DOCSLIB.ORG

Mary's Mission at the Foot of the Cross of Jesus in John 19:25-28A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mary's Mission at the Foot of the Cross of Jesus in John 19:25-28A INTERNATIONAL MARIAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE DAYTON OHIO, USA PONTIFICAL THEOLOGICAL FACULTY MARIANUM ROME, ITALY Mary’s Mission at the Foot of the Cross of Jesus in John 19:25-28a; in light of Isaac’s role in the Narrative of Abraham in Genesis 22:1-19 A Thesis in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Licentiate of Sacred Theology with Specialization in Marian Studies Directed by: Rev. Bertrand Buby, S.M., S.T.D. Kyoung-Hee Michaela Kim, S.I.H.M. International Marian Research Institute University of Dayton Dayton, Ohio, U.S.A. August 17, 2017 Nihil obstat: Gloria Falcão Dodd, STD Vidimus et approbamus: Bertrand A. Buby S.M., STD – Director Sebastian Abalodo, S.M., STD – Examinator Daytonesis (USA), ex aedibus International Marian Research Institute, et Romae, ex aedibus Pontificiae Facultatis Theologicae Marianum, die 14 September 2017. Table of Contents Précis .............................................................................................................. iv Introduction ................................................................................................... 1 Status Questionis ........................................................................................... 2 Methodology .................................................................................................. 4 Chapter one: Isaac’s Role in the Narrative of Abraham in Genesis 22:1-19 ................................................................................................... 8 1.1. Introduction ........................................................................................ 8 1.1.1. The Nature and Object of the Narrative of Abraham ................................... 8 1.1.2. Methodology for the Narrative of Abraham ................................................. 9 1.1.3. The scope and location of Genesis 22:1-19 ................................................ 10 1.2. Isaac’s role in Genesis 11:27-25:11 ................................................. 12 1.2.1. Isaac in the foregoing contexts (Genesis 11:27-21:34) of Genesis 22:1-19 12 1.2.2. Isaac in the context after of Genesis 22 (Genesis 22:20-25:11) ................. 17 1.2.3. Isaac in the Genesis 22:1-19 ....................................................................... 19 1.2.3.1. Texts of Genesis 22:1-19 ......................................................................... 19 1.2.3.2. Commentary on the texts related to Isaac: Genesis 22:1-8: Preparatory of the sacrifice of Isaac ................................................................................................ 20 1.2.3.3. Analysis of Genesis 22:9-14: sacrifice of Isaac ....................................... 24 1.2.3.4. Analysis of Genesis 22:15-19: result of sacrifice .................................... 27 i 1.3. Isaac’s role in Genesis 22:1-19 ........................................................ 29 1.3.1. Isaac: the meaning of life of Abraham and a witness of the faith of Abraham 29 1.3.2. Isaac: the link to the history of salvation and a witness of God’s justice ... 30 1.3.3. Isaac: a key cooperator in history between God and Abraham .................. 31 Conclusion .................................................................................................... 32 Chapter two: Mary’s Role in the Crucifixion in John 19:25-28a ..35 Introduction ................................................................................................. 35 2.1. Analysis of the context: John 19:25-28a ........................................ 37 2.1.1. Mary in the theological themes of the Fourth Gospel ................................ 37 2.1.2. The Analysis of John 19:25-28a ................................................................. 44 2.2. Marian perspectives in John 19:25-28a ......................................... 55 2.2.1. Mary in the Christological Perspective: a witness ...................................... 55 2.2.1.1. Mary’s witness to Jesus............................................................................ 56 2.2.1.2. Mary, a witness of God’s justice and mercy ............................................ 59 2.2.1.3. Mary, a visible witness of the Holy Spirit ............................................... 61 2.2.2. Mary in Spiritual and Ecclesial Perspectives ............................................. 63 2.2.2.1. Gift: God’s gift given by a grace ............................................................. 64 2.2.2.2. A Bridge: Spiritual Maternity and Mediation .......................................... 65 2.2.2.3. Blessing for the disciples ......................................................................... 69 ii 2.2.3. Mary in anthropological aspect .................................................................. 70 2.2.3.1. Active involvement in the history of salvation ........................................ 70 2.2.3.2. Perfect disciple: a model of faith, hope, and love .................................... 72 2.2.3.3. The entire consecration with immolation with Jesus ............................... 74 Conclusion .................................................................................................... 77 Chapter three: Similarities of Isaac’s Role and Mary’s Mission ...79 3.1. The meaning of typology...................................................................... 79 3.1.1. Isaac and Jesus ............................................................................................ 81 3.1.2. Mary and Abraham ..................................................................................... 82 3.2. Typological relationship between Mary and Isaac in their mission 85 3.2.1. A witness of God ........................................................................................ 86 3.2.2. A link of salvation....................................................................................... 90 3.2.3. Model of People of God in faith, obedience, love, and discipleship .......... 95 Conclusion ......................................................................................... 103 Bibliography ...................................................................................... 106 iii Précis The Second Vatican Council’s proclamation of Mary as our mother and model is a special gift for today’s Church. The Church also invites people of God to receive Mary as our spiritual mother in the Christian life. The mother of Jesus has been discovered in her role and mission from the Scriptures and in current Catholic teachings. The Vatican II stresses Mary’s closeness with us in our Christian life as well as her unique and excellent role in the mystery of Christ and the Church. Her Mission is continuously being enacted in Christians who believe in God’s grace and mercy in Mary. The Scriptures proclaims Mary’s significance as our mother and model in light of insights of each evangelist. Especially, the Fourth Gospel conveys the importance of her mission as a witness, a link, and a model. Chapter eight of Lumen Gentium presents the preparation of her mission from the Old Covenant. Her role is prefigured as a symbol, figures, and events in the Old Testament. The Church recognized her mission was prepared from the beginning of the salvation of humankind. This thesis tries to approach a deeper understanding of her mission in the Church through the study of Isaac and his role in the Old Covenant. In particular, the mother of Jesus has a special role in the history of salvation related to the mission of all Christians. It is valuable to pursue a study on the comparison between the role of Isaac in the Old Covenant and the mission of Mary in the Fourth Gospel for understanding their similar contribution in the history of salvation. It will help Christians who are living a faith life accomplish the same mission as both Isaac and Mary achieved in the history of salvation. This thesis presents the mission of Mary compared with that of Isaac through the analysis of the context of Genesis 22:1-19 in the narrative of Abraham and that of John iv 19:25-28a in John’s Gospel. Both events are a climax in Old and New Covenant in their serious and theological significance in the entire history of salvation. Both roles are related to our mission in the Church. As a witness, a spiritual mother, and a model, the mother of Jesus actively served in the work of salvation both in the world and in the Church. Mary at the foot of the Cross contributes to this great mission and will serve it continuously in and with Jesus. In chapter one, the narrative of Abraham is introduced with the Covenant between Abraham and God. One of the promises of the Covenant is the promise of Isaac and Abraham’s descendants. It shows the importance of Isaac in Abraham’s life and God’s Covenant. Through the methodology of narrative analysis, Isaac and his role are discovered in the overview of the entire story of Abraham from his call to the climactic event on Mount Moriah. The additional explanation seen in the scope of the entire context and research about the event on Mount Moriah is included in this chapter. For a better understanding of Genesis 22:1-19, the preliminary readings before chapter 22 and the chapter after the stories are to be understood. Then, through the simple analysis of the text related to Isaac (Genesis 22:1-19), the integral summarization of his role in the Old Covenant and salvation history is presented. In chapter two, the mother of Jesus at the foot of the Cross is described in the light of the theological insights of the evangelist of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer
    Edinburgh Research Explorer 'Dating the Death of Jesus' Citation for published version: Bond, H 2013, ''Dating the Death of Jesus': Memory and the Religious Imagination', New Testament Studies, vol. 59, no. 04, pp. 461-475. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688513000131 Digital Object Identifier (DOI): 10.1017/S0028688513000131 Link: Link to publication record in Edinburgh Research Explorer Document Version: Peer reviewed version Published In: New Testament Studies Publisher Rights Statement: © Helen Bond, 2013. Bond, H. (2013). 'Dating the Death of Jesus': Memory and the Religious Imagination. New Testament Studies, 59(04), 461-475doi: 10.1017/S0028688513000131 General rights Copyright for the publications made accessible via the Edinburgh Research Explorer is retained by the author(s) and / or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing these publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Take down policy The University of Edinburgh has made every reasonable effort to ensure that Edinburgh Research Explorer content complies with UK legislation. If you believe that the public display of this file breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 01. Oct. 2021 Dating the Death of Jesus: Memory and the Religious Imagination Helen K. Bond School of Divinity, University of Edinburgh, Mound Place, Edinburgh, EH1 2LX [email protected] After discussing the scholarly preference for dating Jesus’ crucifixion to 7th April 30 CE, this article argues that the precise date can no longer be recovered. All we can claim with any degree of historical certainty is that Jesus died some time around Passover (perhaps a week or so before the feast) between 29 and 34 CE.
    [Show full text]
  • The Historical Origins of Antisemitism
    THE HISTORICAL ORIGINS OF ANTISEMITISM …Let me give you my honest advice. First, their synagogues or churches should be set on fire, and whatever does not burn up should be covered or spread over so that no one may ever be able to see a cinder of it. And this ought to be done for the honor of God and Christianity… (Martin Luther, 1543) When Wilhelm Marr, a 19th Century German journalist, coined the term antisemitism, he was giving a new expression to a very old hatred. Antisemitism, the hatred of Jews and Judaism, has roots of ancient origin, pre-dating the Christian era and evolving throughout the Middle Ages into the modern era. Throughout their history, Jews have been the victims of a persistent pattern of persecution, culminating finally in the 20th Century in mass murder. The term denoting hatred of the Jews – antisemitism – is spelled here and hereafter unhyphenated and in the lower case. This spelling is more historically and etymologically correct since “Semitic” refers not to a race of people, as Marr and other racists of his time wrongly believed, but to a group of languages which includes Arabic as well as Hebrew. Hence, the oft-used spelling “anti-Semitism” means, literally, a prejudice against Semitic-speaking people, not the hatred of people adhering to the Jewish religion and culture. ANTISEMITISM DURING THE PRE-CHRISTIAN ERA Expressions of anti-Jewish prejudice appeared as early as the 4th Century B.C.E. in Greece and Egypt, whose people drew stark distinction between themselves and others, whom they regarded as “strangers,” “foreigners,” or “barbarians.” Jewish religious practice, based as it was on an uncompromising monotheism and strict adherence to their religious laws and social customs, only heightened endemic suspicions and excited hostility in societies already prone to ethnocentric excess.
    [Show full text]
  • John 19: the Crucifixion of Jesus
    John 19: The Crucifixion of Jesus TEACHER RESOURCE hen Pilate took Jesus and had him bench in the place called Stone Pavement, in Tscourged. And the soldiers wove a crown Hebrew, Gabbatha. It was preparation day for out of thorns and placed it on his head, and Passover, and it was about noon. And he said clothed him in a purple cloak, and they came to the Jews, “Behold, your king!” They cried to him and said, “Hail, King of the Jews!” out, “Take him away, take him away! Crucify And they struck him repeatedly. Once more him!” Pilate said to them, “Shall I crucify your Pilate went out and said to them, “Look, I king?” The chief priests answered, “We have am bringing him out to you, so that you may no king but Caesar.” Then he handed him over know that I find no guilt in him.” So Jesus to them to be crucified. came out, wearing the crown of thorns So they took Jesus, and carrying the cross and the purple cloak. And he said to them, himself he went out to what is called the “Behold, the man!” When the chief priests and Place of the Skull, in Hebrew, Golgotha. There the guards saw him they cried out, “Crucify they crucified him, and with him two others, him, crucify him!” Pilate said to them, “Take one on either side, with Jesus in the middle. him yourselves and crucify him. I find no guilt Pilate also had an inscription written and put in him.” The Jews answered, “We have a law, on the cross.
    [Show full text]
  • The Death and Resurrection of Jesus the Final Three Chapters Of
    Matthew 26-28: The Death and Resurrection of Jesus The final three chapters of Matthew’s gospel follow Mark’s lead in telling of the passion, death and resurrection of Jesus. At each stage Matthew adds to Mark’s story material that addresses concerns of his community. The overall story will be familiar to most readers. We shall focus on the features that are distinctive of Matthew’s version, while keeping the historical situation of Jesus’ condemnation in view. Last Supper, Gethsemane, Arrest and Trial (26:1–75) The story of Jesus’ last day begins with the plot of the priestly leadership to do away with Jesus (26:1–5). As in Mark 14:1-2 they are portrayed as acting with caution, fearing that an execution on the feast of Passover would upset the people (v 5). Like other early Christians, Matthew held the priestly leadership responsible for Jesus’ death and makes a special effort to show that Pilate was a reluctant participant. Matthew’s apologetic concerns probably color this aspect of the narrative. While there was close collaboration between the Jewish priestly elite and the officials of the empire like Pilate, the punishment meted out to Jesus was a distinctly Roman one. His activity, particularly in the Temple when he arrived in Jerusalem, however he understood it, was no doubt perceived as a threat to the political order and it was for such seditious activity that he was executed. Mark (14:3–9) and John (12:1–8) as well as Matthew (26:6–13) report a dramatic story of the anointing of Jesus by a repentant sinful woman, which Jesus interprets as a preparation for his burial (v.
    [Show full text]
  • Teaching the Scriptural Emphasis on the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ
    Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive Faculty Publications 2019 Teaching the Scriptural Emphasis on the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ John Hilton III Brigham Young University - Provo, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/facpub Part of the Christianity Commons, and the Mormon Studies Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Hilton, John III, "Teaching the Scriptural Emphasis on the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ" (2019). Faculty Publications. 3255. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/facpub/3255 This Peer-Reviewed Article is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. This article was provided courtesy of the Religious Educator, a journal published by the Religious Studies Center at Brigham Young University Click here to subscribe and learn more The scriptures consistently emphasize the importance of the Savior’s CrucifixionintheAtonement. theimportance consistentlyemphasize The scriptures oftheSavior’s Harry Anderson, The Crucifixion. © Intellectual Reserve, Inc. Teaching the Scriptural Emphasis on the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ john hilton iii John Hilton III ([email protected]) is an associate professor of ancient scripture at Brigham Young University. colleague recently shared with me how, when teaching missionary A preparation classes, he would role-play with students. When students pretending to be missionaries would ask him (acting as an investigator) if he knew about Christ’s Atonement, he would say, “Yes, I saw that Mel Gibson movie about Christ dying for our sins on the cross.” At least half of his students would correct him, stating that Christ atoned for our sins in Gethsemane, but not on the cross.
    [Show full text]
  • VII. Interactions with the World C. Anti-Catholicism A. the Know-Nothing Era 391
    VII. Interactions with the World C. Anti-Catholicism a. The Know-Nothing Era 391. Editorial, The Catholic Telegraph and Advocate, April 9, 1853 (1) The Late Election. On Monday last an election for municipal officers took place in this city, which resulted in the success of the Democratic-convention nominations, with only a few exceptions. Not only throughout the State of Ohio has the excitement attending this election been known, but papers at the most distant points of the country, have indulged on commentaries in no way complimentary to the Catholics. Now be it known to all to whom these presents shall come, that all the Catholics did was to petition the legislature to amend the school laws, so that Catholic children could attend the schools without sacrifice of the rights of conscience!! This was all our guilt, and we have been repaid by such a deluge of Protestant abuse, misrepresentations and calumny, that we firmly believe the like was never known before in the United States. Editors, preachers, fanatics, loafers, panacea vendors, and quack doctors kept up an assault of such a universal character, that all sorts of style were used at once, all sorts of filth projected against us, all sorts of lies invented, all sorts of insults heaped upon our heads, until it seemed as if the Devil himself was for once exhausted and malignity could do no more. The election day came and the authors of all this insane bigotry and abuse were swept like dust before the power of he people. 392. Editorial, The Catholic Telegraph and Advocate, April 9, 1853 (2) The Source of It.
    [Show full text]
  • Jesus' Cry of Dereliction: Why the Father Did Not Turn Against Or
    Jesus’ Cry of Dereliction: Why the Father Did Not Turn Against or Away from the Son Mako A. Nagasawa Last modified: February 1, 2018 Introduction: John Stott’s The Cross of Christ In his now-classic book, The Cross of Christ , John R.W. Stott presents a sweeping and impressive defense of penal substitutionary atonement. He gives a thoughtful exposition of Jesus’ ‘cry of dereliction’ from the cross, his quotation of Psalm 22:1, ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’ 1 Stott considers three other interpretive options before he gives his own. First, Stott notes, some have suggested that Jesus’ cry was one of disbelief and anger, even despair. Stott rightly rejects this option. It attributes unbelief to Jesus. Interestingly, since this suggestion shares with penal substitution the view that the Father did in fact forsake his Son Jesus, Stott does not explore what it attributes to God the Father . Second, others have interpreted Jesus’ cry as one of loneliness. In this view, Jesus felt forsaken by God in the sense of not being able to sense his presence, and for some reason, was not able to name God his intimate ‘Father,’ but could only name him more distantly and impersonally as ‘God.’ Stott points out that the problem with this view is that it ignores the original meaning of Psalm 22:1: ‘Yet there seems to be an insuperable difficulty [in that] the words of Psalm 22:1 express an experience of being , and not just feeling , God-forsaken.’ 2 Maintaining continuity of the Psalm’s original meaning is important as a criterion of what Jesus meant when he quoted it, which makes it all the more strange that Stott ignores that original meaning when he advocates the penal substitution view.
    [Show full text]
  • The Peformative Grotesquerie of the Crucifixion of Jesus
    THE GROTESQUE CROSS: THE PERFORMATIVE GROTESQUERIE OF THE CRUCIFIXION OF JESUS Hephzibah Darshni Dutt A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY May 2015 Committee: Jonathan Chambers, Advisor Charles Kanwischer Graduate Faculty Representative Eileen Cherry Chandler Marcus Sherrell © 2015 Hephzibah Dutt All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT Jonathan Chambers, Advisor In this study I argue that the crucifixion of Jesus is a performative event and this event is an exemplar of the Grotesque. To this end, I first conduct a dramatistic analysis of the crucifixion of Jesus, working to explicate its performativity. Viewing this performative event through the lens of the Grotesque, I then discuss its various grotesqueries, to propose the concept of the Grotesque Cross. As such, the term “Grotesque Cross” functions as shorthand for the performative event of the crucifixion of Jesus, as it is characterized by various aspects of the Grotesque. I develop the concept of the Grotesque Cross thematically through focused studies of representations of the crucifixion: the film, Jesus of Montreal (Arcand, 1989), Philip Turner’s play, Christ in the Concrete City, and an autoethnographic examination of Cross-wearing as performance. I examine each representation through the lens of the Grotesque to define various facets of the Grotesque Cross. iv For Drs. Chetty and Rukhsana Dutt, beloved holy monsters & Hannah, Abhishek, and Esther, my fellow aliens v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS St. Cyril of Jerusalem, in instructing catechumens, wrote, “The dragon sits by the side of the road, watching those who pass.
    [Show full text]
  • Gospel Chronologies, the Scene at the Temple, and the Crucifixion of Jesus
    Gospel Chronologies, the Scene at the Temple, and the Crucifixion of Jesus Paula Fredriksen Department of Religion, Boston University (forthcoming in the Catholic Biblical Quarterly) I. The Death of Jesus and the Scene at the Temple The single most solid fact we have about Jesus’ life is his death. Jesus was crucified. Thus Paul, the gospels, Josephus, Tacitus: the evidence does not get any better than this.1 This fact, seemingly simple, implies several others. If Jesus died on a cross, then he died by Rome’s hand, and within a context where Rome was concerned about sedition. But against this fact of Jesus’ crucifixion stands another, equally incontestable fact: although Jesus was executed as a rebel, none of his immediate followers was. We know from Paul’s letters that they survived. He lists them as witnesses to the Resurrection (1 Cor 15:3-5), and he describes his later dealings with some (Galatians 1-2). Stories in the gospels and in Acts confirm this information from Paul. Good news, bad news. The good news is that we have two firm facts. The bad news is that they pull in different directions, with maximum torque concentrated precisely at Jesus’ solo crucifixion. Rome (as any empire) was famously intolerant of sedition. Josephus provides extensive accounts of other popular Jewish charismatic figures to either side of Jesus’ lifetime: they were cut down, together with their followers.2 If Pilate had seriously thought that Jesus were politically dangerous in the way that crucifixion implies, more than Jesus would have died;3 and certainly the community of Jesus’ followers would not have been able to set up in Jerusalem, evidently unmolested by Rome for the six years or so that Pilate remained in office.
    [Show full text]
  • The Shape of the Holy
    1 THE SHAPE OF THE HOLY Protestants and Catholics have long been obsessed with their origins. There is something powerful about claiming that one’s faith descends directly from the life of Jesus. Holding to the truth thus means tracing one’s practices and beliefs to the true beginning. Protes- tants have commonly imagined that their faith is grounded in an epochal return to Christianity’s genesis after a long interlude of wandering and corruption. Roman Catho- lics have maintained that they never lost contact with the apostolic age, and have therefore preserved the church that Jesus founded, and then entrusted to Peter. The issue for both parties has been authority, or, in a more modern term, authenticity, though each has posed and answered the question of authority differently. The Catholic tradition has been defined in many ways by asking who spoke for God, while Protestants from the outset focused instead on asking by what means God spoke. The Catholic answer is that the church fathers, the councils, and the continuous chain of popes speak as the united authority of the church. But that glosses over an ongoing conflict within the Catholic tradition that contributed importantly to the Reformation itself: a dominant strain of thought and practice asserts that authority resides in fathers and councils, yes, but that the preeminent servant of God, the vicar of Christ, remains the pope, who is invested with power by unbroken apostolic succession. The pope as the final authority on earth is infallible, as a nineteenth-century promulgation officially established. The Protestant tradition, by contrast, asserted that God spoke for himself, once and for all, in scripture, his Holy Word, which must be the unquestioned authority for all matters of faith.
    [Show full text]
  • Proquest Dissertations
    A SOURCE CRITICAL REASSESSMENT OF THE GOSPEL OF LUKE: WAS CANONICAL MARK REALLY LUKE'S SOURCE? A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Wycliffe College and the Biblical Department of the Toronto School of Theology in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Theology awarded by the University of St. Michael's College By Kari Pekka Tolppanen Toronto 2009 © Kari P. Tolppanen Library and Archives Bibliotheque et 1*1 Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de I'edition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington OttawaONK1A0N4 OttawaONK1A0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-53123-5 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-53123-5 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non­ L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, prefer, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans le loan, distribute and sell theses monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non­ support microforme, papier, electronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la these ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Origin and Evolution of the Gospels
    THE ORIGIN AND EVOLUTION OF THE GOSPELS Dom Bernard Orchard OSB THE STATE OF THE QUESTION That the Church preceded the Gospels is undisputed, though how and why the Gospels came to be written has been a matter of considerable controversy during the past two hundred years. The Catholic Church has always held that the four Gospels are the most important part of the written tradition handed on by the Twelve Apostles in virtue of their personal knowledge of Jesus acquired during their instruction by him in the course of his earthly mission.(1). But the ancient apostolic and patristic tradition that the three Synoptic Gospels (Mt, Mk, Lk) were composed in the lifetime of Peter and Paul, that the Gospel of Matthew had been first to be committed to writing, and that all the Gospels were composed by the Apostles to whom they are attributed has been widely denied by modern liberal scholars. Instead they argue in favour of the priority of the Gospel of Mark and as a result date all Gospels to post-apostolic times, composed by anonymous authors. Among the discoveries of the 18th century Enlightenment one of the most important though seldom recognized factors influential in the argumentation for Markan priority has been the general Theory of Evolution, the view that progression is always a logical development from the simple form to the more complex, and, applied to our Gospels, from the phase of simple memorizing to that of note-making, through the parataxis of Mark to the rounded periods of Matthew.(2). A further significant, perhaps decisive factor which nowadays is paid little, if any, attention is the enormous political interests and pressures in 1 cf.
    [Show full text]