[Catholics Only] Thoughts on Karl Rahner?

[Gnarwhal]

I'm still trying to figure out the parochial vicar at my parish. He's a newer priest, been ordained 3-4 years, and was assigned to our parish last summer. I haven't quite put my finger on it, but sometimes I feel paused by his homilies. He seems like a great priest, and I really like him—he's definitely a good confessor.

Yesterday was the feast day of St. John the Baptist, the patron of our parish, and so his homily was doubly focused on that. He quoted Rahner in his homily, I can't quote it word for word cause Father paraphrased it anyway, essentially it had to do with who we are being in our actions and not our words, and that was something that St. John the Baptist demonstrated.

Anyway, I was just curious if his citing Rahner was a good indicator of anything or not? Is Rahner generally considered an orthodox thinker in the Church?

 

[Bob Crowley]

To be honest, I haven't read any of his writings as yet. As far as I know he was always in good standing with the Church (something that seems to be difficult for Catholic theologians who break new ground or who dare to move any distance from the status quo - not easy after 2000 years - most of it has been said already in one way or another), so there should be no problem with the priest quoting Karl Rahner.

Apparently he worked with The future Pope Benedict XVI during Vatican II, although there was later some disagreement between them (see comment above). I lifted the following paragraph from this site.

Karl Rahner, SJ (1904-1984)

In 1962 Rahner was appointed as a peritus (expert advisor) by Pope John XXIII for the Second Vatican Council. Cardinal Koenig in Vienna selected Rahner as his private adviser on the Council documents. During the Council, Rahner worked with Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) to prepare an alternate text on the issue of the relationship between Scripture and Tradition that was accepted by the German bishops. (Later Rahner and Ratzinger would disagree on the direction of some of Rahner’s writings.) Other topics discussed during Vatican II that showed Rahner’s influence included the divine inspiration of the Bible, the relationship of the Church to the modern world, and the possibility of salvation outside the Church even for nonbelievers.

 

[Davidnic]

In general its not a strong indication of anything wrong. People can take his ideas and run a bit wild with them toward a universal salvation view. So, like many theologians it depends on what else is in a persons theological diet so to speak.

 

[Gnarwhal]

So, like many theologians it depends on what else is in a persons theological diet so to speak.

How about Rainer Maria Rilke?

 

[Davidnic]

The poet? He was Catholic but kind of grew away from and resented his faith. Good poet though. And poetry and Poetic lines searching for God even in confusion can bear truth.

 

[Gnarwhal]

The poet? He was Catholic but kind of grew away from and resented his faith. Good poet though. And poetry and Poetic lines searching for God even in confusion can bear truth.

Yeah the Bohemian-Austrian poet novelist. Okay, that's good to know.

I guess this priest strikes me as surprisingly modern, while our pastor who's only a little bit older, is more traditional. I just wanted to check. I have a copy of Letters to a Young Poet by Rilke that an ex gave me, but I never picked it up.

 

[Davidnic]

Rilkes rejection of the Church came from extended mother issues. Raised a Catholic it was his mother's surface but not deep Faith the led him to reject the Church. She was very culturally Catholic and also saw it as a symbol of status or a way to be better than others.

His actual search for God made him reject this in his mother. But he extended that in error to the Church.

So while he turned away... his search itself was honest and I pray he found God in the moments before death

 

[Davidnic]

Basically made the error of not being able to separate his mother's expression of Catholicism from Catholicism itself.

 

[chevyontheriver]

I'm still trying to figure out the parochial vicar at my parish. He's a newer priest, been ordained 3-4 years, and was assigned to our parish last summer. I haven't quite put my finger on it, but sometimes I feel paused by his homilies. He seems like a great priest, and I really like him—he's definitely a good confessor.

Yesterday was the feast day of St. John the Baptist, the patron of our parish, and so his homily was doubly focused on that. He quoted Rahner in his homily, I can't quote it word for word cause Father paraphrased it anyway, essentially it had to do with who we are being in our actions and not our words, and that was something that St. John the Baptist demonstrated.

Anyway, I was just curious if his citing Rahner was a good indicator of anything or not? Is Rahner generally considered an orthodox thinker in the Church?

I've read enough Rahner to rwalize thst its impossible to figure out what he's really saying. So if your priest is quoting Rahner it's fair game to ask him what he thinks Rahner meant. A passage from Rahner is like a Rorsach test. It tells you more about the person quoring Rahner than about Rahner.

Schellibex (I know I spelled that wrong, but I'm working off my phone away from home) got in trouble because he was pretty clear. So too for Hans Kung. But nobody knew what Rahner's actual point was enough to challenge him.

 

[Gnarwhal]

Basically made the error of not being able to separate his mother's expression of Catholicism from Catholicism itself.

That's interesting. I actually knew a guy when I was a protestant who made a similar decision, he didn't think he could separate "being Mexican" from "being Catholic" so for some reason he became an evangelical.