Peter J. Leithart

You can feel the outrage when David Carrasco ( City of Sacrifice: The Aztec Empire and the Role of Violence in Civilization ) observes, “all significant theories of ritual sacrifice, from Robertson Smith through Hubert and Mauss, Rene Girard, Walter Burkert, Adoph Jensen, and J.Z. Smtih, . . . . Continue Reading »

Does it matter whether we say the events recorded in the Bible happened? Couldn’t we draw the same “lessons” regardless? Not if one of the “lessons” has to do with the pattern of God’s action in history. Whether tropological or allegorical, “timeless” . . . . Continue Reading »

Many have commented on the lack of focus in the “Occupy X” movement that has spread throughout the world. That’s not surprising, though, if we recognize that the movement is taking its theoretical cues (such as they be) from writers like Hardt and Negri. If, as they argue, we have . . . . Continue Reading »

Hobbes, Leviathan : “The nature of Power is in this point, like to Fame, increasing as it proceeds; or like the motion of heavy bodies, which the further they go, make still the more haste . . . . So that in the first place, I put for a generall inclination of all mankind, a perpetuall and . . . . Continue Reading »

Homi Bhabha (in an essay in Redrawing the Boundaries: The Transformation of English and American Literary Studies ) sees the connection clearly: “My growing conviction has been that the encounters and negotiations of differential meanings and values within ‘colonial’ textuality, . . . . Continue Reading »

In his commentary on 2 Corinthians ( The New American Commentary Volume 29 - 2 Corinthians ), David Garland asks what “in Christ” means in 5:17, and answers: “This phrase, ‘in Christ,’ can mean several things that are not mutually exclusive: that one belongs to Christ, . . . . Continue Reading »

It’s remarkable how often de Lubacian themes come up in political discussions nowadays. Kahn: In calling citizens to sacrifice, “Political rhetoric affirms that in the life of the nation, we never die. We are assured of a kind of secular resurrection: he who believes in the nation shall . . . . Continue Reading »

As I suspect, it always comes back to baptism, infant baptism in particular. Kahn: “Liberalism has never produced an adequate explanation of the family, because we cannot understand children” without the framing assumptions of liberalism - its assumption that the individual is the . . . . Continue Reading »

Kahn: “No great insight is required to see the movement toward the pornographic in the representations of romance, or the move toward romance in the genre of the pornographic. This is the great secret inside the romantic: romantic lovers are coconspirators in the pornographic moment. The . . . . Continue Reading »

Kahn again, using the story of Abraham to discuss the erotic foundations of both family and political order: “The Abraham story . . . tells us that meanings must be borne directly on the body. The covenant requires circumcision . . . . The flesh must bear the idea; it must appear as a text . . . . Continue Reading »