{"title":"“描绘天象”:作为信仰铭文的非文本对象","authors":"Héctor M. Varela Rios","doi":"10.1080/10477845.2022.2038045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract That religious objects document religion is usually construed as fact. In this paper, I also confirm that fact via five “object stories” of believers, that is, the complex and diverse lived religion displayed through my informants’ (and my own) relationship with religious objects garnered through open-ended interviews and personal reflection, and also via material culture analysis using Jules David Prown. But what is *it* that religious objects document? Since the key word is document, I begin with Maurizio Ferraris’ “documentality” and its constitutive rule “Object = Inscribed Act.” I also realized during the interview process that my informants were describing and explaining beliefs in varying ways. To elucidate, I turn to David Morgan’s typology of belief. Construing belief as a social act, I formulate the “Ferraris-Morgan” constitutive rule of religious documentality: Religious Object = Inscribed Belief. My informants’ witness suggest that these objects are documents of belief: belief rediscovered, belief nurtured, belief distributed, belief used, belief identified—belief “depicted,” as one informant said. Yet, how authentic are these documentalities of belief? I use Orlando O. Espín to authenticate the “sensus fidei” depicted in these religious documents. Espín will also be helpful to ascertain what is at stake: the subversiveness they present to “official” Catholicism in general yet the preeminence they represent to everyday flourishing of believers.","PeriodicalId":35378,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Religious and Theological Information","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“Depicting Heavenly Reality”: Non-Textual Objects as Inscriptions of Belief\",\"authors\":\"Héctor M. Varela Rios\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10477845.2022.2038045\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract That religious objects document religion is usually construed as fact. In this paper, I also confirm that fact via five “object stories” of believers, that is, the complex and diverse lived religion displayed through my informants’ (and my own) relationship with religious objects garnered through open-ended interviews and personal reflection, and also via material culture analysis using Jules David Prown. But what is *it* that religious objects document? Since the key word is document, I begin with Maurizio Ferraris’ “documentality” and its constitutive rule “Object = Inscribed Act.” I also realized during the interview process that my informants were describing and explaining beliefs in varying ways. To elucidate, I turn to David Morgan’s typology of belief. Construing belief as a social act, I formulate the “Ferraris-Morgan” constitutive rule of religious documentality: Religious Object = Inscribed Belief. My informants’ witness suggest that these objects are documents of belief: belief rediscovered, belief nurtured, belief distributed, belief used, belief identified—belief “depicted,” as one informant said. Yet, how authentic are these documentalities of belief? I use Orlando O. Espín to authenticate the “sensus fidei” depicted in these religious documents. Espín will also be helpful to ascertain what is at stake: the subversiveness they present to “official” Catholicism in general yet the preeminence they represent to everyday flourishing of believers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35378,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Religious and Theological Information\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Religious and Theological Information\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10477845.2022.2038045\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Religious and Theological Information","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10477845.2022.2038045","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
宗教物品记录宗教信仰通常被解释为事实。在本文中,我也通过五个信徒的“客体故事”证实了这一事实,即通过开放式访谈和个人反思,以及通过朱尔斯·大卫·普罗恩的物质文化分析,通过我的线人(和我自己)与宗教客体的关系,展示了复杂多样的生活宗教。但是这些宗教物品记录了什么?既然关键词是文件,我就从Maurizio Ferraris的“文献性”(documentality)及其构成原则“对象=成文的行为”(Object = documented Act)开始。在采访过程中,我也意识到我的线人在用不同的方式描述和解释信仰。为了说明这一点,我转向大卫·摩根的信仰类型学。笔者将信仰视为一种社会行为,提出了宗教文献性的“法拉利-摩根”构成法则:宗教对象=铭文信仰。我的举报人的证词表明,这些物品是信仰的文件:信仰被重新发现,信仰被培养,信仰被传播,信仰被使用,信仰被识别——正如一位举报人所说,信仰被“描绘”了。然而,这些信仰的文献资料有多真实?我使用Orlando O. Espín来验证这些宗教文献中所描述的“信仰感”。Espín也将有助于确定什么是利害攸关的:他们对“官方”天主教的颠覆性,以及他们对信徒日常繁荣的卓越表现。
“Depicting Heavenly Reality”: Non-Textual Objects as Inscriptions of Belief
Abstract That religious objects document religion is usually construed as fact. In this paper, I also confirm that fact via five “object stories” of believers, that is, the complex and diverse lived religion displayed through my informants’ (and my own) relationship with religious objects garnered through open-ended interviews and personal reflection, and also via material culture analysis using Jules David Prown. But what is *it* that religious objects document? Since the key word is document, I begin with Maurizio Ferraris’ “documentality” and its constitutive rule “Object = Inscribed Act.” I also realized during the interview process that my informants were describing and explaining beliefs in varying ways. To elucidate, I turn to David Morgan’s typology of belief. Construing belief as a social act, I formulate the “Ferraris-Morgan” constitutive rule of religious documentality: Religious Object = Inscribed Belief. My informants’ witness suggest that these objects are documents of belief: belief rediscovered, belief nurtured, belief distributed, belief used, belief identified—belief “depicted,” as one informant said. Yet, how authentic are these documentalities of belief? I use Orlando O. Espín to authenticate the “sensus fidei” depicted in these religious documents. Espín will also be helpful to ascertain what is at stake: the subversiveness they present to “official” Catholicism in general yet the preeminence they represent to everyday flourishing of believers.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Religious & Theological Information is an essential resource for bibliographers, librarians, and scholars interested in the literature of religion and theology. Both international and pluralistic in scope, this peer-reviewed journal encourages the publication of research and scholarship in the field of library and information studies as it relates to religious studies and related fields, including philosophy, ethnic studies, anthropology, sociology, and historical approaches to religion. By "information" we refer to both print and electronic, and both published and unpublished information.