Tuesday, February 24, 2004
(9:20 PM) | Adam Kotsko:
John Calvin: Atheist?
Right now I should be reading Derrida's classic examination of religion, The Gift of Death. Today I have already read two essays by Jan Patocka on which Derrida comments, and of Patocka I must say, "Good shit." Of Derrida's analysis of Patocka, I must say, "Isn't really holding my interest." I am becoming more interested in political issues and less interested in religious issues; one may indeed rightly ask if there is any way for me to be more interested in politics or less interested in religion than I already am.
Nevertheless, I am compelled to write tonight about the atheism of John Calvin. I do not intend this to be a post "bashing" or "snarking" John Calvin, although my Wesleyan heritage might incline me to do so. My contention is that John Calvin gestures toward what Bonhoeffer calls "religionless Christianity" (a concept around which I have nearly wrapped my mind since reading Alain Badiou's St. Paul and now Ted Jennings' Insurrection of the Crucified). The key to this? The doctrine of double predestination. I know, it sounds weird. But here's my contention: Calvin created an entirely arbitrary approach to heaven and hell because he does not care about heaven and hell. He does a shitty job of it precisely because it is an issue that he only felt compelled to address because there are some parts of the Bible that address the issue. He pushes it off into an eternal, utterly irrelevant choice at the beginning of time in an effort to make sure that the idea of heaven and hell have nothing to do with the heart of Christian practice and teaching.
A system of heaven and hell, in which God parcels out "rewards" for more or less arbitrary behaviors in the present life -- that's religion to me. That's religion as obscurantism. Perhaps such obscurantism could serve positive ends, but historically, it never has. No one has ever said, "Feed the hungry and clothe the naked, or you're going straight to hell" (a quote from one of my fellow students). No one has ever said, "If you don't stop gossipping and backbiting, you're going to hell." It's always arbitrary stuff that has nothing to do with anything, like using the proper language or putting your dick in the right spot -- all the while remaining completely indifferent to reality, to the extent that you actually have to convince people that Jesus has anything to say about the poor. That's obscurantism, right there. That's religion. That, to me, is "believing in God."
John Calvin, it seems to me, from my limited understanding, is calling us to live as though there were no God. That's what the Reformation as a whole is all about -- getting us to stop believing in God and start following the gospel. It was an attempt that failed. We're addicted to religion. We can't get enough of it. Obscurantism, especially obscurantism that hurts people, is our favorite thing to do as human beings, aside from starting little treehouse clubs based on who believes in God the hardest.
Under normal circumstances, I would write this more ornately, with longer sentences. I'm not in the mood now. I need to go eat, then slog through Derrida. Given Time was a far superior book. Go read Patocka while you wait for the next post.
Congratulations to Robb for his herculean effort earlier this morning.
