著者

松平 功

出版者

桃山学院大学

雑誌

桃山学院大学キリスト教論集 = St. Andrew's University journal of Christian studies (ISSN:0286973X)

巻号頁・発行日

no.51, pp.3-43, 2016-02-18

---

More than fifty years, Rene Girard has developed a hypothesis which is alled the mimetic theory. According to this theory, human beings imitate each other, and this tendency spreads mutually among people and leads to rivalries. This mimetic also causes mutual conflicts in a community. Since the mimetic rivalry that develops from the struggle for the possession of objects is contagious, it leads to the threat of violence. According to Girard, such conflicts are partially solved by a scapegoat mechanism, but ultimately, Christianity is the best appeasement to violene. Girard believes that the gospel texts have instead acted as a catalyst that brings about the break-down of the sacrificial order. The evangelical "good news" clearly affirms the innocence of the victim, thus becoming, by attacking ignorance, the germ of the destruction of the sacrificial order on which rests the equilibrium of societies. The Old Testament already shows several turning points, and also exposes the mythic accounts with regard to the innocence of the victims. The Hebrew people were conscious about the uniqueness of their religious tradition. The gospels fully clarify this hidden system, and unveil the Satanic order which has continued since ancient time. The gospels also describe the foundation of this order as the murder in the account of the Passion. Medieval Europe showed the face of a sacrificial society that still knew very well how to despise and ignore its victims, nonetheless the efficacy of sacrificial violence has not decreased, in the measure that ignorance has receded. Girard sees the uniqueness and of the transformations of the Western society whose destiny today is one with that of human society as a whole. The purpose of this paper is to research about the mimetic theory and the scapegoat mechanism, and to provide a deeper understanding about a relationship between those hypotheses. Through criticizing Girard's concepts, this paper will provide an accurate recognition concerning the redemption.

著者

伊藤 潔志

出版者

桃山学院大学

雑誌

桃山学院大学キリスト教論集 = St. Andrew's University journal of Christian studies (ISSN:0286973X)

巻号頁・発行日

no.50, pp.85-112, 2015-03-23

---

The purpose of this paper is to examine and elucidate the distinctive features of the religious aspects of Ludwig Wittgenstein's philosophical thought. Few people generally regard Wittgenstein as a religious thinker, but research has been carried out on his views on religion and attempts have been made to apply his philosophical thought to theology. Wittgenstein's philosophical thinking is commonly divided into two phases ─ the early phase and the later phase ─ and even as it showed a certain consistency, it also underwent considerable transformation. Accordingly, in the early and later phases of Wittgenstein's philosophy there are both elements that are the same and elements that are markedly different. In this paper I will look at the early phase of Wittgenstein's philosophical thought, picking out certain ideas about religion that run throughout Wittgenstein's philosophy and elucidating the distinctive features of such ideas. Wittgenstein held that language has limits, and that accordingly there are also limits to thought. Further, he held that since language and the world exist with and through one another, the world also has limits. Accordingly, it is impossible to speak anything regarding what exists beyond the limits of language, and impossible to speak anything that lies outside the world. This means that though it is possible to speak of things when they have to do with facts, it is not possible to speak of things when they have to do with values ─ since values lie outside the world. Thus, it is not possible to speak things like religion, faith, revelations, and God (they are `unspeakable'). Nevertheless, Wittgenstein argues, even though it is not possible to` speak' these things, it is still possible to `show' them. According to Kierkegaard, `showing' is a particular state of affairs, and to `show' is a way of indirectly `speaking' something. We might perhaps call this showing a `religion of silence.' Wittgenstein was a philosopher who worked out a religion of silence, a religion that exists on the other side of the limits of language, thought, and the world.

著者

石川 明人

出版者

桃山学院大学

雑誌

桃山学院大学キリスト教論集 = St. Andrew's University journal of Christian studies (ISSN:0286973X)

巻号頁・発行日

no.50, pp.113-138, 2015-03-23

---

Ayako Miura, the Christian novelist, once recalled that in her younger days, she was a militarist teacher. Indeed, the period of her youth spent as an elementary school teacher overlaps with Japan's wartime period. However, when Miura's autobiographical writings are analyzed in detail, it seems more accurate to say that she was not a militarist. This is because she did not consciously support militarism on the basis of sufficient knowledge or opinions about politics and the military during her days as a teacher; rather, she simply complied with and was swept along by the belligerent social atmosphere of the time. Miura's period as a "militarist" teacher can certainly be considered as a dark phase of her life. However, this does not mean that Miura's efforts within the education system of the wartime military state were either malicious or negligent. Conversely, at the time, she strove to accomplish her duties as a teacher in good faith, in the broad sense, with dedication, integrity, and sincerity. That in doing so she consequently became complicit to the evils of the war can only be termed as a lamentable paradox. Though Miura later became an outspoken opponent of war, this opposition was neither based on social scientific knowledge nor grounded in mere humanism; fundamentally, it developed as a result of her Christian faith. Through her wartime experience, Miura had become keenly aware of the fundamental weaknesses, miseries and follies of humanity as well as her own and, in her despair, turned to Christianity. In basing her opposition to war on her Christian faith, Miura failed to consider the classic quandary that religion may also be used to justify war. Nevertheless, her opposition to war is surely worthy of our attention even today.

著者

小柳 伸顕

出版者

桃山学院大学

雑誌

桃山学院大学キリスト教論集 = St. Andrew's University journal of Christian studies (ISSN:0286973X)

巻号頁・発行日

no.51, pp.73-114, 2016-02-18

著者

小柳 伸顕

出版者

桃山学院大学

雑誌

桃山学院大学キリスト教論集 = St. Andrew's University journal of Christian studies (ISSN:0286973X)

巻号頁・発行日

no.50, pp.225-245, 2015-03-23

著者

延原 時行

出版者

桃山学院大学

雑誌

桃山学院大学キリスト教論集 = St. Andrew's University journal of Christian studies (ISSN:0286973X)

巻号頁・発行日

no.50, pp.13-46, 2015-03-23

---

This lecture on "Amor Mundi and Process Philosophy: Reflections on Whitehead's Adventure or Resurrection Metaphysics" was delivered on October 11, at the 36th Annual Convention of Japan Society for Process Studies, at Momoyama Gakuin University or St. Andrew's University in Osaka. Beginning with a tanka: Hito ikani / hisan naru tomo / urakara zo / Kami tomo ni masu / mireba bishou zo( How miserable / humans might be in their lives / if seen from the back / that God is really with them / smile comes out in their faces), I will pursue the theme" how one can be geared toward love for the world despite miseries in one's life." 1. From the back; 2. God is really with us; 3. Seeing; and 4. Smile coming out, are four conditions for love for the world. In subsequent four sections I will deal with Hannah Arendt's Human Condition which has described a life-long critical dialogue with Martin Heidegger; Katsumi Takizawa's idea of an inseparable, non-identical, and irreversible relationship between God and humans critically re-considered; Whitehead's metaphysics of Adventure or the Resurrection in dialogue with Hans Jonas's Das Prinzip Leben; and John 21 to be re-interpreted from narrative theology into metaphysical theology in terms of the" Resurrection"-motif. What is pivotal is the denial of the Unmoved Mover which is hidden in Heidegger's philosophy of Sein's Geschichite and also in Takizawa's Pure The-anthropology as the source of change lying outside the universe or the world. In the case of Later Heidegger, Being─Language relationship is not mediated by any intermediary actualities and is overshadowed by the act of interpretation of the philosopher, namely, Heidegger. Arendt critiques this fact as the moment leading to Heidegger's companionship with the Nazis due to his uncritical judgment about the world affairs. In Takizawa's case, he thinks that the idea of pure the-anthropology is important in recognizing the God─Expression relation as the basic human "Bestimmung," which does not allow particular-historical elements to come in and decide. Also, Takizawa thinks that the "deep depths" or the Proto-factum Immanuel of the human existence is the sacred limitation beyond which no one can go down deeper. In this sense, the idea of the deep depths has a resemblance with the Aristotelian Unmoved Mover; it is unsurpassable as the firm basis for everything in the world while giving rise to the change of all things. For Whitehead, however, the change or transmutation of the Reality by the Adventure into its Unity of Appearance is pivotal in requiring the real occasions of the advancing world each claiming its due share of attention [AI=Adventures of Ideas=, 295]. We can acknowledge here Augustine's reference to the descending Agape as combined with the ascending Platonic Eros or Charitas (in Augustine's case). If our human life memories can ascend with the salvific help of the Risen Lord in order to be offered into the bosom of Heavenly Father, our resurrection can take place. Whitehead's final metaphysical scope is free to accept this vision in terms of his idea of the "reciprocal relation by virtue of which what is done in the world is transformed into the reality in heaven and the reality in heaven passes back into the world"( PR=Process and the Reality=, 351). In terms of Logos Theology appearing in the beginning of John's Gospel, the "reciprocal relation" is approachable by reason of the combination of the" Logos who was in the beginning"[ John 1 : 1 first line]and the" Logos who was with God [pros ton theon]" [John 1 : 1 second line]: the latter Logos is metaphysically deeper than and is inclusive of the former Logos. Incidentally, Takizawa refers to the idea of the "Logos in the beginning," but not to the "Logos with God," in terms of the Proto-factum Immanuel. Presumably, it is for this reason that Takizawa sticks to the idea of the "deep depths" which negates our deeper approach. However, the truth of the matter is that at the deeper ground of the "deep depths" the "Logos with God" is awaiting us to come down even after we perished. Further, the" Logos with God" flies and ascends paradoxically with those who have passed away by reason of the paradoxical principle: You go down deeper and deeper; and you ascend higher and higher. We know that the "reciprocal relation" is designated by Chardin as the "Center of the Universe" which is actually "Christ" (see Future of Man,esp. The two articles of my Credo: The Universe is centred─Evolutively {Above and Ahead; Christ is its Center{The Christian Phenomenon: Noogenesis=Christogenesis (=Paul)). John 21: 4 describes the "reciprocal relation" between the perishable world and immortal heaven as the fact: "Just after daybreak, Jesus stood on the beach; but the disciples did not know that it was Jesus." We must re-interpret and transform the narrative theology of John 21 into the language of a metaphysical theology such as Whitehead's vision of reality:" We perish and are immortal"[ PR, 351, 82]. From this vision of the Adventure or the Resurrection metaphysics I can think of the idea of a university appropriately in my own way. John Henry Newman's idea of the university is overshadowed by the religious sovereignty, which is radically different from Jacques Derrida's idea of the "university without condition." How can we discern the compatibility between the two? Probably we have to ask Whitehead's aims of education to come in to coordinate and say: religious sovereignty is supportable at the level of" romance," whereas in the case of Derrida's motif of the" university's profession without condition" the rhythm of "generalization" might be proper. Then, what about the precision-process? In this regard, we have to re-learn appropriately from the interreligious dialogue (esp. Buddhist- Christian dialogue) which has been flourishing during the 20th and 21st centuries.