Angels as Mirrors of the Human: The Anthropologies of Rilke and Bonaventure through the Lenses of Hans Urs von Balthasar

In this article we present a theological-anthropological exploration, interpreting the figure of the angel as a mirror of our human condition. The point of departure is an analysis of Hans Urs von Balthasar’s approach to two major sources of our imagination of the angel: Bonaventure (1221−1274) and...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Yves De Maeseneer
Format: Article
Language:ces
Published: Karolinum Press 2016-07-01
Series:Acta Universitatis Carolinae Theologica
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.theologica.cz/index.php/theologica/article/view/160
id doaj-271e7aed043d49588b7fe07a551d5b37
record_format Article
spelling doaj-271e7aed043d49588b7fe07a551d5b372020-11-24T23:28:54ZcesKarolinum PressActa Universitatis Carolinae Theologica1804-55882336-33982016-07-016110511710.14712/23363398.2016.63686Angels as Mirrors of the Human: The Anthropologies of Rilke and Bonaventure through the Lenses of Hans Urs von BalthasarYves De MaeseneerIn this article we present a theological-anthropological exploration, interpreting the figure of the angel as a mirror of our human condition. The point of departure is an analysis of Hans Urs von Balthasar’s approach to two major sources of our imagination of the angel: Bonaventure (1221−1274) and Maria Rainer Rilke (1875−1926). A comparison of his accounts of the Franciscan theologian and the Modern poet, respectively, reveals remarkable parallels in discourse, clustered around the tensions between vulnerability and openness, immanence and transcendence, and love and loss. Both Rilke and Bonaventure reject the classical angel figure as a human ideal, as it cannot integrate the paradoxes of human existence. Their alternative visions of what it means to be human, have many terms in common: heart, vulnerability, mortality, openness, abyss, suspension, transparency, receptivity, descent (kenosis), humility, poverty, etc. However, their meaning is different because Rilke does not recognize an absolute transcendence as the source of love and the vis-a-vis of the human. This immanentism leaves him no other option than the vain attempt to exorcize the angel figure altogether, while Bonaventure’s vision preserves the angel as an anthropological mirror, albeit an angel radically transfigured by God’s wounded love.http://www.theologica.cz/index.php/theologica/article/view/160Theological anthropologyangelsHans Urs von BalthasarBonaventureRainer Maria Rilke
collection DOAJ
language ces
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Yves De Maeseneer
spellingShingle Yves De Maeseneer
Angels as Mirrors of the Human: The Anthropologies of Rilke and Bonaventure through the Lenses of Hans Urs von Balthasar
Acta Universitatis Carolinae Theologica
Theological anthropology
angels
Hans Urs von Balthasar
Bonaventure
Rainer Maria Rilke
author_facet Yves De Maeseneer
author_sort Yves De Maeseneer
title Angels as Mirrors of the Human: The Anthropologies of Rilke and Bonaventure through the Lenses of Hans Urs von Balthasar
title_short Angels as Mirrors of the Human: The Anthropologies of Rilke and Bonaventure through the Lenses of Hans Urs von Balthasar
title_full Angels as Mirrors of the Human: The Anthropologies of Rilke and Bonaventure through the Lenses of Hans Urs von Balthasar
title_fullStr Angels as Mirrors of the Human: The Anthropologies of Rilke and Bonaventure through the Lenses of Hans Urs von Balthasar
title_full_unstemmed Angels as Mirrors of the Human: The Anthropologies of Rilke and Bonaventure through the Lenses of Hans Urs von Balthasar
title_sort angels as mirrors of the human: the anthropologies of rilke and bonaventure through the lenses of hans urs von balthasar
publisher Karolinum Press
series Acta Universitatis Carolinae Theologica
issn 1804-5588
2336-3398
publishDate 2016-07-01
description In this article we present a theological-anthropological exploration, interpreting the figure of the angel as a mirror of our human condition. The point of departure is an analysis of Hans Urs von Balthasar’s approach to two major sources of our imagination of the angel: Bonaventure (1221−1274) and Maria Rainer Rilke (1875−1926). A comparison of his accounts of the Franciscan theologian and the Modern poet, respectively, reveals remarkable parallels in discourse, clustered around the tensions between vulnerability and openness, immanence and transcendence, and love and loss. Both Rilke and Bonaventure reject the classical angel figure as a human ideal, as it cannot integrate the paradoxes of human existence. Their alternative visions of what it means to be human, have many terms in common: heart, vulnerability, mortality, openness, abyss, suspension, transparency, receptivity, descent (kenosis), humility, poverty, etc. However, their meaning is different because Rilke does not recognize an absolute transcendence as the source of love and the vis-a-vis of the human. This immanentism leaves him no other option than the vain attempt to exorcize the angel figure altogether, while Bonaventure’s vision preserves the angel as an anthropological mirror, albeit an angel radically transfigured by God’s wounded love.
topic Theological anthropology
angels
Hans Urs von Balthasar
Bonaventure
Rainer Maria Rilke
url http://www.theologica.cz/index.php/theologica/article/view/160
work_keys_str_mv AT yvesdemaeseneer angelsasmirrorsofthehumantheanthropologiesofrilkeandbonaventurethroughthelensesofhansursvonbalthasar
_version_ 1725547214536704000