Symbolism after Dialectics: De Lubac, Rahner and Symbolic Theology
Henri de Lubac advocates the recovery of 'symbolism' in Corpus Mysticum. In the patristic era, real unity between symbol and symbolized was a ubiquitous assumption, sustaining a thoroughly sacramental vision. In the Middle Ages 'dialectical' theology replaced patristic symbolism,...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Published: |
[2018]
|
| In: |
International journal of systematic theology
Year: 2018, Volume: 20, Issue: 4, Pages: 537-553 |
| IxTheo Classification: | KAJ Church history 1914-; recent history NBP Sacramentology; sacraments VA Philosophy |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (Resolving-System) Volltext (doi) |
| Summary: | Henri de Lubac advocates the recovery of 'symbolism' in Corpus Mysticum. In the patristic era, real unity between symbol and symbolized was a ubiquitous assumption, sustaining a thoroughly sacramental vision. In the Middle Ages 'dialectical' theology replaced patristic symbolism, gaining precision, but losing vitality. De Lubac wants to return to symbolism without negating the dialectical era. Yet de Lubac's account lacks systematic clarity and hardly moves beyond the patristic era. Karl Rahner's 'Theology of the Symbol' contributes to the reclamation of this kind of ontological symbolism, but with greater systematic specificity and in reliance on the dialectical age. Yet Rahner applies his ontological symbolism inconsistently. Read together, de Lubac and Rahner's theologies of the symbol are mutually illuminating and corrective. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1468-2400 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: International journal of systematic theology
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1111/ijst.12334 |
