The Theological Notion of the Human Person. A Conversation Between the Theology of Karl Rahner and the Philosophy of John Macmurray

Abstract

osophy on the fundamental subject of his book. Although White wisely remarks that in important matters few people ‘can be persuaded by argument’ (p. 4), let me indulge argument on several issues. First, he declines to enter debate about the existence of God and remarks that, in any case, God ‘is not readily discernible’ (p. 27). In Natural Signs and Knowledge of God, Stephen Evans more persuasively develops Pascal in proposing that various signs make God’s reality widely available but knowledge of the divine reality remains easily resistible – what Evans calls the Wide Accessibility Principle and Easy Resistibility Principle. Second, even if White states that it is clear that ‘we need help’ (p. 369), his theme of ‘man on his own’ can readily suggest the ‘self-made man’ of Ralph Waldo Emerson. Yes, in one sense ‘man must work out his own salvation’ (p. 5), but, as St Paul adds, ‘with fear and trembling, for it is God who is at work in you’ (Philippians 2:12–13). Third, ‘religion’, White maintains, is ‘a way of life’ but not ‘a solution to life.’ But, if, as he agrees, rights and responsibilities are fundamental in human life – and for the way people should relate to each other – how can a society without God, or at least a society that brackets off the question of God, live up to the high standards that White obviously expects from it? If there is an ‘obligation to accept responsibility’ (pp. 407–408), where and how do we ground that obligation? Fourth, ‘freedom’ is foundational for the way White conceives human society (pp. 609–613). But ‘justice’ and ‘love’, which must shape the exercise of freedom, are notable for their absence, at least as explicit themes in this book. This is a little puzzling, since Denis White himself is a thoroughly just and loving person.