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...
| 主要作者: | |
|---|---|
| 格式: | 電子 Article |
| 語言: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| 出版: |
2024
|
| In: |
Augustinian studies
Year: 2024, 卷: 55, 發布: 2, Pages: 221-238 |
| IxTheo Classification: | KAB Church history 30-500; early Christianity KAJ Church history 1914-; recent history KDB Roman Catholic Church NBC Doctrine of God NBF Christology |
| 在線閱讀: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| 總結: | 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 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Augustinian studies
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.5840/augstudies2024121291 |
