Epilogue

My attempt to address rhythm and its theological significance has involved a tension between description and construction. On the one hand, I merely point to rhythm as the ghost haunting theology, describing its varying forms and its effects on that with which it comes into contact. But the other side of this investigation has been a constructive attempt to put together a few of the pieces of what theology would be like if it were performed while keeping one eye on the ghost. The reader may have noticed that in doing so, I have, as far as possible, avoided explicitly aligning myself with any particular theological school, position, denomination, etc., although I offer critiques of certain projects and thinkers. I have, instead, borrowed liberally, though I hope not incoherently, from a wide range of eras, denominations, and theological commitments. The reason for this is that I have attempted to investigate the diversity of approaches to rhythm across Christian theology. Since there exists such a variety of approaches to rhythm, the category is clearly not restricted to a particular theological project. I want this book to reflect that diversity, not to make rhythm the concern of only a subsection of Christian theology. I want to avoid this project becoming absorbed into any particular theological project as a category associated with and somehow belonging to that project....