Jesus of Nazareth Completed

FATHER JAMES V. SCHALL, S.J.

Benedict XVI's unique trilogy about Jesus Christ has, in a

sense, bypassed the whole world of academia by going
right through it.

"Jesus' teaching is not the product of human learning, of whatever kind. It originated from
immediate contact with the Father, from 'face-to-face' dialogue from the one who rests
close to the Father's heart. It is the Son's word. Without this inner grounding, his teaching
would be pure presumption."
Pope Benedict XVI, Jesus of Nazareth, Volume I (New York: Doubleday, 2007), 7.
"The mystery, which has been hidden through all ages and from all generations, is now
revealed to us."
Post-Epiphany Antiphon, Breviary, Mid-morning Prayer.
"The two chapters of Matthew's Gospel devoted to the infancy narrative are not a
meditation presented under the guise of stories, but the converse. Matthew is recounting
real history, theologically thought through and interpreted. And thus he helps us to
understand the mystery of Jesus more deeply."
Pope Benedict XVI, Jesus of Nazareth, Vol. III (New York: Image, 2012), 119.

With the 2012 publication of The Infancy Narratives, the Holy Father's account of Christ,
Son of God and Son of Man, is complete. The slim third volume of the trilogy covers the
Gospel accounts of the birth of Christ in Matthew and Luke. The Birth of Christ is placed
within the historical setting of His time, but also within the Jewish background, as well as

within the philosophical and cosmological significance of what such a birth means. No one
could grasp the full scope of the incarnational event without averring to all the elements that
serve to explain the meaning of its reality.
Much of the world is desperately trying to maintain that the evidence for the fact that Christ
is God incarnate in this world is not true or intelligible. This dogmatic assumption of the
"un-truth" of who Jesus is occurs in order to justify its rejection of Him. This rationalization
allows the world to live as it wishes with a clear conscience, or so it thinks. It need not take
seriously the cogency of the truth of Christ's claim. The pope calmly follows the evidence
and the reasoning. The fact is, as he shows, that Christ is who He said He was.
In a recent address to the International Theological Commission (December 7, 2012),
Benedict spoke of the "prejudice" that argues that "religions and in particular the
monotheistic religions are intrinsically vehicles of violence, especially because they
claim the existence of a universal truth. Some consider that this 'polytheism of values'
alone would guarantee tolerance and civil peace and would and would be in conformity with
the spirit of pluralistic democratic society."

He reveals that
Thomistic side of
him that first
seeks to state
accurately the
position against
his view. He is
not trying to
hide, but to find,
any argument
that Catholics
refuse to
consider against
their view.

The net effect of such a view, of course, necessarily means that religion cannot be true and
therefore has no place in any public order. This view usually leaves the state in charge with
no limit on itself caused by any truth or anything outside its own control. To this selfenclosed view, Benedict responds that "faith in the one God, Creator of heaven and earth,
encounters the rational needs for metaphysical reflection, which is not weakened but
strengthened and deepened by the Revelation of the mystery of the God-Trinity....The form
that the definitive Revelation of the mystery of the one God assumes (lies) in the life and
death of Jesus Christ...."

Two things are said here that cast light on the whole thesis of Jesus of Nazareth. The first
element is, to recall what is likewise found in "The Regensburg Lecture," that revelation of
the Trinity is itself directed to metaphysics, in its efforts to know what it can by man's own
powers. The second point is that this Revelation that is addressed to reason is not just any
old religion but a specific one, the one that revolves around the life and death of Christ.
Every religion may contain some aspect of truth, but no other one reveals Christ, the actual
Son of God, to us.
It is because of the nature and understanding of who Christ is in His complete being, man
and God, that Revelation addresses itself to reason and does not bypass it. The dogmatic
modern (and ancient) view that all religions are false cannot account for the one revelation
that is true. Indeed, it seeks to avoid ever having to deal with the evidence that it is. And
this truth is what Christianity says it is designed to maintain in the world. It is not presented
in any arrogant or haughty fashion. It reports what it has heard and understood from Christ
about the Father within the Trinity.

II.
Here, I do not propose to "review" this last book of the trilogy. Previously I have
commented on the first two volumes (see here and here and here and here). But I would
like to reflect on the significance of the pope's whole presentation of the life of Christ. It is a
remarkable achievement. The work, no doubt, represents a lifetime of study and reflection,
as well as of controversy and dialogue.
This whole text was written by a man with the busiest kind of life. It attests to the results
that can accrue when a disciplined man sets aside time to do a work that he considers
important over and beyond what might be considered his "normal" business, though surely
a pope telling us who Christ is must be the "normal" purpose of the Petrine office that he
holds. Had Benedict not bothered to write these volumes on Christ, no one would have
noticed or thought that he was neglecting his duties either as Prefect of a Roman
Congregation or as Pope. The volumes represent the product of scholarly abundance and
of the love of a wisdom that needs to be expressed.
First of all, these three volumes are eminently scholarly, yet readable and intelligible. Any
one, believer or not, should certainly have them in his library. One does not have to be an
academic to understand them. Indeed, one suspects that academics may be the last to
grasp what the pope is doing here. He is, in a sense, bypassing the whole world of
academia by going right through it. Academics lose much of their aura of autonomy when
one of the greatest of academics of any time time is also the pope who explains how things
fit together, things that the same academics often wrote and taught did not so fit together.

III.
If we can say that there was such a thing as a "John Paul II Revolution," it would be that for
a quarter of a century one of the most dynamic, manly, intelligent, well-loved, and noble of
men was in the Chair of Peter. John Paul II was seen perhaps by more human beings than
any man who ever existed. He died in public, as if to say that it was all right to die,
something that his successor, Benedict, well explained in Spe Salvi. John Paul was a
figure transcending his office by clearly revealing what it was. No one could be indifferent
to him; few wanted to be. He could be classified as a unique personality the likes of which
would not come again.

The volumes
represent the
product of
scholarly
abundance and
of the love of a
wisdom that
needs to be
expressed.

Benedict is a different sort. John Paul himself was a major intellect, though that did not
seem the most important thing about him. It does seem to be the most important thing
about Benedict. Cardinal von Schnborn once remarked that Aquinas was the only man
in the history of the Church who was canonized only for thinking. Benedict falls in this
tradition, along with Newman, whom Benedict beatified.
Any claim that Catholicism cannot be "true" must stand the test of Benedict's mind. And
when anyone avoids it, he discovers that Benedict has already thought through the veracity
of the claim that Catholicism is not true. We see this irony worked out again and again in
the volumes of Jesus of Nazareth.
We underestimate the importance of mind to Catholicism. Catholicism is not just another
"religion." It is not, in fact, a natural religion at all. It is a religion, if we want to call it that,
the content and origins of which are not human, though, through the Incarnation, it is fully
human and stands for what the human, at its best, ought to be. Benedict did not write
these volumes as official Catholic doctrine. He had something else in mind. He did publish
them under both his name, Joseph Ratzinger, and as Pope Benedict XVI. He wanted to
answer the question of what does a pope himself really hold and believe and why. His

answer was that he does hold and believe that Christ was the Son of God incarnate who
did dwell among us in Palestine during the time of the early Roman empire.
Now, why would Benedict hold this position? The answer is because this is what is handed
down and what the faith teaches. But also it corresponds with the historical and
philosophical evidence and facts. These volumes spell out this evidence. Benedict is
aware of the long history of scholarship that has tried to argue for a view of Christ that
would doubt His existence or that he was nothing but a man or that he was the product of
the imagination of the early disciples.
What Benedict shows, I think, is that the arguments against the veracity of revelation as it is
presented in Catholicism are intelligible and subject to examination. He reveals that
Thomistic side of him that first seeks to state accurately the position against his view. He is
not trying to hide, but to find, any argument that Catholics refuse to consider against their
view. In every case, he presents a plausible and cogent position about incidents in the life
of Christ, about what His teaching meant, and about how the Church understood these
matters over the ages. He concludes by affirming that what the Church teaches now is
what was taught by the Apostles. But we now see many things drawn out and developed
that are implicit in the original revelation and were in fact intended to be drawn out by the
Church in its actual living throughout the centuries.

But we also
have, as it were,
a "feast of
intellect," a
magisterial
presentation of
how things do fit
together about
the most
important issue
in any person's
life "Was
Christ who He
said He was?"

Thus, if there is anything "scandalous" about Benedict's Jesus of Nazareth it is, in this
world of skeptical democratic pluralism and diversity, the firm claim that what Christ said of
Himself is true and that this truth and the living that accords with it is, in fact, what is the
purpose of the Church in our or any time and what is most needed by men even for their
own temporal good. But Benedict is also most insistent that men are given free will and
that God's plan for men includes the possibility of God's revelation being freely rejected

with all the consequences for the individual person and for society that the rejection of truth
implies.
Looked at from this angle, Benedict's book is presented as something to be calmly read
and reflected upon. We have here no "threats" of hell or condemnations, but we do have a
faithful presentation of what Christ Himself implied about those who did freely reject Him.
But we also have, as it were, a "feast of intellect," a magisterial presentation of how things
do fit together about the most important issue in any person's life "Was Christ who He
said He was?" When we put down the last of these volumes, we suspect that since He was
who He said He was, our lives and our world are disordered to the extent that they reject
the truth that is also the way and the life.