Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:38:02.133Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Metaphorical Non-Sequitur?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 January 2009

F. Sontag
Affiliation:
Pomona College, Claremont, California 91711

Extract

There is no particular problem with using ‘metaphorical’ language where God is concerned. In Metaphorical Theology Sallie McFague offers a lengthy analysis to show us that metaphorical language is legitimate for theological discourse. This should come as no surprise to anyone except positivists or other stringent empiricists who accept nothing but direct evidence for any discourse. Traditional theologians, such as Thomas Aquinas, have long held that no discussion of God directly qualifies divinity. Mystics, as McFague acknowledges, have in fact been shocked at the idea of speaking about God directly. What, then, is McFague's point in reminding us of the necessary indirection of all speaking about God? She is attempting to curb the increasing agnosticism, if not skepticism, among contemporary theologians, by speaking to what she considers to be ‘the contemporary sensibility’.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Scottish Journal of Theology Ltd 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 SCM Press. London, 1983. All page references are to this edition.

2 The Feminine Mystique. Laurel Books, Dell Publishing Co. New York, 1983. All page references are to this edition.Google Scholar

3 Trans, and ed., H. M. Parshley. 1953 and 1988. Picador Classics, London. First published in French in 1949. All page references are to this edition.