THE PHILOSOPHY PROFESSOR OUTLINES A “POSTMODERN RELIGION”
John D. Caputo is a professor emeritus at Syracuse University and Villanova University. He has written many other books, such as Deconstruction in a Nutshell: A Conversation with Jacques Derrida; What Would Jesus Deconstruct?: The Good News of Postmodernism for the Church; The Prayers and Tears of Jacques Derrida: Religion without Religion; Radical Hermeneutics: Repetition, Deconstruction, and the Hermeneutic Project; Hoping Against Hope: Confessions of a Postmodern Pilgrim, The Folly of God: A Theology of the Unconditional, etc.
He wrote in the first chapter of this 2015 book, “religion is coming apart at the seams all by itself, withering away from within… As a result, religion is being torn up by an internal divide. On the one hand, the conservatives… are in full flight to biblical literalism or the authority of the Church. On the other hand, the progressives are in full flight from the conservatives… in search of a way to live sensibly and commodiously in a rapidly changing, postmodern, hi-tech, multicultural world… The conservatives confirm that religion required believing fantasies. The progressives confirm that living well has little or nothing to do with believing in religion’s supernatural beings and codified doctrines. Indeed… living well is actually impeded by it and too often results in leading furiously reactionary, intolerant, exclusionary, avaricious, mean-spirited, science denying and anti-modern lives.” (Pg. 14)
He adds, “I hope I have made it plain that for the most part religion deserves all the incredulity by which it is presently greeted. My best guess is that in its orthodox form it will become more and more incredible with each passing day, which does not mean it will pass away. Unless there might be another religion, another way of hoping and having faith, another sense of grace and miracle… without mystifying itself with supernatural forces or special revelations. If there is not another religion, then the hope religion offers is hopeless, religion is not worth saving, and [Jean Francois] Lyotard is right to ignore it.” (Pg. 19)
He outlines, “In this book, the mystics play a special role as the insiders in religion, whose bold strokes cut to the core of religion, while all along being outsiders who unnerve the powers-that-be on the inside… I will then turn to two familiar, everyday, commonplace experiences---giving a gift and hospitality---and propose that each of them trembles with mystical depth and each represents a powerful and important ingredient in the case I am making for a postmodern religion… That is all by way of amassing evidence to present to the court for the position I take on God… [Then I will] formulate a repetition of religion, a religion without religion, which turns on what I call the ‘nihilism of grace’…” (Pg. 21-22)
He recalls his period in the French monastic order ‘Fratres Scholarum Christianarum [‘Brothers of the Christian Schools’]: “After four years, I left the religious life… I thanked [Brother Provincial] for the many gifts I had been given in my four precious years as a Brother, one of which was to have discovered my vocation---the life of a philosopher---for which I have been grateful all my life. But I soon learned there was to be no clear line of separation between religion and my philosophical life. Every time I thought I had left religion behind, I found it waiting for me around the next corner, its arms crossed, with a grin to its face, as if to say, ‘its’ about time you showed up.’” (Pg. 26)
He observes, “without the mystical poet’s sense of the unconditional, everything would be a means to an end, everything would be ground up in serving a purpose, and nothing would be worth anything unless we could use it for something else… There would be no gift, no grace in life… We would spend our whole lives saving up for something we never buy… So instead of CHOOSING between the conditional and the unconditional, it is a matter of LIVING between them. The mark of the human condition is to live in the distance between the conditional and the unconditional, to constantly negotiate between them.” (Pg. 36-37)
He explains, “I am signaling a wholly other sort of God, and dreaming of another sort of Church… the pattern is emerging of a God who would have landed me in public school. A God who is otherwise, who abdicates the power to punish his enemies with eternal pain and to reward his friends with eternal happiness. These two, both the Prime Punisher and the Royal Rewarder go hand in hand; they come as a package deal in the economy of salvation.” (Pg. 64)
He notes, “When I am invited to speak by various church groups, I sometimes find myself preaching to the converted, to people who are already doing what I am theorizing, so that the most I can do for them is provide them with a vocabulary they can use at cocktail parties. The word ‘welcoming’ these congregations have embraced is a hot topic in postmodern theory, but I find that the people on the ground, in the working church, are already DOING what we theorists are theorizing.” (Pg. 88)
He states, “the core idea I have about God”: “the proper way to speak of God is to say not that God exists, but that God insists, while we are called upon to make up the difference. We are asked to pick up where God leaves off, to fill up the existence that is lacking in the insistence of God. God insists, but the weight of God’s existence falls on us. The easy yoke and incredible lightness of God’s insistence implies that the gravity of existence is our responsibility, that the burden of existence falls on our shoulders. As the mystics say, God needs us.” (Pg. 106)
He acknowledges, “I admit to serving up an unauthorized reading of the Scriptures, which I treat as if they were texts found in a cave whose authors are unknown, which we read because of what they have to say, not because we are told they dropped from the sky… To rid God of God is to let God dissolve with remainder into narratives about God, which it is up to us to actualize, to leave it to us to make these stories of unknown provenance come true.” (Pg. 126)
He says, “To pray is to keep the world restless with the future, where the God of the gaps means the gaps God opens, not the gaps God fills. To pray is to be prompted by the promise of the uncompromisable, moved by the memory of the immemorial, pushed beyond the limits of the possible by the impossible. Prayer… keeps the world in a state of optimal disequilibrium exposing the world to God’s pressing insistence. Prayer is a way to keep faith with life to sustain the hope that the future is always better, to better pledge of the unconditional.” (Pg. 196)
This book will be of keen interest to those studying contemporary/progressive Christianity.