Rahner’s Rule

Anything by Khaled Anatolios is an event, worthy of deep and careful reading. From my initial perusal, his recent Retrieving Nicaea: The Development and Meaning of Trinitarian Doctrine is no exception; on the contrary, it has the feel of a masterpiece. Nobody knows Athanasius as Anatolios does, and here he also provides lengthy studies of Gregory of Nyssa and Augustine. Few Trinitarian theologians, whether historically or systematically oriented, are as attuned to the Scriptural foundations of Trinitarian theology as he is.

Early on, for instance, he locates his discussion of patristic Trinitarian theology within contemporary discussions, and has this comment on Rahner’s difficulties in carrying out “his own trinitarian Grundaxiom “: “Rather complains about the ‘isolation’ of trinitarian doctrine ‘from other dogmatic treatises telling us something about ourselves conducive to our real salvation.’ However, his own approach does not so much delve into the continuities and discontinuities between the biblical narrative of creation and salvation and the Trinity as the subject of this narrative; rather, he comprehensively enfolds the dialectic of history and spirit/transcendence into divine life and being [ironic, in light of the ways Rahner has been used, by Lacugna, for instance – PJL]. Thus, in actual practice, his identification of the immanent Trinity with the economic Trinity pays little attention to the narrative peculiarities of the economy. All this is not to deny that his trinitarian theology is substantially biblical in its deepest thrust. My point is that his axiom needs to be more thoroughly integrated with particular details of scriptural narrative.” Rahner’s trinitarian theology is abstracted “from the concrete particularities of the scriptural narrative.”