Secularization as Kenosis

secularization as kenosis | 177
form of hermeneutic philosophy. Vattimo sees a continuity between Christianity and
the modern philosophies of history. For Vattimo this is no reason to turn his back on
both, but rather to see the transition from Christianity to secular philosophies of history
as a legitimate continuation of the central message of Christianity.
Vattimo shares with Rorty the intuition that Nietzsche and Heidegger are the guiding
figures for a genuinely postmodern philosophy. For Vattimo, Nietzsche’s critique of
Christianity and the emergence of a hermeneutic kind of philosophy enables the return
of a more authentic religion. 9 Postmodern critique makes it possible for Vattimo to leave
the quest for indubitable foundations behind and to engage in a post-foundationalist
hermeneutics, that takes off from the particular tradition of Christianity. 10 In Vattimo
we thus find a more complex relation to religion and to Christianity. Whereas Rorty
works with a one-sided picture of the God of Christianity in a deistic sense (Such a God
would have no real relationships, no need or ability to act, a God as a ‘mere machine’). 11
Vattimo also voices a critique of the metaphysical nature of Christian theology, but he
underscores the nature of Christianity as a narrative on the kenotic God, whose strength
is in his weakness and who becomes man in Jesus Christ. This is not to say that Rorty
and Vattimo merely defend opposite positions. They both work out a theory of a secular
culture within a postmodern framework. This has made religion a central concern
for both of them. 12 The two differ mainly on the consequences of a post-modern epistemology
for religion. They both emphasize the importance of the historic nature of
rationality and explicitly reject foundationalism. For Rorty, a genuine historicist outlook
is all we need for understanding the history of philosophy, like we understand in
cultural anthropology. For Vattimo, on the other hand, we meet in the history of philosophy,
including all its errors, the history of Being. His originality lies in his insistence
on an ontological questioning as the key to understanding the postmodern condition. 13
This tradition should therefore not be met with an attitude of irony, rather with one of
piety. 14 This implies a methodological difference. The main part of Rorty’s work is concerned
with epistemology as to evade ontological and metaphysical subjects. Vattimo’s
primary interest is in metaphysics and the attempt to understand postmodernism as an
heir of the metaphysical tradition.
What exactly should be understood under the idea of historicity is a point of discussion
between Rorty and Vattimo. Despite all their shared philosophical intuitions,
Rorty and Vattimo travel diverging roads when it comes to the legitimacy of religion and
the shape secularity must take in a postmodern era. Whereas Rorty sees the postmodern
condition as a condition of absolute temporalization and sees therefore no need for
an ontological questioning, Vattimo develops an historicist ontology. Only against this
9 D’Isanto writes: “The pervasive return of religion in contemporary culture increasingly calls for an
interpretation of the present that is no longer grounded in the Enlightenment prejudice against religion, and
consequently in the theories of secularization which maintained that religion would be wiped out by the
modern process of rationalization.” Luca D’Isanto, ‘Introduction’, in: Belief (London: Polity Press, 1995), 10.
10 “Tradition is not foundation” in Gianni Vattimo and Ger Groot, ‘Traditie is geen fundament- gesprek
met Gianni Vattimo’, in: Gianni Vattimo and Ger Groot, editors, Een zwak geloof. Christendom voorbij de
metafysica (Kampen: Agora, 2000), 31–38.
11 Rorty, Mirror of Nature, 376.
12 See their co-publication Richard Rorty and Gianni Vattimo, The Future of Religion (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2005).
13 John R. Snyder, ‘Translator’s Introduction’, in: The end of Modernity. Nihilism and Hermeneutics in
Post-modern perspective (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1988), liv.
14 Snyder, xlviii, li.