UFPPC (www.ufppc.
org) — Digging Deeper CXV
7:00 p.m.
Slavoj Zizek and John Milbank, The Monstrosity of Christ: Paradox or Dialectic? edited by Creston Davis
(Cambridge, MA, and London: The MIT Press, April 2009).
[Thesis. Slavoj Zizek gets the last word in this
high-level theological debate with "radically
orthodox" John Milbank about the nature of
Christianity and its philosophical contribution to
humanity's self-understanding. Zizek's view is that
"Christianity includes within itself its own
overcoming" (287) and that Hegel's dialectic
provides the philosophical means to understand this.
"[W]hile Milbank advocates a postsecular
reenchantment of reality, I claim that we should
learn to 'live in a disenchanted world without
wanting to reenchant it'" (247).]
Series Foreword. Zizek is the editor of the Short
Circuits series, whose "underlying premise is that
Lacanian psychoanalysis is a privileged instrument"
of critical inquiry ([vii]).
Introduction: Holy Saturday or Resurrection
Sunday? Staging an Unlikely Debate, by Creston
Davis. Theology is back (3-4). Organization of
essay (4-5). — I. Toward a Materialist
Theology. Despite reason's evident shortcomings,
balancing reason and faith has proved difficult in
modernity, in part because neither side needs to
speak to the other (5-7). Zizek is a militant atheist;
Milbank a theologian who asserts the primacy of
theology: their "improbable" dialogue is more
interesting than the sterile debates between, for
example, Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath
because it asks what reason is and goes beyond "the
impoverished Enlightenment view of reason" (10;
7-11). With respect to the Cartesian cogito, "for
Zizek the subject is constituted in the gap between
nature and its representation in the symbolic order,"
while "for Milbank the 'subject' is itself an invention
of modernity" (11). Milbank is romantic; Zizek less
so (12). "The debate in this book is principally
framed by how Zizek and Milbank interpret and
idiosyncratically appropriate Hegel in their
respective ways" (13). Truth has been abandoned
for language by many modern thinkers, but Zizek
and Milbank are part of a "return to Truth" that
restores Hegel to his proper place as "the most
significant thinker in modern and twenty-first-
century philosophy and theology" (13). Since
March 1, 2010,
Hegel's idealism posits unity in the subject, it
overcomes the fragmentation of the object:
substance is subject (13-14). — II.
Postmodernism and Theology: The Twisting of
Hegel. Postmodernism substituted a metaphysics of
language for a metaphysics of truth (14-16). —
The Dialectical Method. Zizek views Christ as
"the monstrum (monster)—that is, the exceptional
that cannot be accounted for in rational terms alone
—and is, paradoxically, that on which the rational
itself rests" (17). Zizek sides with kenosis (Christ's
'emptying' of the divine to become human),
Milbank with transcendence (18). — III.
Theology: Orthodox or Heterodox? "The fact
that it is not completely trapped in the standard
'capitalist' Enlightenment's version of reason opens
up the possibility that this debate is a portal to . . . a
new engagement with Christianity" (20; 19-21). —
Conclusion: Holy Saturday (Zizek) or
Resurrection Sunday (Milbank)? Will post-
Enlightenment theology be grounded in dialectics
(Zizek) or in paradox (Milbank)? (21).
The Fear of Four Words: A Modest Plea for the
Hegelian Reading of Christianity, by Slavoj
Zizek. The notion that "He was made Man"
frightens people who cling to a "transcendent God
guaranteeing the meaning of the universe" (25).
Only Hegel's idealism has "thought the implications
of the four words through to the end," and fear of
this has led to a number of defenses (26; 25-28).
The Trouble with Christ in Orthodoxy... A
Hegelian interpretation of the three forms of
Christianity: Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Protestantism
(28-33). ...and in Meister Eckhart. Eckhart made
of God "the only Substance," shattering the God-
creature duality, but was unable to reach the notion
of "pure difference" (34; 43; 33-43). — "A
Matter More Dark and Awful..." A Hegelian
reading of G.K. Chesterton's The Man Who Was
Thursday; "God falls into his own creation" (50; 43-
50 & 52). — From Job to Christ. "[I]n our
societies, anarchism is already in power, wearing
the mask of Law and Order" (50). Similarly, "God
IS also the greatest Rebel—against himself,
ultimately" (51). The Book of Job is thoroughly
modern: God ups the ante and tells Job "it is a much
stranger world than Job ever thought it was " (53
[Chesterton]; 52-53). "[P]otential or actual
catastrophes, from AIDS and ecological disasters to
the Holocaust: they have no 'deeper meaning'" (53;
53-56). "God is neither just nor unjust, but simply
impotent" (56). — The Double Kenosis.
"Protestantism and the Enlightenment critique of
religious superstitions are the front and obverse of
the same coin" (57). God's fall into nature (kenosis)
was necessary for human subjectivity to emerge; as
Badillon says in Claudel's L'otage, "Dieu ne peut
rien sans nous" (60; 58-61). What is sublated in
Christianity is "the divine Substance itself (God as
Thing-in-Itself)"; God becomes "the virtual
presupposition of the activity of finite individuals"
(61; emphasis in original). — Christ with
Wagner. The Christian supplement illustrated by
works of popular culture (61-73). — The
Monstrosity of Christ. "The Christian God
appears as human to himself" (81, emphasis in
original; 73-83). "The ultimate question is . . . in
what kind of universe is freedom possible?" (82).
— Toward a Materialist Theology. Reason in
Christianity, Islam, and Judaism (82-87). Musings
on quantum reality (87-89). We need to get over
our fear of Zero, of matter disappearing if matter is
a "substanceless void with in a void," and embrace
what Zizek is "tempted to call postmetaphysical
idealism" (91, emphasis in original; 89-92).
Badiou: "There is nothing but bodies and languages
. . . with the exception of truths" (92; 98-99). On
embracing ontological fuzziness (94-101).
The Double Glory, or Paradox versus Dialectics:
On Not Quite Agreeing with Slavoj Zizek, by
John Milbank. — I. The Eroto-Linguistic
Animal. Tribute to Zizek's exemplarity as
"Christological clown" (113; 111). But unlike
Zizek, Milbank believes universal logic must be
theistic (111-12). There is a "latent Zizek" that
knows this (113-14). Milbank rejects Zizek's
dialectical metanarrative and embraces paradox
instead (114). Zizek claims to embrace
contingency, but his version of the history of
theology does not take contingency seriously
enough (115). Milbank argues for "a radically
Catholic humanist alternative" to Zizek's "atheist
Christianity" (117). Milbank agrees with Zizek in
rejecting "postmodern free play" (117). Discussion
of Lacan (118-26). — 2. Catholic versus
Protestant Metanarratives. Zizek's account of
history, like other "left" narratives, is "biased
toward Protestantism" (126-31). — 3. Univocity,
Difference, and Dialectic. Zizek exaggerates the
presence of dialectic in ordinary "univocal"
experience (131-47). Schelling (147-58). — 4.
Paradox: A Misty Conceit. In the
phenomenological-logical domain William
Desmond called "the metaxological," "all truth is
mediated by beauty" (166; 160-66). "[O]ur
ordinary experience is paradoxical"; a defense of
paradox as superior to dialectic (176; 166-76). —
5. Christianity, Paradox, and Dialectics. Critique
of Zizek's biased account of the history of the
Trinity (177-88). Critique of Zizek's treatment of
Meister Eckhart (188-216; see also Milbank's
extensive notes on Eckhart, 224-29). — 6. On the
Philosophy of History. "The logic of Christianity
is therefore paradoxical rather than dialectical"
(216). "The entire Bible, but more especially the
New Testament, is, like Plato, counterprogressive
insofar as it resists the advance to pure abstraction"
(217). "It is time we abandoned the paganism of
progress" (218).
Dialectical Clarity versus the Misty Conceit of
Paradox, by Slavoj Zizek. — Materialism,
Theology, and Politics: The Terms of the Debate.
Zizek comments on the limits of the debate, e.g.:
"Of course I 'fail' to see this— . . . because, for me,
there is no transcendent God-Father who discloses
himself to us, humans, only in a limited way. The
reason God can only appear incognito is that there
is nothing to take cognizance of here: God is
hidden not to hide some transcendent Truth, but to
hide the fact that there is nothing to hide" (236-37).
Other misreadings (237-40; 246-47). On the
relation of religion to psychoanalysis (241-46). But
their basic difference is that "while Milbank
advocates a postsecular reenchantment of reality, I
claim that we should learn to 'live in a disenchanted
world without wanting to reenchant it'" (247).
Zizek argues "that it is Milbank who is in effect
guilty of heterodoxy, ultimately of a regression to
paganism: in my atheism, I am more Christian than
Milbank" (248; 247-54). — From the Death-of-
God Theology to Postsecular Thought . . . and
Back. A "new field" is emerging which is not
postmodern or poststructuralist; it includes Giorgio
Agamben, Alain Badiou, and Zizek, and had
predecessors in Deleuze and Lacan (254-55). A
critique of John Caputo's On Religion (2001) (256-
60). Present-day apocalyptism 260-63). "There are
. . ., grosso modo, three main currents in
Christianity: Centrist 'Legal' Christianity (the
ideology of the Church as a State Ideological
Apparatus), 'Rightist' aristocratic Gnosticism, and
'leftist' apocalyptism" (263; 263-65). The reason we
speak of God is that "our immediate self-
experience" tells us that we are not at home in this
"miserable reality"; God is the expression of this
sense of homelessness (264-66). On Satan (266-
68). — Law, Love, and Drive. On St. Paul's
negative appreciation of the domain of the Law
(268-85). — The Necessity of a Dead Chicken.
Because it is unique among world religions in
conceiving its very core as the overcoming of
another religious tradition (Judaism), "Christianity
includes within itself its own overcoming" (287).
The song "Joe Hill" (288-89). "[W]hat 'God is love'
means is: 'No one has ever seen God; but if we love
one another, God lives in us and his love is made
complete in us' (John 4:12, New International
Version). Or: 'No one has ever seen Joe Hill since
his death; but if workers organize themselves in
their struggle, he lives in them . . .'" (290-91).
"Crucifixion is Resurrection—to see this, one has
only to include oneself in the picture" (291). Zizek
agrees he is "effectively on the Protestant side"
(293; 291-95). On the death of God (295-97). In
concluding, Zizek is more paradoxical than
dialectical: "This is where I stand—how I would
love to be: an ethical monster without empathy,
doing what is to be done in a weird coincidence of
blind spontaneity and reflexive distance, helping
others while avoiding their disgusting proximity.
With more people like this, the world would be a
pleasant place in which sentimentality would be
replaced by a cold and cruel passion" (303; 297-
303).
Index. 22 pp.
About the Authors. Slavoj Zizek is a philosopher
and social critic who has published more than thirty
books. John Milbank is a theologian. Creston
Davis has studied under both Zizek and Milbank;
this encounter was his idea.
[Additional information. Slavoj Zizek or, as it is
properly spelled, Žižek, was born on Mar. 21, 1949
in Ljubljana, Slovenia, into middle-class family. He
holds a Ph.D. from the Univ. of Ljubljana and
studied psychoanalysis at the Univ. of Paris VIII.
He has established himself as a leading anti-
postmodernist continental philosopher and his work
has already spawned an International Journal of
Žižek Studies. He is a continental philosopher
interested in Hegelian and Marxist political theory,
Lacanian psychoanalysis, and film theory, and
writes on broad philosophical themes from these
perspectives. Of these, Lacan is of greatest
importance to Zizek. He was a member of the
Communist Party of Slovenia until 1988, when he
resigned as part of a mass protest of intellectuals
against a political trial of intellectual dissidents; he
joined the campaign for democracy that led to the
founding of an independent Slovenia. His first
book published in English was The Sublime Object
of Ideology (1989). Critiquing Zizek has become a
cottage industry in academia. Critics often
complain about his intellectual volatility, for he
changes his position frequently, but Zizek says his
is role is to challenge ideological presuppositions,
not to explain the world. Known for his oratory, he
speaks Slovene, Serbo-Croatian, English, French,
and German fluently. Zizek has been married
twice. He is the subject of the 2005 documentary
"Žižek!" (2005). — John Milbank studied at
Oxford and at Cambridge under Rowan Williams,
the Archbishop of Canterbury since 1991, before
taking his Ph.D. at the Univ. of Birmingham with a
dissertation on Vico. He is professor of religion,
politics, and ethics at the University of Nottingham.
Part of his "radical orthodoxy" is a denial of the
usefulness of modern social theory. — Creston
Davis assistant professor in the Department of
Philosophy & Religion at Rollins College. You can
follow him on Twitter as OedipalRex.]