Challenging Rahner’s Reading of Augustine on Theophanic and Incarnational Peculiarity

This article explores Karl Rahner’s assessment of Augustine’s treatment of Old Testament theophanies and the Incarnation. It scrutinizes Rahner’s contention that Augustine deviated from the Christological interpretation held by earlier church fathers and finds that while Augustine’s interpretation d...

Descrizione completa

Salvato in:  
Dettagli Bibliografici
Autore principale: Robinson, Martin E. (Autore)
Tipo di documento: Elettronico Articolo
Lingua:Inglese
Verificare la disponibilità: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Caricamento...
Interlibrary Loan:Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany)
Pubblicazione: 2024
In: Augustinian studies
Anno: 2024, Volume: 55, Fascicolo: 2, Pagine: 221-238
Notazioni IxTheo:KAB Cristianesimo delle origini
KAJ Età contemporanea
KDB Chiesa cattolica
NBC Dio
NBF Cristologia
Accesso online: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Descrizione
Riepilogo:This article explores Karl Rahner’s assessment of Augustine’s treatment of Old Testament theophanies and the Incarnation. It scrutinizes Rahner’s contention that Augustine deviated from the Christological interpretation held by earlier church fathers and finds that while Augustine’s interpretation differs from the majority of his predecessors, he is not the first significant church father to embrace such a view. Moreover, Augustine’s approach to the theophanies is shown to have deep roots in both tradition and scripture, challenging the explanatory power of the Christological interpretation. The article then argues that it is unreasonable to link Augustine’s theophanic non-peculiarity directly to a rejection of incarnational peculiarity. In addition to the absence of definitive texts denying Christ’s incarnational peculiarity, along with texts clearly affirming it, Augustine’s close association between the missions and processions—an association that ultimately supports Rahner’s Rule—eliminates the possibility of him rejecting the Son’s incarnational peculiarity. Consequently, Rahner’s assertion about Augustine’s alleged denial of incarnational peculiarity lacks solid grounding in Augustine’s body of work.
ISSN:2153-7917
Comprende:Enthalten in: Augustinian studies
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.5840/augstudies2024121291