Miracles, Temporality, and Unfulfillment in A Diagram for Fire

Miracles are one of the most widely acknowledged indexes of "religion" in secular scholarship and common sense. Yet, their theoretical role remains paradoxically residual, as if miracles were good to recognize but not to account for religious lifeworlds. The fundamental pressures imposed by the miraculous upon secular knowledges justify such opaqueness. By following empathetically miraculous veridiction, scholars can be led astray from basic epistemological principles such as neutrality and critical reflexivity, becoming theologians. A possible solution has been to circumvent miracles by sticking to their human co-participants, proposing theories of recognition that bracket their existence while focusing on their institutional, sociocultural, historical, ethical, or cognitive conditions of receptivity or construction. From this angle, the ultimate object of study of disciplines like the anthropology of religion or religious studies would not be miracles, but the media whereby miraculous truth is relayed, from social structures, symbolic systems, and semiotic ideologies to culturally embodied schema and the nervous system.

Scholars might also import miracles into social theory through analogy and substitution. A classic example is Max Weber's secularized notion of charisma, borrowed from Pauline Christianity through theologian Rudolf Sohm and converted into a type of legitimate authority. What Weber calls pure charisma is explicitly residual, existing "only in the process of originating."¹ Pure charisma nevertheless introduces a strategic dose of freedom and unexpectedness into Weber's otherwise bleak theory of modern rationalization, becoming a deterrent for determinism. Carl Schmitt's political theology performs similar work through the analogy between miracles and sovereignty: it selects a particular property of miracles—their extra-normative givenness— and imports it to political philosophy as a critique of liberal democracy. ² A more recent example of such procedure is Hent de Vries's argument about the "structural resemblances" between miracles and special effects, which—like the arguments of Weber and Schmitt—establishes parallels between religious and secular phenomena (leadership, sovereignty, mediation) and oscillates between analogy and substitution.³ Miracles for these authors operate primarily as tools for reading secular modernity otherwise, often against its self-image.

Is it possible to propose a theoretical approach to religion that does not dilute the originary force of the miraculous through either constructivism or analogical thinking? Moreover, can we do that while still recognizing the otherness of social theory vis-à-vis theology or religious experience? Jon Bialecki's A Diagram for Fire faces bravely these major ethical and theoretical challenges through a rich ethnographic engagement with the evangelical Charismatic Vineyard Church. Bialecki's initial research problem was how to account for the dazzling plurality as well as the inchoate family resemblances he encountered in the field under the umbrella "Vineyard Church." How to recognize such inner difference without reifying the Vineyard in terms of stable doctrines, identities, or centralized organization, which ultimately do not empirically exist? This initial problematic expands in the book two ways: it scales up to wider objects that share similar qualities, such as "actually existing Christianity" and "religion" itself, and it scales down ethnographically from the Vineyard movement (they avoid denomination) to particular churches at different locations, small meetings, practices, and experiences.

The resulting argument has a fractal design, which oscillates recursively between what we conventionally understand as "micro" and "macro" levels of analysis while showing these terms' inappropriateness. Such design reflects Bialecki's attempt to avoid both nominalism and essentialism. If there is a religious atom or lowest common denominator in the book, it is not substantial, but an iterable pattern of differentiation traceable across various scales, a "type of recurrent event" (xviii), which is best accessed through what Vineyard members call miracles. This spreadable but aggregating, elusive but affective force is diagrammatic: "a diagram for fire." According to Bialecki, diagrams are "abstract maps of how forces play out that point as much toward the different potentials in outcomes as they do toward a similarity in relations or constitution" (69). Such focus on a set of fundamental relations reminded me of classic structural analysis, with the exception that the stuff of diagrams is...