Wednesday, December 28, 2005
(12:47 PM) | Adam Kotsko:
Potential for Future Damage: Fatherly Reflections, pt. 2 of 2
In my previous unpopular post on this topic, I reflected on the themes and patterns that struck or surprised me in my reading of selected church fathers over the past six months. This time, I will take up a two-pronged approach to possible venues for further research, first thinking in terms of other texts I might need to peruse, then turning toward topics from my current reading that I might address in further detail.I'd like to do at least some reading in mystical theology, starting probably with Pseudo-Dionysius or with Gregory of Nyssa's "Life of Moses" (which I didn't "officially" read as part of my study, though I have it checked out from the library). I noticed the privileging of mysticism in Athanasius and the Cappadocians, and while it would be interesting to ask about historical causes of how that came about at that particular time, it would also be interesting to see how a privileging of mysticism changes theological method -- does the mystic simply have a trump card, or are they still trying to form convincing arguments? Where is the continuity and where is the change? Where does the cross fit in? Since I like to make semi-arbitrary connections: Does later mystical theology cohere with Badiou's reading of how Paul treats privileged mystical knowledge?
In more general terms, I'd like to read some of the figures who came between the Cappadocians and Augustine, as well as some figures I passed over, such as Tertullian. One person who seemed to be held in especially high esteem by all these people (at least those who came after him) was Gregory Thamaturgus, so I'd like to see what the big deal is -- though I suspect that I won't "get it." I also feel as though I would need to plow through Plato and Philo if I were to do anything really serious with Origen or any of the other Alexandrians -- possibly even some of the neo-Platonists as well. (That might wind up creating a bridge to Agamben as well.)
One potential avenue of deeper research would be an attempt at understanding theological anthropology in terms of animal and angel, as I have already discussed somewhat. The thing about drawing a parallel to computer technology in the present day or of bringing it into really detailed conversation with Agamben's work in The Open may or may not turn out to be a productive road to go down. I've probably more thoroughly documented the animal references in the works I've read than, say, the Christological arguments. Another possible venue for research is Basil's reference to the Holy Spirit as a kind of location (based on the use of the preposition "in" with reference to the Spirit). As far as I saw, it didn't come up anywhere else, and I'd like to take a closer look at what he's getting at there. Again, some potential reference to contemporary philosophy is always going to cross my mind, so some work with this and (Derrida's) "khora" might be interesting.
Another potential thread to pick up would be the references to Indian religion, which I first really noticed in Clement but which extends through Athanasius. I would envision a way of broadening the Derridean project of mining the Abrahamic religions to show the ways in which an infinite qualitative distinction between the far and near east (which later becomes east and west) will not stand up. Obviously Origen, with his idea of transmigration of souls, would be a starting point here, but it could potentially branch out to a much broader perspective. I don't know if I would ever really be competent to follow this up, however, without devoting my entire career to it (which I am at all not perpared to do), or else finding some Sanskrit scholar to collaborate with.
Some type of serious work with Origen would be great -- possibly a study of his theory of the soul and of Gregory of Nyssa's critique and reworking of that theory. I'd also be interested to study the relationship between free will and random chance in Origen's thought, together with the implications of the finitude of God in the First Principles. A study beginning with a comparison of Origen's metaphor of each successive world as pouring out a bag of grain and Nietzsche's image of the dice throw could possibly be productive. Generally, a kind of "materialist reading" of Origen, at least of his (basically unique) treatment of miracles as indifferent in terms of evidence for the gospel, might be interesting. I had a fantasy of doing a series of books treating various church fathers simply as thinkers, rather than as potential theological authorities, focusing on what these thinkers found to be important rather than with what later orthodoxy found to be important, and Origen's ambiguous status as church father and heretic would make him an obvious starting point. (Once I'd done all the church fathers, I'd move on to the American founding fathers. Hopefully that would give me enough to do, because I'm drawing a blank in terms of another group of thinkers normally called "fathers.")
I would also like to do some work with Irenaeus, particularly his recapitulatory Christology. I'm sure that it's "been done," but I would personally just like to gain a deeper understanding. A more general study of the persistence of the ransom theory of the atonement might also be fun -- just like with allegorical reading, I was predisposed to find the theory ridiculous (penal-substitutionary all the way! YEAH!), but there were a lot of creative reworkings of the ransom theme, especially in Gregory of Nyssa's catechism.
To do all this, I need to learn Latin and Greek eventually, at least well enough to fake it using facing-page translations and what have you. I'm going to begin work on Latin very soon -- potentially even tonight, after work -- but I have a feeling that it's going to be more difficult and frustrating than German was, and then that Greek will be even worse. At the same time, what's the point of doing a PhD if not to use it as a pretext to pick up language skills that I probably won't be able to justify taking the time for later on in life?
Next semester, I press on toward Augustine, in a course on his Trinity team-taught by David Tracy and Jean-Luc Marion. After that, hopefully some medieval stuff, then maybe even a little Aquinas. I suppose that eventually one must do the Reformers, too -- but can't I just skip from Aquinas to Barth? Or Hegel?
