Durham E-Theses Symbolism: A Systematic Theology of the Symbol MOBLEY, JOSHUA,KENDALL How to cite: MOBLEY, JOSHUA,KENDALL (2020) Symbolism: A Systematic Theology of the Symbol, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/13712/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk SYMBOLISM A BRIEF SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY OF THE SYMBOL By Joshua Kendall Mobley Thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Durham University Department of Theology and Religion 2020 1 ABSTRACT SYMBOLISM A BRIEF SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY OF THE SYMBOL Joshua Kendall Mobley This thesis is a speculative systematic theology that attempts to provide a dogmatic outline for the recovery of a traditional theological practice and rationale. It arises from the problematic posed by Henri de Lubac. De Lubac sought to recover a mode of theology that he called “symbolism,” a patristic mode of thought that assumed a real unity-in-distinction between symbolized and symbol, sustaining a thoroughly sacramental vision. A symbol is a sign that mediates the presence of the symbolized, and “reading” symbols is a work of spiritual exegesis. Such reading involves understanding the symbol, encountering God in and through the symbol, and being transformed into a clearer symbol. Recovering such a theology, de Lubac thinks, offers a vision that can nurture forms of Christian life fit for the challenges of the present. Yet de Lubac is coy about how such a theology might be recovered. What would symbolism, systematically developed in a contemporary idiom, entail and accomplish? This thesis proposes an answer to this question. I take up de Lubac’s fragmentary reflections on symbolism and develop them systematically in order to provide a dogmatic outline for symbolism’s recovery. Beginning with God, I explore the ways the language of symbols can furnish an appropriate analogy for the Trinity. Father-Son-Spirit can be described as symbolized-symbol-symbolism; the Son is the symbol of the Father, and the Spirit is the personal agent of unity between symbol and symbolized. Creatures then participate analogically in these relations, so that symbolized- symbol-symbolism analogically corresponds to God-creation-church: creation is a symbol of God, and the church is symbolism, the unity of creation with creator. Symbolism, thus developed, resists modernity’s “ontotheological” temptation, refuses both a “Barthian” flattening of nature and a neo-Thomist reification of pure nature, and recovers a sense of theology as an ecclesial discipline of mystical reason. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract 2 Table of Contents 3 Statement of Copyright 5 Acknowledgements 6 Introduction 7 1. Background 7 2. The Argument 17 3. Outline 20 Chapter One: Signs, Symbols, and the Trinity 23 1. Introduction 23 2. Augustine, Signs, and the Trinity 25 3. Karl Rahner’s Symbolized and Symbol 34 4. De Lubac’s Sacramental Pneumatology 43 5. Conclusion 54 Chapter Two: Creation 57 1. Introduction 57 2. Two Trinitarian Models 60 3. Aquinas on Creation 60 4. Duns Scotus 77 5. Conclusion 93 Chapter Three: Anthropology 97 1. Introduction 97 2. Nature and Grace 99 3. Anthropology and Fourfold Exegesis 109 4. Mary the Exegete 122 3 Chapter Four: Ecclesiology 130 1. Introduction 130 2. Symbolism and Ecclesiology 131 3. A Few Critiques 148 4. Conclusion 163 Chapter Five: Toward Mystical Reason 165 1. Introduction 165 2. From Mysteries to Mystery 168 3. From Mystery to Mysticism 179 4. From Mysticism to Mystical Reason 194 Conclusion 202 1. Symbolism: a Reprise 202 2. Evil, the Symbol, and the Cross 205 Bibliography 216 4 STATEMENT OF COPYRIGHT The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be published without the author's prior written consent and information derived from it should be acknowledged. 5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thanks are due first to my primary supervisor, Rev’d Professor Simon Oliver, who introduced me to ressourcement theology in an MA program over six years ago and whose encouragement and guidance made this project possible. My second supervisor, Professor Karen Kilby, also deserves immense thanks for her input and direction. While all deficiencies are my own, this project owes its conception and completion to this exemplary supervisory team. I gratefully received funding from numerous contributors. The Centre for Catholic Studies at Durham University, under the leadership of Professor Paul D. Murray, contributed much in financial, academic and social terms. University Baptist Church of Houston, Texas has long been a home to me, and their financial support was immensely helpful. Thanks are also due to the St. Matthias Trust and the Shed Trust for invaluable assistance. Without these and numerous individual contributors, this undertaking would not have been possible. I have had the privilege of doing theology among friends and family. Hanna Lucas and the fellowship of Dun Cow Cottage formed the daily context of this work. Dr. Jameson Ross has been a key conversation partner and friend, and his family a treasure to mine. I would never have started graduate school without the encouragement and example of Dr. Benjamin Crace, for whose friendship and family I am eternally grateful. To my parents, who first taught me to believe and think together, to my siblings and their families, and the rest of our family, I am indebted. Our children have been delightful and patient (our daughter once equated me finishing my PhD with the eschaton!). Finally, for Caitlyn, from whom I have learned more than any thesis could unfold: the gratitude offered here is wholly inadequate to the joy received. 6 INTRODUCTION 1. BACKGROUND This thesis is a speculative systematic theology that attempts to provide a dogmatic outline for the recovery of a traditional theological practice and rationale. It arises from the problematic posed by the great ressourcement theologian, Henri de Lubac.1 De Lubac sought to recover a mode of theology that he called “symbolism,” a patristic mode of thought that assumed a real unity-in-distinction between symbolized and symbol, sustaining a thoroughly sacramental vision.2 It indicates an entire theological paradigm in which symbols ontologically participate in what they symbolize, and all things ultimately symbolize God. To put it somewhat simplistically, a symbol is a sign that mediates the presence of the symbolized,3 and “reading” symbols is a work of spiritual exegesis, a holistic engagement in and through symbols with their hidden source. Such reading involves understanding the symbol itself, encountering God in and through the symbol, and being personally and corporately transformed into a clearer symbol through the encounter. This was a vision at once mystical and rational, thoroughly scriptural and profoundly philosophical, and through and through was theological, that is, it sought to understand God in all things and all things in God. De Lubac traces the various dissolutions of modernity – the severing of faith from reason, mysticism from rationality, biblical exegesis from theology, etc. – to the demise of this theological framework.4 Recovering such a theology, de Lubac thinks, is not just an exercise in nostalgia, but offers a vision that can nurture forms of Christian life fit for the challenges of the present. Yet de Lubac is characteristically coy about how such a theology might be recovered, or what such a recovery might entail. What would symbolism, systematically developed in a contemporary idiom, entail and accomplish? This thesis proposes an answer to this question. I 1 For an excellent and accessible volume outlining the broad concerns of the ressourcement movement, see Gabriel Flynn and Paul D. Murray, eds., Ressourcement: A Movement for Renewal in Twentieth-Century Catholic Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012); see also Jürgen Mettepenningen Nouvelle Theologie – New Theology (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2010). For an overview de Lubac’s work and its reception, see Jordan Hillebert, ed., The T&T Clark Companion to Henri de Lubac (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2017). Other important works include Hans Urs von Balthasar, The Theology of Henri de Lubac: an Overview, trans. Joseph Fressio and Michael Waldstein (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1991); John Milbank, The Suspended Middle, 2nd edition (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005); Susan K. Wood, Spiritual Exegesis and the Church in the Theology of Henri de Lubac (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1998); Hans Boersma, Nouvelle Theologie and Sacramental Ontology: A Return to Mystery (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009); for a biography, see Rudolf Voderholzer, Meet Henri de Lubac: His Life and Work (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2008). 2 Henri de Lubac, Corpus Mysticum, 2nd ed., trans. Gemma Simmonds et. al. (London: SCM Press, 2006), 221- 248. 3 Peter Struck, Birth of the Symbol: Ancient Readers and the Limits of their Texts (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004), 262. 4 De Lubac, Corpus, 221-248. 7 take up de Lubac’s important but fragmentary reflections on symbolism and develop them systematically in order to address a number of crucial issues in contemporary theology. Beginning with God, I explore the ways the language of symbols can furnish an appropriate analogy for the Trinity.