anonymous christ or christ before any of my words?

8/9/2019 Anonymous Christ or Christ Before Any of My Words?

1/11

Anonymous Christ… or Christ before any of my words? A conversation within Rahner and his God centred theology.

Bruno R. Zazo

Rahner is completely wrong, unless… he is completely right. Rahner is an absolute stranger … until he

becomes intensely familiar . During the term I have been reading Rahner I have been highlycritical –and quickly dismissive 1- with him, as many asects o! his theology seemed "erred# and"cynical# to me.

$his is the account o! both my initial misunderstanding on Rahner and the !aith!ul search!or an understanding o! his theology and his erson, with the dialogue it has originated. %sa &hristian scholar with a 'esuit bac(ground, !or a dialogue with Rahner I should have inmind the )iritual *+ercises o! Ignatius o! oyola, which read on its resuosition

/In order that both he who is giving the )iritual *+ercises, 02 let it be resuosed that everygood &hristian is to be more ready to save his neighbor#s roosition than to condemn it. I! hecannot save it, let him in3uire how he means it4 and i! he means it badly, let him correct him with

charity. 025

$here!ore, Rahner could be 'esuitically read, i.e. initially critically, aoretically 64 and, !inally,symathetically 7, or, in $homistic "dialectics#, we could con!ront his main roositionsunder a videtur quod sed contra methodology 8 this is what I will do to address the mainissues that rovo(ed me ma9or unrest during the study.

In this aer I will !ocus mainly on one toic, the very !irst one God seen 9ust as theincomrehensible Being roduced by my inner longings, and the metaphysical andepistemological unrest that this rovo(es. $wo other ma9or asects such as Christ as a meresymbolic result o! my relation with that ine!!able :od 0which rovo(es anthropological

unrest2 and grace , conceived 9ust as the castone demanded by my nature to culminate itsarti!icial ro9ect 0which roduces ethical unrest2 will be mentioned as a corollary o! the !irst.

%s a conclusion o! this study I end with the conviction that Rahner#s theology could beconceived as a "raying theology#, what ma(es it di!!icult to be understood.

V ID!"R #"$D … R A%&R '( G$D I( )"(! A& *I(!+$,$GICA, -CR"!C%'…

%s a starting oint, I managed to agree with Rahner on only one toic to ma(e theology isrecisely to sea( about :od.; %nd I too( this as the starting oint o! my investigationBut immediately the !irst motive o! unrest, the !irst theological "aoria#, arose 9ust with

Rahner#s arado+ical treatment o! the 3uestion o! :od, "the ine!!able#, through Worte ins

1 As per KILBY, Karen, Karl Rahner: theology and philosophy, Routledge, New York, 2004, p. 1.2 IGNATIUS OF LOYOLA, The Spiritual Exercises, P.J. KENEDY & SONS, published as pdf documentby ixtmedia.com.3 Assuming that he ‘meant badly’ all the issues that provoked unrest within the Church; therefore endingin the distrastrous and anguishing ‘anonymous Christ’ that some have been unable to overcome.4 Revisiting the same issues but under a hopeful installation: a Rahnerian reading, an address of Rahner from Rahner; a reading that flows into a subtle and magnificent ‘Christ before any of my words’, a Christthat could, perfectly, be the one pointed to by Rahner throughout his philosophical and theological works.5 Against the view of McCARTHY, Robert C., A critical examination of the theology of Karl Rahner,

S.J., Carthay Ventures, Texas, 2001, p. 13, who opposes Aquinas’s ‘open’ theology to Rahner’s, I wouldargue that Rahner’s theology is also open, but in the openness of a theologian of the Twentieth Century.6 RAHNER, Karl, María, Madre del Señor (Maria, Mutter des Herrn), Herder, Barcelona, 2012, p. 25.


2/11

1

chweigen 0roughly translated into *nglish as !ncounters with silence


3/11

2

ob9ective, universal essential (nowledge into intimate, e+istentialA intimate (nowledge 0yes,!orgetting the senses, as traditional $homists1 allege, but that is not the 3uestion2 as indenken we would look at the universal essence as e%isting in the individual thing .

%nd this !acilitates a smooth and illicit transition !rom a "transcending 0oerative2

condition# in the sub9ect that in !act transcends, to a /transcendental condition of the possibility ofe%perience 54 that is, we would have surretitiously moved !rom the (nowing sub9ect to hisoerations 0the sub9ect in act o! (nowing24 and, !rom his oerations, to the essence o! theoeration o! (nowledge itsel!, /EthatF is precisely EthatF transcendental e%perience 5.6 is wouldaear as an un9usti!ied 9um !rom the "e+istential-individual# realm into the "e+istential-universal# dimension, having crossed be!ore through the areas o! both "individual(nowledge# and "universal (nowledge#... Is this legitimate> r instead, are we inventing a:od because we always loo( beyond beings toward Being>

…(D C$&!RA … R A%&R '( *RI(!I& !%$,$GI( +AD $&, $/ $& 0$RD1 2G$D3…

owever, being Rahner a $homist, it would have been very odd o! him to have enteredinto the shadow lands o! intuitionism, no matter i! it is 9ust "$homistic# intuitionism. nthe contrary, he could be laced –against the habitual criticism addressed to him- as aromoter o! /thin(ing realism5, as his (nowledge theory saves the !undamental reality it has to save not only that o! the ob9ect 0he is de!initely not an anonymous %nselmian7 2, butmostly the who who thin(s, as it is actually a concrete "who# who thin(s "something# to beurgently saved a!ter Descartes 0and where Gant succumbed2.

Hrom the sub9ect to the ob9ect unless we abandon the tyrannical redominance o! "secular#(nowledge8, we will not rogress in our theological investigation. $his is e+ressed by one

word analogy . @e are actually founded on *ystery, as this mystery sustains and attract us, and analogyis a proper way of e%istence .; $here!ore, / +ll the theological statements, although in a very diversemanner and grade, are analogical.5


4/11

3

should conclude now that /talking about faith, only a word can be said2 the word of the supreme God,of the three)times saint God, ineffably mysterious #…$ and within predication and theology there is no place

for another word. "t could also be thought that all the rest should stay under a profound silence, despitebeing worth of compliments #…$.5? $his word, this theology, would be 9ust ure rayerthin(ing :od, e+laining :od, saying ":od# $here!ore and only analogically understood,

the ste !rom the logical to the ontological, 9usti!ied in the e+istential, is legitimate, againstBarth.6A

$he !irst theological aoria, that o! the imossibility o! theology as the discourse on theine!!able :od, would have been solved by Rahner#s !irst-stage theology, a theology that

would be a one-word divine discourse 0where fides qua and fides quae coincide2, a discoursethat would re3uire, !rom man#s 0hearer o! the word2 side, 9ust a listening. It seemed to turntowards a /metaphysical prison 561 but actually the ob9ect o! our (nowledge has mysticallyrescued us6 and once this haens the ad9ustment o! the ob9ect o! (nowledge with itscausa finalis 0and reason as the arehension o! reality in its connection 66 2 is absolute truthis continuously shining, dwelling in us as reciients, an unlimited recetivity 67 that together

with the desire !or the whole o! reality constitute transcendentality or sirit, a power thatreaches out beyond the world and knows the metaphysical 68, in unity of all man(s cognitive powers .6; In aro!ound e+istential 0and analogical, with the e+erience o! both limits6


5/11

4

!ormulation /6 "nfinite God, you have actually willed to speak such a word to me7 #…$ 4ou have cometo me in a human word. or 4ou, the "nfinite, are the God of 6ur 8ord 9esus Christ.57

$his, "transcendental# 0abstract2, almost hermeneutical76 &hrist, would be another conditiono! ossibility o! my thin(ing, as /it makes no difference to the truth of statement and my acceptance of

it, whether the truth is presented to me by an encounter with the thing itself or by a communication fromanother.577 Hurther into this argument, he is incessantly and imersonally re!erred as /the @ord o! :od578, the reality we believe or the reality we mean when we profess our faith , or, worseindeed, what resulted a!ter the Word of God became man

Desite the !rustration this &hrist might roduce, again within obscurity beats a shininglight, the (ey to untie the snare o! the second aoria and, indeed, the loc( that, once oen,

would enable the develoment o! the rest o! the theology o! Rahner. It is recisely on this&hrist that Rahner builds the whole building o! his "anthroocentric# theology, although thecentre o! this theology will not be &hrist.

…(D C$&!RA … C%RI(! I( -!%' + A& A&D (I&C %I+!%$,$G %A( !$ 5 A &!%R$*$,$GICA,…

@e "solved# the !irst aoria with the word o! :od with an e+ercise o! theology that isactually the in!inite utterance o! the word ":od#, by :od himsel!. It would logically seemthat, i! we are to move !urther into theology, the words to be ronounced now should behuman words it should be the turn o! man now. arado+ically, again, it is not mystery canbe attained, it is not anonymous4 Jystery can be said, but not by any o! my words.

In !act it is the word ":od# what genealogically 0and symbolically2 contains, in itself , amotion that, as a big bang , !ormally causes all the theological realities that sustain the rest o!

the theological discourse and originates some additional words, some theological wordsthat /or theology and faith it does not e%ist 1ust something like a God and, close to :im, all theconceivable reality, but it does e%ist only the only God, incomprehensible, three times saint and worth ofadoration #…$ ;ut, having said that, there e%ist a theology of man as such, a profession of faith thate%presses something about man itself, not in parallel to the profession of faith into the only eternal God, butincluded within this profession of faith< an this is because God :imself, within :is =rinitarian life, within:is unfathomable glory, within :is eternal life has assumed us within :is very personal life .57;

ence the "haening# o! the story is still head3uartered in :od God has not given us only a finite thing, created from nothing, but, further to all creation, he has given himself to us. :e himself in hisWord has become man .7


6/11

5

%nd although this "second# @ord might seem very relevant to us , and we can be astonishedby this miraculous event, it is indeed esecially relevant in another mysterious andtremendous sense this is relevant, esecially, !or :od, as "!rom then onwards# e is notonly :od but, also, man a man. $his is what imlies that, as (nowledge !ollows being, !romthen onwards we must recognise that we cannot do theology not doing, at the same time,

anthropology .8A

%ny theology so insolent as to go !urther than the word ":od# will need toa!!irm the Incarnation o! :od and conclude in Jystery4 as a conse3uence, it will have to bea "divine# anthroology 81.

$here!ore, and avoiding any notion o! tailored-made 0or anti-&atholic8, indeed2 man-centred86 theology, Rahner#s "second-stage# theology 0the theology that dared to go !urtherthan the word ":od#, into the "@ord o! :od#2 is still !ully rooted within :od imsel!.Rahner#s second aoria is solved, dissolved, again, in :od Rahner is continuously doing a:od-centred theology and &hrist, the @ord o! :od, is not any word, is not an anonymouserson or, worse indeed, a virtual construct, but the @ord be!ore any o! the words thatmight be uttered by us. 87

C$R$,,AR 61 V ID!"R #"$D … /$R R A%&R GRAC I( $0D !$ $"R & A!"R7 I( A,RAD -I&' "(…

@hen :od assumes the @orld in himsel! 88, :od "oens# the man to receive :od, and it isnot clear what is stronger i! the grace o! :od or the will o! man. Is :od, through man, theone who ma(es the accetation o! is grace> 8;

I have read8


7/11

6

supernatural e%istential is in everybody ;6 through an easy e%perience of loving union with theuniverse ;7, a natural grace would be everywhere 0both in any situation and in any doctrine2 ;8 and the anonymous &hristian would be the believer in a generic, anonymous &hrist, withno need to ro!ess any secial name 0against the reeated teachings o! the :osels2.

$his way, an in an aarently !i+ation with )alvation 0once &hrist is not real and :od is too!ar2, the ath to heaven would be !ran(, as grace is not added to nature, because nature would not be in need o! anything else than a sel!-transcending e!!ort to the In!inite that,!or our own tran3uillity, has haened within the event o! the continuous sel!-communication o! :od /the incarnation is not #…$ the trigger for God(s becoming gracious to us, butthe peak of God(s being gracious to us 5.;; istorical Redemtion, with the contradictory(enosis;


8/11

7

initiated by a goal that remains beyond our control


9/11

8

central a+is o! his theology, Jystery, unless one lives within Jystery, as he actuallydid. Jystery illuminates around with its tremendous light, but 9ust sub9ect to theuni3ue condition o! maintaining itsel! a dee and intimate obscurity.

ה

. $he turnaround o! the inner obscurity o! mystery into theological clarity is the

imossible necessary –/#…$ surely he has taught us one thing2 that everywhere and ineverything we can and must seek out that unutterable mystery which disposes over us 5?7- o! anytheology that wants to "have# :od as its centre, as Rahner#s has, and secially !or a

pastoral AB theology ?;, that has to deal with mystery ? I would say that his ublic, as mysel!, was notreared !or him yet 0as an avant-garde theologian2, or anymore 0as the last !aith!ultheologian2> But Rahner did not stay "silent#??, as a mystic4 he re!erred to tal(.

$hose who needed him most, are actually against him, as he seems systematicallyaoretic and not healing. $here is his wor(, waiting to be listened to. is is theultimate resonsibility.

.ח I would li(e to !inish with the Rahner#s words addressed to his brothers the 'esuitsin 1?


10/11

9

5I5,I$GRA*%

8arl Rahner's sourcesR %L*R , Garl, entido teolgico de la muerte , erder, Barcelona, 1?;8.R %L*R , Garl, :ominisation. =he evolutionary origin of man as a theological problem , Burns M ates, ondon, 1?;8.R %L*R , Garl, piritual e%ercises in the World , )heed and @ard, ondon, 1?;;.

R %L*R , Garl, pirit in the World , )heed and @ard, ondon, 1?;=.R %L*R , Garl, Dature and grace , )heed and @ard )tagboo(s, ondon, 1?;=.R %L*R , Garl, =heological "nvestigations , Darton, ongman M $odd, ondon, 1?


11/11

10

*LL%L, Richard, "$he theology o! Garl Rahner an alternative to the Ressourcement>#, in J PRR%N , aul D.and HNLL, :abriel, Ressourcement. + *ovement for Renewal in =wentieth)Century Catholic =heology , P+!ord, A17.

:%L, Ian, "@as Garl Rahner an anonymous %nselmian>#, in Durham medieval and renaissancemonograhs and essays, Durham, A1.

J %&%D, %ntonio, roverbios y &antares, Revista de ccidente, Jadrid, 1?6.

J %RJIL, Declan, and IL*), Jary 0eds.2, =he Cambridge Companion to Farl Rahner , &ambridge Pniversityress, &ambridge, AA8.J %R$WL : %R&W%-%V), 'osX uis, !l >e%istencialL sobrenatural. Clave interpretativa de la antropoteologa de Farl

Rahner , )antandreu *ditor, Barcelona, 1??6.J %R$WL*Z, *nri3ue, "Realismo ensante. a meta!Ysica del conocimiento en Hrancisco &anals#, %nuario

!ilos!ico, QIIIU6 0A1A2, . 7

anonymous christ or christ before any of my words?

Documents