Impossible God: Derrida’s Theology

Impossible God: Derrida's Theology appears in Ashgate's "Transcending Boundaries in Philosophy and Theology" series. The monograph represents a continued engagement with continental philosophy of religion by Rayment-Pickard whose works include Philosophies of History (Blackwell Publishers 2000) and The Myths of Time (Darton, Longman & Todd London 2004).

The volume's introductory chapter entitled "Death, Impossiblity, Theology: The Theme of Derrida's Philosophy" provides a useful comprehensive sketch of Jacques Derrida's poststructuralist theory as it relates to perennial issues of "truth and reality" in the western theo-philosophical tradition. More than a repackaging of previously published commentary, Rayment-Pickard shows the key elements of Derrida's thought in the context of writing philosophy in a postmodern age. The author insightfully notes in this first chapter the significance of Derrida's "difficult" prose, which many of his critics have too quickly seized upon as an opportunity for intellectual impeachment. Quoting Derrida Rayment-Pickard begins with a line from The Post Card in which Derrida ironically states "I would like to write to you so simply, so simply, so simply" (1). The "so simply," through its multiplication and repetition, provides a complexity that Rayment-Pickard rightly sees as twofold: "a structural complexity that arises because of the way Derrida believes language functions; and a conceptual complexity that arises as he tries to indicate the unstable, paradoxical and impossible character of all foundational ideas and realities" (2). It is this "paradoxical and impossible character of all foundational ideas and realities" that forms the cornerstone of Rayment-Pickard's study. By examining a "Derridean, poststructuralist theory of language" and its implications for conceptual analysis, the author offers a perspective on "Derridean theology" that embraces an apophatic approach to religious inquiry. This makes the volume a valuable contribution to the current interdisciplinary scholarship about the (im)possibility of God and engages directly or indirectly the recent writings of Mark C. Taylor, John D. Caputo, Jean-Luc Marion, Kevin Hart, Richard Kearney, Carl A. Raschke, and other contemporary figures in "religious theory."

If language, in general, functions in the absence of stability and foundation, then what can be said of theological language in particular? This is the inexhaustible question of postmodern theology that begins in the late 1970s with the works of Carl A. Raschke, Mark C. Taylor, and Charles E. Winquist. Rayment-Pickard's contribution to this four-decade long discussion is to re-visit these earlier theo-philosophical breakthroughs in the context of Derridean "impossibility," which Rayment-Pickard views as an ideal space for theological inquiry. While not original to Rayment-Pickard's book, Derridean "impossibility" does find a new sympathetic treatment in this work, especially in the later chapters. In his analysis of this earlier movement around deconstructive theology the author, I would point out, could have provided more context for his argument. The eminent literary scholar Rodolphe Gasché appears in the text as a source for his reading of Derrida; however, the connection between Derrida and theology rests almost solely on the work of Mark C. Taylor and leaves out some of the important writings of the early "postmodern theologians" previously mentioned. Rayment-Pickard's argument certainly is not in error without them, but including these important figures in the history of ideas in postmodern theology would have made for a richer work, especially as it relates to poststructuralist theories of language, death, and theological discourse presented in the later chapters. In addition, an examination of these earlier, Derrida inspired postmodern theological works would have served to mark the differences between a philosophical Derrida and a theological Derrida that is critical to the author's overall analysis.

One of the many significant aspects of this book is the excellent discussion of Derrida's indebtedness to Edmund Husserl and Martin Heidegger. Chapters 2, 3, and 4 provide astute and innovative readings of phenomenology and deconstruction, especially as it ties together various philosophies of language, time, and death. These patient discussions of phenomenology and its aftermath in continental philosophy vis-à-vis deconstruction provide a valuable reassessment of the tension between cognition and revelation. The central concern throughout the chapters is Derrida's attempt "to make a phenomenon of the impossibility of a phenomenology" [119]. The theme of impossibility allows Rayment-Pickard to closely examine the western philosophical tradition as a meditation on death. With an emphasis on Derrida's reading of Heidegger, impossibility appears as an "aporia" or "chiasmus" that marks the impossibility/possibility of God. This line of argument proceeding from the earlier chapters is concisely made in the final two chapters entitled "Theological Impossibility" and "God, this Subject, Entity, or X."

Philosophy's recent turn to deconstruction, according to Rayment-Pickard, begins with Husserl's negation of "false certainties in the field of perception" (123). This is followed by Heidegger's negation of "false certainty of ontic perception" (123), which prepares the way for Derrida's "radical uncertainty of différance" (123). The general trajectory, then, is summarized as the following: "Each operates by identifying and dismantling a false apodicity, showing the play of shadows for what it is, like the prisoners in Plato's cave who releases the blinkers on the others" (123). The key question that troubles the remainder of the book comes from Mark C. Taylor's 1992 essay "nO nOt nO" in which he asks "is his [Derrida's] nonsaying a saying? A denegation?" (123). Rayment-Pickard's response to this difficult question is to posit a series of responses that begin with a consideration of Jacques Derrida as a "negative theologian" (John D. Caputo) and ends with the possibility of Derrida as a "Kantian idealist" á la Kevin Hart. Between these two theological poles lies, of course, the "khora," which serves as an impasse, making a conclusive exposition of Derrida's theology impossible. This impossibility, however, is an "apophasis of khora," which invites speculation on a "Christological heterology" (163) as well as other figurations of the multiple that do not compromise the radicality of Derridean anti-theology. This final meditation on the failure of closure/completion and the primordial status of the "chiasmus" as the other figure in philosophy offers a careful reassertion of the deconstructive principle of indeterminacy. Herein lies the significance of Rayment-Pickard's title: Is Derridean "indeterminacy" theology's impossible God? One could argue, as the author does, that it is.

With its clear discussions of Husserl, Heidegger, and Derrida and its reassessment of philosophical impossibility through the lens of theology, Impossible God is an important addition to current discussions in religious theory.