Eyes of faith 5: Karl Rahner
A. Life and career 1904-1984. Judged by many to be the leading Catholic theologian of 20th century. Influenced by Kant,
Maréchal, Heidegger. University professor in German and Austrian Catholic Faculties. Started in Neo-Scholasticism, official theology of
Catholic Church. Tried to open it up, re-think it existentially and modernise it throughout his life. Suspect in official Catholic circles in
1950s as unorthodox, but then appointed expert for German bishops at Second Vatican Council, strongly influencing its statements.
Incurred strong opposition.
B. Writings. Wrote mainly in essays (23 volumes of Theological Investigations). Enormously popular and influential among
progressive Catholics. Also many other books, essays, and articles covering all theological topics. Writing notoriously complicated, even
for Germans. Aimed to present Catholic doctrine in terms of modern Continental philosophy. Always pastorally concerned to explore
ways of expressing Christian doctrine and Catholic teaching in a modern intellectually satisfying way. Conclusions appeal even when
reasons not understood. Early essays were on Catholic dogmatic teaching and devotions and spirituality; later essays on issues raised
at Vatican II on the nature of the Church and its relation to the modern world; final essays on pluralism, ecumenism and the notion of a
"world church" no longer dominated by Western culture and peoples. Rahner continually viewed the world as the profoundly
mysterious arena of God’s self-communication in Jesus and the Spirit.
C. An exclusive church? “The one who does not believe will be condemned” (Mk 16.16).
rd
St Cyprian in 3 c. Africa insisted
against heretical and schismatic baptisms that “There is no salvation outside the Church (extra ecclesiam nulla salus)”.Became fixed
th
principle as Catholic dogma, as in Fourth Lateran Council (13 c): “There is one universal church of the faithful, and outside it absolutely
th
no one is saved” (DS 802); and in the Council of Florence (15 c): “no one outside the catholic Church . . . can come to share in eternal
th
life, and they are going to hell” (DS 1351) . Began to be qualified in 19 century by Pope Pius IX for those suffering from “invincible
ignorance” who could not in justice be condemned by God. Pope Pius XII in 1943 more positively introduced idea of an unconscious
desire which connects/ relates some people unknowingly to Christ and his church. Moving from ‘container’ to‘family’ metaphor. Holy
Office, against Fr Feeney SJ, explained that the age-long “infallible” statement that there is“no salvation outside the church” applies
to anyone who knowingly rejects the Catholic church, but not to anyone who is in invincible ignorance or who, although not a member
of the Church, has an“implicit desire” to do what God wants (DS 3870). This was confirmed and developed by Vatican II stating how
various groups of people who are not full members of the Catholic Church can be saved through being positively related to it in some
way. “Those who without blame are ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, and yet who seek God with a sincere heart, and
try in their behaviour, under the influence of his grace, to fulfil his will as they acknowledge it through the dictate of conscience, can
attain to eternal salvation” (The Church, 16). See Catech. 836-848. So, following one’s conscience to do the right thing implicitly
includes a willingness to believe in God and to belong to the church which Christ founded, if one knew of them. Thus what started as
an absolute moral condition of how people could be saved only by being in the Catholic Church was gradually replaced by a theological
statement that some people who are not members of the Catholic Church can be saved by following what their conscience tells them is
the right thing to do. An intriguing development of “infallible” doctrine. How explain the change? i.e., How explain the salvation of the
unbeliever? Rahner considered that God’s grace in Christ is continually being offered to all peoples at all times, though not necessarily
accepted by all.
D. “Anonymous Christians”. What had been called“the salvation of the unbeliever” is the result, according to Rahner, of
God continually offering the (supernatural) grace achieved by Christ to everyone, including unbelievers, throughout their lives, to
enable them to act morally. Anyone who unknowingly responds to this and performs a morally good act is behaving under the influence
of Christ, and is therefore, now not a“good pagan”, but an “anonymous Christian”. Not patronising, condescending, or recruiting, as
nd
charged, but attempt to solve a dilemma for Christians/Catholics as to how a non-Christian can be saved. Anticipated by Justin, 2 c.
E. Nature and Grace. Underlying Rahner’s thesis of anonymous Christians lies a rethinking of the traditional distinction, going
back at least to Augustine, between grace and nature. The traditional approach has seen grace as an add-on to created nature, which
seemed in theory created to live and act a natural life drawing on its natural resources (mind and will and feelings). To this God added
qualities (graces) transcending and higher than nature (super-natural) which enabled humans to recover from original sin (healing
grace), concentrate on knowing and loving God at a higher level of existence and behaviour (sanctifying grace and actual graces),
eschewing the natural, and to be destined to reach final fulfilment and happiness (persevering grace) sharing God’s own life (beatific
vision). Hence the distinction between nature and grace is only theoretical; ”pure” nature does not exist, it is an abstraction
(Restbegriff) from existential grace-filled reality. We live in a “supernatural existential”. ‘Existential’, taken from Heidegger, refers to an
essential of existing human beings; ’supernatural’ means freely added by God to the nature he created. So grace is“a constituent part
of our historical human existence” (Dych 37). ‘It is quite conceivable that the whole spiritual life of man is constantly affected by grace.
It is not a rare and sporadic event just because grace is unmerited. Theology has been too long and too often bedevilled by the
unavowed supposition that grace would be no longer grace if it were too generously distributed by the love of God!’ (TI , IV 180). The
“supernatural existential” means we exist in the actual order willed by God of being ordained to supernatural union with God and of
being capable (having the potentiality) of being raised to that union. By being human we are destined to salvation. (The natural
existential would be living as a creature of God with a particular nature, without grace, ordained to a fulfilment appropriate to that
nature). Positing the supernatural existential enables Rahner to hold that everyone is in the supernatural order without seeming to
compromise the gratuity of the supernatural, i.e., not implying that it is owed to everyone by the fact of creation. “From the beginning
of human history all men have received the real offer of Uncreated Grace, the indwelling of the economic trinity. The order of creation
and the order of redemption historically are one and the same. There has never been a purely natural order” (McCool, 190). Christ is
the clmax of God’s self-communication; he is God’s definitive and irreversible communi-cation to humanity as such (even without the
original sin of the fall). So all grace offered to us is offered in Christ, the grace of Christ.Rahner suggests that God’s self- communication
(uncreated grace) is operative in human history from the moment of creation through the work of the Holy Spirit, even though it is only
Jesus' life and death on the cross actually occurring in history which provides the definitive grounds for this possibility.
F. The Fundamental Option. 1. Transcendental Reflection: “Categorial” experience: experience of individual finite things we
can put in categories, to which we can apply concepts and words: thing, person, horse, time. “Transcendental experience”: a
dimension of all knowledge. An awareness of the infinite as backcloth against which we know individuals stretching out away ahead,
always receding, i.e., God. Not separate from categorial experience, but the continual accompaniment, and condition of possibility,
reaching beyond every categorial experience to its horizon. Always seeking expression and conceptualisation in the realm of the
categorial, e.g., language, art, religion, never adequate to the experience. So, in every act of knowing something as a being, we know it
as a being against the inexplicit unexpressed (uncategorial) background (horizon, backcloth) of absolute being, i.e., God. This enables us
to know God. In every act of freedom, of choosing a good, we choose a particular thing or action as good against the inexplicit
unexpressed (uncategorial) background (horizon) of absolute good, i.e., God. This enables us to choose God. In every act of loving, we
love a particular object of our love against the inexplicit unexpressed (uncategorial) background (horizon) of absolute love, i.e., God.
This enables us to love God. 2. The fundamental option. In every individual categorial choice of a particular good I am making an
implicit basic choice for or against absolute good, i.e., for or against God. In other words, in every particular major choice I am accepting
or rejecting God’s offer of himself and his destiny for me. And in every individual deliberate act of choice I am also deciding the sort of
person I want myself to be. “Man’s basic freedom is not a mere choice between objects. It is the achievement of his choice of self. This
self-choice, which cannot be avoided, is by its very nature either self-realisation in the direction of God or a radical refusal of self to
God.” (McCool 255).
G. A world church. As early church in Jerusalem crossed a threshold from Judaeo-Christianity to make itself a church for gentiles
too, it changed in the process. Now in Rome it began to cross another threshold from the Western church to become a church formally
including the whole world, which could involve further changes. Previously Rome exported and imposed European Christianity – and
culture – together, or was seen as a multinational organisation with its head office in the Vatican. Belloc: “Europe is the faith and the
faith is Europe”. Church beginning to emerge under Holy Spirit in Vatican II as a “world church” (Rahner). At Council, 2,381 native
bishops from every hierarchy in the world, not just now missionaries: a world-episcopate in action collegially. Decree on liturgy
approved vernacular languages and rites, facilitating local culture and episcopate. GS showed awareness of Church’s responsibility for
the future of humanity, including third world. Other decrees largely Eurocentric (refer to “missions”), but aim to be non-technical (cf
earlier Roman drafts). Extended possibility of universal salvation to all people of good will. Began to appreciate positive aspects of
other Christian bodies, and separately of non-Christian religions. Showed positive respect for religious freedom. “Within the Church
herself, there is a growing sense of ‘world church’, so much in evidence at the last Ecumenical Council in which bishops native to every
continent – no longer predominantly of European or even Western origin – assumed for the first time their common responsibility for
the entire Church. The documents from that Council and of the magisterium have reflected this new world-consciousness both in their
content and in their attempt to address all people of good will. During this century, we have witnessed a dynamic tendency to
reconciliation and unity that has taken many forms within the Church. “Pope John Paul II, letter to Rev G. V. Coyne, AAS 20 (1989) 276.
Further need in a world church to allow for: Expressing the proclamation of the Gospel in Asian, African, South American
cultures;Allowing for pluralism in expressing their beliefs, morality, worship, canon law, spirituality, all in indigenous terms. Not Rome
paternalistically “adapting” western Christianity; initially, a local responsibility; Applying principle of subsidiarity (see next) in governing
the cumbersome structure of one world church (cf UN and WCC) by more collegiality, episcopal conferences and patriarchates (and
within each); also distinctive and differing roles for Roman and regional synods of bishops. All while protecting unity, without imposing
uniformity; Fresh approach to ecumenical relations with other Christian bodies; New approach to interfaith dialogue with world
religions. Principle of subsidiarity: a principle of social philosophy respecting intrinsic authority of lower groups. Not delegating power,
but helping, when needed (only) . (Leo XIII, Quadragesimo anno). Not subsidiary, but providing subsidy. Involves pushing decisions
down to the lowest possible level in organisations, not absorbing or stifling lower competences or responsibilities. Officially accepted
also for within the Catholic Church by Pope Pius XII. Linked with solidarity by John Paul II.
H. Assessment of Rahner.




A creative, encyclopaedic, roaming thinker, aiming pastorally to make modern sense of Christian beliefs and difficulties (e.g.,
good pagans, World Church). Conclusions attractive even when reasons difficult to grasp (e.g., transcendental Thomism)?
Appeal to supernatural existential and absence of pure nature attractive; but need to explain more the supernatural existential
and transcendental horizons. Latter not a proof that God exists; more an implication of how the infinite God exists? Rahner
continually viewed the world as the profoundly mysterious arena of God’s self-communication in Jesus and the Spirit.
Given anonymous Christianity and fundamental option, what need of demanding categorial (explicit) expressions of belief or
morality (von Balthasar etc)?
Little reflection on Bible apart from selective texts?
I. Possible reading
•
•
•
•
•
•
K. Rahner, Theological Investigations, 23 vols.
G. A. McCool (ed.), A Rahner Reader, DLT 1975.
Karl Rahner in Dialogue, New York, Crossroad, 1986.
William Dych SJ, Karl Rahner, London Continuum 2000.
H. Vorgrimler, Understanding Karl Rahner. An Introduction to his Life and Thought, SCM 1986.
Stephen J. Duffy, The Graced Horizon: Nature and Grace in Modern Catholic Thought, Michael Glazier, 1992