MSU-

LIBRARIES

“

 

RETURNING MATERIALS:
P1ace in book drop to
remove this checkout from
your record. FINES will
be charged if book is
returned after the date
stamped below.

 

 

 

' ,' 9‘ " ' v .1‘.
Na 2 ’. hrwx

 

 

A PROCESS OF CONVERSION:
AN APPLICATION OF LONERGAN'S HEURISTIC STRUCTURE OF
CONSCIOUSNESS TO
KIERKEGAARD'S SPHERES OF EXISTENCE

BY

Beverly Lancour Sinke

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Religious Studies

1986

ABSTRACT
A PROCESS OF CONVERSION:
AN APPLICATION OF LONERGAN'S HEURISTIC STRUCTURE OF

CONSCIOUSNESS TO
KIERKEGAARD’S SPHERES OF EXISTENCE

By

Beverly Lancour Sinke

This dissertation is an application of Bernard
Lonergan's theory of interiority to Soren Kierkegaard's
spheres of existence. The four levels of consciousness
which give access to a further fifth level in Lonergan's
construct are used to illuminate the developmental progress
in Kierkegaard's stages. The task is carried out in a two-
fold movement: from the aesthetic to the moral, and from
the moral to the religious. The dissertation suggests that
in light of these two writers the apex of human striving is
the religious realm of existence characterized by "being-

in-love."

On the Home Front --
To my beloved husband, Robert, whose freeing

love encourages and supports me in the pursuit
of my dreams.

On the Academic Front --
To my dear friend and mentor, Fr. Anthony Kosnik,

whose unshakeable confidence in me is an enabling
factor in actualizing the possibilities within.

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to take this opportunity to express my apprecia-
tion to the Michigan State Professors who served on the
Guidance Committee and gave so generously their time and
energy --

Dr. Robert Anderson
Dr. Elaine Donelson
Dr. Paul Hurrell
Dr. Mary Schneider

I wish to acknowledge a special dept of gratitude to
Fr. Tad Dunne, S.J., who graciously offered to read and

edit the sections on Bernard Lonergan.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER ONE: SOREN KIERKEGAARD'S SPHERES OF
EXISTENCE

Introduction

General Comments

Key Concepts
Despair
Faith

Spheres of Existence
Aesthetic Way of Life
Ethical Way of Life
Religious Way of Life

Conclusion

CHAPTER TWO: BERNARD LONERGAN'S HEURISTIC
STRUCTURE OF CONSCIOUSNESS

Introduction

Being

Levels of Consciousness
Empirical Level
Intellectual Level
Rational Level

iv

Page

13
17
19
26
33

43

45
47
52
S4
55

58

Page

Responsible Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Love Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
Horizon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Conversion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Intellectual Conversion . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Moral Conversion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Religious Conversion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
Schematic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

CHAPTER THREE: APPLICATION OF LONERGAN'S THEORY OF
INTERIORITY TO KIERKEGAARD'S STAGES
OF EXISTENCE
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Kierkegaard's Aesthetic/Ethical Individual . . . . . . 101
First Movement-Lonergan: Aesthetic to Ethical . . . . 104
Empirical Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Intellectual Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
Rational Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Horizon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
Conversion to Realism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
Responsible Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
Moral Conversion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119

Kierkegaard's Ethical/Religious Individual . . . . . . 120

Second Movement-Lonergan: Moral to Religious . . . . . 125

Page
Empirical Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
Intellectual Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
Rational Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
Conversion to Realism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
Horizon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
Responsible Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
Moral Conversion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
Religious Conversion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
CHAPTER FOUR: REFLECTIONS
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
Intention-Process-Goal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
Portrait - Healthy—Minded Religious Individual .t. . . 142
Harmony/Disharmony - Lonergan and Kierkegaard . . . . . 147
Benefits and Application of Dissertation . . . . . . . 152
Personal Reflections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
FOOTNOTES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185

vi

Who is man? A being in travail with God's dreams
and designs....He is the knot in which heaven and
earth are interlaced.

Abraham Heschel
Who Is Man?

 

INTRODUCTION

Sdren Kierkegaard believes all people pass through
certain stages in life when reaching for the apex of human
existence, existentially living with absolute trust and faith
in God. These three spheres of existence Kierkegaard calls
the aesthetic, the ethical, and the religious. The person
who lives in the aesthetic realm is characterized as one who
lives in the immediate now--the sense-oriented person. The
ethical character is one who is bound by choice and
responsibility--the duty-oriented person. The religious life-
style is carried out in the realm of love--the other-oriented
person. Kierkegaard regards the movement through these
stages in life as a conversion or the maturing process of the
human being.

Bernard Lonergan also writes on the concept of conver-
sion or the maturation process for person. However, Lonergan
speaks more of the internal process that explains in greater
depth what this movement entails. Whereas Kierkegaard speaks
of a general attitude as the cause of this process, such as
despair, he does not address precisely the internal movements
the person is experiencing as one moves deeper into self. I

1

2
suggest Lonergan's theory of interiority with his differentia-
tion of consciousness is an appropriate explanation of this
maturing process.

The goal of this dissertation, then, will be to demon-
strate that Lonergan's theory of interiority is an appropriate
suggested explanation and illumination of the process a
person undergoes as one moves through the conversion stages
of Kierkegaard. The task of the paper will be carried out by
the actual application of Lonergan's heuristic structure of
consciousness to the spheres of existence in Kierkegaard's
thought.

It should be noted that this dissertation will address
the progressive aspect of the individual. It will be an
accounting of the movement forward of the healthy-minded
person. It is not in the scope of this paper to address the
pathological aspect of person.

The work of this dissertation will be accomplished in
the following manner. Chapter One will explore S¢ren
Kierkegaard's concept of the maturing process by examining
his three spheres of existence. -I recognize that Kierkegaard's
theory regarding person is far broader than what this paper
will cover. However, to accomplish the task of this
particular work, the scope of Kierkegaard's theory will be

limited to an examination of the three spheres of existence.

3

Chapter Two will be an exploration of Bernard Lonergan's
theory of interiority, the psychological aspects of person-
hood. This will be an in depth examination of his heuristic
structure of consciousness. Steps authentic subjectivity
engages in will be identified and examined. In Lonergan's
theory it is this very structure of consciousness which is
the enabling factor in the maturing process. This is because
it is grounded in God's love.

The third chapter will be the actual suggested applica-
tion of Lonergan's theory of interiority to Kierkegaard's
three spheres of existence. The maturing process as presented
in Kierkegaard will be concretely illuminated by the psycho-
logical explanation of Lonergan's structure of consciousness.

The field of psychology will be implemented throughout
to explicate certain concepts.

The fourth and concluding chapter will identify the
intention, process, and goal of the dissertation. A por-
trait of a healthy-minded religious individual will be
suggested. Benefits and ramifications of the work will be
indicated. A personal reflection will conclude this final

chapter.

A possibility is a hint from God. One must
follow it....It is very dangerous to go into
eternity with possibilities which one has
oneself prevented from becoming realities.

Soren Kierkegaard
2.2122113

CHAPTER ONE

SOREN KIERKEGAARD'S SPHERES OF EXISTENCE

There are three stages: an aesthetic, an ethical

and a religious. But these are not distinguished

absolutely, as the immediate, the mediate and the

synthesis of the two, but rather concretely, in

existential determinationsi as enjoyment-perdition;

action-victory, suffering.

It is the intention of this chapter to examine these
three spheres of existence suggested by S¢ren Kierkegaard.
As stated in the introduction, I acknowledge that Kierkegaard's
philosophy regarding person is far more detailed than what is
revealed by examination of these three stages in life. How-
ever, for the purpose of this particular work, the focus is
limited to exposition and understanding of Kierkegaard's
concepts regarding these three forms of existence. By limit—
ing the scope of this section to an understanding and
examination of the three levels of existence, the paper will
readily lend itself to clear exposition of Bernard Lonergan's
concept of conversion and the internal steps necessary to
achieve the next level proper to this process.

I will begin by first making some general comments

regarding these three spheres of existence. Secondly, I will

4

5
define certain key concepts in Kierkegaard's thought that I
believe are necessary for understanding his philosophy
regarding the stages. Finally, I will examine each stage
illuminating the predominant trait and discuss briefly the
Kierkegaardian catalyst that moves person from one stage to

the next.

General Comments

 

Kierkegaard maintains that all people live out their
lives within the scope of these three classifications, namely,
the aesthetic, the ethical, and the religious. Since these
stages will be dealt with individually and in depth later in
this chapter, the following is a brief overview for orienta-
tion.

The stages provided a framework from which to present
reality as Kierkegaard observed it. He captured the various
real life conditions of people by his articulation of spheres
of existence. One begins in the aesthetic stage where
immediate satisfaction and gratification is the main purpose
in life. As with all deveIOpment, this stage is not detri-
mental if one moves through it to the next level of existence.
In Kierkegaard's scheme of things, the moral stage is the
next step in the maturing process. Here duty and responsi-

bility are mandated for the individual. A task—oriented life

6
is in order. However, this too, must pass to allow for the
emergence of the religious lifestyle. This is the apex of
existence, this is the realm of faith, which is recognized

dependence on the Eternal. Kierkegaard, in Concluding

 

Unscientific Postscript, writes of this maturing process that

 

properly culminates in the religious Sphere:

It struck me as significant that Either/Or ends
precisely in the edifying truth (but without so
much as italicizing the words, much less dogma-
tizingly). I could have wished to see this
principle more definitely emphasized, in order
that the individual stages on the way toward a
Christian religious existence might be clearly
set out.2

 

Kierkegaard in this quote is expressing a regret that

he did not articulate clearly in his book Either/Or--the

 

complete picture of the various realms of existence in life.
In order to capture his total view of the three different

stages, one must read Either/Or for the aesthetic and ethical

 

perSpective but then follow up with Fear and Trembling, the

 

book which illuminates the religious sphere.

It should be pointed out there are no short cuts to the
religious level. One cannot move to the religious stage
unless one has appropriated to self the ethical level of

existence. David Roberts, in his book Existentialism and

 

Religious Belief, commenting on the spheres, states: ”Not

 

until a man's attempt to solve life's problems by means of

philosophical theory or ethical effort have come to a dead'

7

end is he really ready for this leap."3

Again, further on
regarding this same theme of appropriating each stage in it-
self before any forward progress is proper, Roberts writes:
"Only a man who takes morality seriously has a right to pass
beyond it.”4 Although, since the stages represent actual
existence, they do overlap.

Kierkegaard did not map out Specifically what steps were
to be taken to move a person from one sphere to the next. He
speaks simply of the concept of despair as the motivating
factor. However, that issue is the precise task of this
dissertation by suggesting the employment of Lonergan's
heuristic structure of consciousness. Kierkegaard was simply
not interested in a step-by-step explanation of this progres-
sive internal movement. Rather, in his discussion of the
spheres of existence, he wanted to draw attention to the
predominant feature that reigned supreme in each stage to
assist people in identifying their own philosophy of life.
His sole purpose in writing was to provoke thought and

action. In the introduction to Kierkegaard's book, Purity of

 

Heart, Douglas Steere captures Kierkegaard's purpose as an
author:

Kierkegaard conceived it his function as a writer
to strip men of disguises, to compel them to see
evasions for what they are, to label blind alleys,
to cut off men's retreats...to isolate men from
the crowd, to enforce self-examination, and to
bring them solitary and alone before the Eternal.5

8
Kierkegaard wanted people to be able to see themselves
in the various characters he used to exemplify the different
stages in life. In this way he intended people to identify
their own lifestyle which hOpefully would then lead them to
question that lifestyle. Kierkegaard explains in his book,

The Point of View for Mngork as an Author, why he chose this

 

indirect method of communicating: "In all eternity it is
impossible for me to compel a person to accept an Opinion, a
conviction, a belief. But one thing I can do: I can compel
them to take notice."6 The stages then should not be seen as
an attempt to catagorize people, but as an aid in determining
one's purpose and meaning in life, which will, then, help one

move deeper into meaning.

Key Concepts

 

I believe it will be helpful in understanding my presenta-
tion of Kierkegaard's spheres of existence if one first has
some background regarding two key concepts in Kierkegaard's
thought that are intricately related to the stages in life.
These concepts are despair and faith. DeSpair is the
condition which challenges one to move from one stage to the
next and faith is the enabling factor in the movement.

Intertwined and interwoven with the concept of despair

is Kierkegaard's use of the term dread. Even though the two

9
terms go hand in hand, there is a slight difference between
dread and despair and it should be noted.7 Dread is that
moment before decision when one is faced with the possibili-
ties of choice. Dread is that predisposition which immediately
preceeds deSpair but which leads into it. Dread is awareness
that one is caught in an inescapable dilemma; despair is the
realization of that dilemma. Dread is to possibility as
despair is to actualization. With this distinction, let us

examine dread/despair in Kierkegaard's thought.

Despair

Despair, precipitated by dread, is the condition
necessary for movement forward along the road to maturity.
Dread is the signal for despair to appear. George Price, in
his study on Kierkegaard's concept of person, brings out the
importance of this fundamental stance when he states: "The
formative influence in man is found...in an insinuating dread,
which as the vertigo of freedom, accompanies all his
activities as a prior and controlling factor."8

It is Kierkegaard's concept of person that allows for.
the category of dread, the consequent result of which is
despair. Kierkegaard describes person in this way:

Man is a synthesis of the soulish and the bodily.

But a synthesis is unthinkable if the two are not

united in a third factor. This third factor is

the spirit.... How is spirit related to itself
and to its situation? It is related as dread.9

10

Dread is experienced as a feeling of distress and
anxiety that is present when a person perceives oneself in an
inescapable dilemma knowing a decision is called for. Despair
is experienced when one plunges into that decision. This
dread/despair situation in Kierkegaard's application exists
when one is caught between the finiteness of the existential
existence and the beckoning of the Infinite. In other words,
the dread/despair condition manifests itself when one
recognizes the existence of the temporal and Eternal that is

part of what it means to be person. In Concept of Dread,

 

Kierkegaard explains this dilemma: "If a man were a beast

or an angel, he would not be able to be in dread. Since he

is a synthesis he can be in dread...."10 Despair, then, is
the realization that no matter how many choices one is
presented with, one is still faced with the inescapable fact
that one cannot be true to self which demands the impossible--
expression of the Infinite in finite existence.

This admission of synthesis reveals an integral connec-
tion between despair and knowledge. It is in recognizing
one's relationship to the Eternal with the choice this places
upon the individual that one can experience dread that
precipitates despair when that choice is made. In this light,
dread is a necessary and meaningful part of life and explains

why Kierkegaard would say: "...the greater the dread, the

11
greater the man."11 The presence of dread which leads into
despair is proof that one is addressing the God question in
one's existence.

This concept of despair is further illuminated when one
speaks of freedom. Dread, despair and freedom go hand in
hand. Person is free to either choose cooperation with God
in creating oneself or free to choose non-cooperation. Free-
dom gives to humanity the ability to say yes to God, yes to
life. At the same time, this same freedom also allows one
to say no to life, no to God. This awesome choice placed
before the individual posits him/her squarely in dread for
one recognizes decision in this issue is mandatory.12

Kierkegaard writes extensively on despair in Sickness

Unto Death. Here he speaks descriptively of the individual

 

who falls into despair. Since person is a synthesis of body
and soul, a balance must be maintained for a healthy relation-
ship with God. One falls into despair by not being in this
correct relationship with the Eternal. Despair is in direct
proportion to our estrangement from God. Kierkegaard speaks
of two basic forms of deSpair regarding conscious awareness.
He writes that: ”Sin in this: before God...to be in despair
at not willing to be oneself, or in despair at willing to be
oneself.”13

Now "despair at not willing to be oneself" is linked to

12

the external. The individual's interests and efforts in
life revolve around this temporal existence. The person is
caught up in circumstances outside of self over which one has
no control. This individual believes his/her life would be
different if only s/he could control the external trappings,
if only s/he could be a different self. Blame for life not
being what it should be is always laid to something "out
there.” Kierkegaard, describing the individual in this
condition, states: "...since the self has no reflection in
itself, that which brings it to despair must come from
without."14

"Despair over willing to be oneself” will take the
opposite position. This person will look inward and rely
only on one's own power to perfect one's being. Concentration
is on spirit to the exclusion of the temporal. This person
is in the business of creating the self according to one's
own blueprint. Sheer willpower is the key to success.
Again we hear Kierkegaard say: "...the self despairingly
wills to dispose of itself or to create itself, to make it-
self the self it wills to be....”15 Whereas the previous
position is referred to by Kierkegaard as the "despair of
weakness,” this position reflects an attitude of defiance
before God.

Both of these stances taken by an individual reveal a

13
lack of equilibrium. They overemphasize the temporal and
Eternal respectively, thus putting out of balance their true
self which is composed of both. For Kierkegaard, the way out

of this despairing situation is the path of faith.

A willingness to take a risk, to step into unchartered
territory, to follow a road not travelled by others, to
stand alone--this is what Kierkegaard's faith entails. What
is there within a person who dares to be so bold? One finds
undying belief in a God who is revealed as Incomprehensible
Love. One finds a trust in and reliance on God so strong
that it enables the person to fall into this darkness, yet
somehow knowing in a way that has nothing to do with the
intellect, that God will be there to catch him/her.
Kierkegaard could identify with this type of faith for he
had experientially known God as love. He expresses this
sentiment in his Journals when he writes: "It is wonderful
how God's love overwhelms me...and so I grasped eternity with
the blessed assurance that God is love."16

Faith of this kind will triumph over despair and enable
the person to venture out in life,relying on God to "make
all things possible."17 The person of faith leaves all in
the hands of a loving God, even the impossible task of

expressing the Eternal in time. What makes this possible?

14

Love makes this possible.18 Love is the key to this faith.
David Roberts captures this idea beautifully when he writes:
"Love is the eternal nature of God actualized in time."19

This faith position results in freedom for the person.
Freedom equals self-awareness; self-awareness leads to truth,
and truth leads to recognized dependence on God.20 Further-
more, this recognition of one's dependence on a loving God
demands expression in one's life. ”The highest, after all,
is not to comprehend the Highest--but to do it," Kierkegaard
writes in his Journal on what it means to be a Christian.21
Yes, there is still dread and despair but this faith
relationship empowers one to act in spite of it. The person
who embodies these characteristics Kierkegaard dubbed the
"knight of faith."22

The knight of faith perceives this relationship with
God as a demand that s/he be faithful to his/her own truth.
Truth for Kierkegaard is subjectivity. "In the principle
that subjectivity, inwardness, is the truth, there is com-
prehended the Socratic wisdom...that the knower is an exist-
ing individual," writes Kierkegaard.23 Inwardness, sub-
jectivity, truth, faith--all are intricately connected for
Kierkegaard. Truth and faith are just different sides of the
same coin. What is truth for a person is at the same time

one's faith stance. The faith stance for a person is one's

15

own truth. Kierkegaard's definition of truth as "an objective
uncertainty held fast in an appropriation-process of the most
passionate inwardness" is his same definition for faith.24
Kierkegaard also addresses this question of subjective truth
in his personal Journals. He writes in detail about the
search for the only truth that can be binding:

The thing is to understand myself, to see what

God really wishes mg to do; the thing is to

find a truth which is true for me, to find the

idea for which I can live aEE‘EIE.25

For Kierkegaard it is possible that this truth, this
subjectivity, this inwardness, could stand against the
rational. Faith in Kierkegaard's scheme does not undermine
reason; faith simply recognizes the limitations of the
intellect. Kierkegaard writes of this aspect of the faith
position: "Faith is a paradox...which no thought can master,
because faith begins precisely where thinking leaves off."26

The faith-person's trust in and reliance on God
empowers the individual to make this ”leap of faith”; empowers
one to leave behind the ethical which is grounded in reason.
It should be stressed that Kierkegaard does not consider
faith and reason as diametrically opposed, per se, but only
reason which does not admit there are truths the understand-
ing cannot graSp. David Roberts explains this tension of

faith and reason in Kierkegaard's thought:

Kierkegaard makes some excessive remarks which

16

obscure the true import of his position. His

main thesis is not that faith conflicts with

reason as such, but rather with reason which has

forgotten its own proper limits.27

Freed from the limitations of the intellect and grasped
by passionate commitment which places God first, the individual
is then in a position to give expression to this leap of
faith, to give expression to that inner call from self, a
call which stands above the universal ethic. Kierkegaard
refers to this inner call to authenticity before God when he
writes: "Faith...is the paradox that inwardness is higher
than outwardness.”28

In the objective realm where reason rules, one does not
need faith for one has the comfort of the rational, the
ethical, the universal. It is only when the individual is
able to step beyond those boundaries that true faith is
expressed.29

It is only in choosing oneself in this way that the
person can live up to one's fullest potential, can become
"that individua1"--that awesome category of Kierkegaard's
that captures so well the individual alone, before God,
standing against the universal, in fear and trembling, but
being faithful to the inner call of authenticity. It was
this category, "that individual," that could give complete

and full expression to Kierkegaard's concept of faith.

These two Kierkegaardian concepts of despair and faith

17
have not been exhausted. They are far too rich in meaning
to be covered in depth in the space allotted. My intention
is to give one a feel for the depth of Kierkegaard's thought
so one might better appreciate the discussion on the spheres

of existence which is to follow.

Spheres of Existence

 

We now have a general overview of the spheres of exis-
tence and their place in Kierkegaard's thought. We have seen
there are three basic stages in life, the aesthetic, the
moral, and the religious. For Kierkegaard, the apex of
living is the attainment of the religious lifestyle. Since
God contains the fullness of existence, meaning in life could
only be found in relationship to him. The religious sphere
of existence captures this best in Kierkegaard's philosophy.

However, in attaining this religious attitude toward
life one does not leave the other stages behind. The person
does not move from stage to stage cutting all ties with the
previous level of existence. Since the stages represent
actual existence, the individual carries all the previous
baggage right along with him/her as one moves through life.
The dominant traits of the previous lifestyle are simply
dethroned to allow the characteristics of the next level of

existence center stage.

18

We saw that each Sphere was important in its own right;
there are no short cuts on the way to maturity. The harm is
done when one fails to move through a particular stage to
continue on toward highest potential as person.

We then explored the issue of why Kierkegaard wrote in
this way about life. From his own words we discovered he did
not want to judge or categorize people. Rather, Kierkegaard
wanted to lead them to discover truth—*truth about themselves
and for themselves. He intended his readers to identify with
the characters he used to exemplify the various stages and
in so doing lead readers to question their own lifestyle.
Kierkegaard's exposition on the spheres of existence was
intended to provoke people to thought and action.

With the ”what" and the ”why" of the stages explored, we
then turned to the "how." What exactly in Kierkegaard's
philosophy allowed movement from one stage to the next? It
was the condition of despair as an unsettling revelation for
the individual which prompted the questioning and the search-
ing in life for deeper meaning.

Kierkegaard in turn posited faith grounded in love as
the enabling growth factor for person. This faith was an
inner call to authenticity. This faith equaled truth--truth
that was Specific individuality before God in fear and

trembling, but made possible by this absolute trust in the

19
incomprehensibility of God.

With this background, it is now possible to move into
the stages themselves. My intention is to examine the
dominant traits that characterize the aesthetic, the moral,
and the religious modes of existence reSpectively; to explore
what it means to be an existing individual in a particular
sphere of existence.

Once we have a feeling for a descriptive account of
the particular sphere being addressed, we will move to examine
the despair and faith that lifts one out of that stage and

into the next higher sphere of existence.

Aesthetic Way of Life

 

As stated before, Kierkegaard used characters to
exemplify the particular stage he was attempting to portray.
One finds the aesthetic way of life represented by an unnamed

personality in volume one of Either/Or. The character is

 

simply identified as ”A" whose concept of life was revealed
by examination of his papers.

In this book one finds the character of Don Juan, which
for Kierkegaard was an embodiment of the aesthetic lifestyle.
His existence was characterized by constant indulgence in
pleasures and desires. There is no continuity, no reflection,
no pattern to his life. There is only living in the

immediate now. Kierkegaard, through his pseudo-author

20
Victor Eremita, describes Don Juan:

To be a seducer requires a certain amount of
reflection and consciousness, and as soon as
this is present, then it is proper to speak of
cunning and intrigues and crafty plans. This
consciousness is lacking in Don Juan. Therefore,
he does not seduce. He desires.... He desires,
and is constantly desiring, and constantly
enjoys the satisfaction of the desire. To be a
seducer, he lacks time in advance in which to
lay his plans, and time afterward in which to
become conscious of his act.30

The gratification of the aesthetic's desires as the
overriding aim in life is reflected clearly in this excerpt
from the section labelled the "Diapsalmata" in volume one

of Either/Or. Interest is not in what is the best available

 

but only in gratifying present wants.

The essence of pleasure does not lie in the
thing enjoyed, but in the accompanying
consciousness. If I have a humble spirit in

my service who, when I asked for a glass of
water, brought me the world's costliest wines
blended in a chalice, I should dismiss him,

in order to teach him that pleasure consists
not in what I enjoy but in having my own way.31

Yet from another aspect, the aesthetic individual is an
observer of life, a non-participant in this ongoing drama.
S/he does not choose but is driven by bodily pleasures and
in this way is deluded into thinking s/he is free. Every
decision entails regret for the alternative not chosen;
therefore, do nothing. Kierkegaard exposes this dilemma:

If you marry, you will regret it; if you do

not marry you will also regret it;...Believe
a woman, you will regret it, believe her not,

21
you will also regret that;...Hang yourself, you
will regret it; do not hang yourself, and you
will also regret that;...3
However, this does not completely solve the problem.
If one does nothing, one is still choosing to do nothing.
Employing the same rationale, the person ends up regretting

having chosen to do nothing. Louis Mackey, writing in

Existential Philosophers, reveals the way out:

 

The secret of enjoyment is neither to do

nothing nor to do anything with all one's

might. The secret is to do everything in such

a way that one rigorously avoids all commit-

ments.33

In this way the aesthetic retains his/her absolute
irresponsible carefree way of life. The lifestyle of enjoy-
ing everything while caring about nothing, of being totally
uncommitted, remains intact. The aesthetic individual living
in the immediate new acts with total abandon in a driving
pursuit to satisfy the current mood. This philosophy reveals
the aesthetic as being tied to no ethical standard for that
would be far too limiting.

This present pleasurable moment that satisfies the
immediate mood is all important to the person who exists in
this level in life. Kierkegaard presented the aesthetic
person as immersed in the temporal to the exclusion of the

Eternal. He explains the fundamental stance of this sphere

of existence:

22

The more the personality disappears in the

twilight of mood, so much the more is the

individual in the moment, and this again, is

the most adequate expression for the aesthetic

existence: it is in the moment.34

The goal then, of the aesthetic person is enjoyment of
life without restriction, without hinderance, without limits.
This sphere embodies indulgence of the temporal aspect of
one's being with anything in life that gratifies the
individual's immediate desires. However, this enjoyment is
always grounded in something outside the self. The center
and meaning in the aesthetic's life is grounded in the
external--that which is not truly the self. Kierkegaard
through his ethical character Judge William writes: "...he
who says that he wants to enjoy life always posits a condition
which either lies outside the individual or is in the
individual in such a way that it is not posited by the
individual himself."35

The aesthetic individual is wholly preoccupied with this
external pleasure. Kierkegaard explains that this pleasure-
seeking will reveal itself in many different forms.
Kierkegaard maintains, however, that no matter how many
guises this pleasure-seeking takes, the various modes of
existence have this Similarity, namely, that "spirit is not

determined as spirit, but is immediately determined."36 The

person immediately determined has no connection to the

23
eternal realm but only to the temporal realm, hence the
aesthetic existence.

Kierkegaard proceeds to illustrate his point through the
words of Judge William. He speaks of meaning for the
aesthetic in two different modes. The first is meaning that
is found within the person but for which the individual
should not take credit. Kierkegaard suggested health as the
example of this external meaning. A person may simply be
blessed with good health. He writes that "health is the
most precious good, that on which everything hinges."37 This
attribute, then, becomes the be-all, end-all in life. With
this attitude the focus in life is centered on being healthy.
Remove the health and one removes the meaning. The same
thing can be said of beauty when it holds center stage in a
person's life. It too, is found within the individual but
as Kierkegaard points out, "in such a way that it is not
posited by the individual himself."38

The second mode in which the aesthetic finds meaning in
life has to do with things that reside outside the person.
The external advantage of wealth is one such thing. It is
pleasure which places the condition for enjoyment outside
the individual. This view of life recognizes that "wealth,
glory, high station...are accounted life's task and its

content."39

24

Since the self is not the locus of enjoyment in either
of these two approaches, we have the aesthetic perspective.
The human being is a synthesis of body and soul; to emphasize
one aspect to the exclusion of the other as the aesthetic
does, will not be a satisfying situation for person who is
called to a dialectic existence. If one always addresses
the temporal element, the Eternal will be left wanting.

For the aesthetic who resides solely in the pleasurable
moment, a time comes when this inbalance is forced to the
surface. This inbalance reveals itself as boredom. The
"spirit dreaming in man" is the way in which Kierkegaard
describes this nudge to authenticity.40

Regis Jolivet in his book Introduction to Kierkegaard

 

captures the condition of the aesthetic who has arrived at

boredom:

This pure immediacy is a limit impossible to
attain, because pleasure grows worn and faded
and denies itself in its own exasperation. By
dint of wishing to make reality intensive the
aesthetician ends by being gorged and, so to
speak, stifled with it....Thus boredom over—
whelms the aesthetician. Disgust gnaws at the
pleasure-seeker. Enjoyment has a taste of
death. Every aesthetician eventually longs
for death.41

Boredom, therefore, initiates reflection about life,
about purposefulness, about future possibilities. What is
my life all about? Can there be something better? Can one

ever find happiness? This condition which demands reflection

25
reveals the truth that ”boredom is the staling of existence."42
This boredom brings the truth home, that is, that there is
more to life than the temporal.

The "Spirit dreaming in man" brings about this disturb-
ing, questioning, reflecting situation. This restlessness,
this feeling of unfulfillment, calls the aesthetic to
examine his/her lifestyle. It is clearly revealed to the
aesthetic individual that in his/her manner of living some-
thing is wrong, something is missing. This despairing
situation surfaces possibility. One has a choice. S/he can
plunge deeper into pleasure by tuning out the nudging of the
spirit or s/he can listen to self. One can bury oneself in
more temporality or one can be true to wholistic being by
acknowledging the eternal aspect of person. The aesthetic
individual in transition to the ethical stage chooses to be
true to self but dread and despair are present. The past
lifestyle is no longer acceptable but the future is the
unknown, the mysterious.

This individual must now venture out and risk to find
that deeper meaning the spirit is beckoning one to. The safe
and comfortable aesthetical existence must be set aside. The
aesthetic individual must attempt to bring equilibrium into
his/her life. S/he must seek to address the eternal aspect

of his/her being. The call to trust and faith is given. The

26
aesthetic individual in attending to the spiritual aspect of
existence enters the world of values, enters the ethical

realm.

Ethical Way of Life

 

As stated earlier, this condition of despair, then, can
be the catalyst that leads the person forward to seek deeper
meaning in life. This dissatisfaction calls forth from the
individual a continuing search for purposefulness. This
state of restlessness, of boredom, of despair serves to move
the person from the pleasure-seeking aesthetic Sphere into
the self-knowledge of the ethical realm.

Now in the ethical realm it is the eternal aspect of
being that is given consideration. The center of life is no
longer "out there” as in the aesthetic Sphere, but rather
meaning is found within. The ethical person acknowledges the
dialectic of existence, recognizes life embodies both the
temporal and the Eternal. The temporal, the aesthetic
perspective, is not gotten rid of, it is merely "dethroned"
to allow the spiritual aspect of person center stage.

The ethical perspective is characterized by choice,

responsibility, and duty. The second volume of Either/Or,

 

representing the ethical dimension of living, is an attempt
to highlight these values. This ethical lifestyle for

Kierkegaard is a deeper, more value-filled level of existence

27

than is the aesthetic mode of living. For the person it
embodies a more meaningful attitude because the locus of this
meaning now resides in the self.43 "Inwardness is the start-
ing point at which the individual enters life," writes
Alexander Dru in his introduction to Kierkegaard's Journals.44
The ethical individual is in touch with the truth of dialectic
existence.

Judge William is the character chosen to proclaim the

ethical lifestyle. The second volume of Either/Or stands as

 

a response to the first volume. If "A's" attitude was
neither/nor, no choice but pure unadulaterated desires and
wants that was dictated by the immediate mood, Judge
William's attitude is either/or, definite choice, choice of
self, which reveals itself as duty due to its relationship to
the Eternal. Kierkegaard writes through Judge Williams, his
advocate for the ethical life:

Here I would recall the definition I gave a

while ago of the ethical, as that by which a

man becomes what he becomes. The ethical then

will not change the individual into another

man but make him himself.45

Choice is of critical importance for the ethical life-
style. It is by choosing that a person dictates what is
significant for one's life. Therefore for Kierkegaard, it

is thrbugh Choice that. the ethical person shapes and molds

oneself, chooses the type of self s/he will be. Without

28

choice the person is caught in the bodily desires of the
aesthetic world. With choice, one can determine which
desires, wants, moods will be elected to surface the chosen
self. Kierkegaard Speaks about this choosing of self that
comes from within:

...in the choice he makes himself elastic,

transforming all the outwardness into inward-

ness. He has his place in the world, with

freedom he chooses his place, that is, he

chooses this very place. He is a definite

individual, in the choice he makes himself

a definite individual, for he chooses him-

self.46

By opting for self, the ethical person takes responsi-
bility for who s/he is. S/he is the product of his/her
decisions in life. Kierkegaard writes of the mature attitude
of the ethicist: "The individual thus becomes conscious of
himself as this definite individual...being conscious of
himself in this way, he assumes responsibility for all this."47

In opposition to the aesthetic mentality which is
characterized by no choice, the ethical mind-set, then, is
one of choosing, choosing oneself as the task to be addressed
and accepting responsibility for the direction in life this
chosen self will take.

In the process of choosing self the ethical individual
becomes aware that one is related to a universal order. One

stands in direct relationship to the Eternal. Choice, then,

must be made in all seriousness, for the self which is chosen

29
takes on importance because of this relationship to the
Eternal. At the same time, this relatedness gives continuity
and purposefulness to life. The task of this relationship,
then, is in choices which express the eternal in the
temporal sphere. This task is presented in the form of duty
to the ethical mind. Therefore, duty emerges as the claim
of the Eternal. This duty-oriented lifestyle is clearly

expressed in the second volume of Either/Or. In the section

 

entitled "Equilibrium" one reads:

In opposition to an aesthetical view which

would enjoy life, one often hears of another

view which finds significance of life in living

for the fullfilment of its duties. With this

one intends to indicate an ethical life view.48

Kierkegaard perceives duty as intrinsic to person rather
than as imposed from without. This grounding of duty within

the individual explains its centrality in the ethical

perspective. Kierkegaard comments in his Concluding

 

Unscientific Postscript: "The geniune ethical individual

 

therefore possesses calmness and assurance because he has
not duties outside himself but in himself."49 Duty equals
faithfulness to self. Duty is choosing self. Faithfulness
to duty is the epitome of the ethical sphere of existence.
Furthermore, this fidelity to duty is grounded in an
inwardness which is the only truth for the ethicalperson.50

This chosen duty made from one's own subjective truth is

3O
authenticity of person for Kierkegaard. Commenting on this
subjective truth and its relationship to life, Kierkegaard
writes:

Only the truth which edifies is the truth for

you, that is, the truth is inwardness, but

please to note: existential inwardness, here

qualified as ethical.51 '

Kierkegaard proposes marriage as an example of the
ethical life. His concept of an authentic marriage was a
commitment of two people to each other before God where the
relationship to God determined the quality of the love.52
The Eternal, the relationship to God, found expression in the
temporal, in the love the two people held for each other in
their commitment in marriage. Marriage does indeed have the
aesthetic elements but they are held in the proper perspec-
tive. The sensuous is "by no means renounced but ennobled."53

Furthermore, marriage is not a fleeting moment in time
but requires a commitment that is lifelong. Marriage is
also choice, one person definitely chosen over any other.
The seriousness of the commitment is demonstrated by the vow
that is not set aside even Should the mood change. And

finally, marriage is not an imposed duty but one that is

freely chosen. George Price, in his book The Narrow Pass,

 

explains even further why Kierkegaard believed the married
state exemplified the ethical lifestyle:

...although he commits himself for life when

31

he chooses marriage, he has also at the time

chosen freedom--for he has chosen himself.

That is why a true marriage liberates. He

can not be himself...for he is chosen for him—

self even as he chose for himself.54‘

Marriage is an expression of the Eternal in time. As
one lives into an ever deepening commitment in marriage, so
too is this commitment carried over into every aspect of the eth-
icalstperSOn's life. The duty, the claim of the Eternal in
one's life, deepens. This sense of obligation to the Eternal
begins to take root in one's life. The ethical individual
continuing on this path becomes wholly committed to the
Eternal, to the Spiritual aspect of his/her being. S/he is
haunted by the drive to relate to the spiritual in life. The
ethicist becomes what Kierkegaard calls the ”knight of
infinite resignation" who renounces the whole of the temporal
to gain the Eternal.55

The ethical individual, then, is in touch with a command-
ing truth within which grasps and holds him/her. This higher
call to truth within demands obedience and fulfillment. This
Eternal truth is such that specific temporal existence begins
to have less meaning than one's driving pursuit of the
Eternal in one's life.

This is the beginning of despair in the life of the

ethical individual. Why is that? The ethical perspective

recognizes the claim of the Eternal in the temporal existence.

32

The ethical lifestyle further requires it a duty to express
existentially this claim, to live out these universal ethical
maxims. If the ethical person is not faithful to this
perceived duty, the person is not being faithful to self.
The duty is the choosing of self. The problem arises, in
Kierkegaard's explanation, when the person perceives God
telling him/her something that contradicts the ethical maxim.
When that inner truth of self to which the person is now
wholly committed and which embodies the Eternal, stands in
opposition to the universal maxim, i.e.,duty perceived from
the ethical perSpective, a quandary results.56

There is no way out of this Situation if the person
remains in the ethical sphere. The individual comes to
realize one's whole way of being in the world does not
represent truth for him/her. The person is in touch with a
deeper truth that cannot be expressed ethically, hence the
despair with one's ethical lifestyle. Purpose in life,
which is total allegiance to the Eternal, cannot be exempli—
fied with one's present adherence to ethical maxims, an
adherence to duty as objectively perceived. What is required
is an absolute leap of faith.

As with the aesthetic lifestyle, the security and
comfort of the ethical lifestyle must now be left behind.

The person reaching for total potential in Kierkegaard's

33

philosophy must once again step out and risk. The individual
must reach beyond the finite, the logical and the ethical,
and step with trust into the unknown. Only an absolute leap
of faith will resolve this dilemma. Louis Mackey in his
chapter, "Poetry of Inwardness," captures the essence of this
moment: "To live in the anxiety of freedom, without finite
support or encouragment, is to live by the power of God."57

The religious perspective makes its appearance. It
stands beckoning to the ethicist to enter the realm of the
Infinite. It invites the ethicist to make the leap of faith
required for entry into the mode of life that embodies

ultimate meaning.

Religious Way of Life

 

The road to maturity, to fullest human potential now
enters its last mile when the ethical individual makes the
leap of faith required for existence in the religious Sphere.
Realizing the ethical self-sufficient mode of living is not
appropriate, is not an adequate response for the Christian,
the religious individual surrenders to mystery, to the
Eternal, to God. In making this leap of faith into the
unknown, the person reaches the apex of existence. The
individual establishes a direct relationship with the Eternal.
This ultimate goal in life is achieved by the person who

exists in the religious sphere for s/he now lives "in

34

communion with God."58

The locus of this manner of living is the biblical
mandate to love which takes precedence over the call to
ethical duty. Now this love involves a relationship to a
person not a thing, a relationship to Christ which is over
and above a relationship to law. Kierkegaard explains: "The
object of faith is not a doctrine, for then the relationship
would be intellectual...The object of faith is the reality
of the teacher, that the teacher really exists."59

This relationship grounded in love entails faith and
trust in God who is Transcendent, Infinite, Eternal and
therefore the Incomprehensible One. In this light, then, the
depth of this love relationship manifested by faith and
trust is measured precisely by how far one is willing to go
to demonstrate this trust; by how much one is willing to
risk; by how alone one is willing to be in one's action.
Faith is manifested in how much one is willing to step be-
yond the rational and fall into the unknown. ”Reason sets

itself aside" writes Kierkegaard in Fear and Trembling.60

 

Communion with the Eternal is now possible.

The ethical lifestyle cannot possibly reach these
heights. Ethical living places perfection in conformity to
laws and doctrines. Kierkegaard wanted to stress that there

is more to life than ethical self-sufficiency. He wanted to

35

highlight the fact that God, not the law, is the end goal of
the person. The universal maxim and the duty it imposes is
secondary. It is a way to God but is not the be-all, end-all
in itself. When the ethical system holds center stage
completely "ethical universality itself becomes the divine,
and a man is forbidden to enter into any private and direct
relation with God," explains James Collins in his book, The

Mind of Kierkegaard.61

 

This divinization of the law and ethical duty was the
position Kierkegaard was attempting to correct. James
Collins commenting on this issue continues:

Kierkegaard considers this view a relapse to a

pre-Christian position, which misunderstood sin

and forgot that the Sabbath is for the sake of

man, not man for the sake of the Sabbath.

Christianity has revised our view of the univer-

sal and the individual, revealing the personal

God as the true universal and the individual

reality as the perfection in the order of

existence.62

For Kierkegaard, then, the foundation of existence
should be relationship to the Eternal, to God, rather than a
relationship to an abstract universal found in the temporal
order. Kierkegaard believed that one who lives by faith, by
"the power of God" as Louis Mackey put it, will "determine
his relation to the universal by his relation to the

absolute, not his relation to the absolute by his relation to

the universal."63

36
This relationship to the Absolute is explored in depth

in Kierkegaard's book Fear and Trembling. Abraham is chosen

 

to illustrate this religious existence. Abraham's response
to God embodies the essence of faith and trust. Abraham is
Kierkegaard's "knight of faith.”64

In Genesis, chapter twenty-two, one finds the story of
the Father of Faith. Abraham is told by God to take his only
son, Isaac, through whom he has been promised posterity, and
to offer him up as a holocaust. Abraham follows God's
command and sets out with Isaac. The scripture story reads
as follows:

God put Abraham to the test. He called to him,
"Abraham!" "Ready!” he replied. Then God said:
"Take your son Isaac, your only son, whom you love,
and go to the land of Moriah. There you shall offer
him up as a holocaust on a height that I will point
out to you....When they came to the place of which
God had told him, Abraham built an altar there and
arranged the wood on it. Next he tied up his son
Isaac, and put him on top of the wood on the altar.
Then he reached out and took the knife to slaughter
his son. But the Lord's messenger called to him

from heaven, "Abraham, Abraham!" "Yes, Lord,” he
answered. "Do not lay your hand on the boy," said
the messenger. ”Do not do the least thing to him.

I know now how devoted you are to God, since you
did not withhold from me your own beloved son."6S

Abraham had passed the test and was abundantly blessed
by God. He was rewarded for the surrendering of his most
precious possession, Isaac, and according to Kierkegaard's
understanding of the story, for surrendering his finite

ethic, his finite comprehension of duty that a father must

37

love his son, to a higher infinite order that demands
absolute trust. Kierkegaard explains this leap of faith:
"By this act he overstepped the ethical entirely and
possessed a higher "telos" outside of it, in relation to
which he suspended the former...."66

Faith, a belief in the paradoxical and an acceptance of
his finiteness, allowed Abraham to leave the universal
behind, to step beyond the realm of the ethical into a
direct relationship with the Eternal. Kierkegaard grasps
clearly what it is the person must comprehend when acting
out of the faith stance: "It is the duty of human understand-
ing to understand that there are things which it cannot
understand and what those things are.”67

But why is it that an eternal truth expressed in time is
not comprehensible? Why must the object of faith be para-
doxical? Why must one move beyond the ethical to be directly
in touch with God? What kind of faith justifies the father's
movement toward taking the life of the son? Louis Dupre in

Kierkegaard As Theologian explains the need for this absolute

 

belief in the sphere of religious existence:

Kierkegaard's answer is simply: How can one
believe anything except the paradoxical? If

the object is not paradoxical, we have left

the realm of faith for that of knowledge....

The solution can only be that between a divine
revelation and human knowledge there is an
unbridgeable gap....In every respect God is

the unknown limit of our thinking. His otherness

38

is a matter which we can only learn from God

himself. Nothing divine falls within the scope

of human thought.68

Kierkegaard himself referred to this unbridgeable gap
as ”an endless yawning difference between God and man."69

In this understanding of faith one is in direct
communication with the Transcendent. The person who lives
on the religious level must make this act of faith in isola-
tion for no one will be able to understand, so personal and
inward is this response to God.70 Authentic response to God
arises from the depths of one's own being, not from that
which is external to person. Kierkegaard writes: "Faith...
is the paradox that inwardness is higher than outwardness."71

This paradoxical characteristic, which illicits an
unconditional belief from the person of faith, is precisely
what makes this faith subjective for Kierkegaard. One
cannot grasp intellectually the paradoxical, one must simply
believe. This belief is made possible due to love.
Kierkegaard states that "love is the determination of subjectiv-
ity'."72 The Eternal expressed in time is simply beyond
human comprehension. That this truth "becomes paradoxical
by virtue of its relationship to an existing individual," is

Kierkegaard's explanation in Concluding Unscientific

 

Postscript.73 It is one's very finiteness that necessitates

 

the paradoxical and in trusting one acknowledges the

39
the limitations of the finite.

Because of its paradoxical nature Kierkegaard can main-
tain, then, that faith is passionate subjectivity which takes
precedent over the objective realm. In light of this one
can understand his definition of faith as "an objective
uncertainty held fast in an appropriation-process of the
most passionate inwardness."74

Faith, which is truth for the person, is manifested as
paradox and due to this is apprehended through subjectivity,
for only this passionate inwardness embodies the strength
and power to live religiously. Understandable, then, is an
entry in Kierkegaard's Journal which condemned the era in
which he lived, an era immersed in objectivity and rational-
ism: ”Passion is the real thing, the real measure of man's
power. And the age in which we live is wretched, because it
is without passion."75

An act that breaks with the universal ethic is truly
made in ”fear and trembling." Again Kierkegaard expresses
the fact that the individual is alone in his/her truth,
alone in this subjective awe-filled decision:

The one knight of faith can render no aid to the

other. Either the individual becomes a knight

of faith by assuming the burden of the paradox,

or he never becomes one...(he) will never be

able to assure himself by the aid of others

that this application is appropriate, but he can
do so only by himself as the individual....76

40

This faith grounded in subjectivity allowed for
Kierkegaard's awesome category of "the individual."77 What
does it mean to be an "individual" in Kierkegaard's philo-
sophy? It means primarily to respond to all of life ”as an
existing individual."78 Hermann Diem writing on Kierkegaard's
philosophy captures the essence of this "existing individual"
concept when he states:

Everything...is grounded in the ethical passion

of the thinking man infinitely interested in his

own existence. Existing in this way, he does

not reflect on the truth of reality; he is in

truth, becauSg he exists in reality.79 —_

And what does it mean to be an "existing individual?"
It means to love unconditionally. It means to respond to
God absolutely in a faith grounded in truth, that is, truth
for the individual as discerned in one's particular existen-
tial condition. Kierkegaard expresses this clearly and

precisely in his Journal: ”The thing is to understand

myself, to see what God really wishes mg_to do; the thing is

 

to find a truth which is true for me, to find the idea for

which I can live and die."80 It means person has the

 

integrity to stand alone, "alone in the world, alone before
God” as this "existing individual."81
It is in this ability to risk, to step into a relation-

ship with the Eternal, bereft of any temporal support, that

one accomplishes the task of becoming that "individual."

41

"The yardstick for a human being is: how long and to what
degree he can bear to be alone, devoid of understanding with
others," is an entry in Kierkegaard's Diary.82

This category of ”the individual" captured for Kierkegaard
the essence of what it meant to exist. It was all the
inscription he desired on his tombstone.83

The faith Abraham gave expression to as "the individual”
was grounded in love. Kierkegaard states: "God it is who
requires absolute love."84 Abraham trusted God absolutely
and in this trust loved God absolutely. This love was the
enabling power behind Abraham's response in faith to the
call of God regardless of the cost to himself. Kierkegaard
explains Abraham's faith response that called for the
sacrifice of Isaac, his only son: "He did it for God's sake
because God required proof of his faith; for his own sake he
did it in order that he might furnish the proof.”85

This love response is revealed as duty to Abraham, duty
understood precisely as the expression of God's will. This
duty to the Absolute supersedes the duty found in the ethical
realm. Kierkegaard speaks of this higher call to duty which
exists beyond the ethical realm: ”There is an absolute duty
toward God, for in this relationship of duty the individual
as an individual stands related absolutely to the absolute."86

God, and only God, is the appropriate end for person.

42

In the book, The Narrow Pass, George Price comments

 

further on this love perceived as duty that required Abraham
to offer Isaac as a holocaust:

...in the reality of human living...there is

a duty beyond all duties - a duty which is

incommensurable. Such a duty was discovered

by Abraham when he came up against the paradox

of ethics, that is, of the absolute that lies

beyond it. In his case, the occasion arose

because he had come up against God, and "God

is he who demands absolute love."87

Abraham is the perfect knight of faith by responding
to God's commands from within himself. He readily surrenders
his conceptual world in order to move into a deeper relation-
ship with the Infinite. In faith the religious individual
risks everything but in return is given far more than he
has surrendered.88 Abraham did indeed become the father of
a great nation through Isaac the very sacrifice offered up.

As Kierkegaard states, the religious sphere where
faith springing from love is enthroned "begins precisely
where thinking leaves off.”89 One moves from the ethical
sphere where the individual is in control and is master of
his/her destiny to the religious sphere where one submits
to the Transcendent. In honest acknowledgement of the
finite condition s/he responds with absolute trust.

Therefore, for Kierkegaard, this religious dimension is

the only true fully authentic human existence for in it the

finite is transcended and communion with God is effected,

43

even though in "fear and trembling."

Conclusion

 

Kierkegaard clearly distinguishes between the three
lifestyles:

While aesthetic existence is essentially enjoy-

ment, and ethical existence, essentially struggle

and victory, religious existence is essentially

suffering, and that not as a transistory moment,

but as persisting.90

The enjoyment is understood as one who lives solely to
satisfy one's desires and wants. S/he is saturated in
bodily pleasure.

The struggle and victory aspect is grounded in the
decision-making process. Duty calls and one is faced with
an either/or position but at the same time rests securely in
the universal ethic in one's choice.

The suffering element is reflected in the very title of

the book that describes the leap of faith, Fear and Trembling.

 

Acting alone, against the universal ethic, one lives in the
paradox of faith where one stretches beyond rational thought
to reach the Infinite.

The apex of human existence, then, is achieved for
Kierkegaard by entry into the religious sphere. The person
begins in the aesthetic stage, where one had become glutted

beyond endurance with pleasure. Boredom overtakes one's

44
life and so the aesthetic searches for deeper meaning.

The ethical level of existence is discovered. Duty,
choice, and responsibility reveal to the aesthetic individual
that person is a synthesis of the temporal and the Eternal
and both must be addressed. However, here too, despair sets
in. The ethical individual realizes the Infinite cannot be
contained in the finite. One will suffocate the self if
one limits the self to the universal ethic.

With this realization of the limitation of the ethical
way of life, the individual is now prepared to move into
the religious sphere of existence. Absolute faith in God,
the Incomprehensible One, is the rule of this realm. Faith
that springs from love of God empowers the finite with
capability of communion with the Infinite.

Such is the dignity offered the Christian if s/he
like Kierkegaard will strive to understand the self, will
seek what God really wishes him/her to do, will search out
the truth which is true for him/her, will pursue the idea

for which s/he can live and die.

There lies within man's horizon a region for the
divine, a shrine for ultimate holiness. It cannot
be ignored. The atheist may pronounce it empty.

The agnostic may urge that he finds his investiga-
tion has been inconclusive. The contemporary
humanist will refuse to allow the question to arise.
But their negations presuppose the spark...our
native orientation to the divine.

Bernard Lonergan
Method In Theology

 

CHAPTER TWO

BERNARD LONERGAN'S HEURISTIC STRUCTURE OF CONSCIOUSNESS

What promotes the subject from experiential to
intellectual consciousness is the desire to
understand, the intention of intelligibility.
What next promotes him from intellectual to
rational consciousness, is a fuller unfolding

of the same intention: for the desire to under-
stand once understanding is reached, becomes the
desire to understand correctly; in other words,
the intention of intelligibility, once an
intelligible is reached, becomes the intention
of the right intelligible, of the true and,
through truth, of reality. Finally, the inten-
tion of the intelligible, the true, the real,
becomes also the intention of the good, the
question of value, of what is worth while, when
the already acting subject confronts his world
and adverts to his own acting in it.1

The above quote captures the essence of Bernard
Lonergan's transcendental method. He calls it the transcen-
dental for this approach to reality does not limit itself to
"exploiting the opportunities proper to particular fields,"
but rather of "exploiting the opportunities presented by the
human mind itself."2

In the chapter entitled ”Insight Revisited” in Seggnd

Collection, Lonergan explains: "As there is no limit to the

 

questions we can ask, the notion of being is unrestricted.
Accordingly, it is not categorial but transcendental.”3

4S

46

The transcendental method clearly delineates four
levels of consciousness that drive toward self-transcendence.
The focus of this chapter will be an examination and
illumination of these four levels which gives access to the
ultimate level of consciousness. It will be an investigation
into the open-ended dynamic process which is person in the
Lonergan school of thought.

I will begin by briefly addressing Lonergan's notion
of being. His notion of being encompasses all that is
known and all that remains to be known.4 "God is isness" is
the terminology of Meister Eckhart but captures the essence
of Lonergan's thought.5 This paper, however, will address
only that aspect of being at work on the human level, that
is, authentic subjectivity.6 This background, however, is
important for Situating his thought because fullness of
being at the intellectual level is the actualization of the
heuristic structure of consciousness, the essence of the
transcendental method.

I will then move to identify the four different levels
of consciousness which culminates in a fifth level in
Lonergan's later writings. The particular activity proper
to each level will be examined. The third section will
address Lonergan's concept of horizon, a concept which will

further illuminate the transcendental method. Finally, I

47
will explore the area of conversion and how it relates to
the levels of consciousness.

Since Lonergan's notion of being on the intellectual
level is highly technical, the field of psychology will be
utilized in some sections to explicate the particular idea
under discussion. A schematic of the Lonergan concepts

presented in this paper is also provided.

Being
Being is the objective of the pure desire to
know....By the pure desire to know is meant the
dynamic orientation manifested in questions for
intelligence and for reflection.7
In the above quote Lonergan defines person as an

inquiring and critical Spirit, as an open—ended process.

The question "why” is not about the human person, it is

 

person.8 The consciousness which wonders and reflects is
that which constitutes humanity.

According to Lonergan, this unrestricted desire to know
that defines who we are, is pure gift from God.9 Its purpose
is to lead us on to seek and find God who is our true end.10
St. Augustine's famous saying, "Our hearts are restless
until they rest in thee," captures the activity and the
essence of being.11

To assist us toward our fullest potential, our human

nature has a built-in direction finder. In this way

48
faithfulness to our very being will lead us to our true

goal. Philip Mueller, writing in Eglise et Theologie,

 

explains the contribution of Lonergan's notion of being:
"The thrust toward God, therefore, is not simply the cultural
imperative of a former era, as some secularizers claim, but
is built into the unvarying structure of the mind."12

To be in touch with self, then, is to be in touch with
God. The goal of this basic thrust of the human spirit is
continuing self-knowledge which is the way to self-
transcendence.

Frederick Crowe, in The Lonergan Enterprise, speaks of

 

the incarnate subject. This category captures Lonergan's
notion of self-transcendence. The incarnate subject is one
who ”experiences, questions, understands, reflects, judges,
deliberates, decides, and sometimes falls in love."13 This
category of the incarnate subject embodies the drive to know
that defines being at the intellectual level.

Person, or authentic subjectivity, therefore, in the
Lonergan scheme, is not a concept, not an idea, not a static
anything, but a dynamic process. Lonergan states that
"being...is the term of the unrestricted intention that
directs and structures cognitional process and it lies at
the end of that process, not at its beginning."14 Person,

sometimes referred to as a unity-identity-whole, is constantly

49
becoming.15 This process continually moves toward deeper
self—awareness, self-transcendence, self-appropriation.

In his foundational work, Insight - A Study of Human

 

Understanding, Lonergan first proposes the concept of self-

 

appropriation. In his understanding, self-appropriation is
far more than just experiencing, understanding, and judging.
In seeking authentic selfhood, one notices oneself as
experiencing, understanding, and judging; understands one-
self as experiencing, understanding, and judging; affirms
oneself as experiencing, understanding, and judging.16

Denise Carmody captures the concept of the self-
appropriating person in her article "Lonergan's Religious
Person":

...consciousness...is the awareness of one's

self and one's actions which is not objective

but subjective. In other words, consciousness

is not a reflective perception of one's self as

an object. It is not a movie-camera focus on

one's spiritual insides. Rather, it is the

oblique awareness of one's self that accompanies

all one's working thoughts and actions. The

root of this consciousness is the self-presence

that accompanies being when it is at the

intellectual or human level. Self-presence

means the awareness of one's "I" that accompanies

all human activity.17

Self-appropriation is an activity that takes place
neither in the common sense realm nor in the realm of theory.

It is rather in a realm Lonergan calls ”interiority." It

differs from theory because it is a movement inward to the

50

subject himself/herself.18 Self-appropriation is "an attempt
to move behind the worlds of scientific theory to its
grounding worlds of intelligence and rational interiority."19
In discussing the importance of self-appropriation, David
Tracy states that understanding the process of human
intelligibility gives one the absolute foundation from which
to interpret reality regardless of historical setting.20
Lonergan himself writes in Insight:

Thoroughly understand what it is to understand,

and not only will you understand the broad

lines of all there is to be understood but

also you will possess a fixed base, an invariant

pattern, opening upon all further developments

of understanding.21

Self-appropriation is necessary for a clarifying
approach to reality.

...the point is...appropriation; the point is

to discover, to identify, to become familiar

with the activities of one's own intelligence;

the point is to become able to discriminate

with ease and from personal conviction between

one's purely intellectual activities and the

manifold of other, "existential" concerns

that invade and mix and blend with the opera-

tions of intellect to render it ambivalent and

its pronouncements ambiguous.22

Hence, the self-appropriating person not only is in
touch with his/her transcendence, in touch with the highest
human potential, but also possesses a constancy because the

base of operation is the "unvarying structure of the human

mind."23

51

It should be noted, however, that as faithfulness to
being calls forth our greatest potential, there Still
exists the freedom to refuse. Tracy addresses this issue of
refusal:

Indeed, as the contemporary ”third force" in

psychology makes abundantly clear, most men

have the resources and the need to consciously

structure that self-actualization. Still, we

must not become too sanguine: for a closer

study of the dramatic pattern reveals not merely

developmental possibilities but abberrant ones

as well. For as either classical Freudian

psychology or more contempory existential psy-

choanalysis have documented, there exists in

man other darker concerns, other and misleading

interests...the dramatic subject also has the

possibility of bias, e.g. he may refuse insight,

refuse his own drive for intelligence and

rationality and thereby consciously or uncon-

sciously live out a life so filled with bias

that it is unworthy of man.24

What then is fundamental to authentic subjectivity?
What is it that impelS; us towards value or meaning? What
does it mean to be human? The questioning process, the
desire to understand, the search for meaning--this dynamic
process is what is specifically human. Bernard Lonergan is
very clear on this issue: "Man's transcendent subjectivity
is mutilated or abolished, unless he is stretching forth
toward the intelligible, the unconditioned, the good of
value.”25

In Lonergan terminology, therefore, to be human is to

observe the transcendental precepts--Be Attentive, Be

52
Intelligent, Be Reasonable, Be Responsible.26
With this foundation of the Lonergan's notion of being27
when it is at the intellectual human level,28 we now move to
examine in detail the transcendental precepts which

represent Lonergan's heuristic structure of consciousness.

Levels of Consciousness

 

In a notion of being as a dynamic process, a pure
unrestricted desire to know, Lonergan distinguishes four
levels of consciousness: the empirical, the intellectual,
the rational, and the responsible.29 He sees them as
representing the progressive movement toward fullest human

potential. In Method In Theology he explains:

 

...the many levels of consciousness are just

successive stages in the unfolding of a single

thrust, the eros of the human spirit. To know

the good, it must know the real; to know the

real, it must know the true; to know the true,

it must know the intelligible; to know the

intelligible; it must attend to data.30

There is a unity of content and activities. The person
acts. Authenticity to being, however, will require that this
action does not take place until a judgment is made. The.
judgment will not be arrived at without first reflecting and
coming to an understanding of data. And the data can only

arise when an encounter with reality occurs. This is the

unfolding of the four-fold structure in Lonergan's schematic

53

of consciousness. This is the task of processing reality.

But, consciousness means more than just completion of
these four activities. Consciousness or authentic sub-
jectivity, for Lonergan, also includes a recognition of
intelligibility in these activities. In the four-fold
cognitional process there is consciousness of content. In
recognition of intelligibility there is an awareness of con-
sciousness itself.31 Lonergan writes:

Consciousness is not to be thought of as some
inward look...by consciousness we shall mean
that there is an awareness immanent in cogni—
tional acts....To affirm consciousness is to
affirm that c0gnitional process is not merely a
procession of contents but also a succession of
acts...it is a quality immanent in acts of cer-
tain kinds, and without it the acts would be
unconscious as is the growth of one's beard.32

By way of example, Lonergan explains this awareness of
consciousness:

...there are those that would define "seeing"

as "awareness of colour" and then proceed to
argue that in seeing one was aware of colour but
of nothing else whatever, that "awareness of
colour" occurs but that a concomitant "awareness
of awareness" is a fiction. This, I think, does
not accurately reflect the facts. If seeing is
an awareness of nothing but colour and hearing
is an awareness of nothing but sound, why are
both names ”awareness?" Is it because there is
some similarity between colour and sound? Or is
it that colour and sound are disparate, yet with
respect to both there are acts that are similar?
In the latter case, what is the similarity?

Is it that both acts are occurrences, as meta-
bolism is an occurrence? Or is it that both
acts are conscious? One may quarrel with the
phrase, awareness of awareness, particularly if

54

one imagines awareness to be a looking and finds

it preposterous to talk about looking at a look.

But one cannot deny that, within the cognitional

act as it occurs, there is a factor or element

or component over and above its content and that

this factor is what differentiates cognitional

acts from unconscious occurrences.33

This intelligibility which is intrinsic to the cogni-
tional activities represent the God-given dynamism that is
person.34 This intangible intelligibility is that which
thrusts one through the four-fold structure of consciousness.
It is potentiality stretching forth toward actuality. It is
this dynamic quality which ultimately constitutes the capa-
city for transcendence, a capacity which will be discussed
later.

With this general concept of consciousness, it becomes
possible to move now to the examination of Lonergan's

heuristic structure of consciousness that embody four levels

which give access to a further fifth level.

Empirical Level

 

The foundation on which the successive stages build is
the experiential level which is expressed in the transcenden—

tal precept--Be Attentive. Lonergan writes in Method in

 

Theology: "There is the empirical level on which we sense,
perceive, imagine, feel, speak, move."35 It is the level of
presentations; one's consciousness encounters objectivity.

It is simply being immersed in sensibilities.

55
Without this level, activity on the succeeding levels is
not possible. There must first be attention to data for
there to be anything to reflect on, anything to understand.
In writing of this first level Lonergan States:

Its defining characteristics is the fact that it
is presupposed and complemented by the level of
intelligence, that it supplies, as it were, the
raw materials on which intelligence operates,

that in a word, it is empirical, given indeed

but merely given, open to understanding and formu-
lation but by itself not understood and in itself
ineffable.36

Intellectual Level

 

Be Intelligent- is the transcendental command on the
second level of cognitional activity. Lonergan defines this
level of consciousness: "There is an intellectual level on
which we inquire, come to understand, express what we have
understood, work out the presuppositions and implications
of our expressions.”37

This stage is characterized by the drive to understand.
We have the experience, the given. The "incarnate subject"
takes it in and attempts to make sense of it. He/she
reflects, ponders, and studies the data passed on from the
empirical level. It is at this stage that insight occurs.
One comes to an understanding of the reflected-on data and
conceptuations follow: "...intelligence looks for intelli-

gible patterns in presentations and representations; it

56

grasps such patterns in its moments of insight; it exploits
such grasp in its formulations...."38

Insight is the key to the intellectual level of con-
sciousness. Insight is the pivotal point of Lonergan's
Structure of human consciousness. Insight is comprehension
of the whole. "It consists in a grasp of intelligible unity
or relation in the data or image or symbol. It is the
active ground whence proceed conception, definition, hypo-
thesis, theory, system," writes Lonergan.39

Insight, therefore, is the mental act whereby coherence
is given to the diverse scraps of information encountered at
the empirical level.40 The various pieces of the puzzle
fall into place and the whole picture comes into focus.

Lonergan poses Archimedes running naked from the baths
shouting "Eureka" as the example par excellence of insight.
King Hiero had a crown made by a craftsman who had tremendous
skill but doubtful honesty. The King wanted Archimedes to
make sure the crown was made of pure gold, to make sure no
baser metals had been added. The solution came to Archimedes
when he was in the baths. He would weigh the crown in water.
Lonergan comments: "Implicit in this directive were the
principles of displacement and specific gravity."41

In assessing Archimedes' experience, Lonergan posits or

uncovers five aspects regarding insight. Archimedes was

57

obviously wrestling with the question. He even took the
problem with him when he took his relaxation. This indicates
that insight "comes as a release to the tension of inquiry."42
Secondly, the solution comes in a flash, suddenly and
unexpectedly.43

His whole mental attitude was geared to the question.
Insight, then, is a function of inner conditions rather than
outer circumstances.44 A group of people can be given the
same set of facts and yet, some will grasp the meaning
immediately, others only slowly, and still others not at
all. Insight is a function of an innate ability and some
are simply more endowed than others.45

Insight into a particular concrete problem will be
universally applicable. The insight that solved Archimedes'
problem is capable of being used over and over again when—
ever the principles of displacement and gravity come into
play.46 Since the significance of the insight reaches beyond
the present problem, insight is ”the mediator, the hinge,
the pivot" between the concrete and the abstract.47

Furthermore, it passes into the "habitual texture of
one's mind."48 Once the original insight has arisen, it
will forever be present to the person for ready application
to future problems. Hence, the learning process occurs

when experience gives birth to new insights that either

58
rectify or complement a previously held insight.

Finally, the insight itself is preconceptual, but this
"inner word" needs to be communicated and so the "outer
word" emerges. The abstract insight is conceptualized.49
Archimedes' solution is expressed in the principle of
hydrostatics.

Insight, then, is grasping the real meaning in an
experience. It is moving beyond the raw given into the

significance of an encounter. In Creativity and Method:

 

Essays in Honor of Bernard Lonergan, John Dunne writes

 

poetically of this move into meaning: "Insight...is what

happens when reasons of the heart become known to the mind."50
However, the intellectual level, having assigned mean-

ing to the raw data passed on from the empirical level by

way of insight, is still not the completion of the unrestricted

desire to know of authentic being. Intelligent activity

requires more. Lonergan states that "the level of

intelligence, besides presupposing and complementing an

initial level, is itself presupposed and complemented by a

n51

further level of reflection. The formulated insight is

passed on to the rational level.

Rational Level

 

The third transcendental precept-—Be Reasonable, centers

on judgment. Lonergan explains what this entails: "There

59
is the rational level on which we reflect, marshall the
evidence, pass judgment on the truth or falsity, certainty
or probability, of a statement.”52 The conceptualizated
insight passed on from the intellectual level is challenged
and judged.

Up to this point, the experience and the insight give
us only the hypothetical. It is the task of the rational
level to determine the real. "It is rational consciousness,
culminating in judgment...that bridges the gap between "may
be" and "is," writes Denise Carmody.53

The first level encounters objectivity and thereby
provides the data for reflection. The second level raises
the question of the presentations, what does it mean? The
third level ask the question, is it true? Verification is
the last activity in the process of human knowing.S4 It is
the personal check and balance system. Verification is
also the last element in the first component of human fulfill-
ment55 as it completes intellectual conversion.

As.there are components in the human consciousness that
give rise to insights, so there are components that give
rise to judgment. Chapter ten of Insight deals with the
reflective understanding of judgment:

Like the acts of direct and introspective under-

standing, the act of reflective understanding is

an insight. AS they meet questions for intelli-
gence, it meets questions for reflection. As

60

they lead to definitions and formulations, it

leads to judgments. As they grasp unity, or

system, or ideal frequency, it grasps the

sufficiency of the evidence for a prospective

judgment.56

The rational level can be understood by first looking
at judgment and its various relationships and then
examining the act of judgment itself including its general

form and the abstract components present in any judgment.

The validation of judgment follows as a final concern.

Judgment and Relationship

Lonergan begins his discussion of judgment by probing
its relationship to l) propositions, 2) questions, 3) suffi-
ciency of evidence, and 4) the incarnate subject. By one's
rational activity the hypothetical prOposition is passed on
from the intellectual level and questioned as to whether it
is true or false. By simply asking the question, is it so?
the rational level takes over and performs its proper
function. He explains the difference between the two levels:
"The level of thinking heads for objects of thoughts, the
level of judgment heads for objects of knowledge."57

The issue of questions revolve around the fact that
each level has its own proper set of questions. The questions
raised at the intellectual level are quite different from
the questions posed at the rational level. The prior level

answers "questions for intelligence," whereas this level

61

answers "questions for reflection."58 Tracy points out the
importance of the questioning process itself: "...it is the
pure activity of questioning that most adequately reveals
the dynamism of intelligence and rationality."59 The person
must be sure he/she is wrestling with the right question,
the question proper to the rational level--is it so?

Judgment also takes place only when one grasps the
sufficiency of evidence necessary to make such a decision.60
The evidence is meticulously collected and diligently examined.
The very nature of being demands that once the evidence is
presented, a decision must be made. It is the next step in
the thrust toward actualization of authentic subjectivity or
person. Lonergan writes that judging is "the fruit of the
actual rationality of consciousness."61

The last element Lonergan addresses regarding judgment
and relationships is that of the incarnate subject. There
is a particular individual making this decision. A particular
someone is experiencing, making an inquiry, coming to an
understanding, formulating a proposition, questioning whether
it is so, collecting the evidence, and making a judgment.62
One's own rationality is called to judge, therefore, ”the
judgment is a personal act, a personal commitment."63

Furthermore, a person makes a decision that is in Step

with previous judgments. Past decisions are used as

62
foundations to form present determinations. Along with
this quest for coherence in judgments there is, however, "the
dialectical tendency to upset one's preSent position and

bring about a more fundamental advance."64

Act of Judgment

After establishing the relationships in judgment,
Lonergan moves to explain the general form of the act itself
or what he terms reflective understanding. In order to
decide whether one has enough data to make a judgment,
Lonergan maintains one must understand the judgment as a
virtually unconditioned judgment. A virtually unconditioned
judgment simply means that all the conditions have been
fulfilled. It stands in contrast to the formally uncondi-
tioned which has no conditions.65

The virtually unconditioned judgment contains three
elements: the conditioned, the link between the conditioned
and its conditions, and the fulfillment of the conditions.66

The conditioned is the questioning on the rational level
of the hypothetical proposition proposed by the intellectual
level. The critical attitude of "is it so?" transforms the
proposition to the conditioned.

Reflective understanding effects the transformation of
a conditioned to a virtually unconditioned when it grasps

"the conditions of the conditioned and their fulfillment."67

63

Deductive inference is used to illustrate the link
between the conditioned and the fulfillment of the conditions.
A and B stand for more than one proposition. The syllogism
is presented: If A, then B; but A, therefore B.68 An
example will illustrate:

If you are a person, (A)

then you are mortal. (B)
But Socrates is a person, (A)
therefore Socrates is mortal. (B)

In the first statement, B is the conditioned: if A,
then B. A is necessary for B to happen. In the second
statement the condition is fulfilled: A. Socrates is a
person, therefore conclusion B. This conclusion is arrived
at because the combination of both statements reveal B as
a virtually unconditioned.69

It bears repeating that Lonergan only uses the syllogism
to illustrate the link, the act of judging, that is prOper
to the cognitional process. He writes:

Reflective insight grasps the pattern, and by

rational compulsion there follows the judgment.

However, deductive inference cannot be the basic

case of judgment, for it presupposes other judg-

ments to be true. For that reason...deductive

inference is merely a clear illustration of what

is meant by grasping a prospective judgment as

virtually unconditioned.

Demonstrating the elements of judgment, Lonergan

presents a scenario. A person leaves a clean orderly house

in the morning. Upon returning in the evening the person

64

finds that windows are broken, water is on the floor, and
the house is filled with smoke. That something happened is
the logical determination.71

Lonergan explains how the judgment is reached. First,
the empirical level presents two sets of data. The memory
brings forth the picture of the house as it was left, and
the house as it now exists. Secondly, Lonergan reminds us
that "on the intellectual level the person has a grasp of

the notion of things."72

The house is the same, the things
are the same, only now in a different state. When the same
set of things are changed in an interval of time, something
happened.

Lonergan proceeds to place the scene into the syllogism.
If A, then B: if the same set of things are in a different
state in the evening than they were in the morning, then
something happened in the intervening time. But A, therefore
B: but this same set of things was one way in the morning
and is now in a different way, therefore something happened.73

The determination that something has happened in the
intervening time he/She was away from the house is the
conditioned in Lonergan's terminology. The intellectual
level presents the hypothetical conclusion that something

happened. The two sets of data, the memory and the present

scene, are the fulfilling conditions. They present the link

65

that allows the person to move to a judgment. The link
between the conditioned and the fulfilling conditions "is
a structure immanent and operative within cognitional
process."74 The link that allows for judgment is simply an
intangible activity intrinsic to the incarnate subject. This
was the link illustrated by the use of the syllogism.
Authentic being moves automatically to judgment when
sufficiency of evidence is presented. Lonergan concludes
his case:

The three elements have been assembled. On the

level of presentations there are two sets of

data. On the level of intelligence there is an

insight referring both sets to the same things.

When both levels are taken together, there is

involved the notion of knowing change. Reflective

understanding grasps all three as a virtually

unconditioned to ground the judgment, Something

happened.7S

Validity of Judgment

How do we know our judgments are correct? To address
this issue Lonergan first distinguishes between vulnerable
and invulnerable insights.76 A vulnerable insight is a real
insight but there are still loose ends. Further questions
come to mind. These questions give birth to other insights
which serve to complement or correct the present insight.77
The vulnerable insight is the beginning of a cluster of

insights.

In contrast, the invulnerable insight occurs when there

66
are no further questions to be asked, no new insights that
challenge the position held. The matter is settled.78
Lonergan returns to the scenario presented earlier to
illustrate his point. If the person returning home had
declared that there was a fire instead of simply noting
something had happened, the insight would have been more

vulnerable.79

It would be possible for the whole scene to
have been staged. If the scenario was an all-boys boarding
school, one would hesitate to state immediately that the
cause was fire. The Situation is a determining factor.

The issue of context must be explored. The person must
come to the point where he/she is familiar with the sur-
roundings and feels "at home," completely immersed in the
situation to the point that all pertinent questions are
settled.80 The person is contented with the explanation that
something happened.

Lonergan is careful to point out, though, that one can
easily close oneself off to further questions:

Note that it is not enough to say that the condi-

tions are fulfilled when no further questions

occur to me. The mere absence of further questions

in my mind can have other causes. My intellectual

curiosity may be stifled by other interests. My

eagerness to satisfy other drives may refuse the
further questions a chance to emerge.81

How then can one know if he/She is "at home" in a judg-

ment or deluding self? The questioning process itself

67

contains the Clue. Philip Mueller writing in Eglise et

 

Theologie captures the activity that grounds the authentic

 

questioning process that culminates in judgment:

...(there is) an openness to truth, however

inconvenient or uncomfortable it may be. It is

a resolute search for truth that overcomes the

obstac1es that impede man's unrestricted desire

to know. It may require abandoning personal

bias, customary perspectives and the wisdom of

the age. It enjoins resolute attentiveness to

data, vigorous questioning and clarifying in-

sight, a painstaking marshalling and judicious

assessment of evidence. In grasping the

virtually unconditioned, cognitional self-

transcendence is assured.82

This process moves to a condition of familiarity and
mastery of a situation.83 The individual simply exhausts
all avenues in search of data for the judgment. An example
of illustration is taken from a moralist writing about
Christian decision-making. This will concretize the question-
ing process that gives one the "at home? feeling in a judg-
ment.

Anthony Kosnik, who has written extensively in the area
of morality, suggests certain areas that need to be taken
under consideration before one is sufficiently informed to
move to a sound moral judgment: sacred scripture, the
teaching of one's church, the input from the scientific
community, one's own experience as well as the experience of

others regarding the particular question under study, and

the sincerity and openness of the pursuing individual.

68
Furthermore, all this must be carried out in a Christo-
centric atmosphere.84

Once this process is finished, one is equipped with
enough data to move to a sound moral judgment. The individual
can rest secure in the knowledge that he/she has done one's
best in "marshalling the evidence” that will lead one to an
”at home" feeling in one's judgment.

In summary, there are insights that are vulnerable
which open the door for more questions. These further
questions produce new insights that complement or correct
the initial insight- Insight builds on insight to form a
cluster of insights that produce a comprehensive picture that
provides the sufficiency of evidence needed to make a judg-
ment. One is comfortable with the gathered data. No
further questions appear on the horizon. The invulnerable
insight is achieved and one reaches the virtually uncondi-
tioned. One is free to move on to new questions.

This self-correcting process of questioning is that
which provides the invulnerable insight. It is again the
revealed essence of the human spirit--the pure unrestricted
desire to know. Lonergan captures this drive to know when
he writes in Insight: "The business of the human mind in
this life seems to be, not contemplation of what we know,

but relentless devotion to the task of adding increments to

69

a merely habitual knowledge."8S

For Lonergan, then, what is real emerges only in the
process of judgment. Denise Carmody summarizes the contri-
bution of the rational level:

In judgment, then, Lonergan's introspective psy-
chology finds a self-transcendence that asserts
truth: the correspondence of mind and reality.
This self-transcendence, this move beyond what is
problematic, what may be so, to what really exists,
what is solid and verified reality, is the meaning,
the point to human knowledge. It is the real goal
of the first three levels of human consciousness;
it is also the first component of human fulfill-
ment. Man is made to know, to exercise his inner
light, to expand his limited being by an inten—
tionality that lets him share in others' being.

He is made to grow out beyond himself and make his
horizon stretch to whatever can be known, whatever
does really exist....Therefore, reality is not a
matter of sensible contact (experience) nor
hypothesis (insight). It is rather a matter of
rational affirmation, based on a sufficiency of
evidence and an assurance of right understanding.
The final test of reality ("God" included) is
therefore neither the naive realism of common sense,
nor the experience-bound philosophies of positivism
and empiricism, nor the uncriticized understanding
that spawns idealisms. Rather, it is a critical
realism based in the mind's assurance that the
conditions for assessing existence have been met.
This is the final legacy of rational conscious-
ness.86

Responsible Level

 

After the judgment process, the unfolding of the
unrestricted desire to know moves into its final stage. This
fourth level of consciousness is expressed by the transcenden-

tal precept--Be Responsible. Lonergan describes the activity

70

present on this level in Method In Theology: "There is the

 

responsible level on which we are concerned with ourselves,
our own operations, our goals, and so deliberate about
possible courses of action, evaluate them, decide, and carry
out our decisions."87

As rational consciousness is characterized by the judg-
ment process, this rational self-consciousness level is
characterized by decisive action. Knowing in Lonergan's
thought is experiencing, understanding, and judging. At
this point one can say I am a knower for as a concrete unity-
identity-whole I have engaged in experiencing, understanding,
and judging.88 The present level now adds doing to this
knowing.

To put it simply, once the rational level presents us
with truth, the pull of authentic subjectivity demands that
we move to action. The goal is consistency between knowing
and doing. It captures the struggle for full human stature.
This step of accepting responsibility that leads to action
is the second component in human fulfillment and a stage in
the conversion process which will be discussed later.

To know what is right, therefore, is not enough; one
must "do” the truth that one knows. This action requirement

is summed up in the Gospel of Matthew, chapter 7:21-22 where

Christ states that it is not "those who call me 'Lord' who

71

will be saved, but those who do the will of my Father."90

Lonergan also stresses the importance of feelings in
this on-going process. He writes: ”Feeling gives inten-
tional consciousness its mass, momentum, drive, power.
Without these feelings our knowing and deciding would be
paper thin.”91

Feelings can channel one's attention, shape one's
horizon, thus be responsible for the direction of one's
life.92 They play such an important role that Lonergan
writes "not to take cognizance of them...results in a con-
flict between the self as conscious...and the self as
objectified. This alienation. from oneself leads to adoption
of misguided remedies....”93 One needs to be aware of the
feelings out of which one operates in order to make sound
decisions that are called for on the responsible level.

Lonergan moves Still deeper into this fourth level of
consciousness. He states that what has been presented so
far is the anthropological element.94 What now beckons us
forward is mystery, the unknown. This step forward into the
unknown brings us to the realm of love. Frederick Crowe,
commenting on this further movement into the religious
sphere in Lonergan's thought, states that in his later work,

Method In Theology, he "greatly extends the basis of self-

 

appropriation adding the gift of God's love which effects

72

our religious conversion."95

Self-apprOpriation is owning the "I" that is present in
consciousness and taking to oneself that which is proper to
being, the unrestricted desire to know which is demonstrated
in the unfolding of the heuristic structure of conscious-
ness.96 In this owning process, one has appropriated "one's
own interiority, one's subjectivity, one's operations,
their structure, their norms, their potentialities.”97 It
is these "operations, structure, norms, and potentialities"
that lead to the question of God. The "homing device," the
unrestricted desire to know, opens into the realm of love.

Lonergan posits several examples to support his posi-
tion.98 I cite one that illustrates the point that our
conscious intentionality will lead us to the realm of
mystery:

The possibility of inquiry on the side of the

subject lies in his intelligence, in his drive

to know what, why, how, and in his ability to

reach intellectually satisfying answers. But

why should the answers that satisfy the intelligence

of the subject yield anything more than a subjec-

tive satisfaction? Why should they be supposed

to possess any relevance to knowledge of the

universe? Of course, we assume that they do.

We can point to the fact that our aSsumption is

confirmed by its fruit. So implicitly- we grant

that the universe is intelligible and, once that

is granted, there arises the question whether the

universe could be intelligible without having an

intelligent ground...that is the question about

God.99

This illustration points to Lonergan's belief that

73
faithfulness to being which involves this constant question-
ing process ultimately leads to God. Our conscious inten-
tionality is forever stretching forth to whatever is unknown
and the ultimate unknown is God.100 Denise Carmody comments
on the person operating out of this level of consciousness:
"...the religious person is therefore simply the fully human
person, the person centered in the limitless mystery to
which his consciousness tends."101

The domain of God, therefore, lies within our reach
since our questioning knows no limits. Lonergan makes clear
that this domain exists:

There lies within our horizon a region for the

divine, a shrine for ultimate holiness. It cannot

be ignored. The atheist may pronounce it empty.

The agnostic may urge that he finds his investiga-

tion has been inconclusive. The contemporary

humanist will refuse to allow the question to

arise. But their negations presuppose the spark

in our clod, our native orientation to the

divine.102 '

With access to this love domain established simply by
being true to our questioning nature, it remains to examine
certain aspects of this ultimate level of consciousness.

Lonergan in his post-Method writings has distinguished
this ultimate love level as a fifth level of consciousness.103
He calls it the ”quasi-operator" working beyond the fourth
104

level of consciousness and bringing it to completion.

In A Third Collection, Lonergan writes of "quasi-operator" as

 

74

the "passionateness of being” that "underpins and accompanies
and reaches beyond the subject as experientially, intelli-
gently, rationally, morally conscious."105

Up to this point I have treated Lonergan's work as he
himself first presented it--a four-fold structure of
consciousness. At this point I move with him in his thought
and present the love Sphere as a separate fifth level of
consciousness.

The transcendental precept at this ultimate stage is:
Be In Love. Therefore the first aspect addressed will be
the unconditional love that permeates the whole relationship.
Secondly, the mystery element will be explored with the
ramifications that quality entails. Finally, the nature of

faith in light of this mystery will be examined.

Love Level

 

Authenticity is achieved by self—transcendence. Self-
transcendence is achieved by faithfulness to being at work
on the human level. Being is the unrestricted desire to
know. Therefore, since the apex of the unrestricted drive
to know culminates in the realm of love, the person who
loves is the most transcending, therefore, the most authen-

tic. Bernard Tyrrell comments in Christotherapy--Healing

 

Through Enlightenment that not only is "man made to love"

 

but "actually becomes more richly himself" in doing so. The

75
person goes beyond self into communion with other and so

"106 Lonergan, using his

"love then is a certain ecstasy.
own terminology, writes that "just as unrestricted question-
ing is our capacity for self-transcendence, so being in love
in an unrestricted fashion is the proper fulfillment of that
capacity."107

But how does one move from the question of God to the
being-in-love with God? The initiative falls on the other
side. The action is divinity at work. I suggest it is for
this reason that Lonergan calls the previous movements the
anthropological element.

That fulfillment is not the product of our know-

ledge and choice. On the contrary, it dismantles

and abolishes the horizon in which our knowing

and choosing went on and it sets up a new horizon

in which the love of God will transvalue our

values and the eyes of that love will transform

our knowing.108

The gift of unconditional love, then, is the ground of
this highest level of consciousness. It is God's love that
is "seeking to touch and quicken the lover that I am,"
writes Sebastian Moore.109 God knows the potential is there,
s/he invites it into actuality. It is God's initiative
that mediates this conversion which is the last component of
human fulfillment. God extends the invitation to love and

one's openness allows his/her grace to work.110 Even more

than this, the dynamic state of being in love itself is a

76
response to a divine initiative.111 This invitation-
response structure exhibited by the being-in-love clearly
reveals life as a co-partnership with the eternal.112 The
initiative is on God's Side but the person's responsibility
is openness to being that mediates the love response proper
to this level.

The loving state, then, is the ultimate to which one's
very being tends. Response to this unconditional love
demonstrates the primacy of inwardness in its purest state
for the love response can never be coerced from without, it

113

must rise from within. Viktor Frankl shares his insight

on the loving state, the apex of human living which is found
throughout literature:

A thought transfixed me: for the first time in
my life I saw the truth as it is set into song by
so many poets, proclaimed as the final wisdom by
so many thinkers. The truth--that love is the
ultimate and the highest goal to which man can
aspire. Then I grasped the meaning of the great-
est secret that human poetry and human thought
and belief have to import: The salvation of man
is through love and in love.114

What is the ultimate response to this unconditional
love? What is the essence of this love relationship?
Lonergan unfolds beautifully what loving God entails and
the ultimate desire of such a relationship.

To be in love is to be in love with someone. To

be in love without qualifications or conditions

or reservations or limits is to be in love with
someone transcendent. When someone transcendent is

77

my beloved, he is in my heart, real to me from
within me. When that love is the fulfilment of my
unrestricted thrust to self-transcendence through
intelligence and truth and responsibility, the

one that fulfils that thrust must be supreme in
intelligence, truth, goodness. Since he chooses to
come to me by a gift of love for him, he himself
must be love. Since loving him is my transcending
myself, it also is a denial of the self to be
transcended. Since loving him means loving atten-
tion to him, it is prayer, mediatation, comtempla-
tion. Since love of him is fruitful, it overflows
into love of all those that he loves or might love.
Finally, from an experience of love focused on
mystery there wells forth a longing for knowledge,
while love itself is a longing for union; so for
the lover of the unknown beloved the concept of
bliss is knowledge of him and union with him,
however they may be achieved.115

Mystery
Besides this encounter with God's love that is the
basis for this deeper movement into human fulfillment, the
aspect of mystery is also present. Lonergan points out that
even though this dynamic state of being in love is conscious
that does not mean it is known. Experience is consciousness
at one level but knowing is experiencing, understanding, and

116 Since one can never understand, let alone judge

judging.
that which is other than oneself, what is encountered here
is ultimate mystery. In discussing this aspect of mystery
he draws out certain elements that contribute to this love
relationship: ”...the mystery is not merely attractive but

fascinating; to it one belongs; by it one is possessed.

Because it is unmeasured love, the mystery evokes me...it is

78

an experience of the holy."117
Dag Hammarskjold, in his journal, captures existentially

this mysterious force that beckoned him forward when he
wrote: "I don't know who--or what--put the question, I don't
know when it was put. I don't even remember answering. But
at some moment I did answer Yes to Someone--or Something--and
from that hour I was certain that existence is meaningful
and that, therefore, my life, in self-surrender, had a

goal.”118

Rudolt Otto, in his book Idea of the Holy, deals exten-

 

sively with this overwhelming sense of the holy. He refers

to it as the mysterium tremendum—-aweful mystery. Otto

 

speaks of mystery as that which cannot be known: "That which
is mysterious is...the "wholly other."...that which is

quite beyond the Sphere of the usual, the intelligible, and
the familiar...filling the mind with blank wonder and aston-

ishment."119

Faith
This condition goes ”beyond the sphere of the usual,
the intelligible, and the familiar," it calls for an absolute
faith ”born of religious love."120 The mystery which is
"wholly other" puts one in touch with one's limitedness. One
is forced to acknowledge the boundaries of the finite.

Faith, then, calls for a surrender in love to this

79

Incomprehensible Mystery which is revealed as unconditional
love.

Lonergan turns to Blaise Pascal to explain faith
”born of religious love." Pascal wrote that the heart has
reasons that reason does not know.121 By reason is meant
the three cognitional activities of experiencing, understand-
ing, and judgment. The heart refers to this present dynamic
state of being in love. Lonergan writes that "the meaning,
then, of Pascal's remark would be that, besides the factual
knowledge reached by experiencing, understanding, and
judgment, there is another kind of knowledge reached through
the discernment of value and the judgments of value of a
person in love."122

A person may be in touch with cultural and personal
value but when God's love floods the heart, one is put in
touch with transcendent value.123 When God who is "wholly
other" communicates with a person in this kind of love union,
one's horizon is broaded, one's ”apprehension of value" is
deepened, and one surrenders self to this mysterious
transcendent other.124

Lonergan explains how the question of God changes focus
when this level is achieved. Since this state is the ful-
fillment of one's basic orientation to self-transcendence,

the actuality of the potential transforms the question of

8O
God's existence to the question of one's reSponse.125 Faith
no longer inquires about God's nature. Faith now asks the
question, how Shall I love?

Faith, in this dimension, is seeking a creative response
to this Incomprehensible Mystery. It moves beyond the known
in surrender to it. Faith, furthermore, recognizes that
people themselves, as mystery, Since God is our referral,126
are freedom events127 and that God "wills them be persons
not just his automata.”128 Faith, in acknowledging the
dignity of person, clearly illustrates that the law can
never capture the essence of the love relationship, for love
far transcends what is legislated. Faith emphasizes the
primacy of interiority.

This brief discussion in no way exhausts the three
aspects of love, mystery and faith that are core elements of
this dimension of living. It is only intended to give a
sense for the flow of life lived on this plane of conscious-
ness.

The person responding to life out of Lonergan's fifth
level of consciousness is in touch with authentic being.
Transcending love, self-appropriation, and fidelity to the
pull of being are attributes present in such an individual.

In his book, The Individual and His Religion, Gordon

 

Allport lists three criteria for a mature personality which

81
are agreeeable to this Lonerganian description.

Allport's first mark of maturity is the ability to
reach beyond self. As Lonergan's person exhibits transcen-
dent love, Allport's mature person must be concerned with
ideal values that transcend personal satisfaction.129 The
attributes of detachment, reflection, and insight are his
second mark of maturity.130 Allport states that it is the
ability of self-objectification. The awareness of self is
also an important aspect of Lonergan's self-appropriation
theory. Finally, the mature individual has a unifying
philosophy of life.131 There is present a "dominant integra-
tive pattern" that gives purpose and direction to his/her
life.132 Lonergan's person has Incomprehensible Mystery, a
presence that constantly invites. Allport's mature individual
is closely aligned to Lonergan's authentic person.

Each movement through these levels of consciousness is
a self-transcending process that represents the dynamic
intentionality driving toward authentic being. The move
from the empirical level to the understanding level is self-
transcending for it is "the movement from the immediacy of
sense data to the construction of a world view."133 The
step into the judgment level is self-transcending for we go
”beyond ourselves-and what we expect or hope to seek what is

true."134 The fourth level of consciousness is

82
self-transcending when "we seek not our own advantage but

objective value."135

The fifth level is self-transcending

for one is caught up in an other-worldly love, love of God.
The topic I now turn to is Lonergan's concept of horizon

for it further illuminates the levels of consciousness and

addresses the contribution which subjectivity plays in the

concrete application of the levels of consciousness.

Horizon

In his book, Insight, Lonergan discusses the concept
of horizon which individualizes human experience, insight,
and judgment.

Now what differentiates the perceptual flow in
one man from that of another, is found in the
pattern of interest and objectives, desires and
fears, that emphasize elements and aspects of
sensible presentations, enrich them with the
individual's associations and memories, and
project them into future courses of possible,
fruitful activity. In some such fashion, it
would seem, must be explained the differences in
the perceptions of men and women, of people in
different occupations, different climates,
different stages in human history.136

Horizon is the word that is given to this concept and
it denotes the boundaries of one's perspective. Horizon
is "a maximum field of vision."137 It is "the scope of our
knowledge and the range of our interests."138 In Th3

Achievement of Bernard Lonergan, Tracy also states that it

 

”possesses both an objective and subjective pole, each one

83

of which is conditioned by and conditions the other."139

The subjective pole refers to the individual at the
present moment.140 It is the incarnate subject who
"experiences, questions, understands, reflects, judges,
deliberates, decides, and sometimes falls in love.”141 This
horizon pole embodies the personal component present in all
actions. Discussing the contribution of feeling that can
only be associated with the personal "I” of the incarnate
subject, Lonergan notes that "where mind is experience,
understanding, and judgment; and heart is what's beyond this
on the level of feeling and, is this worthwhile?,--judgment
of value, decision. Without feelings this experience,
understanding, and judgment is paper-thin. The whole mass
and momentum of living is in feeling."142

The objective pole refers to the "worlds” of meaning
previously achieved by the individual. These ”worlds" of
meaning have already been established by moving through
the heuristic structure of consciousness.143 The "worlds"
of meaning that are the objective pole in the concept of
horizon are clarified by Lonergan's definition of objecti-'
vity. "There is the objectivity of the world of immediacy,
of the already-out-there-now, of the earth that is firm-set
only in the sense that at each moment it has happened to

resist my treading feet and bear my weight. But there also

84
is the objectivity of the world mediated by meaning; and
that objectivity is the fruit of authentic subjectivity, of
being attentive, intelligent, reasonable, responsible."144

Horizon, then, contains the personal ”I" that does the
experiencing, understanding, and judging in the immediate
now, but this present activity is set against the backdrop
of past experiencing, understanding, and judging that is
stretching forth toward authentic being.

There is a distinction made between a relative horizon
and a basic horizon. A relative horizon "is one's present
horizon relative to one's psychological (education),
sociological (society), and cultural (epoch) development."145
Each horizon will be expressed in accordance with the stage
of development in these areas. This view of horizon allows
questions to arise that address issues found within the
concerns of one's present stage in life.

What specifically constitutes the boundaries that limit
this personal field of vision? Horizon is influenced and
limited by one's interest, historical setting, social back-
ground, education, and personal development.146 A person in
the medical field in the fifteenth century would have
different questions than one involved in twentieth-century
technology. An individual who lives in poverty in Central

America would have different concerns than a middle-class

85

American. One who has never had the opportunity for formal
education would not be investigating the same issues as a
college professor. Horizon is the present world that is
wrapped up with one's own concerns and interests.147

A basic horizon, in contrast, is related to the founda-
tional thrust of person. Lonergan suggests Jean Piaget's
child psychology theory as an example of basic horizon
expansion. Piaget has four basic divisions: sensorimotor
period, pre-operational thought, concrete operations, and
formal operations.148

The beginning horizon is the child's world of immediacy,
the world of reflexive activity.149 The first shift in
horizon takes place when the child enters the world of
symbols and language.150 The child's cognitive development
then moves to the world that relies on specific and concrete
objects.151 Piaget's final division is entry into the

152 With each movement the boundaries

world of abstraction.
of the child's horizon are expanded dramatically, building
on the former stage but moving far beyond it.153

As stated before, one's basic horizon is related to
the unrestricted desire to know.154 This basic horizon
that embodies the drive to know that is present in one's

heuristic structure of consciousness accounts for the pull

of being which allows forward movement in one's thought.

86
This fundamental openness of being, one's basic orientation,
gives one access to the realm of religious love where the
question of God arises. Lonergan explains that God is
within each person's potential, a potential which can be
actualized by a cooperative choice. "The question of God
lies within a person's horizon.- The reach of person is not
his attainment but of his intending."155

Faithfulness to the heuristic structure of conscious-
ness, therefore, which gives births to new insights, will
broaden and enrich, correct and change one's horizon.156 The
employment of the transcendental precepts-~Be Attentive, Be
Intelligent, Be Reasonable, Be Responsible, Be In Love--will
allow one to move to a deeper and richer perspective on
life. The person encounters reality and comes to an insight.
He or she determines whether or not the newly achieved
insight is true. If it is true, then this new piece of
knowledge is integrated into the present horizon, either
correcting or expanding it. So being itself contains the
ability that allows movement from one horizon to another.

A further distinction in horizon is made between a
”horizontal and vertical exercise of freedom."157 The
horizontal shift takes place when the new insight results
in decisions that "occur within an established horizon."158

For example, one is searching for a proper response to God.

87

One experiences a sense of responsibility in life for others.
The insight comes that formal education would enable one to
reach others more effectively. The insight is examined and
verified and the decision is made to go to school. One's
vision has broadened. This is an example of a horizontal
shift taking place within an established horizon. The
theme that one is working with, how to respond to life, is
expanded by the educational process.

A vertical shift in horizon occurs when the new insight
moves one from one horizon to another, transforming the old

horizon.159

This is a far deeper and more enriching move
which springs forth from the old horizon, but moves beyond
it. A vertical shift in horizon that ‘notably deepens and
enriches, and therefore qualifies as a new horizon, would be
evident in a dramatic shift in attitude that affected one's
lifestyle. For example, the individual reaches the conclu-
sion that one should not be "bogged down" by one's sinful-
ness, but rather should be caught up in God's love. The
insight comes in that with the former mindset the picture is
totally out of focus. The spotlight is on the negative
rather than the positive. The freeing insight allows one to
step out and risk, for God's unconditional love is always

there to catch one, even if one fails.

However, this vertical Shift can also be an about face

88
that completely corrects the previous horizon.160 The
insight completely changes the direction one's life is taking.
The realization comes that one's way of living is out of
touch with authentic being and so one takes up a responsible
way of living. The person has made an one hundred and eighty
degree turn. The person experiences a conversion and is
open to the world of interiority.161 A radical shift in
horizon has taken place.

Horizon, therefore, is the fullest range or widest
possible limit of our perception, interest, appreciation,
knowledge and experience. Background and history, past
experiences and achievements, all serve to influence and
limit just how far and how much one can see. Horizons act
like a filter through which all reality is processed. No
one can see what is beyond their horizon but the very
structure of person calls one to ever deepening insights
and insofar as one remains open to authentic being the
questioning process continues. Horizon movement is possible,
then, when one obeys the transcendental precepts.

The statement was made that a radical shift in horizon
is a conversion. Conversion in Lonergan's thought is
triadic. The final section of this chapter will identify
the conversion process and explain how it is related to the

four levels of consciousness.

89

Conversion

 

Conversion effects a restructuring, a reshaping, a
redesigning of one's life. A new creation is brought about.
The converted person "apprehends differently, values
differently, relates differently because he is different."162

Lonergan sums up the effects of conversion in the life
of the individual:

Conversion, as lived, affects all of man's

conscious and intentional operations. It directs

his gaze, pervades his imagination, releases the

symbols that penetrate to the depth of his psyche.

It enriches his understanding, guides his judg-

ment, reinforces his decision...conversion is...a

transformation of the subject and his world.163

It is easy to see how horizon is intertwined with
conversion. A conversion is a vertical shift in horizon.
Conversion, however, is also closely aligned with the levels

of consciousness, for Lonergan distinguishes three different

conversions: intellectual, moral, and religious.164

Intellectual Conversion

 

An intellectual conversion is related to the cognitive
activities of experience, understanding, and judgment.
Lonergan defines the intellectual conversion as "a radical
clarification and, consequently, the elimination of an
exceedingly stubborn and misleading myth concerning reality,
objectivity, and human knowledge."165

The myth referred to above is that knowing is like

90

looking.166

The distinction between the world of immediacy
and the world mediated by meaning is overlooked.167 Know-
ledge is more than just looking. Knowing involves the
triadic structure of experience, understanding, and judgment.

Philip Mueller describes the intellectual conversion
that encompasses the first three transcendental precepts:

Cognitional self-transcendence is an openness to

truth, however inconvenient or uncomfortable it

may be. It is a resolute search for truth that

overcomes the obstacles that impede man's un—

restricted desire to know. It may require

abandoning personal bias, customary perspectives

and the wisdom of the age. It enjoins resolute

attentiveness to data, vigorous questioning and

clarifying insight, a painstaking marshalling

and judicious assessment of evidence. In grasp-

ing the virtually unconditioned6 cognitional

self-transcendence is assured.1 8

Intellectual conversion is exercising the three
transcendental precepts, and understanding how they relate
to one another. When one associates the real with the
affirmed, one has achieved cognitive self-transcendence.169
The person recognizes that he/She must reach beyond the
experience to grasp the real.

Intellectual conversion occurs, then, when one is in
touch with the self-transcendence that is proper to human
knowing. Intellectual conversion is "unimpeded movement
through the first three levels of human consciousness:

experience, understanding, and judgment."170 Lonergan drives

home the point: "It is to acquire the mastery in one's own

91
house that is to be had when one knows precisely what one is

doing when one is knowing."171

Moral Conversion

 

Just as intellectual conversion is a searching for
truth, moral conversion is a seeking of value. Lonergan
states that moral conversion "changes the criterion of one's
decisions and choices from satisfactions to values."172

Moral self-transcendence, then, is the pursuit of values
and goodness in preference to personal satisfaction.173 It
is the struggle to overcome self-centeredness and reach out
to others.174 It embodies the struggle for consistency
between knowing the truth and doing the truth.175

As such, moral conversion is faithfulness to the fourth
transcendental precept--Be Responsible. Bernard Lonergan
captures the essence of the moral conversion that calls for
decisive action when he writes:

We move to the existential moment when we discover

for ourselves...that it is up to each of us to

decide for himself what he is to make of himself.

Then is the time for the exercise of vertical

freedom and then moral conversion consists in

opting for the truly good, even for value against

satisfaction when value and satisfaction conflict.176

Moral conversion involves the capacity for geniune love
of one's neighbor.177 Denise Carmody refers to it as the

entryway into the realm of love: "As intellectual conversion

is a passport to the world of reason, of man's critical

92
spirit, so moral conversion is a passport to the world of
love, of man's response to goodness.”178
Moral conversion, in Lonergan's scheme, sublates
intellectual conversion and moves beyond it. It does not
interfere or destroy it but rather "includes and preserves
its proper features and properties, and carries them forward

to a fuller realization within a richer context."179

Religious Conversion

 

Religious conversion is the apex of human living. It
is the fullest realization of human existence toward which
the unrestricted desire to know has been stretching. Being
now becomes "being-in-love" in an unrestricted manner.180
Lonergan states that "religious conversion is being grasped
by ultimate concern. It is other-worldly falling in love.
It is total and permanent self-surrender without conditions,
qualifications, reservations....For Christians it is God's
love flooding our hearts...."181

This love transcends human love for it is "God's love
flooding our hearts" and as such is pure gift.182 As
infinite love, it is unconditional and other-worldly. AS

other-worldly it opens one up to the mystery.183

Mystery
cannot be understood and so the self-transcending process

at this level calls for complete and total surrender in love

to this touch of the Incomprehensible God.

93
Furthermore, this experience of God manifests itself
in a transformation of one's world. It is a new beginning in
which "one's world undergoes a new organization.”184 The
person is now caught up in "transcendental values, awe,

and love."185

This unlimited self-surrender is loving with
”all one's heart and all one's soul and all one's mind and
all one's strength."186

This lack of restriction, this total commitment of one's
being to this love condition is holiness.187 Lonergan
states that it has a distinct dimension of its own: "It is
other-worldly fulfilment, joy, peace, bliss."188 This
dynamic state of love "reflects the inexhaustible depth of
human subjectivity."189

When reading Lonergan's description of the religiously-
converted person, what comes to mind is Abraham Maslow's
self-actualizing individual and his concept of peak experi-
ence. AS a humanistic psychologist, Maslow emphasizes the
positive side of human nature, the fully-functioning,
healthy-minded individual. The key to his self-actualization
theory is motivation. The drive to self-actuate, to utilize
to the fullest one's potential, is the motivating force
behind person.

Open to the self-actualizing perSon is the capacity for

peak experiences. A peak experience is a transcending of

94
self and a transformation of one's understanding.190 Purpose
and meaningfulness, which are dominant themes in one's life,

191

call forth a strong feeling of responsibility. Maslow

points out that "peakers" are more loving, accepting,

compassionate, and open.192

He states they discover a sense
of "wonder, awe, reverence, humility, surrender and even
worship before the greatness of the experience."193 A sense
of mystery is present.

One final characteristic of the peak experience worth
noting is that it is experienced as being "much more passive
and receptive than active,"194 which is agreeable to Lonergan's
position of ”God's love flooding our hearts."195 Maslow's
"peaker" is strikingly close to Lonergan's religious
person.196

In Lonergan's scheme, as moral conversion carried
intellectual conversion forward into a richer and fuller
context, religious conversion moves beyond moral conversion
into the ultimate realm of authentic subjectivity.197

Questions for intelligence, for reflection, for

deliberation reveal the eros of the human spirit,

its capacity and its desire for self-transcendence.

But that capacity meets fulfilment, that desire

turns to joy, when religious conversion transforms

the existential subject into a subject in love, a

subject held, grasped, possessed, owned through a

total and so an other-worldly love.l

Lonergan's post-Method writing suggest that religious

conversion occurs on a fifth level of consciousness.199 As

95

intellectual conversion opted for truth, and moral conver-
sion opted for value, the decision here is "whether or not
to love God with all one's heart and soul and mind.”200
James Robertson Price, in his article, "Conversion and the
Doctrine of Grace in Bernard Lonergan and John Climacus,"
sums up beautifully the demand of being in love in an
unrestricted fashion:

The fully converted person will be in a dynamic

state of otherworldly love and oriented to

transcendent mystery. He will have transcended

arbitrariness, intellectual sloth and self

centeredness. He will therefore not only be

dedicated to truth and goodness, but possess

the authentic subgectivity that will enable him

to discern them.2 1

There is one more aspect of the conversion concept that
needs to be addressed. Lonergan presents the three
conversions, intellectual, moral, and religious, precisely
in that order. However, this is the order of exposition,
not necessarily the Order of occurrence.202 Lonergan States
that the religious conversion is the "efficacious ground"
of all self-transcendence whether that transcendence is the
pursuit of truth as in intellectual conversion, or the
realization of human values as in moral conversion.203 He
explains this position by claiming that "though religious
conversion sublates moral, and moral conversion sublates

intellectual, one is not to infer that intellectual comes

first and then moral and finally religious. On the

96

contrary...one would say that first there is God's gift of
his love."204

One does not arrive at this ultimate state of being
without God's help. Operating at the fourth level of
consciousness, the person does have a responsibility, but it
is one of openness and response to the love. Religious
conversion is viewed as "both completing and grounding man's
dynamic tendency to self-transcendence."205 Lonergan explains
this dual role in this way:

Openness as achievement is the self in its self-

appropriation and self-realization. Openness as

gift is the self entering into personal relation-

ship with God....Openness as fact is for openness

as gift; and openness as achievement rises from

the fact and conditions and, at the same time, is

conditioned by the gift.206

Conversion, then, is a three-fold process that is
grounded in the inner drive for self-transcendence. One
might say that God created us and then stacked the deck in
our favor. He/She placed within persons this desire to
reach out to him/her as the only satisfying fulfillment of
being. Conversion, therefore, is fundamental to living
religiously. The ultimate call is a radical transformation
of one's life. In this self-transcendent state, one's
relationship to oneself is changed, one's relationship to

others takes on new meaning, and one's relationship to God

comes from an extreme depth dimension that calls for total

97
loving surrender to Incomprehensible Mystery. And all this

is possible ”for first there is God's gift of his love."207

Conclusion

 

I return to the questions posed at the beginning of
this chapter. What is fundamental to authentic subjectivity?
What is it that impels_ one toward value? What does it mean
to be human?

What is fundamental to authentic subjectivity? Acknow-
ledgement of the presence of God within human consciousness
and an awareness of self that stretches to respond to that
presence is what is fundamental to being fully human.

What is it that impels one toward value? Faithfulness
to the innate drive for self-transcendence impels, a person
toward value-~faithfulness in attending to data, in being
critical in understanding, in being rational in judgment,
and being responsible in decisions.208 Responding to one's
own interiority, responding to the transcendental precepts--
Be Attentive, Be Intelligent, Be Reasonable, Be Responsible,
Be In Love—-calls the person forth to live at ever deepening
depths of value.

What does it mean to be human? Being in love in an
unrestricted fashion is to be fully human. It is the apex

of the human drive for self-transcendence. It is pure gift.

98

Lonergan summarizes this ultimate state that captures the

fully human person in remarks on the nature of being-in-

love:

That love is...a radical being-in-love, a first
principle of all one's thoughts and words and
deeds and omissions...a being-in-love that is
without conditions or qualifications or reserves,
and so it is other-worldly, a being-in-love that
occurs within this world but heads beyond it, for
no finite object or person can be the object of
unqualified, unconditional loving. Such uncondi-
tional being-in-love actuates to the full the
dynamic potential of the human spirit with its
unrestricted reach and, as a full actuation, it
is fulfilment....This complete being-in-love, the
gift of God's grace, is the reason of the heart
that reason does not know.209

99

  

.m:0fiumhomo omozu mcflEAOWHom

puomnsm exp mm wfiom mezo can moNHcmouoh omHm use mofipfi>fluom uaEmcxb omonp :MDOHzp mo>oE

Saddl#bfilmmwm£5m mcfiwcoucfl och .mcfion mo mmocmsofluwcou chofipcopcfi ogu mucomosaop mash

 

mo>oq\mHIMMIl mofinflmcoamom om mofinwcommom om mucoMAHHoucH om mo>flpaouu< om

me\ amps //// mega usonm AsmCOMZ mwcmoe ufl Aco>flm

. ow ow H \uzmfla moon pmzzv 3mg
E so oozes 8H med odds
COMmflquAmllllpcoEmwSWAMIllIunaccmpmhowcsmmlllimonoflhoaxm

\\HWWL% \\\\ :ofim»o>:ou
\

\\\\\\\ \\\ HaoooofifioocH

  

 

wmmszOHumzou no mmDHUDmHm UHHmHmam: mzz<wmm204

Human life is holy, holier even than the scrolls
of the torah....Reverence for God is shown in our
reverence for man. The fear you must feel of
offending or hurting a human being must be as
ultimate as your fear of God. An act of violence
is an act of desecration. To be arrogant toward
man is to be blasphemous toward God.

Abraham Heschell
Wisdom of Heschel

 

CHAPTER THREE

APPLICATION OF LONERGAN'S THEORY OF INTERIORITY TO
KIERKEGAARD'S STAGES OF EXISTENCE

With the background of the previous two chapters, it is’
now possible to move into the specific goal of my disserta-
tion. This chapter, therefore, will be the actual application
of Lonergan's heuristic structure of conSciousness to
Kierkegaard's stages of the maturing process. I suggest
that applying Lonergan's notion of person as s/he moves
through conversion toward fulfillment, one has an internal
explanation of how the person is able to move progressively
from one level of existence to another in Kierkegaard's
construct.

This actual application will consist of a two-fold
movement. I will begin by describing Kierkegaard's first
stage, the aesthetic. To illuminate the transition from the
aesthetic to the ethical existence, I will apply Lonergan's
heuristic structure of consciousness. The field of
psychology will be utilized to demonstrate a plausible
horizon shift for the aesthetic-in-transition. When the

process is accomplished, the first movement, aesthetic to

100

101
ethical, is completed.

The characteristics and traits of the ethical individual
stretching toward the religious sphere will then be examined.
Again, with application of Lonergan's theOry of interiority,
an explanation is suggested that details the move from the
moral to the religious stage in Kierkegaard's thought. With
completion of the two-fold movement, which utilizes Lonergan's
theory, one has come to the final and highest sphere of
existence, the religious way of life.

With the attainment of the ultimate stage of existence,
Lonergan's theory of interiority as an appropriate explana-
tion of the movement one experiences as s/he proceeds through

the maturing process has been demonstrated.

Kierkegaard's Aesthetic/Ethical Individual

 

As stated before,1 according to their traits and
characteristics, Kierkegaard divides peOple into three
different categories, namely, the aesthetic, the ethical,
and the religious. The aesthetic level, the first of three
stages in Kierkegaard's process of conversion, is the person
who lives in the immediate now.2 One who exists at this
level is basically characterized as totally self-indulgent.
Satisfaction of the sensual is the overriding drive. The

present pleasurable moment is all there is to life.

102
Kierkegaard explains:

The more the personality disappears in the twi-

light of mood, so much the more is the individual

in the moment, and this again, is the most ade-

quate expression for the aesthetic existence: it

is in the moment.3

There is no time taken for reflection. Life has no
pattern or purpose, therefore, no continuity is evident.
There is only the glutting of present desires. Existence is
the all-encompassing instant of sensual gratification. This
is existence in the present to such an extent that no
consideration whatsoever is given the past or future. The
present moment becomes the be-all, end-all in life.

As previously stated, Don Juan is Kierkegaard's embodi-
ment of this lifestyle. Describing Don Juan, Kierkegaard
writes: "To be a seducer requires a certain amount of
reflection and consciousness...this is lacking. Therefore,
he does not seduce, he desires....He desires, and is con-
stantly desiring and constantly enjoys the satisfaction of
the desire."4

The aesthetic individual living in the present acts
with total abandon in his/her driving pursuit to satisfy the
now-demanding mood. The lifestyle is characterized by
irresponsibility and lack of commitment. This is evidenced

in the absence of ethical considerations. Such standards

would be far too limiting to the sense-oriented aesthetic.

103

The goal, then, of the aesthetic is enjoyment of life
without restriction, without hindrance, without limits. This
enjoyment, furthermore, is always grounded in the external,
in something outside of self.5 AS such it is related to
the temporal order rather than the eternal. Kierkegaard
maintains, then, this level of existence is not authentic
human existence.

Because it is not truly human existence, the aesthetic
person begins to experience frustration and despair. This
lifestyle cannot possibly satisfy the person for it
addresses only the temporal need of the individual to the
exclusion of the eternal. The human being is a synthesis of
body and soul and is called to a dialectical existence.6
When the aesthetic constantly addresses the temporal element,
the eternal is left wanting. This inbalance surfaces as
boredom. The call to authentic living beckons. Kierkegaard
labels this nudge to authenticity as "spirit dreaming in
man."7

Regis Jolivet captures beautifully the condition of the
aesthetic:

By dint of wishing to make reality intensive the

aesthetician ends by being gorged and, so to

Speak, stifled with it....Thus boredom overwhelms

...disgust gnaws at the pleasure-seeker. Enjoy-

ment has a taste of death. Every aesthetician

eventually longs for death.8

The pleasure-seeker has arrived at the catalyst of

104
change: boredom, despair, disgust. Dread settles upon the

person.9

Movement to the ethical stage is now possible.
Choice is placed before the aesthetic. S/he can remain in
the present staling existence and plunge deeper into pleasure
in the attempt to rid self of boredom and despair; or one

can choose self in despair, in Kierkegaard's thought, and

step into the unknown of the ethical realm.

First Movement - Lonergan: Aesthetic to Ethical

 

Lonergan's theory of interiority will illuminate in
greater depth what is taking place within the aesthetic. As
stated before,10 his theory of conversion consists of four
levels of consciousness which gives one access to a yet more
fulfilling fifth level.11

One begins with the empirical level, the given. This
is the level of presentation. " one: moves to reflect on
this raw material and then attempts to draw meaning from
the experience. Understanding the experience brings about
insight. This second level of consciousness is called the
intellectual level. Once the insight has been reached,
authentic subjectivity moves to verify the truth of the
formulated insight. This judgment activity leads into the
t.12

responsible level where one acts on one's verified insigh

The fifth level, as articulated in Lonergan's later writings,

105
is the love realm.13
This heuristic structure of consciousness embodies the
drive to self-transcendence. It is the enabling factor for
the movement from the aesthetic to the moral sphere of
existence.14 Authentic subjectivity is faithfulness to this

open-ended dynamic process.

Empirical Level

 

As stated above, the first level in Lonergan's construct
is the empirical.15 The transcendental precept is: Be
Attentive! Awareness of what one encounters is the task of
consciousness. Lonergan writes: "There is the empirical
level on which we sense, perceive, imagine, feel, speak,

"16 As in the aesthetic existence this level is simply

move.
being immersed in sensibilities. For this reason I suggest
there is an affinity between Kierkegaard's aesthetic
existence and Lonergan's first level of consciousness. I
suggest Kierkegaard's aesthetic individual has not moved
beyond the very first stage of consciousness.

The empirical level "supplies the raw materials on which
intelligence operates."17 The task of this level of con-
sciousness is to take careful note of what one encounters.
Awareness is the priority at this level.

In Kierkegaard's scheme, the careful attention is given

to the experience of boredom and despair. Boredom in this

106
case is due to a dull and tiresome lifestyle. The excite-
ment and fervor has vanished and one is left with a weari-
some, tedious existence. Devoid of interest, the person
merely exists. This is the point to which Kierkegaard's
aesthetic person has arrived: ongoing monotonous existence

that leaves the person wanting.

Intellectual Level

 

The next transcendental precept which demonstrates
subjectivity seeking authenticity is: Be Intelligent!18
Lonergan writes:

From such experiencing there emerges the effort

to understand, to unify and to relate intelli-

gently the data of experience; and as this effort

succeeds, insights accumulate to complement and

correct one another and, eventually, to constitute

a grasp, a habitual understanding, of this world

and of the human condition.19

This level is characterized by the drive to understand,
to make sense of one's experience. The individual, therefore,
takes the experience and Sifts through it. One studies. and
questions the basic raw material passed on from the empirical
level. This reflection produces an understanding of the
situation. This insight, which is the key element to the
intellectual level of consciousness, is then formulated into
a coherent expression.20

Translating Lonergan's theory to Kierkegaard's

structure, one works with the material passed on from the

107
empirical level. The experience of boredom and despair are
thoroughly examined. The condition is reflected upon,
questioned, Sifted through. The thought processes at the
second level of conSciousness begins.

I suggest the following as a possible reflective
thought pattern for the aesthetic in transition to the
ethical way of life. The aesthetic begins with the experi-
ence. "I am bored and weary. Why is this? Why is this?

I have all my desires gratified. I see to it that all my
moments are pleasure-filled. I have no responsibilities or
commitments. Yet I am left wanting. My life is not
satisfying. I am bored stiff with myself.”

The questioning process continues. "Is there more to
life than instant gratification? Life lived in eternal
boredom is unbearable. Is there no way to reach some kind
of significance-in-living? Am I over-involved with the
here-and—now aspect of my life? Is it poSsible meaning can
be found in a different lifestyle? Could there be some value
in taking on responsible and commitment? Is there a deeper
dimension to life that I am not in touch with when I am
totally involved in sensual desires? This present existence
is unending tedium. It cannot go on, but is change possible?"

This questioning reflective process that initiates the

second level of consciousness most reveals the dynamism of

108
of intelligent activity.21 The pull of the transcendent is
revealed in this unrestricted desire to know. Lonergan

points out in Third Collection that this "passionateness of

 

being” not only underpins all consciousness but is the "mass
and momentum" that gives substance to our lives.22 In this
reflective activity the aesthetic is simply being faithful
to authentic subjectivity.

The questioning reflection carried on by the aesthetic
individual moving to the moral level brings about a partial
insight. Eternal monotony is not bearable. The present
situation is deadening to person. Insight reveals that the
situation must be altered. A change in direction is
indicated. One can either chance moving forward to responsi-
bility and commitment, stepping into the unknown, or one can
remain in boredom and despair seeking deeper the pleasure-
filled life.

In the progressive forward movement, the "eros of the
human spirit"23 stretches forth toward self-transcendence.
The aesthetic understands what it means to be responsible
and committed, understands what the moral lifestyle entails.
In Kierkegaard's words, the aesthetic chOOSes to be truly

more himself/herself.24

109

Rational Level

 

However, in Lonergan's theory of interiority, intelli-
gent activity requires still more. The individual engages a
third level of consciousness before attaining the ethical
existence. Be Reasonable is the command of the transcendental
precept on this level.25 It centers on judgment. Lonergan
describes the activity on this level:

But if we can understand, we can also misunder-

stand; so on experiencing the understanding there

emerges a third level of operations, on which we

doubt, reflect, marshal and weigh the evidence,

and finally judge with certitude or probability

that this or that is or is not so.26

Denise Carmody states that this level bridges the gap
between what may be and what is.27 The insight that the
hedonistic manner of living carries destruction for the
human person and that possibly a different lifestyle can
render life meaningful once more, has to be verified. The
check and balance system enters the picture. The task of
verifying begins and continues until the person feels "at
home” with his/her decision.28 Philip Mueller captures the
activity that grounds the questioning process that culminates
in judgment:

There is an openness to truth, however inconvenient

or uncomfortable it may be. It is a resolute

search for truth that overcomes the obstacles that

impede man's unrestricted desire to know. It may

require abandoning personal bias, customary per-

spectives and the wisdom of the age. It enjoins
resolute attentiveness to data, vigorous questioning

110

and clarifying insight, a painstaking marshalling
and judicious assessment of evidence.29

Continuing with Kierkegaard's construct, the aesthetic-
in-transition tentatively acknowledges values and standards.
Cautiously, commitment and responsibility are recognized as
a meaningful part of his/her life. To use Kierkegaard's
terminology, the Eternal in life now takes center stage.30

This acknowledged meaningful existence is then compared
to the previous hedonistic lifestyle. The two experiences
are placed side by Side.31 The question is posed: In which
existence is the most satisfaction and fulfillment found?
The judgment is formed. The aesthetical way of life is
viewed as destructive to the human person whereas acceptance
of the ethical way of life brings fulfillment. The trial
period of the lived ethical experience of the aesthetic-in-
transition proves the insight to be true.

The primary partial insight, that the aesthetic life-
style is no longer a satisfying mode of living, is verified
and also expanded.32 Not only is the aesthetic lifestyle
an unacceptable way of existing, but the aesthetic-in-
transition discovers that the ethical existence does embody
meaningfulness for him/her at this time.

In Lonergan's theory these two pieces of information,
i.e. that the aesthetic lifestyle is destructive to the

human being and that the ethical stance gives meaning to

lll
life, will now be entered into the person's consciousness to
be used for future decision-making.33 With Kierkegaard's
individual this would mean that whenever the aesthetic—in-
transition faces future Situations in which s/he must choose
between the hedonistic or ethical way of life, the insight
that the former deals destruction while the latter gives
meaning, will enter into the judgment at that time. And this
decision, too, will then be added to the person's storehouse
of knowledge to be brought forward when next faced with a
choice.34 With each insight, a new piece of knowledge, we
process reality from a broader perspective. And so it goes,
insight building on insight, constantly broadening or

correcting one's frame of reference.

Horizon

This frame of reference or horizon35 further illuminates
the maturing process that moves the individual to the ethical
way of life. Horizon is ”a maximum field of vision" that is
circumscribed by one's interest and knowledge.36 It is the
personal component in all actions. It is the filter through
which all decisions must pass.

The person moving through these thought processes is a
particular person with a particular background related to
his/her psychological, sociological, and cultural develop-

ment.37 In Lonergan's terms a particular someone is

112
experiencing, making an inquiry, coming to an understanding,
formulating a proposition, questioning whether it is so,
collecting the evidence, and making a judgment.38 Into this
movement the aesthetic brings a certain background and
history, past experiences and achievements, which limit and
influence just how far and how much s/he can perceive.

To concretize this category I will explore the
aesthetic's frame of reference and suggest plausible causes
for this horizon. Next I will describe an experience for
the aesthetic which expands his/her horizon and allows the
movement to the ethical realm.

As stated earlier, the aesthetic lives in the present,
pleasurable moment. This type of horizon could have been
formed at an early age in the home. No emphasis is placed
on commitment, responsibility, or consideration for others.
The religious factor which stresses values and standards is
not present. The parents themselves model a selfish, self—
centered attitude toward life. The home environment teaches
that others are only there to be used for the furthering of
one's own concerns and interests.

The educational opportunities could have been very poor.
Financial circumstances dictate employment at an early age.
Peer pressure places emphasis and meaning on money and

material things. The educational process is ridiculed and no

113
credence is given to it. The aesthetic, consequently, is
not adequately exposed to a different philosophy of life.

This "me-first" attitude could have further been
reinforced by the society in which the aesthetic lived.
Concern for self above all else, cleverly hidden, advances
him/her in the job market. Stepping on and over his/her
working companions, the aesthetic reaches a better position.
The entire sphere in which the aesthetic exists is permeated
with a selfish atmosphere.

The aesthetic's own experience has verified his/her
restricted view of reality. Looking out for number one has
had its rewards. The aesthetic's frame of reference is
formed. This background, this experience, then, is the
horizon out of which the aesthetic operates. Only a Shift
in this horizon, a change in one's view of reality, can
bring about the attainment of the ethical way of life.

I suggest one such shift in horizon could be triggered
by the experience of committed friendship. Bored and dis-
gusted with one's hedonistic existence, the aesthetic-in-
transition timidly steps into the world of ”otherness” to
see if fulfillment is present there.

I turn to the field of psychology for an illustration
on the development of friendship, offering three components.

to explain the deve10pment of a committed friendship:

114
attitudinal positivity, behavioral involvement, and joint
belongingness.39

The initial stage of any relationship must begin with
an encounter. When this interaction results in a positive
attitude, the cultivation of the potential relationship
begins.40 In this building phase even negative experiences
will be weathered that serve to deepen the bond between the
two individuals.41 Compatibility and eSpecially reciprocity
are the cementing blocks as the friendship moves toward
intimacy.42 As more of one's time is invested, the bond
between the two grows ever deeper. A relationship with
commitment and responsibility is forged.

Moving into Kierkegaard's framework, the aesthetic-in-
transition, reaching out for deeper meaning in life,
encounters the other. A sharing of ideas, common interests,
similar backgrounds, surfaces a respect and liking for each
party involved. The aesthetic-in-transition sees possibili-
ties in this involvement. The positive attitude encourages
him/her to continue the interaction.

Cautiously the aesthetic-in-transition places importance
on this involvement and takes on responsibility for the
continuation of the friendship. The friend is in need of a
ride to the airport, the aesthetic puts selfishness aside

and responds to the need. When a financial crisis arises,

115
the aesthetic offers help. Such actions, the aesthetic-in-'
transition discovers, are mysteriously satisfying. And so
the building phase continues as the individual enters deeper
and deeper into the relationship.

The aesthetic-in-transition realizes friendship is not
a one-way street. When s/he needs someone with whom to
celebrate or help bear the burden of grief, the friend is
there willing to share the sorrow as well as the joy.
Sickness arises and support is found in the friendship. The
amount of time spent together increases and with it the
intimacy factor grows deeper. Never before having experienced
such a rewarding relationship, the aesthetic-in-transition
becomes committed to the friendship.

What values does the aesthetic encounter in this
relationship? This depth of committedness is characterized
by mutual self-disclosure and a deep appreciation for the
uniqueness of the other.43 An emotional attachment is
formed without using the person as a means to an end. A
mutual feeling of warm affection is present.44 There exists
a deep-felt sense of loyalty that embraces responsibility
to the other. Confrontation as well as affirmation is part
of what this fidelity entails.45 But the acceptance by the
friend is so total that no situation or words are any longer

threatening.46

116

The aesthetic-in-transition places faith and trust in
another person and is not disappointed.47 The positive
rewards of the involvement are numerous: self-affirmation,
stimulation, variety, excitement.48 This level of friendship
which calls for commitment and responsibility on the part
of the aesthetic-in-transition is experienced as a meaning-
ful and valid way of life. The pleasure of the moment is
gratefully exchanged for the enduring value of the committed
friendship.

In Lonergan's terms, the aesthetic-in-transition
experiences friendship on the empirical level. At the
intellectual level this commitment to and concern for other
is understood as positive and worthwhile. A judgment is made
at the rational level of consciousness that caring for
others is a more valid way of life than the self-centered
stance. The aesthetic's horizon is corrected, expanded and
enriched. A restructuring and redesigning is taking place
in the life of the aesthetic. The hOrizon of the aesthetic,
having experienced this deep relatedness to another, is one

step closer to the ethical realm.

Conversion to Realism

 

This shift in horizon is the first conversion which the
aesthetic undergoes. With progression through the first

three levels of consciousness, the empirical, the intellectual,

117

the rational, the aesthetic-in-transition has effected a

vertical exercise of freedom.49 One has moved to a new
horizon which involves an ”about-face.” Lonergan comments on
this vertical exercise of freedom: ”It comes out of the old

by repudiating characteristic features; it begins a new
sequence that can keep revealing ever greater depth and
breadth and wealth. Such an about-face and new beginning is

"50 The aesthetic-in-transition

what is meant by a conversion.
realizes the previous hedonistic lifestyle is wanting and
so s/he begins to focus on the new vision--ethical living.
Engaging these first three levels of consciousness moves
one beyond the world of immediaCy to the world mediated by
meaning.51 In doing this the aesthetic emerges as an
intellectually honest person. The aesthetic individual may
not explicitly realize how knowing works, but nevertheless,
has the practical knowledge of how to think with objecti-
vity.52
Moving back to Kierkegaard's scheme, the aesthetic
individual, therefore, has engaged the three transcendental
precepts: Be Attentive, Be Intelligent, Be Reasonable.
S/he has arrived at a new view of reality. The converted
aesthetic "apprehends differently, values differently,

relates differently."53 A Shift in horizon has taken place.

The notion that the aesthetic way of life is acceptable

118
behavior for a human being is discarded. Faithful to the
heuristic structure of consciousness, the expanded horizon
now holds the truth that it is the ethical existence which

gives meaning and fulfillment to life.

Responsible Level

 

To this point, in Lonergan's construct, the aesthetic
still remains the aesthetic-in-transition. To know the
truth is one step short of the ethical existence. For
Lonergan, one must not only kggw the truth, one must d9 the
truth.54

The decisive step into the existential world of action
takes place on the fourth level of consciousness. The
unrestricted desire to know now commands: Be Responsible!55
The moral person ”deliberates about possible courses of
action, evaluates them, decides, and carries out the
decisions.”56 Lonergan's fourth level is that consciousness
out of which Kierkegaard's ethical person responds to life.

The aesthetic-turned-ethical incorporates values and
standards, commitment and responsibility into his/her existen-
tial Situations. The center of concern goes beyond personal
interests to concretely serve. The world of ”otherness" is
discovered, appropriated and participated in.

The ethical world includes the scenario of friendship

presented earlier. Now, however, the aesthetic-turned-ethical

119
is no longer just probing to possibly discover a new way of
existence. The verifying period is over. He/she moves into
the ethical sphere to give expression to the verified
judgment of the previous level of consciousness. Kierkegaard's
aesthetic-turned-ethical accepts the commitment and
responsibility that accompany friendship and concretely

incorporates them into his/her manner of living.

Moral Conversion

 

The ethical stance carried out on the fourth level of
consciousness, signified by one's move to action, is the
moral conversion stage in Lonergan's construct.57 Lonergan
states that moral conversion changes the criterion of one's
decision and choices, which lead to action, from satisfac-

tions to values.58

One is responding to life from the deeper
world of interiority which employ the transcendental
precepts.59 The aesthetic-turned-ethical replaces the
pleasure of the immediate now for the meaningfulness found
in the committed friendship which s/he discovered by being
faithful to being at the human level.

This moral conversion embodies the struggle for
consistency between knowing the truth, discovered in the

conversion_ to realism,and doing the truth.60 The aesthetic-

turned-ethical is still the aesthetic—turned-ethical. One

 

does not leave behind the previous existence but seeks to

120

continuously transform it.61

Lonergan's morally converted person operating on the
fourth level of consciousness is amenable to Kierkegaard's
ethical individual who has discovered meaning in accepting
responsibility and opening self to others.

With attainment of the ethical stance in life, I turn
now to Kierkegaard for a description of that ethical
individual who stretches forward toward the next religious

Sphere of existence.

Kierkegaard's Ethical/Religious Person

 

Kierkegaard's second sphere of existence out of which
people respond to life is the ethical.62 As the aesthetic
lifestyle was characterized by indulging the pure unadulter-
ated desires and wants whichvnnmadictated by the immediate
mood, the ethical lifestyle is characterized by choice,
responsibility, and duty.

As the aesthetic placed emphasis on the temporal, the
ethical individual places emphasis on the Eternal. In this
realm the locus of meaning resides, not in externals, but
in the self.63 Kierkegaard states that this choice of self
is revealed as duty due to its relationShip to the Eternal.64

How does choice of self result in a concept of duty?

It is by choosing that a person determines what is significant

121

for one's life. The ethical person, therefore, shapes and
molds his/her own type of character. "He makes himself a
definite individual," writes Kierkegaard.65 The ethicist
creates a chosen self.

Furthermore, s/he takes responsibility for this self.
The chosen self is the product of the ethicist's decisions
and actions. Kierkegaard comments on the attitude of the
ethicist that reflects such commitment: "The individual
becomes conscious of himself as this definite individual...
being conscious of himself in this way, he assumes
responsibility for all this."66 Being faithful to the chosen
self, then, is the task of this lifestyle.

In Kierkegaard's construct, the process of choosing
self surfaces an awareness that one is related to a universal
order. One stands in direct relationship to the Eternal.
Choice, then, must be made in all seriousness, for the chosen
self takes on importance due to this relationship. It is
this very relationship that gives meaning and continuity to
the existence of the aesthetic-turned-ethical. The task
of this relationship, then, the task of being faithful to
the chosen self, is seen as giving expression to the Eternal
in the temporal sphere.67 Faithfulness to the Eternal
transforms the task into duty.

Since duty is faithfulness to the chosen self, which

122
manifests the Eternal in the concrete, it is the epitome of
the ethical lifestyle. Furthermore, duty is not imposed
from without but is intrinsic to person. It arises from the
world of the authentic self, the world of interiority.68 AS
such it commands obedience from the ethicist.

For Kierkegaard, fidelity to duty, which is grounded in
an inwardness, is the only truth for the ethical individual.
The chosen duty, which expresses the self in relationship
to the eternal and arises from one's own inward truth,
expresses authenticity of person. Kierkegaard writes:

”Only the truth which edifies is the truth for you, that is,
the truth is inwardness...."69

I would offer the concept of friendship as an example
of expressing the Eternal in the temporal.70 A committed
relationship calls for a self-transcending stance toward
life. Deep friendship is not a fleeting moment in time but
a lifelong commitment to be for another regardless of the
difficulty involved. In Kierkegaard's dimension of the
ethical, choice plays an important role. Friendship also
involves choice; one person is definitely chosen over
another. The seriousness of the commitment is evidenced in
the giving over of one's time, energy, and material posses—
sions when required. Finally, commitment and responsibility

to another is not an imposed duty from without, but is

123
freely entered into for its own intrinsic value. Such a
relationship represents the spiritual in the material realm.
As the ethicist.lives out existentially his/her choices,‘
the claim of the Eternal deepens. A Sense of obligation
takes root in one's life. The ethical individual continuing
on this path becomes wholly committed to the Eternal, to the

71 The ethicist is

spiritual aspect of his/her being.
driven by the desire to relate to the Spiritual realm. To
accomplish this, Kierkegaard states, the temporal realm is
renounced.72

Since faithfulness to the chosen self, which manifests
the spiritual aspect of person, arises from the world of
interiority, the ethical individual is in touch with a
commanding truth that grasps and holds him/her.73 This
higher call to truth from within demands obedience and ful-
fillment. The Eternal truth is so compelling to the ethical
individual that specific temporal existence begins to have
less importance.

Continuing along this path, in one's driving pursuit
of the Eternal in one's life, the ethical stance begins to
have less and less meaning. This drive to relate whole-
heartedly to the Eternal is the beginning of despair, the

catalyst for movement to the next Sphere of existence in

Kierkegaard's scheme.

124

Why does the drive to relate wholeheartedly to the
Eternal trigger despair in the ethicist? The ethical
perspective recognizes the claim of the Eternal in the
temporal order. This claim surfaces as a duty to express
existentially the universal ethical maxim. This claim of
the spirit, this duty viewed as faithfulness to self, is the
absolute of the ethical existence.

The difficulty arises when the person perceives duty as
something that contradicts the ethical maxim. When that
inner truth of self, to which the person is now wholly
committed, stands in opposition to the universal maxim (i.e.
duty perceived from the ethical perspective), one has a
problem.74

The ethicist cannot remain in the ethical sphere of
existence and still be true to self. The individual recog-
nizes that one's whole way of relating to the world does not
represent truth for him/her. The ethical individual is
invited to step into the religious sphere of existence. The
ethicist is faced with choice. S/he can remain in the
ethical realm in despair because one's lifestyle is no
longer truth for him/her or one can step forward into
unchartered waters where one lives by the power of God alone.
In Kierkegaard's terminology, a leap of faith is required.

Ethical living, in Kierkegaard's construct, places

125

perfection in abiding by the law. Kierkegaard stresses that
relationship to God, not legalism, is the end goal in life.
Collins explains Kierkegaard's position and what the problem
is when legalism is the dominant theme: "...ethical
universality itself becomes the divine, and a man is for-
bidden to enter into any private and direct relation with
God."75 The foundation of existence for Kierkegaard is a
relationship to the Eternal that takes predominance over a
relationship to any abstract law found in the temporal order.

The ethicist in transition to the religious sphere of
existence, therefore, recognizes that the self-sufficient
mode of living is not appropriate, is not an adequate
response for the christian. Recognition of the limitedness
of the finite and surrender to the Incomprehensible God is

the call of the religious level.

Second Movement - Lonergan: Moral to Religious

 

When this deSpair emerges in the ethical individual,
the second movement from the ethical to the religious sphere
is possible. I again turn to Lonergan's heuristic structure
of consciousness to suggest the interior process which is
experienced by the ethical individual reaching forth to the
religious sphere.76

The ground of the religious existence is the love

126

relationship manifested by faith and trust. The depth of
the love relationship is demonstrated by how much one is
willing to trust, willing to step beyond ethical self-
sufficiency, willing to enter the mysterious unknown.
Kierkegaard's example of the person who successfully
accomplishes the transition from the ethical to the religious
sphere is Abraham, the true ”knight of faith."77

The story of Abraham is found in the Old Testament.
Abraham is told by God to take his only son, Isaac, through
whom he has been promised posterity, and offer him up as a
holocaust.78 I will remain with Kierkegaard's own example
of Abraham to apply Lonergan's structure of consciousness in

suggesting the process of interiority at work in Abraham.79

Empirical Level

 

Faithfulness to being at the human level demands that
Abraham be attentive to his experience. What is the experi-
ence of Abraham? Scripture tells us Abraham experienced a
call from God to sacrifice his beloved son, Isaac. The
future rested in Isaac for he was the son through whom God's
promises to Abraham would be fulfilled. Isaac was to be the
vehicle through which Abraham and his posterity would become

80 There existed a tension between love of

a great nation.
the son, the child of his old age, the convenanted son who

embodied all his hopes, and his love of the Mysterious and

127
Powerful God.

The love and protection of the promised son represents
the temporal realm in Kierkegaard's terminology and love of
God represents the Eternal realm. Abraham struggled with
this bitter conflict that touched so deeply his existential
existence. The alarming disharmony between what he knew as
right according to the ethical law (i.e. a father must love
his son), and what the Infinite was asking him to do (i.e.
sacrifice that son), was a quandary beyond description.

Abraham experienced deSpair in his dilemma.

Intellectual Level

 

The command in the next step of consciousness is: Be
Intelligent!81 The second level is initiated with Abraham's
reflection. The following is a suggested scenario of what
might have taken place on this level of consciousness.

The questioning process begins. ”Is God Infinite and
as such Incomprehensible? Am I finite and so must acknow-
ledge limitedness? Is it possible for the finite to under-
stand the Infinite? Would God be God if I could comprehend
his ways?"

Abraham seeks to understand the relationship. "Does
God have a right to ask such a sacrifice? Is he creator of
all? Did he not only give life to Isaac but also to me?

Is he Lord of my life or not? Do I not owe him obedience?"

128

Reflecting on past experiences, Abraham acknowledges
a God of love. ”Has God ever failed me before? Has he not
touched me with his love continuously throughout my life?
Have I not been exceedingly blessed?"

Abraham reaches for an understanding. "God is
Incomprehensible by the finite mind. The whole universe and
all in it belong to him. In the past, love has been his
trademark in my life.”

Abraham arrives at an insight. He determines that God
is indeed trustworthy. However, Abraham also recognizes
that God is beyond his comprehension.

Abraham the ethicist is reaching out for the religious
existence in Kierkegaard's framework. Abraham is acknowledg-
ing that the demand of the Eternal has greater priority in
his life than anything that exists in the temporal realm.82

Abraham does not understand, yet he accepts the call of
his God. He stretches forth in his effort to be true to
himself. He struggles to leave behind a rational way of
life, a self-justifying existence, and step into the existence

where one lives by the power of God alone.

Rational Level

 

The process of self-appropriation continues. Be
Reasonable-—the command of the third transcendental precept,

centers on judgment.83 In Lonergan's construct, in the

129
process of interiority, Abraham seeks to verify his decision
that God is indeed trustworthy yet mysterious. Again, I
suggest a plausible line of thought that could have been a
verifying process for Abraham.

Memory now steps forward to serve Abraham. He reflects
on other times in his life when he was asked by God to do
something that he did not understand. ”Didn't God ask me to
leave my homeland and family and set out for a land he would
Show me?84 Was I not walking away from comfort and security
into an unknown future? Did not God prove trustworthy and
lead me to a better land and life?"85

Abraham continues to recall his relationship with God.
"Were not Sarah and I too old to have a child? Did not God
promise uS one even though Sarah was beyond the child-bearing
years? Sarah even laughed for it was beyond our comprehen-
sion how such a thing could be accomplished.86 Yet do we not
have Isaac as proof of God's mysteriousness and faithfulness?”

Abraham's own life experiences verify the insight that
God is indeed trustworthy. By the reflective process,
Abraham moves from what may be, questioning the trustworthi-
ness of God, to what is, accepting the trustworthiness of
God.

Kierkegaard emphasizes that the decision is made in

fear and trembling.87 That Abraham has verified the insight

130
that God is trustworthy and beyond human understanding, in no
way alleviates the dilemma of the present crisis. He must
step beyond the ethical realm. This he has never done
before. His previous lifestyle was rooted in existential
faithfulness to the ethical way of life. This step beyond
not only denies all his foregoing existence, but also takes
from him his beloved son, Isaac. Such is the awesome

decision placed before him.

Conversion to Realism

 

Moving back into Lonergan's construct, Abraham's move-
ment through the interior realm of the first three levels of
consciousness results in a conversion to realism discussed

earlier.88

Abraham has arrived at a new view of reality.
He not only acknowledges the limitation of the ethical,
self-justifying position, but accepts mystery as part of
the more authentic way of life. He surrenders to the call
of the Eternal and submits his ethical realm to its higher
authority, the religious. In this decision he chooses to

risk, to step into the darkness, leaving behind the safety

and comfort of his prior way of existence.

Horizon
This shift in one's view of life, this decision to

leave the comfort of the law behind and step into the

l3l
religious sphere, is, in Lonergan's terms, a shift in horizon.

Abraham's horizon is influenced and limited to the
historical era in which he lived. His whole background, both
psychologically and sociologically, enters into his decision-
making process. Abraham is a particular person living in a
particular culture and having a particular relationship with
his God. All this comprises the horizon through which
Abraham processes reality.

What is Abraham's horizon, concretely? A brief look at
a suggested frame of reference is all that is possible.89
He lived roughly four thousand years ago. An ethical stance
of that time can be found in the book of Genesis. All-out
retaliation was accepted: "I will kill a man for wounding
me, a boy for bruising me."90 A further change develops
with Moses' "eye for an eye" position as it limits retalia-
tion to no mggg punishment than the crime or deed itself.
While the contemporary individual looks upon this position
as hard and unyielding, yet it was indeed a vast improvement
in horizon compared to the ethical stance of Abraham's day.

A twentieth century horizon might ask, how is it
possible Abraham could even think God would ask such a thing?
He was a man of his times. Historians have revealed that
the cultural era in which Abraham existed accepted the

practice of child sacrifices to the gods.91 This may not

132

have been part of Abraham's religion, but the peOple with
whom Abraham mingled did accept this as proper response to
the gods. Human sacrifice did exist in his cultural horizon
if not in his personal horizon.

Furthermore, the ancient Semitic world did not have
the conception of human dignity of person that a twentieth
century horizon entails. To them life meant survival and
survival depended on the social group. No one individual
was more important than the whole. Society was the higher
priority.92

This frame of reference, society over the individual,
would have a two-prong effect on Abraham. This horizon
could have allowed Abraham to sacrifice his only son, but
at the same time he would be gripped by "fear and trembling"
for it was through this very son that he was to become a

great nation.93

God saves a people and Abraham was called
upon to sacrifice the very vehicle through which Abraham's
people were to come into being.

Abraham's horizon also included a deep committed
relationship with his God. His name was changed from Abram
to Abraham and he was covenanted to his God forever.94 So
serious was this covenanted relationship that it was

signified by an outward Sign, circumcision. This covenanted

relationship, which was so important in Abraham's life,

133
would color deeply the filter through which he would process
reality.

This brief suggested sketch of Abraham's background
demonstrates the importance which the concept of horizon
plays in decision-making. Abraham's horizon directed his
interest, set his goals, contained his fears, limited his
vision.95 Operating out of this horizon, Abraham is willing
to sacrifice Isaac, his beloved son, the only off-spring of
Sarah his wife. He is willing to risk all, placing his
faith solely in the love of God. Abraham makes his leap of

Faith.96

Responsible Level

 

AS the first level of consciousness gives experience,
the second level gives understanding, and the third level
gives verification, the fourth level moves to implement the
verified decision in the concrete.97 The call to action,
then, is the next step in the process of authentic subjecti-
vity. Abraham sets into motion his chosen decision to obey
God, to be faithful to his inner self, to leave behind the
self-justifying ethical realm. Abraham moves from the
comfort and security of having the beloved son by which he
will become a great nation into the religious sphere where
he leaves all in the hands of God. Abraham begins the

preparation for the sacrifice of Isaac.

134

Moral Conversion

 

When Abraham sets out for the mountain with Isaac in
hand, in Lonergan's construct, the moral stage of conversion
is initiated. In conversion to realism, Abraham, by employ-
ing Lonergan's theory of interiority, has reached truth for
himself.98 Moral conversion is exercised when that insight
is put into action.

Moral conversion embodies the good deeds that existen-
tially demonstrate the good thoughts. Moral conversion,
which is the pursuit of values in preference to personal
satisfaction is exemplified in Abraham who seeks ultimate
value in God.99

It is immaterial that Abraham never actually sacrifices
Isaac. The Old Testament tells us that Abraham saddled his
donkey, set out on the journey, chopped the wood, bound
Isaac, placed him on the altar, and "seized the knife to
kill his son."100 Such action initiated Abraham's moral

conversion in Lonergan's thought.

Religious Conversion

 

The first movement, aesthetic to moral, culminated in
the fourth level of consciousness, the responsible level
which calls for action on the truth as perceived by the
individual. However, in the second movement, moral to the

religious,101 completion takes place on a fifth level of

135

consciousness.102

The transcendental precept at this level
is: Be In Love.103

Employment of the transcendental method in the first
movement brings one to the ethical realm and moral conver-
sion. Employment of the transcendental method in the second
movement gives one access to the fifth level of consciousness
and religious conversion. Lonergan explains that the former
"supplies the basic anthropological component,”104 the latter,
while supplying the human element also is empowered and
gifted to address the religious question, the love relation-
ship.

The love one has at this dimension is God's gift of
his/her own love to us.105 Lonergan writes:

It is God's gift. Like all being in love, as

distinct from particular acts of loving, it is

a first principle. So far from resulting from

our knowledge and choice, it dismantles and

abolishes the horizon within which our knowing

and choosing went on, and it sets up a new

horizon within which the love of God transvalues

our values and the eyes of that love transform

our knowing.

To address the divine in one's life is to be in touch
with one's deepest potential, with God understood as one's
highest goal.107 Lonergan is very direct on this issue:
"God's gift of his love to us is the crowning point of our

self-transcendence."108 This sphere of existence, the

religious realm, is the ”profoundest fulfillment of the human

136
spirit."109
Lonergan defines religious conversion as: "being
grasped by ultimate concern."110 It is an other—worldly
falling in love. To love "the one without a counterpart,
the reality of all realities,"111 is to love in an unrestricted,

absolutely limitless manner. This experience is an encounter

of the holy, the mysterium tremendum et fascinans of which

 

Rudoloph Otto writes.112

This gifted love we experience is all-consuming. Total
capitulationtakes place. The religiously-converted person
surrenders self without conditions, qualifications, reserva-

113 The massive thrust toward self-transcendence now

tions.
leaps forth and falls trustingly into the absolute mystery
revealed as unconditional love.

This type of total surrender far surpasses human love
for it is ”God's own love flooding our hearts"114 and as such
pure gift. The religiously-converted individual's responsi-
bility is simply one of openness and response to this
unconditional love.115 The response and openness takes the
shape of absolute faith in the trustworthiness of God.

In ”Unity and Plurality: The Coherence of Christian
Truth" Lonergan explains the progressive movement that

reaches its completion in the religious conversion:

By intellectual conversion a person frees

137

himself from confusing the criteria for know-
ledge of the world of immediacy with criteria

for knowledge of the world mediated by meaning.

By moral conversion he becomes motivated primarily
not by satisfactions but by values. By religious
conversion he comes to love God with his whole
heart and his whole soul and all his mind and all
his strength...."116

Life lived in this religious realm is the apex of human
striving. It is the actualization of the potential present
in the unrestricted desire to know. Lonergan captures the
formidable power of this love when he writes:

Such transforming love has its occasions, its
conditions, its causes. But once it comes and

as long as it lasts, it takes over. One no

longer is one's own. Moreover, in the measure
that this transformation is effective, development
becomes not merely from below upwards but more
fundamentally from above downwards. There has
begun a life in which the heart has reasons which
reason does not know.117

Kierkegaard's description of the religious stage, with

Abraham as the example par excellence of that existence, is

 

consonant with Lonergan's fifth level of consciousness where
one is grasped by unconditional, incomprehensible love.
Returning to Kierkegaard's construct, his religious

individual emerges in a realm dominated by the Eternal.
Therefore, Abraham's horizon is "dismantled and abolished."
To live in direct relationship with God, Abraham must leave
the low-risk, self-justifying ethical realm behind and open
himself to God's ways. The finite must acknowledge its

limitedness. Kierkegaard describes the stance of the

138

religious existence: "It is the duty of human understanding
to understand that there are things which it cannot under-
stand and what those things are."118

Kierkegaard calls Abraham the "Knight of faith."119
This faith, grounded in love, is an other-worldly love. As
such it draws forth from Abraham unconditional love.
Kierkegaard explains: ”God it is who requires absolute

love."120

It was this overwhelming love that enabled him
to respond positively to God regardless of the cost to him-
self. Abraham is willing to sacrifice his covenanted son,
Isaac, for his Beloved requires it.

Abraham surrenders totally to the mystery he encounters.
Without conditions, qualifications, reservations, he takes
Isaac in hand and sets out for Mount Moriah.121 Responding
out of his faith-filled horizon, with fear and trembling,
for he is the aesthetic-turned-ethical-turned-religious,
Abraham makes his leap of faith, Abraham steps over into the
darkened abyss. Abraham, the religious individual, falls

into Incomprehensible Mystery revealed as Unconditional Love.

Abraham says yes to God.

Conclusion

 

By use of Lonergan's heuristic structure of conscious-

ness, I have suggested a theory of interiority that explains

139

the movement from the aesthetic to the moral to the
religious sphere of existence in Kierkegaard's thought.

Authentic subjectivity, remaining faithful to the
massive thrust toward self-transcendence, arrives at the
religious sphere dominated by love. This same love state,
which is ”the profoundest fulfillment of the human spirit,"122
is the very power which grounds the thrust to achieve it.
Not only are we gifted with existence, but faithfulness to
authentic existence returns us to the Giver. Such is the

magnificence of the ”reality of all realities,” God.

Some day, after we have mastered the winds, the
waves, the tides and gravity, we will harness
for God the energies of love and then for the
second time in the history of the world man

will have discovered fire.

Pierre Teilhard DeChardin
The Evolution of Chastity

CHAPTER FOUR

REFLECTIONS

In this fourth and concluding chapter, I will once
again identify the intention, process, and goal of this
dissertation. The fields of Philosophy, Theology, and
Psychology will be examined briefly in regard to human
fulfillment in light of this work.

With the overview completed, I will then examine areas
of complimentarity in Lonergan and Kierkegaard. However,
since I personally experienced a certain discomfort in work-
ing with a section of Kierkegaard's material, I will also
address the difficult issue of subjective truth.

The benefits and applications of the dissertation will
also be indicated. This section will include not only the
theoretical benefits but also the practical applications. A
further step in the utilization of the work will be
suggested.

The final aspect of this dissertation will be of a
personal note. I will address the issue that spoke strongest

to me in the writing of the paper.

140

141

Intention - Process - Goal

 

It was the intention of this dissertation to suggest
that Lonergan's theory of interiority is an explanation and
illumination of the process a person undergoes as s/he moves
through the stages of conversion in Kierkegaard's construct.

This was accomplished by first presenting in depth the
thought of Kierkegaard regarding his spheres of existence.
The second chapter presented Lonergan's heuristic structure
of consciousness and his stages of conversion. With this
groundwork laid, the third chapter was able to move into the
actual application of Lonergan's world of interiority to
Kierkegaard's stages of development. This concretized the
inward process a person undergoes in reaching the various
levels of conversion.

In the actual process, there are basically two move-
ments: aesthetic to moral, and moral to religious. In the
first movement, aesthetic to moral, by employing the first
four levels of consciousness, one is given a suggested
explanation of the psychological process a person undergoes
to reach the second stage in Kierkegaard's scheme, the
ethical level.

Upon reaching'the moral level, which operates on the
fourth level of consciousness, with openness and faith on

the part of the individual, actuation of the heuristic

142

structure of consciousness gives one access to a fifth level
of existence. This is the religious or love realm and as
it is grounded in God's love, one must acknowledge it is
also "gift."

With attainment of this fifth level or religious realm,
one has reached the apex of human striving. In light of
this dissertation, then, the ultimate reach of human fulfill-
ment is religious existence, as defined by Lonergan and

Kierkegaard.

Portrait - Healthy—Minded Religious Individual

 

How do the various disciplines of Philosophy, Theology,
and Psychology speak of this ultimate state of human
existence? What terminology do they use when addressing
this phenomenon?

Kierkegaard, the philosopher, Speaks of human fulfill-
ment as existence in an absolute trust grounded in a faith
that is manifested existentially. One must acknowledge the
limitation of the finite realm and accept the Infinite,
Mystery, as an integral part of life.

Abraham Heschel captures beautifully why Kierkegaard's
religious person answers ”yes" to the invitation of the
Transcendent:

The awareness of transcendent meaning comes with

143

a sense of the ineffable....Finite meaning is a

thought we comprehend; infinite meaning is a

thought that comprehends us; finite meaning we

absorb; infinite meaning we encounter. Finite

meaning has clarity; infinite meaning has depth.

Finite meaning we comprehend with analytical

reason; to infinite meaning we respond in awe.

Infinite meaning is uncomfortable, not compatible

with our categories....It is meaning wrapped in

mystery.1

The dignity of the individual demands that s/he respond
to this Mystery, God, out of the depths of his/her own being.
This decision of the "knight of faith” to step into the
realm of the Infinite is made possible, according to
Kierkegaard, for one is caught up in love and it is this
love that is the enabling factor.

This plunge into Mystery involves tremendous courage,
for the religious realm is the unknown, the darkened abyss.
One gives over control of one's life and waits in anxious
anticipation to be affirmed by the Mystery.

Lonergan, the theologian, speaks of human fulfillment
as faithfulness to the pull of authentic subjectivity.
Reflecting on our experience, intellectually and rationally,
and then taking responsibility for the verified insight,
opens one to the realm of religious love.

This love which is grounded in God's love, and there-
fore gift, is the presence and pull of the Transcendent in

our lives. The gift acts as a "homing device," and so, in

partnership, one is able to reach the fullest dimension of

144
personhood, the ultimate self-transcending stage, religious
love.

Heschel writes of a "noble nostalgia" for God within a
person. He Speaks of that phenomenon which Lonergan identi-
fies as the pull of the transcendent:

All thoughts and feelings about the tangible and

knowable would not exhaust the endless stirring

within us....What is the essence of our feeling

for God? May it not be defined as a yearning that

knows no satisfaction, as a yearning to meet that

which we do not even know how to long for?...

(person's) desire is not only to know more than

what ordinary reason has to offer, but to be more

than what he is; to transform the soul into a

vessel for the transcendent, to grasp with the

senses what is hidden from the mind, to express in

symbols what the tongue cannot speak and what reason

cannot conceive....2

Lonergan's religiously-converted person is one who is
touched and tugged by Unconditional Love revealed as
Incomprehensible Mystery to whom one desires to surrender
completely.

Maslow, the psychologist, speaks of the full potential
of person in terms of a hierarchy of needs and the self-
actualizing person. The self-actualizing person is one "who
is no longer motivated by the needs for safety, belongingness,
love, status, and self-reSpect because these needs have
already been satisfied."3 According to Maslow's theory,

these basic needs must first be addressed for only then can

the person be concerned with the issues of ”justice, order,

145
and beauty." The self-actualizer, therefore, is one who
having satisfied the lower needs in this hierarchy, can now
be concerned with ultimate matters.

This healthy-minded individual is characterized by an
open acceptance of self and others that permit deep inter—
personal relationships which exhibit a naturalness that
admits no artificiality, whatsoever. A fresh appreciation of
life over and over again opens the person to the state of
awe. S/he is in touch with a self-transcending stance toward
life.

When this self—actualizer experiences this state of
being on an intense level, Maslow states s/he undergoes a
peak experience. The "peaker" experiences a oneness with
the universe that is self-transcending in the deepest sense.
The experience is perceived as more a passive state that is
received rather than an active state created or reached by
one's own effort. The resulting emotions include wonder
and reverence, humility and surrender, even worship before
the greatness of the experience itself. The experience is
permeated with awe.

Again I turn to Heschel to describe the depth dimensions
of the state of awe:

Awe is an act of insight into a meaning greater

than ourselves....The beginning of awe is

wonder, and the beginning of wisdom is awe....
Awe is a way of being in rapport with the mystery

146

of all reality.4

The individual who undergoes a peak experience is one
who participates in a "unitive consciousness.” The universe
is one: the self-actualizing "peaker” is a part of it,
belongs to it. S/he becomes more a person, more her/his
real self.

What is the common denominator that is present in these
various disciplines when speaking of the ideal to which
person is called? All speak of a loving, undefinable. link
or mysterious communicative experience between the finite
and the Infinite, between the human being and God.

Kierkegaard will say it is a stance of existential
loving trust for "God it is who requires absolute love."5
Lonergan will say being becomes being-in-love who is grasped
and held by "ultimate concern and other-worldly love."6
Maslow will say it is that which ”gives meaningfulness to the
universe, a unity, a single philosophical explanation which
makes it all hang together."7 I suggest this brief examina-
tion highlights how all address the same reality, simply
using the terminology proper to their particular discipline.

This brief sketch points out the value of an interdis-
Iciplinary approach. Three different perspectives are offered
from which to get a handle on the reality that the finite

is invited to, and is open to, communion with the Infinite.

147

Harmony/Disharmony - Lonergan and Kierkegaard

 

In the working with the specific task of this disserta-
tion, the application of Lonergan's heuristic structure of
consciousness to Kierkegaard's stages of development, I took
note of particular areas of harmony. I was able to identify
with which level of consciousness in Lonergan's construct,
Kierkegaard's three different categories of people were most
amenable.

Kierkegaard's aesthetic individual is one who is
immersed in the sensual, one who bombards self with gratifi-
cation. No reflection whatsoever is credited to the
aesthetic lifestyle. S/he merely desires and experiences
living totally in the present moment. Lonergan's first level
of consciousness is the empirical where one simply encounters
life. One simply experiences the "given.” No reflection
on the experience takes place on the first level. Reflection
initiates the second level of consciousness. I suggest
Kierkegaard's aesthetic individual is one who simply has
not moved out of the first level of consciousness in
Lonergan's theory. The aesthetic's lack of reflection (or,
for that matter, the lack of reflection in anyone's life)
stifles growth and imprisons one on the first level of
consciousness.

Kierkegaard's ethical individual is one who has moved

148

beyond gratifications of self into the ethical world of choice,
responsibility, and duty perceived as one's vocation in life.
As such these values demand expression existentially in the
life of the ethicist. The individual who operates out of
Lonergan's fourth level of consciousness is one who places
values above satisfactions. S/he is one who concretely puts
into action the verified insight received from the previous
level of consciousness. I suggest, therefore, that Kierkegaard's
ethical individual is one who operates out of Lonergan's
fourth level of consciousness. However, the intentionality of
consciousness in Lonergan's construct invites person to move
still deeper into a fifth level. Kierkegaard's ethical position
also is not the ultimate stance one should take before life.

Kierkegaard's religious individual responds positively
to transcendent meaning. His religious person recognizes
the limitation of the temporal realm. S/he, therefore,
caught up in love of the Eternal, steps with trust into
Mystery. Lonergan's fifth level person is one who is
gifted with "god's love flooding the heart." One acknow-
ledges and surrenders to the Incomprehensible Mystery revealed
as Unconditional Love in one's life. The elements of
mystery, trust, love, and surrender manifest the presence of
the Transcendent. When speaking of Lonergan's heuristic

structure of consciousness, then, I strongly identify

149
Kierkegaard's religious individual as one who responds to
life out of the fifth level. Acknowledging that mystery and
surrender, trust and love, could, if accepted as integral
to life, help eliminate a great deal of frustration and
anxiety when addressing the brokeness, not only of our own
lives, but the brokeness in the world around us.

The disharmony I experienced existed in the area of
subjective truth. I personally felt uncomfortable with
Kierkegaard's position. This was evident in the care I took
to footnote the proper process I felt was necessary when
making decisions out of personal consciousness.

In all fairness to Kierkegaard, his horizon and concern
consisted of apathetic Christians who relied on justifica-
tion by the keeping of the law. For him, the Christian
message was a deeply personal one. It was one to which one
must respond paSsionately for only then did one do justice
to the message itself. He stressed that passion was what
gave life its meaning, was the real power in life. He wrote
that the age in which he lived was "wretched for it is with-
out passion."8 Passion was the inner power person had at
his/her disposal.

Kierkegaard was attempting to motivate Christians to
move beyond externals. He stressed personal responsibility.

He was trying to point out that the only proper response to

150

life was one which came from the depths of one's being.
Faith, for Kierkegaard, was the paradox that "inwardness is
higher than outwardness."9 The unique dignity of the
individual was manifested in the fact that one was called
into a direct relationship with God. This direct relation-
ship called for a direct response from the Christian. This
personal response to God was Kierkegaard's subjective truth.

Kierkegaard's individual stood alone before God. S/he
was a ”knight of faith" for one could not turn to others for
help because truth for him/her was not necessarily truth for
others. He writes: "The thing is to understand myself, to
see what God really wishes mg to do; the thing is to find a
truth which is true for me, to find the idea for which I can
live and die."10

Faithfulness to self in Kierkegaard's construct demanded
that the individual act on this inner truth. However, this
inner truth lacks a check and balance system. One needs
objectivity in seeking subjective truth and Kierkegaard's
position does not appear to include this element. Such a
stress on subjectivity, which, from his perspective, was
indeed needed to move people to respond to life from the
world of interiority, the only real world for authentic
living, led to a subjective truth without objective input.

Such a stress lacks a safeguard from self-delusion. I suggest

151

it reveals Kierkegaard as a prisoner of his own horizon.

This stands in stark contrast to Lonergan who also
stresses interiority. However, Lonergan balances his
subjectivity with objectivity. To reach meaning in life, one
must move through the levels of consciousness where
objectivity has its proper place. After experiencing, one
reflects on the experience and comes to an understanding.
The insight is then verified by the judgment level of con-
sciousness. The formulated insight, however, is not acted
on or ”approved" until one feels "at home" in the decision
which the insight calls forth. This "at home” feeling is
arrived at when one engages the third level of consciousness,
the judgment level.11 The individual exhausts all avenues
in search of data that is relevant. One takes a questioning
stance before the issue at hand. One seeks the advice of
experts and looks to one's own experience as well as the
experience of the community. The collected evidence is
weighed. This activity provides the check and balance
system necessary for a sound decision-making process.

Objectivity is given its proper place in Lonergan's
construct. It is not over-emphasized, but neither is it
under-emphasized. I suggest Lonergan's theory of interior-
ity may be a more balanced approach to reality than

Kierkegaard's theory of subjectivity.

152

Benefits and Applications of Dissertation

 

The most obvious asset of this work is that the
interdisciplinary approach allows a perspective on the
Christian ideal of human fulfillment from three different
frames of reference. Each discipline has a slightly
different emphasis, effecting a broadening of one's horizon.
The broader one's horizon, the better one is able to picture
the possibilities for developing self.

The emphasis and stress placed on the dignity of the
human person, due to the relationship with the Transcendent,
is a theme which when addressed personally, can lead to a
shift in personal focus. When one recognizes one is a co-
partner with the Transcendent, a "contemporary of God," one
accepts reSponsibility for the direction, not only of one's
own life, but also for stewardship of the world in which one
lives. One moves from an individualistic morality to a
social one. Issues that embody concern for others take on
deeper significance.

This ramification, i.e. that we must be concerned for
others, seems particularly apprOpriate for our contemporary
world. It serves as an excellent counterbalance, for
example, to a consumerist and hedonistic mentality often
singled out by commentators as pervasive in our American

Society.

153

The insights of this work can also be utilized in the
area of Psychology of Religion. The dissertation presents
an indepth study of the psychology of.conversion from the
convergent perspectives of Kierkegaard and Lonergan who
"border" on the field of psychology.

The dissertation, however, provides more than insight-
ful information. It has concrete ramifications in the work
carried out by counselors, spiritual directors, retreat
masters, and religious educators. Not only is one given an
ideal of human fulfillment, but the steps which enable one
to move through the process are identified.

This work, then, will be an aid for training such
professionals in recognizing and identifying where someone
is in the maturing process.

What is needed at this point? The next step calls for
the development of an evaluative instrument. The task is to
take this work and develop a guide for a Specific and
concrete discernment of where the person is in the process.
Can there be sets of questions constructed which will aid
in identifying where the person is in the conversion process?
Are there certain exercises that will help in this discern-
ing? Once the discernment is made, are there further
questions or exercises that will aid in leading one further

along in the process toward fulfillment?

154

Personal Reflections

 

The position, adequately demonstrated, that the dynamism
of the human spirit is most clearly manifested in questioning,
was that aspect which spoke strongest to me. For Lonergan,
the person who wonders is the person who is most faithful
to the human process that culminates in the Transcendent
sphere. The question "why" is not gbggt person, it ii
person, according to Lonergan. Faithfulness to being at the
human level demands the questioning process. Authentic
subjectivity is visionary by nature.

This innate drive of the individual that so properly
reveals his/her humanism raised many questions for me. How
should we view those institutions and governments who deny
their people this basic human right? Is not the excessive
restriction of freedom, the severe curtailing of the right
to self-expression and questioning, paralyzing to the thrust
of the human spirit? Do such repressive actions allow any
activation of the potential within people for growth through
a questioning search?12

Do not religious communities, in light of their commit-
ment to self-transcendence, have a special responsibility
to call forth the greatest potential in people? Is it not
a direct contradiction to their mission when, responsible

scholars, prudently questioning and searching, are restricted

155
in their academic endeavors, even to the point of silencing?13
When such policies thwart and frustrate the human spirit, can
they in any way serve human fulfillment?

Does this unrestricted desire to know, which is our
transcendence in Lonergan's construct, have a message for
the way we teach religion? Does an educational system,
religious or otherwise, that gives an answer rather than
invites the question, do justice to the human endeavor?

Is it not, rather, the obligation of religious organiza-
tions to take positive steps to foster an open attitude
toward reality? Is it not the very mission of religious
organizations to provide the supportive environment for such
searching?

Harvey Cox addresses this very issue, the role of

religion in society, in his book Feast of Fools. Cox main-

 

tains that our age is limited by our reliance on "feasibility
studies." We are hindered in our search for the good because
we are tied to what is pronounced possible in view of

present resources. We are overly concerned with the "how”
which then inhibits and limits the ”what." Cox explains:

Why have we lost our capacity for social self-
transcendence? Perhaps the answer is that we
have treated utopian thought with the same
suspicion and condescension with which we have
patronized fantasy. We have marked it down as
somehow less respectable than other types of
thinking. It is for poets and madmen, not for
responsible adults.14

156

The solution to this lies in the role which religion
plays in society. Cox maintains that religion is that arena
where reason recognizes its own limitations. Religion's
horizon encompasses the sphere of the Transcendent. In
light of this horizon, Cox identifies religion's task:

How does religion contribute to a society's

capacity for self-transcendence? It does so by

symbolizing an ideal toward which to strive, and

by doing so with enough emotional magnetism to

provide a powerful source of motivation.15

The task of religion, therefore, is to provide the
supportive environment for the individual to dream, to soar,
to "fantasize," by allowing the human spirit free rein in
its quest for the ultimate good. The religious organization,
then, is that community that sustains and strengthens the
individual as he/She reaches out for new horizons.

In light of this view, does there actually exist a
supportive environment which encourages questioning and
searching in the religious organization to which I belong?
Does there exist an open attitude that fosters and enhances
the most proper human endeavor of questioning in my church
today? My experience could not come up with a totally
positive answer.

As a co—partner with God which requires I take responsi-

bility not only for my own life but also accept stewardship

for the world around me, do I not have an obligation to

157
address this issue? Would I be faithful to what it means to
be authentically human if I do not act on this insight?

What is the ultimate question the dissertation raises
in me? What do I perceive as the next step in my own
journey toward self—transcendence? What form will my
response take to this troublesome issue of our day? If
Lonergan's heuristic structure is correct, my own horizon
and consequent actions,will be changed through the intellec-

tual quest this study has initiated.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTES

Chapter One

 

1 Soren Kierkegaard, Concluding Unscientific Postscript,
trans. David F. Swenson 6 Walter Lowrie (Princeton, N.J.:
Princeton University Press, 1941), p. 261.

 

2 Ibid., p. 229.

3 David Roberts, Existentialism and Religious Belief
(New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 1957), p. 71.

 

4 Ibid., p. 70.

5 Soren Kierkegaard, Purity of Heart Is To Will One
Thing, trans. Douglas V. Steere (New York, N.Y.: Harper and
Row, 1938), p. 16.

 

6 Soren Kierkegaard, The Point of View For My Work As
An Author: A Report to History, trans. Walter Lowrie
(New York, N.Y.: Harper and Row, 1939), p. 35.

 

 

7 It should also be noted that some authors do not make
any distinction between the two terms. Robert Heiss is one
such author. He believes the concept dread may not always
be labeled dread but the idea is the same. He states:

"Dread appears under the most diverse guises, as melancholy,-
as sin, as despair." Robert Heiss, Hegel, Kierkegaard, Marx,
trans. E. B. Garside (Delacorte Press, 1963), p. 255.

 

8 George Price, The Narrow Pass (New York, N.Y.:
McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1963), p. 63.

 

9 Soren Kierkegaard, The Concept of Dread, trans.
Walter Lowrie (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press,
1957), p. 39.

 

10 Ibid., p. 139.
11 Ibid., p. 139.

158

159

12 Roberts, Existentialism, pp. 73-75.

 

13 Sdren Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling and The Sickness
Unto Death, trans. Walter Lowrie (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday
and Co., 1941), p. 208.

 

 

14 Ibid., p. 184.
15 Ibid., p. 201.
16 S¢ren Kierkegaard, The Journals of Kierkegaard, trans.

Alexander Dru (New York, N.Y.: Harper and Brothers, 1958),
p. 141.

 

17 Ibid., p. 116.

18 Robert Bretall, Ed., A Kierkegaard Anthology (Princeton,
N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1946), pp. 309—314.

 

19 Roberts, Existentialism, p. 77.
20

 

Kierkegaard, Postscript, pp. 169—224.

 

21 Kierkegaard, Journals, p. 146.

22 Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, p. 52.

 

23 Kierkegaard, Postscript, p. 183.

 

24 Ibid., p. 182.

25 Kierkegaard, Journals, p. 44.

26 Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, p. 64. Kierkegaard
cited the incarnation, God becoming man, as an example where
reason had to acknowledge its limitations.

 

27 Roberts, Existentialism, p. 110.

 

28 Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, p. 79.

 

29 Kierkegaard, Postscripp, p. 182.

 

3O Soren Kierkegaard, Either/Or: A Fragment of Life,
Vol. I, trans. David F. 8 Lillian M. Swenson (Princeton, N.J.:
Princeton University Press, 1944), p. 97.

 

31 Ibid., p. 30.

160
32 Ibid., p. 37.

33 George Alfred Schrader, Jr., Ed., Existential
Philosophers: Kierkegaard to Merleau-Ponpy, Chapter 11,
Louis Mackey, ”Soren Kierkegaard, The Poetry of Inwardness."
(New York, N.Y.: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1967), p. 51.

 

34 Soren Kierkegaard, Either/Or: A Fragment of Life,
Vol. II, trans. Walter Lowrie (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton
University Press, 1944), p. 234.

 

35 Ibid., p. 184.
36 Ibid., p. 185.

37 Ibid., p. 185.

38 Ibid., p. 186.
39 Ibid., p. 187.
40

Kierkegaard, Dread, p. 37.

41 Regis Jolivet, Introduction to Kierkegaard, trans.

W. H. Barber (New York, N.Y.: E. P. Dutton, 1946), p. 127.

 

42 Price, Pass, p. 166.

43 Robert Solomon, Ed., Existentialism (New York, N.Y.:
Modern Library, 1974), pp. 17-24.

 

 

44 Kierkegaard, Journals, p. 25.

45 Kierkegaard, Either/Or, Vol. II, p. 257.
46 Ibid., p. 256.

47 Ibid., p. 255.

48 Ibid., p. 258.

49

Kierkegaard, Postscript, p. 259.

 

50 Subjectivity in Kierkegaard's thought is intricately
connected to what it means to be an authentic Christian.
Christianity is a process of deepening interiority. Subjec-
tivity is a matter of personal insight and appropriation.
Subjectivity is the foundation for passionate concern with

161

life. It is passion which permits the unleasing of the power
within that births transformation. For further insight into
Kierkegaard's subjectivity see Louis Dupre, Kierkegaard As
Theologian: The Dialectic of Christian Existence (New York,
N.Y.: Sheed 8 Ward, 1958), pp. 115-133.

51

 

 

Kierkegaard, Postscript, p. 227.

 

52 Kierkegaard, Either/Or, Vol. II, pp. 48-49.

 

53 Ibid., p. 62.

54 Price, Pass, p. 172.

55 Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, p. 57.

 

56 Ibid., pp. 78—91.

57 Schrader, Existential Phi1050phers, p. 90.

 

58 Kierkegaard, Journals, p. 144.

59 Kierkegaard, Postscript, p. 290.

 

60 Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, p. 73.

 

61 James Collins, The Mind of Kierkegaard (Chicago, Ill.:
Henry Regnery Co., 1953), p. 93.

 

62 Ibid., p. 93.

63 Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, p. 80.

 

64 Ibid., pp. 78-90.

65 Genesis, 22:7-13 (NAB).

66 Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, p. 69.

 

67 Kierkegaard, Journals, p. 117.

68 Louis Dupre, Kierkegaard As Theologian: The Dialectic
of Christian Existence (New York, N.Y.: Sheed G Ward, 1958),
p. 132.

69

 

 

Bretall, Anthology, p. 409.

 

70 Kierkegaard, Fear and Tremblipg, p. 81.

 

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

162
Ibid., p. 79.

Bretall, Anthology, p. 209.

 

Kierkegaard, Postscript, p. 183.
Ibid., p. 182.
Kierkegaard, Journals, p. 77.

Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, p. 82.

 

Price, Pass, p. 192.

Bretall, Anthology, pp. 202-7.

 

Hermann Diem, Kierkegpard: An Introduction, trans.

 

David Green (Richmond, Va.: John Knox Press, 1966), p. 9.

80

81

82

Kierkegaard, Journals, p. 44.
Ibid., p. 134.

S¢ren Kierkegaard, The Diary of Soren Kierkegaard,

 

trans. Gerda M. Anderson (New York, N.Y.: Philosophical
Library, Inc., 1960), p. 103.

83

84

85

86

87

Kierkegaard, Journals, p. 133.

Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, p. 83.

 

Ibid., p. 70.
Ibid., p. 80.
Price, Pass, p. 193.

Francis J. Lescoe, Existentialism: With or Without

 

God (New York, N.Y.: Alba House, 1973), p. 40.

89

9O

Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, p. 64.

 

Kierkegaard, Postscript, p. 256.

 

163

Chapter Two

 

1 Bernard Lonergan, S.J., The Subject (Milwaukee, Wis.:
Marquette University Press, 1968), pp. 22-23.

 

2 Bernard Lonergan, S.J., Method In Theology (New York,,
N.Y.: Seabury Press, 1975), p. 14.

 

3 Bernard Lonergan, S.J., Second Collection, edited
William F.J. Ryan, S.J., and Bernard J. Tyrrell, S.J.
(Philadelphia, Penn.: Westminster Press, 1974), p. 274.

 

’4 Bernard Lonergan, S.J., Insight - A Study of Human
Understanding (San Francisco, Calif.: Harper 8 Row, 1958), p. 350.

 

 

5 Matthew Fox, Ed., Meditations with Meister Eckhart
(Santa Fe, N.M.: Bear 8 Co., Inc., 1983), p. 12.

 

6 Denise Carmody, "Lonergan's Religious Person," Religion
In Life, Vol. XLIV #2 (Summer 1975), pp. 222-3.

7 Lonergan, Insight, p. 348.

8 Bernard Lonergan, S.J.,Collection, edited F.E. Crowe,
S.J. (London, Eng.: Darton, Longman 8 Todd, Ltd., 1967), p. 206.

 

9 Bernard Lonergan, S.J., Philosophy of God And Theology
(Philadelphia, Penn.: Westminster Press, 1973), p. 9.

 

10 Ibid., p. 10.

11 Augustine, The Confessions of St. Augustine, trans.
John Ryan (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday 8 Co., 1960), p. 248.

 

12 Philip Mueller, "Lonergan's Theory of Religious
Experience," Eglise et Theologie, Vol. 7 (1976), p. 239.

 

13 Frederick E. Crowe, S.J., The Lonergan Enterprise
(Cambridge, Mass.: Cowley Publications, 1980), p. 15.

 

14 Philip McShane, S.J., Ed., Language, Truth and Meaning
(Notre Dame, Ind.: Univ. of N.D. Press, 1972), p. 81.
Lonergan's notion of being as unrestricted desire to know, is
a dynamic open-ended process that is ever reaching for actuali-
zation. In the field of psychology Abraham Maslow has developed
a theory of self-actualization related to motivational processes.
He maintains the primary motivating force of human nature is the
drive to self-actualize, the desire to fulfill one's highest

 

164

potential. AS Lonergan's being is the objective of the un-
restricted desire to know, to use Maslow's terminology, being
is the motivating force in human nature. The drive to self-
actualize in Maslow's theory is amenable to being in Lonergan's
theory so far as referring to the drive to fulfill one's poten-
tial is concerned. See the section on religious conversion for
further interfacing regarding Maslow's self-actualizer and
Lonergan's religious person. For a complete presentation of
Maslow's self-actualizing theory, See: Toward A Psychology of
Being (New York, N.Y.: D. VanNostrand Co., 1968).

 

Psychologist Carl Rogers is another fulfillment theorist. Like
Maslow, Rogers emphasizes that the individual has within him/her
a self-actualizing tendency, and when society does not interfere
with the realization of inherent potentialities, a fully
functioning person results. Rogers turns to Kierkegaard to
express and capture the essence of his fulfillment theory--"to
be that self which one truly is." On Becoming A Person (Boston,
Mass.: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1961), p. 166.

 

I want to recognize the contribution of Carl Jung and his theories
of individuation, archetype, synchronicity, and transcendent
function which are amenable to positions taken in this paper.
However, my preference was to work with Maslow due to his stage
construct.

15 Bernard Lonergan, S.J., Understanding and Being - An
Introduction and Companion to Insight, edited Elizabeth A. Morell
and Mark D. Morell (New York, N.Y.: Edwin Mellen Press, 1980),
p. 164.

 

 

16 Ibid., p. 37.

17 Carmody, Religion In Life, pp. 222-3.

 

18 Crowe, Lonergan Enterprise, p. 33.

 

19 David Tracy, The Achievement of Bernard Lonergan (New
York, N.Y.: Herder 8 Herder, Inc., 1970), p. 99.

 

20 Ibid., p. 42.

21 Lonergan, Insight, p. xxviii.

22 Ibid., p. xix.

23 Mueller, Eglise et Theologie, p. 239.

 

24 Tracy, Achievement, p. 117. Similarly, Maslow's

 

165

theory on the pathological is related to deficiency.

(Abraham Maslow and Bela Mittelmann, Principles of Abnormal
Psychology: The Dynamics of Psychic Illness (New York, N.Y.:
Harper 8 Bros., 1951). Maslow suggests that when basic
needs, D-needs (food, rest, belonging, love as opposed to
B-needs which are related to the drive to self-actuate) are
met, the person can develop into a healthy minded individual.
When D-needs are lacking, "deficiency motivation" occurs.

 

 

Maslow explains that ”...neurosis seemed at its core, and at
its beginning, to be a deficiency disease; that it was born
out of being deprived of certain satisfactions which I call
needs...their absence produces illness...when these
deficiencies were eliminated, sickness tended to disappear."
Salvatore Maddi, Ed., Perspectives on Personality, Abraham
Maslow, "Deficiency Motivation and Growth Motivation" (Boston,
Mass.: Little, Brown 8 Co., 1971), p. 230.

 

25 Lonergan, Method, p. 103.

26 Ibid., p. 20.

27 Lonergan uses the word notion as opposed to idea or
concept to refer to being for it captures more accurately
the open-ended process that being is. See Tracy, Achievement,
pp. 144—5, for an indepth explanation.

28

 

Carmody, Religion In Life, pp. 222-3.

 

29 Lonergan, Method, p. 9.

30 Ibid., p. 13.

31 Ibid., p. 15.

32 Lonergan, Insight, pp. 320-21.

33 Ibid., p. 321.

34 Lonergan, Philosophy of God, p. 9.

 

35 Lonergan, Method, p. 9.

36 Lonergan, Insight, p. 273.

37 Lonergan, Method, p. 5.

38 Lonergan, Insight, p. 323.

166

39 Lonergan, Method, p. 213.

 

 

40 Hugo A. Meynell, An Introduction to the PhiIOSOphy
of Bernard Lonergan (New York, N.Y.: MacMillan Press, Ltd.,
1976), p. 2.

41 L .

onergan, In51ght, p. 3.

42 Ibid., p. 3.

43 Ibid., p. 4.

44 Ibid., p. 5.

45 Ibid., p. s.

46 Ibid., p. 5.

47 Ibid., p. 6.

48 Ibid., p. 6.

49

Ibid., p. 273.

50 Matthew L. Lamb, Ed., Creativity and Method: Essays
In Honor of Bernard Lonergan, Chapter I, John Dunne, ”Insight
and Waiting on God" (Milwaukee, Wis.: Marquette University
Press, 1981), p. 3.

51

 

 

Lonergan, Insight, p. 273.

52 Lonergan, Method, p. 9.

3 . .
Carmody, Religlon In Life, p. 224.
54

 

Lonergan, Insight, p. 274.

55 Carmody, Religion In Life, p. 224. The process of
conversion will be addressed separately later in this
chapter.

56

 

Lonergan, Insight, p. 279.

57 Lonergan, Understanding and Being, p. 135.

 

58 Ibid., p. 136.

59 Tracy, Achievement, p. 126.

 

167

60 Lonergan, Understanding and Being, p. 137.
61

 

Ibid., p. 137.

62 This personal aspect is related to Lonergan's concept
of horizon. That concept is complex enough to warrant a
separate section.

63 Lonergan, Understanding and Being, p. 138.

 

64 Ibid., p. 141.

65 Lonergan, Insight, p. 280.

66 Ibid., p. 280.

67 Ibid., p. 280.

68 Lonergan, Understanding and Being, p. 145.

 

69 Ibid., p. 145.

70 Lonergan, Insight, p. 281.

71 Ibid., p. 281.

72 Lonergan, Understanding and Being, p. 148.

 

73 Ibid., p. 148.

74 Lonergan, Insight, p. 282.

75 Ibid., pp. 282-3.

76 Ibid., p. 284.

77 Lonergan, Understanding and Being, p. 150.

 

78 Lonergan, Insight, p. 284.

79 Lonergan, Understanding and Being, p. 150.

 

80 Lonergan, Insight, p. 285.

81 Ibid., p. 284.

82 Mueller, Eglise et Theologie, p. 240. Cognitional

self-transcendence is a type of conversion that will be

 

168

addressed in detail in a later section. I quote here to
Show the activity necessary in coming to authentic judgment.

83 Lonergan, Understanding and Being, p. 151.

 

84 Anthony Kosnik, "Forming the Christian Catholic
Conscience," Hospital Progress (August 1975), pp. 52-54.
Writing from a christian standpoint, Kosnik's position is
that the gathering of input from the various fields is
necessary for "God speaks to us in different ways at
different times.” He proposes consideration of these areas
for taken together they present the wholistic approach
necessary to arrive at sound judgment. The following is in
no way exhaustive. It raises only some of the questions.
The intention is to give one a sense of the questioning
process needed. First, one must seek the authentic message
of the Bible. In doing so, one must be careful to distinguish
what is historically and culturally conditioned. One must
ask what are the basic values proclaimed in sacred scripture?
Secondly, the person must also know the teaching of his/her
particular belief system. What exactly does one's church
say about the particular question under study? Because in
this area the investment of the individual is rooted so
deeply, one must keep in mind Lonergan's statement that we
are called to be "persons not just his automata." (Method,
p. 117) Thirdly, the various disciplines have their proper
input. What are the findings of the scientific community
regarding the question? What are the experts saying? One's
own experience as well as the experience of others regard-
ing the particular question under study needs to be part of
the inquiring process. In questioning these areas, one
must do so with geniune sincerity. The authentic subjective
component must be considered. Am I open to the Spirit?
Finally, this whole process must take place within the
Christic framework. Have I taken the question under study
into prayer? I have presented only briefly this questioning
process to illustrate concretely what a search for truth
entails that enables one to feel "at home" in one's judgment
in Lonergan's theory.

 

85 Lonergan, Insight, p. 278.

86 Carmody, Religion In Life, pp. 224-5.

 

87 Lonergan, Method, p. 9.

88 Lonergan, Insight, p. 319.

169

89 This is the next stage in the conversion process.
Again I merely allude to it here. Due to the complexity of
this section, conversion is presented under a separate
heading.

90 Alexander Jones, The Jerusalem Bible (Garden City,
N.Y.: Doubleday 8 Co., 1966), p. 25.

 

91 Lonergan, Method, p. 31.

92 Ibid., p. 32.

93 Ibid., p. 34.

94 Ibid., p. 25.

95 Crowe, Lonergan Enterprise, p. 34.

 

96 Lonergan, Method, p. 15.

97 Ibid., p. 83.
98 Ibid., p. 101.

99 Ibid., p. 101.

 

 

100 Lonergan, Insight, p. 350.

101 Carmody, Religion In Life, p. 224.
102 Lonergan, Method, p. 103.

103 Lonergan, Philosophy of GOd, P- 38-
104

Peter Huizing 8 William Basset, Eds., New Experience

 

of the Spirit (New York, N.Y.: Seabury Press, 1974), pp. 69-
78.

 

105 Bernard Lonergan, S.J., A Third Collection, edited
Frederick Crowe, S.J. (New York, N.Y.: Paulist Press, 1985),
p. 29.

106 Bernard J. Tyrrell, S.J., Christotherapy (New York,
N.Y.: Seabury Press, 1975), p. 136.

 

 

107 Lonergan, Method, p. 106.

108 Ibid., p. 106.

170

109 Fred Lawrence, Ed., The Lonergan Workshop, Vol. 1,
Sebastian Moore, "Christian Self-Discovery" (Missoula, Mont.:
Scholars Press, 1978), p. 212.

 

110 If one is interested in pursuing further this tension
of God's self—offer and our freedom of response, I recommend
Leo O'Donovan, Ed., World of Grace, Chapter 5, John P. Galvin,
"The Invitation of Grace” (New York, N.Y.: Seabury Press,
1980), pp. 64-75.

 

111 Lonergan, Method, p. 119.

112 Abraham J. Heschel, Who Is Man? (Sanford, Calif.:
Stanford Univ. Press, 1965), p. 119.

 

113Abraham J. Heschel, Quest For God-Studies in Prayer
and Symbolism (New York, N.Y.: Crossroad Publishing Co.,
1982), p. 66.

 

 

114 Viktor E. Frankl, Man's Search For Meaning: An
Introduction to Logotherapy, trans. Ilse Lasch (New York,
N.Y.: Washington Square Press, 1965), p. 176.

 

 

115 Lonergan, Method, p. 109.

116 Ibid., p. 106.

117 Ibid., p. 106.

118 Dag Hammarskjold, Markings, trans. Leif Sjoberg 8
A.H. Auden (New York, N.Y.: Alfred A. Knopf Co., 1966),
p. 205.

119 Rudolf Otto, The Idea of the Holy (New York, N.Y.:
Oxford University Press, 1923), p. 26.

 

120 Lonergan, Method, p. 115.

121 Ibid., p. 115.

122 Ibid., p. 115.

123 Ibid., p. 115.

124 Ibid., p. 116.

125 Ibid., p. 116.

171

126 Karl Rahner, Theological Investigations, Vol. 4,
”On the Concept of Mystery in Catholic Theology" (New York,
N.Y.: Seabury Press, 1966), pp. 36-73.

 

127 Tracy, Achievement, p. 30.

 

128 Lonergan, Method, p. 117.

129 Gordon W. Allport, The Individual and His Religion -

 

A Psychological Interpretation (New York, N.Y.: MacMillan
Publishing Co., 1950), p. 60.

130

 

Ibid., p. 60.

131 Ibid., p. 60.

132 Ibid., pp. 60-61. Allport goes on to state: "I
doubt that any scientifically supported criteria of maturity
would differ substantially from these three."

133 James Robertson Price, "Conversion and the Doctrine
of Grace in Bernard Lonergan and John Climacus,” Anglican
Theological Review, Vol. LXII #4 (October 1980), p. 342.

 

134 Ibid., p. 342.

135 Ibid., p. 342.

136 Lonergan, Insight, p. 73.

137 Tracy, Achievement, p. 14.

 

138 Lonergan, Method, p. 236.

139 Tracy, Achievement, p. 14.

 

140 Ibid., p. 14.

141 Crowe, Lonergan Enterprise, p. 15.

 

142 Lonergan, Second Collection, p. 221.

 

143 Tracy, Achievement, p. 14.

 

144 Fred Lawrence, Ed., Lonergan Workshop, Vol. 1,
Bernard Lonergan, "Religious Knowledge" (Missoula, Wis.:
Scholars Press, 1978), p. 327.

 

172

145 Tracy, Achievement, p. 19.

 

146 Lonergan, Method, p. 236.

147 Lonergan, Understanding and Being, p. 280.

 

148 John H. Flavell, The Developmental Psychology 9f

 

 

Jean Piaget (Princeton, N.J.: D. VanNostrand Co., 1963),
pp. 85-7.
149

The sensorimotor activity takes place during the
first 18 months. Piaget also has six substages within this
period but I do not deal with them for they are not Lonergan's
example of a vertical shift in horizon. Flavell, Piaget,

pp. 85-121.

150 The preoperational period is roughly two to seven
years of age. Even though reflex activity is replaced by
"conscious, deliberate, thought-out problem-solving activity,"
Piaget believes the most Significant accomplishment of this
level is the ability to communicate by language. Barbara
Engler, Personality Theories (Boston, Mass.: Houghton
Mifflin Co., 1979), p. 370.

151 The concrete operations emerge around seven to
eleven years of age. The child at this level also begins to
grow out of the egocentrism of the former stage. The
important feature present here, though, is the development
of logic. The child has "a coherent and integrated cognitive
system with which he organizes and manipulates the world
around him.” Flavell, Piaget, p. 165.

152 The formal operations stretches from twelve years to
adulthood. The twelve year old obviously does not think like
the adult but has now developed the potential. This stage is
"the crowning achievement of intellectual development. The
final equilibrium state towards which intellectual evolution
has been moving since infancy." Abstraction on the highest
level is possible. Flavell, Piaget, p. 202.

 

153 I suggest Lawrence Kohlberg's theory of moral
development as a further example of basic horizon shift.
Kohlberg proposes three main divisions: the preconventional
level in which behavior is judged by consequences--punishment
and reward-oriented; the conventional level in which behavior
is judged by external norms--the dictates of family, society,
or social group; the post-conventional level where interior-
ity is the mainstay of value judgment--the personal conscience.

173

Each stage has its own particular view of judgment and move-
ment to the next level radically changes the person's view
or horizon. See Lawrence Kohlberg, The Philosophy of Moral
Development (San Francisco, Calif.: Harper 8 Row, 1981),
pp. 409-412.

 

 

Progressive movement through Erik Erikson's psychosocial
stages is also another example of horizon Shift. For these
stages see Identity-Youth and Crisis (New York, N.Y.: W.W.
Norton 8 Co., 1968), pp. 91-135 for an indepth analysis. I
simply wish to point out that in Erikson's schematic the
struggle and tension in the various stages, which can
contribute to stagnation as well as growth if the negative
element is overemphasized, is incorporated into the presenta-
tion of his theory. For example, his beginning stage is
trust versus mistrust. In Erikson's theory a proper
integration, a counterbalancing of the two poles is necessary
for the growth which triggers the shift in horizon.

Professor Eugene Wright explains: "(Erikson) has a holistic
interpretation of reality in which good and evil interact
dialectically. These forces are then responsibly directed
into a sense of wholeness that includes both positive and
negative realities. Both poles, trust and mistrust, inter-
act in any given situation...." J. Eugene Wright, Jr.,
Erikson: Identity and Religion (New York, N.Y.: Seabury
Press, 1982), p. 157.

 

 

I have turned to Piaget, Kohlberg, and Erikson as concrete
examples of horizon shift. However, regarding developmental
theory one needs to be cognizant of the work of Carol
Gilligan. This psychologist suggests that the male and
female identity development proceed along different lines.
She states that "since masculinity is defined thru separa-
tion while femininity is defined through attachment, male
gender identity is threatened by intimacy while female
gender identity is threatened by separation." In light of
this Gilligan concludes: ”Since there is a tendency to
construct a single scale of measurement, and since that scale
has generally been derived from and Standardized on the
basis of men's interpretations of research data drawn
predominantly or exclusively from studies of males,
psych010gists have tended to regard male behavior as the
norm and female behavior as some kind of deviation from that
norm. Thus, when women do not conform to the standards of
psychological expectation, the conclusion has generally
been that something is wrong with women." In her book she
lays the foundation for the position that the measurement
scales do not adequately measure female development.

174

Information drawn from these scales reflect the male bias
and, therefore, need to be reevaluated. (See Carol Gilligan,
In A Different Voice, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
Press, 1982.)

154

 

Tracy, Achievement, p. 19.

 

155 Lonergan, Method, p. 103.
156 Ibid., pp. 236-7.

157 Ibid., p. 237.

158 Ibid., p. 237.

159 Ibid., p. 237.

160 Ibid., p. 238.

161 Tracy, Achievement, p. 17.

 

162 Walter E. Conn, Ed., Conversion-Perspectives on
Personal and Social Transformation, Bernard Lonergan,
”Theology in Its New Context" (New York, N.Y.: Alba House,
1978), p. 13.

163

 

 

Lonergan, Method, pp. 130-31.

164 Ibid., p. 238.
165 Ibid., p. 238.

166 See section, Levels of Consciousness, footnote #32,
that explains in Lonergan's own words his concept of knowing.

167 Lonergan, Method, p. 238. For a clear presentation
of Lonergan's thought on objectivity see section on Horizon,
footnote #136.

168 Mueller, Eglise et Theologie, p. 240.

 

 

169 Carmody, Religion In Life, p. 226.
170 Price, Ladder, p. 342.
171

Lonergan, Method, p. 240.

172 Ibid., p. 240.

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

188

189

190

175
Price, Ladder, p. 343.
Ibid., p. 343.

Carmody, Religion In Life, p. 227.

 

Conn, Conversion, p. 17.

 

Price, Ladder, p. 343.

Carmody, Religion In Life, p. 227.

 

Conn, Conversion, p. 19.

 

Lonergan, Method, p. 105.
Ibid., p. 241.

Conn, Conversion, p. 18.

 

Price, Ladder, p. 343.
Lonergan, Method, p. 122.
Price, Ladder, p. 343.
Lonergan, Method, p. 242.
Ibid., p. 242.

Ibid., p. 242.

Mueller, Eglise et Theologie, p. 241.

 

 

Engler, Personality Theories, p. 344.

191 Abraham Maslow, Religions, Values, and Peak
Experiences (New York, N.Y.: Penguin Books, 1964), p. 62.

 

 

192

Abraham Maslow, Toward A Psychology of Being (New

 

York, N.Y.: D. VanNostrand Co., 1968), p. 92.

193

194

195

Maslow, Peak Experiences, p. 65.

 

Maslow, Psychology of Being, p. 86.

 

Conn, Conversion, p. 18.

 

176

196 For a fuller explanation of Maslow's theory of self-
actualization and a complete list of peak experience
characteristics see: Maslow, Psychology of Being, pp. 71-102.

 

197 Conn, Conversion, p. 19.

198

 

Lonergan, Method, p. 242.

199 Lonergan, Philosophy of God, p. 38. There is some
discussion as to whether or not there is a true distinction
between moral and religious conversion. I refer the reader
to: Marc Smith, "Can Moral and Religious Conversions Be
Separated?" Thought, Vol. LVI #221 (June 1981), pp. 178-184.

200

 

Price, Ladder, p. 344.
201 Ibid., p. 344.
202 Philip McShane, S.J., Ed., Foundations of Theology,

Bernard Lonergan, "Bernard Lonergan Responds" (Notre Dame,
Ind.: Univ. of Notre Dame Press, 1971), p. 233.

 

203 Lonergan, Method, p. 241.

204 Ibid., p. 243.

205 Marc Smith, "Religious Experience and Bernard
Lonergan," Philosophy Today, Vol. xxiii (Winter 1979), p. 363.

 

206 Bernard Lonergan, S.J., Collection, edited F.E.
Crowe, S.J. (London, Eng.: Darton, Longman 8 Todd, Ltd.,
1967), p. 201.

 

207 Lonergan, Second Collection, p. 277.

 

208 Mueller, Eglise et Theologie, p. 243.

 

209 Lonergan, Second Collection, p. 129.

 

Chapter Three

 

1 For an indepth presentation of Kierkegaard's thought
the reader is referred to Chapter One. This chapter intends
a brief outline for the purpose of review only.

2 A discussion on the aesthetic personality is found in

Chapter
3

4

9

10

the rea
a brief

11

Frederi
1985),

12
13
14

15
Chapter

16

17

18
Chapter

19
20
21

22

177
One, pages 19-26.

Kierkegaard, Either/Or, Vol. II, p. 234.

 

Kierkegaard, Either/Or, Vol. I, p. 97.

 

Kierkegaard, Either/Or, Vol. II, pp. 183-5.

 

Kierkegaard, The Concept of Dread, pp. 40-42.

 

Ibid., p. 37.

Jolivet, Introduction to Kierkegaard, p. 127.

 

Price, The Narrow Pass, pp. 62-64.

 

For an indepth presentation of Lonergan's thought
der is referred to Chapter Two.' This chapter intends
outline for the purpose of review only.

Bernard Lonergan, S.J., A Third Collection, edited
ck E. Crowe, S.J. (New York, N.Y.: Paulist Press,
pp. 23-33.

 

Lonergan, Second Collection, pp. 151-154.

 

Lonergan, Philosophy of God, p. 38.

 

Lonergan, Third Collection, pp. 29-31.

 

The discussion of the empirical level is found in
Two, pp. 54-55.

Lonergan, Method In Theology, p. 9.

 

Lonergan, Insight, p. 273.

The discussion of the intellectual level is found in
Two, pp. 55-58.

Lonergan, Second Collection, p. 151.

 

Lonergan, Insight, p. 323.

Tracy, Achievement, pp. 125-127.

 

Lonergan, Third Collection, p. 30.

 

178
23
Lonergan, Method, p. 9.
24 Kierkegaard, Either/Or, Vol. II, pp. 256-8.

25 The discussion of the rational level of consciousness
is found in Chapter Two, pp. 58-69.

26

 

Lonergan, Second Collection, pp. 151-2.

 

Z7 Carmody, Religion In Life, pp. 223-4.

 

28 See Chapter Two, footnote #84, for an example of the
activity that provides the "at home" condition.

29 Mueller, Eglise et Theologie, p. 240.

 

30 Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, pp. 56-8.

 

31 Lonergan, Insight, pp. 280-6.

32 Ibid., pp. 242-5.

33 Ibid., p. 6.
34 Ibid., pp. 277-8.

35 The discussion on the concept of horizon is found
in Chapter Two, pp. 82-89.

36 Tracy, Achievement, p. 14.

 

37 Ibid., p. 19.

38 Lonergan, Method, pp. 235-7.

39 Ted L. Huston and George Levinger, "Interpersonal
Attraction and Relationships," Annual Review of Psychology,
Vol. 29, 1978, p. 115.

40

 

Ibid., pp. 115-146.

41 George Levinger 8 H. Raush, eds., Close Relationships,
"The Embrace of Lives: Changing and Unchanging," Chapter 1,
George Levinger (Amherst, Mass.: University of Mass. Press,
1977), p. 7.

 

42 Huston and Levinger, Annual Review, "Interpersonal
Attraction," pp. 124-7.

 

179

43 Levinger and Raush, Close Relationships, ”Embrace
of Lives," Levinger, pp. 7-8.

 

44 Ibid., pp. 7-8.

45 Steve Duck and R. Gilmour, eds., Personal Relation-
ships Two: Developing Personal Relationships, Chapter 9,
"Adult Friendship," John Reisman (London, Eng.: Academic
Press, 1981), p. 206.

 

46 Levinger and Raush, Close Relationships, Chapter 2,
"Interpersonal Relationships-Questions 6 Observations,"
Elizabeth Douvan, p. 22.

47 Robert A. Hinde, Towards Understanding Relationships,
"EurOpean Monographs in Social Psychology 18” (London, Eng.:
Academic Press, 1979), pp. 132-3.

 

 

48 Levinger 8 Raush, Close Relationships, "Interpersonal
Relationships,” Elizabeth Douvan, p. 22.

 

49 Lonergan, Method, pp. 237-8.

50 Ibid., p. 237.

51 Lonergan, Second Collection, pp. 240-243.

52 I suggest engagement of the three levels of conscious-
ness reveals the aesthetic-in-transition has an implicit
intellectual conversion for there has taken place a shift in
horizon. However, for intellectual conversion per se, it is
necessary that explicit recognition of what one is doing
when one is knowing is also present. There is the theoreti-
cal realm in which one must recognize the very process of
knowing. I suggest this theoretical knowledge is not present
in the aesthetic-in-transition. For this reason I have
labeled this section Conversion to Realism rather than
Intellectual Conversion.

 

53 Conn, Conversion, p. 13.

 

54 Lonergan, Method, p. 9.

55 Discussion of the responsible level is found in
Chapter Two, pp. 69-74.

56 Lonergan, Method, p. 9.

180

57 Discussion of Moral Conversion is found in Chapter
Two, pp. 91-92- It should be noted that the three conversion
stages are not normally chronological. They are related in
the fashion of sublation or successive higher integrations.
See Lonergan, Method In Theology, p. 243.

 

58 Mueller, Eglise et Theologie, p. 240.
59

 

Lonergan, Third Collection, pp. 28-33.

 

6O Carmody, Religion In Life, p. 227.

 

61 Kierkegaard's thoughts on the aesthetic stance and
how it is always a part of who the aesthetic is, is found
in Chapter One, p.

62 Discussion on the ethical lifestyle is found in
Chapter One, pp.

63 Kierkegaard, Journals, p. 25.

64 Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, pp. 78-91.

 

65 Kierkegaard, Either/Or, Vol. II, p. 256.

 

66 Ibid., p. 255.

67 Ibid., p. 258.

68 Kierkegaard, Postscript, p. 259.

 

69 Ibid., p. 227.

70 Kierkegaard suggests marriage as the example of the
Eternal in the temporal in Either/Or, Vol. II. I prefer to
continue with the example of friendship offered in the first
movement.

71

 

Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, p. 57.

 

72 Ibid., p. 57.

73 Kierkegaard, Postscript, p. 227.

 

74 Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, pp. 78-91.

 

75 Collins, The Mind of Kierkegaard, p. 93.

 

181

76 Lonergan, Method, pp. 3-26.

77 Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, pp. 78-90.

 

78 Genesis, chapter 22:7-13, (JB)-

79 Since the definition and explanation of the four
levels of consciousness have been reviewed in the previous
movement, I will move right to application.

80 Genesis, chapter 17:15-20, (JB).
81 Lonergan, Method, pp. 3-26.

82 Please note that Kierkegaard's position and example
of Abraham is an extremely subjective stance which is most
properly applicable in the Christian context of Kierkegaard's
writings. (See footnote #50, chapter 1) It is not the
purpose of this paper to defend Kierkegaard's position, only
to accurately represent his position. For sound decision-
making, Cf. footnote #84, chapter 2. I suggest one of
Kierkegaard's basic points is that legalism is a self-
justifying way of existence and Christianity calls for
faith. Kierkegaard believes the dignity of the human person
gives him/her the right to respond to God out of the depths
of one's own being, where one is alone before God. It would
do justice to Kierkegaard's thought if the contemporary
reader took into consideration the horizon which directs
his interest and Kierkegaard's interest was the apathetic
Christians of his day who were observers of the law.

83 Lonergan, Method, pp. 3-26.

84 Genesis, chapter 12:1-9, (JB)-

85 Genesis, chapter 13:1-18, (JB).

86 Genesis, chapter 18:12-15, (J3):

87 Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, pp. 78-91.

 

88 The presentation of conversion as realism (i.e.
Lonergan's intellectual), moral, and religious is the order
of exposition, not necessarily the order of occurrence.
Lonergan's position is that religious conversion is the
efficacious ground of all self-transcendence: "...first
there is God's gift of his love" (Method, pp. 237—244).

 

 

182

89 It is not within the scope of this paper to present
an exegesis on Abraham's historical era. The discussion on
Abraham's background is only to give one a feel for the
concept of horizon out of which Abraham responds to life.
Furthermore, it should be noted at this time also that there
exist schools of thought which consider this material as
far more kerygmatic literature than a record of historical
events or figures. For example, see Gerhard VonRad, gig
Testament Theology, Vol. 1, trans. D.M.G. Stalker, London,
Eng.: Oliver 8 Boyd, 1962, pp. 3—4, 165-175.

 

90 Genesis, chapter 4:23, (JB).

91 John L. McKenzie, S.J., The Two-Edged Sword (Garden
City, N.Y.: Doubleday 8 Co., 1956), pp. 67-82.

 

92 Ibid., p. 78.

93 Genesis, chapter 17:15-20, (JB).

94 Genesis, chapter 17, (JB).

95 Lonergan, Insight, p. 73.

96 Kierkegaard, Journal, p. 117.

97 Lonergan, Method, pp. 13-20.

98 Note that such truth is truth for Abraham himself,
limited and influenced by the parameters of his own horizon.

99 Price, Anglican Theological Review, p. 343.

 

100 Genesis, chapter 22:10, (JB).

101 Discussion of Religious Conversion is found in
Chapter 2, pp.92-97.

102 Lonergan, PhiIOSOphy of God, p. 38.

 

Lonergan, Second Collection, pp. 170-173.

 

Lonergan, Method, p. 88.

Lonergan, Second Collection, p. 151.

 

Ibid., p. 172.

107 Ibid., p. 150.
108 Ibid., p. 153.

109 Ibid., p. 152.

110 Lonergan, Method, p. 240.

111 Lonergan, Second Collection, p. 150.

 

112 Otto, The Idea of the Holy, pp. 12-24.

 

113 Lonergan, Method, p. 106.

114 Ibid., p. 105.

115 Smith, Philosophy Today, p. 363.

 

116 Lonergan, Third Collection, pp. 247-8.

 

117 Ibid., p. 77.

118 Kierkegaard, Journal, p. 117.

119 Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, pp. 78-90.

 

120 Ibid., p. 83.

121 Genesis, chapter 22:1-14, (JB)-

122 Lonergan, Second Collection, p. 152.

 

Chapter Four

 

1 Abraham Heschel, Man IS Not Alone: A Philosophy of
Religion (New York, N.Y.: Farrar, Straus G Giroux, Inc.,
1951), pp. 77-8.

 

2 Ibid., p. 254.

3 Abraham Maslow, Motivation and Personality (New York,
N.Y.: Harper 8 Row, 1970), p. 198.

 

4 Abraham Heschel, The Wisdom of Heschel, edited Ruth
Marcus Goodhill (New York, N.Y.: Farrar, Straus, 8 Giroux,
Inc., 1970), p. 133.

 

184

5 Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, p. 83.

 

6 Lonergan, Method, p. 241.

7 Maslow, Peak Experiences, p. 60. It should be noted
that the self-actualizing state does not necessitate the peak
experience. However, it does open the self-actualizer to the
possibility.

 

8 Kierkegaard, Journals, p. 77.

9 Kierkegaard, Fear 6 Trembling, p. 79.
10

 

Kierkegaard, Journals, p. 44.
11 Cf. footnote #84, Chapter II, for a concrete example
of christian moral decision-making that embodies objectivity.

12 I cite the noted case of the Russian intellectual
dissident, Andrei Sakharov, whose challenging and question-
ing nature brought about his internal exile to Gorky.

13 I cite the attempted Silencing of Hans Kung and
Leonardo Boff, Roman Catholic priests, as the most flagrant
cases that reflect such an unfreeing position taken by a
religious institution.

14 Harvey Cox, The Feast of Fools (New York, N.Y.:
Harper and Row, 1969), p. 102.

15

 

Ibid., p. 105.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Sources - Soren Kierkegaard

 

Kierkegaard, Soren. Concluding Unscientific Postscript.
Translated by David F. Swenson 6 Walter Lowrie.
Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1941.

 

Either/Or: A Fragment of Life. Vol. 1.
Translated by David F. G Lillian M. Swenson. Princeton,
N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1944.

 

 

Either/Or: A Fragment of Life. Vol. II.
Translated by Walter Lowrie. Princeton, N.J.:
Princeton University Press, 1944.

 

 

Fear and Trembling and The Sickness Unto Death.
Translated by Walter Lowrie. Garden City, N.Y.:
Doubleday and Co., 1941.

 

 

Philosophical Fragments. Translated by David
F. Swenson. Introduction and commentary by Niels
Thulstrup. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University
Press, 1962.

 

 

Purity of Heart Is To Will One Thing. Translated

 

 

by Douglas V. Steere. New York, N.Y.: Harper 8 Row,

 

 

 

 

1938.

Stages on Life's Way. Translated by Walter
Lowrie. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press,
1940.

The Concept of Dread. Translated by Walter
Lowrie. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press,
1957.

The Diary of Soren Kierkegaard. Translated by
Gerda M. Anderson. New York, N.Y.: Philosophical
Library, Inc., 1960.

 

 

The Journals of Kierkegaard. Translated by

 

 

185

186

Alexander Dru. New York, N.Y.: Harper 8 Brothers,
1958.

The Point of View for My Work as an Author: A
Report to History. Translated by Walter Lowrie. New
York, N.Y.: Harper 8 Row, 1939.

 

Training in Christianity. Translated by Walter
Lowrie. New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 1941.

 

 

Primary Sources - Bernard Lonergan

 

Lonergan, Bernard, S.J. A Third Collection. Edited by F.E.
Crowe, S.J. New York, N.Y.: Paulist Press, 1985.

 

Collection. Edited by F.E. Crowe, S.J. London,
Eng.: Darton, Longman 8 Todd, Ltd., 1967.

 

 

. "Theology and Man's Future." Cross Currents.
Fall 1969.

 

 

Insight - A Study of Human Understanding. San
Francisco, Calif.: Harper 8 Row, 1958.

 

 

 

Method In Theology. New York, N.Y.: Seabury
Press, 1972. '

 

Philosophy of God, And Theolo y. Philadelphia,
Penn.: Westminster Press, 1973.

 

 

Second Collection. Edited by William F.J. Ryan

 

 

and Bernard J. Tyrrell. Philadelphia, Penn.: Westmin-
ster Press, 1974.

The Subject. Milwaukee, Wisc.: Marquette
University Press, 1968.

 

 

Understanding and Being - An Introduction and
Companion to Insight. Edited by Elizabeth A. Morelli
and Mark D. Morelli. New York, N.Y.: Edwin Mellen
Press, 1980.

 

 

 

187

Secondary Sources

 

Allport, Gordon. The Individual and His Religion - A
Psychological Interpretation. New York, N.Y.:
MacMillan Publishing Co., 1950.

 

 

Augustine. The Confessions of St. Augustine. Translated by
John K. Ryan. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday 8 Co.,
1960.

 

Bretall, Robert, Ed. A Kierkegaard Anthology. New York,
N.Y.: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1963.

 

Boyle, John. "Faith and Christian Ethics in Rahner and
Lonergan." Thought. Vol. 50. #198. September 1975.

Carmody, Denise Lardner. "Lonergan's Religious Person."
Religion In Life. Vol. XLIV. #2. Summer 1975.

 

Collette, Jacques. Kierkegaard: The Difficulty of Being
Christian. Notre Dame, Ind.: Notre Dame Press, 1968.

 

 

Collins, James. The Mind of Kierkegaard. Chicago, Ill.:
Henry Regnery Co., 1953.

 

Conn, Walter E., Ed. Conversion - Perspectives on Personal
and Social Transformation. New York, N.Y.: Alba House,
1978.

 

 

Conn, Walter E. "Bernard Lonergan On Value." Thomist.
Vol. 40. 1976.

Cox, Harvey. The Feast of Fools. New York, N.Y.: Harper 8
Row, 1969.

 

Crowe, Frederick E. The Lonergan Enterprise. Cambridge,
Mass.: Cowley Publications, 1980.

 

Diem, Hermann. Kierkegaard: An Introduction. Translated by
David Green. Richmond, Va.: John Knox Press, 1966.

 

Duck, S. and Gilmour, R., Eds. Personal Relationships.
"Developing Personal Relationships." London, Eng.:
Academic Press, 1981.

 

Dupre, Louis. Kierkegaard As Theologian: The Dialectic of
Christian Existence. New York, N.Y.: Sheed 8 Ward,
1958.

 

188

 

Engler, Barbara. Personality Theories. Boston, Mass.:
Houghton Mifflin Co., 1979. '

Erikson, Erik H. Identity-Youth and Crisis. New York, N.Y.:
Norton 8 Co., 1968.

 

Flavell, John H. The Developmental Psycholggy of Jean
Piaget. Princeton, N.J.: D. VanNostrand Co., 1963.

 

Fox, Matthew, Ed. Mediations With Meister Eckhart. Santa
Fe, N.M.: Bear 8 Co., 1983.

 

Frankl, Viktor E. Man's Search For Meaning: An Introduction

 

To Logotherapy. Translated by Ilse Lasch. New York,
N.Y.: Washington Square Press, 1963.

 

Gilligan, Carol. In A Different Voice. Cambridge, Mass.:
Harvard University Press, 1982.

 

Hammarskjold, Dag. Markings. Translated by Leif Sjoberg 8
A.H. Auden. New York, N.Y.: Alfred A. Knopf Co.,
1966.

Heiss, Robert. Hegel, Kierkegaard, Marx. Translated by
E.B. Garside. Delacorte Press, 1963.

 

Heschel, Abraham J. Man Is Not Alone: A Philosophy of
Religion. New York, N.Y.: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux,
Inc., 1951.

 

Heschel, Abraham J. Quest For God - Studies in Prayer and
Symbolism. New York, N.Y.: Crossroad Publishing Co.,
1982.

 

 

Heschel, Abraham J. Who Is Man? Sanford, Calif.: Stanford
University Press, 1923.

 

Heschel, Abraham J. The Wisdom of Heschel. Editor Ruth
Marcus Goodhill. New York, N.Y.: Farrar, Straus, and
Giroux, Inc., 1970.

 

Hinde, Robert A. Towards Understanding Relationships.
London, Eng.: Academic Press, 1979.

 

Huizing, Peter, and Bassett, William. New Experience of the
Spirit. New York, N.Y.: Seabury Press, 1974.

 

Huston, Ted. L. and Levinger, George. "Interpersonal

189

Attraction and Relationships." Annual Review of
Psychology, Vol. 29, 1978.

 

 

Jolivet, Regis. Introduction to Kierkegaard. Translated by
W.H. Barber. New York, N.Y.: E.P. Dutton, 1946.

 

Jones, Alexander, Ed. The Jerusalem Bible. Garden City, N.Y.:
Doubleday 8 Co., 1966.

 

Kerr, Hugh T. and Mulder, John M., Eds. Conversions. Grand
Rapids, Mich.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1983.

 

Kohlberg, Lawrence. The Philosophy of Moral Develgpment.
San Francisco, Calif.: Harper 8 Row, 1981.

 

Kosnik, Anthony. ”Forming the Christian Catholic Conscience."
Hospital Progress. August 1975.

 

Lamb, Matthew L., Ed. Creativity and Method: Essays In
Honor of Bernard Lonergan, S.J. Milwaukee, Wis.:
Marquette University Press, 1981.

 

 

Lawrence, Fred, Ed. Lonergan Workshop. Vol. 1. Missoula,
Mont.: Scholars Press, 1978.

 

Lescoe, Francis J. Existentialism: With or Without God.
New York, N.Y.: Alba House, 1973. ‘

 

Levinger, George, and Raush, H., Eds. Close Relationships.
Amherst, Mass.: University of Massachusetts Press,
1977.

 

Maddi, Salvatore R., Ed. Perspectives On Personality - A
Comparative Approach. Boston, Mass.: Brown 8 Co.,
1971.

 

 

Maslow, Abraham. Motivation and Personality. New York,
N.Y.: Harper 8 Row, 1970. ‘

 

Maslow, Abraham H. Religions, Values, And Peak Experiences.
New York, N.Y.: Penguin Books, 1964.

 

Maslow, Abraham H. Toward A Psychology of Being. New York,
N.Y.: D. VanNostrand Co., 1968.

 

Maslow, A.H., and Mittelmann, Bela. Principles of Abnormal
Psychology: The Dynamics of Psychic Illness. New York,
N.Y.: Harper 8 Brothers, 1951. '

190

McKenzie, John L., S.J. The Two-Edged Sword. Garden City,
N.Y.: Doubleday 8 Co., 1956.

 

McShane, Philip, Ed. Foundations of Theology. Notre Dame,
Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1971.

 

McShane, Philip, Ed. Language, Truth and Meaning. Notre
Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1972.

 

Meynell, Hugo A. An Introduction to the Philosophy of
Bernard Lonergan. New York, N.Y.: MacMillan Press
Ltd., 1976.

 

 

Mueller, Philip. "Lonergan's Theory of Religious Experience.”
Eglise Et Theologie. Vol. 7, 1976.

 

O'Donovan, Leo J., Ed. World of Grace. New York, N.Y.:
Seabury Press, 1980. '

 

Otto, Rudolf. The Idea of the Holy. New York, N.Y.: Oxford
University Press, 1923.

 

Price, James Robertson. "Conversion and the Doctrine of
Grace in Bernard Lonergan and John Climacus." Anglican
Theological Review. Vol. LXII. #4. October 1980.

 

Price, George. The Narrow Pass. New York, N.Y.: McGraw-
Hill Book Co., 1963.

 

Rahner, Karl. Theological Investigations. Vol. IV. "On
the Concept of Mystery in Catholic Theology." New
York, N.Y.: Seabury Press, 1966.

 

Roberts, David. Existentialism and Religious Belief. New
York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 1957.

 

Roberts, Louis, Ed. The Achievement of Karl Rahner. New
York, N.Y.: Herder 8 Herder, 1967.

 

Rogers, Carl R. On Becoming A Person - A Therapist View of
Psychotherapy. Boston, Mass.: Houghton Mifflin Co.,
1961.

 

 

Schrader, George Alfred, Jr., Ed. Existential Philosophers:
Kierkegaard to Merleau-Ponty. Chapter II. Louis Mackey.
"Sdren Kierkegaard, The Poetry of Inwardness." New
York, N.Y.: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1967.

 

 

191

Smith, Marc. "Religious Experience and Bernard Lonergan.”
Philosophy Today. Vol. 23. Winter 1979.

 

Smith, Marc. "Can Moral and Religious Conversions Be
Separated?" Thought. Vol. LVI. #221. June 1981.

Solomon, Robert, Ed. Existentialism.l New York, N.Y.:
Modern Library, 1974.

 

Tracy, David. The Achievement of Bernard Lonergan. New
York, N.Y.: Herder 8 Herder, Inc., 1970.

 

Tyrrell, Bernard J. Christo-Therapy. New York, N.Y.:
Seabury Press, 1975.

 

Von Rad, Gerhard. Old Testament Theology. Vol. I. Tran-
slated by D.M.G. Stalker. London, Eng.: Oliver 8
Boyd, 1962. '

 

Wright, Eugene J., Jr. Erikson: Identity and Religion.
New York, N.Y.: Seabury Press, 1982.