In his book, On Religion,the philosopher John Caputo argues that the essence of religion is “the impossible” and the proper response is faith, hope and love, the greatest of these being Love. Religion is the ultimate realm of passion. Religion is where love is most fully experienced and expressed. Therefore, religion is a valuable and important part of experience. Religion is a good thing. Lovers are religious and to be religious is to be a lover. Religion is where love most fully manifests itself. According to Caputo, the irreligious lack “salt” and are loveless. Indeed, if you are not passionate, if you are not religious, then you should not refer to yourself as a lover. If there is any truth concerning religion, it is that Love is the mark of “religious truth.”
While I certainly agree that Religion involves Love (and passion, and salt), I disagree that Love, as Caputo understands is, is the mark of religious truth. Rather, Caputo fails to properly distinguish between the object of religion and the proper response. This series will attempt to explain how my view and Caputo’s differ.
RELIGIOUS
According to Caputo, Love, or “religious truth,” gives us faith, making one receptive to the impossible, the “Absolute Future,” that is the future beyond are ability to predict. Love gives us hope that the impossible is possible. Love connects us to the divine. Therefore, being passionate, being a lover, is being truly religious. Because Caputo understands Love to be receptivity to the impossible, the unknown future, he argues that it develops humility and open-mindedness in a person. Such a person is living life “unhinged.” They are living in faith. They can do this because they are Religious, because they are Lovers.
IRRELIGIOUS
In contrast, the irreligious are proud and close-minded, unloving and unjust. They are fixed, rigid, tightly hinged. To live without religion, according to Caputo, would be to live life without the component that adds zest to life. To live without religion would be to have a mediocre existence, a life lacking vim and vigor.
According to Caputo, the idea that there is a singular Truth, a knowledge that is universally and objectively accessible, has been discounted. Therefore, any declaration of Truth is wrong. Individuals who definitely say, “This is so. It cannot be any other way,” are actually irreligious. They are not lovers. They are no longer receptive to the impossible. They do not accept that an impossible still exists. Rather, they have boxed in the future, given it parameters into which it must stay. They are not letting the possible come into contact with the impossible. They are not acting in faith, as those who are “unhinged.” They are acting out of power and control, a desire for security. They are firmly attached to a particular view of reality and refuse to be moved. Their passion is not love, but rather a rage against the unknown; they are violent. They are not receptive to certain seemingly impossible futures; they are intolerant.
Why Be Religious?
Caputo, On Religion
In his book, On Religion,the philosopher John Caputo argues that the essence of religion is “the impossible” and the proper response is faith, hope and love, the greatest of these being Love. Religion is the ultimate realm of passion. Religion is where love is most fully experienced and expressed. Therefore, religion is a valuable and important part of experience. Religion is a good thing. Lovers are religious and to be religious is to be a lover. Religion is where love most fully manifests itself. According to Caputo, the irreligious lack “salt” and are loveless. Indeed, if you are not passionate, if you are not religious, then you should not refer to yourself as a lover. If there is any truth concerning religion, it is that Love is the mark of “religious truth.”
While I certainly agree that Religion involves Love (and passion, and salt), I disagree that Love, as Caputo understands is, is the mark of religious truth. Rather, Caputo fails to properly distinguish between the object of religion and the proper response. This series will attempt to explain how my view and Caputo’s differ.
RELIGIOUS
According to Caputo, Love, or “religious truth,” gives us faith, making one receptive to the impossible, the “Absolute Future,” that is the future beyond are ability to predict. Love gives us hope that the impossible is possible. Love connects us to the divine. Therefore, being passionate, being a lover, is being truly religious. Because Caputo understands Love to be receptivity to the impossible, the unknown future, he argues that it develops humility and open-mindedness in a person. Such a person is living life “unhinged.” They are living in faith. They can do this because they are Religious, because they are Lovers.
IRRELIGIOUS
In contrast, the irreligious are proud and close-minded, unloving and unjust. They are fixed, rigid, tightly hinged. To live without religion, according to Caputo, would be to live life without the component that adds zest to life. To live without religion would be to have a mediocre existence, a life lacking vim and vigor.
According to Caputo, the idea that there is a singular Truth, a knowledge that is universally and objectively accessible, has been discounted. Therefore, any declaration of Truth is wrong. Individuals who definitely say, “This is so. It cannot be any other way,” are actually irreligious. They are not lovers. They are no longer receptive to the impossible. They do not accept that an impossible still exists. Rather, they have boxed in the future, given it parameters into which it must stay. They are not letting the possible come into contact with the impossible. They are not acting in faith, as those who are “unhinged.” They are acting out of power and control, a desire for security. They are firmly attached to a particular view of reality and refuse to be moved. Their passion is not love, but rather a rage against the unknown; they are violent. They are not receptive to certain seemingly impossible futures; they are intolerant.