Assestmen of Reason and Religion in Jurg

(1)

UST FACULTY OF PHILOSOPHY Page | 1

AN ASSESSMENT ON REASON AND RELIGION

IN JÜRGEN HABERMAS’ PHILOSOPHY

A Thesis Proposal Presented to the

Ecclesiastical Faculty of Philosophy University of Santo Tomas

In Partial Fulfilment

Of the Requirements of the Degree Licentiate and Master of Arts in Philosophy

by

(2)

Ecclesiastical Faculty of Philosophy University of Santo Tomas

Manila

Certificate of Originality

I hereby declare that this submission is my own work and that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, it contains no material previously published or written by another person nor material to which to a substantial extent has been accepted for award of any other degree or diploma of a university or other institute of higher learning except where due acknowledgement is made in the text.

I also declare that the intellectual content of this thesis is the product of my work, even though I may have received assistance from others on style, presentation and language expression.

________________________________ ________________________ Signature of advisee over printed name Date

________________________________ ________________________ Signature of advisor over printed name Date

(3)

CONTENTS

Certificate of Originality ……… 2

Chapter 1: Introduction A. Background of the Study ………….……… 4

B. Statement of the Problem ……….……….……….12

C. Significance of the Study ………..……… 15

D. Objective of the Study ……….….……… 16

E. Methodology ………....………… 18

F. Scope and Limitation ………...…….….………… 19

G. Review of Related Literature ………...……… 19

Chapter 2: Jürgen Habermas Chapter 3: On Reason Chapter 4: On Religion Chapter 5: Dialogue Between and Religion Chapter 6: Conclusion Bibliography ………..…….………… 30

(4)

Last January 19, 2004, two prominent German thinkers, Jürgen Habermas

and Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, later Pope Benedict XVI, met for the first time , contemporary as they are,1_{in Munich sponsored by the Catholic University of}

Bavaria, to debate on the topic The Pre-political Foundation of the Democratic

State.

Habermas argues that the government’s legitimacy is self-sufficient but not so with the citizens’ well-being.2_{The government is an institution, the citizens are}

the addressee. Government then must respect cultures or else anarchy will come

out of its nation. The citizens are motivated to cooperate in the society because it is what is taught to them by their culture. And this sheer motivation that goes out of

1_{They are contemporary in a sense that both were German. Ratzinger was born 1927, Habermas,}

1929. Ratzinger took his doctorate 1953, Habermas, 1954.

2_{Jürgen Habermas and Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Dia lectics of Secula riza tion: On Rea son and}

(5)

the citizens to be concerned for the common good, to love, to be ethical man-to-man is produced from what they had learned from religion, obviously not from

science. For us Catholics, we love and forgive our enemies because this is what Jesus taught us. Even government or the secular society create laws and laws that stipulates for justice and equality, the motivation will not be lasting and deep and

we will surely be lost along the way in the enactment of the law since it is simply a law and not a virtue coming from the heart.

We are motivated to continue to be ethical because of a “someone” and for his sake and for love of him we do this. For us Catholic, we are drawn to always think ethically because of our love for Our Lord Jesus, although many Christia ns

many times do not reach the expected. Surely, if the motivation is drawn only from

the human point of view alone for the purpose of a peaceful and ordered society, that motivation will just vaporize for some time and that society will return to chaos and selfishness. On the other hand, Pope Benedict XVI argues that in order to have

peace, reason and religion must learn from each other. By complementing reason and religion again, universal purification can come out of both disciplines.

That was not the end of the debate. The debate produced a book entitled

Dialectics of Secularization: On Reason and Religion3_{where their talks were}

compiled. This book will be my primary source in order to discuss the religio us

3_{It was originally in German entitled Dia lektik der Sä kularisierung. Über Vernunft und Religion}

(6)

return of Habermas not that he does not believe in God but that in his philosophizing, it must only be philosophical and not religious.

It has been lately argued that “philosophy is concerned more and more with religion rather than knowledge and seeks to enter a dialogue with religion.”4

Habermas, though tone deaf in the religious sphere, was alarmed by such religio us

convictions of Islam, as a cognitive challenge for philosophy and opening door for the churches. No one dares to reopen the door except him. Habermas demands that

secular society must acquire a new understanding of religions.5

What is then in religion that philosophy must ponder again as lacking in modernity - an act of return gaze to religion after the so to say “victory of reason in

the Enlightenment period”? Because reasoning in many in the world today is no

longer reasonable on account of the common good. Reasoning must need conversion and purification and must enter into “self-reflection”6_{. Many of the}

philosophers today is no longer an honest searcher for correct reason but only to

justifier of their own beliefs. Philosophy today is no longer a sheer love for wisdom and a noble love for the Other.

Reason is radial. There are so many reasons and to know the appropriate

reason is a challenge for postmodernity. The question lies, “what is then the correct reason in the many reasons? Such that Habermas dramatically says “how many

4_{Habermas and Ratzinger, 5.} 5_{Ibid., 7.}

(7)

societal pathologies, how many failures in individual plans, deformation and disfigurement of lives happened because of mere secularity. Philosophy must be

ready to learn from theology, not for functional reasons but also for substantia l reasons.7

You have been long ago waiting for a child and this year God blessed you

with a son and when he came out of the womb, he is mentally deranged and physically deformed. What would you do? Apply euthanasia, a creation of reason.

Is it to apply euthanasia as a reasonable charity to his condition now and in the future, to ease his pain or to preserve him no matter who he is for he is a gift?

I have encountered some three years ago, I cannot still forget, a girl Rochelle

(actually his cousin) who lives in their same house of one of our seminarian, Br.

Theophilus Quiambao in Quezon City. Rochelle was a teenager and of beauty but she was pregnant. She was so desperate on her condition as she was still on college and maybe planning for abortion. Br. Theophilus counselled Rochelle in front of his parents saying, “the child is not a fault but he is a gift of God. The child is an

angel.” The child is now three years old and is angelic. Rochelle has many reasons

for abortion but preserving the child is still the better reason or maybe the best

reason at all.

(8)

The nature of the Catholic religion is always morality, to do what is right and not the wrong. This morality is overall a gift from the Creator who enlighte ns

and assist the human race to attain a happy life and a happy end. To do otherwise creates disorder in one’s life. Not all chastisement from violating the natural law is

an intentional punishment of the God on high. Drinking a poison will result to death

but that death is not a punishment of God. God did not kill him but it was just that the poison has to react in his cells causing the organic whole to dysfunction.

Religion is always tied to lead man to the correct path, at least in the Christian religion. It is not a sense of limiting the freedom of the person but of directing the person to a correct perspective where true freedom can be found.

Freedom is polar in a sense of false and true freedom. But one must always

choose the right thing to do. Religion intervenes and must intervene to science because science is pushing to excesses. Science enjoys pushing to excesses where society calls it progress and as power for the few. But science as produced by reason

is now becoming destructive.8_{Philosophy then must reconstruct its reason. It was}

science, which is reason, who created the nuclear bombs for the reason of defending one’s nation from oppressors. Self-defense is a reason and do you think millio ns

death is also reasonable?

(9)

Nowadays, security and peaceful life is but a dream because security and joy of living depends upon the hands of the powerful, the controller of bombs and

missiles. Inhabitation can occur anytime with the positioning of bombs and missiles in anywhere in the globe.9_{Bombs for massive human destruction! Not only that. It}

was science, as produced again by reason, the massive infant genocide in abortion

by producing abortifacients, to the horrendous terrors of humongous women ending to mental hospitals avenged psychologically by their crimes. Will not religion must

reformulate and intervene reason?

When the rest of the world had legalized abortion, homosexuality, divorce, euthanasia and Philippines had refused for long ago for she had always believed in

the sacredness of life and marriage. Thanks to our leaders, I think it was in those

times when we had been more rational than the West notwithstanding our poverty. When the hot issue on Reproductive Health Bill is on the court, though now approved, the whole Philippine Catholic Church had rallied for its denunciation. As

the seculars claim rights for their bodies and their own choices and the detriment shall be on their shoulders, well, it is not the believers who suffers more but it is

unbelievers. Goodly, they learned from the choices they made.

Philosophy and philosophers must not only explore knowledge and what else there to know. By this, philosophers feed the people with alienation from being

(10)

concerned to Others. Life is not modus vivendi alone.10 By mere reason, “we have

the ethical abstinence of a postmetaphysical thinking, to which every universa l ly

obligatory concept of good and exemplary life is alien.11_{Life is offered so empty.}

This is the reason why citizens gather for fellowship for indeed in “religious traditions intuitions, in their sacred scriptures, are found error and redemption.”

We must never forget that the word philosophy is in itself philo which

(11)

constellation, we must draw sustenance now, as in the past, from this substance. Everything else is idle postmodern talk.12

Philosophy had been so engrossed with the social, political, ethical, logical, and mathematical, drawing the life of philosophy in a mere theory of knowledge. The problem with reasoning is that not all reasoning are good reasoning. Philosophy

is so hostile with religion because if philosophy took principles from religion, it is no longer reasonable. Which is to some opinions the Medieval Philosophy was not

a philosophy because it is all about God and God. But Habermas took a differe nt approach, at least now.

Religion to him is not a threat to philosophy. In his discourse ethics,

believers and unbelievers, the seculars and the religious, must always communicate

and debate to each other in order to arrive at better rationality for the communit y. Communication must be constant in the public sphere, an integration and inclus io n of cultures and religion so that one understands each other and one can learn from

the other. Without communication, rationality and common good is impossib le. This rationality is the hope for mankind, leading reason to the middle ground, and

too, leading the fanaticism of cultures to be more open and not too sectarian. It is

not, according to Kurt Hubner, a return to faith but to free ourselves from blindness

12_{Jürgen Habermas, Religion a nd Ra tiona lity: Essa ys on Rea son, God, a nd Modernity, ed. Eduardo}

(12)

typical of our age.13_{The problem is not really if one is secular or religious. The}

problem arises from unreasonable secularism and unreasonable fanaticism.

The collapsed of the Twin Towers in September 2011 was caused by the fanaticism of terrorist Islam. Why so? Because of the lack of respect from one another. While the West wants to subdue these Islamic forces and long ago their

racist minds, Islamic forces revenged. The West in their godlessness and greediness, overstepping the rights of others, is responded by suicide bombers in

the name of Allah and their religion. This is the result when reason becomes unreasonable and godlessness is allowed.

The question lies what tool is to be implored for the reason for peace? What

reasoning must we consider as the focus of our philosophy, the mainstream of our

mind that will rescue the world to peace? I do not deny here that philosophy did not help anything at all. Reason did so many. But reason, in order to battle well, must be mitigated and be purified. Reason must consider its limits and must be

summoned to love for the love of mankind. If then only, according to Habermas, this is lived, then there is peace. A philosophy with religion is more rational. A

philosophy who believes in religion and live in the spirit of love will make it more

rational. Religion too express truth, the truth that reason doubts and hesitated. After all, life is not all about reason but it is also about love of God and neighbor.

(13)

B. Statement of the Problem

In the emergence of secularization where man becomes godless and where life is just modus vivendi, a mere procedures and principles, or in other words, life

is just for the sake of living and continuity, and where concern and love for human life is on threat, philosophy must do self-reflection.

With the triumph of Enlightenment, reason had lost its control and freedom

is no longer exercised in the right manner. Reason is no longer as beautiful before. The seculars loved to parade Kant’s statement that “enlightenment was a way for

humanity to escape from immaturity. We have been immature because we have not been ourselves of ourselves.”14_{They accused religion for being the antithes is}

for potentiality and progress. But human life is not all about looking for some more

to invent and experiment but life has a more important direction and this direction

is for his telos, the attainment of a goal, an end, a purpose that was placed on him. Life is not just for a mere reason of existence, to work for mere survival and

study to get a work. It is always more than that and secular thinking does not support

man on this angle. Life or existence is not only an encounter with human beings, with food, with school, with work. Moreover, in a Christian milieu, life is to be an

encounter with his Creator. Habermas says that the Catholic Tradition has this

14_{Dianna Taylor, "Pra cticing Politics with Foucault a nd Ka nt: Towa rd a Critica l Life," Philosophy.}

(14)

perspective in life. It is comfortable with lumen naturale and has no problem in principle with an autonomous justification of morality and law such as the

revelation.15

Life is not a mere accumulation of earthly things but it is looking somewhere else, looking up to the one who created him. It is searching for reason

on his existence and it can only be learned and understood well by searching deep within him from the One who gave it. By this encounter, according to John Paul II

in his Redemptoris Hominis, the persons finds his purpose in the globe. Not as mere products of evolution is man but by this encounter with Him, he finds meaning of what his life is. Moreover, by telling man about the redemption Christ has gifted

him, he will ponder in himself why it was necessary for a God to undergo such

pains just for him, thus this will create a deep wonder of himself.16

Postmodernity do away all these themes. That is why the project of secularity is dehumanizing.

The thesis will discuss the following questions:

1. Who was Jürgen Habermas and what is his philosophy?

2. What is unreasonable in reason that must be placed under the

guardianship of religion?

15_{Habermas and Ratzinger, 13.}

(15)

3. What is unreasonable in religion that must be placed under the guardianship of reason?

4. What is the implication of Habermas’ religious return?

C. Significance of the Study

The study will be significant to the following:

a. Postmodern researchers – Postmodernity has so many excesses. And these excesses are just unreasonable and dehumanizing. It is then the task of philosop hers to bring reason to correct reason, and correct science in her reasoning. The task of

philosophy is needed so much today so as to direct reason to a positive way. To those who want to help critique postmodernity, I hope this study will help them discover what is amassing in postmodernity.

b. Researchers for Jürgen Habermas philosophy – Habermas is again filling the gap between faith and reason in our postmodern era long ago unwelcomed by

philosophy. This work, I suppose, will help them see one of the perspective of

Habermas on the importance of religion in philosophy and it will enlighten them, with Habermas, to pursue widen the doors of religion and philosophy to each other

(16)

c. SMITH Community – The Secular Male Institute of the Two Hearts (SMITH) of Jesus and Mary is a Catholic institute of consecrated priests and seminar ia ns

whose mission is the media apostolate. This is the community where I am a member and I think this thesis will benefit the congregation in their mission for alternative media.17_{Media nowadays becomes so paganized and commercialized thus ruin the}

reason for telos of the people especially the young. By internet, by technologies and scientific advancement, the alternative media of the SMITH which consists of

Christian discipleship will be able to confront postmodernity and rescue the many from these societal pathologies, thus results to brotherly love.

d. Researcher – He is the direct beneficiary of his work wherein he will be able to apply his learning from the discourse ethics of Habermas by engaging in dialogues with the lay people and other cultures for the goal of peace and rationality. Many times our tendency as consecrated souls is just to be so sectarian and exclusive that we do not voiced out our view on world’s important issues concerning human life.

I just realized that we as missionaries has the command to proclaim love into the

world and this is exactly what Habermas is saying. Such that I gain motivation in

my missionary work from Habermas philosophy.

17_{Edgardo Arellano, The Constitutions of the Secula r Ma le Institute of t he Two Hea rts of Jesus and}

(17)

D. Objectives of the Study

In the Medieval times, St. Thomas Aquinas personally tried to marry faith

and reason and resulted to his many wonderful works and of course, the classic

Summa Theologiae. It was surprising that historians, albeit not fault of the historians, calls the era that preceded the Enlightenment as “Dark Ages” when it was actually the “illumined age” because God was included in the discussions of

philosophy. On the other hand, historians calls the era where reason was highlighted as “Enlightenment” when men have trusted more to reason than faith. I do not here

deny the excesses that Church’s ministers sinned those times but it was simply a

blessing that God was discussed in philosophy.

Habermas calls philosophers to reopen the communication between religio n and philosophy in these times against postmodernity. Pope Benedict XVI says “Christianity, as shaped by Peter and Paul, represents a healthy attitude to the

temporal powers: there is no desire to deify the state, but the separate roles of the Church and the temporal rulers are not to be confused.18 St. Paul says, “Remind

your people that it is their duty to be obedient to the officials and representatives of

the government; to be ready to do good at every opportunity; not to go slandering

18_{Joseph Card. Ratzinger, Va lues in a Time of Uphea va l (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2006), 57}_‐

(18)

other people or picking quarrels, but to be courteous and always polite to all kinds of people.”19_{The Christian religion is never putting her disciples to anarchy.}

Habermas calls philosophy to understand the rationality of religion against the pervasive and abusive excesses of reason. Thinkers had been so engrossed in different fields of knowledge, interested in rationalizing practicality and scientific

experimentation. Habermas challenges intellectuals to also explore religion which according to him has an indispensable potential for meaning. Our goal is to discuss

the relationship between faith and reason, challenging philosophy to watch over its reason and consider the rationality of religion as source of alternative rationalit y. Habermas even argues that there is no alternative now to rationality than religio n

itself.

This thesis discusses religion and reason so as to safeguard the reasonableness of reason by learning from religion and safeguard the reasonableness of religion by learning from reason, thus two wings for better

rationality.

E. Methodology

The thesis will primarily be expository of Jürgen Habermas critique of the

excesses of postmodernity and secularity. It will first discuss Habermas

(19)

metaphysical thinking (nonreligious), his former beliefs, his realizations, analysis of postmodernity, analysis of the public sphere and the communicative action

which he proposes to be the solution for better rationality. Then it will discuss postmodernity and the excesses of our times. It will analyze the success of Enlightenment but also its deficiency. Towards the end, it will discuss Christian

love as the indispensable companion to philosophy.

F. Scope and Limitation of the Study

The thesis is on the defense of Habermas on religion especially the Christian

religion. Since some of his books were written in German, the researcher who can understand English used the English translations only. Luckily, some books were written in English. These free copies were downloaded from the internet. Some

books were borrowed from the University of Santo Tomas Ecclesiastical Library.

Articles, interviews and videos available from the internet and YouTube were downloaded and transcribed some of his very important points related to the thesis.

The main reference for this thesis is his Dialectics of Secularization: On Reason

and Religion with Pope Benedict XVI and his An Awareness of what Missing Faith

and Reason in a Secular Age.

Habermas, though a Protestant, is a methodological atheist, since in doing philosophy and sociology, he mixed not philosophy with religious views.

(20)

talks from 1999 to the present 2014 since this is the period where I say his “religio us return”, when he starts including religion in his philosophizing.

G. Review of Related Literature

The following reading materials are helpful in shaping the sincerity of the thesis:

Adams, Nicholas. Habermas and Theology. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

Habermas project was, in order to become more reasonable and to

contribute to the reasoning of the public sphere, one must always practice the discourse ethics. But the problematic in this is that only the secular people could

do this, at least with liberality from a daily basis. It is even dependent of who does the communication. Worst, mere exhaling secular reason of seculars will not inspire a religious. Religions will not do this with the seculars since they are proud of

themselves having God reasoning for their arguments.

Adams unwelcomely says Habermas is inconsiderate with the nature of every religion and why they divide and constantly irritant to each other. They divide because they are fighting for doctrines, for scriptural verses, some dogmas that are irreconcilable to each other and communicating is just so hard to do. Adams rebuts

the possibility of an immediate discourse ethics because religion will not sacrifice

(21)

mentioned this as fanaticism embedded in the religions. The religious are fanatic of their religion per se, defending its position and this is going to continue unless that

fanaticism is overcome. He argues that reasoning in the public is not only the problem. The problem is also among each religions’ relationship to each other per se. You can observe it in public debate between religions. They always quarrel

about Bible verses. Even one party won already in the debate, the conviction of the loser about their arguments does not lose its fire.

In this book, Adams laid down the door by which we can begin the discourse ethics of Habermas and the first to be resolved is the fanaticism that religions has by “scripture reasoning” as a model. This book is essential since it lays down the

foundation for the method of overcoming religious fanaticism since this

unreasonable in the religions must be guided by reason.

Betz, John. After Enlightenment: The Post-Secular Vision of J. G. Hamann. United Kingdom: Wiley & Blackwell, 2009.

This book seeks to illuminate the life and writings of a notoriously obscure figure, Johann Georg Hamann, prophesying the fate of reason. He is a counter-reformist. Hamann’s lack of confidence in the power of autonomous reason, or

reason alone to determine any ultimate meaning or even the nature of reason itself, is what he wants us to see. The book shares the conviction that the effort of the

(22)

beyond the cherished illusion that reason alone is able to provide a sufficient basis for morality or culture. In the After Virtue of Alasdair McIntyre, it was proposed

as a way forward that we look again to tradition (which the Enlighteners for the most part spurned as a source of wisdom), specifically to the example of St. Benedict – whose example, among others, stands as a reminder that through Christ,

if not through secular reason, holiness of life is possible.20

This book is very important in order to enlighten and as a warning to

seculars and sciences because it was them who doom humanity, trusting in mere reason alone, thus, disregard that man is destined to Christ. When life is just for modus vivendi, as Habermas puts it, this book will correct reason in its

unreasonableness and will enlighten the pseudo-Enlightened who trusted alone to

reason to open their eyes to what is true. This book can be a model for the return gaze of philosophy to religion.

Blanton, Ward. Displacing Christian Origins: Philosophy, Secularity, and the New Testament. USA: The University of Chicago Press, 2007.

Blanton appeals for a return of a communicative traffic that was once in

philosophy, a lost communicative traffic from another side. Tracing promine nt

philosophers, they always refer to the Christian origin. These include, just to name several that have received a great deal of attention lately, Jean-François Lyotard’s

20_{John Betz, After Enlightenment: The Post-Secula r Vision of J. G. Ha ma nn (London: Wiley &}

(23)

reading of Pauline thought, Jean-Luc Nancy’s attempt to deconstruct it, Jacques

Derrida’s consistent (though sporadic) references to the New Testament, Giorgio

Agamben’s interpretation of Paul’s letter to the Romans, Hent de Vries’s rethinking

of the Heideggerian legacy through the Pauline epistles, and the remarkable centrality of a Pauline structure of subjectivity in the materialist ontologies of Alain Badiou and Slavoj Žižek,21 Schelling’s fascination with Marcion or the Gnostics,

Kant’s peculiar trouble with the censors over his statements about the Bible,

Nietzsche’s patient readings of the Greek New Testament, or his profound

intellectual affinities with a historian of early Christianity.22

This book is very important because it complements with Habermas,

especially the Catholic religion, in asking philosophy for finding meaning in the

religious. Religion is not a threat to philosophy. These prominent thinkers did so, not because they are Christians per se, but it was just the right thing to do. If we are to find a correct reason over the many reasons, then we must accept divine

illumination.

Bloechl, Jeffrey. Christianity and Secular Reason: Classical Themes and Modern Developments. Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 2012.

This booklet, because it is 25pages only, Bloechl is arguing about the rationality on the agreement of faith and reason. Aristotle defines the relation of

21_{Ward Blanton, Displa cing Christia n Origins: Philosophy, Secula rity, a nd the New Testa ment}

(USA: The University of Chicago Press, 2007), 3.

(24)

self to world by a fundamental openness and total concern such that, in an important sense, literally everything is the self’s affair. Relationship between culture, politics,

and religion, more sharply on the relationship of selfhood, humanity, and world is not to be divorced.23_{Reason must recognize the intelligence of a faith defined by}

openness to revelation.

Albeit God appeared in the world, still natural reason alone could not comprehend all of God. This is why natural reason must submit to the ultimate and

divine norm that is most knowable in supernatural revelation. What is more problematic here is that secular reason or natural reason departed already from its ground because secular reason becomes secularized. This book is enlightening in

the project of reconciling faith and reason, thus provides more incites in balancing

and purifying, learning from one another, for better rationality.

Blond, Phillip, ed. Post-Secular Philosophy: Between Philosophy and Theology. London: Routledge, 1998.

This book of Philip Blond is an antithesis to a philosophy without God. Beginning with Descartes, Kant and Hegel, continuing with Levinas and Derrida,

ending with Irigaray and Baudrillard, Post-Secular Philosophy provides a clear

focus, enabling the reader to follow how the modern philosophical tradition has constituted God. It is a call for rethinking modern philosophy for its godlessness,

23_{Jeffrey Bloechl, Christia nity a nd Secula r Rea son: Cla ssica l Themes a nd Modern Developments}

(25)

retaining the correct order of studying things which is first theology and then philosophy.

This book is a gem in our times, putting God and His gracious existence again in our study, so as not to be lost along in this secularized world, still on faith in the One who is our consolation and hope. This book motivates the reader in

pursuing in faith and not be strayed away by modernism. The book discusses the primacy of faith over reason. Philip starts, “For not all have faith (2 Thess 3.2).

Borradori, Giovanna. Philosophy in a Time of Terror: Dialogues with Jürgen Habermas and Jacques Derrida. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2003.

This book, induced by the terror of Twin Towers aftermath on September 9, 2001, is a dialogue between Derrida and Habermas. The two, formerly opposite,

now friends, reassess the validity of the Enlightenment project and ideals. For Kant

and other Enlightenment philosophers, reason must be used so as to reshape the present into a better future rather than stay in the mistakes of history.24_Having

much use of reason and democracy, philosophy is drawn to ponder if this free usage has an intrinsic moral and social responsibility and whether, on that ground,

philosophy ought to develop a more active relationship with history. 25

24_{Giovanna Borradori, Philosophy in a Time of Terror: Dia logues with Jürgen Ha berma s a nd}

Ja cques Derrida (USA: The University of Chicago Press, 2003), 3.

(26)

This interview is very important because it is really making philosophy look at its reason, of whether its reasoning in this present time is still reasonable or has

it gone to excesses. It might be because that is why terrorist bomb the hubris West. On the other hand, the fanatic terrorist must also direct to pondering because have they thought the aftermath before such attack.

Chambers, Paul. Religion, Secularization and Social Change in Wales: Congregational Studies in a Post-Christian Society. London: University of Wales Press, 2004.

This doctoral thesis of Chambers maps the religious scene in Swansea. It

was a historical view of religion in their locality. When communities collapse

because of industrialization, chapels too collapse. And so if a religion is very demanding of the duties of their members, that religion will lose its members.

Tolerance must be extended to its members of whether they want to be present or

not in fellowship. Modern Europeans are like this, people of choice and freedom. This paper informs the reader of the status of some European places where there is

so much secularization.

De Vries, Hent, and Lawrence Sullivan, ed. Political Theologies. Public Religions in a Post-Secular World. New York: Fordham University Press, 2006.

Assessing the world from being highly secularized and globalized examines

(27)

policy study prepared for the European Commission, ‘‘that the wall between religion and government is now so porous as to be an unreliable guide to attitudes and actions.’’26_{This book challenges us to examine the behaviors of man as mere}

existing and not anymore living, living in God. Victory of reason over the victory of faith. Time travels fast as man is transformed fast, leading to nihilis m,

godlessness and purposeless. This tragedy in man, leading to chaos and lifelessness, is the major project of religion, to lead man again to the true God and not to his

invented god.

Morris, Martin. Rethinking the Communicative Turn: Adorno, Habermas , and the Problem of Communicative Freedom. State University of New York Press, 2001.

Habermas was under Adorno and Weber. He developed his communica t ive

theory on these two pillars. This book is discussing the critical theory of Adorno

and analyzing the problems that arises from the discourse ethics of Habermas. The ideas here will be used for explaining clearly the communicative theory of

Habermas and its many implications.

Safran, William, ed. The Secular and the Sacred: Nation, Religion and Politics . London: Frank Cass, 2003.

26Harlan Cleveland and Mark Luyckx, ‘‘_{Civiliza tions a nd Governa nce},’’ background paper _{for the}

(28)

This book shares the same view with Charles Taylor about the secularity in our times especially the European countries. This continent which was the seat of

Christianity long ago since the time of Constantine and those reigned as Holy Roman Emperors had just faded. The saints were there, the church was in so many places, many vocations, missionaries, priests and bishops and martyrs. Now,

monasteries had been made into museums because there are no more monks or nuns to inhabit them. The large properties of religious orders is now commercial areas.

Religion had just became mere relics of the past, a shadow of the glorious past. Will the church recover its glory in these days?

Taylor, Charles. A Secular Age. USA: Harvard University Press, 2007.

In this book, Taylor lamented the fact that the days are gone when there are

no more processions in the streets, the fiestas. Religion was then “everywhere”, was interwoven with everything else, and in no sense constituted a separate “sphere” of

its own. Religion was in politics, in schools, in hospitals. The painting in these

institutions were Mary or Jesus Christ or anything related to God or the Bible but now it is all gone. Secularity are in most of the public spaces and religion is placed

on the private sphere. There comes when God is no more of any reference to

(29)

the economy, the greatest benefit to the greatest number in the political area, and so on.

This analysis is very important because it opens our understanding of how the world is now. Europe which was very Christian is now very secular. This is very related to the thesis in exposing what Enlightenment had done in our Christian

(30)

BIBLIOGRAPHY BOOKS

Primary Sources

Habermas, Jürgen. An Awareness of What is Missing: Faith and Reason in a Post-Secular Age. Translated by Ciaran Cronin. USA: Polity Press, 2010.

_______________. Communication and the Evolution of Society. Translated by Thomas McCarthy. Boston: Beacon Press, 1979.

_______________. On the Pragmatics of Communication. Translated by Maeve Cooke. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1998.

_______________. Religion in the Public Sphere. Norway: Holmberg, 2005.

_______________. Truth and Justification. Translated by Barbara Fultner. USA: MIT Press, 2003.

Habermas, Jürgen and Ratzinger, Joseph Cardinal. The Dialectics of Secularization. On Reason and Religion. Translated by Brian McNeil, San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2006.

Secondary Sources

Adams, Nicholas. Habermas and Theology. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

Arellano, Edgardo. The Constitutions of the Secular Male Institute of the Two Hearts of Jesus and Mary. Laguna: Two Hearts Media Organizat io n, 2005.

(31)

Multidimensional Perspectives. United Kingdom: Inter-Discipli nar y Press, 2010.

Berger, Peter. Questions of Faith: A Skeptical Affirmation of Christianity. Unite d Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing, 2004.

Best, Steven. The Politics of Historical Vision: Marx, Foucault, Habermas. London: The Guilford Press, 1995.

Betz, John. After Enlightenment: The Post-Secular Vision of J. G. Hamann. United Kingdom: Wiley & Blackwell, 2009.

Blanton, Ward. Displacing Christian Origins: Philosophy, Secularity, and the New Testament. USA: The University of Chicago Press, 2007.

Bloechl, Jeffrey. Christianity and Secular Reason: Classical Themes and Modern Developments. Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 2012. Blond, Phillip, ed. Post-Secular Philosophy: Between Philosophy and Theology.

London: Routledge, 1998.

Borradori, Giovanna. Philosophy in a Time of Terror: Dialogues with Jürgen Habermas and Jacques Derrida. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2003.

Chambers, Paul. Religion, Secularization and Social Change in Wales: Congregational Studies in a Post-Christian Society. London: University Of Wales Press, 2004.

Crossley, Nick, and John Michael Roberts, ed. After Habermas: New Perspective in the Public Sphere. United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing, 2004.

De Vries, Hent, and Lawrence Sullivan, ed. Political Theologies. Public Religio ns in a Post-Secular World. New York: Fordham University Press, 2006 Dressler, Markus and Arvind-Pal Mandair, ed. Secularism and Religion-Mak ing.

Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.

(32)

Edgar, Andrew. Habermas: The Key Concepts. New York: Routledge, 2006. Geuss, Raymond. The Idea of Critical Theory: Habermas and the Frankfurt School.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981.

Goode, Luke. Jürgen Habermas: Democracy and the Public Sphere. London: Pluto Press, 2005.

Gorski, Philip, David Kim, John Torpey, and Jonathan Van Antwerpen, ed. The Post-Secular in Question: Religion in Contemporary Society.

Hamilton, Clive. The Freedom Paradox: Towards a Post-Secular Ethics. Australia : Allen & Unwin, 2008.

Hammond, Phillip, ed. The Sacred in a Secular Age. Towards the Revision of the Scientific Study of Religion. California: University of California Press, 1985.

Hedrick, Todd. Rawls and Habermas: Reason, Pluralism, and the Claims of Political Philosophy. California: Stanford University Press, 2010. Heft, James, ed. A Catholic Modernity. Charles Taylor’s Marianist Award Lecture.

New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.

MacKendrick, Kenneth. Discourse, Desire, and Fantasy in Jürgen Habermas’ Critical Theory. New York: Routledge, 2008.

Milbank, John. Theology and Social Theory: Beyond Secular Reason (2nd_Ed).

United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing, 2006.

Morris, Martin. Rethinking the Communicative Turn: Adorno, Habermas, and the Problem of Communicative Freedom. USA: State University of New York Press, 2001.

Pusey, Michael. Jürgen Habermas. New York: Routledge, 1987.

(33)

Steinhoff, Uwe. The Philosophy of Jürgen Habermas: A Critical Introductio n. Translated by Karsten Schöllner. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.

Taylor, Charles. A Secular Age. USA: Harvard University Press, 2007.

Thomassen, Lasses. Habermas: A Guide for the Perplexed. London: Continuum, 2010.

Thompson, John. Critical Hermeneutics: A Study in the Thought of Paul Ricouer and Jürgen Habermas. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1981.

ARTICLES

Agger, Ben. Critical Theory, Poststructuralism, Postmodernism: Their Sociologica l Relevance. Annual Reviews Inc. (1991): 105-31. Accessed November 13, 2014.

http://www.arts.ualberta.ca/.../BenAggerCriticalTheoryPoststructPostMo d.pdf

Giannis, Konstantinos. Religion and Politics: Debating Secular and Post-Secular

Theories. Accessed November 13, 2014.

http://users.auth.gr/kourebe/Religion%20and%20Politics.%20Debating% 20secular%20and%20post-secular%20theories.%20publish%20(2).pdf. Hovdelien, Olav. Post‐Secular Consensus? On the Munich‐dialogue between

Joseph Ratzinger and Jürgen Habermas. Australian EJournal of Theology (2011): Accessed November 13, 2014.

http://www.academia.edu/960510/Post-Secular_Consensus_O

n_the_Munich-dialogue_between_Joseph_Ratzinger_and_J%C3%BCrgen_Haberma s.

(34)

CURRICULUM VITAE Personal Data

Name: Lorenzo Rodaje Ruga

Date of Birth: May 17, 1986

Place of Birth: San Fernando, Romblon

Religion: Roman Catholic Citizenship: Filipino

Educational Attainment

March 2013 Bachelor of Arts in Sacred Theology Mater Redemptoris College

San Jose City, Nueva Ecija March 2011 Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy

Mater Redemptoris College San Jose City, Nueva Ecija March 2002 High School Diploma

Antonio A. Maceda Intg. School Sta. Mesa, Manila

March 1998 Elementary Diploma

San Fernando Central School San Fernando, Romblon

(35)

Ordination to the Diaconate

Secular Male Institute of the Two Hearts Calauan, Laguna

April 2012

Perpetual Profession

Secular Male Institute of the Two Hearts Calauan, Laguna

December 2011

Temporary Profession

Oblate Apostles of the Two Hearts San Jose City, Nueva Ecija

December 2003 Novitiate

Oblate House of Formation San Jose City, Nueva Ecija June 2002