ABSTRACT
The last chapter ended with attempts to understand Anselm’s argument from a non-philosophical stance. Nevertheless, arguably the greatest interest in the argument in recent times has been expressed by philosophers, for whom it has raised the possibility that God’s existence can be proved in some way or who have felt it possesses sufficient and enduring robustness to be worth responding to and refuting. Although there have been some serious attempts by theologians to get to grips with aspects of the text of the Proslogion (for example, de Lubac1 and von Balthasar2), there has been a failure to appreciate the dialectical nature of the argument presented there. Rahner (writing before and during the Second World War) represents a particularly interesting case. He follows Maréchal in rejecting the ‘paralogism of the Anselmian proof’,3 whilst producing philosophical and spiritual writings that bear suggestions of an unacknowledged Anselmian influence.4
