Who Is a Layman? Historical and Philosophical Perspectives on the “Idiota”/“Laicus”
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Inigo Bocken Who is a Layman? Historical and Philosophical Perspectives on the “Idiota”/“Laicus” The figure of the layman belongs undoubtedly or her life without external coercion and without to the paradigmatic expressions of Western dictation. It is the state to which every individual Modernity – it is the emancipation of the layman attributes the capacity of developing this freedom that is at stake in the most fundamental innova- in an equal manner, limited only by civil law. tions of society, as well as in those of intellectual It is in this respect that every modern construc- and scientific life since Early Modernity. In a tion of a state found its starting point and funda- way, it is even possible to describe Western ment in the paradigmatic figure of the layman.4 Modernity as the era of the layman. From a It is obvious that precisely this logic played a political perspective, it is liberal democracy that crucial role in the discussions since the sixties has determined our society since those days, and of the last century within the Catholic Church that is the expression of the awareness that no concerning the role of laypeople. Here too, the authority ever can be legitimated without consent concept of the layman became the symbol of an of its subordinate individuals – independently emancipatory movement. Inspired by the Second of education, class or origin. But in other spheres Vatican Council, the representatives of this too – in science or religion, to refer only to movement stressed the positive and even decisive these – the principle holds true that authority role of the laity in the Church.5 has to justify itself vis-à-vis every individual par- Although the meaning of the word “layman” ticipant.1 In modern science, the use of authority- in this discussion was reduced to the group of arguments is one of the mortal sins. In the case of religion too, no one has the 1 See C. Kintzler: “Laïcité et philosophie”, in: Archives right to exercise authority – as we can read e.g. de philosophie du droit 48 (2004), 43-56; M. Morineau: in John Locke’s Letter concerning Toleration – “Philosophie de laïcité”, in: Croire (October 2013), unless one joins a group voluntarily, a group retrieved from http://www.croire.com/Definitions/Vie- chretienne/Laicite/Philosophie-de-la-laicite (accessed within whose limits the authority of the profes- 28.02.2014); H. Pena-Ruiz: Dieu et Marianne: Philoso- 2 sional is valuable in an unlimited way. Besides phie de la laïcité, Paris: PUF, 2005; R. Imbach: Laien this, one is allowed to leave such a group at any in der Philosophie des Mittelalters, München: Beck, 1989; moment. Id.: Le défi laïque: Existe-t-il une philosophie des laïcs au Moyen Age?, Paris: Vrin, 2013. According to this logic of Modernity, in fields 2 See I. Bocken: John Locke: De brief over tolerantie, concerning truth, no one has the right – in pol- Budel: Damon, 2004, 56 ff. itics, science or religious discourse – to claim to 3 See B. Kranemann et al. (eds.): Religion und Laïcité in Frankreich: Entwicklungen, Herausforderungen und possess this truth for eternity. Perhaps the most Perspektiven, Würzburg: Echter, 2009. famous example in this context may be that of 4 See J. Maritain: Man and the State, Chicago, IL: Uni- the French laïcité, the fundament of French versity of Chicago Press, 1951. 3 5 See K. Rahner: Glaube im Alltag: Schriften zur Spiri- social structure until today. This model guaran- tualität und zum christlichen Lebensvollzug, Freiburg: tees the freedom of every individual to shape his Herder, 2006 (Sämtliche Werke; 23). INTAMS review 20, 175-181. doi: 10.2143/INT.20.2.3066747 175 © 2014 by INTAMS review. All rights reserved 997918.indb7918.indb 117575 223/03/153/03/15 112:452:45 INTAMS review 20 (2014) non-clergy, this movement was determined by a words, the one who lacks the necessary capacities, comparatively emancipatory ideal: the liberation knowledge or expertise for certain tasks or chal- of the individual from “self-imposed immatu- lenges. Together with the emancipation of the rity”. Various contradictory answers were given individual and his or her autonomous rationality, to the question of how this emancipation should specialization forms a second layer that deter- be realized – Thomas Knieps wrote a marvelous mines modern society. And both layers seem to article on this discussion recently, and it is very develop relatively independently of each other. well known that these kind of discussions often Indeed, on some significant points they even had a dramatic character.6 On the one hand, it seem to collide. The emancipation of the Enlight- was the hierarchical church-model itself that was enment was confronted with the risk of turning questioned by several lay-movements (e.g. the into its opposite – insofar as new centers of “Wir sind Kirche” movement in Germany or the power, inaccessible to laypeople, were estab- “8 May movement” in The Netherlands). At the lished. very least, there were a number of frictions Even more than in other fields of human between societal lay organizations (ZdK, IPB) experiences and knowledge, it is precisely in the and the hierarchy. On the other hand, there was field of spirituality that this collision found its the idea of a “lay spirituality”, which seemed to expression in an almost explosive way. On the lead to a mere confirmation of the hierarchical one hand, every claim to spiritual specialism is a Church, as became clear in the movement of radical contradiction of the value-experience of Josemaria Escriva. modern society. In the name of tolerance, it is On both sides, the opposition between lay- nowadays impossible to claim any kind of people and clergy people seems to be presup- monopoly on spiritual knowledge. Every person posed, and in my opinion, this opposition con- or instance which even only has the smallest tains at the same time a simplification of the appearance of doing so is open to the suspicion complex cultural history of the concept of lay- of being either a clerical fundamentalist or an man. For also in the world “outside” the Church all-knowing guru. On the other hand, our society the meaning of the concept “layman” was any- seems to entrust knowledge and competence only thing but clear or unambiguous – as is made clear to specialists. The pattern of cultural expectation e.g. by Michel de Certeau in the first part of his in relation to spirituality appears to assume that famous La fable mystique. In this book, the this specialized mediation is excluded in the field French historian and philosopher shows the of spirituality; but in that case, “spirituality” increasing and crucial role of the layman for the seems to be identified with an aura of confused understanding of various spiritual movements in and undetermined inner feelings. The kind of Early Modernity.7 public and general criteria that are developed and Whereas in Modernity the figure of the lay- expressed by specialists contradict the very personal man was a metaphor for every kind of liberation and inner character of these intimate experiences from oppressive systems and powers in history, of the soul. there seemed to be a second, at first sight oppo- My intention in these introductory remarks site development – that of specialization. One of has been to show that the layman plays an the myths of Modernity asserted that it was pre- important but at the same time ambiguous role cisely this modern era, the era of Enlightenment, in modern society. It is not a coincidence that that was the first era in history able to develop the idea of lay spirituality makes its first appear- and liberate the potentialities and powers of the ance in the era in which the determination of individual. But in spite of all the emancipative the forms of religious life has become problematic, rhetoric, a lay person remains, in our late modern or at least a redefinition is required. From this view, the one who is not a specialist – in other perspective it will become clear that lay spirituality 176 997918.indb7918.indb 117676 223/03/153/03/15 112:452:45 I. Bocken refers to a field which is far more comprehensive self – will be of interest for our discussion. For than the opposition between laypersons and clergy it is clear that for the followers of the Devotio can stake out. My thesis is that this antithesis is Moderna the concept of the layman/idiota is not far more the expression of a more comprehensive only a sociological category. Rather, idiota refers field, which influenced religious experience and to an ideal that we have to live for, since we want religious consciousness already in Early Moder- to follow the path of the Gospel. In other words: nity. I think it would be interesting to go back the faithful has to try to become a layman, some- to the earliest beginnings of the Modern Era – one who lives and realizes the imitatio Christi by the lay movement of the Devotio Moderna, which means of his concrete life.10 expanded mainly in the Netherlands (both north One of the main reasons for the success of the and south), as well as in Germany, in the four- Devotio Moderna was certainly the strong devel- teenth and fifteenth centuries, and which was opment of the cities in the Netherlands and explicitly a lay movement. Flanders in the fifteenth century. The movement can be seen as a kind of monastic life for the city dweller.11 The urban character of this reform 1. The Layman in the Devotio Moderna movement of Geert Groote had its implications for its attitude towards the hierarchical interpre- The Devotio Moderna, founded by Geert Groote tation of reality.