The Beauty of the Infinite: The Aesthetics of Christian Truth

“Εἰ θεολόγος εἶ, προσεύξῃ ἀληθῶς, καὶ εἰ άληθῶς προσεύξῃ, θεολόγος εἶ,” as Evagrius of Pontus said: “If you are a theologian, you pray truly; and if you pray truly, you are a theologian.” (153 Chapters on Prayer (Περι προσευχῆς), Translation by Luke Dysinger, O.S.B.)If you have gotten this far, this may be a great book for you. It is, for starters, very good news. You will be heartened by David Bentley Hart’s astoundingly lucid prose, even if you only comprehend every third word and every hundredth sentence. Start with the letter “B” in the title, and take it one letter at a time. It will be worth it, in pure delight, and by the time you are ten pages in, you will have mastered the unwritten wisdom of the Kabbalists as well.I have been astonished for years that there are so few reviews of this book, but as I began to try to address that apparent injustice and write one myself, I realized why there are so few: there are not that many people who pray enough, these days.This was several years ago. At that point, I set myself to first jotting down a few notes, things along the lines of “If you have ever been blind-sided by Nietzsche, or gone down for the third time in the middle Heidegger, or hung in there, sensing something of the most imminent relevance in Derrida, and just waiting for him to finish his aerial acrobatics on this particular ssentence and stick the landing, and you are waiting still . . .” But you see, that is exactly the kind of thing that will simply not help this book gain the wider readership one would hope for it, as one would hope more people might listen to Bach with deep ecstatic ears, or Coltrane, or Ravi Shankar.But I digress. The point is, after all these years of jotting notes, and doing some supplemental reading (Augustine in Latin on the Trinity; Levinas, in French, with German footnotes; Maximos the Confessor in the original Greek, with a parallel modern Greek translation text; Leonard Cohen; Bach’s secret journals, written in a mirror code of musical notes; Rumi’s Dance Lessons for Infidels . . . But again, I digress.) . .“Where was I? The two-star reviews of this book are dead on. There are much easier books to read.” (note from 2007.)I have dedicated myself to writing a worthy review of this book for quite some time. I have failed. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea culpa maxima. I intend to get it right, or at least to continue re-incarnating until all sentient beings are saved. I will be the last sentient being saved, in that case, as I will still be doing the background reading required to understand the simplest sentence in chapter 2.But I digress. God bless David Bentley Hart. He is a true theologian, and this book is pure dizzying delight, a beautiful book on beauty, a divine book on God. He punches every tar baby of postmodernism along the way and comes out clean as a penny whistle and smelling like a rose. This is itself is enough to recommend the book.This is not quite a review yet. But I noticed that 68 people have read one of the better five-star reviews of this book, so somebody is already doing something right here, and I take comfort, in my endless labors on this review, in that. I also take comfort in the fact that Jacob himself posted two updates to his primo review, so ha, his is a work in progress too. This is, at least, is the prolegomenon to some notes toward the beginning of a consideration of this book’s utter and delightful loveliness. If you have read this far, this may be a great book for you. Begin with the letter “B” in the title; pray as necessary to continue; rinse, lather, repeat.

It took me several months to finish this book. Hart argues for getting beauty back as a theological category. Reformed and the more intellectually rigorous evangelicals are the ones who will likely read this book. That is good. Those are the ones--and I am reformed--who need to see beauty in theology. Hart uses the latest vocabulary from postmodern philosophy. the reader is urged patience in this regard. The first section of the book (the first 150 or so pages) is incredibly hard to read. Hart assumes that his readers are intimiately familiar with Nietzsche, Derrida, and Levinas. I wasn't.Hart argues that the Trinity is the answer to the postmodern problem of *differance.* Where postmoderns see the world--and language--as chaotic and violent because of the inherent difference of reality, Hart sees the Trinity as a sublime answer to differance. The Trinity can accommodate differance because the Trinity can posit a reality that is both diversity without confusion, otherness without violence. This is the hardest part of the book. What Hart is saying is that postmoderns--and most Calvinists, ironically--assume that any difference in reality is necessarily violent. Hart shows how the Trinity solves the problem of linguistic violence.The rest of the book after that is relatively easy to read. Hart divides his book into Trinity-Creation-Salvation-Eschatology categories. This is where his Eastern Orthodoxy is evident and provides a welcome relief to the strictly judicial categories of the West. The section on salvation literally sang! The last 200 pages were a brilliant tour-de-force.This book has the potential to re-write American theology. It also can unify across confessional lines without watering the unity down into the usual WCC garbage. Let's hope that Hart writes more.LATER EDIT:I've re-read this book (and parts of the book several times again). After reading and listening to a lot of Hart, I began to notice that while Hart often makes weighty and learned points and regularly scores on a high level, at other times I think he is simply showing off his erudition. There are some sections in here on St Gregory of Nyssa and Hart's exposition of them, while beautiful, really do not make any sense upon further reflection. I would give some examples but it would make the review unnecessarily long.I think Hart tries to rescue St Augustine on Absolute Divine Simplicity. It is a brilliant attempt, but I don't think he is successful. Still, the pros of the book outweight the (significant!) cons. It is definitely worth reading due to its importance today.Post-Post EDIT: A few commenters took umbrage at my criticisms of St August. on simplicity. Whatever. I think I have guessed why so many people have the same reaction to this book (though they differ on whether they like it or not). Hart is interacting with the post-Heideggerian schools of philosophy and their challenges (real or perceived) to the Christian faith. If you are struggling with Heidegger's genealogy of the Western narrative, this book is for you. If you are not, then much of this book won't make sense. I'm actually more favorable to Hart now than I have been in the past; my criticisms still remain, though.

This book of theology is a dream to read. It is like sipping a fine liqueur. Beautiful!