of av angel icone gerne), jst betwee the summa te cmp the thst flake that sent inae sks Fadler abe clint ange. ete Fooc the ladle which orersthe dees of things al the world a Eras to promise i tt peri Hee tans sion Wowk the ie of melancholic sell on the ani ‘der on the climactic angel? ven that des at aie to ok it Fuck, What does this ze lok asta, tis ize whose oss tent heaviness hollows the engin bya smperious an crushing center of grit? Fr this gaze gves—Put thon ring a ngs aia, or dhe ats; no hse trays the ‘sle anil ronal specacle inthe direction ofthe sven Where then is at Se? Can ne satin tha ft es he ond te engraving, oF example, on se ery petro engraving? Obsiousty ne BU By this new que, we Ap pce the right answer the gaze of melantvlss stting isl om anyof the beings seed he tame of the engine therefore exits from i ut fu ccton? Nester athe Upper par ihe eaves de angels thease), nor at he fore: round (us. the onlookers), but ar the Ie se of he engravio, aco this eft se pens the avin wr rm ater Pint of vie the ght Tine ges fe of cvs igure foneere onside ofthe engeaiog. Which confined fe the almost he yar tha ate by te Fee ode ene{ng invites a contintion tity 0 of frame, The engraving by is very organization, eefers outside of tself—toward a van ishing point that t does not grasp. And melancholy ares at fothing other than this absent vanishing point [point de {fuel alwence of an «scape, ight Foe any tight te srikes ‘with vanity dhe beings that cacumber and verwhiclan by simply gazing atthe vanishing point—a strange iosance that Constitutes the sibility of melancholy without ell exer ap- pearing and tha, Here, escapes the vise 2 second time: being sited outside of the engraving, whose frame Durer soll and intentionally fixes, OF the beings heze present fac, tele totality and all dir degrees—melancholy discus either the order nor the substance nor de estence: touches ‘oshing in them; beter, its in 90 way interested ip them, since ie does not stop in them. ts gaze merely tarspierces them to ‘ward this point tally exterior to deat bur eat governs thee ‘isle representation and nevertheless misses them duh: 4 ‘anishing point th snot a being a tha, akon here escapes the frame ofthe engraving. The gaze of melancholy Sees being in he wey in which they are ack bythe escape of heir vanishing point hey appear to ¢ a ant ein They 3p pear toi, despite the heavy’ calm by which the engraving i. framed seized by vanity: which the clearing othe upper le ‘comer of the engraving designates pecisely not 362 wd and ‘which exceeds this void el, the igh tom fg. The cage ing lees through the imperceptible fight of beings toward thei vanishing point The world Leaks wanay throug alls beings The world leaks vanity, a being exides horedom MeLanchol, black sun but Durer allows sun sil clear as the day tose, does he not make a bat unfurl he andere on ‘which Melencolia is inscribe? Half ind of nigh, for a ve hhalFangelic, and black. Melancholy srikes with wnt and progresses tothe dere that the gaze perverts what it sees What, then, could lit the advance of melancholy? If melancholy relays the disretion of ‘us by gaps we can presume thar the vanity imparts aso maintains prvleged relation with that se aap ‘Mist comfiemation ofthis comes fron the texts ofthe New Testament In them, vanity ofien recognizes aap 8 its com teary The gral of is njanrion dhe agp’ that is hoe of De heat of geval conscience and of a sincere faith by Tweeter ro his, some have trae nt vain La sce meaty =a berated goa C1 Tam 15-8 ‘Wht aan ks at preske h s e bter s dled, struck wih has Fk pp sot Fase (Acs 14 15), te the tsen Chiat (1 Coe 18 17) one rst see i this the canhrmation of thelr common went tion as ayy! Collowing Ton 48, 16) Hence ave under staal that sanity mi abo agree wit ly ae a the fer inca a Mente ene Gl see Anasler inition comes te corsa this whe esi Jes spuritual sorrel 6 sien! not ere a ei, at precisely before jx hese accomplishment is prohibited eatin open, Set Thomas speaks of acc echoing the abd ote desert Fess se Tes some chara teri of cant hr nll pps Ht tare "Te scr where nie i dpleaseat athe spill goal which ‘ex tof vere, Fangs, molt spel Wie, hate exer ‘ee, bur soerow hv ee Divine goon aut which chaste foie |e gun hurts ade. belongs aspect vce, which Ise! sloth jaca) Sadness, shh reuse good at ‘Snot onl spin, but sre divine, needs thing es thn iunty to contradic it The superna bored th tars the sptual avo the poe ence takes a fom char ity. shich alone n etn, can estore fo soni Ie finale Becomes possible ty intext an limite, mone commen contimtion ofthe elation of ented Some times we in fice experience vanity gress direct peopomion torlove Lot ex uke the hypotfesis—less unrest than pears ofa love that ts repeal ae mach et extreme lose and aseoer nyse lvel in rea th cases wh al the sate excess Ty poles ate defined in a relation tat polarizes not ons the partners bu their whe envionment it the extreme lini. the polrizatin wel define x word where eth term woul ie determines no for al ysl tbe reltin to thet poles, and the ata hat ie maa ttaw exeresses ey the wel Sa tion as at BeaFirst variation: hat ove Is lacking, for me wh lows. therefore reciprocal polarization i suspended, exen for an in sant, even if foe an eanocuous motive, nothing less than the Cente world is immediatly aed completely steack wah vanity the disconnection of the polarizing relation suspen x only its two terms fut ako and expect all the her tems. The suspension of love also affects that which love iself does not 2c, at leas forte one who Tones The ee wn Hanes sees the world only through te absence of what he hoes, a ths absence, for hie boundless, lows back on the entire world: iF 8 single person slacking, all wil ll back ino vanity Fo the ‘world, as opposed to the one love, has nat disappeared ite ‘mains presen, here and now: in no way dos the disippeae: lance ofthe loved one make the world disappear; ut this appearance nevenheless srkes the appeaeance of the world ‘oth vanity: What marvel can sl be fon in he fat that hein, {in gener (he world) when wha one loses no more, and when this elf could not he expressed by the nae hein? ‘The disappearance of what ane lowes shaters a double cer- tainty: hit the world i oes no marvel in sl, al that the Toed one isnot be loved insofar ashe or she is The pts thatthe world which ig,does nor hecome more lsabe or tat reason—on the contrary. And the loved one, sho is Pe ooger, ‘oes noe become les levale fr tha eeasor on the contrary “That which i,t does not receive love, 46 a6 AM were nD ssl that whic isnot, seve polarize vas if were: the indiference to determination accoeing (0 ceo ier tence reappects a8 the responsinity of hve, 38 Defore tas the responsibility ofthe divine agape tn this station, where vanity strikes the world as such hecauce one of ts poles of po Tarieation Lacking there nothing more resonate than the insanity of strifcing all that 1s Cheung nt oat) foe tha ‘which is nor (the sen ved ane) the insanity in fact ems from the ontological illusion that would he a question of sc riicing being for oneing, whereas forthe one whe Toes, Is only @ question of exchanging that which knows nothing about love foe that which lesan is oT ve the woe which serpy of love, fr tat which snot hur belongs othe domain of fove—there is nosing mre eeasonable and ‘even adanagonns Jl no donb sca wager woud Have te undersnx! in dhs son the huss othe heterogeney fof the thind onder tte is (8 This tein fs never tess spent an objection: ey trikes that which fon nase the lene eee oer poke. tH wl su tice shar ithe der thar al boing shoskl be separated re sant and ence ay Hos forth nots mich oe lark of he Toxe ofthe ewstone than, more snp for ak fits presece Frere and ne sais. at, is amen (othe beige of Pings nto foe, Tet us go hac, then, omer to test eke objection to the secon eriation, What etme of the wd, the polarize tion herween those who lowe (one another) eaches its pesect and constant reciprocity? Aor to the objection, any struck the world ony because of the abeence ofthe feat hein sanity resale fran a oti absence Here here emo totic amen the Too pk of ene ae, ee and ome What Fens th ein wi the rest of the worl hn fac til an ceil sere the blow of any nel spy ease insur fm vanity Noho a parcular beautul aneape supports hes peclae charm particular ae of kes othe paricuaehelinne of a peine, particular moment of ‘music, a purticuby elegance of cess or dwelling but these marvels fre: ne fay chance sna then to 2 momentary rest place, thelr gathered splendors never ‘would have heen able to price the least movement ke Apparently thei intrinsic heat: separates then fo vay in ft, they escape onlin the strict sense that the foe they dress conescens t he cha! by them one, out of pure benevolence, Venice homes beautiful ony becase one loves there, al nee the inverse despite appearances, ned! exer since Mile, cena eal Nenice, the heat of the stones and of the sites sill elongs to the domain of trath hence of heingnens—efine lene, receives the dull ow of ‘anit of escapes only by pute grace of association. Le sakes the work with vandy al ndillerence tits tues — ic isan exriaie vanity: in the same wee it rouches certain ‘eins wih a prace st as extinse: acon thi aso cates wih fs inoommcnsiraie action the ont trvbeings the cobblestone that one passes, a cls sleigh, an in vented proper name, the being matters litle. provided tha ‘stem from love to which, in any exe till remin frei, Vanity covers as much what love includes in ss exclusionsy logic a what is excluded by this same lve. The diference des ‘not at al pass between beings and nonheings, or eves erween those who indeed wish in join the polarization of oe, a he others passes tween lve aself nd the work being by fs. Vanity, which follows and zedoubles love as its sake has no oxher funtion, a log as agape has not recapitulate ‘everything under a single author, to mark his nr ent cliference ‘Only Tove does not have tobe. And GM loves witht being ne [5] OF THE EUCHARISTIC SITE OF THEOLOGY Theology can eal autora deo Aojgeal status only i does nee cease 49 Freak with al whey Or yey, iit cas tu speak of God. ater of that Gish strikes ont and cnsses out every ie ‘Mo, sensible or eoncepnial, sf hereore laine ea speak GML in Such a ay that thisaf is undersod a mach a the rig fot the discourse a6 ts abject (Fo Sa objcr, since Gil ean never seewe 38a ‘object, expecially npr fp theology. except Jn dsiguiseat laspheniy, following the axiom that only "Goel Gan we spel o Goa! a finaly tis Sietty nconce able Gif, svuleaneoasty speaking and spoken, gives hin av the Word, 3s the ‘Word given even athe slearsnmediacy radonedt esh—then there is nating fone stable thi that this theology shoul expene a logic to the repereus ‘sons, within ofthe tes et tt Bes ia ‘what, in fet, does theolegy—Chstian hcology—sm? Fr in the enh isin sass clhrssian theology from exes fer does no sem from a singularity of meaning fas dexisive a8 one wld like) Inst from at preeisehe suhoizes his‘eminent singularity, namely, the very pesition given to mean ing, to is statement, and to us referent. Chistian theology speaks of Chest. But Chris calls hive the Wor He does ot speak words inspite By GMa concerning Gd, bute ala ishes in himself the gap hetween the speaker who sates (prophet or scribe) an the sig (speech or tex) aolises this fist gap only an abolishing 4 seco, more Ramer sp, ius, men: the gap between the sign and the eee ta short, Christ does not say dhe word, he ss nse dhe Wed He says himself—the Word! Worl, because be is kl and prof fered through anid through. AS in him coinckde—or eather commune—the sign, the locutor, and the referent that else ‘where the human experience of langage iremedahly dso ‘ates fe mes, contrary to our shatered sping oF eal ued words, tobe sid, wath a capital, the Word Ty say that he sys himself the Word already eta thr we site for this he says himsel” already moans to say—the Worl He says himself, and nothing ese, for povhing eke rena toe Sak outside of this saying of the std, saying ofthe sal ste pe excellence, since profered by the si ayia short the lic ofthe Said Hei aid and all shal accomplishes this word that performs, in speaking. dhe statement that “he ‘Word pitched it tent among us (Jolin 1 4), because soshing to-do, ere, other dan to sy [bse] That he should sy [hime] and al is accomplished, Th he shoul Say [himself], ad all sid. He only has to say hime} in order to do, Hete, he des not eer ise ansting 9 a ‘order to sy everything, since he incarates the cin saving it ‘ho soc said than done. And hence de Wen the Sal, aly ut he ets Pe eh es pele feACTi noanswee” (Jota 1919 ~ Luke 239) Andsobe des by letng be api, andl oe sag hy letting he dane, Soe He sys all ified (John 1930). The Koa does noe say itself] as Word, of beter Sys [isl |—Word!—onl by lenin bye said: which one can understand in a double cense. The Word, as Said of God, no man ean heae oe understand ade ‘quately so thatthe more mea her hia speak des ow words, the less their understanding grasps wa the said wos never theless say a clea a da In retain, mien canoe ender tthe — 0 ‘Word she homage of an adeuate denomination if they can by exweptinal-grace—sometimes cnfess im as Son of Goa ther de not aang (or eer wall mange) 49 shi as he says hinwel The Wiel ots na tongue, sce he tranggresces language Tsell sccing tit, Worl in ests a Frame, the pen as SOAS ake, sgn, an eter The efeves, whieh hee Becomes toca, een Hf he speaks four wos, not said then according to our manner speaking. He profes himself in them, hut not ecase he sys ‘hem he pars himself in them because he exposes himself in them al exposes hice less as one exposes anpinkon prac once danger Rea Tl Ta spething eur word the Word nean unfurling of divinity: fr iis nox question here ist of 2 thought bur ofa referent, in sh ad bine, f the Wi whose incarnation occupies and teansgreses at voce the order of speech and of meaning. No human tonic can sy the Said of Gya. For to sa i, One mst speak ac Te alone speaks. with exousa (Mark 122, et), with tha sovereign freedom, whose (super) natural ascenwlanc inpresses all 36 an omnipatence 0 feat hart only has to spe in order to he amie. The, ‘Word sis itsel, a tggefore heonmes unspeakable to, labile ‘nha of out babble labs our abhi neversnekess as ‘referent. The Word, as Son, receives fom the Father the mar date and the injunction (eol8) wo say; bur, when he becomes the locuor, thie message ale coincides ether (oF pre ‘iseys not otherwise) with that message wich the paternal Tocution termlly realizes him 2s Words such that he can te sitimaely transfer, in the very act of his sitement the Incarmation-—not only the mesage spoken by hie, butte speaker who, with and before him, speaks Wt, hi, dhe uaspeake able Suid, as such—trduan De. When he speaks the words of the Father he kes hel be spoken Bye Fae ss Wok Ths te Word aida ite sat rom he Father and in retzn tothe Father This very tanserence deste he Spit. Or rather the Sprit kes the run a speak inorder to lsigate thstansference of the sper Jesus) he in {ie tex of te avin wl 3s tha of whieh the Spt ay ofersthe referent vole came fom heaven: lone You Sand 1 wil glory you" Cohn 1228) the woe where Spe Speaks (atte Bupa, Ma 3.16) he name of the Father {tanstiguation, Mark 9:7) who speaks he Son as Such. In ‘ther words: [hod this one a ay preerte son in whom | proor myselte prerd he, of al the per 1 peer Becaue he prefers to prfer me rer than Ninel Pre fered, profere the Word, beloved Son, The Woes self be sid by the Father—in the Spin Ut consis, ina sense, ‘aly hissy athe es wld the wil i the Father STs appears the Sud ofthe ane he Word sem tbe the Su wen he appeags the Son ofthe Father Sd the Be ther the Word proered the hrcath ofthe paternal wie, breath, Spin Upon the Cros, dhe Father eg ach the Wira—since they expire dhe same Spirit The Trinity res pies rm being ble ws breathe amen (OF sich Word of sich 8 foo. discourse becomes lei: sate hence posi. only i irrecess sd means the re percussion of Ma itt clans real Ta as ts Che Tinie henleg mst e conceive asa oes ofthe ee two of the Wot sao she Sak-—where. ta be se. every doteine of injec ever theory of dscouTse, ever sentie fepinerlge mst let self he seedy the exene s reubing in capa inmate and anterior nance: Kes nt Simp question of making 2 concession, for exile, a -miting tha. given the eve of Che, certain conditions of lin suisies, of hermeneutics, and of dhe methods of uma si feces ite to tndengo a few mexhications, even excepeions For ere, the Wont arises srt ofthe fief posse ects for gen met: one a wel ten Gt eu, oe canara) to de “ibevlies of lau of niece of pe ress of the mile ashe onan where tn te complement ofthe un changes bur ae cout 0% oa “aneolg ofthe Word” hecause i logos pretenal to precede the Fees this gos blasphemes the Word (GH. On the Said th es self he iat bythe Father can assite the pest rence ofr foyos concerning lm, in reaebingaa t Tet ise he sass I the Word mak Mesh, wnspekleand silent, Theo os cera a man dogs where man oes rot maser nyse but nist et himset be gene by & (ieidegter Fo aon. the onl ogee me that ets self be st eraining human Jogos more than exee—Dv the fo gos To da thevg is ot speak he langage of pol ‘God, butt ler the Worl peak us (or make vs spe) in seta a sik of ail Wo OME "Recee the sn Hatin, inwhich we ers Ab. Fer" (Mam. RS), Nw then, pray thys: Our Rather wham in eawen (Mt, 691! Theo foges that assures its pertinence conceeniog Ck to the S146 ddgrve that lets the Fags bes in el gos self une so (srl: hear as he he alone ca et hel es perfects y the Eater for wr onder ta Sy GG one Fs Tee enesc fe said I i ro the ita thi Ue a don Gil ck in nar spoceh fas ine wlohe Wordsounded the unspeakable Word of his Father. is nor a ques: tion for the “theologian,” of reaching tha which his elscourse Speiks (ell or poorly—ahur does i finale miter. for what ‘orn inthis world wold ceil?) of Gif ut of aandoning, his discourse and ever linguist nite to the Wor, der to lt himsell be said by the Wor, asthe Word ets himself be sid by the Father—him, ana hin, us also tn shot. our Tanguage mill be able to speak of Gd cn tothe degre that {Gi in bis Word, wall speak our Late aa each ws 4 the ‘end speak tas he speaks it—divine; which means in allabandon. In short, i a question of leaning o speak our Tangsge wich the agents eu the aecent of the Wor speak ing it For the Word, hy speaking or words, whic he says ‘wordor-word, without changing anything them (not ta Mate 518), takes us at our word, itera since e speaks what ‘ne speak, but wih an orice ferent accent, he promises ws ‘he challenge, and ges us de means 1 ake toto speak ‘out Bordo word wath is accent the accent of a GL Te theologian lets bine say (or be si hp) the Word, ot eer les the Word fet him speak human Language in ve way that {Gy speaks iin his Word 2—The Foreclosed Event “This poston secured becomes posible i inservee in the debate that defines, not theology. atleast he function ofthe ‘theologian, On what does Chrtsian theology hear? On the ‘event of the death and resverection of Jesus, the Chris. Hone thes tis event, separate rom os by the course ink an documentary dtance, occur to? Rocks 1 us though 2 ‘word spoken by a man, fides ex audi? What does this word Sy? Inevtail ransmits a text: tha fee origina hers, in sating i or by allsion, o ese by deploying ts eimensions following the complete New Testament. 19 any case, the an rouncement makes use ofa text in order 0 ell an eves. The ror des ak tems the tet, Dutra, through the text the event The text doesnot atl onde with fhe event at rst consign the traces oF 28 the wel of Vere eats the feature of Christ by capa persion ofthe eve tha ta a spires The evant texts i eran the eles of mening ioscan nsec pn The ice he ants tele nae a those ince dst em thie ent pet tat goeond wae ees fn he Sa ed Aye en es ere ei icine tte steno ee te tn tate rece Tiana tar nf Eyton oe ex cous has crc ik ern en ha ‘Beith eye neal mein he Ree ti thee ah Fenny ont se seh thea confer illo monn the ar yt ke ene he enon ime inet ase peor he Semantic Ore gn thee eran wo alae a Saher evn bnyr am he es ey hee imeees rsa sec al rome ne ih evel The pls ol oe terete ri econ amour TP Certegy fie Spee eee feces ie ae ean eee Te gro air esto seen te aon ee meth; ss things jy Berge he seo te eth oper al ena ee {ietansetacnnee kg he hee dees Savi cinms tina We, Sean ome eus eeeis not meet), which amounts the seme thing faany 3s, literature dispenses with having recourse to an event in over to hind ts referent in tha event story ay regan the reeren publishes an abolished tex, or ether paises the text of 3 holished teferent at which one aims to the very ett tha remains forever abolished, undone. AS to poetry, alone pa ‘okes, ino prices, ts referent by a pire ad simple text the very emotion tha he ltr causes ins, immanent, His referent, in sense, does nt consutute one ‘Theology alone remains, cles to el the only lag ne ‘therefore mast open up acess to the relerent: but this eer fen consists inthe past death and eestrection of Jews, the (Chest the Easter that was—it ssaid-—aetual as ap event of histor, by the very fact ofthis undone Fit, is aecomnplished, hidden away and foreclose ini: dhe text caves the trace OL foreclosed event bur no longer opens any access The eo finement oft text precect this finite even, inaccessible refer tent. Would we be deprived of te event by the wey sgn that refers toi Would the theological discourse culminate in the repetition ofthe irefutable? Let ws noe solve eo el; by whatever clever move, this closure which elosesthenlogieal ‘iscaurse, but also meaning upon tell. For whereas.no dou, cevery other discourse can adap 10 the clexute af m ‘whence the referent i exile, the thologieal disor proceeds roman event and only announces the indelin fttion off alone cannot do So fut, such access the fin Shed event, such aim and ison of the referent—bow ake We to recognize in them moce than pious wishes? But a wish that remains “pious” hay has nothing pious sour ion hat ‘which would accomplish is cuty wih respect to ve cvine ‘would become pious founders instr tthe level of blaspems Tt this ips, in which the suppssedly theologies ‘course simplicted, ests fom what that discourse Wants 60 reproduce, concering the Logos conte fe ou wo it guste device that the Zagas oxertens wo the bene of ancther ‘evice, this hme theologial, one that iin effect explicit the episode told about the disciples at Emaaus (Lake 2413 49). The Paschal ewer is aevomplshed, the Paschal com pment Is excured ke 241%, te genome = Jin TO on 6p tela ee cp for two knees othe present_ Once hing happen thee ean cr wen for here ema he ea te Now totam, st fr he ce he eed nl the rim ose the chlo the pn death {thie 211 ffenestr clon. ea tones th exon rer ck, We cant Tea he Cale fk fa tha wht nsec ins pe thc hecnne fermen eoukl eer Bra Ba tuner thin cui wheres we dese the eer in is vey ser Whun th dices nerpoet ha sh of he cent hei cet irpetaton cn reac one mea ity mca an Cpe een, wine vise conte oranconese des me even Become enisgele tem her ewe ene hep feign ake 240), taper nw eens ete te Ph ent tha the etre sn puro eles Le a ais the tein cary ct oy is a ten Aha ater ements speak Iypases sta frombesontanTpaseron tse The eer sl ser preted inten fern ons towel fssns ates) {prea and went wom. and chinsl nto) sea tie © alge sen al sh hea ee al thatthe prt sk thc Ct have sata ese things erin ie plory? Av inn mth Mees Bef, he cased ot he ermenet Keyh n Bie Spr of wha eocerne in rene erhonatn ke 2018.25 1 deem Pana eset cane eal exe (OME Testament rom slesofthe sets) ony text elf rece a ae inerrant hat In ag wl e able de jane refer than) ext an hina een? Whe there ld eve “unineligen? “Onl ke HEH) he wh ese hrm Ww al know a fa be das not nna spent know he Ker fon what he ier Throws 5% He knows anf and Fc bs ad Ber Hees at he teers esse eso Tet Cn speak e re‘cause he remains outside the text, dhe referent (onspeakable Word), teansgresses the text to interpret ito us, as an ner preter authorized by his fal authonty (eyonsta) ess explain Ing the text than explaining himself with t explaining himself through it he goes right through, sometimes locus. some times referer, saying and stdin sor sky he tohd Hence a fis principe forthe rer tobe sre, be pr ceeds to a hermeneutic ofthe bili ext hat des nt aim at the text but, through the text athe event. he referent The ext ‘does not offer the original of at, because daes rot eons tutes origin. Only the Word can give an authorized interpre tation of the words (writen or spoken) “soncerning hin Hence the human #gologian eins © mest his mame oly If hae imitates “the theologlan superior to him, our Savion” in teansgressing the text by the text, as far as tothe Word. Other ‘wise the tet becomes an obstacle wo the comprehension of the ‘Word: ust the Old Testament foe the disciples 5, fF us, he ‘New In developing etter indefinitely commcated es Be tel, the text sles the Word hil 16 the muscers 17 the sribes of he elsuicient text wo condemn the Word— forall time. "Some cause rouble a fe sere Fettoducing 8 foreign God added by a fraud of writing (paregerapton and bale excessively ove the eter; may they Know: may they fear there where there is no place to Fear (ms 145), bea their Love ofthe Teer i but the mask of thei mpiet™* They refuse the divinity of the Sprit which, proclaiming ale the livin’ of the Word, assures he tansession ofthe text. Such transgression, which the Verb cartes out person at Emma, fers nevertheless the unigae possibilty not of 2 spiel feading hut of any reading the Serpe wegen, ed Of the sole acces to an orignary word. "The sell Hie Tnamely fom the prophecies) as on 3s yo mone forward the Logd; thus & nonwisdor (nsapieni) lifted, when you ‘move forecrd to the Lond, aa what was water hecomes Wine Do you read the books ofthe prophets wathout heaeing Chris? ‘whut could be more insipid mone extravagant f 9 hear Chis in them, not ols do you savor what you rea, ut yx are elated by liking sor spirit out of your Dal Torgetting. ‘shat is bein you, no Tonge 1 sain ur toad what be i fone! (Philippa 3:13)" Even and especially the hermene: tic f the Dibba ex, ae ast ely lesson he erly the Fete, han othe posers he Lol a i jstce aloe We should be understood. a fs precisely nea mane bese a sy pe Ti ls (whic sick the eter). oF of Tabet, “pita ana, bt this pnp: he tex esl, fours dt consi i fom ‘Word amon us: dhe simple comprehension ofthe text the) function oF the theologian —rexpires infinitely more than is eg formed as ne wr like equires.acess 0 the ‘Wor outa tf the pone owe of ts iF Meng ofsdeselhe Wor This ree rent, as untenable 26 me apc (ad remains, en he anviled The proof thar a ong asthe Word does nat come person (0 inerpret tthe dscples the texts of the prophets Aan even the chronicle ofthe things exw ot, Lake 24 77) at Tensile, this dhuhle text renstins unintelligible srt they eompretend nothing of Wt (ano take 2629) they ck fo se wh evket Che 2417). Pe deg md > Devon the text tthe Word ntepreing fom the post of ew ofthe Word 3—The Bucharistie Hermeneutic Thome wail bi xs this principle nt ead at al odie Sous presuanyion, sity a lian of tterretaion whic asks nan take the place an postion of the Wed himsell? Do we nor even open the fie eval the ratalist interprets tions of Sergey mie an the nme oF the Wot his laced tou eins? There bs mere ype th te ‘Word an person sl cary ut eu ie ese the here neatic of the words, we hefuse exact a the disciples fn Emmaus. Rien der the selfroferential hermencutk of the texts by the Won, we remain equally Blind, unintelligent. The this sole heemeneutic shoud! he relied oF not that we slioald be onthe path ward Ennis onthe wah che end ‘ofthe second millennia Hially matters le eee rneutic coukl open waar eves ty see the exegete ofthe ater ‘Gos 1-9), This objection eas a cematk cris the a‘account of Luke 24, which expressly informs that Christ “car ried out the hermeneutic” ofthe text, daes noe recount thea ‘gument tous, ora fortior the developments of tat argument ‘Oversight? This hyperbesi, passa common, des not ho since the whole account ims ata hermenete ha my renwler the Word visible inthe Ilical text. How this toe under ‘Sood? An absolute hermeneutic is announced. a rt ely its absence, hire Famed it disappears tothe Benet of the eicharistic moment (ke 2428-33), Does not such an abrape transition from the hermeneutic to te Eucharist admit the impesiilty ofthe foe mer? No doubt, but only if, following a serious prejudice of feading one cstnguishes hee, as boteen 80 of Crs ete andthe Eucharist. Ouberwise, an i present self the hermeneutic lesson appears truncited, even absent, onl fone takes to he fer. tent from the Eacharsic celebration where recognition takes place for immediately after dhe breaking fhe brea oe oly tid dhe disciples “recognire im” an! a lattes eyes were ‘opened (Luke 2431), but above all the hermenentic went through the text as ft as the referent “and they said 0 one another di not our hears bur win us, when e was see fing along the way, when he opened tous llowed us to com ‘municte with] dhe text ofthe Seripnures? "(Luke 2432), The Eucharist accomplishes, a6 central moment. he herent tie (ivoccurs at 2430, halfway erseen the ray mentions ofthe Sevpaures, 2427 and 2432) Tealone allows the tex to pass to its referent, recognized as the nontextal Word of the words ‘Why? We kriow why: becuse the Word interprets in person, Yes, but where? Not fie athe point where the Won seas of the Scriptures, about the text (2427-28), ur at ee point where hie profes the unspeakable speech, absolutely fill to the Fs ther—"aking bread, he give thanks. (2440) The Word i tervenes in person in the Euchars. (in person, because only then des he manifest and perform his ilaion 0 accomplish inthis way the hermeneutic Toe Eucharist lone complewsth hermencutic he hermeneutic culminates nthe chars ‘one asites the other is contin of posit: the interven tion in person ofthe feforent of dhe text a center ofits mean — 150 ing. of the We, outside of the words, to reappropriate them | Ae inet anh concerts hin ft Benen (2427) TE the Bal fervent npsen natie cuca omen ‘Deberoenetc tie faked Megs wl ake la tee splenic Theis nape he tna tos es noah the ten fr te fc ip of va he a ee fssuppertand the norm ha spares lithe elon seams THE e- hisheemencute~the ene dit Reser though the text oa the Woreevet Si the eof the ‘Wonbinerprter-—aly In te Forks where the Word ern, soy speaks Messe pk the extent at he Brows ‘eee oe pc the hk pace he uchana he fora Hermenenek Ofer tell place athe ery eo IE ration yh csp, te Win fet depress or courage ego me” (bin 1 Poe ‘ut sot he Won eee ope ecpze ae According othe Spr, shold fected ate where te ing del who ie acco coe Sp, Ns ow cee fromm the Father Unc the Word, tthe evhare omen, thes ent cappcir so mich ave dite, who eating Wi teal aa drink is Hn, dene hemlet tothe one % Mine do tt appear Urs co aera Ty Thee fehes Fae is Pia, erally san ath tha learmnere "They eer im the place fhe a and tum ike hn they jp afer ke 2439 = Man Tech Ths pacer cd nthe Woe open ora sole eran, AREA Kir he wo ile oak tp to Fees oko are cachet hermeneet that ‘ey hive jt experienced and w neon ie ey ewe rectal [hl ihe excess exer] the digs that hap ened othe way al oe es ecg the he Treaking othe real” Cke 2434 To athe euch he. trent rep fo te steve lea new a te tga new nna of he eal ene to prion tis tr, ea aniline Cana ere seretory) confirmation: “While they said these things, he himself ‘Nood among. them” (luke 2437) 10 give dhe Spe, an 0 be Tepeated a absolute Word. "es" abo "Tam me. eo ‘imi ettes (lake 2438-39), The ifleis.cloed the hese etic presupposes that the aseiples oecupy dhe evans The of the Wor, but their bermeneurc, 4 rer, passes Trough eN@ey Test and all speech, ow, aan, she ssolue eerent (Lar lake 2439 = John 424 and $8 = Exodus ‘ih. The Chrsan ascembly that celebrates the Eucharist un eis reprntaces this hermeneutic ste of Holey Fest the ven the propets, the fa, she writings, all ofthe OW Tes tment (asin Lake 2427), den the fg othe Christ (8 Uke 2417 foot dopayed in 2418-24, through 2 srt of hy pothetiedl kerygma, hypothcate fy death). 1 8 rea before fe asembly that, Hhelogica negative asks hata ere cuit allt to Gompreiendl not words, but the Word, Then the heemeneuvie: the priew who presides over she Bucharist tro hy “carrying out the hermeneutic (aan Lake 2427.0 the tenty wathout the comunity yer stinging hi he ‘Word in person (ike the disciples) he hermeneutic that the pomily verbally exgeateshencefon the Werary mow par xcelence of tx tological dicourse=yimust he ac ‘lined inthe cucharstie rife Where dhe Won, sishly aon Takes hums recognize! i the Deakin of de brea, char” (leery te pies as bis perso, ancl assmiates 0 hinwsel those who asimiace him Fly the communi hears the ext verbally passes through ian the direction ofthe referent ‘Mord, because the carnal Wont comes to the commanty and the community into him. The coamurity therefore iterprets the tea in sew of referent nt the src ese that Tes elf be called getter an asia, ence converte iad sneepreted by the Word, sacramental and therefore a diy acting inthe common. Herenentic ofthe text by tbe ‘Community, to be sre, hanks tothe service ofthe theta, fat on coouitn that the camimuinay tele snerpreted by the Word and asinilte! othe place where thoi iter pretation ean be exercise, thanks to the bral serve of the theologen par excellence the Bish. 4 —whereot We Speak This comput devi, whi we oul dese and contin ina uma of rest te oi concept easement he sgn, nother these Bs yg yg meres the heemenentic a He wot ih blew hence ao fa te point of sew ofthe Woe the Ei hnstfers the oncureet hermenedte ste where the Word fam be satin person ithe essing if tne on he cele Inne recedes thio end the Wor a a he Won ects he ane fn inet nneste the eran Gini, hen ae nist coche tha oy hehe mers. the fl serve the ile gay Ts jppeiion a pear paralonc ut athe risk of snping. we st et fon atthe Teaching of the Wont charaverines the apes {hence thax wn loi theeplace ade the pres tng he Faces the cone te ete the fers {erly marks saan Fact gestion ee me: Wa Ineyesng he cas he eet 4 a {he thelial ste: he Wo in perenN donb he ft ofthe dole bermenicute ane deat tithe same wat thi he hishop delegates to the simp pk the function of preity ener the Kuchar An Rt pes ‘who Freaks hs crmmunion with the bishop ca a longer ter int eccestical communion, sa teat who speaks ethos csc agin the Som athe apse. shout, ese aga, his bishop, absolve ens fonger carry is ds couse nan anil aa Eero hs pee tie, pe cot arid eonsiceving ever tempt eta ther at sce te at Teast very rode, en the lei seers ea hese Fey the fet te lemwonstraghe igre dubeess hs hed more pertinence here than in pilexophr this epitemologieal ‘mutacin proms. ce egies, the loosening of the eo del «pation between He ish shea pe excel his teaching anc, who ass al natty Deh fo post ne histelpcrlence. hence fins a possible stan faa asin hort deta nese fan he sep eeset "tnecogi science” an “oe tha ally ete ae tah ihe exhaue ee heme ase of sting eat ie a aa he tr heen sev he oe nate ety ane ae ce Oe eat nt ce fon sw” ex nay il msn ie sea naar che tine Pc pe cet one ee, bei whe en he Merete een commun ay 8 nl Be See ee ati numer Bn he sea ne aren lng the bop esse neni he it hase oor ste" Be Pete Che een ese a tks exer oz tyme ime Te vo of et a am arora o tet del atch thee vy arepessm Me errs oon pare as arti ures acd ny athe Tainan 1 Cor 1 pun) The tela a ee ules he sees car heh Pe oe eee more caer nix el he aoe tae opened ys hema Neen DE seotaan nd an ere vege the esky cs ot not wat cle tn ean sects blrtmat lipesexeal fede cea agent ets Ba ea een, eae he ame ces i ctu st tthe aac ncmanetle bs thous ee he a me cout of a aon se he ejemplo seta one feed tk bomen erty i Fett she ea rt caesar tb tm ool dln, whch 9 ax a ere er ang the ese ee referent, he mus have an anticipated understanding ofthe re fecent, for lke which he will at be able to spat its eee of meaning the West There are mans exegetes or thee ‘vo commit msi misinterpetatons of texts lial or Tri) noe For want of kool, but out of grace of ha in qpuestnn, ofthe ding sell He sha nese kre passion ‘Gun with precision anateae a scene fro ine He Stee Ceansot neers from the point of view of 16 athor— orton he Song ot Songs or exe Hea Col which many com tates sem thick even hse sense) He who never Fea an orchestra sound ean ined decipher a musical score he cannot hear or understand fas the musician composed tn Istenng 10 stents forion the Baim othe Gospels concerning which many commentators sometimes seem #0 Thor they wre alas destined for paver He who clams terse ese the text fe a the Wort muse thereto ko here he speaks to ks hy experience, chant shor, oe Kee fo whut he sere” (Heb, 58) ke Ch hss, according 49 Denys the Asie the divine Hieneteus "either he rece them fom the holy thestans fe con sidered them atthe en of asckenticivestenion ofthe ea rest of Scripture] atthe price of ng rtning and exercises oF Hnally he hale nested into them by 2 more divine ine ration he did not lean things of God alee than dhecugh ‘what he steed, ary this mista compassion cowed them, Fhe was el othe perferion of mst unin and Ea, which, Ione mighe sy are noe tae" To go sou the ext of the Fog onder. thr psn, to receive the Ksson of charity Cin the sense thi to rveine agora hese lcs ut oe sure ou train here the qualification, extrascn tic hut eset, hat makes the oon He rere mk aug, since te encountered by mystical union A! ye one must speak of hin. Wil dis mystical experience the moray fo private vires of the theologian are not Hist a stake, But hoe al is competence aquired in the mater of cae Short of nosing the Word rxnverbaly nls ane Bucharst (Ont seein person kev were be ods ten ‘nt ue at eDiets nes reborn be es 1sAs forthe res es but a question of vision, of otelizene, of labor and oftlent—as elsewhere, ute simply ‘5—The Delay to Interpretation fects acon nae The foci euchnior pun prey er te the up om ete (swore fo he wos ieej eed nhs op the upekae Wd stratescach te sm of ee th th ate he ae of te eens to spelen heen tl nso Sistah okes on spn mei. The tex, here the fons fet of meni xe nea ss cons the Weeiscemsabigy ef he Word the sri thin exceed Se ttne (jun 0,214) Thee scape Oneal {Oped by the Word o air, sais the "beta fume yah ac ee, an he se Sapa: pusesip for he ext ao be cer ose set by moter oncaeid seseb tags Hence acon of nine et compe he Cinta ae enon noi Fe he NEE lane meaning) ors, pteitall a inte reserve re hg ne pee ie eer uchart hee. i ny of merpctaons, mich, cach ove fe ogc heft bck to he Wor knee pon of Se ethe Word heee tangles an fin fea bt Pers Tol ean pores hi so he ee yah Mod andi ex appt en nce and erate holy dete niin Feature he eS mpl tmpesable and ung the tarwexta {Gelaton ofthe Wor nds ofa dc ie pokaton of ‘Sew thology con? na new wa fag cran sods irate Seeate back he Wan erection en uum me ene than by Seto ns bye thor Gripe Spr tr aranges eee comma n weet Seay epee pen gun othe a elena ete he Wo erp orn {to this relation. Coinciding, with this new persona, the com- munity fence aso the theology dale Ai the bishop) realizes a new dimension of the orginal event thas accomplishing new hermeneutic of some wel, iain ew hele: This endless fee depen an the poser cof the Spt thar gies ise Ho the euchariie idks Chere Toe eve cam be ne "progress of theo without a deepen ingofthe eucharistic estre, which fs contrmes bythe fas) theca feelers belore tis writen —hecse “belo a ings an particularly before shel, one mus en by praner* In one to ean Gone) hermencatie ofthe i ne) extn ew ofthe Gite) Woe a nny of sitions are mobilize fran the point of view of the Word, hence an infinity of Fale, celebrated by an infinity of diferent com: munities. each of whic Keds a Ragen of he words ak the the ewer deguee Haacach ane ropes ant wel comes euchariiealy he oa sn person, The multiple of theologies it hese lead eucetialy ment algal sas ens 36 neces ren the weal dati of the Word as des nino Euhariss And te theo contradict one anthers litle as do the Fuchariss—and al a rch, hah nether sen short, he “progres thee works onl 1 orercome te nredicthe delay of te eucharistic inwerpretarion ofthe tex i roe to the manifestation ofthe Word Av despite all our “reliratons” no they will ever be able tv attain the first Parousa by an adequate extension of the tee to the referent oe tt nothing less than a second a fousia of the Ward saul he necessary this way the in Uetinieness of ou new inept (Theologis) also (an especial indicates our tnpetenice tener nt a auhent tally eucharistic eschatlgical—site. Thole like laurel Bicol. ete tesfies less creat thar. nig he onal rept the IH the vente dhe "recapitulation fo the unique ‘ouster, the Christ (Eph. 10). Newemeless, time eispenses with putin, so that ur Fuchs a ntenpec went i teeruptin oes the wr new an the Pass ofthe Wort he etre, Hence an imate consequence The theo faneiooes not costtue, athe Church, an exception the i deal of ts foundation: "here hasbeen given tore al ene in bemen and on eur, Go teaching a ents. teach themto hepa ht have commanded yoo, andre that 1:Yam was you athe days end tie” (Ma 24 18 20) Alls ven sa the Church spe: the tans ine dae ‘y) so tat the Chore may eetarn (keep the command mens tote Wor eau he already reer al (ernst) from the Father, nec His nt «esto, ay moe elsewhere o working toa completion yet on tin, forthe Church, is accomplished deine a Ext, hence atthe origin eres, John 1928 = 13.1 Accomp ‘ment orc atthe origin and morose alone Sle eile peeant with afar To speak research, of dncovery in theology citer fice or bettas a rial anorance of dh cocci theology Ube Bally most be undeste r sway, not Ua theology progres npn Nee ike ‘ery thee discourse, but inthe sen tht oly pores feucharsically a community which aecomplisies fs own ex theo he tet, to the Worn sho hol cam not ait aay ter progres a Hs on eosin the Word the theologian an becoming sep oc ce one othe ooe believers, the common Eucharist ice ll gen remains to inthe expectation that the Sot el sod ome again 10 sa i Thus understeed, deolowal progress ‘would indicate lesan undetermined abn, ad ele oping than the absolutely ate unfolding of posites slreay realized inthe Wor ht ace yer ins an tr sory Shon, the infin freedom of the Word nor wort ep realy Weare infty tee in theology we find al ley fen, pune valle Tony emaine wo ues to Sno enlebrate So much freedom frightens ws deserve HorsTexte{9} PRESENT AND THE GIFT Tisexphin the Ehret ior, cst, and maractve nae. In another sense, t decisive moment of theological bout Tnesiable, since the ramen that com pletes what all the others aim at, 4 €or: povalle assis 0 Christ the a ramen dit riggs the Logie of the Incarnation to ume obeouste pariboe ‘tenn the steiner thats gers rst "orm the Chute comes ke the obligor’ ste where every somesbat consent theological atempe must come in the end to be tested. For the moment, sve sil retain this summons onl the allege thrown aut eo every theology By the most concrete an! leas sntellile instr of faith in Christian Iie The Es Charis thas hecomes the test of every feo- Tegel systomatization, because, n gather fag al, poses the greatest challenge 0 thought TNunré ahowe all Why? What indeed ‘docs it mean here "to explain”? nou cl something ike giving the reason fora Inystery of chaty on the basis ota peli inary group of reasons, supposed their turn to he founded in reson, heace on reason asell Explanation, even hook ca alas seems to end up sn “euchais the pipe’ se wl sce a ters leAf for plies one substites, et, semiotic) that sy 3m a tempt to reabsorb the eucharistic mystery of chi 18 tional conceptual system, In the ease of file, such an efor pears either useless ( lrats sel, thr teckel ohcern, to eecogniving a pure and simple “miracle” im the “Stecesion of physical linguistic evens) or else iasficient {aft mputes ts conceptual insiclencs a mystery tha it has for even approached, by an ineacriical and eroristie sue {ism But in ease of apparent succes, this eft open 10 lessevand ere the essential appears—t0 two er spies floes one not contradict oneself by seeking, in principle te Tore cecil, to frame and hen ro rear che turgid fac andthe mystery of charity ia. 2 system (psa, semi (cea the ek, here again, of ataining only conceptual ol? ‘Do tansubwantation,transfinalization, and tanssgniiction low one to reach the Eucharist” Or do ey substitu shen athe or i Abe al what relewance are we to ack ede TR emerprise dha in der "to explain” wold ten, sok tml oF fet, to consider as selevident the equivalence be tare the ft tha Chest aes of his by and a conceptually Terraced ransmutation? A if ad hi ne ane all doesnot recjie first that one explin 1, but nee! that one recess Does not the haste to explain dsclove an inability to rei and hence the fos of a primordial thoi refi? Tostrutive nevertheless. For the ineviale nateré doesnot suffice wo disqualify every fort of mediation on the euchatis the presence. On the contrary it incites ome to consider thor vrais the conditions in src this efor il not remain. Itexplination’" dhere mst he, e wil erst i he Sense of delinquents of ioe prefers, in the sense tat Jacob Fh. at the ford Jab, an “explanation” withthe angel: in such fin explanation” its. question pet so much of speaking as of Mrugaing, cach achersary demands ofthe ober first, avon pelessing: hence recognition. ere, explanation wet ave {oakimit reciprocity: isa question less of knowing whether a Datcula explanation can account fore eucharistic presence than of seeing wether the theoretical apparas wil lt ase bre eit y that of which sis question, to reach the di iy of wa kat take. Tanga, property sei, must te therefore ese he taken up again on te as ofthe ese inal ahr nal dena neh pe fae nt hh axel le ie he, Fargnne he leer af ence epee recreate Newfie mec fee hen par nie res en Chats nt na Sc hwy ea te aca psec of Crt mites he as pene he i dene he ae minis nth ton er xn Co come te tne anf emp exc el fn he Stier on te onary aye ie each psec, he Shab cma escheat ee Plante shh pea co ee Bate ela the Baars eos tf wine Secs tse cove tt aes I roto ne pcs an tndnenal e eap Cho ie cars he cone enc ‘One or the Other Kdolaury Lee take fk, te, a the sual and ceaeley epee ag ofthe tology of transabattonIe e most ten epee, ang ier things, hie using concepts nth stance, ack, specie, rarsubanton—temminy Fe 2 fiseally define capi tat Arteate (10h fo Pky Hes Toms heey) Ba hepa ne Jesus chr exceth every meat, Tere, com Conscosof he heel eae of ech eg {tans onc would ae wo rence Rw st ing frm clstuoce slope In Rs”) and atemp “vena ew ee Tarece Hug ft treme. crmphinopia sng Thi creer st rea ees Co somiary or exit reflections: For the con stig is ines i eurharstie thea independent of the fea of Avsotke® monn ted He he Gane of Tene aan eu he ones thatto sarof the metabo ofthe Grock Fler! ar than the tno (ach ofcourse, mere tae ae coe eines terms og fast spesk ao aces al aan fsa) arena ft ya ten HC pe aa Pee mena apy #122 ce ari ey 215) cores a ech one ot The ease Tne dove wih Tho het ees mt stfenent At cringe or Skreet he beter ene els le fiioophi shel erst to. Minne te ctu loti ean om ee se ebten whch tc sure dea, On ci Se Fhe thc tarauainon 4 ecle eee me ported om puta metas Oe pene al toa ahi er a Oe gti fone sane mo ane a Se ofthc yo Cv sone ose ee Pe pernon under te apearances pete ett ofc presence teeter ne a rere the sa te pean ay te ci pee est of a ly th magne el He ek heaps pe ois pte “cane tthe seriaton of he urs exe a8 ca (ie Ine ly Satan) ad He see oct) any on in hs sere, pation aa eset the hue 49 ebm ple cecal inthe pon ens hat he HN Sa evvatace "Ga a ie dspstion Me Nw. 8 Fa een a terion ceo oo ean” mae gene wml expt nut relprsace: presence recede a me gang tg ash apne 00 rent he eures wher th omy celebrates by ace niall cance cleo cones ew of Othe ace slant ea i se uate tng 8 see as sence ae ete mes eiy cane we ey hing “deeded of al stgnication except that of prsonce (ate He af preter tg ben map mis prone thereby ane eng Ant he pete go Beyond iM meanness ien rks king poe ek Fh sci trisne haraerigie ereexts t h De Ther tang, Peyn th el peso, the a reletennd-contoamerng, iynpexey presence Tas opertion fas ected fy mbit explana tor mels anion Basher res ea the fan perfect be nye win he rset ran Slaten ise hems spe eth eae thee hemes eto taf eee dm re thiredy emer of cain These del ther, thie in hee legion mo freak th preven nde onthe cor: Whe dn anor Copan wither roe tom psn Te de fate man es one cri news ft suse me cuts he an shrines ie a sl hy epi prune Ce ies othe commons the mw meanings ado he fren ant won, peices te ony ds pace tho chase he 8 ap ope theme st wl be mee sac smn ta veering fel nd sll ns nd {fer rt Or ese fe cnuaryteomesck oe ce tran, ion heh the meaning sal as evant faves human wales) tne expences (sre ergs “ares et} he eH he {ica ne ve Bul the ne. Anyang ese sina postal coi te al Became roger, ar fo aM ina ean consecrate sc) ig te fom he emmy Arex! a ne wl ee the tnt ssh presence tin te comma an OF the hewn sare, of “Gea and of Hoe By com marty tn else ore, A face of the Jd Ro ee ett he moe ecg armen the com Shell ekeac mat sdsund mein of on atcollectine consciousness, a a gen moment AN HS "prOR esi, hid been ale secure Presence ino Toner mes sured bythe excesiveness of an reduc ae i afar ss ‘suming the corporlly deine appeacance ofan irreducible thing. No. doubt there eemains an reducible presence of Chris, but Hs displace from the thing to the community One must pass from Jesus present i the bos 9 Jess present toa people whose eucharistic action manifests realty under the steramental oem “The heat ofthis mystery is that communion with Goa passes by way ofthe communion of men among them es Is fr thi reason dha the sig of coramurion ‘eth God the sharing beeween men... Kms noe be forgocen thatthe Eucharist is helore al ese meal, ‘he sharing of which is the sgn ofthe communion of those who partcpate in And the community of those who share ts fo ks tr dhe sig oF communion ‘pith Geo. slike a ricochet hee sa tety which BSthe sof someshng hat 5, & the Sen of Something ese" ‘We immediely note an eseral point Fen ifthe theology of transubstantiation has ls its legtimaey ad, wih real pres fence, the very notion of presence remains Its simply dis placed from the eucharistic "thing eal presence othe com unity; of, more exactly the present consciousness th collectine selfs substituted forthe concentration of the pre Sent of “God” under the species of thing 1h additon, this substitution does not mack an equivalence lof presence of in presence so much aK accentuates te roe fof the presenta the unigue horizon for the euchatiic xi Fresence, which no thing ere comes to rene veal no onger remains distinc rom the elects conscious, but thy Coincides witht bence a longa, thie conscotsnes,pres- fence endures. Or even: presence Is valid only in the present fd in the present of the community consciousness, Pres tence ceasing 0 ely og a 7es—heneeforth depend entirely fon the consciousness of it possessed, here an nw that fcommonity communion. This & why all sensible mediation Uisippeaes the bread and wine serve as simple perce = 106 medium fora whollitellecual or representational prcess— the cnllecine awareness of the comimaniy by tee The con cern for dhe “comer ead a8 often oa pet intellect Jom that infact disqualifies every lnurgy. The consecrating pvr (the canon) becomes, in the extreme, a6 useless a Performance hy the substnite of Chris (the pres). A gesture ‘ora give. prowiled thar i ecm the commit awareness, safiees "The immediate canscousness ofthe cilective self hence plies te fr appearance ofthe presence of "Gea! to the community The thuman and representational present teymmanel he future of divine presence, Ine sie wa pes tence dsppcars 8 soon 8 the cansconsiess the collect self defines self the insistence with which ne recalls chat the scred species only conse finaly, some Tetoers that dhe feucurisi reservtion has ite o no theologiealjasication, {even that ene ean thn et oF bur the rmserate read and se forth bei feces dhat no thing slices to main tain presence once conscious attention as diapered Te medic consciatsnes of he cllestive elf hee pomp the endl ofthe presence of Gt the comunity The (he ‘man and represemtatinnal presene determines the rleion of divine presence to the ps 2—Consclousness and the Immediate A double dependency hencefoah alfects the eucharistic pres ence. Because the gif of "Gd init depends on human con scjoursess and hecause the Later thinks time on the ais the presen the gift of "Ge sl depeods on the present of consciousness on) tenon, Facharivie presence fs met sure! what the attention oe han cna presen aeconls 0 0 Wie pelo of a pore tnversion (perver ‘Son? of perpetual alortion.Fa ee rm the eucharistic presence ceaselesiv prwoking the attention of men who fl eccatiealy outside othe disposal ofthe present moment, twexeced themsehe inthe pat and the fue, and to weave, ‘without end or hoginning, a perpetuity ofstention tothe aris it where the presence ofthe Ajpha and of the Omega shines ~ hey the eontar: present consciousness elke,Itself to gover ll eacharistic presence ofr! 0 the com tity The intermitencies of alention preke the Hntriny of presence. Adoration henceforth becomes as impensible as per petuity: everyone knows that a group cane concentrate Ha fention for along tine all dhe mote tn that here no exterior ‘object capavates or promokes Hh attention Is nota question fof adoring self perpetually, hu of hecoening conse of tell Celerating che level of rp comsciossess") I, Sak Descartes, the cog endures only from monrent ro manent snd one need not consecrate tow more than a couple of hous 4 year For the collective cogit. the case wll he the sme: m0 Perpetuty; but coming ro consciousness aconting to needs and occasions. The attention of horan and collective on Sciousness measures the eucharistic presence on the bass of the present tha, here and nosy, dominates, organizes, and de Fines the commoa conception of ime. Having thus defined, in ts characteris tis, the concep tion tha pretended reject supped idole the te flog oftransubstntation, we can tur ack oi the cstion that vel posed Is the danger ofan kos aprcach t techarise presence now avered? Obvious far trom disap pearing idolatry here kaows i lump, ad all he more that fives into ro. ‘The idolaty for which one accused, wrong dhe theology of transubstatiation bore upon the reification of euchariie Presence in i Gifd would become an ids the sri sense (Fa mater, ner, and ave representation. For the ax tent, let us not ertcize dis summary etc. Ht ws nomark ‘Simply thatthe ding has atleast an immense advance over Immediate consciousness of (and as) presence: He, in tther words, poses itself ouside ofthe intettencies fate tion, and metites the relation of conecousnes presence In becoming conscious of the thing where eucharigie pres ence i embodied, the believing community dees not become conscious of tel, bu of another, ofthe Othee par excellence Teahusavoidk-—eten at the risk of an exces mitral wa trythe supreme is well a6 suit dssimlated idolatry the spiritual klolry where consciousness becomes 1 itself the ‘Ml of Cs In fa, community conseonsness, i "relzes 16 “what aninates i, becomes the only sertae nea presence, win ane eng Knee sng to meta ts relation to the eugluritic presence Then camsciousnies clam tr be inmmesitels the presence of Clas the kl longer sens fromy any represent whoever, hut fr the represen lation cniensness of self This any jy between sel consciousness drut the conschasnescknomfelge af lari among erween evelaton tnd mniesttion, abolished The asence of represented ject ence dees ot invite tloitey Fut estalises the roming to imitate conse ness eucharistic presence the insumuntalekel Teg ‘out real mediation the ret superiority of Lateran ever Catholicism Hence nothing better than hs repeach can allow ust understand conmario, low eal presence strane by a thing independent of conscknssness) alone oid the Ingest ian yet Catolico es spi of al eth [tha is 1 a ral] 6 actin se i gh psi whe selconscinns pint Ai, fr fall, Ga she Inet pre Seed 1 religions aration ean ester thing the a theran Churely on he cata the hos as sul nota st ‘consecrate but in the moment of enjoyment, inthe ann Iai ois external and inthe act fh, be nthe free selfceran srt cn then is it conseerited and exalted to he present God 7 Whur he consecrate he pases, oF thc permis. she reducible exerioety the presot that Chas, fakes sof imsel i this she tha 1 im becomes sar mental hoe: That this tery fa Fon ord ma, renders posible tn spring from Foes te, ean be mistndersto ly he thoxe mh do ot BANE Ope ‘hemselvesta diganer Only distance, masnaaing a dst separation of terns Caf persis) renders commune po stl nx imnedistely melies the relation, ene an, be teen the ido an distance, ane aunt bess ow precise a his eucharistic consciousness wth 3—Metaphysical or Christie Temporality But idole. ere, i exhaust! wth this fist iaequacy Indeed, the rekon tthe ewchariie presence tt‘mediate consciousness thatthe (community) consciousness hs of ft plays Ks reductionist Rantton onl as lang a6 con scousness Hel 9 grasped a a self presence of thou. Or better, asa though inthe press, which measures the future an the past of presence—and of eucharistic presence i pa Cieulae-—starting fom the preset time, fom time a6 present Bucharitc presence is val here only a long asthe preset of consciousess measures and imparts the preset it sari from the consciousness of the present. But, think time sar ing fom the present consines the function, sake, and chat acteristic not of a specitc metaphysi, Ia of metaphstes a6 a ‘whole, fom Aristotle to gel (and Nietasche}—if at leas one Imi the iniial thought of Heidegger, heace fist if one dacedes toi According to Sein tnd Zeit, fact, metaphysis deploys an “ordinary conception of time.” whose inaugurally “ristorelian formulation i fone! again, te for term, in He sel Time is deploved in Hegel in favor and om the basis of the present, self understood asthe Aer ane! nou by wich com crousness assures fel, oF eather whereby consciousness as Sures itself of being Tor, through menaplnsies, being 16 de ployed in i Being only 3s long as is arly and assured Eallability endures. The eesence avaable in the prevent-—as the bere an nowi—guarantees the permanence wivere spirit maintains & hold on being, The present no oaly determines the only visible, assured, measurable mode of time but als thereby delivers othe disposition of consciousness ea being that can become an objec to st The presen assures an obec: tive posession ofthat which (in he) present. Tis catalog ‘al vedetermintion of primacy ofthe present Teas 10 “double redaction of the Future and of the past the past nishes tnd the future begins 38 soon as the present begins or finishes Their respective temporalties count oaly newarivels, 36 a double nonpresen, even a double nontime. Above al. this ney tive defintion prohibits them from producing the available Sand assured hold over Being that onl the present confers t appears that euchariste presence never fils itself so much Submitted to metaphysics a an the conception dt cstiizes the theology of transubstnition 38 metaphysical: in this con ‘ception the primacy of the present (asthe ere and nea of an otic ipossbiiy) ana sha ofthe human consciousness of time ser n the pen an in Fall The norms that metapbyskes timposes on ever being tating from Hs voce a tie tings exert themselves even on the encharitie presence, with Dootexcepsion ne compromise lay finde is meaphysca completion in the exe enterprise tit clined to erticize a apparently metaphysical encharste thenkags. Which proves, ‘once gain, aro sips mets dos oti, even ineolegs ta fret ew gore It therefore rensins wate a think cuhareic presence swthoor viding 10 ones sshether be that, sapped of the tanaastantial thing, thn, olwious, of (eerie) se eonscinusness oF that, metphisic of the “inary cone tion fume” tsi question. forall hat, of resuming the slogan fof a “theolege ithout metaphysis? Obsiously nt for the ‘overcoming oF metapsics besides hit far from anphing the leas sear for compa thong redouble te de fund fora isnt te cent of theology but ono phi sophieal thought, on comin tha accede tothe nonmeta phisieal ewence of mctaphses, Ove sk ere remains teoioca t-amotints tot precise quest can the euchars tic prewnce of Chast as eansecrtest red an ine deter: mine, tart fom sc sn el alone the conto of HS real the dlnsensons of fs tempers anc! he dpi ‘os aye” Tes cochaite presence sufi for Hs Os comprehension? And fist, of what presence is ia question? Noe tr ota pried temsporlation of ne (he fered neo the present a the pert tt 0 0 Be a Futuna presence nit be tnklestnad starting mos ce tainly from the present hut the present nist he wrest fis 36 hat even One met measure the dimensions i eucharistic presence aginst the falls ths i Te pt Cpa weakness of eccionist iterpetnione stems preesely from ther exclusively anthpologial hence mictaphysica treazment ofthe Fucurist They never undertake to tink pres ence starting from the it day, sheng, conse pres tance nthe pase. For the dimensions ofthe can he deter rine at lest ensine,accering to stacy theological appeach The rigor of the alt mst order the dimensions ofthe temporality where the pesent is made gil Now it happens tha the eucharistic gi, which Crise makes of himself ner the species ofthe consecrate! Bread an! Wine, includes the funcamental terms of temporality of they This temspevalty ‘sin mo way ake here hy the artifice of a incre ape fete eal, It springs from the most concrete analsex tht exe esi can gives, The presen ofthe cuore gif & noe a all femporalized strtng for the fer dd non vat memorial (entporalzaion star fom the pas), then ay escola announcement (emporalizaton starting fm the ftir) rd finally and only nally, as days and wack (cepa tion starting fom the peesent). As opps othe metaphysical ‘concept of time, the present here devs not order the analysis of temporality as 4 whole, but results from i. This reversal ‘which remains Tor us to retrace, implies that we will under sind the eucharite presence less in dhe way ofan avatlable permanence than 38a new sor of aden! 4—The Memorial “Temporalization starting from the pas: the Chetan chars, takes the memorial up agin from the fewish hlessing 93 0 besure, inorder to reall othe subjective memory of he cam munity past face that would be defined by ss nonpresence by the cessation of the presence concerning i fis nota alla {question of commemorating a dead persoa to spare him the Second death of eblivion. In his case, the past stil roma a ically though in wew of the present (to maintain & second fonder presence, immortality ithe memory of men: idobery through the collective consciousness), ancl starting eo HGS samonpresence in the Dene and now). eis question of akon an appeal, in the name ofa past event, t9 Gi im eer that he fecall an engagement (a covenant) that determines te nant presently given (0 the believing community. Whether i he a ‘question of the crossing of the Red Sea oF of the conquest of the Feomised Land, "the memorial of te Mess, yon of Dai uur servant, and the memo of your pepe” the exent emiins less 9 pst fact han a pledge se in the pst oe, today stil to appeal to a futire—an ae, shat of the Mes sah does nt cease to goer his toxin eon tend The christian Hucharis dees not real te memory the eas and the restirecton of Oni kd e h“Ches tians He Toa expen them? rls on an erent be rst vat hays apc cada the Ascension Pe Tongs ttnsically to he dea and resorrection in onler Wo ask with ineitence—extevolegicl iypaence—that Chit ret, enc abo that presence rer the are as mh ast ernest ihe st Tu Efe dhe past en efi Bs nonpresens, of as an complished! aut, orders Ahr ts fereciieaertor ane define accomplisheat heal tk tha, thot t suk remain tsa, diferent, in word ll an wod—uneal, The: memorial makes of he pasa este eal fr the preset, because i ‘Crs sot se, ve fin ad wa aes presen (erin snus Tori son fo this ie presen a) thar we hope in crit te the most miserable en al (1Ge 1517-18). The present no kanger oppnes ts clear and comer seltsiiceney tan mena past On dhe con tray the meer, esse trea and ps event, renders ts day tenable. The pst termine the rea the present — beter the prescot feunaerstnnl as ty to shih alone the memes san ati pledge es meaning an realty 5 —Epektasis Immedtitels one sees the emporaliation ofthe tx he ss past, sinerely refers to an exe shore esential temporal zation hye faire Torte memoria el val ons Suppest i order tha prayer mi plone othe Fc he novatin ad completion fan eschatoeglasent. The me torial irs the Pausini de his memory of ime” (Lake 22:17), “wat he comes” Co 1926) Neer, ‘this fs question no nl of a fitter ta will be un ‘eile in song for Chi to come Canin) inkee asthe exegetes ce — 01 cl Mesks for and a sense, ste the return of Criss tha eet neat sl hase tertrinslte The presence to comme dies not dine the hort onvofasinple possi. tangential wep or histor term,asic were a question ofa simple nonpresence that i would remain t Beng, nll to presence. Onthe contrary the ture tdeernines the eal’ of the present inthe very mode of the tdvent. The eucharistic gf cies, 50 10 speak, on the tension that raises fe since and forthe fate The fare a fe gov ferns, uns hyough, and polaizes the eucharisie it thus “seaning [speeromenos| towed that which i ening (Phil 3:13). The pledge, which the memoeal sets ro opera tion, now anticipates the future, so that he presen self occurs ‘egely as this anticipation concretely lived. The escola petits that temparalies the euchristic present dhe the future i expressed in many ways io the Christian tation, We vill say that the Bucharst constttes the firs feagment of the ‘new creation, the pledge (gnu hac Chris ives us ough his resurrected boxy sacramentally present? We will even laos approach be onercome? to suc a efot, wold he theology of tansubstanition ments prsieyed atone? ‘The fst question wil Had the begining of response i prayer ean transform our approach co the euchariic presen Br, before outlining in whit sense This could be realize one rust soy a preliminary conten. {ne transformn ay a proach tothe eucharistic presert—and mel myself hy isd Inensions—only af the cucharisic present Self clin shed front aie ad fron de cevnscouness thie Efe of nyse (that we have a onsen oR acon One mas ‘alt distance in order tht the other say depo ini the fondons of my sinion wth him, Nowe dhe Henk of rans tanttion alae oMfers the pes of estance. since it sity separates my cescinssess fm Hin who snes Inthe distance ths array, the Orher simon, by his a solutche concrete sacramental Pox y attention and me raver The resprnse the fir esto th plies the see fn, ste! far of te theology of tinsuhstantton. iy fer te abeanee, se mis better understand the apo an ina sense, construct The euchatstic prevent persis, accor: fngto the theologe of tansubstantitin, beyond our conch mention, and yee this persicence is amenable tothe iter pretation of tine according tthe (metaphysical primacy of the here cond nore Theretore one wou have o conceive dhe factual ireducbiity—this read and ths ine a Boxy and Blood without fr all du cing recourse to the pens ing of the presen Wohl i fe fort a learn Gi the Kantian seve) li eucharistic persistence the hss of the logic of chant cence of the Cras) wi eer borrowing. nor detour eras. Let ws outline in thee pas First the Hoey and Bors persist nan ethers that ows as far asthe specie and the appearance ofthe bread aa! wine most certainly Ho assure sn’ Claro and perils) ermancnce—-G)kl hes ne assure permanence.” een that of Hisiorybur to conrine to give themsehes without etn, ‘The Son tok om the beats of humanity onl inorder to play humanly tke tntarian me of lee for this reson als. he owed “to the end” Con 131} hat, (0 the Cross in onde thatthe cto env nstraton of the de and ese fiom no cease ene a he ges hie with instence Iya ead ant heal tat persis eal cy tha the pets He escent this wine a his loo nt inasmuch this blood is "shed! for so Choke 2220, see Mat 26, 28 Mark 14.24) te crsec rate this red as is ead oly nas 5 this hay "gen for ve” Cake 22:20 The comment of Chita ar a8 th be a ine the isk tn rn of bla phen or ef iar ti dts, ane 0 The sae, Breach the convert ae the whe of Ben canescension and trinarian “philanthropy” Is nota question of Some "safery” that permanence soskd assure for man, but Of the irrevocable commatment ofthe love dat “endures all Cor. 15:1). In the eucharistic present, all presence se ‘duced from the charity ofthe if all she res in ie Deceames pearance ora gave wit cay te peepee specie, the metaphysical conception of tne, the retion 0 com Seousness ll are degraded 0 one figure (or caetuee) of Charity. "Everything wine doesnot eat dnt figura ‘The sole object of Serpe sci: Everahing that does ot lead to this sole good is Figurative” (Pasa) The consecrated bread and wine Become the ultimate aspect in which carey elves self body and soul fe remain incapable of recog izing in ic the ukimate advance of koe, the El isnot sce Sponsibiiry—lowe gives asl, even shone dd not rece fhm John 11); love accomplishes the git entirely, even f we conn this it the aul errs tous. the sipsom OF Impotence to read kn, inter wor 0 ene ONCE OU Cs encyt reduce the excharistic present 1 everything excepto the ove that ulkimately assumes a body ns Chest endures Taking a sacramental body; venturing inthe bere and ow that ‘could blaspheme andr idolize him, becrse alee took 4 physical boc othe point of "not resting, not recon rox whrawing (his) ace fom ineuts rendering (his) face hardas sone” (Isaiah 505-7). The sacramental xls completes the ablation ofthe bod oblaion shat incarnate he triniaran ‘blation—"You wanted neither sacefice, nr oblition, hat you fashioned me a body” (Psalms 40-7 according othe TXX. taken ‘pasain in Hebrews 195-10). In shot euoharitic present ‘eeduced from the conmtament of ai The Urgency of Contemplation ‘Second, the eucharistic present doesnot persistently drive i Self the repeated interstices of eu dvs to reside passively in them but eater to transform us fom wor to gars For ths bread—the contemporary deviants are some ht 10 sist on this—ie given only in order wo fed it mae preset ‘lt permits consumption tt ese stm deviance mis _ what 1 feed means beeen consuming this Ford, we don ssimiue the Chrst- ta vir person or tocar "cial hoa OF ‘whatever the food that finds nits ed and soe asi cation. On the coutars, we become asciniated threxgh the seramenbl hod nf the Chest to his ecclesia Bl Who takes comiaunion swore sel not be traning Cris de Fe at insted wl he passing omer nt the mesial boxy of Clit" The materiality tht transubstanti tion prskes aims only at tine us through the Spire that Fvings taut cit the spits oud of Chest canstited by the Chuech 4 sya kh in other words a hody tite more unite, more coherent, moee consislen—in ord, moe real—thin any physical bey The condescension of Chris fray the materia of the Bere aad non even athe risk of reiication, alms a the situa incorporation par excel: leace: incorporation wal he completed fy this wih the Church permits t “compte” (Col F289 hy the «on formu, which # estows on, of ie wl fr that of Chew accomplishing the desig of he Father The dete theo the ‘matenlity ofthe eucsrtic presen plays avery precise role as we spontanenanty conceives the union called “spiital onsteans ust Tess seriousness, ily and commitment than material” uni: thos. by the violent and isupassable Fact of the eucharisi hody~"this discourse is too ar” 4 remark that reacts 10 the Dconrse om the Bread of if (Joh 660) — ‘Chris indicates to usa spctvalcommtnin this not Tess but {even more clene than an union that nour sense, "spel ” The brea ana the wine nist he ceased, to be se, bit thar one definaise union sth the Father may he consummated fo tem, dough commnanion with the ecclestatel Pex of his Son. he euelanstc present deduced from he re ef cation ofthe ecclesia be of Ces, nally he eucharistic present can he accom under the double relation of sacramental commitment a of eccle slastal edification, only when wnerstnd a myst! boy: fs mest reltonal aecepvaton, im fact, the locuton “mystical boxy” concerns the eucharistic boy fhe Chis as opposed tenis cpa sym, the ecclesiastical bork: Meer semantics thas tansterred the fist adjective to the secon sbantiveIndeed, we, who privilege the poine of view of the Ie and row asthe preeminent dimension of tie ard ence of (the) Being (of beng), can hardly anibure realty but way aaable and permanent thing. Or rather. we can hal conceae that fealty should unfokl outside of the aeable and permanent ere and now On the conan. a proper Hheokyge gaze considers the cucharisic present 2 mxstieal, without this being a quemion of a rediction of realty to some vaRUE “mysticism the mystical character ofthe euchaestie present itp a ful geal has one can speak ofthe te manda tion of the mystical es of Crist” (Anaetasia the inate) "the Tesh, tbough becoming mystical, remains nonetheless sell ceible. More, the mystical character ofthe eucharistic preset not only does not desteoy its reality, at cxeries toa comple tion above suspeion, before which the realy ofthe ene cna row sek becomes simple ely an support commen sa ity becomes mystagogy forthe tue realy that ofthe euch tie presenta gt that ssc given ac mystic. Tee neces to revive here the docrine, common thw fallen nto disuse, ff the couple es et sacrament The hea and wine con Secratdl and trnsubstantiated ono the Box and Blond are vali a ree—Carist relly ven in the eucharistic present— bout, a the same time, they sll remain 2 etramentunt with respect tothe ecclesiastical body of Chirk ce Church, which they aim at and construct; only his eclesatical Bay so be called purely es What ae we 1 understand fecha. from the point of view of the Bere and ot the dstetbion of the tems reset sacramenttan would he rally inverted? For our ‘tural Blind ze, tbe bread and wine are real the conse- ated brea and wie are real as bread and wine, sacramental ‘Cinta inthe ordinary sense) 26 Honan Bk of Cs ‘whereas the ecclesiastical boy eemains purely seraimental {Cimstcal boxy” according eo 4 modern aecepeation) Buc ony the mere thas correct theolegcal meni, The reas excl sively "that which he eye as noe seen. hat wl the ear has fot heard hac which has et sen tothe hear of man but hat ‘God reveled 0 us bythe Spr” (1 Cie 29)—all rhe rest has only saeranental ancl indie fusion. The ea is exel sively that which seems “aystial” wo she ordinary gave —the oxi of the Christ sna his eccleshsticil oly: Whoever fears than Abr presence secon 19 he lee nd no tee fe sly of nsataion ans b Ahever ata es nose tha omh the euhanst pee fo tunes ine conve ft t-te a ta a Ie horsemen ple ire the ol fxm tm tno the conan cin erase om fo the hn atl tlie ps fe te ma one tne nhc ocean, eet ne ee ine that he tol of tansntenon treed ine deve and nate cs, hte thon the sees xcs to apps he mytical e ofthe Bnan ofte ined te ence psn tend from th ket stl yale "hs tre ton of the cockaritic presen demen sets tet in st presen oc Gow a the eek Fala ani tos sel tern wa eine he nse emporatatone chen “omar ter fg the ncaa an Rese thon msl res. ett of eschaolota or ete ssi fy the dil it of eur dy) Th mental ee iments tar pesmi teeming or subject appre sit the ete ema he etre rest cp thc hum se mension of propel Gran om Trt: sotha each ome the otctons oe ech [resc reinforcen the orignal of titer Fe is Reem pret eo conch Thar whi acess ge tne of Christan fom a cheval cote i ot msg comprchensinn he Corte pea ath in fs than the ot nro nes wth te mee Cours pence Te cern ons have he eg transit sew amet dbs reine thi hckngs to mezapss onthe eta een ct tax ie hy the ee aa te des mses te they came sop themacbes rm thn aes them arial eye that of thee pee Te ing prising in i hee nee es Cline ft te ake emia (ples eps‘tc, Christians confront, consciously or nat, the test ofthe end ‘Of metaphysics And.as salvation does aot cease to come fs 0 them, the danger also increases frst for them. Theological thought undoubkedly newer experienced in such an imperative ‘vay the duty of formulating its own radially dbeological logic Fohich especialy does not mean “dialectical theology” tundoubsedly its responsibility never appeared spre wi ce Spec to all thought in expectation of 4 "new beynng’ but Theologial thought undoubtedly never stole away with so ‘much fea rom its theological task. The conversion of theolo. ical (and hence ecclesiastical) thought it tak and, hese, 0 the meditation of the eucharistic present fist requites prayer. Inthis sense, what we uederstand by the term “eucharistic con templation” here assumes (rue meaning. summoned 1 dis tance bythe eucharistic present, the one who prays underakes to ket his gaze be convered in it—thus, naddtion, modify his though in In pray, only an “explanation” becomes pos sible. in ether words struggle Between hurt inpotenice receive and the insistent harliy of God to fli And without Sete inthis combat, thoughe will never carry the leas specu Tatve victory. Eucharistic contemplation this sense, would ‘become an angeney "Nc only do se nt sin by adoring im but we sin by not adoring im” (Saou Augustine) = ee LAST RIGOR, Predication. Fait ces er: The cry; By is very vi ence, olesonkn ices anonym fay in which ose stings pain Feo please, hilation fem mali tion. The higher it tses, dhe Fess it ex presses sll lis fonction of commns ‘on dkoppears as vigor snerenes Sinceray hetoates more pronounced Inaharism, at, fo lta, El hs nt ing lke a ciscnase, atleast A scorse implies the succession of argument, the assurance ofan objet that fs defined pe tkely by the preeminence of a subj. Toth neither speaks nor tates: t believes, tnd has no other end than to blew. Or rater i peaks an i ay, tates meanings far a be able, fora time at least, 0 follow the tices of 8 precise Tengiage and to appear, as sell 10 ay something about something, ne must ook forget she essential: fh would ee seh sing witht charity-—i 1 have al dhe {Girone nn, ad de hae chara, Fam nothing” (1 Cor 13.2) Pan ‘mesa ath must he absorb in charity ‘whi ste, in sr ay the gi Charity "ing the pretest ofa (1 Ge 1813), overs faith Which means hae ‘oe must recone in faith, and ence in is taking tan to speak, the characters ities peculiar co charity: Bur these, ae rather this characteristic takes its bearing inthe union of wills" ay wil but yours” “This i union that accep ala ht competes the teinarian communion of persons, and tis a far the aon ofthe Gross Hon then, are to think Eh in convormy ih the union oF mills oro iypies to discret chaety lone produces dhe loge which faith makes use, contrary 10 ‘very other loge, formal or otherwise? “Theology leaves is fst presuppeition th whi devs everything, radically unthoughe as Yong a6 i enn ju by ‘arity and, in the end, tanseride in cary the discourse that faith ters in fe Without this operation, Founders #9 HOS, ‘oF succumbs tothe pretension of a sient that is all the nore illusory when i reaches ts goal The question, then, ‘comes dawn to knowing how fash can et charity speak, and how chara can relate the discus of fh. The answer les Inthe cookesio eo ath, wich sees hat "Jesus is Led Bur wha does the mention of "eoalession of ah ere wale? ‘Why not just ave state dhe elementary predicate prope ton, and fave mode it by a vesb of Statement [onan tion} °X confesses that. ? bn fac, the abdaion of dis argu ment reveals the dvegpence of the fh that speaks from the preicative statement. Thus the analsis of this dvernence Could eal us to specify in what way fh when ites bey logic of chit “To valde an argument °X beliewevenfesses ha I where P stands for the predicsive sttement “less fis] oe” one ‘woul! have (0 satsy several conditions” That of eeiaton: 10 empirical verification cin assure, a Teast in she usual ‘opted sense, the truth of P tha, it, ends Ase > 9 re peatable or measurable confirmation (ese relers ack 10-2 past ark! unique historical even) Ths list canon Suge note git of meaning: can one ake a props ike Jesus Tis]Lorl or Jesus [isthe Chris as ended with meaning i Jord and Christ belong © the demain of rally eigious tiulature, Hse practice ina sort of private Tange tough that ofan entre peuple—Jens This double weakness Wes to reli the ate ofthe preictive sateen ee sai] Sir) to the argument aes wp, ane 19 asking ms ‘shat letimiey: penis speaker to site a precio that Satises emer destin nor meaning? Hegimaey docs not se here its ron the ufterance feo 38 for a wellconanactel propstha, ckineal ih meaning and acually presale. And ae the eran ces nen ease 10 find sll tere fe ceaselessly renee speakers Whence if rot the ltinicy of sch a atement [éencaion at ees Ppeenson to such Tetinacy? From the speaker himself A Feast fr nthe seqacace"X comes that eas ston the wht oF wadaion bes on X- How aid se we piven empirical iis Cake Hom biel to he concent ‘wih at X? By wh righ, anes y what aac? Fo the Jess the pense uterance wil he ale hy itsel eo estabish fs re igo the more the speaker [nonce] wil have to ‘ery the lon of legiinating, wilh ime. the utterance Hence a eiplacrment fas the uteraoce te the speaker fom ‘alison al wert extinaey ad action The Thien is pica wn the aterance—vtwee ene and doahle werk sens to turn ewery peak fm take nguypthe challenge of suc an wterance-—towanl the speaker Bur this being. do nt the deh ress fom ee he retical domain to exittial—hecause dently singly — Insigaficance,indignaable becuse sth traonal To in woke the pace of fh the abyss profane the Inexpiclilayof 2 cominatment, ands on eventoaly pris the Deliver to pul hinself ot of 4 delice situation but on condition, simp of aviing the subject, the contention, The displacement the scene of the gation. Fact does ot simply lead fom the utterance 16 the ane wh ses Ho father, by tat ser xt, # subsites rlisputate decison, Thence aks nsnican aritariness for spa rationality “Topo faci ey rece the question, but disoles Ho fe 19 be ated hat the atest of ath seal he sald omits et Here. terri, ty simi sain "T be Fieve Tye muking the yaa of the wterance “sus [8] a” resto the sk strength of cums, ence om soe parser of eormiton, the Cristian Tess sti the ier ae tha fe unk as wssentl cater The kan ip the Chit comes esse tha ek esc op a theevangelical” epithet hardly masks us stars as slogn. Hence militancy, which shares a common characesitie wi eres to modify as it wishes that which alreadyna longer appears but ‘sa content. Wit here determines the eppotanty aceoting, to nether such an aspect ofthe "mesage” “is accepted” 1 longer accepted) oF the "dlefese ofthe rath” (which one formulates aoa determines ashe likes), or some viher cite rion. mater ithe—in any ee, the relation ofthe speaker to the utterance remains that of eecivenes 1 idiference. of fact tothe unserifle, ia word a elation of masery Bu if relation of mastery gonemns the confesion of faith, restricting {eto busy militancy andioe wo conquering heres we are miles sway from what we were seeking—to abworb the discourse of faith sn the “logic” of chariy? 2—Performance Does this failure lene ws, however, without recor? No, at leas ft conceals sein self more than ise. Te espace ment of the ltgation privileges the speakee The speaker Comes to intespre this privilege asa mastery But can ne noe tinderstand dis same desplaceraent in another way? What can the prslege of dhe speaker over the utterance indicate? The insignificance ofthe later but als the ata’ of the formes Bue what does the acwality ofthe speaker imply? We have nox yet approached it except 38 an acbitracines that arms itself ‘with complete indiference w the uterances, which are never theles supported. Hence the valence, the cymicis, the s lence. Ie remains that efectivness cannot only be justaposed sth the uerance but, 50 doobs as, assume tas such. For ‘eecriveness would he able to peneate, so to speak the ter lance iself, and the uterance flow fuck iota ofetivenes: a thie term conjons them, the seternen |#onciaion| sel Tn some cases, statement permits the one who speaks to pesform the utterance, Te jase ofthe peace utters jénonce}."T de ‘ate you une y the ies of marrige” and the ered ace cally marced; the policeman cers: "Tarrest you in the fame ofthe Ia” othe judge "You are charged witha the citizen fee hitherto—findshinwelfaewally arrest and = 16 charged xy separation. sefsal ie ober evasion well not ‘sie these perermances hur rather ner lie thei ved Idle eflectieness the performance allows the eflsinenes slip outs if dhe one who spas hee he ete fe tthe peace the policeman are nok va on tet om, Fa a epnscnuatves ofeser authorities) tothe uterance eel that thas takes on the omsisenes of an eft. supplementary pron ofthis ffertveness mre apc immediate ony noaber performunke (ketaration of divorce. of charges hs nse. sexta cs a se theft pote an ene interpret om the hast of sich performative the cinesson of fan sshove X ss Tess [Lond This 2 premature ques tion. Alo te pa hate (Fekete gues thon arises the performance becomes possible only when su protedt by a cerain qualieaan oF the ane whe speaks Ons The fst of te eae (his ely colin represent ‘em mur onl the represents of the iw cm tres at ‘eal an ages en ecco, Ha age appears null, cscs kgtimate, cession praseweorty A doubt there is sill performance fone, in a pre acy sits premise” "stu "I Hore so “Use yon ee ‘with an quale needing toe eke ro asi the private devision, a this dacs not dispense i ale ‘ctv enc reminisce, precinct fvery nan, in prininfe at Beas, erie wi ise, and by him the power and the permanence tht le, cane date st poise, plese, fw, ers, ad the like, With thm, becca asc preset he allies hm nplies One sev sees tha this quien ean he et ‘us he fants ag, ths Saree longer pss al ‘often dei from their uate a fo longer perfor cern statements The performative dere fore supposes qualiicaion, legal or natal The one whe speaks must beet ean this quai athe very meas OF whut ks sated pesmi To declare # war one must Tua penser anion 6 cit of tae ya tice ofthe peace 1 coaensiona, politic and ina sense ce ‘eumsantal quaieston ts requied To promi, swe, ke couse, ne mise nal be ii fo nes Hunan“qualification that covers ll dhe human esence, which ean he lost but never recenered Bo cess that Jens is Lava™ ‘what qualification sail sufice, nd from where wilt come? In ‘ther wou, who indeed would be able wo hokd the ae of 9 1. so that he may perfor the uterance, hese se that he will bbe sorbed totaly in the metalanguage of which he cons tutes the fist instance? So that fe can als ase sel he level of what i a question of predicting in the predictive statement-—" Lord? The terminal equivalence, ait phys he toween the fan Lard, eequires an J invested by a0 authoety true to what Lord iphes. What lordship wl exer quay the for a lordly performance? In all igor only he wh sad "Me, am” (Exod. 514 = John 8:24, 5) canta tho statement “Jesus is] Lord” asa performative. Ani sense, he dit Jing het Bat only 9 a Sense foe he, as Son, never ceased 19 receive this lordly qualification from the Father Ae for kes, Chistian dogmsties asses this iin by acknowl Jig in him divinity, or beter by acknowledging thatthe Eer never stopped ack hit, Preeisely inh this Jesus appears Son, “Te abolish (or more esentlly to trverse) dhe jap between and Lord, nothing less than the xernal Son is requuee- Who ‘else would be able? Who other than the Lord wed be ble to perform that "esus [is] Lor"? Fon the Son perio the ker ‘yzma, no one other than an adoptive son would be able to adopt, as his own the pretension of such performance Hat {his response sul resolses nothing who cr ever kno i he has the qualificion of adpive son? To this question, thee sponse remains transistor, and no one cm Ra 0 he who adopes. Hence the dbifcuity miss he approachecl ‘obliquely. Only he who would respect ts formal condition — ‘Asplacement again, ut No longet the saeco accom plsh the performance. Displacement, no from the speaker Into the uterance that he performs ad tht marks he lh ‘ition 3 which this speaker must subscribe, No Foner the ab Sorption of the predicate utterance in the speaker, hut the radhcal determination of the one ahs speaks I it sich runs the game of satement, There i, heron nnession of the displacement no longer is there only dhe set efective — 1 ress of hattines, fut aoe all the “semaevi peaication ‘fihenne who speaks thn the atterance to Be performed athe, fron ivr us fio the cic of the ist clsplacemen, the second ednbles them he its espe nerfed rte avadetot tan dscns, dissed to the deviation of ulilerence (cynics, cpportunis, si Fence the send esplacement Teas tthe mn a ce suaie dscaurse, nfallibl:subject to is deviations. This, in xh word, file pretension to at abso qualification the ‘ert of an election, dhe assurance of having neither exp pation to give nor aunt tate, ro, at the extreme wos ter nke heard. The ecstatic discourse imagines sell to per form the confession of ith, hecause i imgines itself imme dotely saint Ths a founder, as ach a mine tiscourse, in terri and wience, The passage fom pred Cation te perfornsince hs ses not allen eto progress ene Stop It step elses the demand fa second spe net rom the one al spe to the gerne fer the fr clisslacmee, tem the attrac tote one ss spas. Ds these fe topes of the disconect am ofthe meta ge opine ne anther? Or rather, they not counterbal ance one athe? 3—Conversions “Foo csplacments, tn inverse direction, and thereon in ap peaeinee. opposed But hive we noe already hea the orches raion oF ihe theme, hen meaphsses ered ats sun (Hegel, hong nota Rs rnpleton Nitze? Ms we here censiler the speculative proprio that fe et the stihec an the prec i hale memset? The pret {ate the ypéulae proposition des ro conte at ac Sensal or contingent akin to the sje, ut a moment of the very manifestation of the subject The subject passes en tire i the preticte he figured essentially ate that “the fone hows” tha man speaks does at simply to gising some sipplementar’ information oncoming, the Hwee man. A ese that cul ewer he sid 0 bia simpy would noe fe a Hwee Came the promise oa fait)brut the idiction of a dead ro. A’man so never and in 9 ‘way could be called speaking (stele in dhe world wo Constitute #8 “opengess), woul ote mute man (for the fnute also speaks) but indeed! an animal The predicate—ant Iyially or syathetcally uted to subject des not matter There—recenes the truth ofthe sleet which, ee 4 dis placed n i, But then, the simple logical relation of ieee ‘Ofte pret in the subject dusts moe than a peeiative tie the predicate finds in the subject mre tha an inet su Ssratum ¢o which a copula would ataeh AI finds se ii and, by teansporting ase ino the sujet hy eeiteprating self in at through a menement that ates a Meni hat ‘sential becatse dialectical), i recognizes in neahing Hess than the eence of is manifestation. Does not the disketieal ‘movemientof the speculative proposition thus oer a model for ‘the confession of faith, a ode ll de more prwerulin that it tmegtes the two preceding raels and heir ew displace Hofore yeiing wo an easy entice, one would hase to locate two distinctions betaven dhe speculative pecponition snd the confession of faith. Only by his Focation es an at leas partial vilization of become leit To begin sath, the specie propos, as speculitive as At becomes, and precisely because it posits thit the subject substance (and reciproedlly, remains a pare proposition — zneun to Sa a purely predicative statement the subject Is dis placed in the predicate the preicae is displaced inthe s- Jest in a pla ofthe predicate and the subject. very metal fae mus he seasoned the propetonal formula Ths moreuner, des an absolute knee Devine thinkale—a Knowledge tat knows fet and includes dhe one who peaks inde satement, The confession of ft, on the conta: un folds ene within the gap between the one wh speaks and the sateen finding in beth is main dent and fist formal characteristic In thissense would redeue the USE ‘ofthe speculative models. Fst usage “Jesus fs] Loe where subject ad predicate pass recpecally one inet ener apo ‘sil, a fs, sac A he fs ne Sl art Kui, Adon _esus simply does noe coincide wily himself wit his proper name. he whe Shes" (MBH, EEF and Puke 131 and because Inverseh the eschatological sir wuld sve aig he dl nr take oma foxhs ar ater 38 fess Nevaeh ees apologies. cgi hgic as imposes the speculative ewer Sa he subject (ess) me pass etic intthe preiente (ond) i erste exahation ofthe Resireced mast slbsoltey the disniyot the cried, insect is eves that dhe Tony Resurrection retur, aginst chron speak. vest itself nthe humanity Jessi oer tha the ens of the tncaration shoul heveme eneagesble. The speculative reason ofthe sujec tothe preticate” conceals Tere the recip amplicon ofthe Icon ith te A suman, a the hear of the same: "once av for all” (Rem G Mepis: eh IO} Sect usige the speaker remains etn fom the ter: ance, bys gap tena which ps the ro asplacemenis a Fea ened witli dhe repetition of raslerenees exe an rite the pH, bn Bet the one wn vos Chet iconly he shes comprehend, a then adits that he wil never case to coinckle. na rigitous ay that which he sates and that which in him, sates—aoe on rival to reconcile svat he vith what he says (nee “shen ut noe adic tht hes ith He that hess. Before nen te overcome ths fait (ce even whether i is nevesar to tempt tis) st sable to ase to the calecrical model of the specultie proposition, n'a double apposition. Fes, the confession of faith meiies here proposition did a meta Jnguisie instance, Next, acon of Ihe teams ones ere ay at kes appearence the dette owen them bees et ines, at est igh Feet ts caution, Whereby a second rearangement busts semis here ty bevome necessary ‘Why, indeed ces the caletcal movement safer no excep tion, ashereas applied ts the confession of fh, seers fo come to eens wal ane kage (Tess is] Lo), ort be come problematic (6 to the relation bere the saement and the utterance)? It besa the seca ent Ppt er the"seriomsness the seri he patience. al the Lar the neice" Nowe the nee ales the tality meco being a ues a Spink shih ya seme ee Shetrteuene Bueand im ou ees the ica sou Se erctmated—one does mu ave ani tha Thermo fe ence ta of tes ato tha states eath, asngse fan te scene RE Mitough noche teas nor be essed Po. we ‘gel be ale wo sexys ns ese the pt Bie nsaeny or su ures of he spcuatne ‘del inettly apeareToe seen the ems oF theatre onthe one aan! tween the one wD peasant uterance on the ter, ome ML MD Tia deca elton, more eat hee, font 3 Sbneonadory the two shore mented patents ‘Re lee sance permis one to oaoe yond ete {Pporertcontticion. ut snd des no sic to Be how anny hee mo dapat can and must Hager “Hane au sol,” Orne Complies (Pai eae, 951) p. Sli Fete p57 Tern eine hy Son, hese that which can hela takes nse rome er ana) Caen I Apr Sra Hess pa Te al Ae mye stich hoe he emp bas ps ot fantextente the unter bun renin meee defines since ‘Keema the vance 1-H Wir ha sen Yow rar Ska, 1958, 1298, hi jest exe the mets ur concep myth sto ether oe Snes wih an inter thal fs se nensule eH extemal > ‘shir crnkenl psd an whore hi ar freres mone fendte divine mprescun hate Wola ars had cons {Heal theresbkeniy who king wearer ‘eval ae hich eh ler awn made sth ce Tutors oi ht he accede ad wal em {fan oh Hl tor wa one Tis eon fa hing ne thei acne ncaes—even ore, pally emnsaine one afar er the ge bo the Sry Fondrc a ‘xcs an wich exerts very ita mses de {ol dere sien tk oko Ht hen ime othe pron, teflon hi knecs and wpe Ks cer sence wth Iisa he dre ge aia en ke fo the dese ee 1 Toker, ewan ane Deemer Stamp 72 1 Hegre linge, 196), 1 28H 2D la Kell Lp 1 Ka, sti cpa nnn AKAN 14am Bk p50 IF Mersey Coll rina, YI, 297 SF ane Kalan Witt Pv ee 81 15 Revert es Wines es sce, n Gesamcke Werke ereer ein, IH, NT ies les Ona oes eee tne or Mec 16 Cla see abe 17 See Chants, Dahon devo del ange me que Pets 158 ph, wh ohne ha fe nate a Peace a pao oe igh ek he expres in De Sect sing tam dhe Hig ase athena aan ad arene hence esse cnet ain he ig as ‘elt apenas npr18 John of Damascus, every io manifests and ade the se cect? Conta imainum calunnicnre nace 3, I> 8 De ‘Scion des Jarnes on Dama, 3 (Mer, 1975p 126 This formulation st no dd be undersea an es hal oh the Tinaee eff oe tes ce (9207s were Imoreoer (the bese manera ie owe on a Fe Sone 0 Coles 115, expel glesed ewer 18 to aoa tow eben brane aes (ul LS. foe? 170) Th ee Using indies leary doa tbe re of the nse pon the ish that el, by te inverse eat sce bees ce 7, "isle Mira the tose") 19, Counc of Nice, 77 (Desir eer D302) That te con may he sited before he aces of apr table olay only bya theology ops presence (rade di ‘unt from the sobwantal presence tn the Eaharis, hence by ‘rolopeal reinterpretation, demonstate in maser fashion by Com Scnoen, Licone dx Cra Fondoment rolouqnes la Donte etre ho fe Me Conese Nie (825-707) esa [Swazernd), 1975) See ako Nt Baudet “a elu cinq 4 Dyaance au Xe ice apres Neephre fe Patan dein de eso n Ler Eras Peps, 19701, 8-105 20 sec the ormulon of fo of Dareses ed above. 2, Descartes Quintae Repos, Oeares, ed. Aa T0e. lp. 358, 24, Cleric wales "Pour ao ue ibe wae de Til ie dot en aocane fan ve comps, aan que Inco prvnaé meme et conten dans a as formele de iin Descartes, Gare Pinas fF Algué 2( Pars 1957.9 8 (forthe dea ofthe infin, fs tobe rae rasp ol ‘ince the mossy Beng asp comained se the foal Sefton ofthe finte”—Tane. Conia, Stoo a Mu och. p 258, "2 Rene Char, “Contre une mas ssh” J pee Ps Nowell Reve Franca, 1978), p. 125, pte t0 1. Rogue “Thats what is cal an ypch, rm 2 Greek woe meaning op, because we to ere note conser, 3s a Fest pice, al that has fappened before ae hus awn nacheonins hat the ie ere ta eof ae" en ‘nr Unter story foreword rns Forse.) One remsable prin the epoch es bay apa eee He me she aly he are, whi amon pew et poi sere tq int Hay ae acter Tike rina cm konton shee ons cmc te ie at teen a em ae Wi he he Hen te thee precisa frye kanal amg tesa Po osha ere 2.1.82 ieee ce ine sc Da sli te hg stands! egies Unt nee fina uh de ers mat 0-8 emt ener GAL Diy Tvs mt) Soe mn oe Date So ion ance eta Xn Ores comp eine i Io, TESS Pak Nato estes a tht inl Kt my mi” ore Mele CP 90) p> Tras ttcns °C es ening sprig inthe on a asthe acvoyeial see nant ca al es tors inery ce sou st pared aed pretense agate a comets ad tana peend atthe dn ie acc ea eu nent dc Co ee Shoe tp eh. 43849 Ont pn sche deeb Ign fan enero nthe comet elds Nodes he celts define cdr net Wt Bk a Sete tes 2} Pa Ibe nly eran a he meaner eer tame eye (eee een, ce sce tas Cara new Tese cee ren tet teh en: Hee ene er 3 Neuer fs Ms oreo We 3), an GF Nic Wille sr tah: $8 Kann Stage decoction 3p 9895 ane Ee IC Kan onesecher Whurher Se reg Avereter KU nn ch men wr che mace Wer See cancn hurt) ante, tne ema de Ma fon ety enon Eadrnck vere anh ee Gat it a kh een civ der Mig den Inca min] malic wgecchenen Fie cen eye rn mate in asc ce mien Wehr reGes anneimen ence inc sche el pun In conor ith dhe mal aw were none» na Cae the word (an author ofthe wok) oher wor tha Sve ea Gd Le 0 that he (rites an cana at rm a once ‘ofthe poss of (chien) thea pps ats al re Scrbedbiny—asume the extnce of mia ati fe the exstence o Gi” Ka Osu of fees. a, p30, 2} The [French] aration PA Phineas Si, 1) indeed reinforces precisely the Ks facto the es cep’ ne aie au mous une te de pss ot ial fs moraement prescient Fexttence tn auteur moa ‘monde, ces-tdie de Diet” (p. 259) Uewse, “ein maces ‘Wes als Welrheber, mithin ein Gt agenammen werden muse ‘9 moalchas Wesen al Cg der Schlag anvanchmen {sce 8) (°morl (being a asthorof he world) and ene a Gea ‘mora bea the cial asso creat” ans Pl M5, "HG And "Nun ft fone Telelogie henetmeys af einen er "umen Beg Yor Gente hinge allen lem i ier dinchen Weer mtn wan [TH On ose telco dos not all ea x deterrent Sich a ‘onceptcan be fund en the cece of a oe the ‘moras, p46) (See, amon ier, Kar pec Verma ae Rp. 145 franc Beck 71S Rein ita er Green der boson ern i 1 seas Gree and Hon, 1.98 ce) I remains to poser ene Hk moe Ue permis Kin thus to Believe fimsel to hase tie fr a caer that be ex prey menos, ery Uda, KI, sc 9), al dies 8 perttous deison th we can make curse pent thes premebeing by mean ater than a mova atte” ane 51 xn eme no as how ta wich the praca aie ane mf sippane-—that “Gea” expres amit raiy, Bee B ‘cept moray and aap iia Mb Ad ing mould tm an Ran tel "Form mater ow poe foe from ages ef sense suc 2 conces ofthe spree Ben hay be ‘toma theoretical pont of vie; racial the bea ssi once las an Mo, ie, 4 concen of athena nha rs ike" tans, p 391,57) And HG di ot mace the ‘sk inperatie® Kant anewee wel km mt Hae to enloe Go and Chest a well exc the sme le a {example of he moa lw 9 Rolin some de Grn dey Ms soy Sk 3 vil p 13 ans Greene Han,» 0 oe 10 Fhe Phe a Cad ass Gila c ne gice We nan in des Werks F Maint 9. Liane aad pas 11 “Gut ote Reakres al ce los nase Wea” Limeade mene Beet el Stites VD Melon mao a alta eae moral eld ont wat Guan 12 tet eves li, |G Gi (Pn Pres nies tase France, 19981 OE The dx die infant fen the refer by Tassel 0 Gea” get abet presi Sec pret keer ae terete pss every ake eve pestle snc then fe aero he pre ae pe lef Gat” ore tin fas gases oer i the re cea eves Tinting comepe in epseroli consderatons nun apes kx orton cera tie eyes whi cree the poping. athe enh ih {td sce 18 rad) Reon TM eho rad nr alien 1 8 sie avn sk the eek en a {Gesamte de ile so, bine ale Ber a slr Su acer vetapsies ths begs a sch a a WH representing respect ht ier ine lle apd Catteni arenre 6 oerence a p62 fra 0 fal ee HuonantonsWeonrien, GA.9 82 ean Wa manna 1 tha, 68 Sein al Grd nl Stee al onder levees Transp 1S Pad ans. 9 Scone {6 de ans 0 the 4 ae, 72} One mn ear sn rua nice tee [cate tl ha wap tou he ir cee rr, 1 Sache Se geen 1A 0 ane Kel py 26-22) ad De Fee nah ey Tele Wve on nts «igen, 1A) 2 tran lowe p 26h igh of easly, Ged cm sk ot ve ft ese. coe fice He hen becomes even dag te alo theploepbers, mel ethace wine the un eak fd the cones in temo the cava making wi ese onetleringteesanial rigin hice The tinker aces, inc rating the rik epochs, ince one cn tre De wih,“ ot te prion ah ro fut esses fm Cond tng At ih he‘genuine metphysician be more religions (reg han she usual ffl han the members of chur ne even tha the de ‘every confession” Metab feed er ee ne ‘pongo Lb. 1928) GA, 25.211 fans Hemp Phd. p 64-65 ane, p73 mais Dave Be covey nce ake Deon te Ak An ple arene eA toe conta. he experience re fe Maer (hay 1 a0 shes) TH Metz, LPlingen 961). 66 Kr poe fed) Sees"Te una ow agai Gen! rd against the sinner sory word costs nthe ft at God he esto es ie ede ‘der Scene 6 degre 4 the ght si [2 Px ar Iain i) Te hes ow gins Gen tt thot Ga ic eld ote nknomabl, on Gen exstence erm be unpevable, but ate tha the ga eld etal levated ‘he ight valve For hs low comes prcely tm thse wi are nding about ws dont Belew Gd, ht ram hen Steir theologians mtn discourse onthe ing hl ig thems ining vam Nene ler eon ene fare tt seen fom out of fh, thee inna theta Sher bepemy ik mes nde thology oath ae Comes. ‘ro schlecht (ieascnen Wet aot 0 ede | 195. pp. 289-240 = GA, 9,260 (eae Levit p 105) Like when ‘he procaine ‘Ga the algerie ahi. fled ton eraletzung) of ads ence, Here a seule hiking tales the greatest spe areal nt Hes (0 era “itgnans,Wegmarhon oA. 9. $9 Hans el p23) ‘ne eves, hy wey faction: aio ast "Gea con ‘ies here. and in several comergent may, th ler gaint Hoig: bu eould one nt ssc that his very cence ewer ‘he two blaspemis costes by Hel th al no Tess bis tir even though prectly becomes posible, only to aie Fron the eke conde of no nk searing and new fing? 19. Sr, ote aa 195), 708-The ene work (aod therefore no dot ao Sane aly ule aha res oh the anion of Gono the cc eons a pre dis. tion (Hedger o Fascalian) beeen the paste oe” The fs ‘nation exeesed by the ent of the carer ap 714, v3 ee ‘an lsoluntay echo of he hte et esc Anh fon he tae digi Ost Hp 24.5 lanes wl 2p fnvests rt nthe sence of Gnd bat even the elementary chi Tolga the tone mt ere bee for el We ve ee tha dese kf henna de] Asc ect a Fin pe he ng wich lacks Thing we hase sce, the Be fete emesis Fecome ssn, sean heme unlit the Nan Ga ip ie Ec te el {os form se man ret le oe 708) a ene mes the nae and ages evade ta the hes ame ofthe ne reside in the caer wt He fn al Conceptual anlcmish unc amen hen? Tenn, Pw in ie hr 1 ans. Bs pis) 20 F Nate. Mike Call Mein VIA, p83. Hs ‘sand ites ade 1088 ra Kaan, 188 2nd erp sce 2, raged Aa, Lupa Sambo 8 {3 Fare Tanta: Wogan GA. 9 Aa soften eel py nyt 2TH) Tepe pw he es Seay Pee rene of heat epee Main, Ke Ustotcvaborpiclewiton emer pte ¢ mach athe thesis cat.no) Ts (2 The serge ae des wt tke place by some new saxo ne eve, rst the sol fe aes at Senco Where wo he tr crue ie ad Fretted ake fr Hw cu ere eee fe the gy an ava it Gra oa ene eae en las Gost dil ovate bint chine mexeethingtn 2 Thee, Tranter which aie the wane ek tek shed a re Gomi Teck see he within we even the or Fe el il eset ae fede Bk The eee he fore cng of ge ote a fede ae ck he hte oak Weer De Hole 10, 249 ae 250 A'S py Pad 22 Heater pp 9239094) 1h) “What he ad Ine ernie deal ae eee the celgioat of men a ese les bythe theses Arp and tal ckeice Whether it Gon come argh to panto ot of a wi the come eng ot ert str Kemtinton ds Sete de Dh sar Uwe Boe Teh nde el ge, 1962 pam op 9) The dad ence Heng ck the‘evanescence ofall tha ale in eins alles Heme Sind] “The evanescence ofthe hae takes the opens fhe ho las OF fone des Hedin) wi ta hee if Te cls the oy ‘ces very illumination ofthe dine dex Genta. The ‘epenine dark eniencies and conceal the Eck of Gon le ‘ents Hence the comespence,"Tecane ih re cot an ‘ld te destiny of tye es aif an he ack OF Gi [uneinucher als der Fo Ges sd Sages (esc: pp 394 and 395 fans Kel Ip 268) (“One could ote more esr han Theor every trp ‘employ Heino nk henogtale a what ay God isGott OF Heng, there noting to expect ve cee tht ein can newer be though tthe round and exec cf Gab th meses the ‘experience of Gor ad ffs manifest the eee tat he Tater ci indoed meet man fishes ia he cmon of Bes ih Ino way seis th Being. might he ode asa posse pret (x fr Ci (Simin the Lurch rer Fae aD Stu, Pogo 18 (Pars 10), pO see the eo) ane Grke newdegr f as eD Pa 1D, PA8 eh Seon Got rn rl pvc, ses a Seine Got ht 8 saya Sn Lt Got Gt eh eas ‘ie at act, rt as eft So st ei as Got isons Being evened uno fel nthe sence fs i gt) ‘ohh ina aersork) sents pole ng Goa” Some dit Thor 1964 Questo (py 25H) No ha hs bs teat st De uh Ted with more pene han te precaing eso ecu fs ‘mentary et a ode of anno he resent co {eat emai signin fete date he scp thee tet, Scethe Nae on he Dine and Related See atte cnetion of up 2 2 See, bee ale, pial ets: er ian es Ki. series in Hoge, pats 298 = GAP 2H fre Hofsadie p39) ar he snference Fae Ding rie od Auf | linger. 190) a which p31 tes Hose, pA "when we say lt we ae alr thinking ofthe the ce along ‘thi Dy ofthe spe onenese fhe Fr fs de fal do er The dsnises are te beckoning messengers the send [ee wintendon Bote do Gort) Ou othe en a of He Unites he od emerges se hat he whch rerones i fe 8 “omarion wth beings thar are presen, When we pee de ies wea area tke the ete hee along wh hey ‘er of the simple oneness fhe four” To simply things or saber eaerte ie emulate tbe pn rere cook ven Seats since the "apprpiating me pis the une nfl ‘ean an shy dates [eign nd mos eel te word” (ibd, 52 = p17, empaseakinh atheretie since the wh takes theo ofthe here cme the fon ae ftom “a” stati he wok wep the ek athe ee DS Rater to Wie at Nop a hymn A. 9p trans Kautann, p26, 2h Messe denny der bk (92M, A, 2p. 20 frame Hei, pt oman hs tet eas wh the rl. ne Se oud Ze sight ae eld ack oc P Whip (rane p 1G sess Wand 1 Tse precios aaulses are wl the "eat aon” ich characterize er, the Pre n Ze Sac de tos 999.947 ran Sanh pal 2 non ec amine scepter rae fl and Pde cai det Pentex). 0 N- 2 Pot Wf HOT rans Re Pa The ich ponte ae sel er oe. cam serve, ely tt erin ene ma veferente Onthe per ‘anenve othe penne meta othe pj an Ico Per ce the cristo Cin. Ea se ef homomerviee" In cece proce 4 (Pa 12 29 in Me de ond tv Megane, 6A. 9.159 ras. ck. p94 In ee Tet cones an ransom he eee tedsine ranscdenee it consti on the asf Pa “oe ms fis in a adapt comet of Date by amit vrancendence. Then, be eometering, Dash one cn ante poe wen oor fn the rls Dn Ge Heals cnc” The est fw, ta 9 he es thea Pace pone in ca cng eters in tance the penis of any question 6 Goat elore the "unt praia seat plas tre aa po Con tht ol be faves Here of Der a taf Se, changes hig Ke Present pores "uh hespectel ade sy Geran “De Rb GA, p12, onnrsene dr Pmumnemoae GA. 2110 tras fenton p79} Nery p45 ran by Stan IS om eer and Hera de on 9 Wr. eA DoIteans Sheehan, p. 222), We are no king account. Hf course, of the resus ets that ang a the mapa erp Gon sesupreme berg 31 Die Fc edd Ke p45 ans Lint moe. 32 See among ners. ire 24 rae Rel Hep 64a dost geo, 65s Sef 2 38 TDlins Fenburras une ‘poole qo mat tue ae four sete.” Merlyn the sae fem wh wold ne oud fon —teans "HU aquer de base cr” tery te cake of a poy yates, 135 poet in Brice an der Ave der Brunton Adee Hofgeismar, 11954 ans Hart and Marl. p65) 36 [5 apoule peut séonner de wover une Fourche” heal ifthehen an be suprised to al fork Trans [3a Fontaine, bey 8 Le ronan lige hope Tiree LL wingestetn, tracts Logi pipes 0.7 Seon. (Grau, 190), pa ar Res sd McC And See et od ier, p45 ia» Sou py 5-55) 2 nati of Arioe, Toe fps XV, Lake sce XIX, Tote Magness, il, 2. s,m De oo Yr e hc ned dente sens Hohe Dae, 196) pS * “Avot, Mexplyses A, 3, Rabr0| tans Hanes p55} “Origen, On be ong of Sos. G17. 2728 5 Dens, Dine names 13, PG. 3 59, Soe 22,724; Stal ‘reo 1, 9978 Cesta ern NV,9 tone ee sence that whi hidden supascs us" 3h, kewse Maxims Conese ey ath eeeies these he fain al ty ras) honoring he Woe one's Abia P91, 10% “Grea of Navan, hoe wt danger that ofsence sete NCL PG. 37,154 See Docotse XX, SX 14, PG. 365, especie 7 aah On the heme al as eis const 1 som Bal "W tn Seger Caro 8 Seda 1950) 7, See above chap. 1.56 1, 2a 1 One mig conser for imean. His ccs peat eer tanya unavare of the that a is dee Masrche t "beliew inte sires of an asics in fave of eter jpray thos a esiaton someting ie an astere Mu te for ase cate (8-H. 1 Drs ee hoa (rs Genet, 17h p25) An to auhnce he ada nenece {the ne he ere eal hs a eo De. {ars 1%). 2°0, want econ nce we ald hve {ahcrwse tink fier the se of a the existence and the Tatu athe Tea” hee nso eigen mie ‘esis Mend Gad ad Pl ce Sane Hage Ae, t2), Wale sur Mad, nc. 5 = Nisan, Wir, oll em $ 711% S217 Cae ce 151 a HSS te rans oul 1. Resse ce Hama, “Gencak of Nal then Goel cng Mas 1. Utne Kansan, py 312.56, 1 Wes at se. Niche. My, 17615. ahem se 639 = [0] 138 SLE fp 200 ard e712 [any Ra Inari Dance gpg. 4 ede We, ‘dn ec omer des de RET se Pe this ae nae Sel th ei ot he ex 22 eb lens Titnaspectiies tics sr se ext sls Mee” [There ae Ince fing that ean he tia wos They mae omsetes mange They ane whe ald mal” Tans Pats aad Me 1s Wile sur Sal, s 7 = Niche, Mire, 71154, VII,» 22 fran Kanan epi 14 Wile sur Bad, Iran Kata 15 rite Onstage trans 16. Soin Zao cs. , Samana Fein ‘eee 6s, AD) -6.To be ed eee fer once, she hile aon orginal ern kh wh ine Tc ge ‘Steen te, wares nate can rin i i "Mo Sein sieht nrkonmen Der Ge ha die ene des ei fit vig Wenn e is Bait Ie ee ict me Gabe as fra tarer setae. sarin sinc gene Kirt shee an das ‘neers Ihde nr he Sn Hindi asin Eg, decane Gates thea ene, sche escent dem Sein i er schneider a {Ge at ese Gat ee werden kann is ar gt Nascent, LH, TS, 2so de rahrung Ges seiner OMe (fer se Menschen begegnar in dr Dimes dx Soe she. ras eg es Sei kone as nice Praia fr Cot hon Her brauett cx gane neve Unicrchewkinge wn Arena Ausprace mu Maran Hedger) O6XDIOSE yee wed thom hy the Nonranchus der Salento dr ners 7 fich (arch, 198), We thank Mean Result Kr hang permite ts acceso this text [now published n Some te 18 aoe 196) pp. 435-37), 17 ce a crt der Bll one aft 1.1954 ans Hae ad sep 4-65 18 Msc hp 132 (a Rel Wp 8) 19. Phanomenalogie und Theol, Megnarken, GA, 9 9.6 rane Hat rd Maral, 20) "On philosophy a folshnes”bfire Go Fifa de ply, Ga, 0p 9 [ans Maen. Tan Hegmarken. A, 9p. 37 rans. Kalan in Extenda rom Deter 0 Sere, p27 21 Soe Mec 192 ran, Rel pf. oe Come mic comel ths roan I ihe, Ta nei le tenn Dialogue ane Heyer. 2 Par 1973), I poy pi eetret i Eee ite ron plc bs ‘oie Pans 1960), a5 wells "Heeger athlon Heder (rls quan de Di See fall -# Coun, Clon ed “hon Bi Gone ox 2 Brie ase ae cy Hic Akademie Hone, ‘rin Haan Maral, p65 Boge Bef der rata, olzweys. GR, 519828 IIB? rane Dove p.195;see aso pp 145-195 24 Meche, p34 tans eh 16) 2 Respect: Holswege, GA. 5p 2 ans Let Phe Qa tion Concerning Techs si tn Cer der Temenos in egmarkin GA, 9p. 9a Kr p22 26 De ats tom Gd Malis: NE, 157) pp. . 88.6 {Perce pp. 251,821,388, tans Kel. p20. pp, 28 Eda vd Dafevenz, 6465 rans Stambaugh pp. ‘se, toa ese degre, Ds ge mac dir Tce Nore wd uate. 25fta0s Lit p26 Dt, p24 “by dor Getter fi der Hage ich thm oder dann, wenn er pews "tether hel pies oe rene dhsivty the «paston convening my oF nthe uation ‘sre ate sil aR Hp 4a) See ea nd Dierers HA” Wane. Sas AL Respite Hes GA, 5p ag an tt in The Oman Cancernon Tks 12) en See ad Zt se Plott Alexa al ine pA Sew “Ger dew Asking tc Tol cn ole Horan p28 = GA, 220 ah knee tok sa oe wa py eb ase don sen 1927 he Perm rd Teste “Tek ae Wisc des Gabon Wega lr GA 9, S80 [Th the sence ah tran Ha a Mako a Pes of thing p 1 2 Phinemersdnie rnd Tove. Wegonirken, GA, 9, p58 Irs Hae Map 812 1 Sinn Za, ec 1. respecte 9. Ans. Mocquace and adios, p74 aa aA ane, p74 Umea See gn Se {0.40 Ly ans yy 284-9 where eee deseo aig beat es oi dees on iene he ont "so Pw cre peter see el 1A. espeutich, Manomenoloyle wn Thole GA. 9. p56 (is Har Maral p12 sere ahs cowepea remem sl an Sy rd Ze, se. 3 5 md ea, 7 47.9811 1. Meupinsete Anfamseronte dev fp 192A), Ga. 26.920 rans tet 16 hic apatite farms Stand Pomsee 4 47 Phenomenol snd Teo. fo. cp Aan 49 ans,» ‘6; Onihe theleal atom hs ton ee le Aa Rees sures rip epee ce ie paride teves ie Nein Hee nes Sones elses 1% SC Piyonornige soe lee toe itp SE fas.» Ant and Sean p10 Grae Hehe emp Sindee 2 quewion of separating te posses of exec of ich eset ale he tery a sh om eo ‘teem ese Anche doin he lls he cine. here, a ley mater? OF wha tery Sool e aqiestin Hy wha dg would ae id el pe ichnoad ner topper59. 3 trans.» 18nd 0. 64-85 rans. p19} Coreen ws oaerstoon ether prise mo as x mrs 3 psig i ela tion mh fred coordinates, which peat a healt. 2 pin pointing, dort he measuce ofa dit “A Fath say, We” of Dc i 5,1, being aia ans 12.172 “2 Respective, Pome Sr rie des Zt 19251 GA, 2p 109-M0 [trae Nel, pp 79-0 at Serpent ‘fensgrinde der ode 192, GA, 29.77 Herp HO) No dubs is oly 3 question, acanling to cei ens of na. nce of acs, but in phenomenology, appearance ls mares that whch appear even if dnc un aay conrespol ey wih 4 Thu stheben here should he "etx val renews more igor i yefers in fate "deconnectn’ ef Godin the pros enol eatin (User feo Ise 98) ad the cones of the alia neta of Dee (emonesas Py Ls, eco ton Fextconce are Hust ot Hexige (Ps, 19,1. P10 1H) Secabone,chap. 2, nn. 27 a hd De a “Ti sng co explain ho Chron tol ad Deen able beac oerve a3 ph onward hat wc Fema he tos fe 1 See teres sr Sra, pe ras et Bets) an he ten ta 1951, Fe tin PG 13, ced 1 ahene “Hey der Got Holden Hone “Gero” ond “Dor bein? WS 193438, GA, 39, pp 271, 2 One ane ens ced Sea te sign of 3 aon metaphysical hog He here ‘writen a Sin this graphic care ees fo detibe chang ta ‘Seton cried nk nthe fst courses ca erin "Die Tend und de Kare, 45 vans. lan The Queton omceming Technolog. (rie se la 2.081 shoe Dr de “uranic Weyer, GA. pp 819-820 (ans Keel p20) "Fr Helene 209 = GAS, 227 rans Lint in The Question Camco Tcinolog 9. %0 1] The redaction every ent peace to ue even mre develop n Aare “sian Krell pp 158-169 “Be See A. Cat Les énmes dun hémisice Mique a Pew Te. Bugis Ton 314, oe Co 20. 11-24 Cas, 19, 1h. 20, 2, and H, Capt, Pour ne eye de F411 ai, pp MAE isk hat he ano eX dees eam aera neste tense oils eeon hen 4 Faetone fie Pas. 179), p 9. We sma wh he commemary rf Basan ihe hee finds el ene scp ihe dine crn Recon he st cere Outen a, WAY P49 Concern te tke Sane aan ale 318. nko Ea Br iced Se Hse sci se Te tg ne fey 20, le mas he hse re fl tetas St 7a nn "Tee seme de Fp sm son cx etna de Tae Der Teper The fecem stat of Dace, Hs sr Tee tae de Aen” RP ene XV ne) og eh Convincing remain res no da on 4slton fe ee ten earch of eoance—the dsc tera here cn mare Fae origi) eer ae thet Anan sm Haine teu hese eve iy bere wh ag mew eds Osary Ta Ryves Dass her rented Ses Rotget i TN Aen hate el ens kon pact te ‘1 There anew cre yh," ecm aerate ie $14 che Kats pes ee premier Chane Fae p08 wh oes pare Si yerees nthe polemics ant Fue oc cer [mcemsontoghin te ane fo tm eer sen TE {inthe een wh ave oan} ed se cee. rmrk Me can even ge fcr api seenet Tay Re Harn pian ty aly 4) Sz dn heh here conga pte ec Des te Re Re ey on pa ey thon she ilo ben tan th en thc hme ae he en av apo an eae thine nonats t e saeteed Me h arxe-ahuhrenkesevesingbe (PG core No ERCHLT ck SCT Baur eae Src ae megane heaton ae ENP59 espe, De Vn, 21 tans Scum St shen ent Genes 18 Br teapeteltonernmts D. 1 the 2 caine pp 2,98) Oban ne mst ot eet tha hes ta dee tier foe Beamer he pper me G4 The timate mire che ene st st aes one ass HME lan tt one sore the erin of Cvs cmt ‘Gr criign ex ma sen, 697 Wi Che Ge eas conten weld the Father ans. p16) Te SM per tne thos loc i hath, ie Che an apesks tin truth, eas hn whe epee hs Tame Se the strange ecemeria gis his tex hy Fon "ie et Die rue Thome 1962p 197 5 Dem Ast! Fiology, 2 G4, Hs. On the cones ance berm aaa Res, sce ca stab 9 hie Ut di vce, sce [ata Stes aeponkalcxpesin ince“ wre prc of tnd yet techn ese NS Pe aes 9. 824h, nape: Die Name. 7 Ib then ¥ AB. ia ta cern thers of oie ial dene 7 Summa Too, U9 13. 11 many Baers othe Enlsh Dominican Province 70x) ‘Se Repel, Dione Names 8,007, en 17 Wi, ad fia 10, 0S See a3, A te aoe 56) anh v.18 7a “9 Temi queen compete lx — Tr (Gath reduction ofthe Bonin nan nt ont se mame without fom ees rao ag ai ere oman among the vey feet ocurence, We cane Fem Deus noms expos, el Carano Rome, 1950), erage, 29-98, 355, ete c the commentary: pp SDP: Soma Tien i, 3.22 1Con Gentes. 2 "Baddest Commcrary one Sences. 18 1.35, spss sts ibe De erate, 23a Tinga es {he Suntma Theil. 82 The oe pies eo 1 (thick sib mporation. 1 Reape comment on te Sens Lal a8 se ie ume Polo, 542, ep ans, 2 wh tt mi ompane wa chs grin al th paar Actes putts fot i Beng el soning 8H Peete engages fone eR nes expen oe 89 248.063 ee meiner tone sete the present wo celebrate t mab progress co Christian shunaghn, Der _avending tor Gal, “never rose abv Neo “stares che France. 19M pp L2A-139- : iantne capacity of screen upon which every ing i protean anf ssthe vb, costes the conaitnn i psy pa exe Tce eer a tht wu fe ometed 2 Such —narich 3 fret Beng opens he cise] dary asthe sreen| oo ‘vey tol 1 The comparison of | Crkablane 122 with de ae eon cn of Meupbynes 2.1, YOR nS, comes fom Heidegger Hise of ure Cgmaren, GA, 9p. 379 ans Raman in xemalon From Doers to Saree, 9275). "Campo ransnes “ui apell ce gol ist pas comme Cnt agine The Vlgte renders se Woven te DON SO tag eepta sar sad es dem, ds ll 6 8 "A German (Chole) tearslaion fers more eas “ss echt Seiendeals eed herbert (L de Wee, De cher des even ‘amon (elder, 182), 284) 70 See Aste, Pc M1, 200582-84 (ihe kd of meta ant expel he dovussion cf sot gone, On Generation and ‘Conf, 38038, whch scr to Usa aot ener ffom fate peneration nly by acetal relative act ‘Ste te ssa reine as (SIND2B) eo sens "Pls , 192b13-14 32 Seen, 20abowe 75. The Vl trast: et, sue non sun, a ste soe doruete” (deuce reds, poor more ne, tar, ab Tan Liter understands "und a de cass oF 7 wie ube, ems Bt Helder Has ve aaron isp end so hat Gort as Anse Ger Wel de Nese, das ehusetende aera um die Svede, da Henshaw fiche" (heaps oensgrnde dr La GA, 2, p 222) This sca rw asi ah as Merson). ceo preci Se ex us nse upon the fa that Pl uses ata, confor sunk prfane ussite acne et to ei aM ‘Bon reve,sogpend (2 cre, ve U0 sna 9 Ro Irons $3,414 72,1 Corian, 26 Epesins 215,66 "5 frst, Mpls, V1 10283 The gun ea ered ty te sf ann Uke 99 (where it Hea wh seeks «0 sin acs 1727, where is the pagans who eck Genk” wheres fm the eorary agape "hos Sk mn ho RE ‘euts€1 Covrtians, 135) tn Tis 39 sere ae th cha tevoe a spd” One mgt even haat at "Wo sok fe es an aio arena, hi recto, precy aga, Ds comme ne re tapi vet een puna te ee Se vane ao ee an hl Sine cute Ta * neste ses a erm prc eric in ss L20-Dk nthe dtr se Kin rene time, ten Wala a roy ermine ince nhbwely an terete, hs exresion ar Sl sonar poo fo reper poses ear wea The pre plies proper meaning oer aed th twas cae tg to te ed ‘er See sn wth na ae etn digest Gumabrbiome cer Phamamentege Che Bh pT iran Thseator p13) Soe Hempstead ssc tener fog 6.28. ean Hemp ads Ss este tae cons 0 Alosense ina ien suse —Tame A ev a that the ample fa oa or roses place efter the i nse ee he a shares (ich ate ung th er see ler sare ence Iroc sins kn of ont Tene ty fh fae Fed eh Ft oc, tn ali thes eng somes cer pthc) ang Cate ey {rela the no apes er He exchanges re fir eate ay the rela. essen ese cate CA tok Gamers Bi so the se ees a a ot rewnize the ee the ery tment he seize te hse Bren nt Hee he hs el te ff te dts th Pak pte poe 2 The same et eet ke 6 to chara he ew nwo" the ae agent hse Oe Swat: ace Cl eae gar de sed Co vee ™ lee 1 "ithe mee the prin In cio, hich nat soni ii hte hg pre die sy. wel therefor alent agit Th kl cool he thesemeat orth recta ref” M hel ie de Aarne 4 Ores te het tn Ftc mae et De law Hef he trees erates dome TAAL WORT 1 saw to Zo ses Ae An Zi ee,asi, of which Zur Sache des Deon py 7-29, 2828 eas San faa pp 16-20, 28-24) Soe ou pei appeach Fle a dette 19. Respect, Zar Sabo es Dene pen 19 Samia (eae p17 19 Ta Zur Se des Don. 17 fasta of dis paane, wed her anSumagh,On Tne ed eo pL 7 Sef an esto thee” ane in sel ein able ale bac, se. BR La rove aque Deri Hench renckring of te enn pieang Tess 99: Deans, Dame Names, 2, PG, 3,8. coepe Far cece tina aotarnesn cus an pewter in slp 8 Ions. Athenee sng ec pry tate rel dar tae el eid iy ah Thess nha ht Teams eames pa PSs ats env Ran Wn he upd" Act ke Pneephaet esac 48 avn dries Soe Whee fs Maps? inate Wt ing p18 TH Weymonior 9p fas Kanan, Avera fiom Prater 0S, 26 12 Went dane hl he “sapsng ara, 1s “saerc orem psrane Mathews p32 [Http ei crn ts naa is concion(ace 124 Thal einer scope fic the Gate el osc a conmetary nth mgr sentence Vso) sft Oe tt Be > Tbs ducers samnennae rie 11 AE Ba, 1TH Weg 24. 11 ra Rain ak We OS 1 Seed 21 49,422 9140 nl he commentary Diy dae cpp O°-98 We wl he acl oes here he lean of aioe ofetination prey queen nak Arena of protee 1H See Dba ean err ners, ay 8 ‘shoes we a sation de ee he sca tha indo pres at canes, Ihe ata. PS ace pS Lewis Telco Ds evoke the ung Inhale he ted elt es ys ere ccc, dapper taste eth pases tore ne {cco hth eb swaps, ere monger hae sie Eat at tli Aw are a oe se el (verso ede [as ISTP 724 Th ei the wale andl Tce xan cl the ee ssh exh 19 "hw evs apne sae ara ene, OE «soho Fecha. n Ope Seta TeCML i Tuenhunn 19991 284 At to Gent Nn, he hist Aline the el een aspera sic des te ‘ls we eng he we wean he wn sl har olds aye wo thn me cure ca ings at ota "Ante sy pp he necks Ags pens! Hough vt ain We aes-sueuures inthe in an frig arose the athe pes Seends or the ace to exch op tone men Sax” (Conmetar ius Beeston LY. 628- (har 1976) turgusiguset model cei db parle Cnr fesion dea oi series eed Cries. 17 gory Nala, Oratoney XXXL, PG. 46 lh. nar sword ade tml ier regi: Now are Bingo ee Dio longer of Go but of lo What al (Met, a Tre Exes [Pai 980), p77) Despite we, more eal than trae ony becabe nse ste oe hs 8 ‘hah sit on ape, shold ree mene nee "Xregory of Navan, Oraones OM. 8.76 36,1 5 ste, fount Pagel, 1%. 8, CSL, wi MG CT out 1950 92 No dtc one mu rite hance a this tear mee by Hamann 0 cere is Acre Nice (as JF court, nF 13 ars 1960) p41. 10 Gullume de ae Take, Super Cantca Cantera, 02, ‘eet Decne, "Sources Cretennes (Pans, 142), 96 ans these modi) Mother Clu Hap 16 sds chemin ene alley an alison whe ranch mln of Heder ge Trans 12 See Te Feeney es pasts piss, Remt cat Tes, ire ne, 9, 8, and he aed co vn of Masi Cfo on J Sy) Sea Ibe Penn eprint fan Ten ae usa dice eter pan ete settle cis, sl en age ns per sen” (Fgura De Dit Snes Jn We oak nyt ste than tha he ke of Le coms tates epg cont sg ey Tr Dandnk k e l er otakep ga etan ps sas ro Henke, omen rn Pente, Marben, GA 9. pp Start slnane Hera Mar, py eH, LETS R.bians Dine Name 1 PG, 480 crepe se 1. pti ics ne eines tt onan expe ssn ews tone 2 Theol aig i conmon wih clei and ep Sciacca le Catesnan Fegcaon pasede Puch cx Descartes et dom Desa The Hage. 17) ingore pp. 8,1, 3-326 Is panto uderine, ee more than ce) Aragahe e Ste Tome and Du Sens foros the Fates) propove no expaaton o echt pies thar mould clan to eke op the mer of te ay of Ch wn bom thecogil deol corps Only Descartes dL wll {ake hs sep This wy the equtalnce ote iso the Bcast that}, Galton assomes CLopque de MEucansie~ in Reve ca Tig inemationale Communi 5,197) seems dsp or there an ous Unewennes aan oes egal dspace blthedicurse fon contemplation k pees explanation, “The ung thos woul henoe the eucanstepreseice the ‘hind Bate mould hoor Lous XV onthe lia of te eens Ae ig, me ancons hs eal presence are sre sl, ‘and whch acl fm, copiers tht bok hn ‘owe ta he ves ony by tat ate Ths Taller wa ae Soe to celebrate a Eucarst even ore pte an pte ES Mls tro a foe eI Ma ets comptes, lade Pars. 1945) p.485 rane Whey, FSL One fre srpi to seo Malem ced ere nly oe aeesnenes eran eucharitexshat would ment oro sega rea ing. Catbolcame, in Vasa sur ot set, Hoe ct Pp 390, tric coma sequence at remarkable a hele correc. 1394, Touser denounced thik in peuured and precise terms “Eucharisie présence eller transsotation i Recenesde Secs Rls, 1965.2 9 To retgrateansigucaton an astnalation on any scalton in order to consolidate them we the or oe Baie hi 'Prsence euhorsique et Tansey ema, 1999 nd EBuchurte oua, 1964), Ease ec) EX. Durrell (teucharsie prsence da Cre, [Pts 197). aed 1. Nin (Chresence rele eacharstique etree” Bere Hemet 1991) We ad taken up this aim, mln recent Teokypeal een to dea as shove ss, Posen x deance Rito ‘si (ae, 1978). 10. Persona hry, ee John a Pama Cee 8 The vest les te ol serie in persona Cit which means me than in the cae or im place of Ch. Ta persona fay in the speci seraentalWeneation the ret pies of he ee tl Conenant who eae athe piel sue i his ‘scr, a which he cnnot be replace by any” tans. Se mtn oc de a saute ever Pars PHD.) 2A) 11. e can nerd hs wh eerting Fach on co so bean incl he nn fe commun ge trea fn of coma fcc comeues oa Coin A cranial commie ome Seti anette ome e care cee ieetoe ms dcrmiannn the poy, 8s cage ‘stn tay eed eg of Pt ee (Sethe committal pert Tha co nigh pr ae due he elegans the eer? nee funk By me he “ec eave realy Ovens narra te Pe tae fr 1p 109) thane sk tome ya oy beac seh et ur tenet aw hw Pete nce on commen fiend ne i eas Senet que to th conn ees by nero ing aveater on ci a nena Be re ent cha ore 101 a tyke 1 Maton cel he ee Bese Toren te: eet too har Aer spe meee on 2 tephra, “es ei da a tein ov prevent CHER( gers, 177 p hana He Pe commenc ‘nen commen, tinue se eine (ese, I) fn Fen 9. Dey the aden pele de ‘rau oe wi an erie ex he die oa Comin, tiie ee theses be eo Cena Gonmuntm hess secon, te eC ‘sth Gee Unde Cres de fom impor se Snot has eat ashe ha ee re Cae emp cieny thn tsar ah. tive tae fa ne ey cn) ee ke wp inset fn he cine ie corps forme “ir envi ahes keel f sean compen, Du qt" proce hg once aaa pa Go ie ise ete Te ea pat pr ne de nee pcs of aes a, pA a feta) haquen oan barat tka asin, ever ea othe dred a re the i i trent kendo shar bya ae 9 sein fee psec al rate cat, olean the eer tcc no poses, a inde Ek ein a nh, Za Meta fat Le Freon tee omens Tn Hae 1951) se commence iene te eee i incaranonal tec ating thao a ea a wh ee species es ay) so Fehr cee sus aes sea pome gy esesrtin ere ee Sere ulland ok op cp R2KS. wie ogee er oe tam agen dapernce te eset 8m apes nde ey the cca presente cos pee uy peers kal te ema suet oe amine soy cet Hest ae the pring ons bre afer corse hem of re naa peesence cbt ony ease MIL Te oul hoki nA cet re argos es orn oar wen the pes mea a Cam ands cc Te eer oe ete role the pated we es HSS ara ge to presences, penta ) nea Tre con por He te sam ote Ean oma own de Casey 1970 9 paca Can ee ces the Raat the en (te Bee ry of ere) nah case falas aos ete camino WT Conse) iran the dea and etn ere ee pee (Bese, Charts, "Dust Cechen 4) sre ncn sa oe ah of eae Frc fered member ofthe comin hee th bore te conecraon, wa ered (0 lO mene pe commarnt wi owt cps Ta ot es ats pcs cea cig dhe comer reso eat of te We! ge, Eneycopay sc, 552 as Walice a MY OP ete ere mc or he Catia twas wl DoE eee atene psence reopened he weet oS thei ea i See ibe ine i xe cannes an ace present AN. CT to and a re das PAT One wouk! have te give all the Hegelian parallels to tis ikem re thane the fete te Pa a eT tel me ft tet ea te eee crc snl he] exerts n reyes {isn ani an rea et ma iene ee sete me iH 8 ne eae macaw tna i Ca rele lp me gn, and en pH) See ao he roman fein AN aes te cime perspec, Reverb he Fence of sient M7 ‘he nny Renz a lc aes 4 ges Bevan et os beet of easy ra se Username aoe shige, ean therane oie et fh tn a a anthine Atcgeie sl Hosen. 85-384 Bo cme a cass 1 hanced ee See em nance (onions enero fae id ce im ane he crete am tas em nde an ie perpen tc skeletal Me epeat ume” hepeimacy fhe fee ae a he rae atthe peyton cones operiens i ee i er shake Pan ese ale vo he ora one Fram me ter he ven ely he es Sa funn re Sai ee 20 rey pre fr pote Heda (P81 ABE i pect ay 8 2 Oa cr ata semen ett trae per de Mer) Tou Ulett PS awe sean, chee ee tina ot weece Fre fi fen Vso ic aca em “hy ee es aden st a ie peta ON ones: Pe an, 6) eit esa cee as 10°94 182 and Tue Fatt tna nse a, 1782 Ives abate a afte Dacre techs” MP PAY Ye eelson foe whic the Church sl oes wha he vor dl 1 es 2 todo i (pAz9) a Tees WP 8D ay he Moria of asclsportancns es Ne Oo ae eran seas nil sa ee tae ays wa esc 0 NEM the mem ty ce, athe a keto, el i Pee i pte ana 1684 pI). a Ce cen sh ace fal Bt fsa (nin WA a es mv ne ey ht otk, wi oh Gd he presen nant of recoletion (he TH ps

You might also like

• Her Body and Other Parties: Stories

  

  From Everand

  Her Body and Other Parties: Stories

  Carmen Maria Machado

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (821)
• Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore

  

  From Everand

  Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore

  Jay Sekulow

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (137)
• The Sympathizer: A Novel (Pulitzer Prize for Fiction)

  

  From Everand

  The Sympathizer: A Novel (Pulitzer Prize for Fiction)

  Viet Thanh Nguyen

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (122)
• • Magazines
  • Podcasts
  • Sheet music
• A Man Called Ove: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  A Man Called Ove: A Novel

  Fredrik Backman

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (4610)
• The Light Between Oceans: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Light Between Oceans: A Novel

  M.L. Stedman

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (789)
• A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True Story

  

  From Everand

  A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True Story

  Dave Eggers

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (231)
• Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln

  

  From Everand

  Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln

  Doris Kearns Goodwin

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (234)
• Fear: Trump in the White House

  

  From Everand

  Fear: Trump in the White House

  Bob Woodward

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (738)
• The Outsider: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Outsider: A Novel

  Stephen King

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1840)
• Brooklyn: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Brooklyn: A Novel

  Colm Tóibín

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (1946)
• On Fire: The (Burning) Case for a Green New Deal

  

  From Everand

  On Fire: The (Burning) Case for a Green New Deal

  Naomi Klein

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (74)
• The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century

  

  From Everand

  The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century

  Thomas L. Friedman

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (2259)
• Sing, Unburied, Sing: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Sing, Unburied, Sing: A Novel

  Jesmyn Ward

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1104)
• The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America

  

  From Everand

  The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America

  George Packer

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (45)
• Devil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New America

  

  From Everand

  Devil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New America

  Gilbert King

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (266)
• Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race

  

  From Everand

  Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race

  Margot Lee Shetterly

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (897)
• The Woman in Cabin 10

  

  From Everand

  The Woman in Cabin 10

  Ruth Ware

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (2520)
• Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future

  

  From Everand

  Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future

  Ashlee Vance

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (474)
• The Art of Racing in the Rain: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Art of Racing in the Rain: A Novel

  Garth Stein

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (4203)
• Wolf Hall: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Wolf Hall: A Novel

  Hilary Mantel

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (3811)
• Shoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of Nike

  

  From Everand

  Shoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of Nike

  Phil Knight

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (537)
• The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer

  

  From Everand

  The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer

  Siddhartha Mukherjee

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (271)
• John Adams

  

  From Everand

  John Adams

  David McCullough

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (2409)
• A Tree Grows in Brooklyn

  

  From Everand

  A Tree Grows in Brooklyn

  Betty Smith

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (1929)
• The Constant Gardener: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Constant Gardener: A Novel

  John le Carré

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (104)
• The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy Answers

  

  From Everand

  The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy Answers

  Ben Horowitz

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (345)
• Manhattan Beach: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Manhattan Beach: A Novel

  Jennifer Egan

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (792)
• The Perks of Being a Wallflower

  

  From Everand

  The Perks of Being a Wallflower

  Stephen Chbosky

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (2104)
• Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance

  

  From Everand

  Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance

  Angela Duckworth

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (589)
• Bad Feminist: Essays

  

  From Everand

  Bad Feminist: Essays

  Roxane Gay

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1016)
• The Yellow House: A Memoir (2019 National Book Award Winner)

  

  From Everand

  The Yellow House: A Memoir (2019 National Book Award Winner)

  Sarah M. Broom

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (98)
• Yes Please

  

  From Everand

  Yes Please

  Amy Poehler

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1898)
• Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It

  

  From Everand

  Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It

  Chris Voss

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (842)
• Angela's Ashes: A Memoir

  

  From Everand

  Angela's Ashes: A Memoir

  Frank McCourt

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (440)
• Principles: Life and Work

  

  From Everand

  Principles: Life and Work

  Ray Dalio

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (599)
• Steve Jobs

  

  From Everand

  Steve Jobs

  Walter Isaacson

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (806)
• The Little Book of Hygge: Danish Secrets to Happy Living

  

  From Everand

  The Little Book of Hygge: Danish Secrets to Happy Living

  Meik Wiking

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (401)
• The Glass Castle: A Memoir

  

  From Everand

  The Glass Castle: A Memoir

  Jeannette Walls

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (1715)
• The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life

  

  From Everand

  The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life

  Mark Manson

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (5806)
• The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You're Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are

  

  From Everand

  The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You're Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are

  Brene Brown

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1091)
• Little Women

  

  From Everand

  Little Women

  Louisa May Alcott

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (104)