Owen Barfield: Philosophy, Poetry, and Theology

by Michael Vincent Di Fuccia, Owen A. Barfield (Foreword)

In this book Michael Di Fuccia examines the theological import of Owen Barfield's poetic philosophy. He argues that philosophies of immanence fail to account for creativity, as is evident in the false shuttling between modernity's active construal and postmodernity's passive construal of subjectivity. In both extremes subjectivity actually dissolves, divesting one of any creative integrity. Di Fuccia shows how in Barfield's scheme the creative subject appears instead to inhabit a middle or medial realm, which upholds one's creative integrity. It is in this way that Barfield's poetic philosophy gestures toward a theological vision of poi sis proper, wherein creativity is envisaged as neither purely passive nor purely active, but middle. Creativity, thus, is not immanent but mediated, a participation in being's primordial poi sis. ""Michael Di Fuccia has produced the most major study of Owen Barfield so far. He shows just why the future of theology may belong to Barfield's seemingly wilder, but more metaphysically penetrating, style of orthodoxy. Barfield realized early, that in order to believe now, one must disbelieve much of what passes today as accepted secular wisdom. The alternative is some version of theistic positivism, credible only to the emotionally immature. I thoroughly recommend this new book to all sensitive and reflective readers."" --John Milbank, author of Theology and Social Theory Michael Vincent Di Fuccia (PhD University of Nottingham) is a lecturer in philosophical and systematic theology."

Genres: Philosophy

282 pages, Paperback

Published October 27, 2016

Reviews

[Paul Spencer · Rating 3 out of 5]

Di Fuccia does the world of letters a service in introducing Barfield's major ideas and analyzing his arguments in light of philosophical and theological contexts. He does this by introducing Barfield's primary influences, which is a great way to introduce the reader to Barfield's logic. Where Di Fuccia focuses on the evolution of language and metaphor and how certain philosophical commitments affect our view of language and broader reality is where he shines. In extrapolating the ramifications of Barfield's thought into sociological and purely philosophical considerations is where the essay loses its potency. Barfield's thought resists systematic philosophical treatment, as it must in theory and practice, and still Di Fuccia tries to take it into deeper philosophical treatment. And the sociological arguments, though I agreed with many of them, do not flow as naturally out of the philosophy of language that Di Fuccia presents as Barfield's main academic focus.

This book was clearly a PhD thesis. It was not formatted or changed for a general audience and suffers from that. As such, Di Fuccia goes farther in attempting to add to Barfieldian studies than perhaps such an analysis would warrant. I felt that he overstepped in adding his own analysis and extrapolating the consequences of Barfield's thought. But that's what one risks in attaining a PhD.

Further, I found it off-putting that Di Fuccia went out of his way to emphasize the Catholic-ness of the "appropriate" philosophical arguments. I found very little that was specifically Catholic in the arguments, instead of generally Christian, except that those philosophers and theologians quoted happened to be Catholic. In betraying what I reasonably assume are Di Fuccia's religious commitments, he does injustice to his reader and alienates further an audience that may not be patient enough to track laborious philosophical threads that do little to advance the basic thesis.

That said, it was fascinating to be introduced more completely to Barfield's thought. I was introduced to the man in The Fellowship, from which I mostly read him as an eccentric Christian dedicated to the strange beliefs of Steiner's anthroposophy. To see why and how he was committed to Steiner's views and how they affected Barfield's theories of language was massively informative.

[Jason Day · Rating 4 out of 5]

Using a pick-axe to chip away rock to find gold is how I would describe this overview of Owen Barfield’s works. If I were a philosophy major, it would have been much easier. It was loaded, I think, with philosophical terms and phrases which I looked up multiple times. Hard read. But worthwhile.

I greatly appreciate that Di Fuccia was able to not only encapsulate Barfield’s work, but also improve upon it. The very last chapter brought a more Christian theology from the foundation of Barfield’s excellent work. Barfield tried to correct the failings of modern man’s thought which lacks a sense of mystery and a sense of created order among other ills.

I am now going to go back through this book and try to dumb-down Di Fuccia’s work so I can get my brain around it and hopefully offer others the gems latent in Barfield’s thoughts.

I will share one bit from the last chapter that I did grasp. Ancient Greek had a verb tense that was a mix of active and passive called the middle voice. It captures a reality that some (many?) of our actions and decisions are not totally our own, but we are moved in part by an unseen Hand. We in our Western post-Enlightenment worldview see ourselves as independent beings able to choose whatever we wish. Not so. God is at work in so many ways around and in us.

[Elizabeth Jennings · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very worthwhile read for serious students of philosophy or theology, particularly those interested by the Inklings, questions of transendence and immanence, or language. Di Fuccia brings Owen Barfield into dialogue with Heidegger, Levy-Bruhl, Catholic theologians, and others.

My only large disagreement is with his interpretation of Barfield's belief in Anthroposophical reincarnation as "pagan," "incompatible with Christianity," and at odds with a worldview of novelty, surprise, and progress. Every argument he uses against reincarnation could just as easily be made against people having parents: It ties one to the past, detracts from God's creating ex nihilo, etc. I myself do not think that having ancestry, whether geneological or spiritual, instead of popping out of nowhere, detracts from God's creativity or denies the miraculous nature of a new creation. It seems this judgment arises from Di Fuccia's predetermined theological commitments.

Other than that, Di Fuccia's assessment of Barfield and his masterful weaving of Barfield's ideas with others is clear and detailed and very fair to the content of Barfield's thought.

[Vinnie Santini · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is amazing! Hits so many good areas of theology and philosophy within the work of Owen Barfield with a few corrections and improvements.