Dante's "Other Works"

What I would like to propose, in conclusion, is that, to give ourselves the richest opportunity for reflecting on the relationship between theology and the ‘other works,’ it is important that we consciously interpret these as moments of human encounter between ourselves and Dante. We might like the Dante we encounter or not. We might agree with his claims to be speaking for divinity or not. But unless we are open to encountering Dante as a fellow human being offering us his voice on a common journey towards an ever richer understanding of ourselves and the world we are part of, we close ourselves off from the theological heart—and art—of Dante’s writing.

One of the most important currents in Dante scholarship at the moment is the study of what is referred to as Dante’s intellectual formation. I would like to suggest that in order for us to engage with the theological significance of Dante’s work, study of Dante’s intellectual formation ought to be characterized in part by study of Dante’s conscious perception of himself as an author through whom truth speaks; and of the ways in which this perception is consciously presented in Dante’s engagement with Scripture and with Revelation more broadly. In their different ways, the ‘other works’ offer us a remarkable record of a human being attempting to live out—in as truthful a manner as he is capable of—his responsibility to aid other human beings on their journey. As proud or as humble as we might think Dante to be in thinking of himself in this way, our engagement with his work along these lines can be a fruitful experience. At the very least it will allow us to explore, consciously, critically, communally, our own understanding of our relationship with truth. We might or might not think of this explicitly as a theological, spiritual or salvific activity. But, on the interpretive terms I have tried to outline above, I believe Dante might suggest to us that, in any case, this is in essence, an activity that brings us closer to nothing other than truth itself. Be that as it may, reflecting on the relationship between theology and the ‘other works’ is significant both for what it can tell us about Dante and for what it can allow us to discover about ourselves.

Our overarching guide question was: To what extent and in what ways can the ‘other works’ be seen as manifestations of Dante’s (changing) understanding of human personhood—and therefore also human authorship—as having an essentially, and irreducibly, divine dimension? In the light of the various ways in which this question was addressed above, the open-ended interrogative I would like to end with is: What is at stake for us, as scholars and more generally, in responding to the various ways in which Dante’s ‘other works’ invite us to recognize an irreducibly divine dimension in Dante’s voice, and therefore also in our own? It is in this kind of question, I believe, that the significance of reflection on “Theology and the ‘Other Works’” ultimately lies.

(Chapter 11)