12.07.2015 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Rahner’s dual commitment to received doctrine and transcendental re-interpretation doesnot always result in a thoroughly convincing theological argument.Kilby’s suggestion that Rahner’s ‘real symbolism’ is best ‘improved’ by moving it fromthe realm <strong>of</strong> an ontology <strong>of</strong> God to a manifestation <strong>of</strong> the grace <strong>of</strong> God raises questionsabout what Rahner really meant when he spoke <strong>of</strong> grace as not a ‘gift from God’ but the‘gift <strong>of</strong> God himself in proximity’. If Jesus is to be understood not as the real symbol <strong>of</strong>God in the essence <strong>of</strong> his being but rather as the real symbol <strong>of</strong> his economic action ingrace, <strong>this</strong> raises further questions about the immanent/economic <strong>for</strong>mula.The tensions reflected above tend to point to the Achilles’ heel in Rahner’s theologicalapproach. The weakness, or vulnerability, in Rahner’s thought is not that it lacks spiritual,historical and biblical veracity, but that it attempts to reconcile a creative, intellectualreflection on human experience with the preconception <strong>of</strong> the absolute correctness <strong>of</strong>received doctrine. The <strong>for</strong>mer commitment allows Rahner to roam broadly and freely inhis re-imagination <strong>of</strong> the Christian doctrine in light <strong>of</strong> his understanding <strong>of</strong> the humancondition and <strong>of</strong> spiritual theology. The latter commitment; however, means that Rahnermust, to some extent, express his creative reflections in the language <strong>of</strong> concreteconclusions that must be made to fit within the framework and language <strong>of</strong> the receiveddoctrine. Thus, as a spiritual reflection, the idea <strong>of</strong> Jesus as ‘real symbol’ communicatessomething beautiful and inspiring. At the level <strong>of</strong> academic reflection, however, it may beless than fully satisfying as a systematic Christological concept.The redemptive meaning <strong>of</strong> the IncarnationRahner was not convinced that the New Testament data supported an exclusiveinterpretation <strong>of</strong> the primary meaning <strong>of</strong> the Incarnation as a blood sacrifice <strong>of</strong>fered toGod to appease his wrath against sin.First <strong>of</strong> all it is obvious that Good Friday does not mean changing the mind <strong>of</strong> anangry God who is disavowing human beings, but that <strong>this</strong> redeeming act itselfproceeds from the pure initiative <strong>of</strong> God’s holy love and is in no way effected byanything outside <strong>of</strong> God 106 .106 K. Rahner, The great church year, 158.160

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!