The glory of the Lord: Hans Urs von Balthasar’s theological aesthetic Louis Dupré By assuming human nature, God transformed the very meaning of culture. Henceforth all forms have to be measured by the supreme form of the Incarnation. 1. Divine form ans Urs von Balthasars seven volume Hert completed in 196, anks among te fremont theological achievements of out centary The fst thee volumes hate now been compe, tently taalated into Engish under the generale The Clr of the Lor. Te important fist part, Seng De Forms defines the scope, method, and intention of the entice work and includes 2 general theological discussion of what the author cals “the fof ofthe Lord Christ" Volumes Il and Il contain histor elaboration of this aesthetic idesl—“reflected ays of glory” UU 13}-By- representative theologians of the early and ae tal tradition (Vol. Suis Taal Se Clea Style) land by modern poets and tay” thinkers (Vol Lay Sule). Volumes Vand V, a yet untansated, del wath the bronder metaphysical contest in which the Chistian form cold appest ‘rvwhich, by fs absence in he modern age, prevented i om appearing, while VI and Vil treat the theology ofthe Old and The glory of the Lord 385 of the New Testament.t Theology in this majestic work fully regains the central position which it held in the unfolding of Western culture. It extends far beyond the borders of the in- tellectual ghetto into which an increasingly secular climate has sequestered It, To grasp its full scope as von Balthasar does we ‘must return to Plato and Aristotle, lor whom it referred to what ‘we now call metaphysics, as well a to ancient Israel where Society itself formed the source and content of all religious Speculation. From this wider perspective von Balthasar ap: proaches the New Testament in a masterful spiritual exegesis but not before first having studied the successive, expanding. circles ofits impact through the centuries in the Greek and Latin Fathers, scholastic philosophy, and modern metaphysics, and, most outstandingly, in his sensitive analyses of great It- trary works from Dante to the present. At the basis of this comprehensive reflection on our entice Cheistian culture les a judgment on the present as well as a hope for the future. Whichever verdict history may reserve for von Balthasay’s ce tique and expectation, the unique conjuncture of a staggering, erudition, a refined taste, and.a powerful vision, secures his accomplishment both timeliness and survival ‘At the center of von Balthasay’s enterprise stands a simple idea. By assuming human nature God transformed the very meaning of culture. Henceforth all forms have to be mea- sured by the supreme form of the Incarnation. Theology itself, indissolubly united to this visible form, thereby acquired an aesthetic quality. It would have to show in its very structure and diction “the diversity of the Invisible radiating in the vis- ibleness of Being of the world” (1:43. Infact, however, it has ‘moved in the opposite direction. Ithas become satisfied with a fational interpretation of Scripture (exegesis), of nature and history (fundamental theology), and of the ecclesiastical tradi tion (dogmatic theology). By thus neglecting the form of the "fons he voles alse into Els wl bby Roman snr eos an by rman oe oe The Enea ESE Soap in See wee Se Cr Sen oy i sae Si iy Sen 08) Te tat ft Ae kh roca he icon ho eur ad ‘Bess and Cromroad Publican Reeenes to Vetumes 1 to Bott ‘lum war public by Jhon Vesogn mda 060.386 Louis Dupré Bese Nand eon Blo hom Se RO Seo en This, then, is what Glory (Here), the te word that caties the theme throughout these seven volumes, denotes: “the divinity ofthe Invisible radiating in the visible: ness of Being ofthe world” (0,431) The important introduction to the (as yet untranslated) volume on metaphysis” explains ""Svery beautiful form has this openness sthich enables it tO express more than the sum oft components, even in a comt- plete, welldeined form. This more’ isthe por, and i means thatthe beautiful ay such able to serve a form for the reve: lation” (UL, p. 33) As functions in the revelation, aesthetic form does fot arbitrarily restrict what in iset 1s formless. Rather than pointing to an Absolute beyond ite, it maufests the'‘divine sper form” (432) In Chest, God hime appears as expressive m his very nature, The aesthetic fom, thet, lies atthe very heart of the Christion mystery: i eveals “substan: tally and definitively” (1, p.3i)."The sphere of beuty is ag a whole, as Being, trantparent of = divine esse susie {rubsistent Being) which ts grasped only as'a mystery and ‘which, as the hidden original ground shines forth as gly uit, 397 ‘But can theology ever become geminely “aes- thetic?” Does itt belong 10 the essence &f the Christin message not to take the form of this periahing world as defin- itive, much les a8 divine? Ts a "theological esthetic” not Contradiction’ Inthe subjective sense which the new theory of beautiful form, characterstialy called aesthetics (he, scence of perception) acquired in the eighteenth century, undoubtedly! For when tt term gant be uae for eeing oa they of beautifel form, it shifted the meaning from the form sell © 4 particular mode of perxeing: the human subject achieves *Dartt the nrodacion ves rans by Michel Walden in Coumanio 1 Spang, 184) 42, under the We "Transcendent ad Con” The glory of the Lord _ 387 temporary harmony with the perceived object by endowing it ‘with Its own interiorty. In that shortlived union, form be- comes spiritually transparent while the human subject be- ‘comes intimately united withthe world or some past of it. But ‘such a subjective perspective allows no theological aesthetic, Since form becomes reduced to self-created “Intramundane” beauty (IIL, p. 38). At best it may yield an “aesthetic theot- og not sally diferent rom Mathew Armoli’s isin of Chistian. But von Balthasar unambiguously repudiates the “impressionist” subjeciviem of an aesthetics based more on the harmonious telation which the homan subject establishes toward the form than on the form’ intsinsie quality of ad ance. For him as forthe Greek Fathers (and, indeed, or Plot: rs), the light of beauty Breaks forth from the form itself, not from the subjet’s perception of (II, p32). Beauty, as a transcendental qualty belongs to Being itself and is, indeed, it rimary manifestation. This ontological nate the opposit of ny eexthetibm,dispooes it to reveal the depth of Gots pres- tence in all forms: Modern aestitits has Tost Rs ontological sig- nificance, Ite subjectvistattude has tumed away Irom that "sare light of Being” (St.Thomas), and has reduced poetry and arto formalist exercises or private expressions, marginal othe deeper concerns of human existence. Since religion $s con ‘emmed with ltimacy, poetic and artistic form have eeased #0 Serve as its primary expressions. Clearly aware of this modern predicament, von Bathasar defends an carer theory capable revitalizing acy thetics as well as of restoring a more holistic concept of theok- ‘ogy. Not in the subject, but in Being set, dacs the sesthetic ination ffm rgate. Bat nie or dys pio sophical enti of modern subjectivism, for von Balthasar, the ‘ontological culminates in the theological. Beautifal form, be- Yond manifesting Being, eveals the non-manifest depth of & Sivine presence (443) Boing itself here unvels its final countenance, ehich for us rccives themame of tinitartan loves Only with this nal mystery does light fal at laat on that other mystery: Why there is Being at all and Why it aes oe Roan ght and tah and goes and Boat Yet fnot even Being itself provides a grammar for determining388 Louis Dupré The glory of the Lord 389. the structure of that ultimate mystery, how can it be said to ‘manifest at all? Not until the end of volume Tl does the au- ‘thor explain what a manifestation of God's hiddennese must ‘mean. With St. Bonaventure he agrees that the essence of form. Ties notin its being a potential object of sense perception, but rather in its intrinsic power fo express—whatever mode of ap- pearance the expression may take. In the Incarnation God es- sentially expresses himself in a manner that allows us to speak 6f a divine form, even though the expressing God remains hid- den ‘within the expressive form, What the form reveals in Christ and through him in al finite forms, is not a direct “re- semblance” between the visible and the invisible, but that the divine soure ofthis expression in sible form sel formally 1s in their being light and in thelr act of self-expression that the substances resemblance to God len this they express God, though iGerather he who xprsss hie in then th nyt inst the creative power of revelation i broken up into the colors in the: ‘rious llurtinations, and into the forms, which ultimately ate only ‘Various stumps of expression (36). ° What any given form reflects, then, is not one abate of Goa or anothes bt his inexhaustible, ever mysterious expressive tes se Bonaventure declares the world a vestiginm, a “trace,” and Cusanus a cipher not an image, Deentoe Goa resembles none of te things that manifest hs, The vari, ‘ten conflicting forms reveal him as the one whose very nas tore expressive. Inthe linerarium Mento Bonaventure rea ‘Sues the beauty of vsbe thing by thelr power to manifest an frye ely at tance al fon Nor ows thi ae Scendent reference destroy the fint’s own expressiveness, or thet cnattuts no apt op cine sure, Bt ‘manifest God who remains Radon’ and precy ins abiity {odo soles its formal (.e. aesthebe)pertection. Beings appear theologically "beautiful not through 9 particule propor of their being, butsimply through ther beng tel Ne theologe ical category, beauty a raceme atbute of Being sel {1'50, Nomore than tuthor goodness or nity, cant be ited Ot ofthe totality of Being tomar only the privileged excep Stil the reader wonders, why should we call any form expressive of the unmanifest Mystery “beautifl," partic. hlacly when that divine ie nthe ultimate expression of Crises Cross conflicts with accepted. aesthetic standards? +The Christ epipenit of God has nothing about ito the simple radiance of the Platonic sun of the good: Itis am actin which {God utterly freely makes himself present, as he commits tothe fiay the last divine and human depths of love” (12) At this pint one either abandons the project ofa theological aesthetic ES being too far removed from the common understanding of aesthetic, or one rebuilds ton a wholly different footing. Von Balthasar has fllowed the latter course, Rather than rendering his theological esthetic a sbsperies ofthat traction which has developed from Pato to Heidegger, he has set up an analagous Srder that, while sharing the general norms of expressive form, Establishes its own laws from above, 20 fo speak. As in Edk- hats theory and in that of most Christan mystics, this analogy between the divine and the human order does not move in en ascending line (from the creatures fo God), but in a descending ‘ne, that views creation. ina divine, revealed ight Von Balthasar’ theology of form plunges it roots more deeply in the New Testament than ina philosophical aesthetic. The sut- fering and death of Christ, fr fom being the exception they ‘would be in a worldly aesthetic, hte become the mel. They hive, infact, opened new form perspectives on “the nocturnal side of existence” for which earlier theories had no pace. The entire volume on the New Testament (HI22) presents the di Vine glory as essentially consisting in the kasi of God's Word. {That Word was from all eternity destined to slence—frst in Christ’s hide tie, then in his passion andl death, finally inthe ‘escent into hell. Cross and damnation thereby come t belong to the very essence of divine form, A theologieal aesthetic de= scribes how God's perfection becomes actualy manifest, and Scripture reveats it fo consist in the “correspondence between sbedience and love, Between selfannifilaton in hiddenness Sha the ascent toward manifestation” (I, p. 242) "Yet, if the analog crac is to penetrate our entire vision ofthe real, tus, at some point, link up with an idea {f God based upon the analogia ons. Von Balthasar ages with Barth that 2 Christan aesthetic mast start fom the Cross. He Lilfers from him, However, in not admitting any definitive ce Sure betwcen this theology of form and a philosophical cs thetic. Revelation sets up 9 new analogy which, rather than Separating it from transcendental aesthetics, establishes new390__Louis Dupré ‘The glory ofthe Lord 391 norms and criteria for it. Do the consciousness and the lan- fuage available within our culture stil sllow an aesthetic of grace? Has “the perspicuity ofthe analogia ents” not been de- Stroyed by the modern world picture? To be sure, to the pious ‘mind there continues to exist an analogy “rom above,” de- scending from God to the creature—and in this respect the believer may perceive God in the ereature today as much as before. John of the Cross, at the endl of The Living Flame, ex- claims: “Here lie the remarkable delight ofthis awakening: the soul knows creatures through God, and not God through crea- tures. This amounts to knowing the effects through thetr cause, and not the cause through is effects” (IV, 4). Buta theological ‘aesthetic requires more than an inward vison’ it must be able to resent the world as manifesting God's presence. This requires the Bnalogy from above to be complemented by some analogy from below. Only the later ean provide the symbols and images to cconeretize that theological vision and extend it to the entire world. In modern culture this has become exceedingly difficult. More and more, faith tends to depend exclusively on revelation and/or on the inner experience. God has to be known through his revelation and through his inner voice, so to speak, in iso- lation from the world. The battle ery of the Reformation —sola {ile—frst expressed this mentality of the modern age. Even the Catholic representative figures presented in Volume Ill per- ceived the natural link between God and cosmos as broken, John of the Cross and Pascal resist the sola fide doctrine by Stesing the inne exerienso faith, not by reconnecting faith ‘with cosmic experience. 2. Form and the mystery of Being ‘Theological form has increasingly come to be re- duced to the “formal” aspect of the expression rather than revealing tf nthe very experience of the coum structure Where the link between God and cosmos has ceased to be visible, the theological expressiveness of worldly form becomes impaired. When von Balthasar crtcizes Pascal's “harsh dual: ism of the future... betiveen scence and supernatural piety” (ll, 189), he describes in facta common situation which threat fens the success of his own enterprise, Our world is no longer illuminated by the light of grace—whatever divine light reaches ‘the modern believer's mind illuminates mostly the inner realm of the soul. The separation between the realms of nature and ace, a8 well asthe “desincarnation” of al theology in the ‘deen age, are not coincidental phenomena. They express 9 Separation which de fact exists i the modern mind, How does ‘vor Balthasar evaluate these restrictions imposed by our age? “The fist obstacle blocking the Lind of aesthetic Vi sion of reality as a whole reguied fora Uhologial aesthetic the loss ofthe mystory of Beg. At the end of the Middle Ages philosophy ceased t be metaphysical and bucame scentie— Either a positive science of an # ror, deductive one. In the Important introdustion to Volume Ili {in English, Vol. IV), von Balthasar outlines the conditions fora genuine metaphys- tel awareness of Being within which alone the universality of God's glory may become manifest. By metaphysics, the study ofthe Being of beings, von Balthasar understands, inthe Greek tradition, not merely the purely rational mode with which we hive comet Ment prop, But any efecto on ute sate foundations inchiding the mythical and the poetic. All Fundamental thought on Beng as sich and on is tranecenden- tal atributes of rth goodness, and beauty holds metaphyst tal significance. Hence Homer and Viepl, Cervantes an asso, even Goethe, Holdesin and Rilke feature in von Balthasar’ discussion of metaphysics next to Pato, Aristotle, Descartes, dnd Kant. Somewhat surprisingly, von Balthasar even includes the mystics of the late Middle Ages, Eckhart, Tauler, Rus ‘roce, Julian, Catherine of Sien, end Catherine of Gea, In his view al f them probe Bing it eat ater than remaining sated with articulating, the content of Christian revelation, as theologians do, or with discussing the subjective Constitution of objectivity or value, as modern. philosophy tends to do. One may consider such a comprehensive list a= ‘trary. But under it lie the slid dea that genuine melaphys ics requires a thematic awareness ofthe total mystery of Being Only toa reflection that approaches reality from a sense wonder about the mysterousness of Being, can the beautiful remain an essential attabute of Being, The sense of mystery tnd the transcendental nature of beauty go hand in hand ‘Without it the aesthetic Becomes reduced to the effect of 3 subjective disposition. From Homer and Pindarus, dough Plato, Aristotle, and Plotinus, from the exely and high Christan Middle Ages to the Renaissance Sand the Barogue, this ination sthich we here cll “transcendental Ssestheic persists: the Lalo (asthe wholesome, healthy, radian,392 Lowis Dupré beautiful) is one of the transcendental deterninations of Being as Such Wh hs anacendentl aesthetic Biba evan ca Sad ‘mus engage in dislogue, however disinterested it ught to be toward {regional sesthetic that is vesticed tothe inner-wesidly (Id, 3), Such a dialogue slone secures the continuity ofthe aesthetic of revelation a iterates the space needed for receiving the dir ‘ine form: in its transcendental beauty, Being radiates tsa damental graciousness "Tm Dicker wind ie Wells Chars afer”. 24) within which alone the divine form sable {Osevea its own radiance, Form and Being remain indssohly uted bee any forever tat of tevlaton —must be Viewed inthe walt of Being “Wis to possess any ontological power (seinshaft) at all” tp. 32). Pe a Inte formal aspect Christian revelation constitutes a contracted representation ofthe Absolute that sheds a new light on Being as such. With other forms it shares anaesthetic radiance. Yetit fers from them in thatthe revened form Rot ‘merely points tothe Absolute, but “expresses centrally and definitively” (IVI, 3) By the same token transforms our ontempaton ofthe mystery of Being tetas well as dplae Ingall other forms we perceive init light. Comparing ts eect, tothe inherited Greek view ofthe comms, we see i breaking down the lative dentty between that cosinos ad ts absolute foundation. Henceforth only one revealing Subject directs the ‘manifestation ofthe cosmos, How the cosmos manifests the ulimate mysteriousness of Being must, in th nal ana, be learned from that divine Subject ils intaivine Being is not revealed in the sheer radiance of the cosmos alone. With the Christian revelation the transcendental aesthetic assumes ‘wholly new peropetive, one not given in the mind's natural esthetic pereeptiveness, Henceforth that natural perceptive ‘ness fulfils a necessary yet mediating ole. This transformation af our perspective on Being revolutionized Western metaphys- {cs I took the Fathers and Scholaste philosophers centues to implement it within the traditional fame of thought. By the time ofthe High Middle Ages they had suceeded in doing so “Ther philosophical successors were less succesful fn coping with the process of disintegration which, atthe end oi the Middle Ages eroded the metaphysical frame isl. Von Talthasar presents Nichola of Cusa{fiteenth century) as the last metaphysian to attempt 9 synthesis between Christan revelation and cosmic manifesiation, tn his magisterial work The glory of the Lord 398 ‘we already perceive that return to an older, prechrstian cosmic theology which began during his Hfetime’ At the dawn ofthe ‘modem era, Plato and Plotines who had, ofcourse, played an Important par all through the Christian ages, were assigned thenew, even more substantial ask of reestablishing the divine immanence in that cosios of which late medieval theology had dleprved i line of religous thought begun in Eckhart had tended to skip the cosmic realy in attempt fo establish an tinmedisted tion of the soul with Gods What accounts fort wos less an itdirected theology than a spinal response to & plulosophy (and philosophically orient theology) that had {ost touch with te original mystery of Being and reduced the world to'a mere effect of an arbitrary divine causality. The return to Antiquity that marked the humanist movement one tuted on a aiferent level a response fo the same predica iment: a cry for help uttered by a Christan culture that had fet its traditional foundation sipping away. Where Being lost ts iystery the coumoe allowed no more genuine divine mma renee. Hence the split between, on the one hand, an un ‘worldy theology spirtual-empirical or dogmatic postive tnd on the otfer,a new philosophy which, mosty based on pre-Christian sources, defended & cosmic immanence of God That bypassed the revolutionary tanaformation dn tht imma rence wrought by the biblical revelation. The forme led #0 an cosmic Kind of theology, the ater to a pantheistic ort least, iy Christan norms, insufciently transcendent, view of the ‘elation between Cosd and the world. Both exchided the very possbiity ofa property Christian aesthetic. As soon as piles Ephy acjuired a method that enabled it not f0 rly on any Sturees of reality eutside the phlosophizing mind isc, Slaton abvut God soon lst the coumic character which had trielly marked it during the Renaissance, It then came fo com Btn purely a prior nm of rabocinaion only to reveal inthe end (late eighteenth century) what f had been all along Gtanie human construction (IU, p. 592) “Theology proper has suffered no less from the dis- appearance ofits metaphysical background, While once Teve- ittlon constituted “the inwardness of absolute Being, the mys tery of is life and love” (a8), breaking forth asthe sel fevelation ofthe mystery of Being itself” (149), by the end of the Middle Ages theology had become detached fom the nat- ural mystery Of Beng, Natural “piety of Being” (4) ceased to'mediate "supemetural” piety. Yet only Irgrace flly pone394 Louis Dupré The glory of the Lond _ 395 trates the natural order, can finite form become able to express the divine. That divine life itself, as revelation teaches in the mystery of the Trinity is, more than an absence of form, an “infinitely determined super-form’ (1,482) which introduces & new mode of divine presence in the form of nature Following de Lubac’s critique of the supernatural as an independent order of the real, von Balthasar founds his theological aesthetics on a more intimate harmony of nature and grace than the one that has dominated the theology of the past four centuries. Though the divine mystery remairs infin Siaily concesled—the more God becomes sanifest in his rev- elation, the more he remains hidden—a revelation of the divine ‘manifests human nature, and indeed all of nature, to itself Conversely, nature, if seen in the revealed perspective of the Cross, reveals something of God's very being. Thus Irenaeus, with whom Chistian theology originated, insists, against Val- entine’s gnostic spiritualism, on seeking the figure of grace in nature itll The flesh is “not without the artistic wisdom and wer of Cod,” but "God's hands are accustomed, as they ive been from the time of Adam, to give their work a rhythm and hold it strongly, 0 support and place it where they choose’ (Ado. Faeeses 2, 3303, cited in ll, 73). 3. The witness of theology Yon Balthasar devotes his second volume (on “Theology: Clerical Styles") to exploring the often surprising ‘way in which ancient theologians have developed the theme of the transformation of nature by divine grace, He has debe ately selected theologians who have been traditionally iner- preted as challenging such a transformation, either by their Fegative theory (Dens the Ateopagis), or bythe opposition of grace to a corrupt nature (Augustine), or By the ohe-sidedly fatonal quality of thei thought (Anselm) His inspiceddiscus- Sion of Denys shakes longrestablshed positions by a straight forward defense ofthis controversial writer Instead of regard ing him asa rather too faithful follower of Precis, who under 2 audulent authority suceeded in releasing straight Neopl {onism upon an unsuspecting Church, von falthasar presents him as an original, authentically Catholic thinker. He excul putes Denys's work from the charge of a dangerously radial hegative theology by shoving Row it gravitates toward a the- logy of form rather than foundering on a formless ebslute The essays on Irenaeus and Denys show how solidly von Balthasar’s own theological aesthetic remains anchored in an earlier, Greek tradition which it effectively recaptures. lis efforts to rescue the early Western tradition from its later dualist interpretations encounter greater dificul ties. Here also the author diplays a masterly control over his material, often forcing us to correct our reading as well as our reading perspective. Nevertheless they do not alway’ succeed in dispelling al doubts about the solidity of the Latin synthesis, especially in the cases of Augustine and Anselm. Bonaventuze, with whom the second volume concludes, alone perhaps inthe West, approaches the core of what constitutes von Balthasay’s essential insight. From the Vision of the crucified Seraph at its center, this theology of form radiates its aesthetic light over all of nature and history. One may regard his synthesis as the foundation in the Western tradition of von Balthasar’s own work In the modern age when theology became ab- stractly rationalist, the author turns to poets and “lay” thinkers for support of his theological aesthetic. At the thresold of that ‘ew tradition stands Dante, his feet stil firmly planted on me- dieval soil, yet his eyes already gazing at a remote future. He first declared literary form, the harmony of linguistic expres- siveness, imaginative power, and symbolic content, to be the essence of poetic creation, ata time when Cimabue and Giotto ‘were accomplishing a form revolution in painting and Andrea Pisano in sculpture. Yet it was the mystical quality that gave Dante's aesthetic its unique character, decisively elevating it above the courtly tradition in which it had originated. “in Dante the ethos of the cor gentle, originally an obscure, es0- teric, and unreal form of thought, burst its mits, became con- crete and vniversal”” This aesthetic vision gave birth to the ‘most perfect synthesis of nature and grace in the Middle Ages. At the same time Dante already anticipated and in a way re solved some of the tensions of the emerging modern culture iis poetic development moved ‘rom a Platonic spiritualism that merely allegorized corporeal beaity to a fully symbolic mystical vision. The changing role of Beatrice clearly marks the stages of this development. Already in his Vito trch Auerbach, Dt, Pet oft sar Word (Chicago, 196,396 Louis Dupré ‘The glory of the Lon 397 ‘Nuoos, Dante attempted to christanize an ert that withthe ‘deal of courtly love and ite verbalzaton by the Provencal poets had suddenly entered European culture” Hs loving remem bance of Beatrice established the bass for anew religious ha. ans comport in pe ater han noun. ing But not und the Comada di he succeed in fully uniting 1H spe meaning wih ese’ physi presence Med ting between heaven and earth, she Pray ellowed im to brace he nt witht rng aay fo eave, Fe Beatie no longer escapes earthly Tove: she fulfils iin perict union of nature and grace. bn Beatie, Dante conveys Bis fom an extent meaning to his Christ a iy and eros become par of the Sponse Crist (I, 52) Human beauty now rise to express divine goodness. This syn- thesis of nature and grace Hkewise appears in Dante's discon” Certing use of ancient cosmology in the structuring of Parade. ‘The planets and spheres of heaven transform the cosmos ise into. symbol of God's love. Dante clothes everthing in Pare aise with or, even if roqulres deviating from established {theology His soats are clearly more than ecies spits walt ing forthe general resorrction. Their claniied bodies remain subject 10 feeling and emotion. Beatrice weeps in Paradise, Peter fumes against his successors, Benedict complains about the present sate of his onder Sobered by the wave of naturalism which sub- merged the early Chistian humanism during the Renalsance find which continues to inundate moder culture, moder po- fs, while sil glonfying the harmony ofthe Christ event with the entre history of mankind, nevertheless avoid inwinsially ig ancent mythology nthe Catan wove. By and lage, their "symhses” display a greater complexity, a ittomeSaimost paul evident in Gerd Maney topless intiate but tortured embrace of nature and grace. Through the Incarnation permanently embedded in nature, grace reshapes conmos and history info a chistologal form, Henceforth all vente in this world become inspired, stimulated, and 3 ‘waned by a power that rules their order yet surpasses them. ‘But the tansforming mystery of the Incarnation culminates in the Cross, “the fundamental, ontological presupposition of all natural processes that al, knowingly or hot, intansically ig- ‘ify intend by pointing beyond themecves” (IM, 384). The Challenging tsk f the Christan poet consists in rendering Sensible what in stelf must remain completely tanscendent. tact see etme yon ot ut Siena Gedo rec eet aoa aienemaes fen /UInr Mitiaiedefecomiot ton eee ieesmiramea mae Sa oe aa eneeane ns he So coe aha bee hoc! Seer oe eo By Siecle eart se a ct rt = coat py nem rez tte tt Hs ttologeal vison render is work intoa Christan Sua ee ia arr pe eeeuena adanthar! ica acer a eon igen hd eat cnn fee nan aakices atratinaas Loe aera eas Eni. They. rmanentyenaine Ne fem. The ance Cee ea a Ad i ie Ichi Rat desta fo ceive is deve meaning The i ata etree Heat i Rg see beet erase iacued icheeecinarana cece Heh amen wag ete Sed tigate od Bikar pmeete day anther i SRE at a iy cca afat ea Gig Coane menace feed Seer foun gee ean ern potter erence sateen Beet cen ace oe Sietafesisetmete mentshet a Suis nia tle nia ce tiatemmeraac ones iors matcagsabesiasacsets SHG Ry ag? at Ga Fare ik Toots, to hak ono is natona models, and to venerate orl398 Louis Dupré saints—Jeanne d'Are, St. Louie, St. Genevitve, Everywhere Péguy shows a profound respect forthe given order of nature and histoy—"the climate of grace."* His poetry most con. Staten places the order of grace rly wit the natural word du, 40. Hamann, the contemporary of Kant and Herder, understood, alone withthe poets, how a God wit dies on & ‘x0ss transforms history and language. The Bible's poetic dis ‘order reflects the Spits adjustment “the regular disorder Of mature 275), Kare serves a6 “oreoat” tothe dct revelation of Serpture History init great figures symbolically Sntipates and follows the supreme, histocal event of the incenaon Thus, mann Side Socte' ltnate sign cance in his elation to Chst. Socratic ignorance presymbelizes the death of natural reason in faith. In fevelation Gent empbies Fimscl, Hamann refer to Scaplure, the Rens of tre Hey Spirit, asthe sil small voice hat we ein our heats shrunk tof the “small understanding of sen,”= "All history is ike nature, sealed bok a oncesied witness, a dle hat cont beled uns we plow th ome her other than ‘our reason,"* Language, particularly “poetic language, te" Sponds tothe word God addresses tous dn creation It must be Understor in analogy withthe definitive interpretation of is ‘work in Scripture. Heman’s theological aesthetic unites nar {ean grace ina relationship stonce hidden and open. “The Categories he imposes on nate have so radical and seeping, an effect, because ultimately, they derive fom the sphere of Supernatural revelation, Poetic inapiration ly (hidden) proph- cy. Language i (Neden cvine) revelation” (I, 20) ‘Bespite his profound afinty with Hamann, von Balthasar claims a greater autonomy for nature. The Protestant thinker, he feel, fends to “overpower” nature all oo hasty and to “replace” i by Scripture (UL, 272), In defending the Telatve auionomy ofthe finite against an inadequate norms fon of the divine tm nature, von Balthasar revives the medieval controversy whether theology ought to study nature ints own Fight, or merely as 2 branch of Scriptural theology. While fe- $pecing the aulonomy ofthe natural form, howees, theology “Bein Oe mi ete Pa, 10, *Sabatche Donation Nd) 8, The glory of the Lord 399 ought not to remain satisfied with aesthetic principles derived ‘only, or even mainly, from nature. To measure the Christan sryslenes by cite ofthe natural orm st sestheicze them, Precisely for that reason a great work ike Chateaubrand's Ge- tied crsinisne remains permanently inadequate, while Pas- Cal and John ofthe Cros, forall hee distrust of the te form ss expression ofan infinite mystery, may nevertheless De con Sidered authentic Tor” artist ofthe divine, The cave of Joan or the Cross, in particular, vividly lustates Row precarious the balance betwen a fortes supernaturaiom anda natura in formalin had Become nthe mater age ‘As von Balthasse presents fim, John ofthe Cross came ata time when the new view of nature had aleady de Stoyed the symbolic analogy ofthe cosmos that had shaped Dante's Comedia The Spanish mystic proposes a theology 8 {ustere as that ofthe Reformation salvation by faith sone. As ihe soul progreees in her spinal ascent she geadally must discard al ntagos and formant oly the teresa ones, bt ven moce the supesnaturl visions fuminations, and conso- Iations. God can be knovn only tough God himself inthe night of senses and imagination (Il 105, 12). Despite these fontrdestructive principles, von Balthaser grants John of the Goss sgnfcan postion in the theologies aesthetic of the smodern age, What the content ofthe mystics work rejects, Doct Toren reinstates (i, 120), In hs poetry, which contains Rie asence of his message, the naturel imiges, 50 Severely tanned from spiritual fe, become the very medium for ex: Dressing the inageless state for which he aims. With him the Theology of form moves toward a new center The Spirit, though ho longer appearing as the anina mand achieves a new hharmony of nature and grace asthe souree of poetic inspira. tom "ho can divide the spheres of sapematurl and natural ingpiration? Why shouldnt the diect inspiration of the Hly Spint at the same time awaken al of the powers of atic ehthusiasm and creative inventiveness where such powers ex- ist. 12) And yet, such mystical sexthetic hides a deep tension, for the poetry merely induces one to abandon the foctc isin and to suspass all sensaour images, The inal Efapters of The dst of Mount Carmel on religious at disclose hove far John ofthe Crow's theology remains from granting any Find of sacramental presence of Cod the ion. Hes ion teaby beauty, ye the only permanent abode of bey he Stecpifecome hat riss above leary forms: Inthe end, vom400 Louis Dupré Balthasar feels, his “paradox” yields no universal Christin truth, John's way to Cod: ovsever adobe, cannot serve as {Xinodel even inthe modern age. Fase’ witness appears equally complex. Because ofa dstoned reading oft, Augustine, head no natal “liumination” inthe onder ofgrce-whether fom sence ot hls Sach harsh dy (i 1) perenne 2nd piety Would seem to disqualify him for sgnfcaniy con: inaling to theiogl ae, Bt von Dathasr conn ingly shows how his austere Jansenst theology rests on an arthropological basis which bridges the imeconclabie oppost tion between grace and nature. The assumption oftheir deeper "union supports Pasa’ entire moral and intellectual struct. ‘The ideal ofthe hométe homme, the persom who observes the proper form, the jst proportion, the ght relation in hs deal Ing ith he wor preppons tat he Civitan Is abet trandiate the vision of grace into the order of nature (Ii, 201), Frases vision othe human codon reveals what his theo ay tiesto suppress The sence ofthe heart balances the two ihintes between which human existence moves. The person “hovers as aspirin a vid that he cannot understand”, 208): his conn canbe dried only fom within an infinite ‘which he himself fs unsble to grasp. Ths insight, however Aimly perceived, urges the pesson fo accept a transcendent reality without which his exthence fas to make snge: Where ‘nan Gan understand himself only through God existence tel juss faith ven the God of faith, however, emains "a hidden Goa” and faith merely mons the hiddennesy both of am incomprehensible God and of sn inconiprehesibe sifunes. Serre el ceveas nips han nat Sat Taste Tenaya te pasty saci spe aren ere at Tal rh tena ed Pee eid) aria adtene Reece pyar ch sho ieeaa oak da Even the New Testament and the Church, while providing the ““code" to the biblical ciphers, prefigure only the eschatological revelation of glory. They themselves remain fall of mystery and sce The glory ofthe Lord 401 darkness. Loe alone renders the mystery transparent, because the God of love can ceveal his trath only to love (IT, 228). On this oscillating dialectic, then, of hidden’ manifesiness and manifest hiddenness ress Pascal's theological aesthetic. One of those lapidary descriptions in which von Balthasays essays cul- inate expresses st beautify: "His. greatness fs that OF RO tmanesgue architecture, throwing bridges across abyases and indeed i the void within its stractares” , 234). ‘The Pentes constitute a living exercise in what he himself de- fined a6 "tetanic right measure of presentation, of uterance, Of deporting onesel in short, existential proportionateness on Sllevels.Paseal supports vor Balthasar's thesis that a Chestan ‘esthetic tansform all ppearances in the ligt ofthe Cheist form. Chast himoof, Uh form of God in this world, should become the measure not only of revelation but even of the “natura” forms of cosmos and history. Indeed, the light de- sived from the very ivine-human form which appears in it transforms our vision of cosmos and history 4, Revelation and experience Thus far we have simply asumed that the Christ form must provide the final principle for anaesthetic of reve= Intion while the natural forms offer no adequate bass for such 2 theological aesthetic, Yet how could revelation lay an inde: pendent foundation fora theelogsal aesthetic without reac Aig its vision toa “natural” one and its theology to an aesthet- idem? Is the very concept of the aesthetic not grounded in ‘natural ability to percelve™"natura” forms? Von Balthasar, lly Conscious of the decisive significance ofthis question, has de- ‘oted the most profound pages af his opus to an tempt to Bnswer it To repeat, he doesnot deny the relative autonomy of seat fo ith ues trl aa oa grace which, while fully respecting the autonomy Of nature, nevertheless the igh of the Chistian mysteries esthetic transforms the natal, Revelation itself taints fet in which we sect form. hn lmine uo vdebmus men ‘rThelight of faith stems from the object which revealing iselé tothe subject, divs it out beyond taek—into the sphere ofthe object (18). Goals revelation establishes bot its content tnd the believer's ability to comprehend it Christ reveals as the God who expreses, and stands revealed as that which he ex: presses. Unlike the Socratic teacher he does not merely teach universea 7 402 Louis Dupré The glory ofthe Lord 408 the truth he i what he teaches His form conceals as much as itreveals, but that concealment belongs essentially fo the far ture of what he reves. The igh, them, within whieh the be lever apprehends Gots manesiton entirely oriites in the maritestation sel. So does the believing response to i faith does not exit slongsie Christ's word, but is Gac's wn response tot given by one “enaced” by Goud (Eph 210). The Brllever assent “within the object of his ath () 192), thereby Parfaking inthe ctenal yes the Son speaks to the Father. The Union of the believer with Christ inks the two constituent parts af the act of faith~the object and the response tot TRE eye With ‘which the believer sees God, as Eethart forcefully ex pissed li the eyevith which Gases imal In modern Limuage, the conditons for the possibilty of “theological” owletge are the very contiions that constute the theo logit” abject, seth this important restncton that the object ‘cel provides the conditions Yor ts Knowledge. "The light of faith Cannot. be thought or even experienced asa srerely immanent reality in our sou, but solely asthe radiance resul ing om the presence in us of» lumen inet, gaia ere. ata, without our ever being aie to abstract from Cod Inca raion” (215) "AS von Balthasar presents it, that faith, far from standing opposed to experiente (as past theology frequent implied), crests its own experience, The Eastern Church with is theology of God's unerested light that became manifest in Jesus's tansiguraion, hes never ceased to proclaim this st Pernatural experience of faith, Even in the West, particulary m ‘Rugustinefalth originally included experience as an essential pat of itself. Not unt Suarez was the “supernatural” quality Sf that experience dsputed and lowered to a. psychological level. The unity ofthe two is crucial to von Balthasar’s thes experience does not belong to the essence of faith self the form corsttued on the basis of that experience possesses no theological standing whatever. study of thedlogical form then, turns ito a branch of natural aesthetics (as taid inthe aesthetic theologies ofthe romantic era) wherein the form fu tions only a the appearance of a totally different, supermatral realty. For von Balthasar, the gnosis of theology grows entire (ut of the experience of faith and belongs torte same onde "Theology deepens pists into gos so fas thi is possible on earth, and it does this through a contemplative penetration of the dopths of individual face” Bol) Paedstly becue 1 boviginates in the experience of faith all Christan theology pos- sesses both an aesthetic and a mystical quality. All too often modern theology has restricted falth to 9 set of divinely eom- ‘municated principles which theology, then, by purely rational methods, develops into an autonomous system, Following the older tradition, von Balthasar regards faith asa comprehensive, Supernatural experience in its own ight—intellectua, voli tional, emotional—through which God's Spirit takes posces- sion of the human mind, ‘Tho “silts ofthe Holy Spi” bestowed seminaly by grace lead the believer to an ever deeper awareness and experience boil of the peje in fim of a's ing and of he depth ofthe vine Frath goodness, and beauty in the mystery of Cod This experience ‘ranaly refered to as Chstin mastcan in he moat ental nse ofthe term 198). God's revelation, for von Balthasar as for Augustine, estab- iahes its own sesorum inthe soul 0,289, 163) Nor should this experience of faith be separated from the natura experience which it fulfils and transforms. The impact of the objet of faith affects the mind's natural orienta tion toward Being. “Along with the onc order that orients sa and the form ofreeaton tone not, the peo the Holy Sprit creates the faculty that can apprehend this form, the faculty that can relish if and find i joy in Ke that can tnderstand it and sense is interior truth and sighiness” (, 247). "The encounter in faith transforms the souls one dyna anim into a direct recepivity forthe Christ orm, Though fa filing the mind's natural asprations the experience of faith emerges from within faith i conducted by the standards of faith and results in seeing the frm of faith, 225.227), Even as 2 great work of at impaces its own spiritual « prior upon the ‘ewer or the hearer, ath conveys its own intinec necesito the entre natural order (1 Ted. Yet ace “imposes” its form without doing vio- lence to nature."The revelation in Christ occurs withnes die Vinely created nature which already in ts own being manifests God's eternal presence. Hence revelation must not only adopt the form of thie world; icompletesthat form by extending ito itoulmote archetype, God's tune nature. Fence the highest form quality ofthe Chis, hie divine ration tothe Father and the Spit, stands not opposed to the structure ofthis World it404 Louis Dupré appears as form witin this worl, yet one fom which that oid scl mt env te deni fo wa die tive,” because Christ nota sign pointing beyond self o an fnvatle Cad he inst the etitle Godman te rea, ity he signifies, “man insofar ay God radiates from hits, God insofar ashe sppearsin the man Jats” (437), Being ultimate, the Christ form should not be messured by other forms: i becomes ist the measure ofall. For von Balthasar, a9 for Bonaventure, the Son is archetype ofall things Because he is aint epesin "Te ats which he hil itsexpresnive power. esses hing then the ‘spray fore ting a receives te power of sion fom ps The Incarnation would not constitute the definitive form ifChit’s humanity had mersiy beens randomly adopted form, extrinse to G's inner ie Tobe definitive the Godman ‘must express Cad's own form (480, An Infinite wholly i ‘presale would leave the Incarnation no more than 3 do- ‘cnt sgnicance, What Cua reveals ins own ely, how ver, that nga-vine relationship whereby Cod half s form, “In the Son of Man then appears not Cod slone, neces ‘arly thee also appears the intertniaran event of hie po- ssl there appear the tne Gad” (479) Cod is ble to express him in Jesus once he existe ne dine ruture, and Chris humanity, far fom being a. concession made to human fay in Go's sllrevelation, tthe divine rea telat becomes manifest, What reais concealed in Fim this divinity) has ot fen withdrew rm msnuestation. butrather mane the inscrutable, divine mystery Hell. As the work of art no altenor realy hides fend the form the form tly mar, duce 1c vet power. Ie enaitycoraitates as much a postive in the frm of Gots evelaton a the ontincing nyse oe a beloved peron 180) Both the concealed and the revealed Become oe ofthe perepion of faith "Visible form not only ‘Points tan invisible, untathomable mystery; form the ap. onion ofthis mystery. and reveai while, natal, atthe me time protecting and welling The content doesnot lie behind dhe for bat thin (i) The entire mysteny “In Sent, Distinction 38, gs. 3. In, 33. ea The glory of the Lond! 405 of Chit becomes ss, ncuding its teitaran engin. Only the aesthetic perception of form fully transcends the otherwise persistent dualism between the external sign of faith and the {Internal light: the ight breaks forth from the form itselt 5. The foundation of Scripture Not before the final volumes on the Old and the ‘New Testament (V2. parts nd 2) does von Balthosar give the definitive justification of these principles. Only septal fregesis can convey what the “dine form” has concretely ‘meant, fist in the revelation of Israe's destiny as Goes chosen people, then inthe inspired power and amazing divert of ‘riten formalization, finally in that one individual who in his Person exes te fulness of Gx inner. Tow no ore powerful description of Gx’ formegiving activity in hse tory than the volume d Pesta ‘Volume devoted to the Old Testament. Ini Inecome aware ofthe awesome complexity ofa divine election ‘operative inthe concrete cultural context of primitive, hall no- ‘modic tibes slowly unified by @ series of theophanies in an Inolated trek through the desert In unforgettable pages von Balthasar evokes the ‘emendum of these founding events ‘whereby Yahoveh becomes lsae's God and Israel Becomes his le, Next we learn of Israel's doubt response to this Rochen vn te vlence and barsare eruderess (suggests Judges) of the ibs” attempt to sete down inthe ney con quered and. Once some civilized order was established under sreluctantly accepted kingship the succesful exchange sith neighboring tribes poses the even greater threat of culteal as- simulation, ‘The Bible reflects these suecessive stages in a liter- ature which, while expressing Israel's God-given identity—and fs such pulang in fe ace formneserthcess me and tore opens sell fo «savers nenvEasern Ramana hat Ccessopaly sands in grant postion tote own founding ils, rnt tthe perl ngage of tae nthe Proptets andthe Pentteuch we tl he septal dem of Koheleth the unrest ertism of the Song ot Singy the county wasiomn of overs, peste even thede fui ne fae in Job and Some of he Pain, Yt these strands, however secular if aken by themacve, have tntered the one sacred expreston that forhalzes the exper tee ofthe Gotshaped nation. Most remarkably von Baldisar406 Louis Dupré has compelled the farseaching conclisions of radial biblical iitsm into a fundamental, aibcomprehensive religious vi ‘Sion, This enables him to read the entre Bible ae an anticipatory symbol of God's fll revelation inthe form of Christ The final pat of the volume on the Olt Testament is entirely devoted 0 Ihe longing for a divine glory "that was not present”: the “empty time” ofltal's wating forthe messinic ern, During that concluding iblial epoch the principles of the Covenant ‘began to expand) beyond the cultural borders of the nation into the universal space ofthe Hellenistic commonvvealth, So the last section of tis work on God's glory inthe Old Testament ‘ears the provocative ttle "Das Hewte obne Hlerihtet (The Present Without Glory) which takes the idea of divine form to its farthest mits where ts no more than the emp space that ‘Walls tobe filed, The discussion of the New Testament follows a ‘wholly diferent course. Here the form appears perfect and fulled from the start. While the formegiving process Inthe id Testament consisted primarily ina reception of words, in the New Testament it immediatly attains fl expression inthe tne, incarnate Word. The Church continues to ind models and images for this physical presence inthe Bible and wil eontinue to meditate on its mystery unt the end of time. But the pres ences therefrom the begining (32, pp, 253). This inal completeness of the revelation, however, dacs not result in a Single theoiogy. Already the New Testament itself displays a ‘anloty of approaches tthe mystery of the Incarnation de pending on the diferent cultural settings in which it was tobe Embeds! Matthews theology of Cast as the fuliled prom Jce ofthe Oid Testaments clearly distinc from John's dering that opposes the true gris ofthe Gospel tothe gnostic sysr tems of late paganism: Later, theological reflection insoduces further distinctions to_a point where one cannot speak of te theology ofthe New Testament Yet, through it all runs the unifying thread of Jesus's own ile, lie of poverty, fumlty, and total obedience Init the biblical dea of glory receives a new, paradonical mean ing. In Chist a loving. God assuming the sinfulness of the human race in his own body becomes himself the victim in a sacrifice of proptiation, Precisely this lenais manifest a here- tofore hidden splendor of God's inner lf. “Cloried in him God wll alo glorify hin in himself” Gn 13:2), Christ says at the ast supper. And: “Glorty your Son that the Son may’ glo- ‘The glory of the Lord 407 tify you” Gn, 172). That same henotic glory descends over the ete saced community of the new Israel in discussing the New Testament von Balthasar changes his approach to Senpture. His eatment of the Old {Testament full allowed fora Condition charctrist fal ber- tat expression, namely that it requires interpretation. The words of Scripture, though unique in ther revealing capacity, are not Separated from other discourse. They orginae ina concrete, Iiforical seting and are addressed to humans who speak & language of ther own, not necessarily that ofthe ancient nar= tative, prophecy, or legislation, Fence they call for here neutié Ganficaion and historia! crite. In practice Chris- tans have never questioned the need for inierpetation beyond the words ofthe Bible. From the bean they have provided fnew reading ofthe Old Testament text. Vet with respect to the ‘New Testament thet atotude has been more hesitant Since it constitutes the defintive and closed revelation of the one Word, # stands in a dase by itself: For von Balthasar this tnigueness implies tha, rather than rsiying upon external in terpreiation, the words must be allowed to provide thir own light No hermeneatieorpillogicsl methods dopdet of te ting fh of the Church {he only authortative reader of the Wort) can tly enlighten the bebever. Being ae the norma. tive standard, the New Testament recognizes no external ai thory. For von Balthasar, the sacred tex is ill 2 "super- form” of which the varius part luminate each other while ‘efusing any other source of ight to penetrate the inner son im, Ths does not led him toa sleepin doctene, forthe tuthortative tration which helped to shape tha form retains is definitive jrisdietion over its Interpretation. Since Sripture ust be read in the Church, cannot cai form hich ean fe understood and apprehended in isl” 1 586). Ye it does, imply that external source of reading must not be allowed to Interfere with past radio or cecal mgr Hence von Tulthasae, despite a command of exegeteal and philological method equaled by few eects moch recent bitoral schola Ship in his reading ofthe New Testament. He knows i, oct Slonally refers tot but racely applies Thus the aethorship of the Epistle fo the Hebrews and of the pastoral letters i Un FincKingly attributed fo St.Paul as that of the two Petine Jeter to S Petr himsel, Most Protestants and many Catho: lcs refuse to follow him inthis regard. For them word, even the words of revelation, always rajuire more words than the408 Louis Dupré tew’s own content provides. Any “universe of discourse,” they ‘maintain, is by its very nature, permanently open-ended, and hence in need of further interpretation. In adopting a more restrictive attitude von Balthasar reasserts the traditional view Of Scripture a a form in its own right, a view which many Catholics feel has been somewhat sacrificed in the Reforma: tion's emphasis on the openness of the word, But Protestants are likely to respond that the word forever resists being fully identified with any closed form, because of the peculiar com plexity ofits own form—expressiveness. One of the initial ob- jectives of the Reformation had been precisely to defend the Unrestricted open-endediness of the word against any definitive closure—even by the authentic interpreters ofthe tradition, Von Balthasar’s different mode of interpreting the ‘words of the New Testament differs not only from the one he applies to the First Testament, butalao removes it from the total ‘openness of the Chistian worldview (nevertheless based upon ‘the New Testament) with respect to philosophical systems-so ‘magnificently illustrated by Von Balthasar himself in the vol lumes dealing with the “space of metaphysics.” In Part U1 Gin English IV and V) he displays not only the full scope of his awesome erudition (which merited him to be called by Hlensi fe Lubac—the most learned man ia Europe), but also his ex- ceptional openness toward any trend of thought (including modern atheism) that, from near of far, ever entered into di logue with Christianity. The few lines devoted to that encyc edie work in the second section of tis essay may suggest I Scope of the enterprise, but convey no idea of von Balthasar’s allembracing Christian humanism. Surprisingly, when comes to other faiths his attitude becomes less conciliatory. Here 1 occasionally feel a revival of the old tension between nature and grace which he himself so effectively strove to re move. The principle of harmony forces the author to recognize the religious significance and even the indispensabilty of other religions in the economy of grace (e.g. 1,213). Christ becomes ‘the measure, both in judgment and redemption, ofall other religious forms in mankind’ (J, 171). Yet von Balthasar’s own treatment reflects more judgment than redemption, Of course, the nature of a theological asthetic requires a clear delineation of the specific form of the Christian message, But his concern, for formal clarity has led him to paint the contrasts in rather harsh tones. His opposition increases when faiths threaten to dissolve precise form and thereby to jeopardize the very pos The glory of the Lord 409 sibility of a theological aesthetio—as, in his view, Hinduism and Buddhism do, Still, if the pariouarsignifconoe of the Christian form lies precisely in its ability to harmonize nature and grace, then italzo would seem to demand religious openness toward ‘other faiths, Instead von Balthasar unqualiedly rejects “non: (Christian mysticism’ as lacking in objectivity (1,216), Hindu: jsm as “dancing [all forms] away” (, 217), Buddhism as being a religion that “dimbs up toward the divine” (1, 496) rather than Waiting for a divine message from above. Indeed, he ques- tions “anything which passes for an analysis of religious exist tence outside Christianity” (1, 231). Outside Christianity, he feels, the supremacy of the whole almost inevitably results in a shattering of finite form (1, 193). Evaluations of this kind now seem unnecessary for preserving the form of Chistian faith. Von Balthasar rarely engages in 2 real dialogue with other faiths Even a general typology which places the Cheistian form within the context of other religious forms —Judaism, the religious movements of Mesopotamia and Egypt, Hellenistic culture—von Balthasar distrsts as potentially dangerous to its uniqueness “This form... does aot appear ag something relative Ig ofthe Geis of oer ga ander, ft tn le bats fits own poral form, fe Ct form eeates to sel Ss the slate center fhe relative unigdenessof al other forms and lrmages ofthe world, whatever realm Hey derive fom (50) ‘Though he claims that Christ mediates all other forms (1 S274), they appear to lose their religious justification once the Christ form appears. Not to accept that form amounts to "ob- jectively misapprehending it either in whole or im part” (, 509)--a misapprehension which “cannot be exempt fom a cor tain kind of guilt” (, 510). This severe argument rests upon the dubious asstumption that the Christ form “appears absolutely unique” ([, 507). But how can any form appear as absolutly lunigue? Does form not by Its very nature relate to a formal ‘context from which it can never become completely detached? Itis undoubtedly true that inthe form the divine mystery ap. pears. The Incarnation would not “truly” reveal i in Christ we {id not actually apprehend the irradiation of God’s inner form.410 Louis Dupré ‘Yet must we not distinguish the form actually pereied! “with the eyes of faith” from the invisible form belcot to be present ‘on the basis ofthat perception? The German term Gestalt hides 4 fundamental ambiguity. In Christ appears the form (Gestalt here approaches Bild); but we baieve the mystery of God's in- ternal life to possess a trinitasian Gestalt (not Bild and hardly form). While fully accepting the presence ofa gnosis in faith we still ay distinguish the gnosis of perception from that of “dark Knowledge.” Flere perhaps lies an element of truth in negative theology not sufficiently appreciated by von Balthasar.*InIl/1, . 0, Re defines Gestalt, with Cusanus, as a “contracted” rep” Fesentation of the Absolute, But for the Renaissance mystic the contracted expression never surpasses the docta ignorantia in Which what we know does not formally appeat 6. Conclusion With 9 feling of awe the reader closes the final ‘volume of this last great Suna, so orginal an so trditona in which Trdentine theology stains is final perhaps most besutifl expression, Von Balthasar work conde theo logical epoch of the Catholic Chincha period of sod seo atship, enormous erudition, and deep pty. Displaying the Iajestic grandeur ofa Bysantine itrgy, i religous culture sulficed fe those inside the tation while it remalned rele tively inaccessible fo otsiders. By the time von Balthasar began ‘wating the pressure upon the selcontnined structure had be. ome everd an racks bepan fo appear Theze had been cses beoro™the one eased by Vatican the modernist crs yet ach fime the structure had shown is remarkable esience What occurred around the middle of this century was different. ‘The pressure came from within the main body, ng rom afew ‘evastanteloments Among them were thse inthe vanguard Of Cathlic theclogy and philosophy, those who “ugh! von Balthasr (especialy Hen de Ufo), He himself experienced the tension and felt the need to remedy the stuston that catsed it Yet his strategy difered fom that oF other. Rather ‘tae deat wi thi mar extent nny Te Cimon fe (New York, 19si)and in "Negative Thea an Afarmaton of the ete in Speen, avo, od, ed by Bugene Thomas Lang (Washington, Dc. 196 37 Perera xan inom oni eriaelane er forenoon Cato, jay re oe seta onto ahha wos oe ple ea a ee apg cl fang on Pe elie See ae aera ee, Foie412_Louis Dupré Von Balthasar writes with the flair of an artist, a very learned one, butan adit nevertheless. In his essays he practices what his theory preaches. They ae brilliant exercises fn theological aesthetics Rather than abiding by the rational structures of dissertaional wetng, they obey the more adver {urous order ofthe creative Imagination, shaping each inteloc- ual role into an ene contacon ne wi ight fiercely independent of established norms or opinions and to follow the meandering course ofits subjective inspiration This approach yields marvelous results. Often an ides displays itself more advantageously inthe halflght of poetic metaphor than in the fll glare of rational conceptualizaton, To be sure, the method also creates a logical elusivencss potentially die- conorting 0 the philosophically exacting reader, Von Bal thasar has repeatedly proven {(or instance, in his study-on Truth) his ability of sestaining a rigorous argument. The Glory af the Lad. while bearing an even more impressive witness 1 fis formidable powers, eceasionaly displays an equal ntellec: tual desmalue if an argument fils 40 warrant he author's patient attention. Von Dalthasa’s masterpiece contains some passages (his Use of Heideggers thought in Vol I and his re= onstruction of Soviev's in VoL I) that wil do ite to the Philosophers traditional skepticiam with respect toa thealog- eal use of his catgories. Yet small eiiam Is ut of place ‘where get thanks are due, Te Glory ofthe Lr isa glorious ‘work: @ continuous challenge to read anda continuing joy #0 remember * 5 “This pape neues mater published by the author in Relig nd Li gure 18 a. 3 (Autumn 1957! PS, dn Thee Sie #9 0988) Listening to the Fathers Charles Kannengiesser Balthasar has made a great contribution to the expansion of patristics integrated into the movement of contemporary theology. The young Jesuit Hans Urs von Balthasar became acquainted withthe Fathers of the Church through the mediation of Father Heer de Lubse. The encounter occurred at Fourviere between 1983 and 1997. A theology student atthe time, Balthasar had tarler distinguished hime! by an astonishing creativity, pre Cocious and concentrated, in the fields of misical aesthetics snd German iterature. He had fakena liking to spending time inthe company of such men of gentus a Johar Sebastian Bach and Frediich Nietsche. The great ment of Henn de Lu bse wan that he atacted his students avention to the truly inspired dimension of the work of the Fathers. Balthasar showed all the signs of an exceptional openness tothe most, diverse cull values; he was fo recogie himeei n these Father These founders ofthe tradition of Christian in the ‘Wiest had been copa fasting the essential values Of thei caltuze and tansforming them, paling them tthe service of the Gospel that they preacheafalthasar had sufficiently sur ‘veyed the abyss ino hich the German sol ended fe iself te drawn byt apocalyptic inclinations nd fs metaphysical eopatr He row found the example ef the Fatheres rate ative synthesis, a constructive work which ada mystical our dation that would endure for centuries, Inflamed by this incandescent paradigm, he plunged into the ailigent study of Origen and Gregory of Nyssa Isintoa cruclein which were fermenting te nascent energies