Congratulations to First Things contributing editor David Bentley Hart:
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, today awarded the 2011 Michael Ramsey prize to ‘Atheist Delusions’ by David Bentley Hart at a gala lunch at the Telegraph Hay festival.
Speaking about the winning entry, Dr Williams said it “takes no prisoners in its response to fashionable criticisms of Christianity”.
[. . .]
Dr Williams described David Bentley Hart as “a theologian of exceptional quality – but also a brilliant stylist. This book takes no prisoners in its response to fashionable criticisms of Christianity. But what makes it more than just another contribution to controversy is the way he shows how the most treasured principles and values of compassionate humanism are rooted in the detail of Christian doctrine. I am pleased that we have identified a prize winning book that is so distinctive in its voice. It is never bland. It will irritate some, but it will also challenge and inspire readers inside and outside the church. No one could pretend after reading this that Christian theology was lacking in intellectual and imaginative force or in relevance to the contemporary world.”
May 31st, 2011 | 10:13 am
Among other things, this reflects very well on Rowan Williams, one of David Hart’s few genuine peers in theology.
It must be very boring to be David Hart. I can’t think of more than 4 or 5 theologians in North America who would not put him to sleep.
May 31st, 2011 | 11:10 am
Although I understand that the reference is respectfully made, it seems impossible to imagine David Hart bored. Such an overflowing mind. His companions exist throughout time.
May 31st, 2011 | 1:13 pm
Congratulations to Mr. Hart! :D
May 31st, 2011 | 1:19 pm
Very good news. Congratulations to Mr. Hart.
May 31st, 2011 | 2:05 pm
DBH, THE Theologian!
congratulations!
May 31st, 2011 | 5:15 pm
DBH is a treasure.
May 31st, 2011 | 9:19 pm
Dr. Hart deserves this award. He’s not only brilliant, but an indispensable writer, here! The only question is: what took them so long?
June 1st, 2011 | 8:17 am
“…. he shows how the most treasured principles and values of compassionate humanism are rooted in the detail of Christian doctrine.”
Now theists are appropriating humanism as a creature of christian doctrine. That is not right and Dr William’s notion of conflating the christianities with humanism is tendentious. What of the values and principles of humanism rooted in Buddhism or Islam, or Hinduism, or ancestor worship in Papua New Guinea? Are they too, to be equally accorded this deep relationship with humanism?
Humanism is about human relationships with humans, irrespective of the type and colour of theism. Indeed humanism rises above and eclipses religion; it is the common makeup, the features, qualities, properties and traits that identity us as humans without recourse to any reference to religion. Religions, in one form or another, are proscriptive boundaries that spotlight the difference in people rather than their similarities and give prominence to that ‘difference’. To conflate humanism, those universal aspects that are products and a function of our genetic and evolutionary makeup, with a doctrine [putatively] handed down by a non-human from a different universe [a supernatverse] simply does not meet the criterion for reason and logic. Such conflation is not based on fact or evidence or any other form of substantiating verification. The christian doctrine subverts all that it is to be human to the indignity of being simply ‘god’s creature’ with which he can do whatever he wishes.
And he deserves the award.
June 1st, 2011 | 9:58 am
Papalinton’s understanding of humanism reflects both a misunderstanding of how the term is used in Christain discourse and a profound ignorance of the history of Christian thought.
Congratulations to the ever readable DBH!
June 1st, 2011 | 11:54 am
Do you guys have any recommendations on the best works of Hart to kick off with? I have never read him before.
Love the blog BTW
June 1st, 2011 | 1:46 pm
Congratulations Dr. Hart!
My prayers for your continued health and writing.
Damien here is my recommendation: http://www.amazon.com/Aftermath-Provocations-David-Bentley-Hart/dp/0802845738/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1306949290&sr=8-3
A simple search of First Things will give you most of the essays in the collection. From there: The Doors of the Sea, then: Atheist Delusions, and finally: The Beauty of the Infinite. I find nearly all of Hart’s writing well worth the effort. (His vocabulary is way bigger than mine)
@ Papalington: Where and when did the humanism you speak of begin? It certainly has a pedigree.
June 2nd, 2011 | 12:31 pm
Thanks PeterG I will give that a go.
June 2nd, 2011 | 2:55 pm
Humanism is about human relationships with humans, irrespective of the type and colour of theism. Indeed humanism rises above and eclipses religion; it is the common makeup, the features, qualities, properties and traits that identity us as humans without recourse to any reference to religion.
Count how many faith-based assertions in this “factual” statement.
Behold: the myth of mythlessness – the religion that isn’t just another religion, but the One Truth that transcends all religion and “stands above it”.
June 3rd, 2011 | 12:35 am
“Count how many faith-based assertions in this “factual” statement.”
Are you against ‘faith’? What’s your beef with ‘faith’, Blake? I thought you would have at least get an understanding from where I’m coming, seeing that I am endeavoring to communicate with you through religious language.
Humanism was around even well before jesus was a twinkle in Mary’s eye.
C’mon Blake, humanism is that part of the human identity commandeered or appropriated by all religions onto which they append their particular regionally-based brand of mythos.
You know that deep down. That is why, among a mountain of evidence, that there is one form of humanity but thousands upon thousands of religions. It stands to reason.
June 3rd, 2011 | 12:46 am
Hi Lawrence
“…. and a profound ignorance of the history of Christian thought.”
I am reminded of these words in a different context:
” …. and a profound ignorance of the history of Islamic thought;
I also recall a Jewish leader referring to a christian theologian to the effect:
” … little more than a profound ignorance of the history of Judaism and the Tanakh.
Lawrence, your comment doesn’t add to the commonwealth of human knowledge.
June 3rd, 2011 | 11:24 am
“Count how many faith-based assertions in this “factual” statement.”
Are you against ‘faith’? What’s your beef with ‘faith’, Blake?
I have no problem with faith.
It’s when people confuse faith with fact that I start to get distressed. I like my boundaries to stay clear and honest.
June 3rd, 2011 | 10:26 pm
@ Blake
“It’s when people confuse faith with fact that I start to get distressed. I like my boundaries to stay clear and honest.”
Then it would be correct to say that you rely on ‘faith’ and not on ‘fact’ that there is a 3-in-1 godhead for the christianities?
Would it be correct to posit then, mindful that you like ‘your boundaries to stay clear and honest’, that you base your acceptance of abiogenesis only on ‘faith’ rather than ‘fact’?
Please show where it is that I confuse ‘faith’ with ‘fact’ when I say that there is only one form of humanity and yet there are thousands and thousands of ‘religious truths’ extant, each as fervently pursued as you do yours, each as fervently claimed as ‘the one true religion’ as you do yours?
To me Blake, truth is synonymous with fact.
June 5th, 2011 | 11:57 am
Please show where it is that I confuse ‘faith’ with ‘fact’ when I say that there is only one form of humanity and yet there are thousands and thousands of ‘religious truths’ extant
No, where you are confusing “faith” with “fact” is here:
June 8th, 2011 | 5:43 pm
[...] no new god.”) Probably all of the above. But to celebrate David Bentley Hart’s Ramsey Prize, it’s appropriate to let him explain: Christianity is the midwife of nihilism not because it [...]
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact