I just finished reading Alain Badiou's work on Paul - Saint Paul: The Foundation of Universalism. Funny - an atheist advocating for Christianity. I just started Zizek's The Fragile Absolute which is a similar perspective. I must say that the ideas put forth by Vattimo and Badiou's have had an impact upon me... I keep thinking about the implications. Both emphasize charity / love over and against dogmatic rigidity. Badiou sees Paul as someone who is faithful to the event of Christ's resurrection - an event that proclaims new beginnings... new life. For Badiou - the resurrection is a truth event that collapses all difference... all opinions and cultural distinctions. It is the truly universal from which the differences found in the various situations derive meaning. In this context Badiou focuses upon Paul's insistence that differences be overcome - "There is no Jew or Gentile - male or female." For Badiou, Paul is an egalitarian who recognizes how the law leads to death - to the "eternal recurrence of the same thing" - to the cultivation of what he calls automatic desire... desire that arises from the law's instigation. Here Paul's message of faith, hope, and love overcomes the law - overcomes all particularity - bringing the possibility of new life, of breaking free from the natural cycle of desire cultivated by the law, becoming open to the future.
Yesterday my family visited the Basilica (St. Mary's) here in Minneapolis. I've been there before - on Pentecost Sunday - which was quite the spectacle (in a good way.) Yesterday's service was a bit more subdued - but fascinating none the less. My kids loved it - my oldest daughter asked if we could go there every Sunday because, as she put it, "this is something I could get used too..." I understand why - there is so much to take in, so many things going on, so many different movements - and of course the "smells and bells" are something she hasn't experienced very much. As I experienced the service I couldn't help but think of Vattimo and Badiou. I thought of the Basilica's work in the neighborhood on behalf of the poor, I thought of the various ethnic groups gathered together under the dome, I thought of the number of gay and lesbian attendees given it was Gay Pride weekend and the parade route went right by the church - I thought of all of these things in the context of Vattimo's "weak thought" and charity, and Badiou's universalist Paul. I have to say - it was a fascinating way to interpret a worship service... even if I can't go with Vattimo and Badiou the full way.
The homily, however, was certainly not in the vein of Vattimo and Badiou. It was the feast of Corpus Christi - so the homily was on the Eucharist. Very metaphysical... emphasizing the Eucharist as the bodily presence of Christ. In one way the priest acknowledged it as something that cannot be explained - there was no lecture on transubstantiation. But in the end... it seemed to cut off us protestants... putting up a boundary, a dividing line, where Badiou might say Jesus and Paul emphasized unity. What should I expect - it's a Catholic Church (of course they're going to emphasize Catholic teaching) - and to be fair the homily was not bad... he delivered it well and there were parts that I could very much agree with. My critique, if it is one, is the result of taking these late modern philosophers to church with me... which is, I suppose, the purpose of getting an education.
No comments:
Post a Comment