What do you think?
Rate this book
Woorden van Christus
In Words of Christ (Paroles du Christ) -- here translated into English for the first time -- Michel Henry asks how Christ can be both human and divine. He considers, further, how we as humans can experience Christ's humanity and divinity through his words. Are we able to recognize this speech as divine, and if so, then how? What can testify to the divine nature of these words? What makes them intelligible? Startling possibilities -- and further questions -- emerge as Henry systematically explores these enigmas. For example, how does the phenomenology of life bring to light the God of which scripture speaks? Might this new region of phenomenality broaden or transform the discipline of phenomenology itself, or theology?
Henry approaches these questions starting from the angle of material phenomenology, but his study has far-reaching implications for other disciplines too. Intended for a wide audience, his work is a uniquely philosophical approach to the question of Christ and to the place of this question in human experience. This highly original, interdisciplinary perspective on Christ's words was Henry's last work, published shortly after his death in 2002.
Henry approaches these questions starting from the angle of material phenomenology, but his study has far-reaching implications for other disciplines too. Intended for a wide audience, his work is a uniquely philosophical approach to the question of Christ and to the place of this question in human experience. This highly original, interdisciplinary perspective on Christ's words was Henry's last work, published shortly after his death in 2002.
- GenresPhilosophyTheology
180 pages, Paperback
First published October 1, 2002
15 people are currently reading
109 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
January 6, 2018
This book was my introduction to Henry and the first book I ever read by any sort of phenomenologist. It may be an understatement to say that it was mind-stretching because it seems more mind-blowing than anything. It is probably one of the most thought provoking books I ever read. As for integrating or adjusting it with my present conceptions of the "Words of Christ" (Christian orthodoxy) I realize that will take much more thought and study. I found a number of articles that look interesting which can be found if one "googles" the names Michel Henry and those that provided the translation, forward, and introduction to this book. Of course what they included with this volume were very helpful. Another name you may want to check in connection with Henry is Joseph Rivera. All of that being said, I will simply add that this was not an easy read but I'll nevertheless dangle a carrot for those interested and say that I'll probably never read the Words of Christ in the Gospel of John or any of the gospels in the same way. I might summarize why I think this by adding that my trinitarian "belief" was probably given a virtual transfusion of "Life" such that I haven't felt since reading some of C. S. Lewis thoughts on the Trinity in "Mere Christianity" many years ago. If to some extent you like to "think outside the box" this slim but fairly "packed" book will help you do so.
September 5, 2023
As Henry's last work, this is also, in my opinion, his best work for those who want a succinct yet thorough introduction to his thought. Not only is the book just over 100 pages, but it also employs the least technical jargon of all the works I've read by him; each chapter is about 10 pages and tends to focus on a core theme, making it very readable.
He covers his classic themes, like the dual appearance of the world, which is visible, and that of life, which is invisible, and which he equates with God; the reductiveness of materialism, which fails to adequately account for subjective human experience; the distinction between finite lives, which all of us are, and infinite Life, which bestows the power of life to us; the illusion of the independent ego, which leads to modern subjectivism (similar to Heidegger); and the disparity between ordinary language, which is referential, and the pathos of life which, in its feeling, is at one with itself.
I'm not a Christian, nor am I religious for that matter, but I found Henry's elucidation of the foundation of Christian ethics fascinating. This is a topic I'm very interested in, more so philosophically than solely theologically. For example, two ideas that struck me the most: (1) love, if it is to be truly love, ought to be unconditional rather than reciprocal and (2) God, conceived as our interior life, our conscience, knows the "secrets of the heart," which is a rich concept with many parallels (e.g., Socrates, Kant, Derrida, Heidegger—even Sartre, I'd wager!).
Yet there is much in here of which to be critical, too. A glaring aspect is his unrelenting, intense anti-modernism. I've never been sure which denomination Henry was—I think I read in some academic review that he was Catholic—but throughout this work, as well as his other Christian works, he loves to take shots, many of them cheap, at contemporary society through his religious lens. There's nothing inherently wrong with this, as it is his freedom of expression, after all; but there is a reactionary, venomous quality in his polemics that comes through strikingly.
He claims Christianity is being systematically oppressed, especially in education, probably in response to France's laïcité policy, and rails against "the totalitarian dogmatism of so-called 'democratic' nations" (8) "where [there] is no longer either law or respect for or observance of laws" (I forgot to get the page number here). To be sure, liberal democracies are not perfect and can be criticized, but Henry seems to want to restore a kind of theocracy that violates the separation of church and state.
Several times, he announces, "Contrary to the falsehoods of the positivistic, pseudo-historical, and atheistic exegesis of the nineteenth century, it can therefore be assumed…” (6) and “For contrary to the atheistic and mendacious exegesis of the nineteenth century…” (45-6). Naturally, since he uses "therefore," you'd expect him to provide an argument—but he doesn't. He seems to be more interested in dogmatics and apologetics than anything else when he criticizes "atheistic exegesis" without providing historical, archeological, or literary arguments to back it up; instead, his argument seems to be that Christ truly was divine for a priori reasons, or else his statements wouldn't be as powerful.
Lastly, as a philosophical point, he insists that "absolute Life is not a concept or an abstraction: it is real life which experiences itself really in itself” (83). I can buy his phenomenological argument about the dependence and immanence of finite life, but to say that we genuinely, in first-person experience, feel some kind of "absolute life" that is eternal and self-generating, I can't help but be skeptical that this is metaphysics rather than phenomenology.
He covers his classic themes, like the dual appearance of the world, which is visible, and that of life, which is invisible, and which he equates with God; the reductiveness of materialism, which fails to adequately account for subjective human experience; the distinction between finite lives, which all of us are, and infinite Life, which bestows the power of life to us; the illusion of the independent ego, which leads to modern subjectivism (similar to Heidegger); and the disparity between ordinary language, which is referential, and the pathos of life which, in its feeling, is at one with itself.
I'm not a Christian, nor am I religious for that matter, but I found Henry's elucidation of the foundation of Christian ethics fascinating. This is a topic I'm very interested in, more so philosophically than solely theologically. For example, two ideas that struck me the most: (1) love, if it is to be truly love, ought to be unconditional rather than reciprocal and (2) God, conceived as our interior life, our conscience, knows the "secrets of the heart," which is a rich concept with many parallels (e.g., Socrates, Kant, Derrida, Heidegger—even Sartre, I'd wager!).
Yet there is much in here of which to be critical, too. A glaring aspect is his unrelenting, intense anti-modernism. I've never been sure which denomination Henry was—I think I read in some academic review that he was Catholic—but throughout this work, as well as his other Christian works, he loves to take shots, many of them cheap, at contemporary society through his religious lens. There's nothing inherently wrong with this, as it is his freedom of expression, after all; but there is a reactionary, venomous quality in his polemics that comes through strikingly.
He claims Christianity is being systematically oppressed, especially in education, probably in response to France's laïcité policy, and rails against "the totalitarian dogmatism of so-called 'democratic' nations" (8) "where [there] is no longer either law or respect for or observance of laws" (I forgot to get the page number here). To be sure, liberal democracies are not perfect and can be criticized, but Henry seems to want to restore a kind of theocracy that violates the separation of church and state.
Several times, he announces, "Contrary to the falsehoods of the positivistic, pseudo-historical, and atheistic exegesis of the nineteenth century, it can therefore be assumed…” (6) and “For contrary to the atheistic and mendacious exegesis of the nineteenth century…” (45-6). Naturally, since he uses "therefore," you'd expect him to provide an argument—but he doesn't. He seems to be more interested in dogmatics and apologetics than anything else when he criticizes "atheistic exegesis" without providing historical, archeological, or literary arguments to back it up; instead, his argument seems to be that Christ truly was divine for a priori reasons, or else his statements wouldn't be as powerful.
Lastly, as a philosophical point, he insists that "absolute Life is not a concept or an abstraction: it is real life which experiences itself really in itself” (83). I can buy his phenomenological argument about the dependence and immanence of finite life, but to say that we genuinely, in first-person experience, feel some kind of "absolute life" that is eternal and self-generating, I can't help but be skeptical that this is metaphysics rather than phenomenology.
June 5, 2017
Le Verbe divin se révèle à travers ce livre. Cet ouvrage m'emmène vers une nouvelle rencontre avec le Christ.
April 5, 2020
I want to believe....
January 12, 2025
Fantastic book. Wise and compelling. I'm sure I'll be picking it up again (a few times) to get to the bottom of it.
March 3, 2013
An interesting text, but I think fundamentally flawed as concerns traditional, orthodox Christianity. Henry seems to have a flat ontology making little distinction between Christ and Christians. Also, his ambiguity on who has life creates a possibility that animals, by his definition are not alive. Nevertheless, I would recommend this text to anyone who wanted to see an attempt at combining Christianity and phenomenology. I will, however, readily admit that I am no expert in phenomenology and may be misconstruing his thought. This is merely my first blush understanding.
February 23, 2018
Een fenomenologische closereading van het Bijbelboek Johannes, zoals Kierkegaards 'Vrees en beven' een existentialistische closereading is van het verhaal van het zoonoffer van Abraham. En een absoluut meesterwerk.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews