That’s Barthes not Barth. As in Roland.
Prickett suggests that Barthes’ proclamation of the death of the author, his manumission of interpretation from the obsession with the limited, final, “secret” meaning, and his hope for a liberated “anti-theological” and “revolutionary” reading that refuses “to fix meaning” in fact opens the way to a transcendental argument for the existence of God. Barthes recognizes that meaning is guaranteed ultimately by God, and that if there is no God there is no meaning. Thus, “We do not need proofs of God; the concept of ‘proof’ is itself meaningless without God.” Barthes is “right . . . to insist however backhandedly that the creation of meaning is the central theological activity.”
Moral Certitude and the Iran War
The current military engagement with Iran calls renewed attention to just war theory in the Catholic tradition.…
The Slow Death of England: New and Notable Books
The fate of England is much in the news as popular resistance to mass immigration grows, limits…
Ethics of Rhetoric in Times of War
What we say matters. And the way we say it matters. This is especially true in times…