 |
|
|
|
Italian version
 Scholar
of Biblical Sciences, editor, in EDB, of two series of Biblical topics:
The Bible in History and Writings on the Christian origins
(together with Romano Penna), this is the presentation visiting card of Giuseppe Barbaglio. Born in 1934, Barbaglio has been a lecturer in the
faculty of Theology in Milan and, among other writings, he is the author
of The theology of Paul. Sketches in epistolary form (2001); Jesus, a
Hebrew in Galilee, Historical investigation (2005); The thinking
of the apostle Paul (2005); In front of God, the spiritual
journey of Moses, Elijah and Jesus (2001), together with Piero
Stefani; Love songs in the old Israel, poem of the Song of Songs
(2004), together with Luigi Commissar. His latest publication is
Jesus of Nazareth and Paul of Tarsus, a historical confrontation
published by Edizioni Dehoniane in 2006. We have addressed to him a few
questions on themes of strict ecclesial actuality, such as the first
book of Pope Benedict XVI.
The
publication of the book written by Pope Benedict XVI on Jesus of
Nazareth is imminent: From Baptism in the Jordan to the
Transfiguration“. Considering the anticipations recently spread on this
work, how does your “Jesus of Nazareth and Paul of Tarsus” stand before
the book of the Pontiff?
“It
is always arduous to say anything of a book hardly announced and not yet
published. The newspapers anticipations offer generic elements, which
will have to be completed and specified before we have the book in our
hands. Anyhow, we can start the discussion. The Pope takes his position
on the method of the historical research in modern times, criticising
the minimising scepticism of the “lives” of Jesus written along the past
two centuries.
Actually, the problem that the Pope intends to face is that of the
historical Jesus reduced to a very feeble image and deprived of the most
qualifying aspects in his religious personality, opposed to the Christ
of faith, and understood as the only real Jesus, while the present one
would belong to the mythical sphere. In reality, the difference does not
concern the level of objective reality and that of the fantastic,
illusory sphere, rather the cognitive approach, which is double: the
historical knowledge and the knowledge from the intuition of faith.
The
historical knowledge has its own specific statute. Negatively, it does
not want at all to reach evidences; rather his conquests are in the area
of probability, of the plausible and possible. It is a knowledge of the
past with eyes fixed on the present. It studies the past on the
foundation of its testimonies and documents, which are subjectively
interpreted. The positivist historiography, which presumed to re-build
up things just as they had effectively happened, is now over. History
has now fewer presumptions. The question it intends to answer is to seek
how things of the past have been narrated.
During the last years, I published two historical researches on “Jesus,
Hebrew of Galilee” and “Jesus of Nazareth and Paul of Tarsus”
(edizioni Dehoniane di Bologna), analysing accurately the old Christian,
Jews, Greek and Roman testimonies, drawing from them some probable
elements and building up a plausible picture of his person, framed in
precise topographical, chronological, cultural and political
co-ordinates of the time, with no claim of of stating that it is
complete. The historian must acknowledge that he ignores the exact
birth-date of Jesus. Most probably six years B.C.; where he was born
(Nazareth, Bethlehem?); when he died on the cross (during the decennium
of the Roman Prefecture of Pontius Pilate, 26-36). Even more problematic
is the determination of his historical figure. Today we have two images
depicted by the historians: that of the prophet tending to the future of
God’s Kingdom anticipated in the present, and the one of the wise master
of life.
There
is no claim of imposing an objective and real Jesus, the one who really
existed.
On
the other hand, the historical knowledge had a limited field of
research, capable of linking only what enters the sphere of his
competence limited to what is natural and rational. The outside is by
definition stranger to the resources of history, which can say nothing
about the subject matter, neither in a positive nor in a negative sense:
he can simply ignore it. It follows that it is incompetent to pronounce
anything, for instance, on the virginal birth of Jesus or on his
Resurrection: it can neither deny nor state them.
Outlined like this, it is wholly legitimate to study Jesus historically,
acknowledging the limits and avoiding to invade the field of faith: each
knowledge has its own field.
I
think that the knowledge of the Historical Jesus is legitimate as well
as that of faith, without one invading the other”.
In these months, Pope Benedict XVI, with his catechesis on Wednesdays,
is going on his journey among the protagonists of the Christian origins.
His reflections, specific of a worthy expert as he is, do not fail to
fascinate and to charm many persons. These are moments of a pontificate
in which the scholar, the discreet and reserved man of libraries, rather
than the deep knower of mass-media, prevails. What do you think about
this?
“Doubtlessly Benedict XVI is a worthy expert, but even more surprising
is the fact that he writes his book not ex auctoritate, but as a
believer among other believers. He puts in writing his Christian creed,
comparing it with that of christifideles and discussing it with
all of them. He somehow locates himself at their own level, like Paul
who writes to the believers in Rome, “I am longing to see you so that I
can convey to you some spiritual gift that will be a lasting strength,
or rather that we may be strengthened together through our mutual faith,
yours and mine” (Rom 1,11-12). I think that when the book of Benedict
XVI will appear in the bookshops, the interest not only of the
believers, but also in general of many more, will overflow: a Pope who
like other believers communicates his convictions of faith and his
persuasions, ready to discuss them”:
About St. Paul, during an audience, Benedict XVI said, “ We must
admit that the Apostle is an eloquent example of a man open to
collaboration: He does not want to do everything by himself in the
Church, but avails himself of numerous and diversified colleagues”.
Do you share this portrait of ”Him who understood better and
interpreted the work of the Master” ?
“Rightly the Pope highlights that Paul did not interpret his mission as
a wandering knight and solitary man, but as a missionary head of a rich
equip made up of many collaborators, tens of men and women. The closest
collaborators (synergoi) were, first of all Timothy,
co-remitter of several Pauline letters (see addresses of 1 Th, 2 Co, Ph
and Fm), sent by the Apostle of Thessalonica and introduced as “our
brother and collaborator of God in the proclamation of the Gospel of
Christ” (1 Th. 3, 2), messenger of Paul to the community of Corinth, “I
sent to you Timothy, a dear and faithful son to me in the Lord” (1 Co
4,17), worthy of being welcomed because “he is doing the Lord’s work
just as I am” (1 Co 16,10), partaking with Paul and Silvano in the
proclamation of Christ Jesus (2 Co 1,19),his collaborator (synergos)
(Rom 16,21); then Titus at the side of the Apostle, who entrusted him
with the delicate task of restoring relations with the church in Corinth
, presenting him in 2 Co 8,23 to the Corinthian faithful as “my
associate” (koinônos) and my collaborator (synergos) for
you”. With the same appellative Paul mentions the couple Prisca and
Aquila and Urbano (Rom 16, 3), Epaphroditus (“Epaphroditus, my brother
and fellow-worker and companion-in-arm”) (Ph 2, 25) and Clement and the
other collaborators of the Philippians church (Ph 4, 3), among whom
perhaps there were also two women, Euodia e Syntyche (Ph 4, 2).
The
example of missionary collaboration par excellence is offered by the
Philippians who stipulated a covenant with the Apostle from the very
beginning: to support him financially in his evangelising action. The
Apostle adopts a commercial language. The Philippians and he
constituted an exchange society: the community of the Philippians
supplied the livelihood and he allowed them to participate in the work
of evangelisation (4, 15). He acknowledges that the community had been
faithful: already in Thessalonica he acknowledged that it had
accomplished its part, “more than once, you sent me what I needed” (1
Th 4, 16). In a few words, Paul ‘evangelist’ was associated with the
community of the Philippians and this was associated with him; they
formed a societas in the sign of the Gospel, which they had to
proclaim”.
Again, in his Wednesdays’ catechesis, Ratzinger, concluding his
reflection, said, “let us think once again of this word from St. Paul:
both Apollo and I are ministers of Jesus, each in one’s own way,
because it is God who gives the growth. This word is still valid today
for all, for the Pope, the Cardinals, the Bishops, the Priests and the
laity. All of us are humble ministers of Christ”. Is the
underlining of serving the Gospel, each according to one’s own gift,
which calls to mind his first affirmation as soon as he was elected to
the See of Peter as “humble servant of the Lord’s vineyard”, a reading
key of this pontificate?
“Paul
has inspired Benedict XVI also when, in his letter to the Corinthians he
specifies the role pertaining to him in his evangelising mission
compared with the very action of God. As headmaster (architektôn)
the Apostle had cast down the foundation of the edifice, Jesus Christ;
Apollo and the other missionaries had built up on it; but the action of
God had been decisive. Paul uses a metaphor, “For what is Apollo and
What is Paul? They are the servants through whom you came to believe,
and each has only what the Lord has given him, I did the planting,
Apollos did the watering, but God gave the growth. In this neither the
planter nor the waterer counts; only God gives the growth…. After all
we, we do share in God’s work; you are God’s farm, God’s building” (1 Co
3, 5-9).
Paul,
and in general the missionaries, have been at the service of God for the
building up of the Church. This is why, in the old church of Rome the
Pope was called servus servorum Dei”.
What is the task which the consecrated persons are called to today? In
particular, before a changing world that grows in the capacity of being
ever more violent, to the disadvantage of the frailest and undefended
ones, how should those religious behave who, as we read in the message
for the 2007 World Day of Consecrated Life, offer themselves to the
service of the families in our country, taking care of children and kids
in the various school and educative contexts?
“The
forms of service in the Christian communities as well as generally in
the world are various. Paul has left us an example in the missionary and
pastoral action… servant of God, the service of the Pope being in its
unique genre.. The consecrated women and men witness the particular
charismas they have received from God. However, let us not think of
specific services, because lay services are not missing: those of the
parents for the family, of the citizens for the people, of teachers for
the students, of the medical doctors for the sick, etc. Jesus himself
sets an example, “The son of man himself came not to be served but to
serve and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mk 10, 45). In
particular The religious are called by God to render their service to
the neediest”.
To witness to the Gospel in different parts of the planet is equivalent
to living situations at risk, which not rarely have implied extreme
sacrifices. From Leonella Sgorbati to Don Andrea Santoro: the 2006 also
has ended with a bitter balance in terms of human lives. According to
you, is the exigency of faithful and coherent witnesses, a theme very
dear to Pope Paul VI, still actual or does the present society, more
and more tending towards image and oblivion, need to be re-thought in
the light of the on going tendencies?
“The
services we are called to are not entrusted to us without the eventual
payable high prizes. If Jesus was ready to give up his life for others,
Paul has not been less available. As he was going to leave for Jerusalem
to take the contributions to the poor among God’s holy people in
Jerusalem, he begged them to pray that God might protect him against
those in the Holy City who were ready to threaten his life, that he
might escape the unbelievers in Judea and that the aid he was carrying
to Jerusalem would be acceptable to God’s holy people (See: Rom 15,
25).
|