Secularization as Kenosis

196 | postmodern condition and secularity
Enlightenment initially separated faith and knowledge, but due to a continuing secularization
this separation is undone in what Vattimo calls ‘a nihilistic ontology’, which he
defines as “. . . as the renewal, pursuit, ‘application’ and interpretation of the substance
of the Christian revelation, and preeminently the dogma of the incarnation of God.” 102
This is not merely to say that hermeneutic philosophy and Christianity are compatible,
rather that hermeneutics as a nihilistic ontology is dependent on the decisive events
proclaimed in the Christian tradition. The Christian tradition is not a bygone phase
in the history of the West. It is rather the other way around. Through a deeper understanding
of secularization as an ongoing process of weakening, originating in the
kenotic events of Judaism and Christianity, “hermeneutics becomes aware of its own
place within the history of salvation.” 103 The ‘law of philosophy’ is distorted by kenosis
as the historical embodiment of the weak logic of Christianity. The fact that the kenotic
interpretation distorts the ‘law of philosophy’ does not mean that the kenotic interpretation
comes down to a mere pluralism. Secularization, understood as kenosis, follows
a specific, weak logic. This logic is revealed in Christianity’s rule of love. Postmodernism,
as the knowledge of an ultimate and inescapable plurality, cannot be upheld. 104
The only circumstance under which a given plurality makes sense is in the process of
secularization as kenosis. Vattimo backs away from a mere pluralism, and argues that
we have to be more specific as to the nature of Being. Vattimo asserts that “. . . even the
pure and simple affirmation of the irreducible multivocity of Being would always be the
object of a ‘unitary’ metaphysical affirmation.” 105 The characterization of secularization
as kenosis is thus not without consequences, but it implies an alternative to a relativism
often associated with postmodernism.
When, as often happens, philosophy in general and hermeneutics in particular declare
that there are many ways of having an experience of truth (for example that myth is an
‘other’ way alongside the logos), this is stated as logos, which is implicitly affirmed as
the superior form.. . . Hermeneutics can be what it is – a non-metaphyiscal philosophy
with an essentially interpretative attitude towards truth, and thus a nihilistic ontology
– only as heir to the Christian myth of the incarnation of God. 106
To be postmodern also means to be beyond a mere affirmation of irreducible plurality.
In order to avoid the extremes of objectivism and relativism, Vattimo speaks of kenosis
as the historical embodiment of truth as weakness. Kenosis is the logic of secularization,
so that the end of metaphysics cannot serve as a legitimation for myth and ideology,
or for mere relativism. 107 When Being is dynamic, says Vattimo, it does not have the
stability ascribed to it by the metaphysical tradition. Rather it is always an event here
and now. In this light, the ‘rebirth of religion’ is no coincidence, but is an application of
the Western religious tradition and the weakening of Being. This familiarity between
102 Vattimo, Beyond interpretation, 52.
103 Vattimo, Beyond interpretation, 56–7.
104 Vattimo, Beyond interpretation, 47.
105 Vattimo, Beyond interpretation, 54.
106 Vattimo, Beyond interpretation, 54.
107 Vattimo writes: “When for example post-metaphysical philosophy limits itself to a mere defense of
pluralism for its own sake, she does nothing but preach a return to myth and ideology without any principle
of criticism, apart from tolerance . . . if the overcoming of metaphysics will be complete than it may not
be reduced to a new legitimation of myth and ideology nor to the leap of faith of Pascal.” Vattimo, After
Christianity, 24–25.