Bijdragen, International Journal in Philosophy and Theology 68 (2007)

Ten geleide (Dutch)Dit artikel probeert te begrijpen dat de ervaringvan moeite per se bij het gebed hoort. Rahnersideeën over menselijke transcendentaliteit spelendaarbij een belangrijke rol. Dat het artikel zichdoor onderwerp en uitwerking op het snijpunt bevindtvan filosofie, theologie en spiritualiteit is nietalleen interessant maar ook nodig. Volgens de auteurnamelijk wortelt Rahners transcendentale theologiein geloofservaring en spiritualiteit. Moet ookhedendaagse theologie niet meer aandacht hebben voorhaar worteling in geloofservaring en spiritualiteit?

THE DIFFICULTY OF PRAYER

AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE THEOLOGY OF RAHNERAND ITS SPIRITUAL ROOTS

JOS MOONS

This article focuses on three questions. The firstquestion is about the theological meaning of man’sdifficulty concerning prayer. Should this difficultynot be seen as inherent per se, as part of theexperience of the mystery of human contact with God?Rahner’s theological approach, the so-called‘transcendental theology’, will be introduced as ahelp in exploring this suggestion. The second question concentrates not on a particulartheological topic but on Karl Rahner as a theologianand on the reception of his work. Shouldn’t Karl

The Difficulty of Prayer

Rahner’s thinking be given a more balanced receptionthan it has had up to now? Isn’t secondaryliterature lacking in attention to human experienceand spirituality? And aren’t precisely these theaspects that play an important role in fullyunderstanding Rahner’s works? The conclusion in section five summarizes theanswers to these two questions and leads on to afinal, third question: Is the combination of thetheological and spiritual approach a promising andnecessary one for theology in our era?1

1. A gap in the secondary literature on Rahner:spirituality

Is secondary literature lacking in attention toexperience and spirituality and, if so, is this animportant omission? This first section offers abrief look at Rahner’s works and at the study of hisworks (1.1), in order to answer this question (1.2).

1.1 Rahner’s works

The body of work Rahner left is not only impressivein quantity, but also in diversity of subjects itcovers. Rahner wrote about philosophical topics,e.g. the relation between philosophy and theology;on methodological and fundamental questions, likethe historicity of theology and the possibility offaith; and on a great variety of specifictheological issues such as the Trinity, Mary,

1 This article owes much to prof. dr. H. Rikhof and to prof. dr. P.v. Geest. Their enthusiasm and helpful advices have been a greatsupport.

2

Jos Moons

original sin, and the status of lay people.Furthermore, there are his articles on all sorts ofpastoral questions such as contemporary faith, thefuture of the church, ecumenism, the life of faith(e.g. praying, priesthood, religious obedience) andmoral questions. Finally, he wrote about mystics andabout the possibility to be a mystical Christiantoday.2

The drawback of this diversity in Rahner’s work isthe lack of comprehensive treatises. Usually,Rahner’s reflection on a certain issue started whenhe was asked to lecture on a certain topic or at acertain occasion. His work can be characterized as‘contextual’ or, with the German words of KarlLehmann, as “anlaßbezogen”.3 Nonetheless, there is a coherence, in his approach.Rahner’s work is ‘contextual’ because for himtheology should stay in touch with the issues of thetime. The words ‘heute’ (today) and ‘heutig’ (oftoday; present) figure frequently in the titles hegave to his articles. Secondly, there is coherencein the content of his writings too. In his time, asin ours, faith was not a natural part of lifeanymore. Rahner tried to find new ways of reflectingupon faith. Human transcendence is an importantconcept in this respect and a leading thread runningwithin his work. Another important aspect of thisnew way of reflecting is mystagogy: “Theology should

2 Cf. the ‘grobsystematische Werkübersicht’ that is offered by A.Raffelt: www.ub.uni-freiburg.de/referate/04/rahner/rahnerma.htm .

3 ‘Rahner, Karl’, p. 806 in: W. Kasper en K. Baumgartner (red.),Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche (LThK) VIII, 3e druk (Freiburg 1993-2001), 805-808.

3

The Difficulty of Prayer

be a mystagogy leading towards the experience ofgrace.”4

1.2 The study of Rahner’s works

Not only is the quantity of Rahner’s legacyimpressive, but also the amount of secondaryliterature about it. An on-line bibliography counts1,293 titles until the year of Rahner’s death in1984, and about 3,300 titles until 2005.5 But is theimpressive diversity of Rahner’s work also reflectedin this secondary literature? The anwer is, yes butonly to a certain extent. There are articles aboutthe philosophical aspect of Rahner’s work, comparingit with great thinkers as Heidegger and Maréchal.There are many articles about Rahner’stranscendental theology and anthropology and aboutrelated subjects: the anthropological turn, grace,universal salvation, ‘the anonymous Christian’. Thesame goes for his theology on key issues such as theTrinity and Christ. Finally, Rahner’s thoughts aboutmore specific issues such as Mary, the priesthoodand Ignatian spirituality can be found in secondaryliterature.

4 Cf. ‘Überlegungen zur Methode der Theologie’, in: Schriften zur Theologie(Schriften) IX, Einsiedeln 1970, 79-126. The titles of its three sectionsare telling: 1. theology as the actual situation requires; 2transcendentality and transcendental theology; 3. the role of themystery and of mystagogy in theology. Citation: cf. note 7.

5 Cf. www.ub.uni-freiburg.de/referate/04/rahner/rahnerma.htm. Thisnumber is only indicating the quantity. For it might not be precise,e.g. because of translations and double publications. Further, itcontains articles and books of very different level, depth andimportance.

4

Jos Moons

Although there is a variety of subjects in thesecondary literature, it does not fully reflect thediversity of Rahner’s work. Several important themesof his work are either absent altogether or treatedas being of secondary importance. This is often thecase for spiritual themes, discussing the ‘inner’aspects of Christian faith: prayer, poverty, thecross, the experience of grace and its difficulty,love of neighbour.6

What importance must be given to this unbalancedreflection of Rahner’s work? Do the missing themesof spirituality play an important role in theunderstanding of Rahner’s thinking? For Rahner, theology and spirituality are highlyinterconnected. Spirituality - living (in) thepresence of God - is the source of theology and itsgoal. In a lecture on the method of theology, Rahnersays: “Theology should be a mystagogy leading

6 Rahner’s first article, at the age of 20 or 21, is about prayer:‘Warum uns dat Beten not tut’, in: Leuchtturm 19 (1924-1925), p. 10-11. Cf. the 12 other titles on prayer: ‘Das Beten ist auch eine Tat’, in: K.Rahner, Chancen des Glaubens. Fragmente einer modernen Spiritualität, Freiburg 1971,89-90; ‘Gebet’ (IV. Dogmatisch), in: J. Höfer en K. Rahner (red.), LThKIV, 2nd Press (Freiburg 1957-1968), 542-545; ‘Gebet zu den Heiligen’,in: J.B. Metz / K. Rahner, Ermutigung zum Gebet, Freiburg 1977, 41-110;‘Geistliches Abendgespräch über den Schlaf, das Gebet und andere Dinge’,in: Schriften III, Einsiedeln 1956, p. 263-281; ‘Sendung zum Gebet’, in:Schriften III, Einsiedeln 1956, 249-261; ‘Thesen zum Thema: Glaube undGebet’, in: Geist und Leben. Zeitschrift fur Aszese und Mystik (GuL)42 (1969), 177-184; ‘Über das Beten’, in: GuL 45 (1972), 84-98; ‘Vom Beten heute’, in:GuL 42 (1969), 6-17; ‘Vom Mut und der Gnade, sich auf das Ganzeeinzulassen. Beten als Grundvollzug menschlicher Existenz’, in: GuL 56(1983), 12-14; Von der Not und dem Segen des Gebetes, Freiburg 1958; Worte insSchweigen, Innsbruck 1954; ‘Zwiegespräch mit Gott?’, in: Schriften XIII,Einsiedeln 1978, p. 148-158.For articles about related and spiritual issues: cf. the website that Ireferred to.

5

The Difficulty of Prayer

towards the experience of grace. Theology as ascience should not exchange itself for the kerygma,the immediate spiritual word. However, neithershould it forget what it forgets too often: that itcomes forth from this spiritual word and that it hasto serve this word. Otherwise theology loses itsobject.”7

A concrete example of the application of thisprinciple is Rahner’s reflection on whether prayeris a dialogue.8 In this article the method Rahnerproposes is clearly visible. Its theologicalreflection is being developed from the subjectivespiritual experience that prayer seems to be amonologue whereas tradition understands prayer as adialogue. In the end, the theological reflectionreturns to the subjective spiritual level: Rahnerexpresses his hope to have clarified the dialogicalcharacter of prayer, so that in a renewed ‘naiveté’,prayer can be experienced as a dialogue.This interconnection of spirituality and theologymeans that the secondary importance attached tospiritual themes in secondary literature is aserious omission and that, tragically, the abundanceof quantity does not guarantee its quality. For

7 ‘Überlegungen zur Methode der Theologie’, p. 123: “Sie [dieTheologie] müßte eine Mystagogie in die Gnadenerfahrung sein, und dürftevon der Gnade nicht bloß wie von einer Sache sprechen, die nur durchihren Begriff allein für die Existenz des Menschen anwesend wird. DieTheologie als Wissenschaft darf sich gewiß nicht mit Kerygmaverwechseln, mit Paränese, mit unmittelbar geistlichem Wort, aber siedarf auch nicht, was sie nur zu oft tut, vergessen, daß sie von diesemgeistlichen Wort herkommt und ihm dienen muß, weil dieses und davonabgeleitet die Theologie bezogen sind auf die ursprüngliche Erfahrungdes Geistes in der Existenz des Menschen oder überhaupt ihren Gegenstandverlieren.” Cf. K. Rahner, Grundkurs des Glaubens, Innsbruck 1976, p. 28.

8 Cf. ‘Zwiegespräch’.

6

Jos Moons

attention to experience and spirituality is not onlynecessary because these themes are being part ofRahner’s work. Above all attention for spiritualityand experience will show a crucial point of Rahner’stheology: the movement of theology that is beginningand ending with spiritual practice.9 For thatreason, I believe that the larger part of thecriticism of Rahner is due to a misunderstanding ofthe spiritual dimension of his theology.

Luckily, there are exceptions. D. Marmion is one ofthem. In his article ‘Theology, Spirituality, andthe Role of Experience in Rahner’, the firstsubtitle is ‘The Spiritual Basis of Rahner’sTheology’. He continues: “Probably the main reasonfor the enduring success of Karl Rahner’s spiritualand theological writings is his conviction thattheology cannot be divorced from experientialknowledge of God.”10 Marmion is one of the (few)authors who has valued the sprititual basis ofRahner’s work and who uses this in his approach toRahner.

9 Reading the Grundkurs, the spiritual aspect could be overlooked,because there seems to be an overwhelming attention to rationaltheology. However, one should be attentive at the short remarks or wordsthat point at it’s spiritual roots and goal. For example: returningwords like ‘one experiences oneself as …’ (p. 42) when Rahner seeks todescribe the person, or the remark that the reader should not limithimself to words, because they can be misunderstood: the reader shouldinvestigate his own experience (p. 37). That also the concept oftranscendentality, which is the central feature of the book, implies aspiritual basis will be showed later.

10 D. Marmion, ‘Theology, spirituality, and the role of experience inRahner’, in: The courage to risk everything... . Essays marking the centenary of Karl Rahner'sbirth, Leuven 2004 (Louvain studies 29, 1-2), 49-76, p. 49.

7

The Difficulty of Prayer

While discussing the theological meaning of thedifficulty of prayer in the next sections, I willtry to apply the type of theology that is necessaryfor a correct understanding of Rahner, viz.spiritual theology.

2. The difficulty of prayer

In this section I want to point out what preciselythe difficulty of prayer is (2.1). Rahner is a greathelp in this, although he himself never uses theword ‘difficulty’. That is why I have to account forthe introduction of this term and to justify the useof Rahner’s works (2.2).

2.1 The nature of the difficulty of prayer

What is the difficulty of prayer about? Newactivities are often difficult in the sense thatlearning something new is demanding. Learning topray is like learning to sail, to preach, to makepancakes: one has to learn several words, conceptsand ‘techniques’ and one has to learn to practisethem. Usually these efforts are considereddifficult. However, this is not the sort ofdifficulty that is meant here. The concept ‘difficult’ also means ‘requiring aneffort’ or ‘requiring much motivation’. It means:demanding an effort of one’s body and of one’s will,literally e.g., while digging the garden, andfiguratively e.g., while a politician is facing acrowd that does not agree with his newest proposaland needs to persuade them. Both digging and beingsuch a politician are really difficult: demanding an

8

Jos Moons

effort and motivation. However, the sort ofdifficulty that is meant here is not this difficultyof mind and body. Thirdly, difficult can also refer to an intellectualdifficulty. For some people mathematics is difficultbecause of its abstract and complex reasoning. Inthe same way, prayer may be difficult, because it isabout a God that one’s reflections cannot capturefully. But even not these are difficult in the waythat I mean.

The difficulty at stake in this reflection is aboutan inner experience, which can be characterized as arather passive, ‘suffered’ difficulty. It is a‘passive’ experience in the Greek sense of the word:undergoing, experiencing, and not just ‘painfulsuffering’. Of course, even such a passiveexperience does not happen without some activity.Without accepting the experience that is coming up,even a passive experience cannot exist. It is like the difficulty experienced facing theloss of a loved one. This is a passive experiencethat is has not much to do with learning, nor withwill or muscles, nor with understanding. Theseaspects play a role and are related, but they arenot central to the difficulty of mourning.

Three concrete examples may be helpful.The first example is the experience of God’ssilence. In prayer, one will sooner or later facethe question whether God is hearing our words andwhether He is answering us. This might be related tothe initial part of the learning process, requiringgood basic spiritual guidance; or to a lack of will,

9

The Difficulty of Prayer

requiring the effort simply to begin to talk to God;or to the understanding of how Creator and what hecreated meet each other, requiring the reflection ofan intelligent theologian. However, even with goodspiritual education, sufficient effort and goodtheological insights, a certain difficulty will notdisappear. On the contrary: the difficulty may growdeeper and stronger.Rahner says about this difficulty: “To people ofthese days, prayer seems a monologue or in the bestcase a self-dialogue, but not a dialogue with God. …That one has access to a personal God [‘that He is‘von uns anredbar’] remains unclear; and above allit should be clarified that He answers to peopletalking to Him and that he doesn’t keep silent.”11

While one is given a certain experience of God inprayer, and consequently is spared the problem ofGod’s silence, another difficulty can arise. The Godone prays to may reveal Himself as a reallydifferent God, as the “inexpressible, holy,incomprehensible mystery”.12 This is not an agreeableexpression of a beautiful experience, but rather avexation. One experiences the gap between on the onehand one’s concrete images and the words expressing

11 ‘Zwiegespräch’, p. 150-151: “Das Gebet scheint ihm [jm: “demMenschen von Heute”] ein Monolog oder bestenfalls ein Selbstgespräch zusein, aber nicht eine Zwiesprache mit Gott, ein Geschehen, das man imErnst und ohne zu viel Vorbehalte Zwiesprache, Dialog nennen könnte. (…)Daß der persönliche Gott von uns anredbar ist, bleibt noch dunkel; undvor allem, daß er bei einer solchen Anrede antwortet und sich nichtverschweigt, müßte auf jeden Fall deutlicher gemacht werden.”

12 ‘Vom Beten heute’, p. 9. “(…) wenn wir merken, daß man Gottgleichsam nur unter schweigender Anbetung des unsagbaren, heiligenunbegreiflichen Geheimnisses hat (…).”

10

Jos Moons

them and on the other hand God who differs so muchfrom these words and images. One of Rahner’s prayers reflects this difficulty:“God of my life! But what do I say when I call You‘my God’, the ‘God of my life’? Sense of my life?Goal of my ways? … God of my brothers? God of myfathers? Never I would have expressed You [‘niehätte ich dich ausgesagt’]. But why at all do Ibegin to talk to You about You? Why do You vex mewith your infinity when I will never be able tomeasure it? Lord, how desperate my spirit becomeswhen I talk to You about You. How else could I callYou than ‘God of my life’? But what do I haveexpressed with it, when no name really calls You?”13

This tension, between the God who transcends man onthe one hand and the concrete words with whom oneaddresses Him on the other, appears in a rathertrenchant way in the prayer of supplication. Onefeels that the biblical, spiritual and theologicaladvice ‘to ask whatever one wants’ is good. Oneshould, indeed, tell God one’s concrete wishes andone’s real needs. On the other hand, while onenotices the difference between these concretequestions and God’s eternal being, one may feelinclined to forget one’s concrete needs and to prayless concretely. One starts seeking God’s inner

13 Worte ins Schweigen, p. 8-9: “Gott meines Lebens! Aber was sage ichdenn, wenn ich dich meinen Gott, den Gott meines Lebens nenne? Sinnmeines Lebens? Ziel meiner Wege? (…) Gott meiner Brüder? Gott meinerVäter? (…) Nie hätte ich dich ausgesagt. Aber warum fange ich dannüberhaupt an, dir von dir zu reden? Warum quälst du mich mit deinerUnendlichkeit, wenn ich sie doch nie ermesse? (…) Herr, wie wird meinGeist ratlos, wenn ich von dir zu dir rede! Wie kann ich dich andersnennen als den Gott meines Lebens? Aber was habe ich damit gesagt, wenndoch kein Name dich nennt (…)?”

11

The Difficulty of Prayer

consolation, peace and strength, which is accordingto biblical, spiritual and theological advice too.However, it will only be a genuine human prayer ofsupplication with God as its addressee, if onemaintains and lives according to both aspects.This is precisely Rahner’s advice. He explains: ‘bykeeping together “the highest self-interest[‘Eigenwill’], that makes that one offers one’s ownwishes to Him, and the highest resignation, thatmakes that one prays to Him whom one cannot force ortalk round or bewitch but just ask, … the prayer inwhich one asks becomes in a certain sense not theleast but the highest, divine-man way of praying.”14

However, the tension between these two features willremain and will become increasingly difficult. It isexactly the application of Rahner’s advice that willperpetuate the difficulty of prayer.

2.2 The absence of the term ‘difficulty’ in Rahner’s works

I am using the term ‘difficult’ to cover thedifferent experiences of the difficulty of prayer.Is the use of Rahner’s examples and of hisreflections on transcendentality justifiable, sincehe himself never uses this term?

14 ‘Sendung zum Gebet’, p. 250: “Daß solches Gebet höchster‘Eigensinn’ (man trägt ja Ihm seine Wünsche vor) und höchste Resignation(man betet ja zu Ihm, den man nicht zwingen und beschwätzen und nichtbezaübern, nur bitten kann) in einem ist, daß sich hier höchster Mut undtiefste Demut (…) treffen und unbegreiflich eins werden, das macht dasBittgebet in einer Hinsicht nicht zur niederesten, sondern zur höchsten,gottmenschlichen Art des Betens.” Developed also in ‘Über das Beten’, p.92-95.

12

Jos Moons

The absence of this specific word is not surprisingconsidering the character of Rahner’s work and ofhis views about the relationship between languageand reality. Rahner’s language is not highlysystematic. He seems to pile sentences and words ontop of each other, probably in an attempt to makehimself as understandable as possible. Rahner mayuse many different ways to refer to one reality.15 Inthe area of reflection on human existence and othervery fundamental questions, exact words are not hismain preoccupation. Every verbalization in this sortof reflection “asks for the ‘good will’ [‘den gutenWillen’] and the effort of the hearer. Because whathe should hear is not that what is given directly inthe concept [‘Begriff’] itself, but these conceptsare essentially references to a more original humanbasic experience [‘Grunderfahrung’] of hissubjectivity and personality. This is a basicexperience that does not exist simply in anabsolute, wordless and non-reflected experience, norin what one can say with words.”16 The absence of asystematically developed vocabulary diminishes the

15 For example: see Rahner’s prayers in Worte ins Schweigen. For a mostremarkable example, see page 9 of the article ‘Vom Beten Heute’: in onesentence at least 10 formulations (with even subformulations) describeone experience!

16 Grundkurs, p. 37: “Solches Reden [about the deepest reality of thehuman being] ist freilich immer auf den ‘guten Willen’ des Hörersangewiesen. Denn das, was er hören soll, ist ja nicht das, wasunmittelbar im Begriff als solchem steckt, sondern solche Begriffe sindaus dem Wesen der Sache Hinweise auf eine ursprünglichere Grunderfahrungdes Menschen von seiner Subjektivität und Personalität, auf eineGrunderfahrung, die es zwar nicht einfach in einem absolut wortlosen undunreflektierten Erfahren gibt, die aber auch nicht in dem, was wir mitWorten sagen können, gegeben und von außen indoktriniert ist.”

13

The Difficulty of Prayer

possibility of finding in Rahner’s works one wordfor what I call difficulty. However, it is possible to show that Rahner’sreflection is nonetheless on the specific experienceI call difficult. An important indication is the useof words referring to an experience that can indeedbe called difficult. As mentioned above Rahner callsthe very fact that one can talk to God “obscure”,because of God’s apparent silence. He names hisprayerful experience of God a “vexation” by an“inexpressible, incomprehensible, holy mystery”.Elsewhere, he talks about the “feeling of inabilityto talk to God”, about the confrontation between themystery of God and the person he is himself, andconsequently about the temptation to flee from Godto more simple experiences.17 These examples clearlyshow that the absence of the word difficult does notimply the absence of this concept and experience.Rahner apparently talks about what I call thedifficulty of prayer without using this word.

3. Transcendental theology

This section introduces Rahner’s theologicalapproach, ‘transcendental theology’, to answer insection four the question about prayer.

17 ‘Vom Beten Heute’, p. 8: “Das Gefühl des Unvermögens, Gottanzureden zu können”; Worte ins Schweigen, p. 10: “Lord, what a terrifyingriddle is man: he belongs to You, and You are the incomprehensible one”,and p. 9: “No name calls You as You are; that makes that I’m alwaystempted to go [‘fortzuschleichen’] to things that are morecomprehensible than You and that are more familiar to my heart than yourweirdness [‘Unheimlichkeit’].”

14

Jos Moons

3.1 Introduction

What Rahner intends with ‘transcendental theology’,is a theology in search of a condition in the humanbeing that makes Christian revelation possible. Howcan God reveal Himself as Himself to man? Theintention is, in other words, to keep theology fromthinking God as ‘remaining external to the world andto man’ on one side or ‘becoming an object in theworld like other objects’ on the other side. Is itpossible to find something in human nature like a‘starting point’ for God’s grace?The approach of transcendental theology resemblesthat of transcendental philosophy. Both arereflecting on the precondition and on the subject.In the case of philosophy on knowledge, in the caseof theology on revelation. “Both [Kant und Rahner]are putting the questions from the viewpoint ofman,” and can be called ‘anthropocentric’ in thissense.18 However, although the approach is similar,there is a difference. Transcendental philosophy isconcerned with the possibility and the process ofknowing, and transcendental theology with thepossibility and process of the encounter with God.Transcendental theology uses philosophical conceptsfor its search, but is more than the application ofphilosophy to a theological object: “theologicalreflection on man’s nature as the possibility

18 N. Knoepffler, Der Begriff ‘transzendental’ bei Karl Rahner; zur Frage seinerKantischen Herkunft, Innsbruck 1993, p. 195: “Beide [Kant und Rahner] fragenvom Menschen her”.

15

The Difficulty of Prayer

condition for revelation belongs to theologyitself”.19 In other words: transcendental theology isa discipline in its own right.20

3.2 Exploring human nature: transcendental experience

What is this human nature that transcendentaltheology explores in search of the possibility ofGod’s self-revelation? The most original and mostfundamental feature of human nature is that manexperiences himself as fundamentally more than thesum total of anthropological data. Finally, a self-inquiry, ‘who am I?’, will not result in an answerbut in the experience of the depth of his being.“Man is the question that has no answer.”21 If man acknowledges this depth, he is living theexperience Rahner calls the “transcendental”. Thisexperience accompanies all knowing or doing, and‘discloses’ that one is ‘more’ and ‘morefundamental’ than this knowing and doing: Oneexperiences oneself as knowing and doing, and open

19 K. Rahner, ‘Transcendentale theologie’, in: Sacramentum Mundi.Theologisch Lexikon voor de praktijk. Handboek bij het gebruik van de nieuwe katechismus XII,Bussum 1968-1971, 52-85, p. 53: “… omdat de theologische reflectie op de‘natuur’ van de mens als de voorwaarde voor de mogelijkheid van degenade tot de theologie zelf behoort, dus theologie is die op filosofielijkt.” Cf. ‘Überlegungen zur Methode der Theologie’, p. 96.

20 For further study on Kant’s ‘transcendentals’, on the relationwith Rahner and the development in Rahners works, cf. Knoepffler. Forfurther study on different theological interpretations, cf. B.Irlenborn, ‘‘Was ist eine ‘transzendentale Erfahrung?’ Zu den Entwürfenvon Krings, Rahner, Lotz und Schaeffler’, in: Theologie und Philosophie 79(2004), 491-501. In this essay, Rahner and more specific his Grundkursare my starting point.

21 ‘Was ist der Mensch?’ in: Wagnis des Christen. Geistliche Texte, Freiburg1974, 13-26, p. 13: “Der Mensch ist die Frage, auf die es keine Antwortgibt”. Cf Grundkurs, p. 39-41.

16

Jos Moons

to knowing objects and to doing things.22 Thisexperience is transcendental in the sense that itprecedes every possible concrete knowing and doingas their possibility condition. It is Rahner’sconviction that this possibility condition is realand consequently can be experienced. In this, hediffers from Kant, for whom ‘experiencingtranscendentality’ is nonsense.23 Although transcendental experience transcendsconcreteness, is does not ‘float’ above concretehistory. “Transcendentality and freedom areperformed in history”: the experience oftranscendentality is accessible precisely in livingand experiencing life’s concreteness, and asks fortranslation into the concreteness of words anddeeds, that is: into history.24 It is precisely inthe reality and in the necessity of doing concretethings, using concrete words and having concretefeelings, that one experiences oneself as ‘being’ ina more fundamental and foundational way. “Man is the

22 Grundkurs, p. 31: “Das subjekthafte, unthematische und in jedwedemgeistigen Erkenntnisakt mitgegebene, notwendige und unaufgebbareMitbewußtsein des erkennenden Subjekts und seine Entschränktheit auf dieunbegrenzte Weite aller möglichen Wirklichkeit nennen wir dietranszendentale Erfahrung.” Also described with other, shorter expressions,e.g. ‘die Selbstgegebenheit des Subjekts’ or ‘die ursprünglicheSelbstgegebenheit des Subjekts’, p. 28-29.

23 This is a crucial difference with Kant, for whom experiencingtranscendentality is a ‘contradictio in terminis’. Knoepffler explainsthat for Kant the transcendental reality is an ‘ontic’ [“ontisch”] and‘gnoseologic’ [“gnoseologisch”] one, whereas for Rahner it is a reallyexisting one in an ‘ontologic’ [“ontologisch”] sense. Cf. Knoepffler, p.179 and 183. For Rahner’s argument, cf. Grundkurs, p. 44; he argues thatit cannot be ‘nothing’ that is experienced as the transcendentalreality.

24 Grundkurs, p. 51: “Transzendentalität und Freiheit werden inGeschichte vollzogen.”

17

The Difficulty of Prayer

spirit [‘Geist’] that experiences himself as spirit,because he experiences himself not as pure spirit.”25

This transcendental experience is not something man‘has’, as some sort of ‘absolute subject’ would do,but something man receives. One’s historicalexistence - which is the only access totranscendentality - is a given existence; also man’stranscendental nature is given. Both are precedingto man’s subjectivity and can only be received[‘gegeben’, ‘vorgegeben’].26 Transcendentality comesfrom and aims at [‘das Wovonher’ and ‘dasWoraufhin’] a reality that Rahner calls ‘the holymystery’. It is a mystery, for it is inaccessible;it is holy, for it is opening its being, includingbeing inaccessible, in loving freedom to man.27

3.3 Transcendentality and revelation

Christian faith confesses God’s self-revelation toman in history. How can this be understood from thepoint of view of the transcendental human nature? First, the explanation of transcendental experienceshows that human experience - and thus: humanhistory - is capable of mediating the presence ofthe ‘holy mystery’, in a way that enables themystery to remain mystery and human beings to graspthis mystery as a mystery. This can be called the“natural revelation”.28 Then God, as this mystery iscalled in Christian faith, may decide not only to

25 Grundkurs, p. 43: “Der Mensch ist der Geist, der sich als solchererfährt, indem er sich nicht als reiner Geist erfährt.”

26 Cf. Grundkurs, p. 45.52-53.27 Cf. Grundkurs, p. 68-75 for further explanation that ‘das Wovonher’

and ‘das Woraufhin’ are to be understood as ‘the holy mystery’.

18

Jos Moons

make his presence accessible as a mystery ‘faraway’, as is the case with the transcendentalexperience, He may reveal Himself and make thisself-revelation - by grace - accessible by“modifying” human transcendentality and thus openingit for His presence, which Rahner calls‘supernatural’ [‘übernatürliche’] transcendentality.Of course God’s presence remains mystery-like, butno longer as the mystery of an absence, but as themystery of a loving presence.29 The theoretical possibility of such a divine self-revelation in history can be understood fromtranscendentality, but its actual possibility isGod’s free choice. The reality of this choice ofself-revelation will never be fully captured byhuman mind and words, however, for it precedes manand is given to man. Yet, it can be experienced. Inliving supernatural transcendentality, access toGod’s presence in the depth of one’s history andlife is confirmed. Abandoning oneself into itsmysterious presence, there will be a moment that oneexperiences the holy mystery as being near, insteadof remaining far away.30 Thus, living courageouslythe transcendental experience hidden in one’s

28 Grundkurs, p. 173. This revelation is already sustained by grace,cf. p. 66. Is this the grace of ‘Kreatürlichkeit, p. 83–88, and in thatsense different from the grace of the ‘übernatürliche Transzendenz” thatenables God’s self-revelation, p. 135?

29 Cf. Grundkurs, p. 125: “die Selbstmitteilung Gottes im Modus derNähe, und nicht nur im Modus des abwesenden Anwesens.”. For moreextended descriptions, cf. idem, p. 137.

30 Cf. Grundkurs, p. 136-137: “The human being who opens himself tothe transcendental experience of the holy mystery will experience[‘macht die Erfahrung’] that this mystery is not only the horizon faraway (…), but also (…) welcoming presence [‘die bergende Nähe’],forgiving intimacy, self-communicating love (…).”

19

The Difficulty of Prayer

concrete life puts one on the way to God’s self-revelation. On this way, however, not only personal experiencesare important. Other people’s experiences and theexpressions they have given to them are importanttoo. This so-called “categorical historical self-interpretation” [‘kategoriale geschichtlicheSelbstauslegung’], i.e. expressing thetranscendental experience into concrete history, isa transcendental necessity. ‘Expressingtranscendental experience’ means not only intowords. Also, more fundamentally and more hidden,every doing and not-doing in the lives ofindividuals, communities and societies istranscendental self-interpretation.31 What is the importance of these expressions? Theseinterpretations are not just human poetry, but partof God’s self-revelation. Because God revealsHimself in historical transcendental experience,transcendental ‘self-interpretation’ and its historycan be considered as the revelation of God Himselfand this revelation’s history. There is not only a“general, transcendental and categorical revelation-history”, but also a “particular, regional andcategorical revelation-history”, for transcendentalhuman life does not exist ‘in general’, but onlyspecifically, concretely and in a ‘particular’ way.32

Finally, in Jesus, the ‘God-man’, the interpretation

31 Grundkurs, p. 157–158: “Die kategoriale geschichtlicheSelbstauslegung dessen, was der Mensch ist, geschieht nicht nur undnicht einmal in erster Linie durch eine ausdrückliche, in Sätzenformulierte Anthropologie, sondern in der ganzen Geschichte des Menschen….”

32 Grundkurs, p. 164-165; italics by JM.

20

Jos Moons

of God’s transcendental self-revelation was mostsuccessful, and by that a ‘criterion’ for otherexpressions.33

4. Transcendental theology and prayer

This section’s crucial point is: can prayer beconsidered as a transcendental act and itsdifficulty as part of this transcendentality? If soit is in fact the difficulty of the (transcendental)mystery of human contact with God.

4.1 Prayer and transcendental experience

There seem to be strong similarities between prayerand transcendentality. They have in common that onefeels gifted with an openness to the transcendentalreality (‘capax infiniti’) and with a certainexperience of God and of his presence (‘capax Dei’).Also, this experience is characterized by concretehuman words, images, acts and thoughts on the oneside and on the other side by the transcendentalexperience which rises above these words, images,acts and thoughts. Moreover, the dynamics betweenthis transcendental and categorical aspect is anongoing one: the transcendental experienceoriginates in concrete categorical life and asks fora concrete, categorical expression; at the same timetranscendentality is the condition which makes it

33 Clearly, this is no more than a rapid outline of the dynamic ofGod’s self-revelation, as transcendentality clarifies it. For moredetailed explanations, e.g. about Jesus and about ‘official’(“Amtliche”) revelation-history, cf. Grundkurs 157–177. In summary, cf.‘Überlegungen zur Methode der Theologie’, p. 105-109.

21

The Difficulty of Prayer

possible to living consciously this concrete,categorical life. The fundamental and fundamentallygraceful character of the transcendental experiencecharacterizes prayer as well: its possibilityprecedes human effort; the human effort is to acceptwhat is given as a possibility.What do these similarities mean? Rahner’s idea aboutthe connection between prayer and transcendentalityis most clear: Praying and living one’stranscendentality is one and the same. He uses thesame words to describe the transcendental way ofliving and to describe prayer. For example hecharacterizes prayer as “the mysterious[‘geheimnisvolle’] event [‘Ereignis’] in which ahuman being becomes involved with confidence[‘vertrauend’], explicitly [‘ausdrücklich’] andthematically [‘thematisch’] into the ultimate[‘letzte’] mystery of his existence.”34 Rahner ismost explicit in this: “The moment a human beingaccepts himself and experiences himself asconfronted with the incomprehensible mystery thatincludes his existence, a mystery that was inknowing and in freedom already offering its presenceto the human being, he is doing what prayer reallyis and wants, and he experiences what is meant withGod, the foundation [‘Urgrund’] of all reality andbeing-on-oneself [‘Beisichselbersein’].”35

34 ‘Über das Beten’, p. 86: “Aber es [das Gebet] läßt sich doch …immer erkennen als jener geheimnisvolle Vorgang, in dem ein Mensch sichauf das letzte Geheimnis seines Daseins als solches vertrauend,ausdrücklich, thematisch, einläßt.”

35 ‘Über das Beten’, p. 89: “Dort und dann, wo sich ein Mensch in derGanzheit seiner Existenz annimmt und so sich erfährt als demunbegreiflichen Geheimnis konfrontiert, das seine Existenz umfaßt undden Menschen in Erkenntnis und Freiheit immer schon in diesem Geheimnis

22

Jos Moons

If prayer and transcendental experience are one andthe same, prayer must be more than a verbalconversation. Prayer is a relationship with God thatis lived throughout daily life, in the same way asit is in daily life that the transcendentalexperience of the depth of one’s existence can belived. If we try to bring this dimension to ourlife, we are living a prayerful life. So our wholelife can be prayer, however with two nuances. First, Rahner admits that this relationship becomesmost tangible at certain points in daily life, inacts that are clearly related to love, fidelity,trust, hope and sacrifice, e.g. acts like forgiving,or offering help or time without receiving gratitudeor satisfaction, or deciding something from thedepth of one’s conscience.36 These specific acts moreclearly offer the possibility of transcendentalexperience and of prayer than ordinary daily life:“if one is experiencing this, ‘it’ prays already in

wesen läßt, vollzieht er das, was eigentlich Gebet ist und meint, underfährt er, was mit Gott, dem Urgrund aller Wirklichkeit und allenBeisichselberseins, gemeint ist.”Other passages express in different ways the same connection betweenprayer and transcendentality. Prayer is also characterized as “such atotal ‘Grundakt’ of human existence” and “the event [‘Ereignis’] of theexperience of God Himself”, idem, p. 85 and 89. The Lexikon, p. 543describes prayer as “the explicit and positive realisation of man’snatural-supernatural orientation and relation [‘Bezogenheit’] to thepersonal God of salvation.” This is repeated in the statement that “eachexplicit lived relation (‘Beziehung des Lebensvollzugs’) with God infaith, hope and love … is already prayer in a formal sense”, ‘Thesen zumThema: Glaube und Gebet’, p. 180.

36 Cf. ‘Über das Beten’, p. 95-98; cf. ‘Vom Beten heute’, p. 10.; cf.‘Thesen zum Thema: Glaube und Gebet’, 180-181 and 183-184.

23

The Difficulty of Prayer

oneself, and a real and explicit prayer is offeredto one’s freedom.”37

Yet, secondly, prayer is not only the choice torelate oneself explicitly and positively to themystery of transcendentality throughout daily lifeand daily experience. Prayer, hidden mysteriously inthe apparent profanity of one’s life, has to find averbal expression.38 Prayer needs ‘incarnation’because of the nature of human transcendentality:the experience of ‘more’ and ‘more fundamental’ isnot only lived in one’s concrete life, but demands,like the transcendental ‘Selbstauslegung’, forexpression in this concrete life too. Language isone of characteristics of human life.39

4.2 Prayer’s difficulty and transcendental experience

In section 2, we have indicated the rather passive,‘suffering’ difficulty of prayer. Is this thedifficulty per se of meeting God? Is experiencingdifficulty per se part of transcendental experience?And if so, is this the same difficulty as the oneconcerning prayer?

37 ‘Über das Beten’, p. 98: “Wenn wir so die Erfahrung des begnadetenGeistes machen …, dann betet ‘es’ schon in uns und ist unserer Freiheitein eigentliches und ausdrückliches Gebet angeboten.”

38 Cf. ‘Über das Beten’, p. 98: “However, this experience of theSpirit und of grace [as Rahner has interpretated transcendentalexperience] has to be expressed [‘ausgesagt’] somehow, in order to makethis talking really prayer.” Cf. ‘Vom Beten heute’, p. 9-13.

39 In a somewhat confusing language, this prayer is called“kategoriales Beten”, “das übliche Gebet”, “ausdrückliches Gebet”,“unser Beten in ausdrücklicher und ‘normaler’ Weise”, cf. ‘Vom Mut undder Gnade’, p. 13 and ‘Über das Beten’, p. 95 and 98.

24

Jos Moons

Difficulty, not as an intellectual but as an innerexperience, is indeed part of the transcendentalexperience. The reality as experienced intranscendental experience is a mystery that cannotbe ‘grasped’ or comprehended. Rahner describes thisdifficulty as “the dark abysses of the desert” whoseincomprehensibility is like a “thorn”.40 This pain isnot softened by God’s self-revelation, but ratherthe contrary. Staying in contact with a mystery thatis finally not absent but - in a still mysteriousway - revealing its loving presence, is all the moreincomprehensible. Consequently, there is no escape as long as onelives this transcendental contact. Transcendentalityis difficult per se. The transcendental possibility toexperience oneself as ‘more’ and ‘more fundamental’appears - in a painful way - to have its limits. Tothe human being, the mystery experienced intranscendentality remains incomprehensible andfundamentally preceding himself. “The pride of man’sspirit [‘Geist’] - that there is nowhere one has tostop definitively- is at the same time (and more andmore clearly experienced) the pain that there isnowhere one definitively arrives”.41

Transcendentality is fundamentally “unfulfilled” and“not able to be fulfilled”.42

40 Grundkurs, p. 14: “Und dieses Ganze [of man’s existence] führt indie dunklen Abgründe der Wüste dessen hinein, den man Gott nennt”; ‘Wasist der Mensch?’, p. 21-22, “der Stachel der Unbegreiflichkeit”, that isand will always be per se part of meeting God.

41 ‘Was ist der Mensch?’ p. 45: “Der Stolz des Geistes, nirgendsendgültig haltmachen zu müssen, ist auch der (immer deutlichererfahrene) Schmerz, nie endgültig anzukommen.”

42 Idem, p. 18-19.

25

The Difficulty of Prayer

One could flee this painfully unfulfilledtranscendentality. There clearly is the temptationto embrace concreteness and to “narcotize” thetranscendental experience that knocks on the door ofone’s life. Utopias and ideologies, psychologicaltechniques, pleasure and consumption are offeringmany distractions.43 However, the only real‘solution’ is to accept the incomprehensibility ofthe transcendental mystery surrender to it. “Howeasy Christian faith is: the intention to abandononeself to God’s incomprehensibility in surrenderinglove …”.44 However, “simply” abandoning oneself toGod appears to be difficult. Therefore livingtranscendentality asks for “courage” [‘Mut’] and“boldness” [‘höchste Kühnheit’]; it is an “extremerisk” [‘äußerstes Wagnis’].45 This courage may -psychologically - be required for each abandoning,it is all the more required in transcendentalitybecause of the experience of God’s self-revelation.For in this experience “a minimal particle of thehuge universe engages itself wanting to have contactwith all reality’s preceding and founding totality”,which can really be considered as an “absurdity”.46

43 Cf. idem, p. 19. Cf. Von der Not und dem Segen, p. 11-12. Rahnerstates: ‘this ‘narcotized escape to mere concreteness’ is whatChristians call “sin”’, cf. Grundkurs, p. 109 and 395.

44 Idem, p. 26: “Wie einfach ist das Christentum: die Absicht, in derkapitulierenden Liebe sich der Unbegreiflichkeit Gottes zu ergeben; ….”

45 ‘Vom Mut und der Gnade sich auf das Ganze einzulassen’, cf. thetitle itself and p.13. Cf. ‘Was ist der Mensch?’, p. 23, where Rahneruses the words “Leap” [‘Sprung’] and “this unintelligible risk” [‘diesesunverständliche Wagnis’].

46 ‘Vom Mut und der Gnade’, p. 13: “Dieses Sich-Einlassen [auf dasGanze; auf Gott] ist höchste Kühnheit …: Eine minimale Partikel desungeheuren Universums nimmt es … auf sich, mit der vorausliegenden undgründenden Totalität aller Wirklichkeit zu tun haben zu wollen. … eine

26

Jos Moons

It is not only courage that this experience asksfor. Like for new tastes, it also asks for a processof getting used to an initially strange experience.47

The difficulty of prayer can be considered the sameas that of transcendentality. This is true not onlybecause prayer and transcendentality are almost oneand the same (§4.1) but also because of the similarcharacter of the difficulty. Both are ‘ratherpassive, ‘suffered’ experiences, in which the onlyhuman activity is to accept this difficulty -instead of running from it. Further, prayer’sdifficulty is in the same way an inherent, per sedifficulty: fleeing difficulty entails the end ofprayer, and likewise the end of the transcendentalexperience. Finally, prayer’s difficulty is alsorequiring surrender: surrendering oneself to God’ssilence, to God’s mystery and to the tension withinthe prayer of supplication.

4.3 Experiencing God

The argument of §4.1 and §4.2 confirms the initialsuggestion: the theological meaning of thedifficulty of prayer is indeed the difficulty per seof prayer. However, because the experience oftranscendental reality and God cannot be captured inwords, not only words and reasoning should confirmthis conclusion but experience itself. And becauseman’s transcendental nature does not existden Verstand sprengende Absurdität ….”

47 Cf. “Über die Erfahrung der Gnade”, in: Schriften III, Einsiedeln1962, 105-109, p. 108: “That may seem strange, at the beginning, and onewill be tempted again and again to be frightened and to flee in what wasfamiliar and nearby …. Yet, we should gradually try to get used to thetaste of the spirit’s pure wine, that is filled by the holy Spirit.”

27

The Difficulty of Prayer

‘somewhere’ in general but here and now in thisconcrete reality, it should be confirmed also mostconcretely. In other words: is there in man’sexperience something to confirm that amidst theconcrete painful experience of God’s silence (§2.1,example 1), and of God’s mystery (example 2) and ofthe tension-filled prayer of supplication (example3) God Himself can be met? Rahner gives testimony ofhis conviction that there is - a confirmation that,once again, should be ‘tested’ in one’s ownexistence by living one’s own experience and findingone’s own words, and a conviction that requires,once again, abandoning the desire for ‘hard’scientific proof.48

First, if one gives up one’s questions about God’sapparent silence (example 1) and surrenders oneselfto God’s silence, He appears to be speaking. Afterabandoning one’s search for concrete words, Godappears to answer in His way: “In prayer, oneexperiences oneself as the one expressed by God[‘die von Gott Gesagten’], as coming forth fromGod’s freedom and depending upon it for theconcreteness of one’s existence”.49 God’s

48 Talking about the ultimate (transcendental) reality always impliesthe limits of words and the necessity of the reader’s effort. Cf.Grundkurs, p. 53: “All the concepts that we have used here should beconsidered… only as evocating an understanding of existence [‘Evokationeeines Daseinsverständnisses’]; every individual has to experience inone’s own life that this understanding … fundamentally cannot beavoided, in the same way as the concepts, words and sentences that wehave used here are capable of or wanting to catching up the real andoriginal being of this [transcendental self-] experience ….”

49 ‘Zwiegespräch’, p. 154. Having concluded that answering thequestion of God’s silence in the convenient way is impossible, Rahnersuggests: “Wir müssen versuchen auf andere Weise weiterzukommen. (…) Wie

28

Jos Moons

contribution to the dialogue is the deeptranscendental experience of His presence that issustaining one’s existence. Rahner’s testimony concerning the difficulty ofGod’s mysterious being (example 2) is similar. Hisadvice is ‘simply’ to live this experience with in acertain trusting surrender, by praying to God as tothe holy mystery. This means: entrusting oneself tothe mystery - in silent worship, in abandoningoneself in love to the mysterious God - continuingas well one’s concrete prayer with one’s concreteimages.50 Doing so, one will in this abandoningexperience what love really is and one will findpeace. In Christian words: one will find God. Abouthis own experience Rahner says: “See, if you stay inyour despair [‘Verzweifelung’] and if you, in thedoubt [‘Verzweiflung’] about the gods you calledGod, do not doubt [‘verzweifelst’] the real God,then all of a sudden you will realise [‘innewerden’]that His silence is full of the word without words;and His silence says that He is there”.51 If one

aber wenn wir sagen würden und sagen dürften: im Gebet erfahren wir unsselber als die von Gott Gesagten, als die in der Konkretheit unsererExistenz von der souveränen Freiheit Gottes Herkommenden und Verfügten?”

50 Cf. Worte ins Schweigen, p. 10-12. Or “Vom Mut und der Gnade, sich aufdas Ganze einzulassen”; cf. p. 12: Rahner characterizes the differencebetween atheist and Christian not on the level of content but on thelevel of relation; for both, God is a mystery, however: they refuse arelation with this mystery, whereas we Christians desire a relation withit.

51 Von der Not und dem Segen, p. 18: “Denn siehe, wenn du standhälst unddie Verzweiflung nicht fliehst und in der Verzweiflung an deinenbisherigen Lebensgötzen (…) die du Gott nanntest nicht ver-zweifelst andem wahren Gott, wenn du so standhälst (…) dann wirst du plötzlichinnewerden, (…) daß sein Schweigen (…) erfüllt ist von dem Wort ohneWorte (…). Und sein Schweigen sagt dir, daß Er da ist.”

29

The Difficulty of Prayer

abandons oneself to God’s mysterious being, Heappears to be a mystery of presence.Finally, the tension of the prayer of supplication(example 3) also appears a possibility forexperiencing God. For it to be a really humanprayer, this prayer should entail concretequestions; and at the same time, to be really aprayer to God, it should also be a prayer ofabandoning these questions. A demanding balance, yetnecessary for prayer to be prayer. A balance thatcan be seen as the balance of Christianity itself.In Rahner’s words: the tension of the prayer ofsupplication is precisely the tension of “the fleshof God’s eternal Word”, which makes it “not thelowest, but the highest, ‘gottmenschlichen’ way ofpraying”.52 The presence of God in this prayer can beexperienced as freedom: “One’s will for a specifictemporary good is not abolished [‘aufgehoben’], butit attains the freedom where one is not dependentany more on anything in his existence [‘keinerEinzelmacht mehr untertan’], because one hasabandoned oneself to God.”53 If this experience ofpure freedom in which one transcends concrete goods

Cf. ‘Über die Erfahrung der Gnade’, a brief article about exactly thissubject of experiencing God’s presence in daily experiences.

52 ‘Sendung zum Gebet’, p. 249. Rahner’s quite sharp reaction to thecriticism of prayer as ‘anthropomorphic’ is: “do we or do we not believein the Flesh of God’s eternal Word?” On page 250, he concludes that theprayer of supplication is as well asking one’s own questions [‘höchsterEigensinn’] as abandoning all this questions [‘höchster Resignation’];this makes the prayer of supplication “in einer Hinsicht nicht zurniedersten sondern zur höchsten, gottmenschlichen Art des Betens”.

53 ‘Über das Beten’, p. 94: “Der Wille des Menschen zu einembestimmten zeitlichen Gut wird nicht aufgehoben, aber er dringt zu jenerFreiheit vor, in die der Mensch gelangt, wenn er, weil Gott übergeben,keiner Einzelmacht in seinem Dasein mehr untertan ist.”

30

Jos Moons

and reaches beyond them is lived with a Christianbackground, one is meeting the Christian God - theGod that came to share man’s life, to give manaccess to a supernatural life.

5. Conclusion

In this article we set out to answer three basicquestions. First, is the difficulty of prayer thedifficulty per se of meeting God? Secondly, is therea lack of attention to aspects of experience andspirituality in the reception of Rahner’s work, andif so, is this lack a serious handicap? Thirdly, isa combination of theology and spirituality apromising and necessary approach for theology in thepresent era?

Transcendental theology reflects on humantranscendental experience as the possibilitycondition for God’s self-revelation in history andfor human access to this self-revelation. The humanexperience of the preceding and ‘given’ depth ofone’s concrete existence reveals a trace to themystery of God. Christian faith confesses what theChristian experience confirms: in this experienceGod reveals Himself.However, the difficulty of this transcendentalexperience is the tension inherent in it. Man isnaturally inclined to a transcendental reality thathe will never fully capture. In other words: tolimit oneself to concrete historical existence isunsatisfying and contrary to human nature, and yettranscendental experience remains necessarily linkedto historical concreteness. This makes the

31

The Difficulty of Prayer

transcendental experience and God’s self-revelationa mystery that will always be accessible but at thesame time beyond human grasp. Because this essay’s crucial insight is, first, thatpraying and living one’s transcendentality arealmost the same, it is clear, secondly, that livingwith the difficult yet necessary tension betweentranscendental and categorical is the conditio sine quanon for meeting God as God - an insight confirmed byexperience. So indeed, the difficulty of praying isthe difficulty per se of meeting God.

In section two I already stated that the lack ofattention to spirituality is a serious deficiency inthe reception of Rahner’s work. The study oftranscendental theology in section three and fourconfirms this statement, for it shows transcendentalexperience as being closely linked to spiritualexperience. Rahner, as a genuine transcendental theologian, issearching for God - not God as an idea or concept initself, but God who is present in one’s experienceand one’s life. This transcendental search implies acomplex intellectual analysis of human nature and ofGod, as for example the Grundkurs shows. Yet,transcendental reflection also implies that allthese intellectual reflections, arguments and wordsare to be understood as pointing towards anexperience of God that, precisely because it istranscendental, goes beyond these words. “Theseconcepts are essentially ‘direction indicators’[‘Hinweise’] to a more fundamental [‘ursprünglich’]human base-experience; … although this experiencedoes not exist in some absolute wordless and not-

32

Jos Moons

reflected experiencing, nor is it given in what canbe said in words and learnt from outside [‘von außenindoktriniert’].”54

This means that transcendental theology is not onlycharacterized by the ‘anthropological turn’, butalso by a turn towards experience. Theanthropological turn means that not only dogmatic,theo-centric reflection is a place for finding God.55

Similarly, the turn towards experience implies it isnot only in intellectual reflection that God can befound. And just like the intention of theanthropological turn is not to disqualify theo-centric theology, the intention of the turn towardsexperience is not to disqualify reasoning and words,but to relate words to experience. Then, in so farthis ‘experience’ is, as a transcendental one,ultimately the experience of God’s self-communication in the depth of one’s daily life andpractice, this turn towards ‘experience’ can beconsidered ‘a turn towards spiritual experience’.56

It is common opinion that understanding Rahnerwithout bearing in mind the anthropological turn isa serious handicap. What about understanding Rahnerwithout bearing in mind this turn towards experience- the ‘spiritual turn’? This too is a serioushandicap. In the words of Karl Lehmann: “With someexceptions, the nearly endless quantity of

54 Grundkurs, p. 37; in german: note 16.55 This insight relativises the anthropological turn. Cf. Rahner’s

thesis and explanation in ‘Theologie und Anthropologie’, p. 43f:“Anthropocentrism in theology is not an opposition to most stricttheocentrism …”

56 The role and precise meaning of ‘experience’ deserves moreattention. D. Marmion’s article offers many references.

33

The Difficulty of Prayer

literature about Karl Rahner has hardly noticed theinner proximity of piety and theology in thisreflection. But without this aspect, one would verymuch misinterpret Rahner’s theological figure.”57 The‘spiritual turn’ would result in paying moreattention to the spiritual dimension of Rahner’swork by reading spiritual writings for theirtheological value and by reading theologicalwritings for their spiritual depth.58

Is combining theological and spiritual attention apromising and necessary approach to theology in thepresent era? I believe it is a promising one becauseit is a necessary one. First, in this era, theology can no longer limititself to explaining the ‘givens’ available fromrevelation in some sort of ‘Denzingertheology’. Dueto the present pluralism in theology, with differentviews within the different disciplines, these‘givens’ are no more self-evident. Neither are these‘givens’ self-evident for theologians and believerspersonally. For contemporary society is dominated by‘hard’ rational science which excludes thepossibility of God’s self-revelation. Thisdevelopment calls for another theology. Instead of

57 K. Lehmann, ‘Einführung’, in: K. Rahner, Gebete des Lebens, Freiburg1984, 5-10, p. 10: “Die fast uferlose Literatur über Karl Rahner hat,mit weinigen Ausnahmen, davon [‘die innere Nähe von Frömmigkeit undTheologie’] kaum Notiz genommen. Aber ohne diese Dimension würde man dietheologische Gestalt Karl Rahners radikal verkennen.”

58 Cf. Rahner’s most clear statement and admonition, as cited in note7: “Theology should be a mystagogy leading towards the experience ofgrace (…). She shouldn’t forget what she forgets too often: that shecomes forth from this spiritual word and that she has to serve this word(…), otherwise theology loses its object.”

34

Jos Moons

starting with structuring presupposed, self-evidentdata, reflection should begin on a more initial‘first level of reflection’, justifying these data.59

On this level, faith is reflected in atranscendental way, asking for the possibilitycondition of that which is at the heart of faith,i.e. God’s self-revelation. Ultimately thispossibility condition - man’s transcendentalexperience - is a spiritual experience. So the factthat theology’s object is not self-evident any moreasks for a spiritual approach, in which thepossibility of revelation is shown by taking man’sexperience as the starting point.Such a spiritual approach is also necessary becauseof theology’s core issue, i.e. the reflection onGod’s self-revelation. This revelation is not a goalin itself. God’s self-revelation is God’s grace-fulgift to mankind, in other words: salvation. Thisgift concerns the whole of man’s being, that is:man’s transcendental orientation embedded in the dayto day life. This means that reflection on thesalutary character of God’s self-revelation has totake into account salvation on the level oftranscendental experience. Further, God’s self-revelation and its salvation are ‘preceding’ and‘given’, and can consequently never be fully madeexplicit by language. Salvation will only beunderstood if reflected in a transcendental way,starting from one’s own existence. For these tworeasons once more theology -the reflection onsalvation- asks for a spiritual approach.

59 Cf. ‘Überlegungen zur Methode der Theologie’, p. 81-91 orGrundkurs, p. 15-22.

35

The Difficulty of Prayer

Such a spiritual approach was holding great promisein the midst of the 20th century.60 It is stillpromising in the context of the contemporary WesternEurope, because there are still gaps that thisapproach may help to bridge, for instance, the gapbetween theology and natural science that wasdiscussed above. Or the gap between people’s intensesearch for sense and depth and the Christian‘offer’. For most people, Christian belief does notmatch their deepest desire, and they take theirrefuge in eastern spirituality, the Pentecostalmovement and related movements, ideologies,materialism or ‘nothing’.61 Finally, a spiritual and theological approach maybridge the gap between reason and experience thatseems to dominate the domain of faith. New Ageglorifies all sorts of experience and innerknowledge and banishes reason and its criticalquestions. And if reason is not in a radical waydisqualified as ‘dark’, it is still criticised as‘too difficult’ and ‘not touching the depth ofreality’. This attitude can also be found betweenChristians. For example Pentecostal movements seemto value reason in the same way. But shouldn’t aChristian consider reason as a gift of God? On the

60 Cf. ‘Einführung’, p. 5-6: “An important theme of this era’stheology is the alienation [‘Entfremdung’] between its scientific-methodological efforts and Christian faith’s spirituality. … With someother theologians, Karl Rahner belongs to the pioneers who didn’tcontent themselves with traditional theology’s alienation from dailylife.”

61 Cf. ‘Über die Möglichkeit des Glaubens heute’, p. 14-15: “The realargument against Christianity is the experience of one’s life, theexperience of darkness [explained before].” In a transcendentalreflection, Rahner shows that “precisely this experience is the argumentpleading for Christianity as well”.

36

Jos Moons

other side, a rational approach that glorifies theinner logic of theological reflection and ofrevelation in a rational way - or criticizes it forits wrong logic - dominates several modern as wellas traditional theologies. Every glimpse ofexperience is looked upon with suspicion. Do thesetheologians live God’s loving presence in the depthsof their existence and throughout their day to daylife? Are they really praying ‘abba’? Combining atheological and spiritual approach bridges this gap.For it esteems reason as well as experience, andconsiders both as a gift on the way of living andreflecting God’s salutary self-revelation.

Rahner’s oeuvre was the main source and inspirationfor writing this article. However, one of the tragicfeatures of his work is that he wanted to write atheology accessible to everyone, yet it appears tobe too complex even for most students of theology. Ihope this article offers in an accessible way adeeper understanding of ‘der Meister selber’, stillwith the same Ignatian purpose: ‘ad maiorem deigloriam et salutem animarum’.

Jos Moons was born in 1980 in Gouda. He studied theology inUtrecht (Katholieke Theologische Universiteit) and Paris (CentreSèvres), and received formation to the priesthood in Utrecht(Ariënskonvikt), Paris (Jesuit’s community) and Voorburg(Vronesteyn). In 2005 he finished his studies and was ordainedto the priesthood. He works in a federation of parishes.Address: Willem van de Veldenweg 24, NL-2451 BB Leimuiden

37

The Difficulty of Prayer

SummaryThis article focuses on three questions. First ittries to understand why the difficulty manexperiences when he is praying, is an inherent partof prayer. Everyone who prays, will experience thatGod is intangible. Rahner’s analysis of the humantranscendental experience is a help in understandingthis experience. Rahner shows that humans, byinteracting in the concrete world, are capable ofgoing beyond it. In deeds of for example love,freedom, wisdom one transcends concrete existence,and experiences to be finitum capax infiniti. Yet, this possibility implies a very particulartension: man is naturally inclined to atranscendental reality but will never be able tofully capture it. Limiting oneself to concreteexistence will be unsatisfying. Avoiding concreteexistence will not work neither, for thetranscendental experience only exists if linked tothe tangible life we live here and now. Transcendental theology explains that living withthis difficult but at the same time necessarytension between transcendental and categorical isthe condition sine qua non for meeting God. This meansthat, if prayer is such a meeting with God, it willalways have an element of difficulty in it. He whoprays, knows this. By subject and content this article is at thejunction of philosophy, theology and spiritually.The author argues that this is necessary as Rahner’stranscendental theology is based on spirituality, aview shared by others, but which, in the opinion of

38

Jos Moons

the writer, is lacking in most of the secondaryliterature. Finally the author is of the opinion thataforementioned approach should not be limited toRahner’s work. Should, out of contextual,theological as well as strategic reasons,contemporary theology not pay more attention tospirituality?

39