In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

A D,e onstmction ofReligion On Derrida and Rahner Michael J. Scanlon Listening to Jacques Derrida at the roundtable discussion celebrating the new doctoral program in philosophy at Villanova University, I was amazed by his enthusiastic presentation of the "messianic" structure of experience as distinct from the "messianisms" of the religions ofthe Book. I was seated next to the current President of Villanova with whom I had taught theology in Washington for a number of years. We looked at each other with eyebrows arched in astonishment. Derrida had clearly evoked our common "transcendental " memories of the great twentieth-century theologian, Karl Rahner, whose work had shaped the tone and much of the content of the curriculum of the school where we had taught during the seventies and the eighties, the Washington Theological Union. As Derrida elaborated his reflections, I immediately jumped to what were to me intriguing connections between the great "postmodern" deconstructionist and the Roman Catholic "modernizer." In his own way Rahner had deconstructed religion and had developed from his own tradition a "religion without religion." Readers ofthis volume may find his theological deconstruction interesting. 223 • On Derrida and Rahner Michael}. Scanlon Listening to Jacques Derrida at the roundtable discussion celebrating the new doctoral program in philosophy at Villanova University, I was amazed by his enthusiastic presenlation of lhe ~messianic" structure of experience as distinct from the "mcssianisms" of the religions ofthe Book. I was sealed next to the current President of Villanova with whom I had taught theology in Washington for a number of years. We looked at each other with eyebrows arched in astonishment. Derrida had clearly evoked our common "transcendental " memories of the great lvIentieth.ccntury theologian, Karl RaImer, whose work had shaped the tone and much of the content of the curriculum of the school where we had laught during the seventies and the eighties, the Washington Theological Union. As Derrida elaborated his reflections, lim· mediately jumped to what were 10 me intriguing connections between the great ··postmodern" deconstructionist and the Roman Catholic "modernizer:· In his own way Rahner had deconstructed religion and haddevcloped from his own tradition a ·'religion without religion." Readers ofthis volume Illay find his theological deconstruction interesting. 223 Michael J. Scanlon OfhimselfDerrida says that he "rightly passes for an atheist." Although he has come to embrace the ethical demands of prophetic Judaism, he does not participate in the religious activity of Judaism or of any of the religious messianisms. For him the messianisms always lead to war. Their universal claims to having the ultimate truth pit them against one another and rule out peaceful coexistence-not to mention collaboration for the good of people. The tragic history of the "encounters" of the messianisms warrants Derrida's distancing. And yet Derrida is a peculiar atheist (all reflective atheists seem to have their own peculiar brand of atheism); maybe, like Ernst Bloch, he is "an atheist for God's sake" in his own way. Theologically literate he certainly is, and he remains quite interested in contemporary theological discussions-for example the tradition of negative theology about which he has spoken and written rather frequently of late. And he is certainly a man of "faith"! To "modernize" Catholic theology Rahner borrowed Kant's notion ofthe "transcendental" and Heidegger's existential approach to time. He sought to fulfill the task given by the First Vatican Council to show the intrinsic connections among the many Christian doctrines in relation to human destiny. He was most enthusiastic in his reception ofthe Second Vatican Council's acceptance of a "hierarchy of doctrines" -a hierarchy to be assessed by relating the many doctrines to "the foundation of Christian faith." That foundation for Rahner is the Self-communication of God to the world. And God is the incomprehensible, ineffable Mystery. Any verbalization of God is infinitely distant from the Reality ofGod. To use Wittgenstein's distinction, God cannot be said, but God can be shown. To locate the divine showing in the world Rahner recalls Genesis I:26 (human beings as image and likeness) as focused by Jesus Christ, as the necessary "moment" in the universal divinization of humanity through God's Self-bestowal in the Spirit. Rahner was very concerned with the contemporary phenomenon of massive atheism. With the weakening ofthe socio-cultural supports for religion in the ongoing process of secularization he often spoke of believers as constituting a diaspora. He sought to reconcile his central beliefin the universal salvific will of God with the many cultural "deaths...

Share