l E next day March 15, Deo Volente, will be released worldwide the second part of the work 'Jesus of Nazareth ', under the name of Joseph Ratzinger-Benedict XVI as author, authorship, at least, quite misleading. Yesterday informally anticipated in some parts of the book , I imagine that as advertising, to stimulating public interest. I do not understand is that is excited by these run-up to the controversial issue, given the content of the extracts that have been advanced.
About the book 'Jesus of Nazareth' I have discussed in this blog and elsewhere, has been a monumental indiscretion (or recklessness), to the extent that fosters confusion between papal teaching (Not) and the views and / or exposure-Christological exegesis of a famous theologian (which is what is just.) At the end we must recognize that Professor Ratzinger has fallen into the understandable (and forgivable) typical attitude of the author who thinks the world would not be complete without his work. I understand the commitment and appreciation of Professor Ratzinger for his scholarly work, but I do not understand the commitment of His Holiness Benedict XVI to see his works published those now, when your personal circumstances have changed and are others, of another level. Some
nothing extraordinary work on the other hand. Little (if any) used to reading these books, the Catholic public Thanks to the publishers that have released the book as a best-seller have read the first part of 'Jesus of Nazareth' , feel amazed at the quality, height, depth and interest of its chapters. But it warned that the work of Professor Ratzinger is one more of the many that have been published on that same theme in recent decades. More Item: Prof. Ratzinger, with all its undeniable expertise, reveals itself as a theologian of his time, his moment perfectly traceable to their sources, inspirations, influences, preferences, etc. units. Nothing exceptional. Fairly predictable. Quite recognizable in the trends and styles of theology Christology and exegesis of the pre-and post-conciliar period.
That is why I dare to discuss and even contradict it, if possible, perhaps in a certain foolhardiness sin, I am not entitled exegete, I'm no professor of theology, I'm just a Catholic I know what I believe and I have formed and maintained within the faith of my elders, faithful to the truth of a doctrinal tradition I have passed. Only.
That said, I go to my poor short dissertation on the front of the book, with all due respect for its author, of course:
appears that the second part of his book 'Jesus of Nazareth' Professor Ratzinger interprets certain passages Passion, the press has highlighted one in particular: participation and / or responsibility of the Jewish people in the condemnation of Jesus , including the tremendous appointment Mt 27, 25
"... And all the people answered: "His blood be on us and on our children !»..."
In his book the prof. Ratzinger tends to lighten the traditional sense with which the Church from time immemorial, have understood this verse from the Gospel of Matthew. A verse that - in spite of the efforts in the opposite direction of prof. Ratzinger - in tune with the story of the same scene in the other Gospels, not just San Mark and Luke, but also of San Juan.
aside other questionable assertions and also disconcerting, coming from whom they come, with regard to this particular verse, I'd say:
- participation is indisputable star of the Sanhedrin and the Hierarchy Jewish priestly condemnation of the Lord, Caiaphas and Annas, High Priest, head
- that according to Jewish tradition they represent the people, very special in this holy nation, a social identity, political, stratified and especially religious defined and recognized
- that in Sacred Scripture from the Old to the New Testament appears with a mean value of the highest figure of corporate personality or representative capital, in which some individuals, family groups religious institutions and / or policies have a proxy, corporate actions redound to the benefit or detriment of all the people, who represent a real and effective, not only symbolic, so in the beginning, the sin of Adam and Eva affect all their progeny, and the Patriarch Abraham's covenant and undertake to bless all the seed, and later, the sin of the kings gravitate over his people, and, especially, the priestly office of Aaron and his sons and descendants in the sacred ministry cultic represents the entire people, of whom offer burnt offerings and sacrifices, and even more particularly limited to the specific person of the High Priest, his job is defined as a sacred function and is representative of all the people, most especially at the time of his priestly liturgical day of the Feast of Atonement, when gets so solemn and exepcional (only the day of the year) in the Sancta Sanctorum Temple, to offer the sacrifice of atonement the sins and failings of all people (cf. . Lev 4, 3SS and Lev 16, 2SS. ) ***
- that the powers and gifts received by reason of such priestly dignity, permancen even amid the circumstances of the time cúlmenes the Mystery of Redemption, as explicitly emphasizes St. John in his Gospel (cf. . Jn 11, 47-52 , a text which sets one of the most important keys for understanding the meaning and value of the Lord's Passion)
- that exposure would be outrageous to give preference to some texts over others, as if some passages of the Holy Gospels deserve more credit than others, or as if we discount the value of certain passages in the interest of others, being as they are fully revealed texts with an eigenvalue and immutable in its sense
- it would be disconcerting exegetical attitude be defined against the tradition of the Church, who has said these texts with a sense of well-defined and constant, and in the same New Testament books and then in the works of the Fathers and the comments of the Doctors of the Church ancient and modern
- has been constant in the exegetical tradition of the Catholic Church the effort to match texts Evangelicals seem to disagree if it appears in some details and / or expression, being alien to the tradition of the Church to expose these texts as if they were in flagrant contradiction between them, something impossible given the sacred character and revealed the same
If this was motivated by an apology for the innocence of the Jewish people in the Lord's death as an excuse seems redundant spare discuss something in the Gospels themselves are exposed, and also in other sacred texts. Could be worth as excursus of the author, as a note on the text in question, but whenever you do not download these excerpts from his value, but shudder what the text says, his had significantly, and its scope.
Concerning the Jewish people and their assessment pre-and post-Christian New Testament texts are sufficient and valid, and should not be either magnify or minimize in any way, nor with an excess of charge or ignoring or exonerating the complaints. In this sense, the Pauline texts on this particular issue should be taken as definitive.
A hatred fed by a "deicide" would always be remembered against them sacrosanct words of Christ on the Cross -"... Father, forgive them for they know not what they do "Luke 23.34 , but a release of faults in that terribly proclaim the words of Mt 27, 25 summarizing one of them particularly evident in the passion, would be a concealment of the text of the Gospel by a positive bias as wrong as those who carry the ink vindicantes driven by a negative prejucio . What is written is written , arguably, using words from the Holy Gospel.
In another articulete commenting on any issue on the attitudes and teachings about the Jewish people that have characterized the last two pontificates, that of John Paul II ° and the current Benedict XVI, I remember wondering to what extent the personal history and lived and known Acontecimento Karol Wojtyla and Joseph Ratzinger in Poland and Germany during his youth, in the ominous year of the criminal regime of Adolf Hitler, then have influenced the thoughts on Jews and Israel have shown passim in the documents of the two pontificates. I understand that is not a casual matter, and that one day might deserve some attention from this case study.
In contrast we have experienced the profound contradiction that stands as a real wall, beyond good intentions, between Church and Synagogue, for example in the controversy about prayer pro Iudaeis of the Holy Office Good Friday, a venerable liturgical text that should never have been altered or replaced, before or now, I think.
In these matters so full of history, facts and history of its development gives reason to the same story with those same facts, a matter of time, more time, more history. Just what seems to be forgotten in our day, so fond of accelerations, motions and hasty moves, as harmful to reach a peaceful and wise understanding of things. Or it would seem better: A holy understanding and realization of the mystery, beyond the imperfections of nustros judgments and impressions. For these cases, the tradition is a possible remedy but a fundamental need and irreplaceable. ***
Even this figure of corporate personality is latent in the very dogma of the Redemption, as Christ gives Himself and deserves for us, a truth which then expands due to the Pauline doctrine of Mystical Body in the First Corinthians: Christ is the head and Christians are members of it as part of the Church which is His Body.
+ T.
-
0 comments:
Post a Comment