The Notion of Spirituality in Karl RahnerDeclan Marmion

This article attempts to clarify the meaning of the term “spiritual-ity” in the writings of one of the giants of twentieth-century Catholictheology — Karl Rahner. Our aim is to indicate the foundational roleof spirituality in Rahner’s theology. Firstly, we outline the main sourcesof, and influences on, his spirituality, and then, in a second step, a num-ber of the main characteristics and themes underlying this spiritualityare introduced. Thirdly, we shall explore some points of intersectionbetween Rahner’s theology and his spirituality. The article concludes byfocussing more particularly on Rahner’s use of the term “spirituality,”the contexts in which the term arises, and the meaning he attributes toit. In short, we are asking what lies at the core of Rahner’s conception ofspirituality.

1. The Spiritual Basis of Rahner’s Theology

a. Experiences of God

Probably the main reason for the enduring success of Karl Rahner’sspiritual and theological writings lies in his conviction that theologycannot be divorced from experiential knowledge of God. Not contentwith providing renewal programs for theology and the Church, Rahnerwrites about himself and the history of his life with God.1 In theolo-gizing, therefore, from an experiential starting-point, Rahner does notsimply deal with human experience in general, or in the abstract, oreven with the experience of others, but explores the depths of his ownhuman and Christian experience.2 This is why he kept insisting, in his

1. Karl Rahner, “Why Am I a Christian Today?,” The Practice of Faith, ed. KarlLehmann and Albert Raffelt (London: SCM Press, 1985) 17.

2. Herbert Vorgrimler, Understanding Karl Rahner: An Introduction to his Life andThought, trans. John Bowden (London: SCM Press, 1986) 2-3.

Louvain Studies 21 (1996) 61-86

later years, that his life and work could not be separated.3 Thus, Rahner’smore “spiritual” writings are not merely the “overflow” or practicalapplication of his more scientific, theological or philosophical investiga-tions. In this sense, what Rahner once said of Aquinas can also be saidof him:

Thomas’ theology is his spiritual life and his spiritual life is his theol-ogy. With him we do not yet find the horrible difference which isoften to be observed in later theology, between theology and spiri-tual life. He thinks theology because he needs it in his spiritual lifeas its most essential condition, and he thinks theology in such a waythat it can become really important for life in the concrete.4

Rahner’s experiences of God are best captured in his prayers andmeditations and reveal the mystical dimension of his religious thought.The point about Rahner’s prayers is not so much that they form a teachingabout prayer, but rather that they are an encouragement for “readers” toexpress themselves in a similar way, i.e., to speak from the heart to God.Similarly, his early writings on the mystical doctrine of Origen andBonaventure for example, led him to take seriously such teaching asvalid theological sources.5

For Rahner, no crude frontiers exist between doing theology in thecontext of Church, on the one hand, and the life of prayer, meditation,and commitment to people, on the other. All form part of faith’s seek-ing to understand the meaning of God’s love. The mystical dimensionof his theology is deeply rooted in a personal inner experience of grace.6

This “inner” experience both grounds Christian piety and holiness, aswell as constituting a Rahnerian theological point of departure.

Moreover, the experience of grace is related to Rahner’s under-standing of the transcendental orientation of the human person to God.Such a primal orientation to God leads the human person into anapparently endless search for meaning, culminating in a being drawn

62 DECLAN MARMION

3. Johann Baptist Metz, “Karl Rahner – ein theologisches Leben,” Stimmen derZeit 192 (1974) 305-314. See also Robrecht Michiels, “De theologie van Karl Rahner,”Collationes 8 (1978) 264-292; Karl Lehmann: “Karl Rahner: A Portrait,” The Content ofFaith: The Best of Karl Rahner’s Theological Writings, ed. Karl Lehmann and Albert Raf-felt, trans. ed. Harvey D. Egan (New York: Crossroad, 1994) 1-74. However, the mostrecent biographical work on both Rahner brothers is Karl H. Neufeld, Die Brüder Rah-ner: Eine Biographie (Freiburg: Herder, 1994).

4. Karl Rahner, “Thomas Aquinas,” Everyday Faith (London: Burns and Oates,1967) 188 (italics mine).

5. Karl Rahner and Marcel Viller, Aszese und Mystik in der Väterzeit: Ein Abriß,with an Introduction by Karl Heinz Neufeld (Freiburg: Herder, 1939; 2nd ed., 1989).

6. Karl Rahner, Helmuth Nils Loose, and Paul Imhof, Ignatius of Loyola, trans.Rosaleen Ockenden (London: Collins, 1979) 15-16.

towards holy mystery. While the experience of grace from within maynot always be made explicitly conscious or thematic, it does include thepossibility of a more explicit encounter with God. Faith, Rahner insists,is never communicated merely by a “conceptual indoctrination fromwithout;” rather, it can also be experienced as a reality within us.7

Indeed, he does not restrict this encounter with God to a privileged few,but presents it as a possibility for anyone (i.e., as an offer) in the midstof their everyday experiences of life.

b. Ignatian Influences

In an interview8 towards the end of his life, Rahner acknowledgedthat the spirituality of Ignatius of Loyola had a more profound signifi-cance on him than any theology or philosophy learned either inside oroutside his Order. This influence is, above all, evident in a piece wherehe has Ignatius of Loyola, founder of the Society of Jesus, speak toJesuits of today.9 In this article, Rahner reveals once again the quite per-sonal and deeply rooted primal experience of God that is at the heart ofhis theology — especially his understanding of spirituality. Towards theend of his life he came to see it as a kind of testament to his life and work.

Rahner’s interest in Ignatian spirituality can be traced back to hisearliest major theological studies on the “spiritual senses” according toOrigen, and in the Middle Ages, where he focussed on the contributionof Bonaventure.10 These articles arose out of the context of the Gebets-theologie of the Ignatian Exercises and need to be understood within thisframework.11 Chronologically too, the early publications of Rahner (onthe doctrine of the “spiritual senses” in Origen, Bonaventure, etc.) are

THE NOTION OF SPIRITUALITY IN KARL RAHNER 63

7. See Karl Rahner, “Theological Thinking and Religious Experience,” Karl Rah-ner in Dialogue: Conversations and Interviews 1965-1982, ed. Paul Imhof and HubertBiallowons, trans. ed. Harvey D. Egan (New York: Crossroad, 1986) 328.

8. Karl Rahner, “Gespräch mit Leo O’Donovan, New York (1978),” Im Gespräch,ed. Paul Imhof and Hubert Biallowons (Munich: Kösel Verlag, 1983) 2: 51.

9. Rahner et al., Ignatius von Loyola, 11-38.10. Karl Rahner, “The ‘Spiritual Senses’ according to Origen,” and “The Doc-

trine of the ‘Spiritual Senses’ in the Middle Ages,” Theological Investigations, Vol. 16,trans. D. Morland (London: DLT, 1979) 81-134 (henceforward abbreviated to TI).These articles first appeared in French in 1932 and 1933 respectively.

11. What was this “context?” Beginning in 1894, the Monumenta HistoricaSocietatis Jesu, 71 vols. (Madrid / Rome, 1894-1948), a collection of source materialon the founding of the Society of Jesus, helped shed new light on the origin of theIgnatian Spiritual Exercises. In turn, new investigations and research on Ignatius and onthe spiritual characteristics of the Jesuit Order were undertaken – in which both theRahner brothers were involved. See Karl H. Neufeld, “Unter Brüdern: ZurFrühgeschichte der Theologie K. Rahners aus der Zusammenarbeit mit H. Rahner,”Wagnis Theologie, ed. Herbert Vorgrimler (Freiburg: Herder, 1979) 341-354.

prior to the publications of his major philosophical works.12 Both KarlRahner and his brother Hugo Rahner closely followed, as well ascontributed to, the new research on the person of Ignatius and on theoriginal sources of Jesuit spirituality, undertaken in the period immedi-ately before the Second World War.13 During this period, there was achange in the then prevailing “baroque” view of Ignatius, interpretedprimarily as an ascetic, towards a growing appreciation of him as one ofthe pre-eminent mystics of the Church.14 Among those responsible forthis change were Otto Karrer, Erich Przywara, and Albert Steger, all ofwhom influenced the young Rahner by their writings, and, in the caseof the latter two, by their personal contact with him. Part of the reason,too, why Rahner showed such a keen theological interest in Ignatius isbecause he felt that the Exercises could form a subject of theology and,in a certain sense, be one of its sources.15

c. Rahner’s Early Spiritual Theology

During his early theological formation in Valkenburg, Holland(1929-33), Rahner concentrated on the study of spiritual theology, thehistory of spirituality, and patristic mysticism. We have already referredto his collaborative work with Hugo Rahner in this area. But we need togo further back to discover Rahner’s very first published text: “Warumuns das Beten nottut.”16 This work was written by Rahner as a twentyyear old in 1924, and is a short reflective meditation on the necessity of

64 DECLAN MARMION

12. Karl Rahner, Spirit in the World, trans. William Dych (New York: Herder andHerder, 1968). This first major philosophical work of Rahner’s was originally completedin May, 1936, and the first edition published by Rauch in Innsbruck in 1939.

13. Hugo Rahner, Ignatius von Loyola als Mensch und Theologe (Freiburg: Herder,1964). While both brothers displayed a common interest in Ignatius and in the Ignat-ian Exercises, Hugo Rahner, an historian and an outstanding authority on the subject ofIgnatius, was led to delve backwards into the tradition of the Founder of the Order. KarlRahner, on the other hand, starting with Ignatius, moved forwards in an attempt toarticulate how the Ignatian Exercises might be significant for contemporary theology andspirituality.

14. In Rahner’s view, the person most responsible for this growing appreciation ofIgnatius was Erich Przywara, a fellow Jesuit and long-time friend. For a personal accountof his debt to Przywara, see his “Laudatio auf Erich Przywara,” Gnade als Freiheit: Kleinetheologische Beiträge (Freiburg: Herder, 1968) 266-273.

15. Karl Rahner, The Dynamic Element in the Church (Freiburg/London:Herder/Burns & Oates, 1964) 87. Rahner also directed many retreats based on the Exer-cises. See, for example, Meditations on Priestly Life, trans. Edward Quinn (London:Sheed and Ward, 1970) and Spiritual Exercises (London: Sheed and Ward, 1976; reprint1986).

16. Karl Rahner, “Warum uns das Beten nottut,” Leuchtturm 18 (1924-25) 10-11.The text is also in Karl Rahner, Sehnsucht nach dem geheimnisvollen Gott: Profil, Bilder,Texte, ed. Herbert Vorgrimler (Freiburg: Herder, 1990) 77-80.

prayer. It reveals elements of Rahner’s spirituality which he was later todevelop, e.g., the heart as symbol for, or inner ground of, the humanperson, the longing of the Christian to understand and to do the will ofGod, and, finally, the searching for a God of mystery, who, in the lastanalysis, is beyond all our understanding and concepts.

Rahner’s spiritual classic is undoubtedly Worte ins Schweigen,17 acollection of meditations on aspects of God who is encountered insilent, prayerful reflection. In this series of ten meditations, Rahnerspeaks directly to the one who is God of his life, of his Lord Jesus, of hisprayer, of his knowledge, of law, of his daily routine, of those who areliving, of his brothers and sisters, of his vocation, and, finally, of theGod who is to come. This work, his first book publication, also revealshow central is the question of grace for all of Rahner’s theology andspirituality — grace as the self-communication of God to humanity.

While Worte ins Schweigen remains one of Rahner’s most successfulpublications, it is also, theologically, one of his most overlooked texts.One possible reason for this is that, at first sight, we are dealing herewith prayers and meditations, which seem to have little “theological”significance. However, on another level, they reveal a characteristic of allRahner’s theological thinking, namely, a return to, or better, a searchingfor the source, and a return to an original core experience. In Worte insSchweigen, the theme of the reflections is God — not as a concept or anidea, but as (the searching for) the God of our experience. And it is onlywhen this question of experience is taken seriously that the search forGod can be undertaken faithfully and correctly.

What experience is at issue here? One approach to this question isto examine the context out of which the prayers arose.18 These “conver-sations” of Rahner with God initially appeared, anonymously, in a pas-torally-orientated periodical for clergy in Vienna in 1937. The back-ground theme or framework for the periodical was the spiritual andpastoral renewal of priests in ministry, and it is precisely within thiscontext of ministry that Rahner wished to show how God can bediscovered. Each title of the ten meditations indicates the place ofencounter with God, and forms the starting-point from which theconversation with God, the “word into the silence,” begins.

THE NOTION OF SPIRITUALITY IN KARL RAHNER 65

17. Published in Innsbruck in 1938, this book has been one of the most success-ful of all of Rahner’s works. By 1967 it had reached its tenth edition and been translatedinto eight languages. ET: Encounters with Silence, trans. James M. Demske (Westmin-ster, MD: The Newman Press, 1963).

18. See Karl H. Neufeld, “Worte ins Schweigen: Zum erfahrenen Gottesver-ständnis Karl Rahners,” Zeitschrift für katholische Theologie 112 (1990) 427-436.

Also relevant to the more immediate context of the book’s appear-ance is the fact that, in the winter and summer semesters of 1937/38,Rahner had begun to lecture in Innsbruck on the relationship betweentheology and philosophy. These lectures were subsequently published asHörer des Wortes in 1941.19 Thus, both Worte ins Schweigen and Hörerdes Wortes belong chronologically together. However, there is also athematic relationship between the two works. In Hörer des Wortes, Rahneris exploring whether the human person is able to hear a word spoken byGod, i.e., to hear a possible revelation proceeding from God. The com-mon denominator in both titles is “Wort.” Even the words “Hören” and“Schweigen” indicate a certain correspondence — they indicate theimportance of a personal orientation on the part of the person towardsGod in order that a real communication between God and the personmay occur. The term “silence” has two sides. On the one hand, itdenotes the silence of God, echoing the silence of the dead, and frus-trating any attempts at prayer. On the other hand, and more positively,this “silence” represents that “boundless space” in which, alone, onefinds the love to make an act of faith. In Rahner’s words:

Your silence is the framework of my faith, the boundless spacewhere my love finds the strength to believe in Your love … Your lovehas hidden itself in silence, so that my love can reveal itself infaith.20

What is at issue here, then, is the question of revelation, but not inthe sense of a pure “word” revelation as opposed to a revelation in deeds.It would be a misunderstanding of Rahner’s notion of revelation to limitthe term “word” to a fixed proposition. Rather, the term “word,” in thecontext of these two early Rahnerian works, is to be seen as a metaphorfor that process of God’s self-communication to humanity which formsthe innermost center of the Christian understanding of existence.

Worte ins Schweigen is therefore an attempt to highlight and facil-itate in his readers that encounter (Begegnung) with God, which lies atthe heart of prayer and spirituality. Such an encounter transcends all ourwords and concepts of God, and is not the result of our own specula-tions:

Your Word and Your Wisdom is in me, not because I comprehendYou with my understanding, but because I have been recognized byYou as Your son and friend. Of course, this Word, spoken as it is out

66 DECLAN MARMION

19. Karl Rahner, Hörer des Wortes: Zur Grundlegung einer Religionsphilosophie(Munich: Kösel/Pustet, 1941, 2nd rev. ed., ed. J. B. Metz, Munich: Kösel, 1963). ET:Hearers of the Word, trans. R. Walls (London: Sheed and Ward, 1969).

20. Rahner, “God of the Living,” Encounters with Silence, 56.

of Your own Heart and marvelously spoken into mine, must still beexplained to me through the external word that I have accepted infaith, the “faith through hearing” of which St Paul speaks.21

In 1939 Rahner published what he called a brief outline on thethemes of asceticism and mysticism in the Patristic era: Aszese undMystik in der Väterzeit: Ein Abriß.22 In fact, this book was a completereworking of the French original by Marcel Viller who supported thepublication of the German text. Writing in the Foreword, Rahneradmits how the study of asceticism and mysticism had, to a large extent,become an independent discipline. Yet, the spiritual teaching and her-itage of the Church, he stressed, could not simply be a matter of anenthusiastic heart and pious devotion. Rather, it involved a critical orscientific reflection; hence, the importance of a thorough research intothe history of this spiritual heritage. While a number of detailed studieson specific, individual questions concerning the spiritual life of theChristian were available at this time, there was no introductory text oroverview of spirituality available in the German-speaking world. Hence,Rahner regarded his book as an introductory text on the history ofspirituality for beginners and interested laity.

From plan to publication the work took about three years tocomplete. Together with Geist in Welt 23 it forms one of Rahner’s mostcomprehensive early works. Unlike Geist in Welt, however, Aszese undMystik found only minor recognition from experts. Even later attemptsby Rahner to publish a new edition of the work met without success.

What is the relationship between Aszese und Mystik and Geist inWelt both of which were published in the same year? In Geist in Welt,Rahner attempted “to get away from so much that is called neo-Scholas-ticism and to return to Thomas himself, and, by doing this to movecloser to those questions which are being posed to contemporaryphilosophy.”24 A similar method can be detected in Aszese und Mystikwhere he attempted to move away from the ambiguous term “Spiritualität,”and return to those foundations and witnesses on which contemporaryChristian spirituality and piety is based. In this way, he hoped to makeaccessible a historical resource, namely the spiritual doctrine of the

THE NOTION OF SPIRITUALITY IN KARL RAHNER 67

21. Rahner, “God of my Knowledge,” Encounters with Silence, 31.22. Karl Rahner and Marcel Viller, Aszese und Mystik in der Väterzeit: Ein Abriß

(2nd ed., Freiburg: Herder, 1989).23. Unlike Aszese und Mystik, Geist in Welt was reprinted in 1957. According to

Karl Heinz Neufeld in his introduction to the second edition of Aszese und Mystik, 13*-15*, this factor has contributed significantly to the tendency to interpret Rahner fromthe perspective of Geist in Welt rather than from Aszese und Mystik.

24. Rahner, “Preface to the Second German Edition,” Spirit in the World, xlvii.

Fathers of the Church, whom, he believed, represented a living power— capable of enriching the spiritual lives of contemporary Christians.

Reference to two further works will conclude this representativesurvey of the spiritual publications of the early Rahner. Both werepublished in 1949. The first, Heilige Stunde und Passionsandacht 25 is aseries of meditations on the passion and death of Jesus, including ascriptural meditation on the seven last words of Jesus. The second, Vonder Not und dem Segen des Gebetes26 is a collection of sermons deliveredin Munich in the immediate aftermath of the Second World War. Thesehomilies express Rahner’s attempts to impart hope to his listeners in thecontext of their suffering, encouraging them to turn toward God intheir anguish and fears. In fact, he is dealing here with the difficultproblem of petitionary prayer. How was it possible to overcome theweary scepticism of many with regard to such prayer? For Rahner, thismeant listening attentively and with sympathy to those on whom theburden of life had pressed most heavily, and who felt that God hadfailed them. When he looked into the history of humanity, it was notwith the detached, dispassionate eye of one blind to the sorrow and pessimism around him. There was also a remarkable optimism at work,based on his conviction that each human life is caught up into theunspeakable nearness of the divine mystery hidden in it. It is to thisdescription of God as the mystery in human experience that we nowturn — a topic with which we will begin our discussion of some keythemes underlying Rahner’s spirituality.

2. Key Themes in Rahner’s Notion of Spirituality

a. God as Mystery

While there exist a number of key terms linking many of Rahner’skey ideas, one of the most significant is his preferred description of Godas “holy mystery” (das heilige Geheimnis).27 To be human is, in Rahner’sthinking, to be exposed to the “mystery” which pervades all of reality.The “restlessness of heart” — a notion traditionally associated with

68 DECLAN MARMION

25. Like Worte ins Schweigen, this work was also published in Innsbruck butunder the pseudonym Anselm Trescher (Trescher was his mother’s maiden name).

26. ET: Karl Rahner, Happiness through Prayer (London: Burns and Oates, 1958,1978).

27. For Rahner’s development of this topic, see his Foundations of Christian Faith:An Introduction to the Idea of Christianity, trans. William Dych (London: DLT, 1978)42-71. Henceforward, this work is abbreviated to FCF.

Augustine in his Confessions — has as its counterpart in Rahner’s theologythat questioning which he sees at the root of the human search for meaningand fulfillment. Such questioning provides an important context forRahner’s explanation of the “transcendent” nature of the human person:it helps to explain why we experience a certain dissatisfaction withanything finite purporting to answer, in an absolute way, the question ofhuman existence. In Rahner’s own terms, it is in their nature as spiritthat people open themselves to the unlimited horizons of the humansearch for meaning. In the depths of one’s heart, the individual is acapacity, a question, to which only the Absolute can answer — one is a“hearer,” waiting for a word from the Absolute.28

Without going into a detailed analysis of his concept of transcen-dental experience, we can say that, for Rahner, God is the mystery inhuman experience. In other words, God is the depth dimension inexperiences such as solitude, friendship, love, hope and death. We havementioned how finite objects cannot fill our infinite horizon. Suchencounters with limitation reveal our essential contingency, our depen-dency on a power greater than ourselves. These experiences of limit arehighlighted in such experiences as loneliness, disappointment, theingratitude of others, or, in more tragic circumstances, suffering, sick-ness, and death.29 But Rahner would claim that such experiences canalso be graced moments because they open us to the transcendent. Inbeing thrown back on our finite selves we also have the opportunity ofexperiencing the liberating power of submitting to the mystery thatlovingly supports and draws near to us.

How is Rahner’s description of the human person as a questionerwith an infinite horizon related to his description of the person as spirit?The term, “spirit,” when applied to the individual, means, for Rahner,both self-presence and questioning. In other words, self-presence is notan absolute possession of oneself, but a self-presence that goes out ofitself and is ordered to the world. One both possesses oneself and is insearch of oneself at the same time. Moreover, it is in this context of thequestioning nature of spirit that Rahner locates the question of God.Reflecting on one’s experience as a questioner, one realizes that the rangeof questions is open-ended:

Every goal that one can point to in knowledge and in action isalways relativized, is always a provisional step. Every answer is alwaysjust the beginning of a new question. One experiences oneself as

THE NOTION OF SPIRITUALITY IN KARL RAHNER 69

28. See Rahner, Hearers of the Word, 3-27.29. Rahner, “The Experience of God Today,” TI 11 (1974) 149-165, esp.

pp. 155-159.

infinite possibility because in practice and in theory one necessarilyplaces every sought-after result in question. One always situates it ina broader horizon which looms before one in its vastness.30

In short, in knowing the finite, one is already beyond the finite, i.e., onecan only recognize a limit as a limit when one sees it over against theunlimited or the infinite. According to Rahner, when one affirms thepossibility of a merely finite horizon of questioning, this possibility isalready surpassed, and the individual shows him or herself to be a beingwith an infinite horizon. If this view of Rahner’s is correct, then thequestion of the religious dimension of experience inevitably arises.Without an infinite horizon, one would be immersed in a world ofobjects, ceasing to question, thus evading the experience of transcendence.

Unlike the term spirit, the notion of transcendence connotes thatthe human person is dynamic, a process, on the way toward a goal thatis nothing less than the infinite itself. Despite the fact that we areimmersed in the world, we are also aware of ourselves as transcendingthe world of our immediate experience. Yet, our knowledge of the infi-nite is never something totally on its own. Rather, our experience ofGod, or the Infinite, is given with and through human experiences inthe world. For Rahner, therefore, every human experience has a religiousdimension.

This conviction of Rahner’s, that all human beings are essentiallyoriented to the Infinite, received its philosophical justification in Geistin Welt where he attempted to examine all that is implicitly involved inthe concrete act of human knowing. In this metaphysics of knowledge,Rahner sought to show that human beings are finite spirits whose cog-nitional life can only be properly understood by positing an infinitehorizon as its condition of possibility.31 This thesis, in its many differ-entiations, remained decisive for Rahner’s continued development intheology. In an essay on “The Experience of God Today” (1970), hewrites:

The moment we become aware of ourselves precisely as the limitedbeing which in so many ways we are, we have already oversteppedthese boundaries … We have experienced ourselves as beings whichconstantly reach out beyond themselves towards that which cannotbe comprehended or circumscribed, that which precisely as havingthis radical status must be called infinite, that which is sheer mystery.32

70 DECLAN MARMION

30. FCF, 32 (in this, and in other Rahner quotations, I have substituted inclusivelanguage).

31. See Rahner’s “Introductory Interpretation,” Spirit in the World, 15-22.32. Rahner, “The Experience of God Today, ” TI 11 (1974) 155-156.

A significant consequence of this insight is that the Infinite (or God orHoly Mystery) is never known or grasped by us as an object. Godremains concealed and unknown, since He is never the direct object ofknowledge, but is the infinite horizon within which every finite objectis apprehended.

Our discussion in the previous sections reminds us that theseinsights of Rahner in fact predate his more explicitly philosophicalworks and can also be found in some of his early prayers. One suchexample is the meditation entitled “God of Knowledge” in Encounterswith Silence, where he reflects on the limitations of knowledge in pene-trating to the heart of things, and to the depths of one’s being. Instead,the true heart of reality can only be fathomed when knowledge developsinto love, which, in turn, transforms a person in their very self:

Only knowledge gained through experience, the fruit of living andsuffering, fills the heart with the wisdom of love, instead of crushingit with the disappointment of boredom and final oblivion. It is notthe results of our own speculation, but the golden harvest of whatwe have lived through, that has power to enrich the heart and nour-ish the spirit.33

This reflection leads Rahner to assert that he “knows” God not primarily through words and concepts, but through experience — theexperience of living and suffering. It also reveals the existential rootof all theological knowledge — a root based in the experience ofbeing totally grasped by the love of God. Moreover, the meditationprovides us with an example of how Rahner reflects on the notion oftranscendence in two dimensions. The human person is a dynamismof both knowledge and love, and Rahner investigates the religiousdimension of the person under both these aspects. We have alreadymentioned his thesis that in knowing anything finite, one also at thesame time “knows” the infinite — precisely as the “condition of possibility” of knowing the finite. The significant consequence Rahner draws from this is that God can never be known, that is,“grasped” as an object:

The concept ‘God’ is not a grasp of God by which a person mastersthe mystery, but it is letting oneself be grasped by the mystery whichis present and yet ever distant.34

A similar type of reflection is operative in Rahner’s discussion ofthe dynamism of love. At the heart of human subjectivity is the mystery

THE NOTION OF SPIRITUALITY IN KARL RAHNER 71

33. Rahner, “God of Knowledge,” Encounters with Silence, 30.34. Rahner, FCF, 54.

of human freedom.35 The capacity for choosing among alternatives,points to a fundamental characteristic of human existence. But freedomof choice, Rahner argues, is not merely our freedom with regard to afinite object or possibility in the world; rather, it is the capacity for theinfinite, the power human beings have to assume responsibility for thetotality of their existence. In short, all the discrete acts of choice of aperson are really dimensions of the one freedom by which that personactualizes him or herself. Here again, for Rahner, the religious dimen-sion is evident. Firstly, one is free with regard to any finite objectbecause that finite reality exists within the infinite horizon of one’s free-dom. And, secondly, if one is conscious that one’s freedom exists withinthis infinite horizon, one is compelled to take a stance towards it. Inother words, if one lives within the Mystery, and if this Mystery is thecondition of possibility of a person’s finite freedom, then the questionemerges as to the type of free response possible vis à vis this Mystery:one can open oneself and surrender to the Mystery, or one can absolu-tize some finite object in the world. The latter approach would be a self-contradictory use of human freedom, since no finite reality can satisfy the dynamism of transcendence. For Rahner, God is the onlyterm for which transcendence exists. Thus, even in these brief reflectionson the relation between freedom and human transcendence, it becomesapparent that human freedom is ultimately a matter of a fundamentaloption, an option for or against God.

These reflections serve to show that, because the human person isspirit, he or she is also transcendence or a dynamism of knowledge andwill — oriented to nothing less than the infinite. Rahner’s claim, then,is that the human person is oriented to the Mystery, which he calls God,and that this orientation is a constitutive element of one’s being.36

Yet, assuming Rahner’s philosophical anthropology to be correct, itleads only to modest conclusions. While his reflections reveal that thequestion of God is unavoidable, they do not explain precisely how Godcan be the answer to the individual’s ceaseless questioning. In order toshow that God is not just the silent, nameless, transcendent and distantMystery, Rahner needs to reflect again on the human person as the

72 DECLAN MARMION

35. Rahner deals with this complicated notion in more detail in FCF, 26-31, 35-41, and 93-106. See also his article “Freedom,” TI 6 (1969) 178-198, esp. pp. 183-186. For a helpful analysis of how the nearness of God as Mystery is the guiding motifof Rahner’s entire theology, see John O’Donnell, “The Mystery of Faith in the Theologyof Karl Rahner,” The Heythrop Journal 25 (1984) 301-318.

36. Rahner, “The Concept of Mystery in Catholic Theology,” TI 4 (1966) 36-76.For Rahner’s analysis of the subject who is oriented to, and confronted by, Mystery, seethe “Second Lecture,” 48-60.

event of God’s self-communication, that is, on the person as a subject ofgrace.

Some implications for spirituality emerge from the above reflec-tions.37 Firstly, in Rahner’s eyes, to speak about the human is already tospeak about the divine. Underlying the myriad ordinary human eventsand experiences in which people are thrown back on themselves —moments of deep joy or deep pain for example — “is the one primalexperience: that the human person is more than the sum of chemicalelements and processes, that human life rests on an incomprehensiblemystery, indeed constantly begins to flow in that direction.”38 Secondly,this explains why, for Rahner, prayer cannot be the sole subject-matterfor spirituality. God is not only the mystery in our prayer, but also themystery we experience in the details of our daily lives. Thirdly, it can beseen that God’s presence cannot be limited solely to those experiencesthat are filled with consolation, but can also be found in experiences ofstruggle and suffering.

b. Christian Life: A Mysticism of Everyday Faith

A consistent thread running throughout Rahner’s writing on thespiritual life is a rejection of what he calls an elitist interpretation ofChristianity. In his reflections on spirituality and mysticism, Rahnerinsists that everyone is called to the immediacy of God’s self-presence, acall which, of course, can be rejected. Underlying this assertion is God’suniversal salvific will, and radical self-communication to all. Here we aretouching on an essential foundation of Rahner’s understanding of spiri-tuality, namely, his theology of grace, a topic which is beyond the scopeof this article. In the last section, we described how Rahner sees God asthe depth dimension in such experiences as solitude, friendship, etc. Forthe moment, however, we wish to explore Rahner’s understanding ofwhat he calls a mysticism of “everyday life.”39

According to Rahner, every Christian is called to a mysticism ofeveryday faith, hope and love that differs only in degree, and not inkind, from the extraordinary experiences of recognized mystics. One ofthe key tasks of Christian theology as a whole (and Christian mysticaltheology in particular) is to render intelligible how there is an experi-ence of being referred to Mystery even in the simplest acts of faith,

THE NOTION OF SPIRITUALITY IN KARL RAHNER 73

37. See Anice Callahan, “Traditions of Spiritual Guidance: Karl Rahner’s Insightsfor Spiritual Direction,” The Way 29 (1989) 341-347.

38. Vorgrimler, Understanding Karl Rahner, 14.39. See, for example, Rahner’s meditation “God of My Daily Routine,” Encoun-

ters with Silence, 45-52.

hope, and love which permeate daily life. In other words, Rahner ismoving away here from an understanding of mysticism as representingthe final stage of Christian perfection.40 Mysticism is thus not limited tothose who are technically called mystics in the Christian tradition.Instead, when Rahner says that the devout Christian of the future willbe a ‘mystic,’ he is stressing how a Christian’s faith-conviction will beintimately related to a genuine and wholly personal experience of God:

… The Christian of the future will be a mystic or he or she will notexist at all. If by mysticism we mean, not singular parapsychologicalphenomena, but a genuine experience of God emerging from theheart of our existence, this statement is very true and its truth andimportance will become still clearer in the spirituality of the future… Possession of the Spirit is not something of which we are madefactually aware merely by pedagogic indoctrination as a realitybeyond our existential awareness, but is experienced inwardly.41

So, when Rahner speaks of mysticism, he is not referring simply toextraordinary “mystical” phenomena such as visions, raptures, andecstasies, but rather to a personal, interior experience of, and unionwith, God’s Spirit. His thesis is that mystical experiences (in the sense ofmystical illumination and unification) are simply a variation of thatexperience of the Spirit which is radically offered to every person and toevery Christian. Behind this assertion lies an attempt to move beyondthe traditional “divisions” or stages in the spiritual life, through whichone must pass on the way to Christian perfection. In other words, it isinaccurate to assume that:

the ‘mystic’ is the only one who has gone or goes on that path toperfection of which the last stage directly and alone borders on one’sperfection … Christianity rejects such an elitist interpretation oflife, which can see a person’s perfection as attained only in thetrained mystic.42

It is this with problem of the gradual ascent to Christian perfectionthat Rahner is concerned, even from the beginning of his more scientificwritings on the theology of the spiritual life. Traditional divisions or

74 DECLAN MARMION

40. It would be incorrect, however, to claim that Rahner denies that there are nostages of growth in the spiritual life. Quite apart from Ignatius, he was well acquaintedwith the classical mystical works of St Teresa of Avila and St John of the Cross. Heregarded such mystics as “almost irreplaceable teachers” in rendering intelligible theirexperience of God. Rahner, “Teresa of Avila: Doctor of the Church,” Opportunities forFaith: Elements of a Modern Spirituality, trans. Edward Quinn (London: SPCK, 1970)123-126.

41. Rahner, “The Spirituality of the Church of the Future,” TI 20 (1981) 149.42. Rahner, “Experience of Transcendence from the Standpoint of Christian

Dogmatics,” TI 18 (1983) 175.

stages in the spiritual life presupposed a stage-by-stage process ofbecoming holy and perfect, which was also equated with a continualincrease in sanctifying grace. Rahner rejects such a quantitative, imper-sonal, conception of grace, which leads only to what he calls a growth in“ontic” sanctity.43 This rather artificial approach results in two irrecon-cilable conclusions: on the one hand, the “ontic” approach implies thatthere should be a continual increase of grace in the course of a longChristian life, that is, the person should have become more “perfect” orholy; yet, on the other hand, experience shows us that, in mostinstances, this is not the case. Without going into a detailed solution tothis problem, Rahner hints that a solution is nonetheless to be found ina more personalistic, and less entitative, conception of grace.

Returning to Rahner’s understanding of the term mysticism, we cansay that, for him, the term signifies both “an experience, the interiormeeting and union of a person with the divine infinity that sustains him or her and all other being,” and “the attempt to give a systematicexposition of this experience or reflection upon it (hence a scientific discipline).”44 Rahner also distinguishes between mysticism in the strictsense (i.e., the unusual experiences of the saints) and mysticism in awide sense (i.e., ordinary Christian experience in the person’s naturaldomain). He concedes, however, that the extraordinary mystical experi-ences of the saints are psychologically different from everyday experiencesof grace. They experience in an extraordinarily psychological way whatall Christians experience in a more hidden way.

Rahner is also concerned to locate the precise role of faith in suchmystical experience. He criticizes descriptions of mystical illuminationand unification in which God communicates himself so “immediately,”and intervenes so gratuitously, that such experiences are no longerperceived within the framework of faith. In his view, there can be notheologically higher experience on earth than that of faith in the Spiritof God, and a genuine mystical experience is only to be understood as a“variety” of this experience of grace in faith. The difference between themysticism of the saints and the less explicit form of ordinary Christianlife belongs not to the realm of the supernatural, but to the order ofpsychology or parapsychology. Mystical experience (in the strict sense)then, does not so much represent a “higher” stage of the Christian lifein grace, because the basic experience of God is not the privilege of a

THE NOTION OF SPIRITUALITY IN KARL RAHNER 75

43. Rahner, “Reflections on the Problem of the Gradual Ascent to Christian Per-fection,” TI 3 (1967) 8-13.

44. See “Mysticism,” in Karl Rahner and Herbert Vorgrimler, Theological Dictio-nary, ed. Cornelius Ernst (New York: Herder and Herder, 1965) 301.

few, but is given to all. This experience is not confined to the extraordi-nary lives of the mystics and the saints, but penetrates every aspect ofdaily life. Rahner’s understanding of mysticism is, therefore, not that ofa pure interiority divorced from the world.

We have previously referred to the element of the ineffable, of themysterious, in human existence, and how Rahner conceives of thehuman person as a being constantly reaching out beyond him or herself.This element of the ineffable is not something abstract, but is present inthe concrete experiences of everyday life. Examples of this mysticism ofeveryday life include:

experiences of “aloneness”, … when everything is “called in ques-tion,” … when the silence resounds more penetratingly than theaccustomed din of everyday life … when one is brought face to facewith one’s own freedom and responsibility, feeling this as a single andtotal factor embracing the whole of one’s life … when one suddenlymakes the experience of love and encounter, and suddenly noticesthat he or she has been accepted with a love which is absolute andunconditional …45

For Rahner, the secular mystical experience is the courageous and totalacceptance of life and of oneself even when everything tangible seems tobe collapsing. In short,

whenever secular life is lived with unreserved honesty and courage;… whenever there is a lived moderation without any thought ofreward; whenever there is a silent life of service to others, there too,can be found the mysticism of daily life.46

Such experiences point to that which, or better, to Him whom we callGod. And this experience, while it may be unacknowledged, unreflectedupon, or even suppressed, nonetheless takes place for most Christiansnot in meditation proper, but in the humdrum of everyday life. As acore-experience or experience of transcendence (which is also always anexperience of grace), it is mediated unthematically in one’s everyday lifethrough the discovery of God in all things.

It is to Rahner’s credit that he has provided a basis for a mysticismof everyday life which moves away from any elitist interpretations ofChristianity. He has managed to separate what is essential, namely, thepersonal core-experience of transcendence, which is possible under awhole variety of circumstances, from what is secondary, namely the

76 DECLAN MARMION

45. Rahner, “The Experience of God Today,” TI 11 (1974) 157.46. Harvey D. Egan, “‘The Devout Christian of the Future Will … Be a Mystic’:

Mysticism and Karl Rahner’s Theology,” Theology and Discovery: Essays in Honour ofKarl Rahner, S. J., ed. William J. Kelly (Milwaukee: Marquette University Press, 1980)155.

unusual phenomena which sometimes accompany mysticism. Finally, hecorrectly highlights how a genuine Christian mysticism, far from fleeingthe world, involves instead an ongoing attempt to discover and acceptthe presence of Holy Mystery in the everyday.

c. Prayer as Surrender of the Heart

A frequently recurring characteristic, which we have noted, ofRahner’s theology and spirituality is its starting-point in Rahner’s ownpersonal, even mystical, experience of God (with its insights as well asits questions). From this concrete starting-point, he tries to understandthe traditional faith of the Church.47 He also invites others to discoversimilar experiences in themselves, or even to consider theologizing fromquite different experiences. In either case, there is the stress on a returnto one’s personal experience, while attempting, at the same time, toavoid an arbitrary subjectivism in matters of faith. Rahner’s theologyhas, at times, been labelled “anthropological,” which means that his theology takes as its starting-point the experiences, fears and questionsof contemporary men and women. What does it mean, then, to describeRahner’s experience of God as mystical? In the context of Rahner’s theology (and of the Jesuit-Ignatian tradition whence he comes), itmeans that his theology grows out of prayer, is accompanied by prayer,and, finally, leads back again to prayer.48 Prayer, here, refers to a “letting-go,” a surrender, which embraces all aspects of our lives. It is thetrusting, explicit, loving acceptance of the ultimate mystery of one’slife.49 The title of this section describes prayer as surrender of the heart.The word “heart” is significant in Rahner’s reflections on prayerbecause, for him, it is a primordial symbol (Ursymbol) of the center ofthe human person.50 In the context of prayer, the heart represents theplace of our encounter with, and our surrender to, the mystery of God.When he comes to a discussion of prayer, however, the basic questionrevolves around the possibility of prayer today, given the pluralistic

THE NOTION OF SPIRITUALITY IN KARL RAHNER 77

47. This is of one the basic characteristics (“Grundzüge”) of Rahner’s theologyaccording to Vorgrimler, in “Grundzüge der Theologie Karl Rahners,” Sehnsucht nachdem geheimnisvollen Gott, 14-31.

48. Vorgrimler, “Grundzüge der Theologie Karl Rahners,” 15. See also Karl-Heinz Weger, “‘Ich glaube, weil ich bete': Für Karl Rahner zum 80. Geburtstag,” Geistund Leben 57 (1984) 48-52.

49. Karl Rahner, Christians at the Crossroads (London: Burns and Oates, 1975)48-50.

50. Rahner, “‘Behold this heart!’: Preliminaries to a Theology of Devotion to theSacred Heart,” and “Some Theses for a Theology of Devotion to the Sacred Heart,” TI3 (1967) 321-352.

nature of contemporary society. A second derivative question followsfrom this, and concerns the form prayer must take, if it is to be mean-ingful.

Prayer, for Rahner, constitutes a fundamental act of human exis-tence. It is something that can only be properly grasped by its practice.As a fundamental reality of human existence, it can be experienced assomething that has already been given to us as an offer to our freedom— which we can either accept or brush aside. Rahner subsequentlyspeaks of the possibility of prayer today because he is aware of the majordifficulties (theological and otherwise) that make prayer hard or impos-sible. One difficulty has to do with the effects of the phenomenal devel-opment in what he calls the “exact sciences” (e.g., empirical psychology,genetics, biochemistry, and similar disciplines), leading to an explosionin knowledge about the human person. The temptation, in all of this, isto understand oneself in terms of a computer, rather than acknowledgingthe remnant, the not-yet-known, the “more,” which not only persists inthese exact sciences, but which is also experienced as the element ofmystery in human life. Prayer, however, being a realization of thehuman person, can never be the object of such exact sciences, because itescapes such exact and lucid treatment. Nevertheless, scepticism anddoubt about the possibility of prayer persist, and these are furtherevident in such problems as: the apparent absence and intangibility ofGod, the difficulty in understanding God as a “person” who addressesus, and whom we can address, and finally, the difficulty of petitionaryprayer.51

When Rahner claims that prayer is best grasped by its practice, hemeans that when someone accepts themselves in the totality of theirexistence and so experiences themselves as confronted with the incom-prehensible mystery embracing this existence, then such a person is livingout what prayer really is and means. In other words, Rahner starts withthe reality of prayer: the human person can and does, in fact, pray. Thisability to say You to God (dieses Dusagenkönnen) sums up the essence ofthe human person as “partner,” one who must still surrender, but onewho has received everything including the ability to address God.52 Inhis guidelines for education for prayer, Rahner suggests that, prior toany theological treatment of prayer, there should be an attempt at an

78 DECLAN MARMION

51. For a discussion of some of these difficulties, including prayer to the saintsand to the dead, see Rahner’s contribution in Karl Rahner and Johann Bapist Metz,The Courage To Pray (London: Burns and Oates, 1980) 29-87.

52. Rahner, Christians at the Crossroads, 55. Since English does not have theDu/Sie distinction as in German, some of the original sense is lost here in translation.

initiation (eine Mystagogie), into one’s own personal experience of mys-tery including that mystery which we call God, “whose reality cannot bemerely indoctrinated from outside, but is always experienced by us inour present life mysteriously, implicitly, and silently.”53 Indeed, we sawhow Rahner refers to a whole array of everyday experiences permeatingone’s life that can lead to prayer.54 When, a person learns to face andaccept (and not repress) these experiences with an incomprehensiblecourage, then they are already on the threshold of true prayer and onecan speak of a genuine initiation or mystagogy. A person’s apparentlysecular life, on the one hand, and their explicit prayer, on the other, canthus mutually interpenetrate, or, to put it another way, apparently secularexperiences can be regarded as an opening onto more formal prayer.

We have seen how Rahner views prayer as a fundamental act(Grundakt) of human existence that can assume different forms. In afurther step, he maintains that such fundamental acts are prior to anysubsequent reflection on them, i.e., these acts belong on a more funda-mental level to the human person than the words, language and conceptsin which they are expressed. This is a central thesis of Rahner on prayer:the completion of the act of prayer takes place prior to any attempt toexpress this in words. Thus, he describes prayer not so much as a “speak-ing”, but in terms of “movement” (Bewegung). In other words, hegrounds the meaning of prayer not on the conceptual level but in theessential core of the human person.55

The distinction above between prayer as a fundamental act of theperson, and the second, conceptual level of expressing such an act inwords, language, actions, etc., reveals two aspects of prayer, whichRahner describes as “transcendental” (transzendental) and “categorial”(kategorial) respectively.56 By “transcendental,” he is referring to that apriori constitution of the human person which is always open to thatwhich he calls “mystery.” And, it is on the basis of this transcendental

THE NOTION OF SPIRITUALITY IN KARL RAHNER 79

53. Rahner, Opportunities for Faith: Elements of a Modern Spirituality, trans. E.Quinn (London: SPCK, 1970) 59.

54. “Wherever there is selfless love, wherever duties are carried out without hopeof reward, wherever the incomprehensibility of death is calmly accepted, wherever peo-ple are good with no hope of reward, in all these instances the Spirit is experienced, eventhough a person may not dare give this interpretation to the experience.” Rahner, “Howis the Holy Spirit Experienced Today?,” Karl Rahner in Dialogue, 142. See also his“Reflections on the Experience of Grace,” TI 3 (1967) 86-90.

55. Klaus P. Fischer, “Wo der Mensch an das Geheimnis grenzt: Die mystagogi-sche Struktur der Theologie Karl Rahners,” Zeitschrift für katholische Theologie 98 (1976)164.

56. Rahner, FCF, 31-35, 51-68. See also, “Religious Feeling Inside and Outsidethe Church,” TI 17(1981) 228-242.

nature of the human person (i.e., one’s absolute openness to God), thatprayer as a dialogue can be intelligible. If, in such prayer, we experienceourselves as those spoken to by God, and understand this as our trueessence by freely accepting it, then our prayer is already a dialogue withGod.

Alongside this first transcendental aspect of prayer, Rahner refers toa second “categorial” aspect, namely, the concrete, historical content ofone’s prayer. Influenced by the Ignatian Exercises, Rahner has in mind,here, a particular, categorial “object of choice,” (e.g., the choice of a stateof life) which may be understood as part of the dialogical relationshipbetween the person and God within the broader framework outlinedabove. Yet Rahner is keen to emphasize that prayer as an expression ofour love of God does not always manifest itself in acts of an explicitlyreligious nature. Love of God is also affirmed, at least implicitly, in theunselfish love of neighbor. If this were not the case, Rahner argues,prayer would quickly denigrate into a religious solipsism.

Having explored some of the key themes underlying Rahner’sunderstanding of spirituality, we will now focus, in the final part of thearticle, on what Rahner means by the term “spirituality,” and on how helinks this term to his understanding of theology. From our discussionabove, it is evident that one of Rahner’s principal concerns is to over-come the division or “compartmentalizing” of faith and everyday life bydeveloping a “spirituality of the everyday” (eine Alltagsspiritualität).57

3. Towards a Definition of Spirituality in Rahner

a. Linking Theology and Spirituality

In the Preface to his Foundations of Christian Faith, Rahner statesthat his intention is to provide an intellectually honest justification ofChristian faith.58 However, we have to go further back to discover thereasons behind this intention. The context was the immediate aftermathof Vatican II, and the task was to initiate a reform of theological studyin the light of the Council’s Decree on the Training of Priests, OptatamTotius.59 Rahner’s contribution to the debate was to stimulate discussionon the development of a new concept of theological study based on the

80 DECLAN MARMION

57. Elmar Klinger, Das absolute Geheimnis im Alltag entdecken: Zur spirituellenTheologie Karl Rahners (Würzburg: Echter Verlag, 1994) 37.

58. FCF, xi-xii. See also Rahner’s, Zur Reform des Theologiestudiums, QuaestionesDisputatae, 41 (Freiburg: Herder, 1969) 64 (n. 49).

59. See Optatam Totius, esp. nn. 13-18.

directions given in the decree.60 Envisaged was a type of introductorycourse (or Grundkurs) which Rahner hoped would ground the innerunity of all the individual theological disciplines. It was not a questionof offering a pious introduction to theology aimed solely at religiousedification. Instead, such a course would be situated within the frameworkof intellectual reflection, (i.e., it is an attempt to offer an intellectualjustification for faith), while at the same time, it would be especiallyconcerned with the personal decision to believe.

One reason for the necessity of such an introductory course intheology, according to Rahner, is that the contemporary theologicalstudent is no longer supported by a homogeneous religious environment.The practice and presence of Christianity is no longer something thatcan simply be taken for granted. Nevertheless, it must be possible, heargues, to help the beginner in theology with an intellectually honestaffirmation of the Christian faith. The individual theological disciplinescannot accomplish this by themselves because they have become toosplintered, fragmented, and specialized.61 At first sight, it may seem thatintellectual honesty has to do with maintaining a sceptical reserve,devoid of any personal self-commitment, in a position of dispassionateneutrality. However, Rahner refuses to see intellectual honesty and thedecision to believe as mutually exclusive. In fact, even the attempt tolive without self-commitment, and in this sense to remain “neutral,” isitself a decision. Faith, on the other hand, involves the “taking of sides,”i.e., a decision, whereby “the ultimate meaning of existence is acceptedand embraced as God’s word to us.”62 Indeed, Rahner views faith as adecision of hopeful courage, in that this decision can be taken evenwhen one feels weighed down by uncertainty and darkness. Moreover,this decision is never solely the outcome of rational speculation, i.e., itis prior to any theorizing on our part. While Rahner cannot be accusedof downplaying the intellectual element in faith, he is highlighting,what he calls, the “existential difference” between our lived experienceand our theoretical evaluation of such experience.63

There is, it seems, a tension present in Rahner’s thought here, atension which is reflected in both his theological and more spiritual

THE NOTION OF SPIRITUALITY IN KARL RAHNER 81

60. Rahner, Zur Reform des Theologiestudiums, esp. 51-98.61. Indeed, this situation of pluralism in contemporary theology — what Rahner

terms “interdisciplinary fragmentation” — only underscores the need for such an intro-ductory course. See FCF, 8.

62. Rahner, “Intellectual Honesty and Christian Faith,” TI 7 (1971) 56-57.63. Ibid., 53. This “existential difference” manifests itself also in his distinction

between concrete lived faith and theological reflection. There is the “always more” thatis entailed in the decision to believe, to live in a particular way.

writings. On the one hand, he is attempting an introduction to the ideaor concept (Begriff) of Christianity, while on the other, he does not wishto restrict this introduction to a mystagogical initiation — which is theprimary concern of his more spiritual writings. Yet, a neat distinctionbetween Rahner’s spirituality and theology is, for the most part, artifi-cial.64 There is always a tension, he concedes, between our theologicalconcepts and our attempts to relate these concepts back to an originalexperience. This tension, moreover, indicates his basic conviction thattheological concepts are, at best, a rather limited expression of what hasalready been experienced and lived through, more originally, in thedepths of one’s existence.65 Indeed, Rahner never considered his specifi-cally theological writings as “scientific” in the strict sense of the term —even these writings were to have an “edifying” purpose.66 Theology, inhis view therefore, also has a “mystagogical” task.67 It is here that theborders between his spiritual and more strictly theological writingsbecome rather fluid. We have already seen that Rahner’s “spiritual” writ-ings consist primarily in prayers, meditations and homilies, aimed less atscholarly precision than as a stimulus to help people discover and“make” a similar experience themselves. In this sense, Rahner character-ized his more spiritual writings as “pre-scientific” (vorwissenschaftlich).What is at issue here is that all theological reflection begins and ends inthe holy mystery of God. A theology that does not acknowledge this

82 DECLAN MARMION

64. Rahner’s comment on the underlying intention of the different essays in volume 16 of Investigations indicates his desire “to show how religious experiences of aspiritual or mystical kind can overflow and be transposed into the idiom of theologicalreflection. In this way the rift, all too common even today, between lived piety andabstract theology may be bridged.” TI 16 (1979) 72, n. 12.

65. FCF, 17.66. “Brief von P. Karl Rahner,” in Klaus P. Fischer, Der Mensch als Geheimnis: Die

Anthropologie Karl Rahners. Mit einem Brief von Karl Rahner (Freiburg: Herder, 1974) 402.67. Theology, in this sense, becomes “instruction in the experience of mystery.”

Referring to the theology of Thomas Aquinas, Rahner reflects “ … that the highest pre-cision and sober objectivity of true theology ultimately serve only one purpose: to forceone out of the lucid clarity of one’s existence into the mystery of God, where one nolonger grasps but is moved, where one no longer reasons but adores, where one does notmaster but is overpowered. Only where the theology of concepts and comprehensionraises itself and is transformed into the theology of overwhelming incomprehensibility isit really theology. Otherwise it is at bottom merely human chatter, however correct itmay be. The ‘Adoro te devote, latens Deitas, quae sub his figuris vere latitas’ must notalways be recited lyrically; it must be the central principle of all theological thought andknowledge.” Everyday Faith, 189-190. Put differently, we could say, with Rahner, that alltheological reflection begins and ends in prayer. This experience of God in prayer (aswell as in other situations and activities) is one of the basic characteristics linking Rahner’s spirituality and theology. See Vorgrimler’s comments on this in Rahner, Sehn-sucht nach dem geheimnisvollen Gott, 14-24.

dimension of mystery, the reductio in mysterium (or more precisely, the“reductio in mysterium Dei”)68 has, in his view, failed in its true mis-sion. It has failed to recognize the analogical nature of theologicalpropositions and remained stuck on the conceptual level.69

Elmar Klinger, a former pupil of Rahner’s, has offered some perceptive comments on this problem of the relationship between theology and spirituality in Rahner’s writings.70 He finds a point ofintersection between theology and spirituality in Rahner with thenotion of the experience of God. The Rahnerian notion of spirituality,according to Klinger, consists essentially in an experience of God, whichis at the core of what it means to be Christian. Theology, then, in a second step, reflects on this experience, describes and elucidates it. Inother words, theology both grows out of the spiritual life and remains indebt to it. In effect, Rahner understands theology as the “science ofmystery,” which ultimately transcends the formulation of mere humanwords and which calls for an attitude of trembling and silent adoration.Thus, the mystagogical task of theology is to appeal to the basic experienceof grace, that is:

to bring all human beings again and again to a fresh recognition ofthe fact that all this immense sum of distinct statements of theChristian faith basically speaking expresses nothing else than animmense truth, … the truth namely that the absolute mystery thatis, that permeates all things, upholds all things, and endures eter-nally, has bestowed itself as itself in an act of forgiving love uponhuman beings, and is experienced in faith.71

In our examination of a number of the connections that existbetween Rahner’s theology and spirituality, we have also attempted toindicate the mystical structure of his theology.72 Our concluding section

THE NOTION OF SPIRITUALITY IN KARL RAHNER 83

68. Rahner, “The Concept of Mystery in Catholic Theology,” esp. the “ThirdLecture,” TI 4 (1966) 60-73, and “The Hiddenness of God,” TI 16 (1979) 227-243.See also his “Third Lecture” on “Reflections on Methodology in Theology,” TI 11(1974) 101-114. In his description of some of the fundamental characteristics of Rahner’s theology, Karl Lehmann gives the “spiritual element” pride of place, seeing inthis the living source or ground for the dynamism of Rahner’s theology. Karl Lehmann,“Theologie aus der Leidenschaft des Glaubens: Gedanken zum Tod von Karl Rahner,”Stimmen der Zeit 202 (1984) 294.

69. On the occasion of his eightieth birthday, Rahner gave a lecture to theCatholic Academy of the archdiocese of Freiburg (11/12 February, 1984) entitled“Erfahrungen eines katholischen Theologen,” in which he highlights once more the ana-logical nature of all theological language. Karl Rahner in Erinnerung, ed. Albert Raffelt,Freiburger Akademieschriften, 8 (Düsseldorf: Patmos, 1994) 134-148.

70. Klinger, Das absolute Geheimnis im Alltag entdecken, 47-60.71. “Reflections on Methodology in Theology,” TI 11 (1974) 105.72. Rahner’s theology can be called mystical for three reasons: “1) It takes seri-

ously the experience, although often hidden or repressed of God’s self-communication;

will concentrate more particularly on Rahner’s use of the term “spiritu-ality,” the contexts in which this term arises, and the meaning he attrib-utes to it.

b. Components of a Definition

While Rahner, it seems, was not disposed to provide a neat defini-tion of the term, “spirituality,” it is possible to deduce from his writingswhat he meant by this term, and what he considers to be the moreimportant elements in Christian spirituality. We have already examineda number of these “themes,” and are now in a position to provide amore precise indication of how the term itself was employed by Rahnerin his spiritual writings.

Although Rahner was always reluctant to make a hard and fastdivision of spirituality and theology into two separate academic disci-plines, it is noteworthy that one of his earliest publications, Aszese undMystik, consisted precisely in a historical study of early Christian asceticismand mysticism. The title of the book offers a clue as to how spiritualitywas usually understood at that time, namely, the pursuit of perfection.Further, the German word “Spiritualität” derives from the French (“laspiritualité”), and is a relatively recent addition to the German theolog-ical vocabulary. Instead, the more frequent term that we find in Rah-ner’s early writings is the older word “Frömmigkeit.” This term can betranslated as “piety” or “devotion.” However, it would be inaccurate torestrict the use of this term in Rahner solely to his early writings.73 It isprobably more accurate to say that he uses the terms “Frömmigkeit” and“Spiritualität” interchangeably, without making a sharp separationbetween them.74

There are a number of underlying issues that Rahner is grapplingwith in his discussion of what spirituality entails. One of these is what

84 DECLAN MARMION

2) it leads persons into their own deepest mystery by awakening, deepening, and expli-cating what every person already lives; and 3) it attempts to compress, to simplify, andto concentrate all Christian beliefs by indicating how they evoke the experience of God’sloving self-communication to us in the risen Christ.” Harvey D. Egan, An Anthology ofChristian Mysticism (Collegeville, MA: The Liturgical Press, 1991) 600.

73. For example, piety (Frömmigkeit) is the theme of Rahner’s article, “ReligiousFeeling Inside and Outside the Church,” TI 17 (1981) 228-242. See also the lateressays: “Devotion to the Sacred Heart Today,” TI 23 (1984) 117-128 and “Courage forDevotion to Mary,” TI 23 (1984) 129-139.

74. A good example of such an interchangeable use of the two terms is to befound in an article of Rahner’s entitled “Christian Living Formerly and Today” (“Fröm-migkeit früher und heute”) in TI 7 (1971) 3-24. Rahner was aware of the individualis-tic connotations that make up much of traditional piety and devotion. Hence, he latercame to regard the terms “piety” and “devotion” as less apt to express the notion ofChristian spirituality.

he calls the church-relatedness of personal piety. In other words, a per-son’s relationship with God is shaped by (though not identical with)their relationship to the Church. Christian spirituality, for Rahner,involves both these elements: the Church and the individual. However,the matter is also more complicated than this, because, while there is alegitimate ecclesial dimension to spirituality, there also exists spirituality(and piety) outside the Church. To return to the ecclesial aspect, Rahnerconcedes that the importance one ascribes to this dimension depends onone’s view of the Church, and the question of its indispensability or oth-erwise for the salvation of humanity.75 In his view, Christianity (and thisincludes Christian spirituality) is essentially ecclesial, in that it is morethan an affair of a person’s subjective and pious dispositions.

In short, Rahner sees no inherent contradiction between spiritualityunderstood as an absolutely personal experience of grace in the individual,and the fact that this spirituality can (and must) find a concrete ecclesialexpression, both in the sacraments of the Church, as well as in its devo-tional life and practices. However, he would claim that certain ecclesialexpressions of piety are secondary, and do not form the essential core ofwhat makes up Christian spirituality. One must not confuse too readily,he reminds us, particular church forms of piety with that “anonymous”piety that exists outside of the Church.76 Nevertheless, Rahner alsomaintains a oneness of piety in the Church and outside it. This onenessresides in the primal experience of God which, as we have seen, is an apriori transcendental experience of the human person, and is eitherfreely accepted or rejected. Rahner concludes his reflections by suggest-ing that Christian spirituality in the future will concentrate on what ismost essential to it, namely, on a personal experience of God. Such anexperience forms the most primal and sustaining ground of all spiritual-ity — both inside and outside the Church. We have shown how Rahnerdistinguishes between a primal experience of God, and a reflective, verbally objectifying knowledge of God. In other words, he distinguishes(and connects) personal spiritual experiences (such as love, joy, fear, etc.)and their verbal objectification in reflective form. Further, we notedhow this primal experience of God belongs to the transcendental nature ofthe human person, as the direction towards which this transcendence tends.

An objection to Rahner’s proposal might be made at this point. Ishis understanding of the essential core of spirituality not advocating areturn to the “spiritual individualism” of the past? He is aware that

THE NOTION OF SPIRITUALITY IN KARL RAHNER 85

75. We cannot go into Rahner’s ecclesiology here, but merely draw attention tohis article, “The Spirituality of the Church of the Future,” TI 20 (1981) 152-153.

76. Rahner, “Religious Feeling Inside and Outside the Church,” TI 17 (1981) 231.

many Christians of his generation could certainly be accused of this, butin his vision of a spirituality of the future, he also outlines the impor-tance of “fraternal community,” even if he is hesitant to pinpoint whatexactly he means by this. It seems he wishes to leave open the possibil-ity of what he calls “a communal experience of the Spirit.”77 Rahner wasreluctant to dismiss phenomena (such as baptism in the Spirit, andspeaking in tongues, etc.), which he believed could occur in prayergroups of the Charismatic and Pentecostal movements. His intuition, atany rate, even if he did not offer any recipes of how this could comeabout, was that a more fraternal or communally lived spirituality wassomething that still needed to be developed.

To sum up, it is clear that Rahner is constantly attempting to make agreater link between spirituality and everyday life. His early historical stud-ies of spirituality taught him how the spiritual life was too often presentedas a type of sublime superstructure placed over and above the normalChristian life. Thus, the “spiritual” people lived in monasteries, convents,or similar institutions, and were considered “professionals” in Christianity.There, they were able to pray, do penance, and strive after holiness andperfection, without having to be “distracted” by everyday, worldlyconcerns. Today, that situation has changed. The agnostic milieu, and theconstant threat of the annihilation of humanity are just two characteristicsof modern society which, he believes, make it impossible and irresponsiblefor the contemporary Christian to remain untouched by the world in atype of spiritual paradise. Indeed, for Rahner, a person will only be able tocome to terms with this world to the extent that one is radically Christian.This, we have seen, implies an experience of God in the depths of one’sbeing, which he characterizes as “mystical,” but not in an elitist sense.Finally, Rahner has described spirituality as “simply a question of copingwith our life’s work in a Christian way.”78 Even given the great variety ofexpressions of Christian life, the root of all spirituality lies in the act ofentrusting the plurality of one’s life calmly and silently to God. His con-cern, moreover, is not to speak of spirituality in an overly abstract manner.Instead, spirituality is primarily Christian life in faith, hope and love.

Declan Marmion holds the S.T.L. degree from the Katholieke UniversiteitLeuven. At present he is engaged in doctoral studies there, concentrating inparticular on the notion of “spirituality” in the writings of Karl Rahner. He isa priest of the Marist congregation (Irish Province). Current address: MaristCommunity, Tiensevest 124, 3000 Leuven (Belgium).

86 DECLAN MARMION

77. Rahner, “The Spirituality of the Church of the Future,” TI 20 (1981) 151.78. Rahner, “The Spirituality of the Secular Priest,” TI 19 (1983) 103.