The Aesthetic Collision: Hans Urs von Balthasar on the Trinity and the Cross

The relationship envisioned by Hans Urs von Balthasar between the Trinity and the events of Christ's passion and death has elicited concern from various theologians that he has muddled the important distinction between God's eternal life ad intra and his interaction with the world through the economy of his actions. This article argues that such a reading of Balthasar's theology is ultimately a serious misconstrual of his work since it overlooks the aesthetic categories established early in The Glory of the Lord through which his narration of the cross‐event must ultimately be interpreted. By interpreting Balthasar in this manner, this article clarifies the content of what is perhaps Balthasar's most important theological contribution, and provides a creative alternative for how best to situate the relationship (oft‐discussed in twentieth‐century theology) between the Trinity and the crucifixion.     

Erich Przywara’s Theology of Israel: A Critical Response to “Historical Criticism”

In the Anglophone world the Jesuit philosopher and theologian Erich Przywara (1889‐1972) tends to be known almost exclusively to Balthasar and Barth scholars (as an important mentor to the former and a formidable nemesis of the latter). In recent years, however, interest in Przywara has grown beyond these circles, owing in part to the English translation of his magnum opus, Analogia Entis (2014), and a handful of articles and monographs on his thought. Indeed, it is gradually being recognized that Przywara was an important philosopher and theologian in his own right – of no less stature, and arguably profounder, than the most recognized names in modern theology – even if he did not possess the same oratorical gifts. At the same time, however, a shadow has been cast over this recovery effort since an American church historian named Paul Peterson accused Przywara, along with Balthasar and even Barth, of varying degrees of anti‐Semitism and fascist sympathies – charges that, were they true, would make one reluctant to read him or find out why Edith Stein, Balthasar, Rahner, Josef Pieper et al. thought so highly of him. The point of this article, accordingly, is to set the record straight, at least as far as Przywara’s supposed “anti‐Semitism” is concerned (his view of National Socialism will be treated separately). It is understandable, of course, that Peterson is troubled that theologians could have contributed to the conditions that led to the horrors of the Shoah; and this alone justifies the zeal of his investigations. But the unfortunate way he has conducted them has also come with a cost: in this case, the misrepresentation of the intentions and the unjust impugning of the character of an eminent theologian, from whom, according to Rahner and Balthasar – indeed, according to John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and Pope Francis – the church still has much to learn. But, as regrettable as this may be, Peterson’s investigations have also done a service for modern theology: not only have they occasioned a closer look at Przywara’s cultural and political views, which was overdue; they have also helped to uncover, however inadvertently, a distinctly Pauline theology of Israel, aspects of which may yet prove fruitful.     

Herman Bavinck’s ‘Yes’ and Karl Barth’s ‘No’: Constructing a Dialectic‐in‐Organic Approach to the Theology of General Revelation

By grounding theology in God’s revelation, Herman Bavinck (1854‐1921) and Karl Barth (1886‐1968) take differing attitudes to general revelation, which is widely accepted in the circle of Reformed theology. Bavinck firmly says ‘Yes’ to the existence of the knowledge of God in creation. In contrast with him, Barth holds fast to the Christocentric view of God’s revelation, and thus says ‘No’ to general revelation in the universe. This divergence is primarily due to their different theological thinking and concerns. Bavinck deploys organic thinking in revelation and focuses on God’s creation, which seems to blur the distinction between general and special revelation. By contrast, Barth makes use of dialectical thinking and preoccupies himself with divine‐human reconciliation, which subordinates creation to God’s redemption. To this extent, both bring about disparities within God’s revelation. This essay proposes a dialectic‐in‐organic approach to general revelation, which affirms the disclosure of the knowledge of the Triune God in creation, recognises the independent value of creation, and maintains the diversity‐with‐parity within the revelation of the Triune God.     

Balthasar and the Eclipse of Nietzsche

This essay is about Hans Urs von Balthasar’s critical appropriation of Nietzsche as a prophetic and apocalyptic thinker whose thought presents a challenge to a tired European culture and a petrified form of Christianity. But it is also about a particular expiration date for this critical appropriation which can be dated to the 1940s. The bulk of the essay deals with two early texts of Balthasar in which Nietzsche is a dominant figure, that is, Balthasar’s dissertation, Geschichte des eschatologischen Problems in der modernen Literatur (1928) and Apokalypse der deutschen Seele (1939). The centrality of Nietzsche in these texts makes it all the more shocking that by the mid 1940s Balthasar’s engagement has essentially come to an end. The hypothesis put forward is not that the questions raised by Nietzsche have ceased to have pertinence, but that Heidegger, who had also from the beginning been an important figure for Balthasar, essentially takes over Nietzsche’s apocalyptic provocation and thereby eclipses him. Thereafter, Heidegger becomes not only the emblem of the best that Phenomenology can do, but also of a form of Nietzschianism that is more subtle and complex in its negotiations with Christianity and precisely for that reason more dangerous.     

The “Strange Acts of God:”The Hermeneutics of Concealment and Revelation in Luther and Shakespeare

Abstract: Martin Luther called himself “God's court‐jester”. He saw history as one of the “masks of God,” and he understood God as hiding Godself often behind the mask of the Devil. Luther developed a paradoxical theology, a theology of the cross, that is surprisingly compatible in certain respects with the paradoxical artistic vision of Shakespeare, especially in Hamlet, King Lear and Measure for Measure. Crucial motifs of Luther's theology—the hidden God, indirect revelation, revelation by concealment, revelation under the opposite, the “strange acts of God,” God's “rearward parts”(posteriora), and suffering (Anfechtungen and melancholy)—resonate with certain latent, even if at times blasphemeous, theological motifs and themes in Shakespeare. They also resonate with the experience of the Lutheran church in Hungary both in its past under communism and today in post‐communist Hungary.     

The Consubstantial Otherness of God: Divine Simplicity and the Trinity in Hans Urs von Balthasar

Martin explores divine simplicity according to the twentieth‐century Catholic theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar. She grants that Balthasar does not provide a traditional presentation of the attribute of divine simplicity. In his doctrine of the Trinity, Balthasar emphasizes such themes as distance, “hiatus,” and infinite difference, none of which seems to promise a robust doctrine of divine simplicity. Indeed, some have suggested that Balthasar's Trinitarian theology does not allow for traditional claims about divine simplicity. Martin argues, however, that one finds in Balthasar's Trinitarian theology the doctrine of divine simplicity, assumed as an internalized starting point and rooted in his understanding of the analogia entis. This can be seen, for example, in his various engagements with Aquinas as well as with contemporary thinkers such as Gustav Siewerth and Erich Przywara. Likewise, when addressing the issue of whether the Trinitarian Persons can be “counted” according to our normal understanding of number, he insists with Evagrius that God is simple. In the same context, he similarly draws upon Plotinus, Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory Nazianzen, Tertullian, Ambrose, and Aquinas. Martin therefore gives particular attention to the Theo‐Logic and to Balthasar's affirmation in his Trinitarian theology of the points that the divine Persons are fully God, the divine attributes are identical with each other in God, and the distinction of Persons has to do not with three parts of God but with opposed subsistent relations.     

Is it Possible and Desirable for Theologians to Speculate after Barth?

This essay asks what Karl Barth meant by ‘speculation’ in volume two of the Church Dogmatics. Rather than equating speculative theology with metaphysical theology in general, Barth views speculation not as a monolithic act but as a conglomeration of modes of theological speech that undermine God's revelation in Jesus Christ. This essay argues that Barth's views of speculation, rather than undercutting the use of metaphysics in theology, pave the way for a responsible Christian use of metaphysics by tying one's use of categories and concepts in theology closely to the text of Scripture.     

Two Accounts of Qur'anic Revelation

This essay examines the notions of revelation and prophecy as offered by Fazlur Rahman and Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd. Their ideas regarding prophecy and revelation contribute to the clarification of some foundational issues in Islamic theology. For both Rahman and Abu Zayd, theology begins with the idea that divine revelation is intended for human beings. So, even though this revelation is divine in origin, it is also mostly intelligible. This rethinking of the idea of revelation is welcomed by some Muslim thinkers, but has not met with so positive a reception in more traditional Islamic circles. I argue that what makes these human-centric accounts of revelation controversial is the idea of Muhammad's “contribution” to the revelation process and the article investigates this idea as it is formulated in the work of these two scholars.     

Suffering the Promise of God: Engaging Oswald Bayer

This article examines Oswald Bayer's wide‐ranging constructive appropriation and application of Luther's theology of the Word. Bayer grounds theology in the divine word of promise, understanding theology and the Christian life as a vita receptiva in which human action is, from first to last, responsive. He pits Luther against modern theological evasions of the Word in his insistence on the distinctively Christian pathos of existence, and his ethic of categorical gift reflects this. I conclude with a commendation of Bayer's theology of the Word, a question about the relation between God's revelation and hiddenness and a concern that he may at times compromise the definitive self‐revelation of God in Christ.     

Word of God or Dialog with Science? Overcoming a False Dilemma Through Missional Encounter

Abstract : Why would a theology grounded in God's word engage with the sciences? After laying out two alternative approaches to revelation—constructive theology (general revelation) and Logos theology (special revelation)—I advocate an evangel theology grounded in mission, worship and the gospel of Jesus Christ. This approach engages both culture (including science and technology) and God's word from a critical missional basis. An evangel theology engages the sciences through apologetics, cultural critique, hermeneutics, and the cooperative task of developing a Christian worldview.     

Cross,Contestation and Consummation: An Engagement with Ted Peters’ God – The World's Future

The third edition of Peters’ systematic theology provides an opportunity to assess his contextual theology, descended from Tillich's ‘method of correlation’, from the perspective of my own textual theology, descended from Karl Barth's revelation theology, on the common ground of a shared Trinitarianism and positive retrieval of the twentieth‐century's rediscovery of the New Testament eschatology. The article affirms Peters’ sharply focused cognitive claim to truth about God as the world's future, but asks a series of questions about how this claim is actually sustained in Peters’ capacious work. It concludes with the ‘apocalyptic’ judgement that Peters’ ‘progressive’ method is not fully adequate to the challenge of our present spiritual situation.     

Unapocalyptic Theology: History and Eschatology in Balthasar's Theo‐Drama

In this essay, I evaluate the claim that Hans Urs von Balthasar's interpretation of trinitarian doctrine undermines the importance of history for the Christian God. Where other critics argue that the very distinction between immanent and economic Trinity robs the economy of salvation of theological significance, I contend that the underlying problem lies in how Balthasar restricts the theo‐drama to an event between heaven and earth on the cross of Golgotha. Through this limitation of God's active involvement in history to a single event, Balthasar's theo‐drama becomes an “unapocalyptic theology”, which devalues God's salvific history with the world and the biblical expectation of an eschatological end of history. Furthermore, Balthasar underplays the messianic‐political dimension of the Christian concept of salvation and thereby cements the status quo of a yet unredeemed world.     

A GIFT TO THEOLOGY? JEAN‐LUC MARION'S ‘SATURATED PHENOMENON’ IN CHRISTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

Jean‐Luc Marion has recently established himself as one of the most important and theologically fertile thinkers within the phenomenological tradition. With his study of ‘the gift’ and ‘the saturated phenomenon’, Marion presents a challenge to theology to rethink revelation in its surprising givenness, as exceeding the boundaries often set up in advance by metaphysics and a priori anthropological foundations. This paper examines Marion's mature thought, particularly within the perspective of Christology. The paper argues that Marion's phenomenological style of reflection, as adapted to theology, is deeply contemplative and markedly Johannine in sensibility. As a strategy for theology, the phenomenological style gives to it important incentives and skills for reading off God's self‐revelation in Christ in its surprising and counter‐intuitive beauty. Marion's challenge/gift to theology is, however, in need of a balancing emphasis, one that appears too infrequently in his work: the ethical‐prophetic dimension of the Christ event. In view of keeping both the mystical and prophetic poles of theology closely linked, the paper argues that just as beauty is a key category for saturated phenomena, so too is the reality of suffering and evil. However, whereas beauty invites a humble receptivity to and contemplative enjoyment of the gift, the inscrutable reality of suffering and evil, which so often exceeds comprehension, touches off a critical and practical response. In broadening the study of saturated phenomena to include the refractory character of experience, especially that which threatens humanity, Marion's valuable contributions to theology require a complementary emphasis from those narrative‐practical Christologies that highlight the prophetic aspects of the tradition.     

Two Forms of Catholic Apocalyptic Theology

While the emergence and development of apocalyptic forms of theology in Catholicism have been inhibited by particular theological styles as well as the powerful presence of the institutional church, it is the case that from the second half of the twentieth century on Catholicism has seen a number of forms of apocalyptic theology being well received. The two most influential forms have been provided by Johann Baptist Metz and Hans Urs von Balthasar. In this article I bring these two very different forms of apocalyptic into critical conversation with a view to coming to some provisional judgement regarding relative theological adequacy. The crucial issue is whether in the apocalyptic figurations of Metz and Balthasar the church is faithfully represented or undercut. I determine that Balthasar elaborates an apocalyptic form of theology in which the institutional church represents Christ and that Metz fundamentally undercuts the church. Still, the judgement of ‘Catholic’ adequacy or inadequacy is not solely based on the articulation of different views of the church largely because in neither case is the view of the church absolutely free standing. Not only is the conception of the church connected with other conceptions, for example, a view of God, Christ, community and person, but it is also influenced by how one interprets the Bible, understands tradition and engages philosophy. If apocalyptic and the church connect (Balthasar) or fail to connect (Metz), this will be in part due to very different decisions regarding these three features.     

DIONYSIUS IN HANS URS VON BALTHASAR AND JEAN‐LUC MARION

This article evaluates Jean‐Luc Marion's retrieval of Dionysius against the backdrop of the debate in recent continental philosophy over the identity and meaning of “negative theology”. Marion's interpretation and use of Dionysius draws heavily on that of Hans Urs von Balthasar, both in his manner of approaching Dionysius and with the central elements of the Corpus Dionysiacum upon which he focuses. Through this comparison, it is clear that different polemical and apologetic interests shape their similar but distinct retrievals. Marion, like Balthasar before him, is translating Dionysius for a new audience. With this translation, I argue that Marion provides a richer and more complex confrontation with Dionysius than has previously been offered within the contemporary discussions of “negative theology”.     

THEOLOGIANS OF SPIRITUAL TRANSFORMATION: A PROPOSAL FOR READING RENÉ GIRARD THROUGH THE LENSES OF HANS URS VON BALTHASAR AND JOHN CASSIAN

This essay contends that René Girard is not a philosopher or a scientist whose ideas are open to theological appropriation. Instead, contrary to his assertions otherwise, the Girard corpus ought to be read as if it were articulating a form of theology whose primary intellectual home can ultimately be found on a theological map. As the field of Girardian theology grows, it becomes more evident that we need some theological lenses for examining the theology already lying waiting—sometimes inchoately, sometimes not—in Girard's texts, and also for examining how theologians use and misuse his texts. If we can see that he is already doing theology then a theological critique becomes plausible and valid in principle, and indeed becomes an internal critique. Applying good interpretive lenses will provide some rigorous criteria for analyzing the degree to which Girardian theologians are following the internal logic of Girard's thought in their appropriations of it. The interpretive lenses I propose using on Girard are first the theology of Hans Urs von Balthasar (d. 1988) and then the theology of John Cassian (d. circa 435). These two theologians provide us with lenses that help us see that Girard is fundamentally a Catholic theologian involved in resisting the speculative re‐writing of Christianity by proponents of “false gnosis” and that he belongs within the category of theologians who advocate spiritual transformation and “true gnosis.”     

Words that reveal: Jean-Yves Lacoste and the experience of God

Much of the contemporary discussion of religion seems to do away with the very possibility of revelation. In this article, I use Lacoste’s phenomenology of la parole to rethink a theology of revelation in terms of God’s personal self-giving in experience. After examining Lacoste’s views of the relationship between philosophy and theology, his liturgical reduction and what this means for an understanding of experience and knowledge, and his thought of la parole more broadly, I give critical consideration to how he thinks the possibility of God’s address to humanity. Lacoste maintains that God’s presence in experience may be known through affection, and, indeed, that the word may so move us that we are able to recognise that presence. He uses the notion of self-evidence rather than the usual phenomenological category of evidence to evince the reasonableness of this response. I argue that while Lacoste accords due deference to a traditional understanding of revelation as the repetition or unfolding of a word addressed to us in the past, his thought also allows us to think revelation as a contemporary event, the hermeneutics of which allow us to know God in ways that are new.     

The Neighbor Between Rosenzweig and Lacan

Death is the persistent kernel of a human life in both Jacques Lacan’s psychoanalytic theory and Franz Rosenzweig’s theology. Lacan’s reformulation of the Freudian drive conceives of death as the annihilating force behind each person’s desire. Accordingly, the other assumes death’s absolute impenetrability. Rosenzweig likewise insists that perpetual acknowledgement of death must individuate a human life; however, his theology of revelation allows for the disclosure of the absolute Other in a commandment to love. Two ethics proceed from these two figures of death: a Lacanian ethics of distance and a Rosenzweigian ethics of communitarian love. Finally, I consider whether a Rosenzweigian posture toward the neighbor must be predicated on a transcendent faith.     

The Analogia Entis as a Standard of Catholic Engagement: Erich Przywara's Critique of Phenomenology and Dialectical Theology

The purpose of this article is to introduce the reader to the twentieth‐century Jesuit, Erich Przywara (1889‐1972), who was arguably the most brilliant and prolific Catholic philosopher, theologian, cultural and literary critic of the 1920s and 1930s, but is known today more by association with his friend Edith Stein or his protégé Hans Urs von Balthasar than for anything he wrote. Rather than focusing on any single work, however, this article focuses on his early understanding of the analogia entis as a synthesis of the teaching of Augustine, Thomas, and the IV Lateran Council, and on his subsequent deployment of the analogia entis as a Catholic standard in response to the dialectical theology of the early Barth and the phenomenology of Husserl, Scheler, and Heidegger, respectively. Looking back to Vatican I and anticipating Vatican II, it is clear that Przywara was in the vanguard of the Catholic Church’s engagement with the modern world. What remains to be considered today, aside from his immense contribution to modern theology, is the merit of his responses to Barth and Heidegger at this time, e.g., his claim that dialectical theology, instead of being a corrective to modernity, was only a symptom of its fundamental imbalance, and that phenomenology, rather than overcoming or displacing a Catholic metaphysics of the analogia entis, is fulfilled in the ontological openness signified by it.