ABSTRACT

THEOLOGICAL AESTHETICS OF HANS URS VON BALTHASAR IN DIALOGUE

WITH THE DIALECTICAL MOTIF OF KARL BARTH.

Mathew Kurukunjiyil Samuel

Readers: Stephen J. George, Alias K. Eldhose.

The term Theological Aesthetics in contemporary theology inform the

presence of an assortment of interpretations. The transformative capacity of an aesthetic
experience in theological reflection, with cognitive and emotional value, have emerged in
diverse theological traditions with contrasting directions. Theological aesthetics is
considered as a product of redemptive consciousness, an application of aesthetical
categories to control the form and content of theology, or a subject to explore the
relationship between theology and arts in worship and liturgy. The epistemology of the
sensory experience in theological aesthetics lead to some substantive questions: are
aesthetic experiences a subjective sensation without any objective reality? Or what is the
nature of an objective aesthetic experience? Or what are the dynamics associated with the
human perception of divine self-disclosure? Or is aesthetics a valid category to shift
theological reflection forward? The general subtlety identified with the definitions
regarding the ‘essential’ qualities associated with aesthetics, in its relationship to
theology, results in a mixture of theological outcome.
The theological aesthetics of Hans Urs von Balthasar is examined in dialogue
with the dialectical motif of Karl Barth. The polarity associated with aesthetics in
theological reflection and the human perception associated with the divine self-disclosure
are interpreted within the presuppositions related to the pneumatic realism connected to
Evangelical Theology. A theological proposal is suggested regarding the validity of
adopting ‘Beauty’ as a sustainable category for theological reflection and perception
within Evangelical Theology.
The thesis of this dissertation is that the aesthetic openness and objectivity
associated with the theological aesthetics of Balthasar is beneficial for reflection within
Evangelical Theology, but the nature of the existential perception associated with the
pneumatic realism within Evangelical Theology reveal the existence of a divine
designation culminating in a purposeful limitation regarding the human aesthetic
perception of the divine self-disclosure. The ‘aesthetic ontology’ or the ‘spiritual senses’
(internal aesthetic pneumatic realism of faith-doubt polarity), as a result, need not
function as a valid category for theological formulation but must necessarily function as a
pneumatic-existential epistemological category for the perception of the ‘divine-self’
associated with the Revelation of God (John 14:21-23; Ephesians 1:17-23; 3:17-19).
iii