5
both closeness and distance, likeness and difference, interior and exterior.
27
As Taylor
asserts:
This strangely permeable membrane forms a border where fixed boundaries
disintegrate. Along this boundless boundary the traditional polarities between
which Western theology has been suspended are inverted and subverted. Since it
is forever entre-deux, a/theology is undeniably ambiguous. The a/theologian
asks errant questions and suggests responses that often seem erratic or even
erroneous. Since his reflection wanders, roams, and strays from the "proper"
course, it tends to deviate from well-established ways. To traditional eyes,
a/theology doubtless appears to be irregular, eccentric, and vagrant. At best it
seems aimless, at worst devious. Within this framework, a/theology is, in fact
heretical. For the a/theologian, however, heresy and aimlessness are
unavoidable. . . . The erring nomad neither looks back to an absolute beginning
nor ahead to an ultimate end. His writing, therefore, remains unfinished. His
work is less a complete book than an open (perhaps broken) text that never really
begins or actually ends.
28
Taylor believes that through the tool of deconstruction, and by staying in this
"middle" position, it will reveal a brand new way of reading and writing scripture.
29
B. Mazing Grace
Another important concept for Taylor is his notion of "mazing" grace. A "maze"
is a labyrinth of winding, interconnecting, passages. To "be mazed" is to be perplexed,
to wander about in one's mind either through delusion or deception. Taylor implores us
to wander, to err and move about, to deviate, free from the false security of modernism..
It is through this erring by which we experience grace. Taylor says: "Mazing grace
situates one in the midst of a labyrinth from which there is no exit." He claims that this
is a "second innocence" which presupposes the death of God. To straightforwardly
accept the death of the transcendent God is grace.
30
III. What can we learn?
As evangelicals, can we learn anything at all from Taylor when he seems to
radically transgress everything we cling to? We believe that we can glean some helpful
insights from Taylor's a/theological concerns.
A. Serious Contextualization?
27
Taylor, Erring, p. 12. François Nault points out a similar ambiguity in the French, L'athéologie: "Cette
affirmation ne peut s'entendre, le `a' de l'athéologie étant inaudible, comme le `a' de la différance derridienne.
La spécificité de l'athéologie se réduit ainsi à un trait d'écriture." François Nault, Derrida et la théologie: Dire
Dieu après la déconstruction (Paris: Les Edition du Cerf, 2000), p. 119.
28
Taylor, Erring, pp.12-13.
29
Ibid., p.13.
30
Ibid., pp. 150-151; 168-169.