The Effects of Nihilism

"This leads me to define the logic of nihilism as a sundering of the something, rendering it nothing, and then having the nothing be after all as something" (Conor Cunningham, Genealogy of Nihilism, xiii).

"An important word for this book is provide... This word is employed in relation to nihilism so as to bring out the logic of the nothing as something. It performs this task because it can be made to suggest that nihilism 'provides' what it does not itself have- namely being... Discourses, such as Biology, appear now to be dealing with cadavers. This is the nothing as something" (xiv-xv).

"The subject begins to be negated or negates itself only as it mistakenly assumes itself substantially to suffice as its own end, whereas it is only as it participates in the ever-arriving gift of its doxological- which is to say, teleological- existence... For in positing itself, which apart from its gifted, participated existence ultimately is nothing, the will effectively performs a perverse desire for nothing as a positive object. In contrast, the ecstatic openness with which the doxological subject is ontologically configured rules out the idea that every reception is an a priori incursion, because the subject is always receiving itself as a gift, and indeed through confession being recapitulated truly as itself, from out of the future. Thus on Augustine's terms, nihilism can arise only when doxology fails, and all that is not doxology is nihilism" (Michael Hanby, Radical Orthodoxy: A New Theology, 115-116).

According to Milbank, nihilism is largely a negation, a deconstruction, a violence. Indeed, it is the refusal to receive oneself as gift; it is a refusal to participate in the charity of the Triune God. The result of this failure to participate is a negation of being. In other words, for much of Radical Orthodoxy, to fail to worship means to cease to be.

Conor Cunningham offers a nuanced approach to Milbank. Of course, nihilism deals with negation, but it is not solely deconstructive. Instead, Cunningham finds a logic of nihilism that is able to sunder the something (participation in the Triune God), render it as nothing (collapsing everything into the immanent plane, no transcendence), and then, after all, having the nothing to be something (a human making "outside" the co-operant work with the Holy Spirit). In essence, nihilism engages in creation ex nihilo, just as we believe the Triune God creates out of nothing. But, the nihilistic creation is not able to create out of plentitudinous love, but instead out of lack. Thus, nihilistic creation leads only to death and a morbid fascination with death. Thus, a culture/society/subject formed out of the nihilistic account of creation is not doxological but instead practices necrophilia. Thus, everything becomes an exercise in death: biology becomes the discourse of cadavers.

This plays out clearly in the Exodus passage this week. Prior to this week's reading, Moses ascends the mountain, and while he is gone, the people come to Aaron and demand that he give them a god "to go before us." Aaron takes their gold and crafts a golden calf that they begin to worship. Aaron's work represents the projection of the people seeking to be without YHWH (taking something and rendering it as nothing). As they worship this calf, they take nothing in a vain attempt to make it to be something (a transcendent god who will protect them and guide them). Immediately, the feast for the golden calf falls into debauchery. It then leads to death, first by Moses' hand, and then by the plague sent by God. This week's reading is Moses' attempt to restore relationship with God.

Moses seeks God to be present amongst them. He states, "Is it not in your going with us, so that we are distinct, I and your people, from every other people on the face of the earth?" (v. 15b). The Israelites have being only by the presence (and their faithful participation in that presence) of God. To not live in this presence, is to have their lives rendered as nothing. Moses, thus, beseeches God to turn away from his anger over the calf and to return to dwell amongt his children.

In the Gospel reading, the same dynamic is at work. Here, we immediately see that the community living in doxological praise of God has been set aside in order to deal with a "threat." Jesus has invaded the Temple and continues to pronounce judgment on the Temple practices and authorities. Now, within the Temple itself, an unimaginable alliance of Pharisees and Herodians attempt to trap Jesus. What previously might have been construed as a reasonable questioning of Jesus' authority to pronounce judgment is now revealed as just an attempt to destroy a challenger. Again, they have severed their relationship with YHWH, rendering it nothing, and instead seek to protect the Law and the Temple, as ends in themselves. They embody the very judgment that Jesus is pronouncing. As the Temple and Law become ends in and of themselves, they cease to be iconic. Instead, they become idols. The Pharisees and Herodians have invested heavily in these images and will defend them murderously. Hell hath no fury like an idol scorned!

What is at stake in this argument is the First Commandment. The Pharisees and Herodians have taken a god other than YHWH, a god constructed by their own hands and given the same name as the one true and living God. They attempt to trap Jesus by forcing him to take a stand on the taxation issue. For 25 long years, Rome has forced Israel to pay taxes for their occupation. The people chafed, and while most were bitter, there had been a number of revolts over the tax that led to crucifixions and other reprisals by the Romans. Consequently, the Pharisees and Herodians lay a carefully constructed trap, even baiting it with the sweet words of flattery, praising Jesus for his wisdom and objectivity. They ask whether or not Jews should pay the tax to Caesar. If Jesus says no, he will be deemed an agitator and removed by the Romans. If he says yes, the people will see him as a sell out to the Romans. Either way, the problem will take care of itself for the Pharisees and Herodians. Jesus, however, springs a trap of his own. In response to their question, he asks for a denarius. Out of their purses, they fetch a denarius, and he asks them, "Whose image and inscription is there on the coin?" They answer, "Caesar's." It is at this point that they realize they have been had. Jesus exposes the true idolaters. Those who believed themselves to be the Keepers of the Faith have brought the image of a pagan emperor, whose inscription titles him Son of God and High Priest, into the Temple of the Lord. In short order, they have revealed themselves not as faithful Israel, worshiping God through holy living and constant doxological praise, but as worshipers of nothing save pure power politics. They have rendered the something as nothing, and are now trying to reconstitute it as something. That the something is the one true and living God, and His gift of the Temple and the Law, heightens the degree of shame brought upon the Pharisees and Herodians. They withdraw, amazed by Jesus' teachings. He tells them to render unto God what is God's and unto Caesar what is Caesar's. In the logic of the Scriptures, everything belongs to God. Thus, he gives the radical answer they were hoping he would give, but in doing so, unveils them as the parody they have become, albeit a tragic parody. They have traded their birthright for a mess of pottage, and life for death.