Theopoetics and Praxis: Imagination and Poetic Expression as God-Talk

Current understandings of the field of theopoetics articulate a method of theological conversation that acknowledges the mysterious nature of the divine through an attentiveness to the confines and limitations of language. Poetry’s use of figurative language, imagery, rhythm, rhyme, diverse forms, and other particularities of the genre make it an effective form of communicating the complex and expansive mysteries of the triune God. However, the field of theopoetics often confines the theological analysis of poetry to theoretical engagement with the poetry of others through essay form rather than through the creation of poetry or other forms of art. Consequently, the field of theopoetics would benefit from an intentional shift toward praxis, through the creation of art and poetry from the commons, amidst analysis and theological God talk. Without this emphasis on praxis and creation, the field of theopoetics promotes the idea that poetry and artistry are confined to the sites of professionalism and expertise. Language from William Easterly’s _The Tyranny of Experts_ helps to frame the ways in which confining artistic expression and the creation of poetry to professionalism limits the expansive and accessible mode of theologizing and God-talk offered through the tool of theopoetics and artistic creation.

This presentation will first explore current articulations of the field of theopoetics through figures such as L. Callid Keefe-Perry, Karl Rahner, Stanley Hopper, and Miguel H. Díaz. Three key named components of present understandings of theopoetics include, first, an emphasis on poetry and its use of figurative language as an accessible method for God-talk. Díaz articulates this point, in conversation with other Latinx theologians, “that poetry more than prose is a language better suited to express the ineffable mystery of God” (_Queer God de Amor_, 12). The second component revolves around the claim that poetic language is a preferred mode for scriptural interpretation and theologizing. As Rahner claims, “the practice of perceiving the poetic word is a presupposition to hearing the word of God…. In its inmost essence, the poetic is a prerequisite for Christianity” ("Poetry and the Christian” in _Theological Investigations_, 363). The third and final component is a particular understanding of the genealogy and origins of theopoetics as a field. Keefe-Perry attempts to trace the contemporary origins of the field of theopoetics to a presentation offered by Stanley Hopper in 1971 at the American Academy of Religion annual gathering. Keefe-Perry summarizes Stanley Hopper’s definition of theopoetics as “not merely the poetizing of an extant religious faith or theological knowledge, but a reflection on poiesis, a formal thinking about the nature of making of meaning, which subverts the -ology, the nature of the logic, of theology” (_Way to Water: A Theopoetics Primer_, 3). In summary, this origin moment of Theopoetics acknowledges the ineffable nature of God and seeks to engage, and create, meaning through logic-defying reflection on abstraction and creativity.

The second portion of this presentation will challenge contemporary articulations of the field of theopoetics in three ways. The first critique will name that genealogies of the current field of theopoetics are often whitewashed, pointing toward a specifically white male lineage. The second challenge will name alternate genealogies of theopoetics through the naming and exploration of interlocuters who theorize using poetry: Rubem A. Alves, Audre Lorde, and Gloria Anzaldúa. The third challenge will emphasize the importance of praxis and the practice of poetry writing and artistic expression amidst theopoetics. This third challenge will receive greater attention than the previous challenges.

This emphasis on praxis within theopoetics is critical to the “who” of theologizing and God-talk. Poetry and artistic expression are pulled from our unique lived experiences and humanity. Audre Lorde helps imagine this meaning-making process through poetry “as a revelatory distillation of experience” (_Sister Outsider_, 37). As a result, poetry, artistic expression, and theopoetics are manifestations of human experience and our attempts to make sense of ourselves, this world, and the divine. Due to the limitations of language, it is often difficult to engage and articulate our experience in ways that make sense of the world around us. As a result, Rubem Alves claims that poetry is the “desperate attempt to say what cannot be said” (_The Poet, The Warrior, The Prophet_, 26). And within this attempt to convey our experiences and understandings through the limitations of language, Gloria Anzaldúa points to the social and cultural power structures present within language and its context. Anzaldúa’s concept of the borderlands helps to note these power structures and the opportunity for new meaning making within liberatory work of poetic expression as a lingual pathway amidst the physical experiences and violences of existing in the borderlands. Framing the borderlands as the interstices between geographic, national, and identity boundary lines names the continuous journey “from a nightmare into a numinous experience. It is always a path/state to something else” (_Borderlands – La Frontera_, 80). Poetry provides a pathway to reimagine an alternate numinous future that is liberatory and life-giving. Anzaldúa’s description of the tangible liberatory work of poetry pushes deep into the tangible ramifications and necessity of the liberatory work of poetry.

Consequently, it is important to consider what is lost within theological reflection and articulation when authors only analyze the poetry of an another within essay form instead of attempting their own poetic responses or reflections. What would it mean for theologians, especially those exploring the field of theopoetics, to always include poetic responses alongside essay text? These poetic responses would not be intended to be analyzed as the work of a literary poet, but as genuine reflections and articulations on the divine. How would the invitation to readers to craft their own poetic and artistic responses to readings deepen understanding and expand the accessibility of theological inquiry? The exploration of these questions will be followed by an invitation to the attendees of the session to craft their own poetic or artistic response to their learnings and experiences of the session.

How might God meet you

here? In your own creative

wisdom and response?