I am very late to the table in commenting on this book, which was published last spring and is now an astonishing bestseller in Germany: over half a million copies sold in the "land of the empty churches". Jesus of Nazareth is an elegantly written book - as we have have come to expect from Benedict/Ratzinger - which is at once eminently readable and intellectually challenging. (It would be nice to think that all of the people who bought the book actually read it, but I wonder.) It is a book that will delight not just Catholics (I am not Catholic) but any Christian, or anyone interested in understanding the Christian faith and the meaning of the Gospels.
In his preface, Benedict writes that his book "is in no way exercise of the magisterium, but is solely an expression of my personal search ... Everyone is free, then, to contradict me." I will take him at his word, even though I note that any critics among the 1000 reader reviews on Amazon.com have been excoriated as hostile detractors of the Holy Father or even blasphemers.
Jesus of Nazareth covers the crucial period of the public ministry of Jesus from the Baptism to the Transfiguration. Benedict's purpose in the book, as he states from the outset and often repeats, is to close the gap between the historical-critical understanding of Jesus that has emerged from recent scholarship and the Christ of faith. Benedict then proceeds to throw historical-critical exegesis under the bus: this is a book about Jesus Christ, not the man from Nazareth. Every critical passage in Scripture is interpreted by Benedict as illuminating the divinity of Jesus.
This becomes clear in Chapter Eight, which covers the imagery in the Gospel of John. Benedict elevates the Fourth Gospel above all others, and interprets the Synoptics through the lens of the gnostic thrust of Johannine vision. At the same time, Benedict insists on the historicity of the Fourth Gospel. John is the Beloved Disciple, the eyewitness. This may come as something of a surprise for those of us who have bee jolted by the stark difference in language found in the Fourth Gospel. Benedict insists:"The Jesus of the Fourth Gospel and the Jesus of the Synoptics are one and the same: the same "historical " Jesus." Benedict thus imposes a consistent -albeit sublime- image of Jesus as Son of God which just doesn't square with the Jesus that emerges from the earlier Gospels - the mysterious figure who constantly baffles those who follow him.
Every so often in the book the real world of today intrudes in the high Christology. For example, in interpreting the parable of The Good Samaritan Benedict suddenly shifts to a discussion of Africa:
The topical relevance of the parable is obvious. If we apply it to the dimensions of globalized society, we see how the population of Africa, which finds itself robbed and pillaged, concerns us closely. We see how much they are our 'neighbor;' we see also that our style of life, the history in which we too are involved, have despoiled them and continues to despoil them. In this regard, what's understood above all is the fact that we have wounded them spiritually. Instead of giving them God, the God who is close to us in Christ, and thereby gathering from their traditions all that is precious and grand and carrying it to fulfillment, we have instead brought them the cynicism of a world without God, in which only profit and power count; we've destroyed moral criteria so much that corruption and the will to power deprived of scruples become something obvious. This doesn't apply just to Africa. Yes, we must give material aid, and we must examine our kind of life. But we give too little if we give only material things."
Here is where Benedict once again brings up his running criticism of Marx, whom he accuses of a one-dimensional materialism in the analysis of man's alienation, even as he credits Marx with recognizing alienation as the prime fact of modern existence. This, then, brings us to the meaning of the Kingdom of God. Already in his meditation on the Beatitudes, Benedict insists that the first Beatitude -"Selig seid ihr Armen; denn das Reich Gottes ist euer / Blessed are the poor; for yours is the Kingdom of God" - (Mark 6:20) - does not refer to material poverty, but rather piety. But it is clear that Jesus was not just speaking of the pious, since he follows up with a condemnation of the rich: Aber dagegen: Weh euch Reichen! Denn ihr habt eueren Trost schon gehabt / Woe to you rich; you have already had your reward. But Benedict does not address this. The Kingdom of God, then, is relegated to an interior space. It soon becomes clear that Benedict's argument is not so much with Marx, but rather with the (unmentioned) Liberation Theology that would see the presence of God in the struggle for peace and social justice. This is the result of a flawed Christology that puts human endeavor ahead of an objective truth that comes from God, and stands above the human will to power. Social injustice and war are the consequences of falling away from God, and are automatically corrected when a true belief in God is achieved:
"Discord with God is the point of departure for all the poisonings of the human person; and overcoming that discord is the fundamental presupposition of peace in the world. . . . Standing in peace with God is an indispensable part of any commitment to 'peace in the world.' It's from the former that the criteria and the strength derive for this commitment. Where humanity loses sight of God, peace also falls away, and violence takes the upper hand with previously unimaginable forms of cruelty. We see this today all too clearly."
What does this interpretation mean for people confronting a real war, real injustice, the grinding poverty of the Third World? Is it a coincidence that the publication of Jesus of Nazareth coincided with the release of the Notification of Sobrino, which reaffirmed Benedict's teaching that "the first poverty among people is not to know Christ"?
Every reader of Jesus of Nazareth will have a favorite section which touched him or her deeply. Benedict shares with the reader his knowledge of theology, the Church, world religions, and philosophy as he meditates on words we knew but never truly understood. This book is a corrective to the American image of Jesus, who has been reduced to a bumper sticker slogan and the spiritual equivalence of a winning Powerball lottery ticket . For me the chapter on the Lord's Prayer was especially illuminating. Why do we pray the Vaterunser instead of the Vatermein - Our Father rather than My Father?
",,,the word "our" is really rather demanding: It requires that we step out of the closed circle of our "I". It requires that we surrender ourselves to the communion with the other children of God. It requires then, that we strip ourselves of what is merely our own, of what divides. It requires that we accept the other, the others- that we open our ear and our heart to them."
Benedict provides similar insights into each line of the prayer (Note: feminists may have strong objections to his explanation for why we don't pray to Our Mother. See also Christa Tamara
Kaul: Leider fehlen in diesem Buch die Frauen - "Women are missing in this book" ).
Jesus of Nazareth is meant to be a provocative book; many readers will be provoked by Benedict like I was to revisit the Gospels, the Psalms and the prophecies of the Old Testament with new understanding. That is no doubt the outcome that Benedict was hoping for in writing this book. In the preface, Benedict mentions that he has planned a second book on Jesus that will cover the infancy, Passion and Resurrection. We can only wish that this 82 year-old pontiff will have the stamina, good health and time amidst all of his other duties to complete this project.
Comments