Newspaper Page Text
j
>
4
PAGE 5-March 1,1973
Jesus-Son of Man
BY FATHER AL MCBRIDE, O.PRAEM.
It’s the style today to speak to Jesus only in terms of his
humanity. “Superstar,” pointedly, omits affirmations about the
divinity of Jesus, and the resurrection and second coming as
accompanying tenets. Literary and dramatic efforts to show
Jesus was a real man frequently hover around his sexuality.
Kazantzakis, in his “Last Temptation of Christ,” gives us a Jesus
tormented with sexual affection for Magdalene. “Superstar ,”
reverses the plot and has Magdalene wondering about how to
love him.
Theologians, following a psychological taste, have probed the
humanity of Jesus in terms of his human consciousness. As they
see it, Jus human awareness grew and developed in the normal
human way. In other words, there was no special infusion from
the Godhead to inform Jesus about his nature and his mission.
In modem terms, Jesus had to struggle like all of us to know
who he was and what he should be doing with his life.
His self image proceeded from interaction with daily life,
from the way people reacted to him, from the impressions that
poverty and hypocrisy made upon him, from the love he
received from Mary and Joseph and his friends. It also grew out
of his progressively deepening prayer to his Father, maturing
incalculably as the years went on. Lastly, it drew from his
capacity for openness to life.
This vision of Jesus in terms of human awareness and
psychological growth does not exclude his divinity. There is no
way to know how he understood that dimension of himself. It
remains utter mystery. The Gospels tell of Jesus referring to
himself as “son of man,” or simply a man.
We cannot conclude from this that he had no awareness of his
What Do You
Want to Know
About God?
BY FATHER CARL J. PFEIFER, S.J.
“Did God ever fall in love with a girl?’* “I think we would
like to know more about what God did when he was on earth.”
“What did God look like when he was on earth.” “More about
Gc u when he was a teen-ager.”
These are typical responses to the question on a
questionnaire given to 7th-8th graders around the United States:
“What do you think people your age want to know about God
and religion?” Of the more than 2,000 responses one of the
most common requests was to learn about the life of Jesus,
what he was like, how he felt, what he did at various periods of
his life.
But, as the selected replies cited above suggest, there is a
common tendency to simply interchange the names “God” and
“Jesus.” Each of the above replies uses the word “God” where
the youngsters refer to “Jesus.” This was a common
characteristic of the seventh and eighth graders who responded.
Jesus was simply referred to as “God” more frequently than as
“Jesus” or “Christ,” even when referring to obviously human
factors as physical appearances and feelings.
It is worth reflecting on this phenomenon. The 2,000
youngsters were from every part of our country, from both
parochial schools and CCD. They were given no instructions
except to answer the questions honestly in their own words:
The majority spontaneously identified “Jesus” with “God.”
In itself this is somewhat consoling and reassuring. So often
religion teachers and textbooks are criticized for allegedly
failing to teach the divinity of Christ. Just the opposite
conclusion comes through the questionnaire replies. It seems
that the youngsters are well aware of the Church’s teaching
about Jesus’ divinity. What seems less evident is that they realize
Jesus is truly human.
That fact is somewhat disconcerting and seems to confirm the
assertions of historians of religious education who maintain that
Catholic catechesis and preaching has for centuries so
emphasized the divinity of Jesus as to seriously neglect his
humanity. Judging from the answers to this one questionnaire
even recent attempts to present a more balanced approach to
Jesus, true God and true man, apparently have not been
noticeably effective.
It is worth reflecting on the fact that our knowledge of Jesus
as God rests on our knowledge of him as man. The fullest
revelation of God is the Incarnation, the reality of God’s Son
becoming fully human. As Jesus told Thomas at the Last
Supper, “whoever has seen me has seen the father” (Jn 14:9).
The General Catechetical Directory summarized the proper
catechetical balance: “Catechesis must proclaim Jesus in his
concrete existence and in his message, that is, it must open the
way for men to the wonderful perfection of his humanity in
such a way that they will be able to acknowledge the mystery of
his divinity” (53). It is through Jesus, Son of Man, that we come
to faith in Jesus, Son of God.
Without an honest attempt to come to grips with Jesus’
complete humanness we run the risk of making the Incarnation
a mere facade, and Jesus’ life a kind of play-acting. Many a
Catholic cannot really identify with Jesus because he cannot
accept the fact that Jesus truly suffered, was tempted, learned
through experience. Jesus is seen as acting out a role, pretending
to leam, to suffer, to die.
Yet the Church’s teaching is that he is truly and fully human.
As the Second Vatican Council states, “He worked with human
hands, he thought with a human mind, acted by human choice,
and loved with a human heart” (THE CHURCH TODAY, 22).
The New Testament teaches that Jesus “was tempted in every
way that we are” (Heb. 4:15). The attractive humanness of
Jesus needs to be honestly explored in religious education along
with his divinity.
Any honest attempt to understand Jesus as man and as;
God inevitably leads to questions that remain unanswered.
“How” questions can be inexplicable: “How, if he is God, can
he suffer?” “If he is God and knows everything, how could he
leam?” “How could Jesus make a mistake?” What is vital for a
developing understanding of Christian Faith is that such honest
questions be left open to even deeper insight - that the mystery
of the Incarnation remain mysterious.
At the same time the basic facts of Christian faith - expressed
in the New Testament and in subsequent tradition - need to be
reaffirmed, namely that no matter how inexplicably mysterious
it may be, Jesus, who is God, is fully human. The more we come
to know Jesus as human, the more we are in a position to
recognize him as divine.
divinity. We can only say that if he were aware of it, he
surrounded that element of self understanding with awesome
silence. This does not prevent us from meditating on the matter.
Medieval religious thinkers did so and spoke of beatific and
infused knowledge.
Returning, however, to the “son of man” saying. It speaks of
Christ’s manhood. It also is a technical expression meaning
messiah.
Two prophets of the old testament use the saying “son of
man” extensively. Ezechiel employs it to emphasize the
precarious condition of exiled man before an angry God. Daniel
uses it to describe the nobility of a future man who will embody
the exalted hopes of God for the world, in other words, a
messiah.
It is Daniel who first uses the imagery of a “son of man”
coming on the clouds of heaven to rule the earth and render
justice to the maltreated and create a kingdom of the saved. “I
gazed into the visions of the night. And I saw coming on the
clouds of heaven, one like a son of man. On him was conferred
sovereignty, glory and kingship, and men of all peoples, nations
and languages became his servants.” (Daniel 7:13-14)
Hence the “son of man” usage on the lips of Jesus both
affirms his full acceptance of his humanity as well as the
discovery of his call to be messiah, and the determination to live
up to the crucial demands of that calling.
Devotional literature has always been sensitive to the
humanity of Jesus. Meditative people from Francis of Assisi to
Ignatius to Teresa of India speak of their hearts being touched
to the point of fire by the compassionate love of Jesus. Their
own lives are full of an equally extraordinary humanity. John
XXIII writes in his journals of the impressive gentleness,
humility and brotherliness of Jesus. And while John bore the
papal office he was a worldwide witness to those very same
virtues.
There is a pitfall in trying to look only at the humanity of
Jesus, for at no moment in real life did his humanity ever exist
apart from the divinity. There is also a trap in only looking at
his divinity, for that inaccessible light could scorch the meaning
of humanity from our eyes.
We are cursed in our words and concentrations and emphases
to miss the whole truth when looking at part of the truth. We
are blessed when we remember that this is the touchy condition
of our meditative pursuits. When one element is being revealed,
then another is concealed. Hence the need to struggle toward
the concealment to reach a precarious balance.
We speak here of the humanity of Jesus. The Gospels are full
of his humanity. The parables, the miracles, and above all the
Passion speak of his man-ness. Imitate his profound humanity
even as you breathe it within the presence of the divine.
BY FATHER QUENTIN QUESNELL, S.J.
They did not really call him “Son of Man.” But later they
remembered that was what Jesus used to call himself. Jesus said
“I” about as often as anyone else does.
But Jesus also said “Son of Man,” especially in statements
that were particularly important and weighty. “The Son of Man
must suffer much and be rejected . . .He will be put to death and
after three days he will be raised to life.” “The Son of Man has
power on earth to forgive sins.” “Unless, you eat the flesh of
the Son of Man and drink his blood, you will not have life in
you.”
Why did Jesus favor this expression? To tell the truth, we
don’t really know for sure. There are many possibilities.
“Son of Man,” in some sectarian literature from Jesus’ time
and place, meant a mysterious, superhuman being who was to
stride over the earth shortly before God’s final judgment.
“Son of Man,” in the prophecy of Ezekiel, was the prophetic
figure who received special revelations from God in order to
pass them on to men.
“Son of Man,” in the prophecy of Daniel, was a figure who
had the appearance of a single human being, but who was in fact
a living symbol for all those who were to be saved, God’s chosen
ones, the people of Israel, the community of the saints.
“He was part of the human family, and grew as a
man grows ‘in body and wisdom’.” Growing boys test
their agility by climbing a tree at a lakeshore. (NC
Photo by George P. Koshollek)
“John XXIII writes in his journals of the impressive
gentleness, humility and brotherliness of Jesus. And
while John bore the papal office he was a worldwide
In any of these senses, “Son of Man” was at least someone
outstanding and marvelous even if he had to remain hidden for a
time. He was a person of special mission and destiny. To him
and through him remarkable things were to happen.
Any one of these senses, or something of all of them, might
be the key to Jesus’ usage in the Gospels. Jesus did preach God’s
impending judgment and warn people it was coming. He was
indeed - though people didn’t realize it - mysteriously
supernatural, keeping hidden in so many ways that which only
later faith would discover in him.
He was also truly God’s special agent for transmitting
revelation to mankind. And he did sum up in himself all God’s
people: first Israel, then all the redeemed, then all mankind.
There is one more sense of “Son of Man” that can be found
in writings from Jesus’ time. In Aramaic, Jesus’ native tongue,
“son of man” was an ordinary way of saying “human being.”
Now it wouldn’t seem, at first glance, to make much sense for
someone to go around saying “the human being” instead of
saying “I,” so most people doubt that this is what Jesus had in
mind when he referred to himself as “Son of Man.” Still, it is
hard to deny that this last sense - stressing the fact that Jesus is
part of the human family and glad of it - is the sense that seems
to speak most directly to people today.
The recent demise of Life magazine illustrates, unfortunately
for its employes, a pattern common in our contemporary
society. Philip Scharper, editor of Maryknoll Publications’ Orbis
Books, succinctly described this trend of human events in the
December 8 issue of Commonweal.
“Change leads to change leads to change. Flux, not fixity, is
the basic dimension of modern man. So, at least, read the
soundings of many who make it their business to study the
course of human events, and the evidence for their position
seems to mount higher every day.”
Life at one time was a pioneering journalistic feat. It started
and mushroomed during a period when extensive visual
communication in the publishing field had just begun. But that
magazine fell victim to the very technological progress which
originally spawned the venture those decades ago. Television
came to dominate the scene and so gobbled up the advertising
dollar and captured the public’s looking hours that not enough
of either remained to make Life a profitable venture. And so it
goes.
There is a liturgical lesson of sorts here for Roman Catholics.
The many ritual reforms we have experienced over the past 10
years have left some weary, anxious to reach a plateau, seeking a
breathing space in time during which worship authorities will
once more reassure us: “Change, no more, change never again.”
I don’t think we will ever or should come to that kind of
plateau or breathing space. We can expect, in fact already
witness, a certain stabilization in the liturgy. Major structural
modifications have been completed; now the relatively minor
implementation and adaptation of externals is underway on the
local level. But worship in tune with a changing world must
itself change; it needs to adjust, to reflect cultural shifts, to
show modem man that the Mass confines divine, changeless and
human, changeable elements within it.
witness to those very same virtues.” Pope John meets
members of emerging African governments in 1959.
(NC Photo)
He was part of the human family, and grew as a man grows
“in body and in wisdom.” He “learned obedience in the school
of suffering” (Hebrews 8,8) just as the rest of us do. “He
became like his brothers in every way” (Heb. 2,17). Indeed, “he
was tempted in every way we are” - and how many ways that
is! -- “But he did not sin” (Heb. 4,15).
When he saw what had to be done, “he made up his mind and
set out on his way to Jerusalem” (Luke 9,51). In the final crisis,
faced with death itself, “he made prayers and requests with loud
cries and tears to God who could save him” (Heb. 5,7).
““Father, save me from this hour!” (John 12,27). “Take this
cup away from me!” (Mark 14,36). “My God, my God, why
have you abandoned me?” (Mark 15,34).
So it was indeed a son of man who accomplished the
redemption of mankind. One of our own did it -- and we can do
it too. A son of man has loved that much - and so should we.
“Christ gave his life for us. We ought to give our lives for our
brothers” (I John 3,16). He saved the world - and we “fill up
what is wanting to the sufferings of Christ” (Col. 1,24). A man
has conquered death - and we can too. “Death is destroyed,
victory is complete . . .God gives us the victory through our
Lord Jesus Christ” (I Cor. 15,54 ff.). He was from God and
God’s son, and “he gave to all who believe in him power to
become God’s children” (John 1,12).
This demands of those concerned two attitudes or
approaches; a tenacious clinging to the divine, changeless
essential in our liturgy and an easy accepting of the new, the
human, the changeable in Catholic worship.
An example may best illustrate the point.
Several months ago a young, attractive wife and mother of
two learned she had a rare and critical disease. As the days
moved on and the illness spread over her body, she felt a strong
desire to receive the Eucharist each day. The woman’s weak
body, however, was not up to the wish of her determined,
devout mind.
After reading about the Pope’s approval of lay ministers for
Holy Communion, the couple wondered if this might not be the
solution for them. Their bishop agreed and designated the
husband as one.
Every morning the husband, a daily communicant long before
this trouble came into his home, participates in Mass at his
parish church and receives Holy Communion. Afterwards, he
goes into the sanctuary, receives a consecrated host from the
priest and carries the Lord to his ailing spouse.
The restriction many of us learned - that only the sacred
hands of a priest (or deacon) were allowed to touch the Body of
Christ - had an excellent purpose in mind. This legislation was
designed to insure proper reverence and care for the Eucharist.
That is the essential, divine, changeless element of which we
speak. Limiting distribution of Communion to priests and
deacons, however, is a human, accidental, changeable matter.
Changing times and different circumstances seem to dictate a
new approach at least in special situations.
I am sure that this distraught husband used as much or more
care and reverence in handling the host than some priests or
deacons would have in exercising that particular ministry.
Moreover, unless he had been so appointed, it would have been,
practically speaking, impossible for his wife to be strengthened
- daily - by Holy Communion.
(All Articles On This Page Copyrighted 1973 by N.C. News Servicej
[Know Y our F aiih J
Jesus Christ Was Part of the Human Family
Divine 9 Human Element of Liturgy
BY FATHER JOSEPH M. CHAMPLIN