THE CATHOLIC RECEPTION OF SØREN KIERKEGAARD : WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO THE WRITINGS OF HENRI DE LUBAC , HANS URS VON BALTHASAR , AND CORNELIO FABRO BY JOSHUA FURNAL SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DURHAM UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF THEOLOGY AND RELIGION 30 July 2013 Abstract In this thesis, I argue that although he is not always recognised as such, Søren Kierkegaard has been an important ally for Catholic theologians since the early twentieth century. Moreover, properly understanding this relationship and its origins offers valuable resources and insights to contemporary Catholic theology. Of course, there are some negative preconceptions to overcome. Historically, some Catholic readers have been suspicious of Kierkegaard, viewing him as an irrational Protestant irreconcilably at odds with Catholic thought. Nevertheless, the favourable mention of Kierkegaard in John Paul II’s Fides et Ratio is an indication that Kierkegaard’s writings are not so easily dismissed. My thesis investigates the writings of emblematic Catholic thinkers in the twentieth century to assess their substantial engagement with Kierkegaard’s writings. I argue that Kierkegaard’s writings have stimulated reform and renewal in twentieth century Catholic theology, and should continue to do so today. To demonstrate Kierkegaard’s relevance in pre- conciliar Catholic theology, a number of Catholic theologians with a reform agenda need to be examined, paying close attention to their emphases and responses to Kierkegaard. I set this backdrop by investigating the wider evidence of a Catholic reception of Kierkegaard in the early twentieth century—looking specifically at influential figures like Theodor Haecker, Romano Guardini, Erich Przywara, and other Roman Catholic thinkers that are typically associated with ressourcement . A thesis could be written on any one of these figures, and space does not permit an exhaustive index of Catholic engagement with Kierkegaard. However, I have chosen to focus upon the writings of Henri de Lubac, Hans Urs von Balthasar, and the Italian Thomist, Cornelio Fabro. I turn to de Lubac as a Catholic reformer that offers a model of positive engagement with Kierkegaard’s writings, and to Balthasar as a negative model. In Kierkegaard’s writings, de Lubac finds the appropriate grammar to name the shared Enlightenment presuppositions of both Neo-scholasticism and the atheistic humanism of his day, and to express anew the insights retrieved from the Church Fathers. In Balthasar’s case, Kierkegaard serves as a kind of Protestant foil in his account of theological aesthetics, which I argue distorts Balthasar’s own theology of anxiety and Christology. As an original contribution, I introduce for the first time in English a necessary supplement to the Catholic reception of Kierkegaard in the underexplored writings of the Italian Thomist, Cornelio Fabro. In particular, Fabro draws heavily upon Kierkegaard’s account of freedom and attempts to provide concrete examples of Kierkegaard’s high regard for Mary and his critique of Christendom in ways that parallel John Henry Newman and makes Kierkegaard more palatable to Catholic readers. In selecting de Lubac, Balthasar, and Fabro, my aim is not just to narrate a history of Catholic engagement with Kierkegaard, but also to provide a range of representative entry points for Kierkegaard’s writings to continue to stimulate reform and renewal in Catholic theology today in the shadow and spirit of the ressourcement movement. ii Statement of Copyright The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation of it should be published in any format, including electronic, without the author’s prior written consent. All information derived from this thesis must be acknowledged appropriately. iii Declaration This work has been submitted to Durham University in accordance with the regulations for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. It is my own work, and no part of it has been previously submitted to the Durham University or in any other university for a degree. iv Acknowledgments I could not have researched and written this thesis on my own. Indeed, I have gratefully incurred a number of debts and friendships along the way, some of which will inevitably go unmentioned, but have nonetheless made this thesis possible in one way or another. First, I would like to thank my supervisory team: the germ of this thesis began as an essay for Marcus Pound, who first helped me to see the difference between an experimental essay and a research proposal. If it wasn’t for his abiding assistance and encouragement, this thesis would never have got off the ground in the first place. I first came to Durham to work with Gerard Loughlin, who has been generous with his time and his comments have been perceptive. A special thanks goes to Lewis Ayres for his informal guidance and unfailing support with sharpening my argument. This thesis has been much improved through such help. Second, I would like to thank those who have made my research financially possible: If it were not for the tireless creativity and immense generosity of Paul Murray, the Sisters of Mercy Oaklea Sunderland, the Newman Association, and Porticus UK, I would not have been able to go this far with my education. I am also thankful for a serendipitous meeting in Trieste that led to important friendships with Sr Rosa Goglia ASC, Antonio Russo, and Elvio Fontana who all helped me get better acquainted with the person and archives of Cornelio Fabro CSS. A special thanks to Cullen McKenney, Andrew Brower-Latz, Thomas Lynch, and Matt Crawford, who all took the time to help me revise earlier drafts. Non posso neanche dimenticare la mia inspirazione spirituale e sostegno di fede: Marco & Lucilla, Sr Carmen, Alberto and Ricardo OSM, e Jose Maria Castillo. Devo ringraziare Dio per la vostra amicizia in questo sentiero di speranza che ci fa esperimentare una comunicazione di vita più profonda, e che ci fa crescere nella gioia dello Spirito. Hasta Siempre! I’d like to thank especially Jeff Byrnes, who first prodded me to pursue graduate studies and continues to be for me a constant inspiration, source of wisdom, and friend. Also, I am grateful for my recent acquaintance with Dan Watts, who graciously gave of his time and whose conversations instilled confidence in my reading of Kierkegaard. I will always be grateful for the encouragement and indelible insight that David Burrell CSC has offered to me over the years—I stand on the shoulders of giants. Finally, I dedicate this labour of love to my beloved April, who is ever-patient—she never ceases to remind me that with God, all things are possible. v Contents Abstract ..................................................................................................................................................... ii Statement of Copyright ......................................................................................................................... iii Declaration ..............................................................................................................................................iv Acknowledgments ................................................................................................................................... v Contents...................................................................................................................................................vi Epigraph ............................................................................................................................................... viii Introduction: Catholic Theology after Kierkegaard ............................................................................ 1 1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Rationale of Thesis: Why Study the Catholic Reception of Kierkegaard? ........................... 3 1.3 Distinctive Contributions ............................................................................................................ 4 1.4 Chapter Outline ............................................................................................................................ 5 The Catholic Soul of Kierkegaard’s Writings? .................................................................................... 7 2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 7 2.2 Re-examining the Lutheran Preconception of Kierkegaard’s Works of Love ........................ 9 2.3 Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 16 2.4 The Autopsy of Faith................................................................................................................ 16 2.4.1 The threat of plagiarism regarding the knowledge of God in history ....................... 21 2.4.2 Climacus on the Socratic and non-Socratic approach to seeing the truth ................ 23 2.5 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................. 30 The Wider Reception of Kierkegaard’s Writings by Catholic Thinkers in the 20 th Century ..... 31 3.1 Kierkegaard Renaissance in Europe ....................................................................................... 31 3.1.1 Theodor Haecker ..............................................................................................................