THE THOMIST A SPECULATIVE QUARTERLY REVIEW OF THEOLOGY AND PHILOSOPHY EDITORS: THE DOMINICAN FATHERS OF THE PROVINCE OF ST. JOSEPH Publishers: The Thomist Press, Washington, D. C. 20017 VoL. 41 APRIL, 1977 RAHNER'S SPIRIT IN THE WORLD AQUINAS OR HEGEL? RAHNER's INTERPRETATION OF ST. THOMAS No. 2 RECENTLY, IN A provocative and impassioned book,1 Cornelio Fabro scrutinized the seminal work of Karl Rahner, Spirit in the World.2 Fabro's project is noteworthy . For Rahner has retained this philosophical anthropology , first elaborated in a doctoral dis.sertation, as the basis for his protracted Theological lnvestigations.3 But Fabro contravenes Rahner. At issue, in general, is the nature of historic Thomistic meta1 Cornelio Fabro, La svolta antropologica di Karl Rahner (Milan: Rusconi Editore, 1974). •Karl Rahner, Spirit in the World, trans. William Dych, S. J. (New York: Herder and Herder, 1968) = Karl Rahner, Geist in Welt [1st ed. 1989], 2nd ed., revised Johannes B. Metz (Munich: Kosel-Verlag, 1957). Henceforth cited as SW. 8 Cf. Metz, SW, " Foreword," xvi-xvii. 167 168 DENIS J. M. BRADLEY physics and noetic theory, specifically, the relationship of this metaphysics to Rahner's transcendental anthropology. Extensive commentary on the general problem 4 bolsters Fabro's specific repudiation of Spirit in the World: Rahner's transcendental anthropology is not a development, in any ingenuous sense, of Thomistic metaphysics.5 However, I shall not duplicate Fabro's comparison of Rahner and St. Thomas. Another perusal, text by text, here promises no benefit. Similar comparisons-and this is the probable fate of Fabro's book-have been ineffective. Rahner deters this kind of criticism since, as he candidly admits, his " fundamental conception has remained completely unchanged." 6 While this admission should make any prospective critic hesitate , Rahner's apparent intransigence signifies his enduring conviction about "the original philosophical event in Thomas."1 Yet, it is this event, however one chooses to characterize it, that challenges every serious interpretation of St. Thomas. What, indeed, is "the original philosophical event in Thomas"? For this, Rahner insists and we can agree, is a question that should be asked. But, how is Rahner's peculiar insistence to be related to a comparable element in St. Thomas? Granted the theological intention, aim, and character of St. Thomas's thought, Rahner's claim and, for that matter, procedure, invite comparison with " Thomistic" philosophical manuals. Are we, once more, engaged in the familiar manualist exercise, finding a philosophy in St. Thomas's theology by severing from its rational argumentation any "revealed" premises? 8 •See Cornelio Fabro, C. P. S., Participation et causalite selon S. Thomas d'Aquin (Louvain and Paris: Publications Universitaires de Louvain/Editions BeatriceNauwelaerts , 1961). 5 For a criticism of Fabro's historical placement of the metaphysics of St. Thomas, see R. J. Henle, S. J., "A Note on Certain Textual Evidence in Fabro's La Nozione Metafisica di Partecipazione," Modern Schoolman, XXXIV, 4 (1957), Q65-Q82. 6 SW, "Preface to the Second German Edition," xlvii. 7 SW. 1. 8 Cf. Etienne Gilson, "Historical Research and the Future of Scholasticism," Modern Schoolman, XXIX, 1 (1951), 1-10. SPIRIT IN THE WORLD 169 Rahner, however, explicitly acknowledges the actual framework of the Summa Theologiae. St. Thomas's doctrine of man is part of and determined by a "theological systematic." 9 Unfortunately , Rahner does not adequately specify the normative value of Aquinas's theological systematic; he neither provides a textual exegesis of the relationship between philosophy and theology in the writings of St. Thomas, nor, and this would be more to his purposes, sets forth precisely which are the principles that allow one to derive a contemporary philosophy from Thomistic theology.10 To compound the difficulty, Rahner, while reiterating his dependence on " the teaching of Aquinas himself," rejects as unphilosophical an investigation into the historical origins of Thomistic doctrine.11 Instead, he adverts to the " original philosophical event" which underlies St. Thomas's theology. This event can be recaptured by abandoning oneself to" the dynamism of the matter itself." 12 The " matter itself " is encapsulated in the proposition, so resonant of Heidegger, that " Everything metaphysical is known only in and at the world." 13 Nonetheless, Rahner proposes to explicate this fundamental thesis...