Karl Rahner is one of the great theologians of the twentieth century, known for his systematic, foundationalist approach. This bold and original book explores the relationship between his theology and his philosophy, and argues for the possibility of a nonfoundationalist reading of Rahner. Karen Kilby calls into question both the admiration of Rahner's disciples for the overarching unity of his though, and the too easy dismissals of critics who object to his "flawed philosophical starting point" or to (...) his supposedly modern and liberal appeal to experience. Through a lucid and critical exposition of key texts including Spirit in the World and Hearer of the Word , and of themes such as the Vorgriff auf esse , the supernatural existential and the anonymous Christian, Karen Kilby reaffirms Rahner's significance for modern theology and offers a clear exposition of his thought. (shrink)

Karl Rahner Karl Rahner was one of the most influential Catholic philosophers of the mid to late twentieth century. A member of the Society of Jesus and a Roman Catholic priest, Rahner, as was the custom of the time, studied scholastic philosophy, through which he discovered Thomas Aquinas. From Aquinas’ epistemology and philosophical … Continue reading Rahner, Karl →.

Karl Rahner (1904–1984) has exercised a profound influence on Catholic theology. This paper reconstructs both why and how Rahner’s ideas were received in the United States since the 1950s. American theologians did much more than simply repeat what the German Jesuit had outlined. Rather, they made use of his thought in order to do theology constructively. Thus, even today Rahner’s influence in the US is quite noticeable.

Throughout his writings, Karl Rahner remained open to the prospect that the process of cosmic evolution had yielded sentient life form in other galaxies. He argued against any theological veto on this notion, while also distinguishing the existential significance of such life forms from that of angles. Furthermore, the possibility of multiple incarnations is raised though not affirmed. With its Christological intensity, his theology seems to militate against any repetition of the incarnation. This essay examines some of the arguments (...) for and against the possibility of multiple incarnations, before assessing the current state of the extraterrestrial intelligence debate. In the light of inconclusive scientific findings, the cautionary position of Rahner is reaffirmed. (edited). (shrink)

Rahner presents an example of an ambivalent stance towards human materiality. the essay provides a discussion of rahner's use of the concept of materiality in his metaphysics of human knowledge and shows that rahner's anthropology contains two arguments which define the limitations of human materiality in different ways. one of these arguments affirms that human materiality is essential and good, whereas the other stand seems to deny the goodness and the permanence of human materiality.

In Karl Rahner’s early writings we see that a search to understand the embodied experience of God motivated him to develop his understanding of the person as spirit-in-world. Along the way he developed a “tectonic logic” that would shape his entire theology. This early attempt to wrestle with the paradoxes of bodily graced experience offers a hermeneutical key for both understanding Rahner’s theology and thinking theologically about the body today.

Karl Rahner’s “world church” turns out to be a church of significant theological and cultural pluralism in which doctrine can sometimes strain to unify disparate elements. This article examines this problem in light of Rahner’s theory of doctrinal development. First, it examines the notion of doctrine itself, suggesting a pliable model inspired by usages of “dogma” in the early church which reflect both teaching and confession of faith. Second, Rahner’s theory of doctrinal development is discussed in light (...) of Newman’s theory. Rahner’s theory shares Newman’s emphasis on “mind” or “faith consciousness.” Although both attend to the historical mediations of revelation, the truth of doctrine remains at an ideational level, an expression of abstract truth. William Lynch’s notion of the imagination of faith and dogma as a poetic embodiment of truth offers an alternative model that accommodates fundamental insights of both Rahner and Newman. Finally, this article discusses how we can find a foundation for coherence amidst a pluralism of interpretations. The ancient regula fidei is invoked. Here, Rahner’s suggestion of short creedal formulae provides a possible modern equivalent. It is also itself an example of doctrinal development appropriate for situations within the world church in which Catholics now find themselves. (shrink)

Although rahner originally maintained the validity of conceptual abstractions and the nonintelligibility of matter, Other works arguing from the ultimate unity of spirit in matter both in god, Their common origin and end, And in the essence of the soul, Led to the affirmation of a certain intelligibility of matter. Rahner's proof for god's existence, Based on the intellectual dynamism that transcends all finite realities, Concepts included, As it seeks fulfillment in the infinite, Is ambiguous. Whether the infinite (...) is god, Matter, Or perpetual transcendence cannot be demonstrated, And the appeal to the supernatural beatific vision is insufficient. "grundkurs" finally argues that the matter entering into human "esse" and knowing demands the affirmation of god's infinite mystery if the world has a sense. Yet rahner simultaneously strives to preserve conceptual knowledge and catholicism's "sacramental vision." in this he is similar to maritain and st. Thomas. (shrink)

Karl Rahner’s analysis of genetic manipulation is found most explicitly in two articles written in 1966 and 1968: “The Experiment with Man,” and “The Problem of Genetic Manipulation.” The articles have received some attention in ethical literature. The present paper analyzes Rahner’s use of theological and ethical principles, comparing and contrasting the two articles. In the first article, Rahner emphasizes humankind’s essential openness to self-creativity. What has always been true on the transcendental level—-we choose our final destiny (...) and thus create ourselves—-may now be possible as well on the categorial or historical level. Thus we Christians have no a-priori theological warrant for rejecting genetic manipulation.But there is a considerable difference in Rahner’s second article. Whereas in the first he makes no immediate ethical application, in the second he introduces both a normative principle—-there ought never be a fundamental separation of procreation and marital intercourse—-and a metaethical concept--his “moral instinct of faith”—-to enable him to deal specifically with artificial insemination by third party donor, a procedure he rejects. There is also a shift in emphasis in his anthropological approach from the first to the second article.A close analysis of his method here discloses some difficulties concerning the “moral instinct of faith” and forces us to ask how principles of theological anthropology are and ought to be applied to questions like genetic manipulation. I conclude with my own proposal for the use of theological principles in medical ethics. (shrink)

This paper explores the continuing relevance of Karl Rahner’s work on development of doctrine to a church within a world marked by an emerging postmodern consciousness. It focuses primarily on three elements of development as Rahner understands it, theological discussion, the influence of the Spirit and the role of church authority. The discussion of a possible definition of Mary as co-redemptrix and the controversy over the ordination of women are cited as concrete examples of issues of development facing (...) the church today. Rahner’s increasing awareness of the context of irreducible plurality that marks the world-church of today and tomorrow led him to the increasing conviction in the later works that the Spirit is leading the church to a deepening understanding of the central mysteries of faith rather than to a further proliferation of defined dogmas. In the later works especially, he encouraged an attitude of open discussion that reflects the confidence that the Spirit is with the whole church as it struggles to express its faith in ever changing contexts. The paper concludes that Rahner’s understanding of the complex balance of elements involved in authentic doctrinal development continues to offer valuable insight to today’s discussions. (shrink)

This article responds to the article by R. R. Reno that appeared in the May 2013 issue of the journal First Things. In that article, Reno calls Rahner a restorationist, an integralist, and the “ultimate establishment theologian,” who reassured but failed to challenge the mind-set of the Church before Vatican II. Reno also claims that Rahner had a negative impact on the Church, blaming him for the many deficiencies Reno sees in contextual, feminist, liberation, and revisionist moral theology. (...) The first part of this current article looks at the term intégrisme, and rebuts Reno’s suggestion that Rahner is an integralist. The second section explores Reno’s charge that “Rahner’s time has passed.” The third part examines the ecclesiologies of Reno and Rahner, highlighting the differences between the two and the implications for theology. The article concludes with a brief discussion of Rahner’s contribution to theology in his own right. (shrink)

This article explores Karl Rahner’s conception of the “Liturgy of the World” in light of the theme for the 2019 Annual Convention of the Catholic Theological Society of America, “Another World is Possible: Violence, Resistance and Transformation.” Employing Rahner’s hermeneutics of worship, violence can be conceived as a denial of this cosmic liturgy, transformation as conversion to it, and resistance as the stance opposing the denial. Resistance entails solidarity with all humanity in liturgical participation and in action for (...) social justice. Metz’s political-theological critique of Rahner, with assistance from Bruce Morrill’s analysis of Metz’s work for liturgical theology, and Rahner’s reference to Teilhard’s “Cosmic Mass,” taken today in light of contemporary cosmology with assistance from Roger Haight’s non-dualistic approach to models of God, are among the implications to be considered for engaging Rahner’s vision in ongoing efforts at liturgical renewal. (shrink)

Back in the early 1960s, Karl Rahner acknowledged that ‘religious agnosticism’ did have “some truth” in it [meint etwas Richtiges]. On the Hegelian assumption that a thing being defined involves as much what it is not, as what it is, this paper will explore in what sense Rahner thought that religious agnosticism does contain an element of truth, by contrasting his interpretation of its component parts to that of the nineteenth century agnostic trio of Herbert Spencer, Thomas H. (...) Huxley, and John Tyndall. (shrink)

Key to Rahner's understanding of Easter is his linking faith in the resurrection with anthropology. The human person is transcendence, always moving beyond self to the ever-greater God. The subject therefore seeks a definitive realization of freedom, and this realization must be bodily, since the human person is spirit-in-matter. Rahner makes an original point about the credibility of the resurrection, in that our human hope, under the influence of grace, enables us to open ourselves to the truth of (...) Christ's resurrection. Another original point of Rahner's theology is that he can accept either the theory of an intermediate state between death and final resurrection, or a resurrection which is simultaneous with death. According to Rahner, the virtue of hope functions as the link between faith and love, enabling the subject to project himself into God's future. (shrink)

The essay reviews the evolution of Rahner’s understanding of sacrament and evaluates his contribution to the renewal of sacramentology. By elaborating the notion of the Church as basic sacrament of the world and by doing so in light of the theology of the Word, Rahner rescued sacramentology from the discussion of dead-end controversies about the number of sacraments and about the institution of the Church by Christ. This has provided the basis for a most promising model of sacrament (...) for the ecumenical project. (shrink)

Jean Porter, a noted moral theologian, has argued that Karl Rahner’s influential theory of the fundamental option is of little practical use in actually attempting to live a holy and virtuous life. Thomas Aquinas’ account of the infused virtue of charity, she claims, offers a richer account of the Christian moral life and so is of greater practical use. This essay challenges this assertion by placing Rahner’s notion of fundamental option into dialogue with Thomistic caritas. It argues that (...) the actions that Porter takes to be characteristic of charity—itself a controversial proposition—are themselves in need of greater specification and so not as “concrete” as Porter would have one believe. Beneficence, almsgiving, and fraternal correction must be interpreted in light of diverse historical and cultural circumstances. Rahner recognizes this problem and so is legitimately hesitant to over-specify the demands of neighbor love. Further the Thomistic account of virtues with its commitment to the unity of the virtues is not able to resolve the problem of the “flawed saint” or the virtuous non-believer’s prospects for salvation in the way Rahner’s account can. Thus the Thomistic program is far less detailed than Porter suggests and it involves considerable theological and pastoral costs. (shrink)

Dalam tradisi Kristiani gambaran tentang surga dan, terutama, neraka berlimpah. Dengan melukiskan keindahan surga dan, lebih lagi, kengerian api penyucian dan neraka para pengkhotbah pernah berusaha untuk mengarahkan umat ke hidup yang baik. Tetapi sekarang “hal-hal akhir” jarang dibicarakan dalam khotbah. Seakan-akan kurang njamani mengajukan pertanyaan tentang apa yang terjadi sesudah kematian. Padahal justru berhadapan dengan sikap acuh tak-acuh sebagian masyarakat tersekularisasi dengan ejekan dari sudut ateisme baru, baik orang beriman maupun mereka yang mencari justru mengajukan pertanyaan seperti: Apakah ada (...) hidup sesudah kematian? Apakah hakikat surga? Apakah betul Allah akan menyiksa para pendosa dalam neraka? Apakah barangkali neraka kosong? Dan apakah maksud serta dasar ajaran tentang api penyucian yang tidak dipercayai oleh Gereja-gereja Ortodoks dan Protestan? Kalau kita mencari informasi mendalam yang memungkinkan menjawab pertanyaan-pertanyaan itu, apabila kita tahu latar belakang religius dan budaya ajaran tentang “hal-hal akhir” itu serta apa yang dipikirkan oleh para teolog Kristiani paling mutakhir, kita akan merasa sangat terbantu oleh buku yang ditulis oleh Dr. Theol. Johanna Rahner, guru besar pada Fakultas Teologi Katolik Universitas Kassel, ini. Sayang, buku ini hanya tersedia dalam bahasa Jerman................................ Buku ini penting pada zaman di mana bagian hakiki setiap agama—apa yang akan terjadi dalam dan sesudah kematian—jarang diangkat. Kekuatan Johanna Rahner adalah bahwa ia membahas tema itu dari pelbagai sudut: dari sudut mitos-mitos dan agama-agama kuno, dari sudut Perjanjian Lama dan Perjanjian Baru, dari sudut teologi serta pelbagai “ajaran” yang muncul selama 2000 tahun Gereja dan Kristianitas, sampai dengan teologi paling muthakhir yang membuka perspektif yang sangat baru dibandingkan dengan pengertian tradisional. Johanna Rahner sendiri merangkum maskud bukunya: “Tantangan menentukan eskatologi adalah sandungan kematian yang berkaitan dengan pertanyaan yang tak terbungkamkan tentang keadilan serta harapan tak terpuaskan agar kerinduan yang mengharapkan agar pada akhirnya semuanya menjadi baik jadi terpenuhi.” Yang tidak dibicarakan dalam buku ini adalah pertanyaan-pertanyaan tentang universalitas atau keterbatasan penyelamatan Ilahi. Juga tidak dibicarakan adalah pertanyaan yang kelihatannya merupakan dobrakan baru, yang beberapa tahun lalu muncul dalam suatu konferensi teologis di Vatikan, yaitu apakah anak kecil, anak yang mati sebelum dilahirkan, bisa masuk surga atau harus dianggap masuk ke dalam suatu limbus. Buku ini cocok bagi para teolog serta bagi setiap warga Kristianitas yang ingin memahami secara mendalam ajaran tradisional dan muthakir Gereja Katolik tentang ke mana kita akan pergi dalam kematian. (Franz Magnis-Suseno, Program Pascasarjana, Sekolah Tinggi Filsafat Driyarkara, Jakarta). (shrink)

This essay examines Karl Rahner’s theology of sin, specifically his unique rendering of original sin. Before advancing to this specific consideration of original sin, I shall seek to situate his overall theology of sin within his thinking on human freedom. Following this, Rahner’s Mariology will be described and shown to be more or less compatible with traditional Marian teachings. The crux of this essay will argue that Rahner’s rendering of original sin creates a tension with the Mariology (...) that he and the church espouse. Therefore, revision or addition to either Rahner’s Mariology or theology of original sin appears necessary for greater theological coherence. (shrink)

Classically, Christians have professed the saving efficacy of the cross. Does Karl Rahner? Recent commentary on Foundations of Christian Faith has described Rahner as conflating “atonement” generally with penal substitutionary theories of a changing God, as ruling out the redemptive significance of Christ’s death, and as denigrating the normativity of Scripture in order to do so. This article responds to these claims, unfolding Rahner’s soteriology and arguing that he advances a theology of the cross which affirms its (...) saving efficacy, including in the last decade of his work. (shrink)

In this article I have highlighted what I take to be some salient deficiencies in Rahner's basic philosophical position, and I have argued that Lonergan does provide arguments which can be validated on the basis of the data of self-consciousness. Rahner's metaphysics of knowing often appears as a catena of simple assertions derived, it is claimed, from St Thomas' philosophy. There are occasional attempts to justify positions taken against the possible objections of contemporary philosophy but these attempts are (...) sporadic at best. It is Lonergan, rather than Rahner, I contend who is able to deploy St Thomas' insights in a fruitful way in the domain of contemporary thought, and that is due to the expeditious method he adopts. Characterizing an essential aspect of that retrieval of the tradition so as to be at the level of our own philosophical times, Lonergan writes: «The fact is that my aim is vetera novis augere et perficere. Nor is my procedure haphazard. Basically it is a matter of deriving basic terms and relations from the data of consciousness, of accepting traditional metaphysics in the sense that it is isomorphic with these basic terms and relations, and of rejecting traditional metaphysics in any sense that is not the to-be-known of human cognitional activity». (shrink)

This article responds to the article by R. R. Reno that appeared in the May 2013 issue of the journal First Things. In that article, Reno calls Rahner a restorationist, an integralist, and the “ultimate establishment theologian,” who reassured but failed to challenge the mind-set of the Church before Vatican II. Reno also claims that Rahner had a negative impact on the Church, blaming him for the many deficiencies Reno sees in contextual, feminist, liberation, and revisionist moral theology. (...) The first part of this current article looks at the term intégrisme, and rebuts Reno’s suggestion that Rahner is an integralist. The second section explores Reno’s charge that “Rahner’s time has passed.” The third part examines the ecclesiologies of Reno and Rahner, highlighting the differences between the two and the implications for theology. The article concludes with a brief discussion of Rahner’s contribution to theology in his own right. (shrink)

The personal tragedies of life as well as the horrors of genocide and plague leave many people wondering whether Christian hope is not an empty sentiment. Despite the strong incarnational thrust of his Christology which led to a kind of optimism about the human prospect, Karl Rahner recognized the problems of falsereligious hope. His “optimism” is therefore framed within a stark realism, or “pessimism” about a human condition marked by guilt, suffering and death. Hope is found not in pious (...) escapism, in evasion of darkness, but in standing squarely within and facing the tragic dimensions of life. A comprehensive understanding ofRahner’s Christian pessimism opens up both the history of human entanglement in guilt (Rahner’s rendering of original sin), and the implication of God in darkness of death (the classic issues of providence and divine suffering). Rahner’s incarnationalism is offset in his later work by a theology of the cross, where theincomprehensibility of human suffering rests in the incomprehensibility of God. An eschatological hope is thus rooted in the suffering and death of Jesus. The Christian is one who can dare to hope in the face of tragedy because the cross is where God’s saving presence is most realistically revealed. (shrink)

This paper explores the continuing relevance of Karl Rahner’s work on development of doctrine to a church within a world marked by an emerging postmodern consciousness. It focuses primarily on three elements of development as Rahner understands it, theological discussion, the influence of the Spirit and the role of church authority. The discussion of a possible definition of Mary as co-redemptrix and the controversy over the ordination of women are cited as concrete examples of issues of development facing (...) the church today. Rahner’s increasing awareness of the context of irreducible plurality that marks the world-church of today and tomorrow led him to the increasing conviction in the later works that the Spirit is leading the church to a deepening understanding of the central mysteries of faith rather than to a further proliferation of defined dogmas. In the later works especially, he encouraged an attitude of open discussion that reflects the confidence that the Spirit is with the whole church as it struggles to express its faith in ever changing contexts. The paper concludes that Rahner’s understanding of the complex balance of elements involved in authentic doctrinal development continues to offer valuable insight to today’s discussions. (shrink)

An early and persistent criticism of Rahner was his use of transcendental philosophy and his emphasis on human subjectivity, with an attendant loss of concrete historicity and human embodiment. By finding connections between Rahner’s concept of the transcendental and philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein’s treatment of language and its uses, the article highlights Rahner’s own often-overlooked treatment of human embodiment and concrete historicity. The argument here focuses on the priority of being over appearance, and the necessary connection between intentions (...) and actions, important themes in both men’s thought. (shrink)

The importance and influence of Karl Rahner’s theology is due in great part to the number of excellent scholars who have elucidated his thinking over the years. This article assembles considerations of Rahner’s idea of freedom as found in the rich secondary literature on Rahner. Rahner’s ethics, and indeed much of his theology, rests upon the idea of discernment, his own spiritual experience, and the Ignatian practice of discernment of spirits. Discipleship with Jesus and the love (...) of neighbor, all undergirded by the person’s free response to God’s grace and revelation, is the horizon that embraces all of what Rahner has to say. The idea of freedom rests at the basis of Rahner’s understanding of the human person, our call to discipleship, and our fundamental choice to grow in God’s grace. (shrink)

The first part of this paper presents the mystery of Eucharist as the symbol or sacrament of, and hence as identical with, the central mystery of Christian faith: the paschal mystery of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. It also situates Rahner’s theology of Eucharist within the larger context of his theology as a whole, particularly his Christology. The humanity of Jesus as the real symbol or sacrament of the Logos provides the prime analogate for understanding Eucharist as (...) sacrament, and the two-fold movement of Christology as both descending and ascending provides the basic structure of sacramental activity as embodying both the divine offer of grace and human response to it. The second part considers Rahner’s contribution to specific problems in Eucharistic theology: real presence, the idea of transubstantiation, sacramental causality and institution by Jesus.The third and final part looks to the still unfinished agenda of Karl Rahner’s theology of Eucharist. He describes the task facing theology in the future as that of transposing theoretical beliefs into practical imperatives, “so that the theological as such becomes a principle of action.” For the Eucharist this means seeing Eucharist primarily in the context of the reign of God that was the center of the preaching and ministry of Jesus rather than only in the context of the church. More specifically, this means seeing the church’s Eucharist in the world within the larger context of the liturgy of the world. The liturgy of the world celebrates the ongoing transformation of the secular realm by the power of the Spirit in its movement towards its consummation in the final coming of God’s reign. (shrink)

The commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” is central to Christian discipleship. How does the concrete way that we express love enhance or diminish our ability to love? This paper brings Karl Rahner’s theology of neighbor love into dialogue with a description of altruism and compassion provided by social psychologist, C. Daniel Batson, and neuroscientists Tania Singer and Olga Klimecki. For Rahner, grace enables and sustains love. In addition, a mutually reciprocal relationship of unity exists between human (...) love for God, neighbor, and self. Furthermore, Rahner contends prayer as one way to cultivate compassion for another. The scientific research presented here examines aspects of the relationship between self and other known as empathy and compassion. The research of Batson, Singer, and Klimecki shed light on the role of self-love in compassion as well as the ways our capacity to empathize conditions our potential for altruism. (shrink)

This article describes how its author has used Karl Rahner’s thought to engage seminarians and college students in the practice of theology.

This paper explores the continuing relevance of Karl Rahner’s work on development of doctrine to a church within a world marked by an emerging postmodern consciousness. It focuses primarily on three elements of development as Rahner understands it, theological discussion, the influence of the Spirit and the role of church authority. The discussion of a possible definition of Mary as co-redemptrix and the controversy over the ordination of women are cited as concrete examples of issues of development facing (...) the church today. Rahner’s increasing awareness of the context of irreducible plurality that marks the world-church of today and tomorrow led him to the increasing conviction in the later works that the Spirit is leading the church to a deepening understanding of the central mysteries of faith rather than to a further proliferation of defined dogmas. In the later works especially, he encouraged an attitude of open discussion that reflects the confidence that the Spirit is with the whole church as it struggles to express its faith in ever changing contexts. The paper concludes that Rahner’s understanding of the complex balance of elements involved in authentic doctrinal development continues to offer valuable insight to today’s discussions. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:RAHNER ON THE UNORIGINATE FATHER ROBERT WARNER St. Joseph's University Philadelphia, Pennsylvania I. Introduction Y ANY MEASURE, Karl Rahner was one of the principal architects of the renascence of trinitarian theology that has marked the last half of this century. Rahner found that in their pract:icail lives Christians were "a1most mere' monotheists'" 1 while :in speculative endeavors the treatise on the Trinity stood " isofoted in (...) the structriwe of dogmatic theology as a whoile," 2 and so he devoted himself toov ;ereoming both the priadicaJ irre~evance and the theoretical isolation of the doctrine. He p:mposeid as a methodologicaJ Grunda:dom the dictum that " the ' 1econom~c' Trinity is the 'immanent ' Trinity and the 'immanent ' Trinity is the 'economic ' Trinity," 3 in 011der to preclude any sharp disjunction between how God is in se and how God is ad extra, between theofogy and the,economy. He al:so developed a techn~cal concept of self-communication, inscribed it within the heart of his trinitarian theology, amd materiaily recast the traditional account of the Trinity to wccm~d with that notion. H1s account of the 1dentity and roil.e of God the Father is a striking, although littiie noted, feature of Rahner's thought. His trinitarian theofogy trumpets the primacy of God the Father: this is evident in his oft-stated resolve to begin the 1Karl Rahner, The Trinity, trans. Joseph Donceel (New York: The Seabury Press, 1974), p. 10. Hereafter cited as Trinity. 2" Remarks on the Dogmatic Treatise 'De Trinitate '," in Karl Rahner, Theological Investigations IV, trans. Kevin Smyth (New York: The Seabury Press, 1974), p. 78. Hereafter cited as "Remarks." a Trinity, p. 22. 569 570 ROBERT WARNER ;theological entel'prise, in consort with Scripture and the Greeks, with God Father, rather than the one divine es-,senoe shared by Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.4 And that primacy, in tum, is secured by an extra.ordinary emphasis on the urnoriginatedness trruditionaUy,ascribed to the Father. 'What unoriginatedness involves and how unoriginatedness and fatherhood bear on the identity of the Father become cmci.ail questions within Rahner's trinitarian theology. This is no bit of trinitarian arteana, no subtlety of interest only to a scholastic mindset, but an issue whose consequenee1 s reverberate throughout Rahner's Two e:mmples will suffice. Insofar as Rahner on the notion of self-communicatfon, he riegufar~y identifies the F1ather as the origin of the self-communication. Divinity is communicated rbo the Son 1:the HoJy Spi:cit. Issues regacvding the id.entity of the Father impinge, therefore, on questions the seH-communication p11eioise[y because upon the identity of the self that is communicated. In 1addition, Rahner works out the identification of being of God and the triune being of God in the person of Father. Thel'eby the question arbout ifhe :identity the Father becomes important in sett1ing the ontological status of immanent the sense in which God is 1anteoedently trinity se. This essay examine Rahner's rich and compfox a1C1count of the identity of Father. It be necessary, firis:t of all, to situate that teaching, to clarify Rahner means by un-.origina.tedness, and to determine how he understands unorigifatherhood to be interr1 elat1ed constituting the identity of the the essay will argue that Rahner's account not, fo fact, succeed and,this his theology. Rahne'l.''s position can thus: be seen a,s an attempt to identify a philosophically colJJceiv;ed,abyss the Father trinitarian doctrine by reworking the unoriginatedness tr:aditionaHy ascribed to the Father. 4 Trinity, p. Hl. RAHNER ON THE UNORIGINATE FATHER 571 II. 'O 8e6c; and the Father In an essay that appears early on in the Theological Investigations, "Theos in the New Testament", Rahner outlines the content of the New Testament conception of God under seveml heaidings.5 He notes, first of 1all, the New Testament's imperious claim that its God is the one true God, o 8e6c;. Rahner describes this as the New Testament"s doctrine of God',s uniqueness. Under a second rubric, God as person, Rmmer ranges several topics. Aocording to Rahner, as personal, God is (1) an agent who.wets (2) freely in (3... (shrink)

Karl Rahner’s transcendental Christology examined the conditions for the possibility of faith in Christ and presented human nature as developing in response to God’s grace. This article affirms Rahner despite the critiques of Michel Henry, Roger Haight, John McDermott, Patrick Burke, and Donald Gelpi. Rahner’s Christology is not a phenomenology but a theology that affirms God’s presence in history. To be sure, some critics have attacked Rahner for emphasizing God’s initiative and diminishing human responsibility and for (...) uncritically accepting Greek metaphysics . Yet Rahner rightly depicted Christ as a sacrament of the Father’s will, an event in history with consequences for all time. Other critics have accused him of obscuring the distinction between God and humanity and suggesting that there are two conscious subjects in Christ . This article accepts Rahner’s view of Jesus as both the presence of God’s Word and the human response to it. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:KARL RAHNER'S EXISTENTIAL ETIDCS: A CRITIQUE BASED ON ST. THOMAS'S UNDERSTANDING OF PRUDENCE I KARL RAHNER'S THEORY of a "formal existential ethics," which he proposes as a necessary supplement to the "essential ethics" of the Thomistic naturallaw tradition, has been both praised as a brilliant adaptation of the tradition to contemporary philosophy as well as criticised as a misleading and unnecessary break with Thomism. William A. Wailace, (...) one of the critics, characterizes Rahner's ethics as an unfortunate combination of mysticism and casuistry.1 Personal moral decision-making, according to Wallace, should depend on the virtue of prudence plus " gifts of grace" instead of on a theory of private spiritual discernment. A genuine Thomism in his view already achieves what Rahner wants to accomplish with the problematic category of existential ethics and simultaneously provides more coherent and explicit safeguards against situationalism and abuse.2 Rahner's chief expositor, James F. Bresnahan, claims in his extensive dissertation on Rahner's ethics that the extent of Wallace's misunderstanding of "the need for ' existential ' ethics is hard to convey in a short space," and that Wallace is wrong in thinking that Rahner displaces prudence.3 In the 1 William A. Wallace, O.P., "The Existential Ethics of Karl Rahner: A Thomistic Appraisal,'' in The Thomist, 1963, vol. 27, pp. 493-515. 2 Ibid., pp. 510-513. a James F. Bresnahan, S.J., The Methodology of "Natural Law" Ethical Reasoning In The Theology of Karl Rahner, And: Its Supplementary Development Using The Legal Philosophy of Lon L. Fuller, 1972 Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University (available from University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Mich., no. 72: 29520), footnote 106, pp. 77-78. 461 46~ DANIEL M. NELSON course of this exchange, not much is said by either party about the characteristics of the virtue oi prudence itself. An investigation into the function and status assigned to prudence by St. Thomas may be of use for deciding whether existential ethics is in keeping with his moral teaching or, rather, a distortion. But first, in order to evaluate Wailace's criticism and claim that prudence is a preferable alternative to Rahner's proposal, a brief description of Rahner's categories of essential and exi,;tential ethics is in order.4 Rahner uses the category of essential ethics in two ways. First, he identifies it Yvith what he portrays as a somewhat static and conservative natural-law tradition. Second, he uses it to refer to his own description of a rehabilitated dimension of ethical reasoning that complements and calls for a supplemental category of existential ethics. Essential ethics in both cases refers to the moral principles or laws derived from knowledge of the essential elements of human nature. The difference has to do primarily with disagreement about what it is that constitutes human essence. According to Rahner, essence is much less unchangeable and much more " open " than traditionally or ordinarily assumed. As a consequence, he argues, claims about natural law should be less absolute and universal than they often are. Whether one understands essence as fixed or fluid, however, essential ethics involves a syllogistic application of natural law to circumstances. A universal principle based on human essence 4 An understanding of Rahner's ethics is macle difficult by several factors: his thinking is deeply indebted to " transcendental" Continental philosophy; some of the relevant texts and criticisms are available only in German; passages dealing with ethics appear in widely scattered (and unindexed) essays; he does not conceive of himself primarily as an ethicist and thus is not systematic in his discussion of his moral theory; his prose may be charitably described as challenging; and the only extensive analysis of his ethics written in English is Bresnahan's 650-page dissertation, which contains a wealth of information and explication. Bresnahan has published two helpful summaries: "Rahner's Christian Ethics: in America, 1970, vol. 123, pp. 351-354 ancl "Rahner's Ethics: Critical Natural Law in Relation to Contemporary Ethical Methodology," in the Journal of Religion, Jan. 1976, vol. 56, pp. 36-660. KARL RAHNER's EXISTE?~TIAL ETHICS 463 is contained in the major premise, an actual situation is described in the minor premise, and an imperative is... (shrink)

La théologie de Karl Rahner mérite-t-elle le label de «classique»? Pour instruire le débat, l’article présente quatre dissertations doctorales récentes , ainsi qu’un ouvrage collectif, consacrés à l’oeuvre de Rahner. Nature et grâce, christologie et triadologie, théologie et anthropologie, athéisme et sciences naturelles, expérience et subjectivité, épistémologie et apologétique: les thèmes abordés par ces études témoignent de la diversité des questions traitées par le corpus rahnérien. De cet examen, trois lignes de force caractéristiques du style de cette théologie (...) peuvent être dégagées: modestie du langage théologique, rigueur des critères de validation, audace spéculative et systématique. En contrepoint critique, trois questions peuvent légitimement être avancées concernant l’universalité du langage employé et de l’expérience décrite, la fidélité au mystère et les points aveugles du système. Il y a fort à parier que l’avenir confirme le diagnostic qui s’impose à l’issue de cette étude, à savoir qu’il convient de considérer Rahner comme un classique de la discipline théologique pour avoir proposé, en un moment critique de son histoire, une voie de renouvellement tout à la fois grandiose et contestable. (shrink)

The article discusses some parallels between Weltanschauung analysis in contemporary philosophy of science and Rahner’s criticism of the context/content approach to theological pluralism.

A great amount of scholarly attention has been devoted to Karl Rahner’s early philosophical writings, but his theological work from the same time period remains only marginally known. While his dissertation in philosophy, Spirit in the World, has been published in multiple editions and in many languages, his dissertation in theology, E latere Christi, was only available in archives until it was published in the third volume of his collected works, Sämtliche Werke. Exploring the content of this third volume (...) which contains Rahner’s early writing on the spirituality and theology of the Church Fathers, this article illuminates a neglected part of Rahner’s career: his fascination with patristic thought during his early, formative years. It also identifies themes in these early writings which reappear in his more well known mature writings on the theology of das Symbol, soteriology, mystery, and the importance of historical theology for the activity of today’s theologian. (shrink)

In recent years, Karl Rahner's theology of concupiscence as a «pre-ethical appetite» has been subjected to some negative criticism as «un-Thomistic» and as presupposing modern philosophy's dualistic understanding of being. The present essay tries to situate Rahner's interpretation within the theological context of the time when it was originally published; the major debate then was on the nature of the supernatural and the desiderium naturale videndi Deum. It then tries to reconstruct the usage Rahner himself made of (...) Aquinas's theology and Heidegger's philosophy, as presented in the latter's Sein und Zeit . In 1941, Rahner's major contribution consisted in reformulating Aquinas's theology on concupiscence in Heideggerian terminology. The Incarnation and the gift of integrity constituted two benchmarks that Rahner used to test his own understanding of concupiscence. Finally, Rahner's contribution is placed within the context of the Catholic-Lutheran Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification and the definition of concupiscence as presented in the accompanying Official Common Statement. (shrink)

Given the cultural dominance of the empirical sciences, it is perhaps inevitable that theology should seek a self-understanding that emulates them. Yet post-modern thinkers concur in rejecting Enlightenment canons of knowledge as too restrictive for any discipline seeking to fathom our own humanity, a pursuit that theology shares with literature. In both fields, language, as an engagement with symbols, is not the pursuit of an object of knowledge so much as an act ofself expression and an opening to communion. This (...) is illustrated by an examination of the life and work of Virginia Woolf, as she is revivified in Michael Cunningham’s novel, The Hours. Its explication is drawn from the writing of the German Jesuit theologian Karl Rahner, who insisted that St. Thomas Aquinas viewed all of reality as essentially self expressive, and the human person as that spot in creation, ordered toward all that is and achieving self-constitutionthrough symbolic intercourse with others. (shrink)

Given the cultural dominance of the empirical sciences, it is perhaps inevitable that theology should seek a self-understanding that emulates them. Yet post-modern thinkers concur in rejecting Enlightenment canons of knowledge as too restrictive for any discipline seeking to fathom our own humanity, a pursuit that theology shares with literature. In both fields, language, as an engagement with symbols, is not the pursuit of an object of knowledge so much as an act ofself expression and an opening to communion. This (...) is illustrated by an examination of the life and work of Virginia Woolf, as she is revivified in Michael Cunningham’s novel, The Hours. Its explication is drawn from the writing of the German Jesuit theologian Karl Rahner, who insisted that St. Thomas Aquinas viewed all of reality as essentially self expressive, and the human person as that spot in creation, ordered toward all that is and achieving self-constitutionthrough symbolic intercourse with others. (shrink)

The author acquired in May of 1965 a copy of Karl Rahner’s observations on the latest draft of “Schema XIII” which would becomeGaudium et Spes. The title was “Anmerkungen zum Schema DE ECCLESIA IN MUNDO HUIUS TEMPORIS (in der Fassungvom 28.5.65).” After the third session of Vatican II serious work remained to be done on that text. Among several meetings was onelong and important occurred at Ariccia in the Alban hills outside Rome. Rahner could not attend because he (...) could not miss so manylectures at the University of Munich. He sent written comments. That document is a valuable source for the research of the theologicalbackground of Gaudium et Spes. Rahner’s observations fall into three subheadings: remarks on the Latin syntax and style; generalobservations on the underlying theological principles; detailed observations on particular points. (shrink)

Robert Lassalle-Klein’s paper has provided an examination of how Ignatio Ellacuría, working with philosopher Xavier Zubiri, both used and criticized some of Karl Rahner’s key ideas for the purpose of finding a philosophical framework for working out Ellacuría’s own theological vision, rooted in his experiences as a Spanish Jesuit serving in Latin America. While the technical work in this adaptation receives some commentary here, most of my remarks are observations about the impact of this work on Rahner scholarship (...) more generally. Ellacuría’s use of Rahner is in marked contrast to Metz’s critique that saw Rahner’s transcendental method incapable of dealing with historical realities. Ellacuría’s work can be understood as supplying a particularity to Rahner’s austere structures that, I argue, is intrinsic to those structures. As such, Ellacuría’s work should be adopted into the canon of mainstream Rahner scholarship. (shrink)

In his evolutionary Christology, Karl Rahner shares some surprising affinities with Bonaventure. Both envision human beings as microcosmic, that is, as uniquely representative of the whole of creation. Both describe creation Christocentrically, oriented in its design and goal toward the Incarnate Word. Both understand humans as radically responsible for the non-human world. These similarities point to a more foundational congruence in their Trinitarian theologies. Rahner and Bonaventure connect the Father’s personal character as fontal source of Son and Spirit (...) to God’s unoriginated and free relation to creation. If the Word expresses the Father fully, creation expresses God in a real but incomplete way. This grounds a series of analogous relationships between created spirit and matter, human freedom and nature, as well as grace and human nature. From this perspective, Rahner’s evolutionary Christology can be seen as ecologically significant, appreciatively critical of evolution, and ultimately rooted in the Trinity. (shrink)

In his evolutionary Christology, Karl Rahner shares some surprising affinities with Bonaventure. Both envision human beings as microcosmic, that is, as uniquely representative of the whole of creation. Both describe creation Christocentrically, oriented in its design and goal toward the Incarnate Word. Both understand humans as radically responsible for the non-human world. These similarities point to a more foundational congruence in their Trinitarian theologies. Rahner and Bonaventure connect the Father’s personal character as fontal source of Son and Spirit (...) to God’s unoriginated and free relation to creation. If the Word expresses the Father fully, creation expresses God in a real but incomplete way. This grounds a series of analogous relationships between created spirit and matter, human freedom and nature, as well as grace and human nature. From this perspective, Rahner’s evolutionary Christology can be seen as ecologically significant, appreciatively critical of evolution, and ultimately rooted in the Trinity. (shrink)

Responding to Richard Lennan’s paper, this short essay highlights three elements of Rahner’s work on ecclesiology: sacramentality, heresy, and mission. In Lennan’s account, the first two of these call for self-reflection and self-criticism. Viewing church as sacramental, rather than as a continuation of the incarnation, is important for Rahner because it makes room for ongoing self-criticism. Rahner even turns the category of heresy into an opportunity for self-reflection rather than the condemnation of others, asking how the church (...) offers a compelling “yes” as well as a guiding “no.” The third element of Rahner’s ecclesiology that Lennan engages is mission. Rahner’s work does not fit neatly into traditional notions of evangelism or contemporary typologies of mission. In Lennan’s rendering, however, Rahner’s ecclesiology provides a powerful view of mission as persistent, embodied hope. This view of mission—appropriate to a self-critical and self-reflective church—might be precisely what is needed today. (shrink)

This article describes how its author has used Karl Rahner’s thought to engage seminarians and college students in the practice of theology.

This paper explores the contribution of Karl Rahner to theological reflection on the topic of the sensus fidelium and offers his thought as a resource towards rethinking ecclesial norms and praxis in the Roman Catholic Church. Rahner’s reflections bring to the surface a theological value at the heart of revelation, the sensus fidelium, which has remained latent in the Christian tradition. Rahner understood that the People of God as a whole are “Hearers of the Word.” They share (...) the collective responsibility of transmitting revelation from age to age. Rahner understood authoritative teachers of the faith to have a normative role in interpreting God’s revelation; yet the insights and collective faith consciousness of the faithful also provide a legitimate norm for the faith. This work presents Rahner’s thought on the sensus fidelium to show how it is relevant to present-day theological discussion and offers his ideas for integrating the value of the sensus fidelium into the practices of the Catholic Church. (shrink)