|
© J. Glenn Friesen 2003-2005 |
Notes regarding WdW I, 69 1. Corresponds to NC I, 104. 2. It is interesting that Dooyeweerd regards the word 'religion' as deriving from 'religio' in the sense of a joining of meaning. This assumes an etymology of the word from 're-ligare, ' meaning "to link back" (suggested by Lactantius in his Divinae Institutiones) and not "re-legere" (suggested by Cicero in his De natura deoram). Lactantius derived the word 'religion' from 'religare.' He said it meant the reunion of man with God. This reconciliation included the three ideas of an original unity, a separation by sin, and a restoration of the unity again. It is commonly supposed that C.G. Jung followed the etymology
of 'religare,' but in fact he disputes this. He derives the word 'religion'
from 'relegare,' or 'religare,' meaning careful observation and taking
account of the numinous. See letter from C.G. Jung to Pastor Tanner of
Feb. 12, 1959, Letters, Gerhard Adler (Princeton, 1973), Vol.
II, p. 484. Cited in Edward F. Edinger: The New God-Image (Wilmette,
Ill.: Chiron, 1996), p. 35. 4. Creaturely meaning and the Being of the Arché are not on the same level. This is a definite ontology, and despite Dooyeweerd's protests, it is a metaphysical view of the Origin. That does not mean it is not correct. It does mean that Dooyeweerd cannot avoid a metaphysics, either. Revised March 25/05 |
|||