theology of Karl Rahner

Reviews the historical origins and principal elements of Karl Rahner's critique of Thomas Aquinas and Bernard Lonergan. Argues that Rahner's critique fails to come to terms with the basic problematic of Trinitarian theology, and misunderstands the significance of Thomas Aquinas's achievement.

Vorbemerkung enn einem Text attestiert wird, er sei immer noch aktuell, so ist dies eher als Kompliment gemeint: Er war seiner Zeit voraus und enthält viele noch unausgeschöpfte Gedanken. Wer heute den 1972 von Karl Rahner veröffentlichten Text Strukturwandel der Kirche als Aufgabe und Chance 2 liest, hat in der Tat diesen Eindruck. Rahner hingegen hätte es wohl weniger gefreut, dass rund 50 Jahre später sein damaliger Text noch als "aktuell" bezeichnet wird. Eigentlich sollte in der allmählichen Umsetzung der Würzburger Synode (1971-75), die ja ihrerseits Anstöße des II. Vatikanischen Konzils umsetzen wollte, doch vieles von dem, was er als Reformvorschläge unterbreitete, Realität geworden oder von anderen, besseren Ideen überholt worden sein. Wenn "Aktualität" in diesem Fall kein Kompliment ist, so fällt dies jedoch nicht auf den Autor der kleinen Schrift zurück, sondern auf den Adressaten: eine Kirche, die den angemahnten Strukturwandel nach einem halben Jahrhundert, das seit dem Konzil verstrichen ist, versäumte. Blickt man auf den damaligen Stand der Diskussion, so zeigt sich, wie reformresistent die Kirche, bei aller Betriebsamkeit, in den Jahrzehnten nach der Synode blieb. Und die Laien schauten ergeben auf eine Initiative des Amtes, die ausblieb. Der vielbeschworene Dialog war ein Druckventil, kein Organon der Reform 3. "Die große Wende", resümiert Norbert Lüdecke, "der langfristige Reformprozess nach Würzburg blieb aus." 4 Davon kann eine relecture der Schrift Rahners nicht absehen.

The work is based mainly on Dermot Lane's book Stepping Stones to Other Religions: A Christian Theology of Inter-religious Dialogue (2011) in which he summarizes Rahner's thoughts and reflections on other religions and in relation to Christianity, emphasizing the role of experience in the process of building unity.

Il presente elaborato si divide in due parti. Nella prima parte ho presentato una sintesi del terzo capitolo «Schema sistematico d’una teologia trinitaria» nel quale K. Rahner dopo aver «ascoltato» quanto sulla Trinità hanno detto la Scrittura, la storia dei dogmi e il magistero ecclesiastico «dice ciò che ha ascoltato». Il punto di partenza è l’assioma fondamentale «La Trinità economica è la Trinità immanente e viceversa» dal quale poi Rahner procede spiegando il concetto di autocomunicazione (Selbstmitteilung) di Dio. La mia lettura si è concentrata soprattutto sulle ultime pagine del trattato, nelle quali il teologo tedesco presenta il problema dell’aporia del concetto di ‘persona’ nella dottrina trinitaria. Il tema di quesa indagine è così vasto e lo spazio di questo elaborato così ristretto da ricordare l'incontro del Vescovo di Ippona con il bambino sulla spiaggia. Così, anziché utilizzare la conchiglia per svuotare il mare, la avvicinerò al mio orecchio e mi metterò anch'io in ascolto prima di queste pagine di Karl Rahner e poi di alcuni studiosi che le hanno ascoltate prima di me.

Nella seconda parte ho presentato, infatti, alcuni esempi della ricezione della proposta rahneriana, limitati vista la natura del presente elaborato, per dimostrare come il dibattito sulla teologia trinitaria sia sempre vivo e la fiamma, soprattutto dopo il Concilio Vaticano Secondo, si sia riaccesa. Forse il miglior tributo che possiamo rendere a Karl Rahner, come ha scritto Catherine Mowry LaCugna a conclusione della sua introduzione, «consiste nell’osservare che, a causa di questo libro e delle discussioni teologiche che esso continua a suscitare, non è più vero che, se la dottrina della Trinità dovesse essere soppressa “come falsa … , gran parte della letteratura religiosa potrebbe rimanere quasi inalterata”».
I riferimenti alla fonte principale presentata nel titolo indicheranno una T seguita dalle pagine della traduzione italiana di Carlo Danna, nella quinta edizione della Queriniana, 2013 e la sigla DDG seguita dal numero di pagina del testo originale tedesco: Der dreifaltige Gott als Transzendenter Urgrund der Heilsgeschichte.

This academic paper is prepared as part of Letture and it is an attempt to read and study the said work of Karl Rahner.  The book The Church and the Sacraments is written in simple language through which complicated concepts are presented.

This paper details how St. Thomas Aquinas' Trinitarian theology provides a hinge for the first book of the Summa Theologica, and how the treatise "On the One God" is deliberately structured to parallel "On the Blessed Trinity", that is to say, that its thematic organization parallels the order or taxis of the Trinitarian processions; this in turn provides the format of Thomas' later discussion of other rational beings, like humans and angels.

Wenn in dieser Ausgabe von "Theologisches" zu Karl Rahner auch seine Stellung zur Evolutionstheorie untersucht werden soll, mag dies nur den zu überraschen, der nicht um den extremen Einfluß dieser zunächst naturwissenschaftlich scheinenden Theorie auf alle Bereiche unseres Geisteslebens weiß.

Kürzlich erschien in Theologisches eine Artikelserie [1] über Willigis Jäger, den die Glaubenskongregation disziplinieren musste. Einer der "Eckpfeiler" der häretischen Ideen dieses Zen-Meisters und exklaustrierten Benediktiners - und vielleicht Ursache, die ihn den Glauben verlieren ließ- ist die Evolutionstheorie. An anderer Stelle [2] wurde das Verhältnis namhafter Naturwissenschaftler zu Religion und Naturwissenschaft referiert - der Einfluß der Evolutionstheorie ist offenbar. Es ist nicht schwer, Äußerungen wie die folgende aus einem Lehrbuch für Medizinstudenten zu finden: "Die kontinuierliche Evolution der pflanzlichen und tierischen Arten seit der Entstehung des Lebens ist heute wohlbewiesene Grundlage unseres Weltbildes" [3]. Sofern es ein einheitliches Weltbild in einer multikulturellen Gesellschaft gibt, ist die Evolutionstheorie sicherlich dessen Grundlage - allerdings nicht die Grundlage des meinen als Schüler Christi und zwar nicht nur, weil ich der Bibel höhere Autorität einräume als säkularer Weisheit, mag sie auch noch so glänzend erscheinen, sondern auch weil ich gerade als Naturwissen¬schaftler die Evolutionstheorie schlichtweg für falsch halte und ich denke, dass ihre weite Verbreitung gerade wegen ihrer dem erbsündigen Menschen hochwillkommenen weltanschaulichen Konsequenzen geschieht[4].

Vielerorts bezieht sich Rahner auf die Evolutionstheorie, z.B.:

"Theologisches zum Monogenismus" Schriften zur Theologie I. Einsiedeln: Benzinger 1954
"Zur Theologie des Todes" Quaestiones disputatae, Freiburg: Herder 1958
"Theologische Anthropologie und moderne Entwicklungslehre" 1960
"Erbsünde und Evolution" Concilium 3 1967
"Die Christologie innerhalb einer evolutiven Weltanschauung"[5] (abgekürzt "Christologie")
"Das Problem der Hominisation"[6] (abgekürzt "Hominisation")

Karl Rahner stand der Evolutionstheorie positiv gegenüber. Hier soll untersucht werden, welche evolutionären Ansichten sich bei Rahner finden und was dazu fachlich zu sagen ist: was war zu seinen Lebzeiten schon bekannt, was wissen wir heute. Dann werden die theologischen Folgerungen Rahners dargestellt und kommentiert.


Rahners evolutionäre Vorstellungen

Die Materie hat sich auf das Leben und den Menschen hin entwickelt (Christologie 192), der Zufall ist für den Naturwissenschaftler kein sinnvolles Wort (Christologie 196) – heute würde man dies wohl "gelenkten Zufall" nennen, anscheinend kann Gott gar nicht anders, als durch von Ihm aktiv gelenkte Evolution zu schaffen, denn "eine Wesensselbsttranzendenz aber ist ebensowenig wie die (einfache) Selbsttranszedenz ein innerer Widerspruch, sobald man sie geschehen läßt in der Dynamik der inneren und doch nicht eigenwesentlichen Kraft des absoluten Seins, in dem, was man theologisch Erhaltung und Mitwirkung Gottes mit dem Geschöpf nennt, in der inneren und bleibenden Getragenheit aller endlichen Wirklichkeit in Sein und Wirken, in Werdesein, in Selbstwerdesein, kurz in Selbsttranszendenz, die zum Wesen alles endlich Seienden gehört" (Christologie192). Glücklicherweise, möchte man hinzufügen, hat die Evolution nach Rahner notwendig "Einbahnigkeit und Gerichtetheit" (Christologie 198) und der Mensch kann seine Evolution heute sogar steuern (Christologie 196).

Es halten sich nach Rahner in der biologischen Evolution neben den neueren und höheren Formenkreisen auch die Vertreter der niedrigeren, von denen die höheren Formenkreise sich herleiten (Christologie 207).

Er spricht von einer "Homogenität von Materie und Geist die der Naturwissen¬schaftler erwarten würde", ist scheinbar dagegen wegen der "Wesensverschiedenheit" beider (Christologie 186), stimmt dem aber dann doch zu, da im Menschen die Grundtendenz der Selbstfindung der Materie im Geist durch Selbsttranszendenz zu ihrem definitiven Durchbruch käme (ibidem).

Ein wirkliches "Werden" sei kein "Anderswerden" sondern ein "Mehrwerden" im Sinne einer Selbsttranszendenz und Selbstüberbietung (Christologie 191, vgl. 192)[7]: Die Evolution ist ihm offenbar aus philosophischen Gründen sogar eine Notwendigkeit.

Die Naturgeschichte kommt in der Geistesgeschichte des Menschen zum Ziel (Christologie 192), der Mensch trägt neben dem Geist noch die Naturgeschichte der lebendigen Materie in sich (Christologie 195)– das entspricht etwa dem, was man heute "Evolutionäre Psychologie" nennt: evolutionäre Welterklärungen beschränken sich nicht auf tierisches oder pflanzliches Leben und den menschlichen Körper, sondern beziehen auch menschliches Verhalten, Fühlen und Denken mit ein. Dabei ist grundlegende Annahme, dass Gene für ein Verhalten des Gesamtorganismus sorgen, das ihre eigene Weitergabe optimiert: "Traurig, aber leider wahr: Evolutionspsychologisch gesehen ist die hohe Gewaltbereitschaft in Banden keineswegs abnormal, wenn die Voraussetzungen Armut, mangelnde Ausbildung und ein passender Anlaß zusammenkommen. (…) wenn jemand nichts hat, sind für ihn die Aussichten, tot zu sein, ein Leben lang keine Frau beziehungsweise keinen sozialen Status zu besitzen, im Grunde genommen völlig gleichwertig. Entwicklungsgeschichtlich muss jemand sein eigenes Leben als wertlos betrachten, wenn er keine Aussicht auf Nachwuchs hat. Und je weniger Chancen er in der Zukunft sieht, um so größere Risiken nimmt er bereitwillig auf sich."[8]


Theologische Folgerungen Rahners

Dass der Mensch von der Erde stammt, ist bisher theologisch zu wenig verstanden worden (Hominisation 24).
Es ist sinnvoll und kein schlechter und auf die Dauer unhaltbarer Kompromiß zu sagen, der Mensch stamme dem Leib nach aus der Materie, dem Geist nach jedoch nicht (Hominisation 44). Die Materie ist durch Gott so geschaffen, dass sie die Potenz zum Hervorbringen des Geistes schon trägt und dieser dann im Menschen sich manifestiert (Hominisation 49- 55). Die Erschaffung der Seele ist "kein exzeptionelles außergewöhnliches Vorkommnis" sondern ein Wirken durch Zweitursachen (Hominisation 60ff), die Rahner "Ermöglichung der aktiven Selbsttranszendenz des endlich Seienden durch sich selbst" nennt. Die unsterbliche Geistseele des Menschen scheint Rahner "schrittweise" entstanden = evolviert (Hominisation 57) und Gott hätte entsprechend der Phylogenese die erste menschliche Seele dem Nachkommen einer Tiermutter gegeben. Er holt die von Aristoteles stammende scholastische Lehre der Sukzessivbeseelung hervor, um dies plausibel zu machen (Hominisation 79- 84) (Lebensrechtler wird es nicht freuen, dass so Frühabtreibung tendenziell legitimiert wird).

Der evangelikale Theologe Junker stuft in einer Übersichtarbeit über evolutionäre theologische Konzepte Rahners Theologie als "konsequent evolutionistische Sichtweise" ein. Solche Theologen "(plädieren) dafür, das Evolutionskonzept in jeder Hinsicht anzuerkennen und die biblische Botschaft entsprechend neu zu interpretieren. (…) Der Glaube (wird) in evolutionäre Termini übersetzt. Die Evolutionsfaktoren werden als voll ausreichend angesehen, um die Lebensvielfalt, den Menschen eingeschlossen, hervorzubringen" [9]

Konsequent deutet Rahner zentrale biblische Wahrheiten entweder evolutionär um oder leugnet sie:

"Nach der Evolutionslehre ist nur ein Polygenismus denkbar, wenn man nicht ein besonderes unmittelbares Eingreifen Gottes in den Evolutionsprozeß postulieren will. Die Frage nach einem Mono- oder Polygenismus der Menschheit ist theologisch relevant, denn die Zeugen des Neuen Testamentes stellen Jesus Christus, den Erlöser, in die eine von Adam herkommende Menschheitslinie (Monogenismus) und dem ersten Adam gegenüber (Röm 5,12ff). (…) Die (…) Enzyklika Humani generis von Pius XII. aus dem Jahre 1950 kritisiert die Polygenismus- Auffassung:  (…)

Anmerkungen
[1] Thomas Wittstadt, Diese kosmische Religion kennt keinen Erlöser, Theologisches, Jahrgang 33, Nr 8/9 S. 387- 404, Nr. 10 S. 461- 480, Nr. 12 S. 601- 614
[2] Elmar Anwander, Namhafte Naturwissenschaftler zum Verhältnis von Religion und Naturwissenschaft, Theologisches, Jahrgang 34, Nr. 1 S. 15- 30
[3] Manfred Schweiger, Monika Hirsch-Kaufmann, Biologen für Mediziner, Pharmazeuten und Chemiker, Stuttgart Thieme 1987, S. 224
[4] ein mutatis mutandis analoger Fall, dass naturwissenschaftliche Kriterien aus außernaturwissenschaftlichen Gründen nicht respektiert werden, ist die Arzneimittelsicherheit der "Pille": sie ist zwar nicht gerade giftig und Nebenwirkungen sind insgesamt selten, es sind aber so viele Fälle von Komplikationen und selbst Todesfällen bekannt bei Fehlen eines medizinischen Nutzens, dass jedes andere Medikament schon zehnmal vom Markt genommen wäre … die "Pille" aber nicht. Weil sie dem (erb-)sündigen Menschen hochwillkommen ist, um zu betreiben, was Paulus πpορνeιa Unzucht nennt.
[5] Karl Rahner, Die Christologie … , in: Schriften zur Theologie Band V, 183- 221
[6] Karl Rahner, Paul Overhage, Das Problem …, Quaestiones disputatae 12/ 13, Freiburg Breisgau 1961
[7] der Satz, dem ich dies entnehme, ist im Grunde aufgrund der vielen rahnereigenen Neologismen und der insuffizienten Syntax unverständlich, wie so viele Sätze Rahners. In der Psychiatrie habe ich viele Patienten mit manischen oder schizophrenen Psychosen gesehen, die vergleichbare Sprach- und Denkstörungen zeigten. Aber es ist bei Rahner eine Geisteskrankheit nicht so manifest wie in Nietzsches Schriften dessen zerebrale Syphilis.
[8] William F. Allman, Mammutjäger in der Metro, Wie das Erbe der Evolution unser Denken und Verhalten prägt, Heidelberg – Berlin Spektrum 21999, S. 197
[9] Reinhard Junker, Leben durch Sterben?, Studium Integrale, Neuhausen- Stuttgart 1994, S. 23 + 49-59.

Karl Rahner, SJ (1904–1984) was one of the most influential Catholic theologians of the twentieth century. Theologians often encounter him first through his trinitarian “rule,” which states that the “economic” Trinity is the “immanent” Trinity and the “immanent” Trinity is the “economic” Trinity. While many can recite the rule, few understand its significance. We endeavor to offer a comprehensive study of Rahner’s doctrine of trinitarian personality by tracing this thread through the doctrine of God, theological anthropology, Christology, and soteriology.

By understanding the hypostases of Son and Spirit as ad intra self-communications, Rahner formulates a means for the triune God to communicate himself to human beings, the divinely equipped recipient of his gift of self. When the eternal Son of God expresses himself concretely, he is expressed as a hypostatic union of divine and human natures. Through this hypostatic union Christ actualizes and consummates the relationship between God and man by becoming the climax of divine gift and its human acceptance in freedom. For Rahner, this divine self-communication elevates humanity to consummate life through the beatific vision.

In this study, we argue that Rahner’s formulation of trinitarian personality cannot sustain a fully trinitarian gift of self, because it is trinitarian in mode of delivery only—in manner, but not in matter. Therefore, it is not properly a divine gift of self. By
appealing to the twentieth-century Reformed theologian Cornelius Van Til (1895–1987), we propose a doctrine of perichoresis to ground a biblical-theological and systematic model of æonic image conformity as an alternative. The beatific vision (and glorification) ought to be construed in a covenantal context as an eschatological transformation, which recovers the threefold image of God bestowed upon man at creation and elevates him to an estate higher than that in which he was created. In contrast to Rahner’s theology of divine self-communication, the glorified man does not become incorporated ontologically or hypostatically into God. Rather, as believers are conformed to the image of Christ, they participate in his resurrection glory, manifesting more fully its ultimate source, the triune God himself.

A la hora de pensar la teología del último siglo, los aportes teológicos del teólogo alemán Karl Rahner son ineludibles a la hora de estudiar y hacer la teología. En particular su contribución en el tratado de trinidad, que  ha sido decisiva, particularmente a partir de la publicación de sus “Advertencias” al tratado. 
En general, según M. González, en todas las confesiones cristianas se está protagonizando “un proceso de renovación de los estudios trinitarios como no se conocía desde la alta edad media. Al punto que para encontrar otro momento de esta densidad, hay que remontarse a los siglos III y IV, época de oro del dogma trinitario.” Aquí se ubica el desarrollo teológico de Rahner , ya que, sus aportes constituyen, por una parte, un significativo “punto de inflexión”  en la renovación postconciliar de la doctrina sobre Dios.  Afirma también al respecto G. Zarazaga: “Su pensamiento influyó como ningún otro en el proceso de búsqueda y renovación de la teología trinitaria ocurrido en la segunda mitad del siglo XX”.
En el siguiente ensayo, se presentará en primer lugar una aproximación al método teológico de Rahner, seguido por las críticas a la teología trinitaria de su tiempo, continuando por una presentación del Grundaxión rahneriano y su sistematización, finalizando por una presentación de críticas a su pensamiento trinitario.

Entbindung des ‚mimetischen' Moments der Erzählung: Erfahrung, Ausdruck und sprachliche Gestaltung -exoterischer Charakter der Erzählung und esoterische Interpretationen -biblische Erzählung beerbt die Darstellungsform des Mythos und wendet sich zugleich gegen ihn -Weisheit erweitert die biblischen Literaturgattungen (Ägypten!), und zwar nicht nur inhaltlicher Art, sondern auch in der Darstellungsform (Aphorismus / Apophthegma) -Formen der Weisheit in der rabbinischen Literatur und bei den Kirchenvätern -Wissenschaft als überprüfbare, methodisch durchgebildete begriffliche Darstellung (diskursiv) -Wissenschaft erhält mit der Etablierung der Universitäten im Hochmittelalter ihren urbanen Ort -Wie Begriffe geschliffen werden: Probleme der diskursiven Darstellung.

What is a transcendental experience? Deliberations regarding Karl Rahner and Béla Weissmahr.

In dieser Arbeit wird die Weise der Beziehung zwischen der Fähigkeit des Menschen zur Erkenntnis alles Möglichen und dessen erst ermöglichendem Grund erforscht, mit dem Ziel eine allgemein gültige, erstpersönliche Möglichkeit der Rede von Gott darzustellen. Eine solche erstpersönliche Rede von Gott mit Allgemeinheitsanspruch kann daher nur durch Überlegungen der jedem Mensch innewohnenden Vernunft erfolgen. Deshalb sind die folgenden Überlegungen philosophischer  Art und im Bereich der Metaphysik, als erste Philosophie , einzuordnen. Denn mittels metaphysischer Überlegungen wird das Ganze der Wirk-lichkeit von einem Urgrund aus in den Blick genommen und auf einen ursächlichen Grund, der im Christentum „Gott“ genannt wird, verwiesen. Die Gewissheit der Vollendung allen metaphysischen Denkens und Fragens zeigt sich in der transzendentalen Erfahrung auf diesen ursächlichen Grund hin.

Rahner's Rule states that 'The "economic" Trinity is the "immanent" Trinity and the "immanent" Trinity is the "economic" Trinity.' 1 How are we to understand this odd tautology, and what led Rahner to coin it in the first place? Phan (2011) stresses the importance of placing the Rule within its historical context.

This first section on the convergency of God and mankind examines the possible connection from God to mankind and mankind to God beyond ‘theocentrism’ and ‘anthropocentrism’ in the dialogics of the theological turning point of the XX-XXI century. The starting point for this theological current leaves aside the ecclesiological priority and goes back to the ‘fundamentals’ of christian faith: God and the whole human experience, opening the ecclesial togetherness to its full ecumenical experience from the eucharistic key. A strong de-conceptualization of God’s mystery is needed, looking at secularisation and the radical prospective as de-positivisation of theology, assuming the ‘diasporisation’ of Church life today, and leaving evolutionary pan-christism as a hypothesis and going back to the historical priority in salvation towards the eschatological way out of Hope in the one history of mankind. Over against ‘sacred history’ and neo-apocalyptic re-foundations, a new start can be discerned in the ‘anonymous’ believer so as the initial steps of ‘liberation’ to be better known, letting the different ‘traditionalisms’ on their rocks and opening the way to a further explorability of the christian faith.
Transcendental anthropology -although- needs a method which could be ‘from word to language’.
Transcendental anthropology -although- needs a method which could be called ‘from word to language’, overcoming a ‘two-stores’ theology in a network connecting all ‘word-names’, from ‘naming-fixing’ to ‘anonymous-flexible’, reconsidering conventional missionnarity from the ecumenical ‘ut unum sint’ oriented towards interreligious togetherness, with ‘anonymous grace’ as authentically ‘transcendental’, involving christological re-prospection, remaining more existential than sapiential, not excluding an ‘anonymous Christ’ in full kenosis, and even ecclesiological rethinking… The human person is considered from its ‘freedom’ and reaches with his words-language Gods revelativity becoming auto-revelation in its keywords towards key-symbols… This is born from the overall relationality of Love in God’s ‘letting be’. Transcendentality is the link from the human person to God in the whole of creation and freedom is transcendentality in history… A creative rethinking of anthropology can be undertaken…

This paper analyzes Karl Rahner’s and Pierre Benoit’s theologies of divine authorship and the inspiration of Scripture in light of Vatican II’s Dei Verbum.  Rahner presents somewhat different theories in his early and late periods.  Yet in both phases, he argues that the Church primarily speaks in Scripture.  Benoit’s work involves a creative synthesis of Thomistic epistemology and historical exegesis, especially as practiced at the École biblique et archéologique française in Jerusalem in the first half of the 20th century.  Benoit argues for both divine and human authors of Scripture as non-competitive causes of the sacred text.  The key to his solution is found in his theory of speculative and practical judgment.

Carlos Schickendantz CENTRO TEOLÓGICO MANUEL LARRAÍN «Entiendes de exégesis menos de lo deseable». Son palabras que Rahner se aplica también a sí mismo y expresan su modestia, o más exactamente, la relativización de sí mismo de la que habla a menudo, su autocrítica, también su ironía 1 . Pero ellas expresan además un problema en la obra de Rahner: se trataría de un sistema especulativo con poco trabajo bíblico e histórico. Un análisis más o menos detallado, como el que afronta esta contribución, dejará a la luz que tal opinión está necesitada de matices.

Todo encuentro con el hombre concreto Jesús en su seguimiento siempre singular, que no es imitación, sino siempre llamada individual desde su vida concreta, en la participación del misterio de la vida de Jesús desde su nacimiento hasta su muerte es a la vez, siempre y en todas partes, consagración a su muerte y su resurrección.

Esta pequeña investigación procura, relacionando la perspectiva genética y sistemática, poner de relieve el valor de la teología de la gracia en la obra de Karl Rahner y destacar su significado para elaborar un mensaje de lo cristiano adecuado a la época. El desarrollo que Rahner recorrió en la elaboración de su teología de la gracia subraya su actualidad.

Después de haber recibido tantas laudationes, me siento un poco nervioso ahora que yo mismo debo tomar la palabra. Pero lo intentaré. En el programa de esta jornada el tema que voy a desarrollar fue titulado "Experiencias de un teólogo católico". Con esto no me refiero a experiencias personales e íntimas que pertenecen a una auténtica biografía y que nunca se escribirán. Tampoco me refiero en primera línea a experiencias eclesiales, político-eclesiales y clericales. No considero que dichas experiencias sean de mayor relevancia y, por lo tanto, hoy no me explayaré sobre ellas. Me refiero más bien a las experiencias como teólogo, o mejor dicho, a las experiencias de alguien a quien le fue asignada la tarea de ser teólogo, y que no está seguro si ha hecho justicia a la tarea que le fue encomendada. Esta duda no procede de un sentido general de la limitación humana, sino mucho más de la sobre exigencia que reside esencialmente en todo esfuerzo teológico, porque debe hablar de la incomprensibilidad de Dios. Si ahora hay que hablar de "experiencias", es imprescindible advertir desde el inicio que, aunque tratamos con afirmaciones teológicas que desean ser objetivas, no puede negarse la subjetividad en su elección, sino que hay que reconocerla francamente.

El teólogo jesuita Karl Rahner, después del Concilio Vaticano II, se convirtió en el paladín de la nouvelle théologie y en el princeps novorum theologorum, mediante la proclama del célebre giro antropológico trascendental. Para poder comprender adecuadamente a este teólogo de Freiburg, es menester analizarlo desde sus fundamentos filosóficos. Con el presente libro, Mn. Jaime Mercant Simó, haciendo un análisis pormenorizado de Geist in Welt (Espíritu en el mundo), demuestra cómo el doctor Rahner, mediante su Erkenntnismetaphysik (metafísica del conocimiento), tergiversa los principios de la metafísica y la gnoseología tomistas prácticamente en su totalidad, llevando el cogito cartesiano hasta sus últimas consecuencias, identificando en el hombre el ser, el conocer y el ser conocido. En definitiva, el autor demuestra que Rahner, a pesar de que se presente como auténtico intérprete de santo Tomás de Aquino, se ve influenciado, más bien, por el racionalismo de Kant, el idealismo de Hegel y el existencialismo de Heidegger.

Preface
"Origen died about 254, but his spirit lived on in theological discussion. . . Origen had been deeply opposed to Monarchianism, either in its 'modalist' form that Father, Son, and Spirit are mere names which do not correspond to any distinctions within the Godhead, or in its 'dynamic' form that Christ was a holy man and wise teacher filled to a unique degree with the Spirit of God."--Henry Chadwick, Dionysius of Alexandria..., (The Early Church) 

"The orthodox  had insisted that there is no first principle other than God the creator (Pantocrator), no coequal devil, no coeternal matter, but a single monarchia. The Monarchian critics of the Logos theology had two courses open to them. Either they could say that God who created the world was so incarnate in Jesus that there is no difference to be discerned between the Son and the Father; or they could say that Jesus was a man like other men. differentiated in being indwelt by the Spirit of God to an absolute and unique degree."--Henry Chadwick, The monarchian controversy (The Early Church)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Introduction by J. Zachhuber
Scholarly interest in patristic ideas about personhood has had a somewhat curious history. It is arguable that its point of origin was denial: theological heavy weights Karl Barth and Karl Rahner both argued, albeit in different ways, that Trinitarian faith  today would do well to dispose of the formula 'one God in three Persons' given its apparent  tritheistic overtones. This demand was not meant as a late correction to the language of late fourth-century Nicenism according to which the Trinity was one ousia in three hypostases.  Instead, the twentieth-century theologians claimed that 'three Persons' was unhelpful as a translation of Treis Hupostaseis. The Church Fathers, in other words, had never meant to confess a Godheadin “three Persons” in our own meaning of the term. Hypostases for them were 'modes of existence' and not 'independent centers of self-consciousness.

Rahner's Dictum
The ground-breaking treatment of the doctrine of the Trinity by one of the most important theologians of the century is here reprinted on the 30th anniversary of its original publication. In this treatise, Karl Rahner analyzes the place of the doctrine of the Trinity within Catholic theology and develops his own highly original and innovative reading of the doctrine, including his now-famous dictum.  

In a previous article I have commented that Rahner follows Didymus the Blind, the eminent Origenist Dean of the Catechetical School, who taught most Church fathers of his time including Gregory Naziansen and Jerome.  But the seer did not follow master Origen, he thought the Holy Trinity is in a fusing Ousia. John Philoponus elucidted in  "De trinitate," the Alexandrian Personhood theology of Dionysius the Great. [Files: 1-4]

Karl Rahner, SJ (1904 — 84) was a German Jesuit and theologian who, alongside Hans Urs von Balthasar, is one of the most influential Roman Catholic theologians of the 20th century. Before Vatican-II Council, Rahner joined Yves Congar, Henri de Lubac and Dominique Chenu, associated with the Nouvelle Théologie, elements of which had been criticized in the encyclical Humani Generis of Pope Pius XII. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

John Philoponus Doctrine of the Holy Trinity:
'Thus if people say that the divinities are of a different nature, their talk is pagan and Arian. if however, they say one (divinity) according to number and in one hypostasis, they become Sabillians. John Philoponus holds throughout that with his explanation he is in agreement with the fathers.Thus he says that Gregory was against three non-consubstantial and by nature alien ousiai in the Trinity, but not against three consubstantial substances."--Theresia Hainthaler

John Philoponus engagement in the Tritheist Dabate
The inspiring genius of John Philoponus, dictated to be involved in the late phase of the Tritheism debate, by his student, Athanasius, the grandson of Empress Theodora. Young Athanasius was an admirer of John Askotzanges, the founder of the sect. John Philoponus confessed that Father; Son and holy Spirit are three consubstantial divine persons. God's unity is in the ousia general substance. John holds throughout that with his thesis he is in agreement with the church fathers.

Philoponus ontological vision
More than two hundred years after the Nicene Council, another form of Tritheism was suspected in the writing of John Philoponus, who stressed the distinction between the Father, the Son, and the Spirit in "hypostatic co-existence," debating that there are three hypostases in the one common divine essence (ousia) of the Godhead. This was virtually read as Tritheism. John of Damascus, who is noted for his stress on the the co-inherence among the Godhead, supplemented this alleged tritheism by his renewed emphasis on the divine fusion (absolute unity).

Non est Natura sine Persona
"Philoponus lends to the Cappadocians a precise thesis on the existence of specific and generic universals, this thesis is philosophical in nature and is expressed in philosophical language. Species have existence (hyparxis) in individuals and don't have any being separate from individuals. The fact that Philoponus presents the Aristotelian thesis of the immanent existence of universals as being the position of the church is very telling as to the importance of logic in Christological discussions." -- Christophe  Erismann

Christophe  Erismann made it clear that Philoponus, tended to describe the crucial term ‘hypóstasis’ as meaning something like ‘primary substance’ in the sense of Aristotle's Categories, i.e. an individual organic being. The fragments of his treatise On the Trinity confirm this. Since hypóstasis is certainly not an accident of divinity, Philoponus argues, it must be the case that the three hypostáseis of the Trinity are three particular divine substances with distinct properties. It is thus reasonable to speak of the consubstantiality of the three Persons, for if there were only one divine substance, what sense would it make to speak of consubstantiality at all?

". . . in the Eastern church, tritheism was little more than a hostile label given to certain intellectuals who tried to make the mystery of the Trinity intelligible in philosophical language. Philoponus was one such intellectual who, again, resorted to Aristotelian terminology to clarify and settle the trinitarian dispute."-- C. Wildberg, Stanford E. P.

Rahner on Summa Theologiæ
Rahner says that there is a distinction introduced by Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologiæ. He is critical of what he describes as, "an unfortunate Thomistic distinction between treatises that first deal with God’s unity, essence, attributes and names, and then with the tri-personal God as such (i.e. processions, relations, persons, proper roles, missions). Rahner states that he wishes to link every dogmatic treatise, especially the mystery of our salvation, to the Trinity itself, in this way, rather than the Trinity existing in ‘splendid isolation’

Vincent Battaglia Concludes
Karl Rahner’s The Trinity reminds us that we are called to share in the life of God (cf. 2 Pet 1:4) both now in the life of the grace of the Spirit and the liberating truth of the Incarnate Word, and in the future, when we shall see Him as He really is (cf. 1 Jn 3:2). The mysterium Trinitatis is thus the mysterium salutis because the Father sent His Son to save us and His Spirit to divinise us. This connection between the Trinity and salvation is explicit when Rahner’s works on the doctrine of God, grace and the incarnation, explicitly linked by him in The Trinity, are considered in toto, and this interconnection is a theological commonplace today.

Rahner’s contribution reminds us that there is a single saving plan encompassing creation, redemption and eschatological plenitude, whose order and possibility is the work of the triune God. Despite some significant limitations, if The Trinity can help us know, love and praise the tri-personal God by considering what He does for us in Truth and Love, then this short work of Rahner has achieved much.

What is the impact on thinking lay Christians

Good Read Reviewers 
Please read more, comment or write  On "Good Read"
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/762915.The_Trinity

In light of Martin Heidegger’s contextualized influence upon them, John Macquarrie, Rudolf Bultmann, Paul Tillich, and Karl Rahner engage in theologies that, in their respective tasks and scopes, venture into existential theology, following Heideggerian pathmarks toward the primordiality of being on the way to unconcealment, or “aletheia.” By way of each pathmark, each existential theologian assumes a specific theological stance that utilizes a decidedly existential lens. While the former certainly grounds them fundamentally in a kind of theology, the latter, by way of Heideggerian influences, allows them to venture beyond any traditional theological framework with the use of philosophical suppositions and propositions. In an effort at explaining the relationship between humanity’s “being” and God’s “Being,” each existential theologian examines what it means to be human, not strictly in terms of theology, but as it is tied inextricably to an understanding of the philosophy of existence: the concept of what being is.

Karl Rahner ha sido seguramente el pensador que más ha influido en la teología católica postconciliar. Su abundante producción ha sido estudiada y comentada ampliamente por la teología contemporánea. Sin embargo, pocas veces se ha llevado a cabo una seria crítica acerca de los fundamentos filosóficos del jesuita alemán. Éste es, precisamente, el objetivo de estas páginas, una parte de un trabajo más amplio sobre la teoría del conocimiento de Rahner.

En 2012 se cumplen 50 años del inicio del Concilio Vaticano II, inaugurado por el Papa Juan XXIII el 11 de octubre de 1962. Es un dato reconocido el importante papel que desarrollaron muchos teólogos a lo largo de los diversos debates conciliares. Entre ellos destaca la figura de K. Rahner. Su principal contribución se dirigió a los asuntos eclesiológicos. Menos conocido es su aporte a los debates que, iniciados en octubre de 1962, conducirían, recién en 1965, a la aprobación de la Constitución Dei Verbum. Luego de una breve introducción, me detengo, en primer lugar, en el informe que Rahner preparó en noviembre de 1962 en contra del Esquema preparatorio, De fontibus revelationis. En un segundo momento, describo otro texto, el llamado "Esquema Rahner -Ratzinger", elaborado en la misma época, pensado como un texto alternativo al oficial. En tercer lugar, destaco algunas ideas centrales de una conferencia de Rahner de 1963, titulada "Escritura y Tradición". Finalmente, analizo el número noveno de Dei Verbum que, como se advertirá, muestra que las posiciones bíblico-sistemáticas de Rahner se direccionaban en el sentido de la llamada mayoría conciliar.

Tratándose de una interpretación teológica fundamental del concilio Vaticano II, consideramos oportuno hacer algunas observaciones introductorias al tratamiento del tema. Hablamos de interpretación fundamental, y con esto, entendemos una interpretación que no viene de fuera, sino que es sugerida por el mismo Concilio, de modo que en este caso esencia fundamental e interpretación fundamental indican la misma cosa. Presuponemos naturalmente el dato de hecho y la convicción de que este Concilio -aún con todas las casualidades históricas que acompañan a acontecimientos de este género-no ha sido un cúmulo arbitrario de episodios y decisiones singulares, sino que posee, en todos sus eventos singulares, una cohesión interior esencial que no se limita a mantener unidos a estos últimos por la peculiaridad jurídica formal de un concilio. Por otra parte tiene poca importancia si tal concepción fundamental del Concilio haya estado más o menos presente en gran medida, con claridad y con urgencia en la conciencia explícita de sus organizadores. Si ya el sentido y la esencia de ciertos eventos existencialmente importantes en la vida del individuo abrazan siempre algo más de lo que este objetiviza y busca explícitamente en la propia conciencia, esto se verifica tanto más en el caso de eventos importantes de la historia de la Iglesia, que se desenvuelven en medida específicamente única bajo la guía del Espíritu Santo. En cuanto a las intenciones explícitas de Juan XXIII acerca de la asamblea conciliar no sabemos mucho más que esto: que consideró razonable y oportuno convocar un concilio incluso después del "papalismo" del Vaticano I, y que quiso un concilio "pastoral"; con lo cual, sin embargo, no se ha dicho que, más allá de esto, no sea posible una concepción teológica más profunda y más amplia. Buscamos una interpretación teológica fundamental, porque -sin adentrarnos aquí en el problema de la relación entre teología e historia de la Iglesia-consideramos que esta última es de un tipo específicamente distinto de la historia secular y debe en el fondo describir precisamente la historia de la esencia de la Iglesia, esencia que, en una relación de recíproco condicionamiento, suministra el principio hermenéutico de la historia de la Iglesia y, en cuanto esencia en la historia, se manifiesta en ella.

RESUMEN: La consideración de la influencia que la espiritualidad y la teología de San Ignacio de Loyola tuvo sobre el quehacer te-ológico de Karl Rahner es una relación que los conocedores del teólogo jesuita alemán han visualizado en recientes investigacio-nes. Este artículo quiere indagar en esta relación desde la pers-pectiva de la Cristología de Rahner, en la cual encontramos elementos que surgen de lecturas y reflexiones que éste realizó de los Ejercicios Espirituales del fundador de su congregación. La cristología y mística rahneriana tienen la característica principal de comprenderse como históricas y encarnadas en la experiencia del creyente y por tanto de la Iglesia. Será desde esto último que se intentará, al finalizar el artículo, una reflexión en torno a los desafíos que una cristología así entendida le impone a la Iglesia, a la teología y a la pastoral actuales.


ABSTRACT: The consideration of the influence that the spiritual-ity and theology of Saint Ignatius of Loyola had on the theological work of Karl Rahner is a relationship that the experts in the German Jesuit theologian have visualized in recent investigations. This article intends to investigate this relationship from

Karl Rahner (1904-1984) ha iniziato la sua produzione scientifica con opere di carattere propriamente filosofico, a cominciare da Spirito nel mondo (Geist in Welt), che costituisce un tentativo di interpretare la gnoseologia tommasiana con le categorie del trascendentalismo kantiano. Ed è proprio con questa premessa che il teologo gesuita intraprese una radicale riforma della teologia cattolica in forza della quale essa dovrebbe, nell'interpreta-zione razionale del dogma, abbandonare definitivamente il metodo logico-metafisico (che è proprio del tomismo) e sostituirlo con il metodo fenomenologico-ermeneutico. La riforma metodologica di Rahner – che nel Novecento è stata recepita favorevolmente dalla maggior parte dei teologi cattolici – deriva innegabilmente da istanze più ideologiche che scientifiche, ma aveva bisogno di un'apparenza di incontrovertibilità, sia per quanto ri-guarda l'interpretazione della gnoseologia tommasiana che per quanto ri-guarda l'assunzione del falso dogma storicistico in forza del quale la filosofia oggi non potrebbe più mettere in discussione il soggettivismo trascenden-tale. Ciò spiega il grande impegno di Rahner nel presentare la sua nuova teologia sulla scorta di premesse filosofiche che sembrassero rigorosamente logiche, addirittura tomistiche, il che lo ha indotto a ricorrere a veri e propri sofismi esegetici, che questo saggio intende smontare confrontando anali-ticamente le argomentazioni di Rahner con i testi nei quali Tommaso d'Aquino tratta dei trascendentali dell'essere, delle facoltà cognitive del-l'uomo e dei procedimenti di ricerca della verità.
Questo lavoro di JAIME MERCANT SIMÓ, studioso majorchino, riproduce una parte della dissertazione con la quale egli ha ottenuto il dottorato di ricerca in Filosofia presso l'Uni-versitat Abat Oliba CEU (Barcellona) e che presto sarà pubblicata integralmente. La lin-gua del testo è lo spagnolo; in nota sono riportati passi originali di Karl Rahner (in tedesco) e di Tommaso d'Aquino (in latino).

Starting from Ingmar Bergman's "The Seventh Seal" we cover the boundaries of the ontologies of God, Humanity and Death. In the end is Death really the great empty void or is it something more than this. Does the incarnation and resurrection show us a different view of Death that changes it from the terminal to terminus. From ending space to liminal space.

This is the PDF-PowerPoint which I used for my exposition held on Saturday, 21st August 202 at the SOCIETAS ETHICA´S 57th ANNUAL CONFERENCE, 19-21 August 2021, Time of Crisis – Time of Hope ZEIT DER KRISE - ZEIT DER HOFFNUNG. The title of my lecture was: “Hope opens perspectives”.
Keywords: crisis, hope, transformation, plurality of meanings, subject, expectation, Moltmann, activity, Spinoza, passion, emotion, disposition, mind, New Creation, action, future

Any time or any occasion of crisis whatsoever represents a challenge for hope. In my paper, I would like to analyse some aspects of hope as a kind of antidote against the crisis and against the effects of crisis on the individual mind.
Throughout the history of thought, the concept of hope has known positive and negative judgments: Spinoza, for instance, does not give hope a positive evaluation: he states that ‘Hope is nothing else but an inconstant pleasure, arising from the image of something future or past, whereof we do not yet know the issue.’ - Ethics, III, Prop. XVIII, Note II -; he asserts that ‘Hope is an inconstant pleasure, arising from the idea of something future or past, whereof we to a certain extent doubt the issue.’ - Ethics, III, Definitions of the Emotions, XII -.
On closer inspection, we can see that the concept of hope is not a univocal one, and that hope can have, actually, many meanings. Spinoza’s criticism is directed against an interpretation of hope as an emotion, as an ephemeral condition of mind, so that his strategy corresponds to the project of mind’s emendation from the factors of instability. An alternative interpretation of hope can, on the contrary, show that hope represents a stable formation of the individual mind and, as a consequence, constitutes a factor of stable disposition of mind towards the external reality.
I shall propose an interpretation of hope as a disposition of mind which completely transforms the subject as regards his attitude towards history, events, and crisis moments. Thereto, I shall refer to Moltmann’s theology of hope: in Moltmann’s view, hope in Revelation and in God’s promise of a New Creation implies a radical modification of the subject. Hope in the New Creation entails a refusal of the present conditions of the world and promotes action in order that reality be modified in the form of the anticipation of the New Creation. The promised New Creation is the criterium of judgment in order that it can be observed what does not function in the present reality and what ought to be changed therein. Hence, hope is not an emotion, is not a passion; it is a mind disposition, an internal constitution of the subject immediately connected with a programme of transformation of the present.
Thus, for the individual, to have hope in the New Creation is to receive and possess a complete formation and a disposition of mind involving a general orientation in life.
Hope is not, therefore, for the individual, a temporary condition of mind, it is not an ephemeral state of the soul; hope is an overall outlook on life, reality, and history. Hope becomes the shape of mind itself of the individual, since it is, for the individual mind, the source of interpretation of the whole reality. The hoping subject knows that the dimension of the present is not an inescapable one. The present is only temporary: it does not represent the fullness of time. Hope is the attitude through and thanks to which life is expanded and enlarged both with the expectation of a different future and with the activity directed to the realisation of a new future. Thus, hope represents, for the individual mind, a form of liberation of the thought from the present, since hope is the awareness that the conditions of the present are not an inevitable tie for the individual; there will be an alternative reality; a new reality will be anticipated by the action of the individuals.
Through hope, the future becomes an autonomous dimension in comparison with the past and present: the future will not be the repetition of truths which have been already expressed or of orders of society which have been already established. Through the announcement of the New Creation, the believer receives an antidote against all manipulation strategies aiming to convince him that the fullness of time has already been reached and that no alternative reality is possible, to persuade him that reality is unmodifiable and that it must be accepted so as it is. Hope tells that the order of the present is not a destiny. Hope, therefore, opens and broadens perspectives.
References
Moltmann, Jürgen. Das Experiment Hoffnung. Einführungen. München, 1974
Moltmann, Jürgen. Das Kommen Gottes. Christliche Eschatologie. Gütersloh, 1995.
Moltmann, Jürgen. Ethik der Hoffnung. Gütersloh, 2010.
Moltmann, Jürgen. Gott in der Schöpfung. Ökologische Schöpfungslehre. München, 1985.
Moltmann, Jürgen. Theologie der Hoffnung. Untersuchungen zur Begründung und zu den Konsequenzen einer christlichen Eschatologie. München, 1977 [1964].
Moltmann, Jürgen. Theologie der Hoffnung, in Entwürfe der Theologie, herausgegeben von Johannes B. Bauer. Graz – Wien – Köln, 1985, pp. 235-258.
Moltmann, Jürgen. Trinität und Reich Gottes. Zur Gotteslehre. München, 1980.
Pieper, Josef. Über die Hoffnung. Olten, 1948.
Rahner, Karl. Zur Theologie der Hoffnung, in Schriften Zur Theologie. Band VIII. Einsiedeln – Zürich – Köln, 1967, pp. 561-579.
Robert Harvey Monro. The Chief Works of Benedict De Spinoza, Translated From The Latin, With An Introduction by R. H. M. Elwes, Vol. II, De Intellectus Emendatione – Ethica, Revised Edition, London 1901.

Karl Rahner SJ (1904-1984) regnes blandt de mest betydningsfulde og indflydelsesrige katolske teologer i den 20 årh. Hans teologiske tanker praegede en generation af katolske-og også protestantiske-teologer og fik indflydelse på udformningen af nogen af de mest centrale dokumenter under det Andet Vatikankoncil (1962-65). Hans tanker og meget omfangsrige skrifter er alle båret af hans saeregne teologiske grundtanke, menneskets transcendentale erfaring af Gud, og breder sig herfra ud over et vaeld af religionsfilosofiske, fundamentalteologiske, dogmatiske og pastoralteologiske emneområder. En så kortfattet introduktion til hans taenkning som denne må derfor nødvendigvis begraense sig til en fremstilling af Rahners grundlaeggende teologiske tanke og overlade det til den interesserede laeser selv at udforske hans righoldige skrifter om så diverse emner som ekklesiologi, mystik, bønsteologi, mariologi, økumeni, sakramentelaere og moralteologi. Først følger dog en kort biografisk introduktion af teologen Karl Rahner, hans virke og den tid, hvori det udfoldede sig, samt en oversigt over hans hovedvaerker.

1 "Pluralizacja, sekularyzacja, postsekularyzm", w: "Studia Sociologica" VI (2014) vol 1, 69-82. Pluralizacja, sekularyzacji, postsekularyzm Stanisław Obirek Uwagi wstępne Peter L. Berger, jeden z najważniejszych propagatorów teorii o nieuchronnej sekularyzacji, stał się też jednym z najbardziej wnikliwych jej krytyków. We wprowadzeniu do książki opublikowanej 1999 roku pod znamiennym tytułem Desekularyzacja świata. Powstająca religia i światowa polityka napisał wprost: "Założenie, że żyjemy w świecie zsekularyzowanym jest fałszywe" 1 . Stało się bowiem faktem, że religia nie tylko wróciła do łask, ale stała się przedmiotem namysłu różnych dziedzin humanistyki i już od dawna opuściła hermetyczne salony teologów i religioznawców. Wystarczy przywołać wydaną w 2009 roku książkę Powrót Boga z podtytułem Jak globalne ożywienie wiary zmienia świat 2 autorstwa Johna Micklethwaita i Adriana Wooldridge'a, redaktorów miesięcznika "The Economist". Czyżby religia stała się jeszcze jednym, dobrze sprzedającym się towarem? Raczej, zgodnie z ostatnimi wynikami europejskich i światowych badań wartości, należałoby mówić o nowych priorytetach i zmianie upodobań człowieka XXI wieku. Jak stwierdza Aleksandra Jasińska-Kania, która koordynowała te badania w Polsce: "Wyniki badań EVS i WVS w znacznej mierze potwierdzają przewidywania teorii modernizacji i przemian ponowoczesnych. Najwyższy stopień przyjmowania zarówno wartości świecko-racjonalnych, jak i postmaterialistyczno-indywidualistycznych, występuje w krajach o wysokim poziomie rozwoju społeczno-gospodarczego" 3 . Warto podkreślić, ze Jasińska-Kania nie mówi o sekularyzacji, ale o modernizacji i przemianach ponowoczesnych, których dookreślenie jest oddzielną sprawą. Najnowsze ustalenia Petera L. Bergera warto uzupełnić wynikami badań Grace Davie, która bodajże jako pierwsza zauważyła, że to zsekularyzowana Europa

Tras los 45 años de la clausura del Concilio Vaticano II (1965-2010)ofrezco una serie de notas personales de los diversos libros que han ido configurando mi reciente descubrimiento y disfrute del acontecimiento por antonomasia de la Iglesia católica en el siglo XX. Distingo entre padres, hijos y nietos del CVII. Para justificar esta distinción, argumento así: los Padres conciliares engendraron y dieron a luz el Concilio; los hijos formarían la generación siguiente (v.gr., los del 68); y los nietos somos los que conformamos la generación subsiguiente: no vivimos en carnes propias la preparación ni la celebración conciliar ni el pontificado de Pablo VI, sino que somos producto de todo ello. Hijos del posconcilio, todo es nuevo para nosotros: el sufrimiento del antes, la pasión del durante y parte de la vivencia del después, con la visión de las cosas casi medio siglo más tarde. Valga decir que ahora me siento muy a gusto entre todos los grandes teólogos conciliares (no digo ya conciliaristas o no) y que lo escrito aquí surge del respeto a todos ellos por su importante labor.

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 (1999) 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.

The “ventures” that Macquarrie, Bultmann, Tillich, and Rahner take in existential theology follows Heideggerian pathmarks towards the primordiality of being on the way to unconcealment, or άληθεια. By way of each “venture,” each existential theologian assumes a specific theological “stance” that utilizes an existential “lens”—while the former certainly grounds them fundamentally, the latter, by way of Heideggerian influences, allows them to “venture” beyond traditional theological framework with the use of philosophical propositions. In an effort at explaining the relationship between humanity and God, each existential theologian examines what it means to be human, not strictly in terms of theology, but as it is tied inextricably to an understanding of the philosophy of existence: the concept of "what being is."

Roman Catholic theologian Karl Rahner (1904-84) attempted to bridge the gap between the symbolic and existential poles in 20th-century Christian theology.  This presentation begins with the following hypothesis: in Rahner’s judgment mystical experience originates in the human capacity to see the symbolic quality of all created beings.  From this beginning, the presentation will try to explicate how Rahner distinguishes this capacity for “symbolic vision” from pre-Enlightenment or anti-modern definitions of mysticism that numenize the world in a way that is destructive to human freedom and the values of transcendental philosophy.  Such numenization may be sufficient for what Rahner defines as “natural religion,” but it remains inferior to human acceptance of God’s self-communication.  To experience such divine communication one must not turn to the categories of religion or nature.  Instead, to encounter God, one must examine human freedom and its decision to see reality as inherently symbolic.

Rahner charges that any criterion of mystical experience that is based on perceptible content cannot defend itself against the charge that this criterion is no guarantee of the divine origin of a vision.  Rahner judges that when all manner of human psychological and parapsychological faculties are brought to bear on a particular case, any mystical experience limited to the empirical level can be satisfactorily accounted for by solely human capabilities.  Basing the criterion of mystical experience on perceptible content confuses the material senses with the spiritual senses and introduces the idea that persons can, or even must, have a material and sensual knowledge of the divine.  This mystical empiricism is blasphemy of the highest order and must be rejected.

The difference between mystical empiricism and symbolic mystical vision, the genuine criterion of mystical experience, is that the latter moves beyond the categorical perceived content of mystical revelations and engages material creation at the transcendental level.  In Rahner’s own words, “[T]he world . . . . is seen correctly, therefore, not as “holy nature,” but as the material for the creative power of man.  Man experiences his creatureliness and encounters God in it, not so much in nature, in its stolid and unfeeling finiteness, but in himself and in the world only as known by him.”  Turning conventional understandings of mystical experience upside down, Rahner locates the criterion for genuine mysticism within the parameters of human freedom during the encounter between God and humanity.

Claiming that mysticism is nothing more than looking at the concrete world in a symbolic way could be understood as cheapening mysticism, as advocating a mystical hyperinflation.  In a way this is true, but it should be a welcome truth.  Just as Rahner tried to avoid an extrinsic understanding of grace in theology, he tried to avoid an extrinsic understanding of grace in mystical experience.  Rahner’s understanding of symbolic vision provides Christian theology with a compelling resource for reconciling the categories of freedom and theophany.