Preaching Deconstruction

by Robert M. Price, Thomas J.J. Altizer (Foreword)

Deconstruction is usually denigrated (or praised!) for being esoteric, abstruse, a method and a language restricted to a self-appointed academic elite. Its critics object that Deconstruction is a mind-game with no connection or relation to the real world. Perhaps the very opposite kind of speech is pulpit preaching, a dispensing of comforting bromides and pious clichés aimed at reinforcing the prejudices of the pew potatoes. What could Deconstruction and Postmodernism possibly have to do with preaching? They seem alien even to social activist liberal Protestant cheer-leading. In this book Robert M. Price applies the philosophy of Jacques Derrida and the radical theology of Thomas J.J. Altizer to real questions of spirituality and biblical interpretation. Price preaches from both Old and New Testaments, as well as the Koran and the Gospel of Thomas. Other influences on these sermons, delivered in a Baptist church, include Paul Tillich, Paul de Man, Rudolf Bultmann, Robert W. Chambers, Ingmar Bergman, Malcolm Boyd, and Thomas Ligotti. The book features a foreword by Thomas Altizer, an important new essay in its own right, as well as Price’s introductory discussion of Deconstruction, then a set of innovative sermons. The sermons are not about Deconstruction. They are about spirituality and the Bible. But Deconstruction is everywhere present as an atmosphere and a medium. It quickly becomes clear, not only that no theological orthodoxy is any longer possible, but also that it is not necessary for Postmodern man (and woman) to blaze a path on the new spiritual frontier. The radical theology that erupted in the 1960s has long been relegated to a pop cultural time capsule along with lava lamps and Nehru jackets. But it is not unusual for the majority to (nervously)laugh off what makes them uncomfortable. In the 1990s, Deconstruction revived the theology of the Death of God, providing a much-needed theoretical reformulation. The significance of Deconstruction can be measured by the amount of controversy, even hysteria, that it provoked. The publication of these unique sermons is an attempt to keep that witness alive. And to demonstrate that Deconstruction provides a new way forward in religious exploration.

151 pages, Kindle Edition

First published February 18, 2014

About the author

Robert McNair Price is an American theologian and writer. He teaches philosophy and religion at the Johnnie Colemon Theological Seminary, is professor of biblical criticism at the Center for Inquiry Institute, and the author of a number of books on theology and the historicity of Jesus, asserting the Christ myth theory.

A former Baptist minister, he was the editor of the Journal of Higher Criticism from 1994 until it ceased publication in 2003. He has also written extensively about the Cthulhu Mythos, a "shared universe" created by H.P. Lovecraft.

Reviews

[Stephie Williams · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an interesting book because the author used deconstructionism as elaborated by Jacques Derrida in his sermons, some of which are printed in the book, he once delivered to his former Baptist congregation in New Jersey. Deconstructionism as I understand it eschews authorial intent and focuses strictly on the text. This interpretation takes a lot of liberties with the text. It uses wordplay, etymologies, and the changing of meaning words undergo as among its tools to deconstruct the text. In Robert M. Price’s hand the Bible gets deconstructed. What his congregation thought I cannot even imagine. He left the ministry by his own accord, but I wonder if his flock had anything to do with his leaving. Each sermon focuses, which for some would be out of focus, on the Bible readings for the Sunday on which they were delivered. I imagine that he had quite a bit of fun constructing his deconstruction sermons.

The following our some comments I have made on specific pieces of text from notes I wrote as I was reading the book. Page numbers are in brackets [] from the pagination of the Kindle edition. An “@” symbol indicates pages where I had a particular thought occur to me, but not necessarily connect with the text on that exact page.

[6] “All these familiar phenomena [like verbal (Freudian) slips] make pretty clear that the unconscious is a thoroughly textual beast, and a strange country in which no conscious intentionality of ours has ever set foot.” As language production is on the whole, like all thought, unconscious, does not necessarily mean we think in language. Language could just be the translation of thought. It is also possible with this understanding that the verbal slips could just be mistranslations, having nothing to do with the expression of some deeper feelings.

[7-8] “As a conscientious feminist, you might eschew the word ‘man’ for ‘person,’ but you must have forgotten that ‘per-son’ meant firstborn male child, thus heir. Uh-oh.” Is there no way out.

[@9] I am not impressed by Freudian psychology, and since I have my doubts that deconstruction is a valid way to interpret the “meaning” of a text, it may play a spurious role in the interpretation of any text. My main sense is that deconstruction expresses the person who is doing the interpretation of the text meaning, not the text itself. It is like using a book review to discuss one’s own views (something I indulge in). Thus, it is not exactly illegitimate to deconstruct texts.

[32] “When you read a text, you are the authority and must take responsibility, whereas when you yield to the commands of a speaking voice, to some guru or expert, you abdicate responsibility, you let someone else be in authority over you.” (author’s italics) Is this not what Christians want—someone to be an authority over them, and hence a way of abdicating responsibility to those actions so dictated.

[@41] My thought on deconstruction is that it says everything and nothing about a text. As a search for truth it falls under its own weight because there is no truth to be had from a text, only the text and its interpretation.

[46-7] Commenting on saying 5 of the Gospel of Thomas, he writes: “’Say, isn’t Jesus Christ a heavenly revealer? Why not go ask him?’ Jesus the answer man. But he will not be cast in such a role, no matter how much traditional Christian theology may wish to portray him so. Theologians approach him with questions, but he answers them with more questions.” I like this kind of Jesus, even if he is still fictional.

[52] “Whenever somebody in the early church collected these letters of Paul from the churches he had originally sent them to, he rerouted the letters. Ever since then we have been reading somebody else’s mail?” Ha, ha. Here Price is expressing a good sense of humor.

[@63] In deconstruction “the word is not the thing,” it is the only thing.

[72] “Readers must make of the text itself what they can, and they may get a totally different meaning out of it.” This does not necessarily make it correct (in deconstruction there is no correct meaning) or true. But, I will agree, true or not, it us human beings that give meaning to a text and the world at large as well.*

[73] “There is no truth independent of language, standing outside it or above it, no Transcendental Signified. There is no meaning outside that could be imposed onto the field of signifiers, this ocean of words, of text.” Under this interpretation, you could say that language poisons everything.

[124] “But if it is of God, it cannot be a word, for God can have no need of them. To suppose he does is to ape the childishness of the writer of Genesis One who has God create the darkness and call it ‘Night,’ or the Hebrew word for ‘night,’ as if God spoke Hebrew before there were any human beings on earth, much less Hebrews!” (author’s italics). The orthodox Jew would beg to differ. To them Hebrew is the language of the divine.

I was quite amused when reading parts of the book. It was great fun seeing Price twist and turn whatever he wanted to from the biblical text. Whether or not deconstructionism is a valid mode of textual interpretation (see some of my comments on this), he does as masterful job with it. His learning is indeed deep, and his deconstruction has a clarity that most deconstructionists do not have. Price is one of my favorite atheist writers; although, he does not seem to accept this designation for himself. I recently read something that would lead me to think he would not. Anyway, a good deal of his writing, I think, supports atheistic beliefs.

If you like deconstructionism and/or biblical exegesis you might enjoy this book. However, if you are unwilling or unable to entertain alternative meaning(s) of the Bible, I think it might be best if you shied away from it.

* See my blog “What Do You Mean?” for an exploration of this idea @ https://aquestionersjourney.wordpress....