THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY of AMERICA Resurrection and Platonic Dualism: Joseph Ratzinger's Augustinianism a DISSERTATION Submitt
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA Resurrection and Platonic Dualism: Joseph Ratzinger’s Augustinianism A DISSERTATION Submitted to the Faculty of the School of Theology and Religious Studies Of The Catholic University of America In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree Doctor of Philosophy By Patrick James Fletcher Washington, DC 2011 Resurrection and Platonic Dualism: Joseph Ratzinger’s Augustinianism Patrick James Fletcher, Ph.D. Director: Chad C. Pecknold, Ph.D. Both St. Augustine and Joseph Ratzinger have written in detail on the resurrection of the body, a topic which was the center of a lively debate in the 20th century. St. Augustine formed his theology of resurrection in part as a response to the dualistic devaluation of the body present in Platonism, a theme which Ratzinger grappled with in his writings on the resurrection. This study seeks to answer the question as to whether, and to what extent, Joseph Ratzinger’s theology of the resurrection of the body can be described as “Augustinian.” In order to do this, four “Augustinian characteristics” are first educed by a detailed study of Augustine’s own theology of resurrection, paying particular attention to how Augustine deals with Platonism (a topic central to the 20th century debate on the resurrection in which Ratzinger was involved). Then, Ratzinger’s theology of resurrection is considered under the headings of these “Augustinian characteristics” in order to determine how, and to what extent, Ratzinger’s views can be described as “Augustinian.” This study shows that Ratzinger’s theology of resurrection can be termed “Augustinian” in that the key characteristics of Augustine’s mature eschatology come more and more to the fore in each successive Ratzingerian writing on the resurrection. Ratzinger brings his own unique approach to eschatology, and in his theology of resurrection he does not simply imitate Augustine. There is, however, a common trajectory shared by the two theologians. Both began with a theology partly influenced by certain dualistic elements, and both gradually purified that theology throughout their lives, moving in the direction of a greater physical realism. In this way, Ratzinger’s correspondence to Augustine is not static, but dynamic. Their similarity lies not only in shared ideas, but in a shared trajectory. This dissertation by Patrick James Fletcher fulfills the dissertation requirement for the doctoral degree in Systematic Theology approved by Chad C. Pecknold, Ph.D., as Director, and by Msgr. Kevin W. Irwin, S.T.D., and by Tarmo Toom, Ph.D. as Readers. ______________________________________ Chad C. Pecknold, Ph.D., Director ______________________________________ Msgr. Kevin W. Irwin, S.T.D., Reader ______________________________________ Tarmo Toom, Ph.D., Reader ii To my wife, Corinne, whose enthusiasm, support, and tireless efforts in caring for me and our children have immeasurably helped me to carry the burden of this dissertation during these last two years. iii Table of Contents Introduction . 1 0.1 The Resurrection of the Body: Contested Throughout History . 1 0.1.1 The Challenge of Platonic Dualism . 2 0.2 Ratzinger, Augustine, and the Modern Situation . 4 0.2.1 Ratzinger’s Augustinian Influence . 6 0.2.1.1 What is “Augustinianism?” . 7 0.3 Situation of the Current Study . 10 0.3.1 Method and Purpose . 10 0.3.2 General Outline . 11 0.3.2.1 Examining Augustine’s Theology of Resurrection . 11 0.3.2.2 Ratzinger’s Theology of Resurrection in Light of Augustine’s . 12 Chapter 1: Resurrection: Characteristics of an Augustinian Theology . 15 1.1 First Augustinian Characteristic: Apologetics and Proclamation . 15 1.1.0.1 Introduction . 15 1.1.1 Augustine the Platonist Christian . 16 1.1.2 Kerygmatic Apologetics . 18 1.1.3 Augustine’s Rhetorical Strategy . 21 1.1.3.0 The Structure of De Civitate Dei . 21 1.1.3a The Credibility of the Resurrection: Miracles and the Natural World 23 1.1.3a.1 Miracles . 23 1.1.3a.2 The Natural World . 24 1.1.3a.3 Resurrection and Birth . 25 1.1.3a.4 The Power of God . 26 1.1.3b The Truth of Platonism . 27 1.1.3b.1 The Value of Porphyry . 28 1.1.3c The Problem of Mediation . 31 1.1.3d Porphyry’s Objections to the Resurrection . 35 1.1.3d.1 Corpus esse omne fugiendum . 36 1.1.4 Apologetics and Proclamation: Summary . 39 1.2 Second Augustinian Characteristic: Anthropological Duality: Making Distinctions . 41 1.2.0.1 The Charge of Dualism . 41 1.2.1 The Distinction Between Body and Soul . 44 1.2.1.1 Soul-Body Hierarchy . 45 1.2.1.2 The Two Resurrections . 48 1.2.2 The Distinction Between Death and Resurrection . 49 1.2.2.1 The Soul’s Immortality? . 53 1.2.3 The Distinction Between The Body and Corruption . 54 1.2.3.1 The Source of Evil: Sin, not Embodiment . 55 1.2.3.2 The Body-Flesh Distinction and the Later Distinction Between Flesh as Substance and Flesh as Immorality or Corruption . 58 1.2.3.3 The Question of the Spiritual Body in 1 Cor 15:44 . 63 iv 1.2.4 Anthropological Duality: Summary . 66 1.3 Third Augustinian Characteristic: Matter: Discerning Continuities . 69 1.3.1 The Material Identity of the Risen Body . 69 1.3.1.1 Some Criticisms . 73 1.3.2 The Transformation of the Body and the Material World . 76 1.3.2.1 The New Qualities of Matter . 77 1.3.2.2 The Completion of the Body . 79 1.3.2.3 Divinization . 80 1.3.3 The Risen Body and Historical Continuity . 81 1.3.3.1 The Wounds of the Martyrs . 82 1.3.3.2 The Persistence of Gender . 83 1.3.4 The Body: Locus of the Communal Visio Dei . 87 1.3.4.1 The Communal Nature of the Visio . 90 1.3.5 Matter: Summary . 92 1.3.5.1 Some Concluding Remarks on Nature and Grace . 93 1.4 Fourth Augustinian Characteristic: The Beauty of the Body . 95 1.4.1 The Body Beautiful: Harmony . 95 1.4.2 The Beauty of the Body: Summary . 98 Ratzinger’s Theology of Resurrection in View of Augustine’s . 99 Chapter 2: Apologetics and Proclamation in Ratzinger’s Theology of Resurrection . 99 2.1 The Movement Away from Anti-Platonism . 100 2.1.1 Ratzinger’s Early Position: Christianity Corrupted by Platonism . 100 2.1.1.1 The 20th Century Theological Background . 101 2.1.1.2 “Anti-Platonism” in Ratzinger’s Early Works . 102 2.1.2 Ratzinger’s Later Thought: A Re-Evaluation of Plato . 107 2.1.2.1 Greek Thought and the Christian Tradition . 114 2.1.3 Anti-Platonism and De-Materialization . 118 2.1.4 Augustinian Evaluation . 120 2.2 Polemics and Proclamation . 123 2.2.1 Ratzinger and Polemics . 123 2.2.1.1 Greshake’s Accusations of Misunderstanding . 127 2.2.1.2 The Imprecision of the Word “Platonism” . 128 2.2.1.3 Ratzinger’s Polemical ‘Victory’ . 128 2.2.2 Ratzinger’s Concern for Proclamation . 129 2.2.3 Proclamation and the “Modern Worldview” . 134 2.2.3.1 The Adaptation of Proclamation to the Modern Worldview . 134 2.2.3.2 Proclamation in Spite of the Modern Worldview . 138 2.2.3.3 The Use of Natural Science in Apologetics . 141 2.2.4 Augustinian Evaluation . 143 2.3 Conclusion . 146 Chapter 3: Anthropological Duality in Ratzinger’s Theology of Resurrection . 148 3.1 The Body-Soul Distinction . 149 3.1.1 The Development of the Body-Soul Distinction in Ratzinger’s Theology 149 3.1.1.1 Ratzinger’s Early Theology . 149 v 3.1.1.2 A Turning Point: Soul Distinguished from Body . 151 3.1.1.3 The Soul: Separable from the Body? . 154 3.1.1.4 Dualism and Monism . 157 3.1.1.5 Another Defense of Duality . 159 3.1.2 Ratzinger and the anima forma corporis Doctrine of Thomas Aquinas: A Crucial Development . 161 3.1.2.1 The Origins of the Christian Soul . 161 3.1.2.2 Difficulties with Thomistic Hylomorphism . 164 3.1.3 The Soul’s Post-Death Relation to Matter . 172 3.1.3.1 The All-Cosmic Soul . 173 3.1.4 The Dialogical Immortality of the Soul . 177 3.1.4.1 The History of the Idea . 177 3.1.4.2 Relation and Person . 179 3.1.4.3 Immortality: Nature or Grace? . ..