Church in the Present Tense

After what seems like a really, really long wait (I downloaded drafts of the chapters from the web in February 2009), I finally got my copy of Church in the Present Tense: A Candid Look at What's Emerging through the post this week. Edited by Kevin Corcoran (Associate Professor of Philosophy, Calvin College), it includes chapters from Corcoran himself, Jason Clark, Pete Rollins, and Scot McKnight.

Yes, they're all white men (see the direction in which the comments thread on Jonny Baker's review went). Yes, both the blurb on the back and Corcoran's own comments stress that each of the authors have doctorates. And, yes, there are plenty of women with PhDs that could've contributed (including Maggi Dawn, Heidi Campbell, and Gladys Ganiel - all female academics active within the emerging church conversation and/or who have conducted scholarly work on aspects of the conversation, whom Corcoran, as a sefl-described "newbie" to the conversation, ought to explore if he wants "some scholarly voices [to] weigh in on the conversation" - oh, and me).

But this is a slightly odd criticism to make of a book with only four contributors. It's not like it's an edited collection with over 20 chapters, none of which are writtten by women or ethnic minorities. And it can detract from serious engagement with the contents of Church in the Present Tense... something I hope to be able to undertake in the next little while. Maybe I'll attempt to read it on my flight to New York next week.

Paul and Political Theology

I need to buy this: Paul, Philosophy, and the Theopolitical Vision: Critical Engagements with Agamben, Badiou, Zizek and Others, edited by Dougals Harink (in Wipf and Stock's Theopolitical Visions series).

Here's the back cover blurb:

"The apostle Paul was a man of many journeys. We are usually familiar with the geographical ones he made in his own time. This volume traces others—Paul's journeys in our time, as he is co-opted or invited to travel (sometimes as abused slave, sometimes as trusted guide) with modern and recent Continental philosophers and political theorists. Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Benjamin; Taubes, Badiou, Zizek, and Agamben—Paul journeys here among the philosophers. In these essays you are invited to travel with them into the regions of philosophy, hermeneutics, political theory, and theology. You will certainly hear the philosophers speak. But Paul will not remain silent. Above the sounds of the journey his voice comes through, loud and clear."

And here's the contents:

"Introduction: From Apocalypse to Philosophy" - and Back, Douglas Harink

Part One: From Apocalypse to Philosophy

1 "The Gospel invades Philosophy," J. Louis Martyn

Part Two: Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Benjamin

2 "Living 'As If Not:' Messianic Becoming or the Practice of Nihilism?" Travis Kroeker

3 "Heidegger's Paul and Radical Orthodoxy on the Structure of Christian Hope," Justin D. Klassen

4 "The Messiah's Quiet Approach: Walter Benjamin's Messianic Politics," Grant Poettcker

Part Three: Badiou and Zizek

5 "A Very Particular Universalism: Badiou and Paul," Stephen Fowl

6 "Ideological Closure in the Christ-Even: A Marxist Response to Alain Badiou's Paul," Neil Elliott

7 "Subjects between Death and Resurrection: Badiou, Zizek, and St. Paul," Geoffrey Holsclaw

Part Four: Agamben

8 "The Cross as the Fulcrum of Politics: Expropriating Agamben on Paul," Paul J. Griffiths

9 "Messianic or Apocalyptic? Engaging Agamben on Paul and Politics," Ryan L. Hanses

Part Five: Hermeneutics, Ecclesia, Time

10 "Hermeneutics of Unbelief: Philosophical Readings of Paul," Jens Zimmermann

11 "On the Exigency of a Messianic Ecclesia: An Engagement with Philosophical Readers of Paul," Gordon Zerbe

12 "Time and Politics in Four Commentaries on Romans," Douglas Harink

Christianity and Contemporary Politics

Over at the churchandpomo blog, there is a micro review by James K.A. Smith of Luke Bretherton's Christianity and Contemporary Politics: The Conditions and Possibilities of Faithful Witness.

I'm hoping to take my own research in the direction of political theology, drawing out the socio-political implications of my thesis on "truth" in emerging Christianity and post-secular theologies (Radical Orthodoxy and deconstructive theology). This will, I hope, speak to the debates around "new traditionalist" critiques of liberalism and democracy (Stanley Hauerwas, Alasdair MacIntyre, John Milbank, John Rawls, Jeffrey Stout), so I'll be putting Luke Bretherton's book - which explores the positive contributions of the over-polarised field of political theology; a field that, as Jamie Smith writes in his micro review, is often divided between "Stoutian liberals vs. ecclesiocentric ROers" - on my to do list. In particular, I'm looking forward to the conclusion: "Towards a Politics of Hospitality and a Theology of Politics."

Related is a a King's College Faith and Public Policy Forum seminar on Monday 18th October 2010 that Jason Clark drew my attention to: "Stanley Hauerwas in Conversation with John Milbank and Luke Bretherton," also marking the publication of Hauerwas' Hannah's Child: A Theologian's Memoir. The event will run from 5.30-7.00pm at the Great Hall on Strand Campus.

What I'm Reading

One of the key figures in my doctoral thesis is James K.A. Smith, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Calvin College, Grand Rapids, Michigan. As well as blog Fors Clavigera (see here for an explanation of its title), he writes a What I'm Reading blog, which is actually the older of the two. Jamie describes What I'm Reading as "something between an annotated bibliography and a collection of book reviews." This is something that I'm going to try out with this blog.

Having completed my PhD, I now spend my days hunting for academic jobs, writing conference papers, and turning my thesis into a book and a couple of articles, and I'll still post about these things. However, I'm also still reading new things. So I thought I might try out posting snippits of what I'm reading which will give insight into where I am hoping to go next with my work.

Since my postdoctoral aspirations converge on exploring the possibility of Derridean radical sociality, I thought starting with this from Slavoj Zizek's The Puppet and The Dwarf: The Perverse Core of Christianity, pp.43-44 -

"When today's Left bombards the capitalist system with demands that it obviously cannot fulfill (Full employment! Retain the welfare state! Full rights for immigrants!), it is basically playing a game of hysterical provocation, of addressing the Master with a demand that will be impossible for him to meet, and will thus expose his impotence.

"The problem with this strategy, however, is not only that the system cannot meet these demands, but that those who voice them do not really want them to be satisfied.

"When, for example, 'radical' academics demand full rights for immigrants and the opening of borders to them, are they aware that the direct implementation of this demand would, for obvious reasons, inundate the developed Western countries with millions of newcomers, thus provoking a violent racist working-class backlash that would then endanger the privileged position of these very academics?

"Of course they are, but they count on the fact that their demand will not be met - in this way, they can hypocritically retain their clear radical conscience while continuing to enjoy their privileged position."

Abstract accepted for Attending to the Other

My abstract for the International Society for Religion, Literature and Culture's "Attending to the Other: Critical Theory and Spiritual Practice" was accepted by the theology panel. The paper is called "How to Eat Well in Church: Saying 'Yes' to the Other and Becoming Nothing in Derrida, Paul, and Emerging Christian Discourse," and will detail the ways in which emerging church literature advocates "attending to the other" and mirrors approaches to "the other" in Paul (particularly in Romans) and in Derrida.

A timely publication from within the UK emerging church milieu which I can't wait to get my hands on is Kester Brewin's Other: Loving Self, God and Neighbour in a World of Fractures.

Another book of interest, which comes out too late for me to include it in my September paper, is Graham Adam's Christ and the Other: In Dialogue with Hick and Newbigin. Here's the blurb: "How should we relate to "others" - those within a particular tradition, those of different traditions, and those who are oppressed? In the light of these anxieties, this book offers a vision of Christ as "the Shaken One," rooted in commuinty with others and building upon the work of Andrew Shanks. Shaped through dialogue with the theologies of John Hick and Lesslie Newbigin, Adams urges Christian communities to attend more deeply to the demands of ecumenical, dialogical and political theologies, to build an ever greater "solidarity of others" - a quality of community better demonstrating Christlike "other-regard."

Cross and Khora

Jack Caputo gave me a heads up about an edited collection about his work, Cross and Khora: Deconstruction and Christianity in the Work of John D. Caputo. It's out in January 2010, edited by Marko Zlomislic and Neal DeRoo (Neal edited a collection on phenomenology and eschatology, of which I've read a few chapters but haven't yet had time to fully review, as well as one on James K.A. Smith, which I looked at a bit here, here and here). I'm hoping Jack'll be able to get me a copy to review here and use in my thesis.

Here's a list of other books about Caputo's work:

• Roy Martinez, ed. 1997. The Very Idea of Radical Hermeneutics.
• James Olthuis, ed. 2002. Religion with/out Religion: The Prayers and Tears of John D. Caputo.
• Mark Dooley, ed. 2003. A Passion for the Impossible: John D. Caputo in Focus.
• Christopher Simpson. 2009. Religion, Metaphysics and the Postmodern: William Desmond and John D. Caputo.

Marcus Borg

The Progressive Christianity Network (Britain) are hosting a weekend conference next September (Friday 10 - Sunday 12 Sept 2010) in Edinburgh with Marcus Borg. Registration isn't open until December 1, but I imagine it'll sell out pretty quickly. Would be interesting.

Here are links to some of his books: The First Paul: Reclaiming the Radical Visionary Behind the Church's Conservative Icon (with John Dominic Crossan); Jesus: Uncovering the Life, Teachings, and Relevance of a Religious Revolutionary; The God We Never Knew: Beyond Dogmatic Religion to a More Authentic Contemporary Faith; Conflict, Holiness and Politics in the Teachings of Jesus; The Heart of Christianity: Rediscovering a Life of Faith; The First Christmas: What the Gospels Really Teach Us About Jesus' Birth; and The Last Week: What the Gospels Really Teach About Jesus's Final Days.

Writers' Rooms

So I've been writing. I'm working on a chapter which explores how the notion of "truth" is connected to the notion of "justice," and, seeing as how that means I've not been blogging much (or doing, really, anything apart from writing - my partner Sim is being absolutely fantastic about doing cooking and washing up), I thought I'd blog about where I do my writing.

Well, since I haven't really got that much interesting to say on the subject (my study is in a small upstairs extension at the back of our house, with skylights [that leak] and a window with a tree outside it, is full of books, folders and [for the moment unused] musical instruments... oh and I haven't cleaned it once since we moved in over a year ago), I thought I'd post some photos instead, a la The Guardian's excellent (and obviously much more interesting than mine) "Writers' Rooms." So, here we go on a tour of my study...

On the door is this picture. It is generally "where I'm at."

Then there are lots of book shelves without many books on them. Like this:

They're a bit empty because most of the books are all piled up around my desk so I can grab them quickly. Like this:

But there are some books that do make it back onto the shelves after I've used them. Like these:

And here's my window with the tree where the long-tailed tits make me happy when it's not going so well!

The (Shocking?) Shack

Over our summer hiatus, "Theologically Speaking," the theological discussion group that I'm part of at my local Anglican church, has been reading The Shack by William P. Young. Although I have very little time to read anything that I don't have to read for my doctoral studies, I'm going to try reading a few chapters of this a night, ready for our meeting towards the end of September (also when I hope to have a finished "first final draft" of my thesis for my supervisor to read!).

I'm not particularly looking forward to reading it. I've only ever read Brian McLaren's "Christian fiction" (A New Kind of Christian, The Story We Find Ourselves In, and The Last Word and The Word After That). I found the quality of writing rather disappointing, even though the theological perspectives put forward (not necessarily all held by McLaren himself - this is fiction, after all, and aims at provoking indepdent thought rather than instilling a particular line) were moving closer to my own position. However, I find the fragments of fiction in the work of someone like Pete Rollins (now collected here) and in the liturgical practices of communities within the emerging church milieu must more inspirational than I imagine any single sustained work of ficiton could be (as it often entails the systematization of perspectives into a unified narrative). Anyway, my presuppositions about The Shack (based only on a quick reading of a few reviews, see here and here for example) are that it is going to be theologically "daring" only from the perspective of conservative Christianity. I don't think it is going to be that radical - i.e. it is not so audacious to imagine God as a black woman - and so will end up, I imagine, coming off as a bit pedestrian from the perspective of my own thinking.

But, I stress, I haven't even opened it yet. I am prepared to be shocked by The Shack. In fact, I hope it does surprise me out of my own presumptions. It would be great for it to stimulate some thinking for me and, hopefully, in conversation with everyone else at my discussion group, it will. I imagine that some of the others at Theologically Speaking will also be hoping that The Shack doesn't still domesticate whilst seeking to radicalise. I'll have to wait and see. Anyone else read it?

[Post Update: Having read it, you can now read my reflections on The Shack here.]

Updates After Andalucia

So I didn't get all my holiday reading done. Mainly because it's quite hard to read when its 40 degrees. I did get through Dialogue and Deconstruction: The Gadamer-Derrida Encounter and Reading Derrida / Thinking Paul: On Justice, though. So I've got a few more texts to go (especially Realist Christian Theology in a Postmodern Age, which I got half way through about two years ago) before I feel more comfortable in moving ahead with my remaining chapters (mainly Chapters Four, Five and Seven).

While we were away, I did some good thinking on how I'm going to characterise the relationship between my different sources of empirical and theoretical data. I have both empirical texts (interview transcripts, e-questionnaires, and a variety of emerging church media) and theoretical texts (mainly by Jack Caputo and Jamie Smith, but including secondary literature by people like Gavin Hyman, Theodore Jennings, Bruce Ellis Benson, Richard Kearney, Robyn Horner, Merold Westphal, Kevin Hart, and Mark C Taylor).

My starting point is, of course, my empirical data. But because of the very nature of this starting point, my own reading of theology and philosophy has to follow the trajectories of my participants. Therefore, the theoretical texts augment the empirical ones, making in particular two strands clearer within the data. In the process, then, there is a massive amount of literature that I've only been able to dip into, including work by St. Augustine, Alain Badiou, Jacques Derrida, Hans-Georg Gadamer, Martin Heidegger, John Hick, Gerard Loughlin, Immanuel Kant, Soren Kierkegaard, Emmanuel Levinas, Jean-Luc Marion, John Milbank, Friedrich Nietzsche, St. Paul, and Graham Ward, etc.

My thesis is not "on" the work of any of these people. To an extent, it could be said to be "on" deconstructive theology, or Radical Orthodoxy, or, of course, the emerging church milieu. It might even be said to be "on" Jack Caputo and/or Jamie Smith. But I have to be clear that mine is not, for example, a thesis "on Derrida." Instead, I've been thinking about using the word "fragments" to refer to the other reading practices that I have had to engage in. This form of reading does not, for example, "do justice" to "Derrida." On the contrary, it probably does a lot of violence. This is similar to the way that Jennings frames his use of both Derrida and Paul in his Reading Derrida / Thinking Paul: On Justice. He writes,

"the procedure here adopted entails a certain violence to the texts both of Derrida and of Paul, for it requires extracting bits and pieces of their respective arguments in order to show points of convergence and illumination... I hope, however, that the violence of this reading is to a certain degree mitigated by its attempt to undo the greater violence that has come from the supposition that neither author is really concerned with the question of justice" (p.xii)

In the hope of "doing justice" to my empirical texts, I have done violence to the theoretical texts of several philosophers and theologians. As (a "fragment" of!!!) "Derrida" says, "in order to be just, I am unjust and I betray... it is unjust to be just. I always betray someone to be just; I always betray one for the other" ("To Forgive" in Questioning God, p.49).

Also whilst we were away, I also realised that a guiding structural question of my thesis is "how do non-propositional understandings of truth affect participants' relationships to religious propositions?" I had already worked out that Chapter Three, "Thinking Truth(s) Otherwise," moves from participants' considerations of religious propositions to ask whether this is even where religious truth is located and, further, to explore whether religious truth is (also) non-propositional. I had even created a three-fold structure for the closing section ("Non-Propositional Religious Truth"): Truth is God, Truth-Event, and Living in Truth. But, on a train (dictating to Sim, as I don't travel very well), I worked out that part of what my thesis is actually asking is how participants relate non-propositional understandings of religious truth to religious propositions.

In turn, this means that I've been able to much better articulate (should that be, "articulate much better"?!?!?) what I'm up to in some of my thesis chapters. So, the "Interlude" makes clear that a structuring question is, "what does non-propositional religious truth mean for religious propositions?" Then, chapters four, five and seven detail the implications of the non-propositional understandings of truth I enumerated in Chapter Three (Truth is God, Truth-Event, and Living in Truth) for religious propositions. So, Chapter Four presents the implications of "Truth is God" for religious propositions, Chapter Five details what "Truth-Event" means for religious propositions, and (part of) Chapter Seven demonstrates how "Living in Truth" relates to religious propositions. That means that I can clarify that, for the two strands in my data, "dialogue" and "deconstruction" become the respective guiding principles for non-propositional notions of truth to religious propositions. Well, I think that's clearer, at least!

Holiday Reading

So I've been madly trying to get as much writing done as possible before our holiday to Andalucia in a few days. I've made a few leaps of progress, as well as making some detours and a few deadends.

I've written the first "final" draft of my Introduction, and finished most of the sections of the first "final" drafts of chapters one, two and three ("Emergence" - what is the emerging church? why study truth in the emerging chruch? - "Ordinary Philosophy" - how did I study truth in the emerging church? - and "Thinking Truth(s) Otherwise" - how is truth conceptualised in the emerging church?). I've also made headway with chapter six ("Truth, Theology, and Fictionality" - is Radical Orthodoxy or deconstructive theology more appropriate for the emerging church, given participants' conceptions of truth?).

That leaves me with a vague idea of what I want to achieve with my interlude ("Determining Truth") and chapters four, five, and seven ("Dialogue and Determinate Truth" and "Deconstruction and Determinate Truth" - what are the philosophical and theological implications of such conceptions of truth? - and "Truth/Justice and Kingdom Poetics" - what are the ethical and political implications of such conceptions of truth?). I've still got a bit of reading to do for these chapters, particularly now that I know what I want them to do, so I've chosen a few key texts to get to grips with on holiday. These are works that will help in particular with my distinction between two strands in my data (chapters four and five) and the practical translation of truth into justice (chapter seven). They include:

• Dialogue and Deconstruction: The Gadamer-Derrida Encounter, edited by Michelfelder & Palmer;
• Realist Christian Theology in a Postmodern Age, by Sue Patterson;
• Liturgy of the Neighbor: Emmanuel Levinas and the Reigion of Responsibility, by Jeffrey Bloechl; and
• Reading Derrida/Thinking Paul: On Justice, by Theodore W. Jennings, Jr.

The Discipline Proper to the Study of the Truth Proper to Religion

You know there are times when you just wish you'd come across or been told about a book earlier on in your studies? Well, I've recently stumbled upon two, each of which relate to the question of what discipline is best for the study of religious truth.

The first is a monograph by Donald Wiebe (1981) entitled Religion and Truth: Towards an Alternative Paradigm for the Study of Religion and argues that, since religious truth is primarily propositional (he does consider non-propositional truth but finds it problematic) then religious studies is able to ask questions regarding the truth of religion. He spends less time exploring whether the correspondence theory of truth is the theory of truth proper to religious propositions, than he does arguing that religious truth is primarily propositional. So it's a good one to get your teeth into and really problematise.

Secondly, I found an edited collection called Phenomenology of the Truth Proper to Religion, edited by Ganiel Guerriere (with contributions from Louis Dupre, Edward Farley, Merold Westphal, Richard Kearney, Jack Caputo and Walter Lowe) that explores the question of the type of truth proper to religion from the spectrum of phenomenological subdisciplines: existential, hermeneutic, ethical, deconstructive, and transcendental.

Oh to have located these studies earlier! They are both very useful for the sections of my thesis in which I consider the interdisciplinary nature of my project, particularly the relationships between religious studies, theology, and philosophy (incl. phenomenology). It's also been useful in mounting an argument against the routine exclusion of the religious elements of life and, therefore, of truth by theorists of truth. So a very useful find.

New Book on Evangelicalism and the Emerging Church

At the end of August, a new book in Ashgate's Explorations in Practical, Pastoral and Empirical Theology series will be published in hardback: Evangelicalism and the Emerging Church, by Cory Labanow. Cory's very kindly emailed me a PDF copy to review as soon as I'm able. I've had a very quick read through it and it looks very interesting.

Focusing on an ethnographic study of a Vineyard Church connected to the global emerging church milieu, Cory explores the congregational life and culture of a community working through issues of religious identity. Here's a bit of blurb from Ashgate to get you interested. I'll post a review as soon as I can.

"With the Christian church in the west in decline, some churches are undergoing difficult transitions as they seek to become relevant, to both themselves and their surrounding cultures. Evangelicalism and the Emerging Church details an ethnographic study of a Vineyard congregation making sense of their Vineyard roots and their growing relationship with the self-proclaimed "emerging church" network. Through a rich account of congregational life and tensions, universal issues are raised such as relating to religious parentage, creating safe places for spirituality, Christian growth and maturity, communication with contemporary culture, and the challenges of identity reconstruction. This book is the first to conduct an academic study of a Vineyard congregation in the United Kingdom."

Refuting the Allergy to Determinacy

My paper at the "Towards a Philosophy of Life" conference, "Making Good on the "Good" of Life: Emerging Logics and Poetics of the Kingdom" (see here for my abstract) was well received. A few people who hadn't been there had heard from others who were that it was good, which was really nice to hear. Jack Caputo called it 'sizzling,' but I don't really know what that means! He said he completely agreed with my analysis of James K.A. Smith's work, particularly the logic of incarnation (see blog post here about Jack's paper, "Bodies Without Flesh: The Soft Gnosticism of Incarnational Theology"), and said again that I read him very well (he had positive things to say about my Boston paper too, see here for an overview of what I said). But I guess it's easy to get those kinds of reactions when the person whose work you are reflecting on is a lovely guy and when you're saving favourable things! I'd love to get Jamie Smith's take on what I'm doing. Maybe I could email him? He's working on a trilogy (first part to be published this September, entitled Desiring the Kingdom: Worship, Worldview and Cultural Formation) on a theology of culture, but I'm particularly intrigued by his methodological work arguing for the importance of liturgical practices as the site for philosophical reflection on religion.

Anyway, this paper forms parts of my doctoral thesis, particularly chapter Six, "Truth and Fictionality." But, as slightly tangential to my main argument, it is something that could easily be turned into a journal article with some more padding out and the like. As you can see from the paper's abstract (here), my main concern is to refute the criticisms Jamie Smith levels at Jack Caputo's Derridean deconstructive theology. Jamie's criticisms can be found most accessibly in his "The Logic of Incarnation: Towards a Catholic Postmodernism" in Neal DeRoo and Brian Lightbody's The Logic of Incarnation: James K.A. Smith's Critique of Postmodern Religion, pp.3-37. Smith identifies in both Caputo and Derrida what he terms a 'logic of determination.' (See here for more details on all this). My paper argues that the operative logic at work in Caputo's theology is that of the call or the promise which, far from being allergic to particularity, as Smith contends, seeks to release the promise in particular determinate religious (and "non-religious") traditions.

My argument runs basically thus:

• A presentation of Smith's characterization of the 'logic of determination.'

For Smith, the Derridean/Caputian logic of determination results in an interpretation of particularity that assumes, first, the finite nature of human life to be structurally (that is, necessarily) regrettable and, second, the interpretive visions of life and hopes for life of humanity’s determinate religious traditions to be exclusionary, violent and unjust. Thirdly, for Smith, the consequences of such a logic include the translation of Derrida’s undeconstructible justice into an indeterminate, not specifically Christian, kingdom of God that is similarly structurally always to-come, never present.

• A defense of Caputo's theological project against these criticisms (in an alternative order).

Firstly, Caputo’s reflections on the name of God are associated with several particular determinate traditions, including the creation narratives and the kingdom parables of the Christian scriptures. Secondly, an exploration of these creation and kingdom themes reveals that finitude is affirmed as part of the "goodness" of creation, no matter what, by God's "good," his "yes," at the moment of creation, and that the kingdom of God is our second "yes," our affirmation of the task of "making good" on the goodness of creation, no matter what. Thirdly, then, a (mis)interpretation of the kingdom of God as a concept that corresponds to a literal reality that will either arrive (Smith) or never arrive (Smith's reading of Caputo) (mis)characterizes it as a concept that aims to be representational rather than as a concept that aims to be transformational.

• An argument that Caputo's theology is preferable to Smith's.
  

In reflecting phenomenologically on the general structure of religious experience, both Caputo and Smith emphasise the undecidability of life, the contingency of our interpretations of it, and the fictive nature of all hermeneutics. However, Caputo more successfully retains these phenomenologcal insights in his particular, determinate Christian theology than Smith.

You can view my powerpoint presentation below, and email me if you'd like a copy of the paper I gave; but I'm thinking seriously about turning it into a journal article. Over the next year (once I've finally submitted my thesis) I will be attempting to get a publishing contract to turn it into a book, but this little nugget of the argument could easily be slotted out and published in article form. At the moment, I'd entitle it: "Refuting the Allergy to Determinacy: Determining the Theo-Logic of the Call in Weak Theology."

Making Good on the "Good" of Life: Emerging Logics and Poetics of the Kingdom

View more documents from Katharine Moody.

Philosophy of Life Conference Round-Up

I got back last night from Liverpool Hope's "Towards a Philosophy of Life: Reflections on the Concept of Life in Continental Philosophy of Religion" conference, having had a thoroughly enjoyable (if not totally follow-able) weekend. My own learning style is not comfortable with listening to people read written papers. I'm much more at home with people presenting, rather than reading, work. But philosophers tend to go for the practice of writing a journal paper or book chapter or whatever, and then just reading it out - rather than thinking about their audience's learning styles and altering the piece in order to facilitate rather than alienate others! Only very few of the papers this weekend were easy to follow (even if you knew the material they were talking about) which was disappointing. But I have always felt that sociologists of religion are much better presenters, thereby actually helping their audience follow their argument. Didn't mean to start this post off with a bit of a moan, but philosophers' styles of presentation do tend to detract from the enjoyment of philosophy conferences.

I met a cool bunch of people, including Simon Scott (PhD student at Warwick), Shahida Bari (How To Live blog), Aaron Landau (University of Hong Kong), Todd Mei (University of Kent) and Chad Lackies (Concordia Seminary, here's his blog). It was particularly great to meet Colby Dickinson (KU Leuven) whose paper on Agamben, the messianic and canonicity was really stimulating because of a resonance with my own work. Canonicity, Colby writes, is "the 'desire' for the canonical over and beyond any canon," clearly mirroring the hope against hope for the messianic given voice in but not restricted to determinate concrete messianisms. My paper also charted this dual movement, but in relation to Jack Caputo's historical association with Christianity (I was looking particularly at creation and kingdom in order to refute Jamie Smith's characterization of Caputo's work as allergic to determinate particularities, more of which in a later post) and messianic disassociation. Colby made some intriguing connections with identity formation, and Jack, Colby and I had a useful discussion after his paper about how communities that adopt deconstructive theologies actually do (ir)religious community. It's what I'm hoping to work on next, getting together a proposal for a research fellowship after I've finished my thesis.

Anyway, Jack's paper on "Bodies Without Flesh: The Soft Gnosticism of Incarnational Theology" was very thought provoking, though I know there were a lot of people that were very disppointed that John Milbank only came for his own paper, rather than engaging with Caputo's criticisms of Radical Orthodoxy's incarnational theology. His excuse was that he had, apparently, been stuck on one of the amphibious vehicles (duck) that take you on tours round Liverpool and brokedown (lame). Well, Jack's paper draws from his work towards a sequel to The Weakness of God, currently entitled The Weakness of Flesh. He argued that incarnational theology's incarnation is not radical enough. It is a theology of in-carnation, rather than a theology of carnality. It places "the life of flesh within an economy of bodies without flesh." Like contemporary robotologists, incarnational theology attempts to transform bodies of flesh into bodies without flesh, in the process "betraying" flesh, harbouring a secret "horror of flesh." Instead, he asked, "What would a theology of carnality itself, before or without In-carnation, look like?" "Instead of a transaction between fleshly and fleshless being, I propose a more radical conception of incarnation as an event of flesh itself, of becoming-flesh," of taking, therefore, Christianity seriously, at its word, as the Word made flesh. Caputo is, as I intimated above, not removing himself from the Christian tradition but trying to make the tradition "make good" on its promises. Looking forward to The Weakness of Flesh already!

Not Yet In The Now

Neal DeRoo and John Panteleimon Manoussakis have co-edited a book called Phenomenology and Eschatology: Not Yet In The Now (Ashgate). If I get a PDF copy or find £50 down the back of my sofa, I'll review it at some point in the (near) future. But, for now, here's some blurb from Ashgate's website and the contents:

This book brings together a world-renowned collection of philosophers and theologians to explore the ways in which the resurgence of eschatological thought in contemporary theology and the continued relevance of phenomenology in philosophy can illuminate each other. Through a series of phenomenological analyses of key eschatological concepts and detailed readings in some of the key figures of both disciplines, this text reveals that phenomenology and eschatology cannot be fully understood without each other: without eschatology, phenomenology would not have developed the ethical and futural aspects that characterize it today; without phenomenology, eschatology would remain relegated to the sidelines of serious theological discourse. Along the way, such diverse themes as time, death, parousia, and the call are re-examined and redefined. Containing new contributions from Jean-Yves Lacoste, Claude Romano, Richard Kearney, Kevin Hart and others, this book is necessary reading for anyone interested in the intersection of contemporary philosophy and theology.

Contents:

Introduction - PDF download here;

Part I Phenomenology of Eschatology:

1. The phenomenality of anticipation, Jean-Yves Lacoste;

2. Awaiting, Claude Romano.

Part II Phenomenological Eschatology:

3. Sacramental imagination and eschatology, Richard Kearney;

4. The promise of the new and the tyranny of the same, John Panteleimon Manoussakis;

5. John Zizioulas on eschatology and persons, Douglas H. Knight.

Part III Eschatological Phenomenology:

6. The eschatology of the self and the birth of the being-with; or, on tragedy, Ilias Papagiannopoulos;

7. Being and the promise, Jeffrey Bloechl.

Part IV Phenomenology and Eschatology: Historical Confluences:

8. 'Hineingehalten in die Nacht': Heidegger's early appropriation of Christian eschatology, Judith E. Tonning;

9. Phenomenology and eschatology in Michel Henry, Jeffrey Hanson;

10. 'Without world': eschatology in Michel Henry, Kevin Hart;

Appendix: The present and the gift, Jean-Luc Marion.

A PDF of the Introduction is available for download from Ashgate here.

Postmodern Universalization and the Logic of Incarnation

Neal DeRoo, a guy I met in April at the Society for Continental Philosophy and Theology conference in Boston, has co-edited with Brian Lightbody a book called The Logic of Incarnation: James K.A. Smith's Critique of Postmodern Religion. Jamie Smith also contributes and responds.

Here's some blurb and endorsements:


"With his Logic of Incarnation, James K. A. Smith has provided a compelling critique of the universalizing tendencies in some strands of postmodern philosophy of religion. A truly postmodern account of religion must take seriously the preference for particularity first evidenced in the Christian account of the incarnation of God. Moving beyond the urge to universalize, which characterizes modern thought, Smith argues that it is only by taking seriously particular differences—historical, religious, and doctrinal—that we can be authentically religious and authentically postmodern.

"Smith remains hugely influential in both academic discourse and church movements. This book is the first organized attempt to bring both of these aspects of Smith’s work into conversation with each other and with him. With articles from an internationally respected group of philosophers, theologians, pastors, and laypeople, the entire range of Smith’s considerable influence is represented here. Discussing questions of embodiment, eschatology, inter-religious dialogue, dogma, and difference, this book opens all the most relevant issues in postmodern religious life to a unique and penetrating critique."

"This volume brilliantly highlights the importance of Smith's logic of incarnation. It amplifies a new and indispensable voice in the postmodern debate." —Richard Kearney, author of The God Who May Be and Strangers, Gods and Monsters

"The Logic of Incarnation offers the reader a helpful overview and critical discussion of James K. A. Smith's engagement with postmodern thought based on Christianity's central mystery: God's becoming human. In critically engaging Deconstruction, the emergent church, and the role of tradition, The Logic of Incarnation introduces the reader to central themes of current thinking on religion that have especially dominated North American discussions, but it also points, particularly in Smith's concluding response to his critics, toward recovering an ancient incarnational thinking whose radical quality—reaching far beyond modernity and postmodernity—lies precisely in recovering the ecclesial and eschatological nature of Christianity."—Jens Zimmermann, author of Recovering Theological Hermeneutics: An Incarnational-Trinitarian Theory of Interpretation

"It is as testament to James K. A. Smith's career that, even at a relatively young age (academically speaking), his work merits an interaction as robust as this book. The Logic of Incarnation will not only introduce many to Smith's important writings, but it will also spur on conversation about these very significant ideas where, indeed, theology, philosophy, and church meet."—Tony Jones, author of The New Christians: Dispatches from the Emergent Frontier