Abstract

This essay is a response to Ron Highfield’s critique of Rahner’s doctrine of sin and freedom. Highfield holds that Rahner’s doctrine of sin is erroneous because it is rooted in Rahner’s attribution of a divine-like character (i.e., definitiveness) to human freedom. This attribution, according to Highfield, leads to Rahner’s misunderstanding of biblical and dogmatic texts on human freedom, internal contradictions in his doctrine of sin, and the blurring of the distinction between Creator and creature, nature and grace, philosophy and theology.The essay rebuts these charges by drawing attention to Rahner’s emphasis on the analogical character of our discourse about human freedom, to his theology of death, to the difference between absoluteness and definitiveness, to the distinction between liberum arbitrium and libertas, and to Rahner’s theology of time andhistoricity.