Movement, space and the logic of the gift: Reflections on Milbank and the African religious archive

This article reflects on how the contemporary relationship between movement and space can be reversed so that movement regains priority over space in the experience of life. Its key argument is that movement has potential to take priority over space but only via the logic of the gift. The logic of the gift has potential to undermine the privilege colonial modernity accords to space over movement because its conception of exchange challenges exchange as a construct of economic logic central to the experience of modernity. The article focuses on the gift as is found in the work of John Milbank and the African religious archive. It tries to show that along with Milbank’s imagination of the gift, the gift as a construct of the African religious archive stands to contribute in the fight against the continuing alienation brought about by the project of modernity. This is because it imagines the sacred dimension primarily via the terrain of the family.Contribution: This article contributes to a reading of capitalism via the logic of the gift as a construct of the African religious archive and does so by borrowing from the work of theologians. In doing so, it tries to present a different way of thinking about gift giving in relation to the African religious expression, which has until the recent past been dominated by anthropologists.

Between God and the world: a critical appraisal of the sophiology of Sergius Bulgakov

The sophiology of Sergius Bulgakov has exerted a significant amount of influence over Anglophone theology over the last decade. Theological figures as significant as Rowan Williams, John Milbank and Paul Fiddes, to name but a few, have positively engaged with and utilised Bulgakov's sophiology within their own theological contributions. Thus, for many, Bulgakov's sophiology has proven to be a fecund source of theological inspiration, especially when articulating the relationship between God and the world. However, historically, Bulgakov's sophiology has been criticised by many Orthodox theologians, who argue that Bulgakov's proposals are theologically flawed and challenge traditional orthodox readings of Christian doctrine. Despite the controversy surrounding Bulgakov's use of Sophia, very few comprehensive, critical studies of Bulgakov's sophiology, spanning its historical development, exist. This article seeks to fill this void at a time when Bulgakov's sophiology is enthusiastically adopted by many without an accompanying critical lens.

What’s Wrong with Subjective Rights?

Whether a right is natural or legal, it is a kind of property. This chapter examines the thought of five contemporary Christian thinkers, who hold that the modern concept of a right is tied—certainly historically but perhaps also logically—to Hobbesian social contract theory or Ockhamist nominalism, and therefore to radical individualism and moral subjectivism: Alasdair MacIntyre, Joan Lockwood O’Donovan, Oliver O’Donovan, John Milbank, and Ernest Fortin. It concludes that these critics variously misinterpret Ockham and overestimate the influence of Hobbes. Nevertheless, they are correct to discern that modern rights-talk does tend to shut out other kinds of moral discourse—that ‘rights’ do tend to displace ‘right’. As a consequence, it obscures the contingency of rights upon other moral considerations and so upon justice, all things considered in the circumstances.

The wisdom of John Milbank: a critical appraisal of Milbank's sophiology

Despite the theological controversy surrounding ‘Russian sophiology' amongst Orthodox theologians, John Milbank has claimed that it has proven to be one of the most daring theological breakthroughs within twentieth-century theology. He further considers it to be a fecund avenue of theological and philosophical reflection that has the potential to effectively communicate his central theological arguments in a new idiom. However, many of the positions which Milbank adopts within his sophiology prove to be controversial. This article offers a critical appraisal of Milbank's sophiology, drawing particular attention to several theological aporias it appears to generate and leave unresolved.

Peace and War: A Christian Alternative to the Metaphysics of Violence

В статье рассматривается богословская концепция «мирной онтологии» (ontology of peace), противопоставляющейся «онтологии насилия» (ontology of violence). Данное различение принадлежит современному богослову Джону Милбанку и обладает эвристической ценностью для христианской метафизики при её диалоге с постмодернистскими философскими и богословскими нарративами. «Мирная онтология» выступает фундаментальной истиной христианского мышления и жизненной практики, позволяющей признать весомость и значимость различий как дара божественной аналогии. The article discusses the theological concept of «ontology of peace», which is opposed to the «ontology of violence». This distinction belongs to the modern theologian John Milbank and has heuristic value for Christian metaphysics in the need for its dialogue with postmodern philosophical and theological narratives. «Ontology of peace» is the fundamental truth of Christian thinking and life practice, allowing us to recognize the weight and significance of differences as a gift of divine analogy.

RECONCILING JOHN MILBANK AND RELIGIOUS FREEDOM: “LIBERALISM” THROUGH LOVE

ABSTRACTJohn Milbank's critique of the secular as a violent distortion of Christian theology is well established. Less clear is how Milbank's framework might bear upon secular liberalism as it specifically relates to liberal ideas of religious freedom and public or secular reasons in political contexts. This is especially worthy of investigation since “religious freedom” is part of the liberal framework Milbank so stridently critiques. This article attempts to reconcile Milbank's theological critique of secular liberalism with the idea of religious freedom by applying Milbank's theology and the law of love to liberal notions of public discourse for the purpose of redeeming and transforming that discourse. This redeemed “liberalism” provides a framework for persuasion to the Good by recognizing that all public positions (including secularism) are ultimately faith positions, and advocates a discourse governed by the law of love to produce genuine religious freedom that paradoxically transcends and fulfils the liberal ideals that secular liberalism proclaims but can never attain.

The Politics of Virtue?

Interlude B reviews The Politics of Virtue: Post-Liberalism and the Human Future by John Milbank and Adrian Pabst, in which they charge “buffered” liberalism and authoritarian interventions with the “atomization” of society. For them, “post-liberalism” replaces “market, state, and technocracy” with the relational fabric of “society, culture, and interpersonal relations.” They also hold that “virtue ethics” is both “more demanding” than utilitarianism and “less moralist” than Kantian deontology. They go on to review politics, economics, culture, and international relations, providing significant insights for a viable post-liberal agenda. Although applauding the general tenor of the book, the Interlude takes exception to a number of accents, such as appeals to (unreflective) “naturalism,” “verticality,” and “neo-medievalism.”