Augustine, Rahner and Trinitarian Exegesis

Yesterday, I mentioned that the Robinsons have been a bit busy writing books. I reviewed three books by Levi, my six-year-old son. He likes to remind me that he has composed more books than I have. Thus, it was only fitting that I review his works first.

But today it’s my turn.

Though its title lacks the catchiness of Levi Robinson’s publications (most notably Flip It, Don’t Rip It), the title, Augustine, Rahner and Trinitarian Exegesis: An Exegetical Exploration of Augustine’s Exegesis of Scripture as a Foundation for Rahner’s Trinitarian Project and Rule, still gives some clues to what the book is about.

St Augustine: arguably the most influential theologian since the close of the New Testament.

Karl Rahner: arguably the most significant Roman Catholic theologian of the 20th century. A big player in Vatican II. But he’s the kind of theologian that Protestants and Orthodox theologians pay a lot of attention to. He began what some people describe as a “Trinitarian Revival” in 20th century theology. (Other people think that’s a massive exaggeration.)

Trinitarian Exegesis: how we understand the Trinity in light of the Scriptures, and the Scriptures in light of the Trinity (the emphasis of the book is more on the former here)

An Exegetical Exploration of Augustine’s Exegesis of Scripture as a Foundation for Rahner’s Trinitarian Project and Rule: basically, the book is about how Augustine’s exegesis of Scripture supports Karl Rahner’s broader Trinitarian project, and particularly his “Rule” (that the economic Trinity is the immanent Trinity and vice versa)

Some context

In 1967, Rahner published an influential essay called Der Dreifaltige Gott (The Trinity). he lamented the isolation of the doctrine of the Trinity from “the economy of salvation” (the created realm in which God acts to bring about salvation) and the greater body of religious thought in Western Christianity. According to Rahner, this isolation ultimately found its genesis in the theology of St Augustine.

Problems Rahner Detects

Here are some of the problems Rahner detects in Augustine and the Augustinian-Western tradition that followed:

1. The doctrine of the Trinity is too far removed from the Bible

2. God’s one-ness and three-ness have been unhelpfully separated

3. It seems like the Father or Spirit could have taken on flesh, meaning that there’s nothing “peculiar” or “particular” about the Son being the “God-Man”.

4. The doctrine of the Trinity has been isolated from the doctrine of creation

5. The doctrine of the Trinity has no practical relevance for every day Christian faith

6. The doctrine of the Trinity ignores the Old Testament

7. The doctrine of the Trinity is disconnected from the doctrine of salvation

8. The doctrine of the missions (the idea that the Son and Spirit are sent into time and space at Christmas and Pentecost) have been disconnected from the processions (the idea that the Son eternally proceeds from the Father, and the Spirit eternally proceeds from Father and Son)

To overcome the alleged shortcomings of the tradition, Rahner proposed his Rule, that “the economic Trinity is the immanent Trinity and vice versa”. The economic Trinity refers to the God as he is towards us, while the immanent Trinity refers to God as he is in himself.

This Rule doesn’t mean that there are two “Trinities”. Rather, it simply means that the God who reveals himself in space and time (aka “the economy of salvation”) is the very same God who exists within himself eternally. Therefore, the relations we see between Father, Son and Spirit in time and space (think economic Trinity) are something of a temporal manifestation of their eternal relations (think immanent Trinity). The economic is grounded in and reveals the immanent.

Problems Detected with Rahner

In recent decades many have questioned the explanatory power of the Rule, noting various alleged incongruities between the economic Trinitarian relations and Rahner’s Latin conception of the Trinitarian relations. Some alleged problems:

1. If the Father-Son relationship in time reveals their eternal relationship, and the Son is subordinate to the Father in time, doesn’t Rahner’s Rule mean that the Son is therefore subordinate to the Father in eternity?

2. If the Father transfers authority to the Son in time, doesn’t that mean that introduce reversibility or interchangeability into the Father–Son relationship? Wouldn’t Rahner’s Rule mean that there is reversibility in the eternal relations too?

3. Again, on the reversibility thing, doesn’t the idea of mutuality within the Father–Son relationship (think mutual love, glory, etc.) in time further introduce reversibility, or even “mutual subordination” into the doctrine of the Trinity if we adopt Rahner’s Rule?

4. The Bible mentions all three divine persons in multiple patterns (e.g., Father–Son–Spirit, Father–Spirit–Son, Son–Father–Spirit etc.). If we deduce from this that there is no single order or taxis in the economic Trinity, wouldn’t Rahner’s Rule mean that there is no real order in the immanent Trinity as well?

5. How can there be an eternal analogue to the Son’s return to the Father upon mission complete?

6. Doesn’t the Son–Spirit relationship seem to be inverted at various points in time (e.g., Jesus’ incarnation, baptism, sending, and empowerment in the Spirit, crucifixion, resurrection, and Pentecostal outpouring of the Spirit)? If we apply Rahner’s Rule, wouldn’t that create problems for idea that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son [Latin Filioque, literally “and fromthe Son”]

7. Given the alleged changes in Son–Spirit relationship in time, wouldn’t Rahner’s Rule open up the Trinity in eternity to continuous change?

Augustine Saves the Day

Having outlined the problems, I then embark upon a systematic program of bustin’ some Augustine (or bust-een some August-een depending on how you like to pronounce his name).Through close and sustained analysis of Augustine’s exegesis of Scripture, my book argues that Augustine’s Trinitarian exegesis offers significant—though not inexhaustible—support for Rahner’s Trinitarian project and, particularly, his Rule.

Firstly, it argues that Augustine provides weighty, biblically rich, support for Rahner’s Trinitarian agenda at exactly those points where Rahner is explicitly critical of Augustine and the “Augustinian-Western tradition”, overcoming various weaknesses detected in the later tradition, and pre-empting many of Rahner’s later solutions.

Secondly and consequently, it argues that Augustine offers a scriptural reading strategy that addresses the major exegetical difficulties perceived to emerge from Rahner’s Rule. Thus, in Augustine’s exegesis of Scripture, the Augustinian-Western tradition has always had the resources at its disposal to avoid or address the most poignant criticisms levelled both by and at Rahner.

TLDR: Augustine saves the day.

Overall, the book serves as a useful introduction to the interplay between Augustinian and Rahnerian Trinitarian theology, but younger readers may find Levi’s book a little more accessible.

Keen to read more? Visit here or here.