IPS In Action
Where do your passions meet the needs of the world?
  • Home
  • IPS Programs
  • About IPS
  • Home
  • IPS Programs
  • About IPS
  • Home
  • /
  • Uncategorized

Rahner In Review

by Ryan Hoffman

Introduction

Karl Rahner was without doubt one of the most influential contemporary theologians in Catholicism. Karen Kilby writes of Rahner:

In the 1950s he was on the margins, his orthodoxy questioned, his work censored; in the 1960s he suddenly was at the centre of things, a theological expert at the Second Vatican Council, and, in almost all accounts but his own, one of the shaping influences upon it (p. xv).[1]

The set of essays contained here seeks to illuminate these ‘shaping influences’ by treating Rahner’s theology of the human person and Jesus Christ. It will not be an exhaustive treatment of such topics; I acknowledge more could be said about Rahner’s theology, the connections he makes and the conclusions he draws. I know, too, that the implications of his work have been immense, informing ecclesiology, Trinity, Grace, and beyond. Even so, as a student of Rahner, I will surface my own syntheses of these key Rahner constructs and discuss their relevance today. In doing so, following Rahner’s lead, I will use predominately masculine language. I intend no disrespect to women; I use his language for clarity’s sake. Rahner, if he were writing today, would likely utilize more inclusive language, a move I support.

Rahner in Review: Christian Anthropology

Karl Rahner’s approach to the question of what it means to be human is foundational in his theology. How are we to understand human potential? Where, and in what form, does the divine dialogue with humanity? It is no accident that Rahner starts with the human and traces other theological constructs (e.g., God) from this starting point. Understanding Rahner’s Christian Anthropology is essential in theologizing about his concepts of God, Christ, Trinity, and more. As such, I start here too.

Rahner aptly discusses the human person in a chapter entitled The Hearer of the Message.[2] Humans, in their capacity as subjects, whether conscious or not, hear something calling themselves beyond themselves. The essence of being human, Rahner asserts, rests in humans’ transcendence. Rahner writes that “man raises analytical questions about himself and opens himself to the unlimited horizons of such questioning”[3] – this very questing, reaching out, restlessness and energy being man’s attempt to transcend himself. Karen Kilby notes that this transcendence, rooted in our personhood, is constitutive of who we are and exists from our inception. We are born, whether we understand it or not, already related to God.[4] Our trajectory, our dynamism, from the beginning, is pointed towards God. It is as if there is a piece of God already nestled within us, inviting us to come home to ourselves so that we may flourish in God.

Furthermore, though pointed towards God, humans are free subjects. Rahner describes this sentiment in saying, “We can only say, then, that because and insofar as I experience myself as person and as subject, I also experience myself as free…” (p. 35). Greater freedom is a derivative of our finiteness and dependence on God. The more dependent on God we become the more liberating we feel; dependence on God and humanity’s freedom are in direct proportion to each other. Spiritually speaking, an encounter with God, and humans’ complete surrender to the divine, allows us to experience greater freedom and peace. To be sure, this is a paradox of human reality, a reality which claims the more we trust in God the more we are able to self-surrender and self-actualize in God.

The above treatment of human subjectivity, transcendence, and freedom lays claims on us as Christians. Part of what it means to be Christian is taking our personhood, our creatureliness, seriously. This departs from more scholastic (traditional) understandings of humans as depraved, inherently inadequate, unworthy. Rahner flips this on its head, advancing a Christian Anthropology that not only affirms the human condition but alleges its inherent divinity and goodness. We are, then, based on our ontological goodness and transcendental access to the divine, asked to make decisions for or against God – and thus for or against ourselves. This fundamental option, marked by our cumulative choices and actions, invests in God’s reign or disparages it. Taking our humanity seriously, given the context laid out above, means spending time reflecting on who we are and discerning our calling, praying alone and in community, making intelligible our yearnings and desires, and the like. We are not only subjects, but agents and stewards of a shared world.

Moreover, humans do not exist in a vacuum. Rather, as Rahner points out, there is a historicity to our existence. Otto Hentz writes of this when saying, “God creates the human spirit as transcendence in history” (p. 111).[5] We are socially, culturally, ideologically, religiously, and even temporally and spatially located. This ‘uniqueness,’ or ‘specificity,’ lays claims on Christians, too. The context in which we live presents certain challenges and joys. Rahner highlights historicity by saying:

Historicity means that characteristic and fundamental determination of man which he is placed in time precisely as a free subject, and through which a unique world is at his disposal, a world which he must create and suffer in freedom, and for which in both instances he must take responsibility… it is in historicity that the subject must work out his salvation by finding it there as offered to him and accepting it (p. 41).[6]

Instead of shying away from modern cultures and worldviews, Rahner implores Christians to critically assess and examine the signs of the times. What unique gifts and talents, individually and collectively, are being called forth? What perspectives and wisdom, prophetic or otherwise, are taking root? Rahner reminds us we must take responsibility for what we do in the here and now. God’s in-breaking is not only an eschatological hope, but a present-day reality, based, in-part, by human self-actualizing (realization) and potentiality.[7] As is customary in all of Rahner’s writings, we are asked to look at a broad horizon, a salvation history connected to, constitutive of, human history. We must acknowledge God active in all times, in all people, in a myriad of ways. This begins by knowing ourselves (humanity) as ‘wired for God,’ part of a supernatural existential in which we are offered, and asked to accept, God’s very self.

Rahner in Review: Jesus Christ

Our notion of Christ only makes sense in and through our understanding of what it means to be human. Perhaps, rather, our understanding of humanity takes place in reflecting on Jesus the Christ. Whatever the case, in Rahner’s theology these constructs are tightly linked, there exists interplay between the essential Jesus and who we are as humans. Rahner makes this point when saying “a Christology cannot be developed without repeatedly bringing in considerations from transcendental anthropology” (p. 213).[8] Otto Hentz affirms this significance:

In sum, to express and appreciate anew the meaning of Christ we need an understanding of the God-man which is based on a reflective appreciation for what it means to be a human being… an approach to Christology through anthropology is one of Karl Rahner’s major contributions to contemporary theology (p. 110).[9]

Kilby repeats this Rahnarian approach by describing Christ as “a radicalization of all of us” (p. 20).[10] It is not that we are Christ, but that we can be Christ-like. It is not as if Christ was substantially different from who we are as humans. There is overlap in Christ’s very self and our own being. We share a humanity positioned toward God. The difference, therefore, is not in kind but degree. Kilby describes this dynamic yet another way, articulating that Jesus “is what the rest of us are, only more so” (p. 16). The difference lies in the fact that Jesus is the prototype, perfect believer, the supreme integration and unity of humanity’s capability and potential divinity in God. Though Jesus possesses hypostatic union, something we cannot say of ourselves, we embody and respond to God’s Grace, something that reaches its climax in Jesus.

God chose, through God’s logos, to express God’s self in the form of Jesus. Jesus as man touches humanity on its terms – in its time and place. As such, when we say God became man and took on human form in flesh, we mean everything this encompasses.

Jesus is truly man, he has absolutely everything which belongs to a man, including a finite subjectivity in which the world becomes conscious in its own unique, historically conditioned and finite way, and a subjectivity which has a radical immediacy to God in and through God’s self-communication in grace, just as it is also present in us in the depths of our existence (p. 196).[11]

We understand God acting here in a double gratuitous manner, evoking creation and then giving himself to that creation in Grace through Jesus (incarnation). The tangible and explicit gift of Jesus makes God’s giving of himself in love “absolute and irrevocable” (p. 193).[12] Creation and incarnation, as Rahner points out, is part of one process by which God bestows God’s self in the world and shows it complete and radical love. Humanity, then, is the recipient of God’s self-communication through our transcendental experience and in and through Jesus as Christ as offer. Jesus is part of a process by which God gives us our authentic self through which we also receive God’s own self.

The preceding discussion of Christ has appraised a transcendental Christology. There is much to be said, too, of the historical Jesus. This approach to Christology examines the life of Jesus the man as we know him through critical-historical scripture exegesis. Peter Schineller, writing about an ascending Christology, offers that the historical approach “means following and even reenacting the path and process by which the disciples came to believe in Jesus as Christ” (p. 94).[13] Schineller, paraphrasing Rahner’s analysis of the historical Jesus, declares we know this of Jesus of Nazareth:

Jesus, born a Jew, took part in the religious life and culture of Palestine. This involved worship at the temple and synagogue, familiarity with Jewish laws and customs, celebrations of feasts and praying the scriptures. Within this tradition, Jesus intended to be a religious reformer rather than a radical religious revolutionary (p. 95).[14]

To this end, a reflection on the historical Jesus revolves around our encounter with Jesus’ birth, life and death. It must involve not only a rational approach to who Christ is and his relationship to God and humanity, but an affective, experiential methodology by which we invite Jesus to be a friend and mentor. It is clear from scriptures that those who experienced Jesus had, as Rahner notes, a “radical conversion or metanoia” that was “inseparably connected with his person” (p. 251-2).[15] Followers were able to relate to Jesus in ways new to them. He seemed to inspire goodness and promote wholeness. People intuitively knew Jesus to be a unity of flesh and spirit, matter and embodiment. Jesus’ essence, composed of the intersection of humanity and divinity, touched people deeply. His teachings and healings transformed people so much so that people began to follow and hope in him as messiah and eschatological prophet. Jesus was a man who moved people and communities and in which they encountered someone radically different yet completely faithful.

Moreover, Jesus’ historical reality challenged the structures and institutions of his time. Rahner records this sense in saying that Jesus:

Fought against legalism in order to move beyond a mere ethic of pious sentiments, and beyond a justification by works which was supposed to give man security against God… he was someone who saw himself in radical solidarity with social and religious outcasts… his mission was bringing him into mortal conflict with the religious and political society (p. 248).[16]

The ministry of Jesus, his mission and function, was to bring about the Kingdom of God. This reign was to include, perhaps primarily include, the poor and hurt, wounded and homeless, the marginal and hated. It is this type of world Jesus gave voice to, hoped to usher in, instill in those he encountered. It is this vision of the reign of God which gave rise to and sustained a movement. It was this very movement, however, that became dangerous for the elite and powerful. The Jesus worldview – gaining traction, credibility, and authenticity – undermined traditional power structures and sought to cultivate, instead, a society built on relationality, marked by, above all else, love of God and love of neighbor.

Rahner in Review: Shaping Influences

I began this paper by citing Karen Kilby’s assertion that Rahner had shaping influences on Catholicism. In this final section of the paper, I lay out what I believe to be the most exceptional of these influences. Given today’s historical milieu, how might Rahner be relevant? What are we to take away from this analysis and how it informs modern society? Finally, in what ways are Rahner’s theological constructs in dialogue with present reality? It is in these questions that we are able to unlock Rahner for today, unpacking pragmatic and pastoral implications.

First, as human consciousness evolves and we search for more expansive understandings of our world, we must, also, re-examine, re-envision, and re-appropriate our faith and religious beliefs (perhaps religious structures and institutions as well). In many instances Rahner re-interpreted traditional scholastic teachings into a more modern, digestible, accessible form. Rahner’s theologizing understood the need to touch lives, inform practical living, and be a part of the fabric of human yearning and growing. It is my contention that Rahner saw in traditional Catholicism outdated tenants and anti-modern tendencies. For Catholicism to be relevant, for it to continue to harvest vibrant faith communities and touch people interiorly, it had to undergo a re-working of what it means to not only understand religious concepts, but how to live out and embody the truth of such teachings. Ultimately, no longer could God and Jesus be qualitatively different, or radically apart from, who we are as human beings.

To this end, Rahner’s theology of the human person is one considerable area, perhaps the primary area, which instructs the rest of his theology and implicates Christians in a much more radical way. First off, Rahner’s theology allows us, even implores us, to take experience seriously. Like sacred scriptures and church teachings, we are to carefully discern the consolations and desolations of our lives, seek to understand and acknowledge our divinity and woundedness, face honestly our gifts and talents; mainly, to explore our rich, and to be sure, complex, humanity in order to find the God ‘still-point’ within calling us to greater wholeness and union. It is in and through our categorical experiences, revelation, and freedom that we come to greater awareness of and dependence on our transcendental selves. Again, what it means to ‘find God’ is not located in a wholly different realm or substance; rather, is located in the innermost dimension of who we are as people, giving voice to our truest desires and most self-actualized existence.

Moreover, humanity, with all of nature, co-creates and co-affirms life in God. We are given, as pure offer, in the very texture of our humanness, unmerited and unearned love. As such, we begin not depraved of and disconnected from God. Humans are not degenerates or lascivious beings; we are inherently good. Rahner’s most profound contribution to Christianity is this understanding of the human person and its relationship to the divine. It is a starting point which threads that which is God and that which is human very closely together. This is the major pivot Rahner constructs, moving away from a traditionalist scholastic understanding of the cosmos ontologically barren of Grace to creation infused, from the very beginning, as the condition of the possibility of human existence, with God’s Grace. The modified arrangement raises up divinity and humanity.

Finally, building on top of what has already been explored here, is the matter of access to a Christian God. We have approached this material from both an anthropological and Christological perspective; our access to God is constitutive of who we are and the person and symbol of Jesus. In today’s discourse, it is vitally important to keep the significance of this at the center of credible theology. While parishes and congregations attempt to hold up salient values and theologies, and standard operating procedures and rituals, what is most important is not found in rigid, uncompromising doctrines but in deep thinking about what it means to be true to our authentic individuality while also, perhaps because of our inner self, being in solidarity with all of humanity. Who we are reveals what we do. What we do discloses who we are. Our sense of creatureliness is forever beholden to the one (Jesus) who most embodies, and at the same time, extends who and what we are.

Conclusion

Rahner was able to look at Catholic tradition and re-formulate what it meant. He was able to restore and sustain a fresh look at dated doctrines and traditional conclusions. Ironically, Rahner’s own words about Jesus exemplify what he was able to do as a theologian. Describing the totality of Jesus’ ministry, Rahner writes that, “Jesus… proclaimed nothing really new, but only proclaimed the old anew, although in a prophetic and radical way” (p. 253).[17] The same I believe is true of Rahner. While his thinking did not produce original inventions, it did suggest and solidify ways of thinking not previously allowed or formally accepted until his daring attempts. Rahner’s theology re-arranged the furniture of Catholic systematics: he suggested different emphases, shaded and illuminated different parts, spotlighted and accentuated varying pieces of the whole, and refined and suggested different hermeneutical accents. In creatively balancing the tension between himself, his religious tradition, and his scholarly gifts and calling, Rahner epitomizes what is asked of many of us today, that is, living a life renewing our humanity while re-imagining and building up authentic and faithful community in hopeful anticipation of the more that is yet to come.


[1] Kilby, Karen. 2007. Karl rahner: A brief introduction. Crossroad Publishing Company.

[2] Rahner, Karl. Foundations of Christian Faith. The Crossroad Publishing Company, January 1, 1982.

[3] Rahner, Karl. Foundations of Christian Faith. The Crossroad Publishing Company, January 1, 1982.

[4] Kilby, Karen. 2007. Karl rahner: A brief introduction. Crossroad Publishing Company.

[5] Hentz, Otto. 1995. Starting with the human. In A world of grace: An introduction to the themes and foundations of karl rahner’s theology., ed. Leo J. O’Donovan, 17-29. Georgetown University Press.

[6] Rahner, Karl. Foundations of Christian Faith. The Crossroad Publishing Company, January 1, 1982.

[7] This is not pelagiansim as it does not rely solely on our efforts but requires God’s grace, too.

[8] Rahner, Karl. Foundations of Christian Faith. The Crossroad Publishing Company, January 1, 1982.

[9] Hentz, Otto. 1995. Starting with the human. In A world of grace: An introduction to the themes and foundations of karl rahner’s theology., ed. Leo J. O’Donovan, 17-29. Georgetown University Press.

[10] Kilby, Karen. 2007. Karl rahner: A brief introduction. Crossroad Publishing Company.

[11] Rahner, Karl. Foundations of Christian Faith. The Crossroad Publishing Company, January 1, 1982.

[12] Rahner, Karl. Foundations of Christian Faith. The Crossroad Publishing Company, January 1, 1982.

[13] Schineller, Peter. 1995. Starting with the human. In A world of grace: An introduction to the themes and foundations of karl rahner’s theology., ed. Leo J. O’Donovan, 17-29. Georgetown University Press.

[14] Schineller, Peter. 1995. Starting with the human. In A world of grace: An introduction to the themes and foundations of Karl Rahner’s theology., ed. Leo J. O’Donovan, 17-29. Georgetown University Press.

[15] Rahner, Karl. Foundations of Christian Faith. The Crossroad Publishing Company, January 1, 1982.

[16] Rahner, Karl. Foundations of Christian Faith. The Crossroad Publishing Company, January 1, 1982.

[17]Rahner, Karl. Foundations of Christian Faith. The Crossroad Publishing Company, January 1, 1982.

Posted on July 15, 2010 by Gosia Czelusniak. This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
In Class
Rahner: God is Far From Us

    Search

    Recent Post

    • A conversation with Jenni Dressler ’22 IPS alumna
    • September 2023
    • Dr. William Schmidt Celebrates 30 years with IPS
    • The time is now – to discern, reflect, comprehend and act
    • Meet Julie

    Categories

    • Art & Religion
    • Business & Religion
    • Catholic News
    • Catholic Social Thought
    • Chaplaincy
    • Early Christianity
    • Environment
    • Graduation
    • Interfaith Dialgoue
    • IPS
    • IPS Alumni
    • IPS Events
    • IPS Photos
    • IPS Student Orientation
    • IPS Students
    • IPS Videos
    • Jesuit University
    • Karl Rahner
    • Loyola University
    • Old Testament
    • Parable
    • Pastoral Counseling
    • Pope Francis
    • Refugee Crisis
    • Service
    • Social Justice & Community Development
    • Uncategorized

    Archives

    • August 2024
    • September 2023
    • April 2023
    • February 2023
    • August 2022
    • May 2022
    • March 2022
    • February 2022
    • October 2021
    • May 2021
    • July 2020
    • June 2020
    • May 2020
    • March 2020
    • February 2020
    • January 2020
    • December 2019
    • November 2019
    • October 2019
    • September 2019
    • July 2019
    • June 2019
    • April 2019
    • March 2019
    • February 2019
    • January 2019
    • December 2018
    • November 2018
    • October 2018
    • September 2018
    • August 2018
    • July 2018
    • May 2018
    • April 2018
    • March 2018
    • February 2018
    • January 2018
    • December 2017
    • November 2017
    • October 2017
    • September 2017
    • August 2017
    • July 2017
    • April 2017
    • March 2017
    • February 2017
    • January 2017
    • December 2016
    • November 2016
    • October 2016
    • September 2016
    • July 2016
    • May 2016
    • April 2016
    • March 2016
    • February 2016
    • December 2015
    • November 2015
    • October 2015
    • September 2015
    • August 2015
    • July 2015
    • June 2015
    • May 2015
    • April 2015
    • March 2015
    • February 2015
    • January 2015
    • December 2014
    • November 2014
    • October 2014
    • September 2014
    • August 2014
    • June 2014
    • May 2014
    • April 2014
    • March 2014
    • February 2014
    • December 2013
    • November 2013
    • October 2013
    • September 2013
    • August 2013
    • July 2013
    • May 2013
    • April 2013
    • March 2013
    • February 2013
    • January 2013
    • December 2012
    • November 2012
    • October 2012
    • September 2012
    • August 2012
    • July 2012
    • June 2012
    • May 2012
    • April 2012
    • March 2012
    • February 2012
    • January 2012
    • December 2011
    • November 2011
    • October 2011
    • September 2011
    • August 2011
    • July 2011
    • March 2011
    • February 2011
    • January 2011
    • December 2010
    • November 2010
    • October 2010
    • September 2010
    • August 2010
    • July 2010
Powered by