Introductory notes for readers of this thesis - Theses - Flinders ...

Many things in life act as signs that symbolise something: a green traffic light is a symbolfor ‘go’, red for ‘stop’; a nod of the head in Western culture means ‘yes’, a shake of thehead means ‘no’. These signs provide non-verbal, recognisable communication but arearbitrary: they don’t represent in themselves the essence of the meaning of thecommunication. For example, traffic legislators could have chosen red as the ‘go’ signand green for ‘stop’—or have used different colours altogether. In contrast to anarbitrarily chosen sign for pragmatic purposes is a ‘real symbol’. A gentle hug or kiss onthe cheek is not merely a sign of affection; the gesture itself is full of the meaning andpresence of the affection it seeks to communicate, and it brings about what it nonverballyproclaims. It is in this sense that Rahner describes the Incarnation of Jesus as the‘real symbol’, or ‘sacrament’, of God 101 .When God the Father wishes to expresses himself within the immanent Trinity he does soin his Word. When God the Father wishes to express himself in the world this same Wordis expressed in the humanity of Jesus. Just as a human person is revealed in the worldthrough their total bodily expression (physical presence, emotional or intellectualpresence, words) and this bodily expression is a genuine and full expression of theiressential person, so the bodily incarnation of the Logos is the genuine and full expressionof God. The human Jesus is much more than an arbitrary sign of God’s care andcommunication; Jesus is the genuine expression and presence of God. Jesus is the realsymbol of divinity, bringing about the actuality of what his incarnation non-verballyproclaims 102 .O’Donnell explains that, for Rahner, the ‘real symbolism’ of Jesus’ sacramental life ishighlighted by a reversal of logic in the traditional understanding of thecreation/incarnation sequencing and its anthropological implications. The incarnation ofthe Logos is the ‘condition of the possibility’ for the creation, rather than the other wayaround. In other words, the Incarnation is not God’s reluctant last-ditch effort to avert the101 J.O’Donnell, Life in the Spirit, 41-42.102 Ibid, 42-44.158