Skip to main content
Log in

Blurred vision: Marion on the ‘possibility’ of revelation

  • Published:
International Journal for Philosophy of Religion Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper I challenge Merold Westphal’s claim that Jean-Luc Marion’s hermeneutical phenomenology is especially useful for theology. I argue that in spite of his explicit allegiance to Husserl’s “principle of all principles,” Marion fails to embody a commitment to phenomenological seeing in his analyses of revelation. In the sections of Being Given where he discusses revelation, Marion allows faith-based claims to bleed into his phenomenological analyses, resulting in what I call his ‘blurred vision’—the pretension that phenomenological seeing can be extended to theological matters. This pretension undermines Marion’s phenomenological aspirations, because it invests his analyses with a theological content that phenomenological intuition cannot account for or clarify. At the same time, this blurring of the line between theology and phenomenology also makes Marion’s work theologically ineffective. For it furnishes the theologian and believer with the false assurance that faith-based commitments can be grounded in phenomenological knowledge—a claim that he simply cannot make good on. In light of these problems, I propose an alternative Heideggerian approach that maintains the boundary between philosophical and theological discourse and thereby safeguards the integrity of both.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bossche S. (2001) God does appear in immanence after all: Jean-Luc Marion’s Phenomenology as New First Philosophy for Theology. In: Boeve L., Leijssen L. (eds) Sacramental presence in a postmodern contex. Leuven University Press, Leuven, pp 325–347

    Google Scholar 

  • Burch M. I. (2009) The twinkling of an eye: Kierkegaard and Heidegger on the possibility of faith. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 83(2): 219–238

    Google Scholar 

  • Crowell S. G. (2002) Authentic thinking and phenomenological method. In: Hopkins B., Crowell S. G. (eds) The new yearbook for phenomenology and phenomenological philosophy. Noesis Press, Seattle

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlstrom D. (1994). Heidegger’s method: Philosophical concepts as formal indications. The Review of Metaphysics, 47(4): 188, 775–797

    Google Scholar 

  • De Vries H. (1998) Formal indications. MLN 113(3): 635–688 (German Issue)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gadamer H.-G. (1987) Die Religiose Dimension in Gesammelte Werke Band 3: Neuerer Philosophie I Hegel, Husserl, Heidegger. J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), Tübingen

    Google Scholar 

  • Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). San Francisco: Harper & Row.

  • Heidegger M. (1998) Phenomenology and theology. In: McNeill W. (eds) Pathmarks. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Heidegger, M. (2001). Phenomenological interpretations of Aristotle (R. Rojcewicz, Trans.). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

  • Husserl, E. (1982). Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology and to a phenomenological philosophy: First book (F. Kersten, Trans.). Dodrecht: Kluwer.

  • Husserl, E. (2001). Logical investigations (J. N. Findlay, Trans.). New York: Routledge.

  • Kant, I. (2000). Critique of pure reason (P. Guyer & A. W. Wood, Eds.). New York: Cambridge University Press.

  • Kierkegaard, S. (1992). Concluding unscientific postscript to the philosophical fragments (H. V. Hong & E. H. Hong, Eds., Trans.). Princeton: Princeton University Press.

  • Kuhlmann G. (1929) Zum theologischen Problem der Existenz (Frage an R. Bultmann). Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 10(1): 28–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinas, E. (1987a). Freedom and command. In Collected papers (A. Lingis, Trans.). Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

  • Levinas, E. (1987b). The ego and the totality. In Collected Papers (A. Lingis, Trans.). Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

  • Levinas, E. (1987c). Philosophy and the idea of infinity. In Collected Papers (A. Lingis, Trans.). Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

  • Levinas, E. (2000). A god “Transcendent” to the point of absence in God, death, and time (B. Bergo, Trans.). Stanford: Stanford University Press.

  • Marion J.-L. (1998) Metaphysics and phenomenology: A summary for theologians. In: Ward G. (eds) The postmodern God; a theological reader. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Marion, J.-L. (2000). The saturated phenomenon. In D. Janicaud (Ed.), Phenomenology and the theological turn: The French debate (B. G. Prusak, Trans.). New York: Fordham University Press.

  • Marion J.-L. (2002a) They recognized him; And he became invisible to them in. Modern Theology 18: 145–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marion J.-L. (2002b) Being given: Toward a phenomenology of givenness. Stanford University Press, Stanford

    Google Scholar 

  • Otto, R. (1969). The idea of the holy (J. W. Harvey, Trans.). New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Sartre, J.-P. (1994). Being and nothingness (H. E. Barnes, Trans.). New York: Grammercy Books.

  • Westphal M. (2006) Vision and voice: Phenomenology and theology in the work of Jean-Luc Marion. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 60: 117–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthew I. Burch.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Burch, M.I. Blurred vision: Marion on the ‘possibility’ of revelation. Int J Philos Relig 67, 157–171 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11153-010-9226-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11153-010-9226-9

Keywords

Navigation