Erring: A Postmodern A/theology

by Mark C. Taylor

" Erring is a thoughtful, often brilliant attempt to describe and enact what remains of (and for) theology in the wake of deconstruction. Drawing on Hegel, Nietzsche, Derrida, and others, Mark Taylor extends—and goes well beyond—pioneering efforts. . . . The result is a major book, comprehensive and well-informed."—G. Douglas Atkins, Philosophy and Literature

"Many have felt the need for a study which would explicate in coherent and accessible fashion the principal tenets of deconstruction, with particular attention to their theological implications. This need the author has addressed in a most impressive manner. The book's effect upon contemporary discussion is apt to be, and deserves to be, far-reaching."—Walter Lowe, Journal of Religion

Genres: Philosophy, Theology, Religion, Nonfiction, Literary Criticism

234 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1984

About the author

Mark C. Taylor, Ph.D. (Religious Studies, Harvard University, 1973; B.A., Wesleyan University, 1968), is a philosopher of religion who chaired the Department of Religion at Columbia University 2007–2015. Previously, he was Cluett Professor of Humanities at Williams College (Williamstown, Massachusetts), where he began his teaching career in 1973.

Reviews

[Theresa · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a challenging read and provocative of further thought. It is an application of Deconstructive Philosophy to Western Theology.

Here is my 'take' on it.
Deconstruction raises the question whether there is or is not meaning (coherence) to life. Meaning (coherence) demands a narrative. But life is is episodic. To construct a narrative requires one to allow imagination. "Both the historian and the believer insist that beneath appearances (phenomenon) a logic (logos) is present."

God is transcendent. So the believer searches for transcendence (Western Theology).
An author is an origin. Therefore all books (narratives) are a reference to God (AUTHOR) and so are mimetic. Modern philosophy has moved from the mimetic to a poiesis. That is, the death of God means that the SELF becomes a true creator. The BOOK (narrative) is closed. TEXT (writing, erring: no beginning or ending) is opened. Deconstruction is the movement away from theology to a/theology. This causes the emergence of a radical Christology. Incarnation (embodiment) is the death of a transcendent God.

Without a transcendent Author, all boundaries break down. Everything is relational (not hierarchical) . So writings are relative, de-constructed. There is no logos, there are only hieroglyphics (erring traces and erratic markings). This constant state of flux is now the divine milieu. The general malaise which then undermines all activities deprives them of joy. A/theology is aneschatological, open-ended. There is no goal. Enter nihilism.

As a result, PLAY appears gratuitous. But it can also mean freely bestowed. Grace? or law? It is outside the bounds. It opens a way of loving the world., makes it possible to 'give up the struggle of mastery and to take delight in the enigmatical'. Enigmatic form is living form, like life, an iridescence.

A text, therefore, is not a product to be consumed, but an activity (relative, relational, a tissue of quotations).
The hole-i-ness of scripture leaves gaps, so it extends an invitation to the reader.

Erring (wandering) opens up the 'mazing grace' eternally inscribed in the cross(roads) that is scripture.

Taylor writes that there is no conclusion in his 'book"(these writings), only an interlude.
And that seems entirely fitting.

[surfurbian · Rating 4 out of 5]

A lite refreshing summer read to be enjoyed with a wine spritzer.

[Joseph Sverker]

This books certainly show all signs of being deconstructionist. It is complex, demanding of the reader and avoiding its own authority as a text. Taylor is at least clear with the complexity of being a deconstructionist and writing a book, where letters actually are objectively put on a page in a certain order conveying a message. He has some very interesting points on the question of identity and how identity is not constituted by sameness, but by difference. In that identity therefore includes it's own other, or rather is other. This is then taken over, mutatis mutandi, to language and meaning, or sign, signifier and signified in Taylor's (Saussure's) terminology. The end product is one of plurality and relativity and the impossibility of reaching set interpretations. I'm not sure that I agree with this all interpretations are equal conclusion. I also wonder if it is possible to argue about language in the same way he argued about human identity. With a human being one might argue that it is something in itself simply by being a human body with a brain. From that identity in its otherness is then created. However, with language, and even more so when using the theory of signification, there needs to be a language and with that a language user, before the reciprocity between signified and signifier can begin. It is, thus a problem of origin, which he doesn't quite solve. The signified only becomes also a signifier once the process of signification has started. Before that, it is simply a thing in itself caught in its own being without becoming.

[George Bratcher]

Best Christian deconstruction you can read.

[John Nash · Rating 4 out of 5]

What a phenomenal work.

This is not a text for young players -- and a fair majority of the time spent in it will lead to frustration due to the sheer semantic slipperiness of it all.

How does theology, a discipline founded on The Great Book, composed by the Definitive Self-Asserting Author, survive a collision with post-modernity? Well, it takes Mark Taylor 180 pages to ultimately tell us that whatever conclusion he poses is a mirage lost in the endless plurality of signifiers that indicate nothing more than more signifiers!

Well worth your time to think through the implications of Derrida, Nietzsche, and the Deconstructionist tradition on Orthodox faith. While this book merely indicates a whole new paradigm for theology, it is a must-read for any theologian grappling with the implications of the death of the author.

[Chloe · Rating 3 out of 5]

Totally fine. Definitely written in the 80s by Some White Guy tho.

[Carl · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is complex, deconstructionist, and demands a significant amount of work by the reader. It avoids referring to it's own authority due to being a text itself. Taylor poses the idea that Identity is not constituted by sameness, but by difference. As a result, identity therefore includes it's own other, or rather is other. The end product is one of plurality and relativity and the impossibility of reaching set interpretations.

[Adam · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is a little beyond me.

[John]

nonfiction,philosophy,criticism