Joseph Ratzinger non è il primo e non sarà l’ultimo teologo a indossare i panni del biblista. It is not just a personal matter, it is not just the human desire to escape from his responsibility for evidence in other fields. It has always, since Christianity has run built in system, theology went to supervise the rest, ready to intervene, often determined, at times even cruel, to put at risk as the unit altogether.
The threat arising from the study of the Bible is a constant concern of theology, if one considers the fact that for centuries it was forbidden to approach it without the help of a cleric, just think of the fact that one of the most dramatic on which it is consumed Lutheran schism fu la traduzione della Scrittura in lingua volgare e la sua diffusione a mezzo stampa, basti pensare al fatto che il modernismo mosse i suoi passi dalle ricerche storiche e dagli studi filologici sul cristianesimo delle origini. E il modernismo ha perso, ma ha provocato un altro scisma, anche se sommerso.
Non è soltanto la voglia di cimentarsi in un campo che non è mai stato suo, dunque, a muovere un teologo come Joseph Ratzinger a una prova come il suo Gesù di Nazaret , oggi al secondo volume, ma è l’esigenza di riaffermare il primato della lettura teologica su quella storico-critica, come peraltro è in manifesto con la Verbum Domini which followed the Synod of the Word 2008.
myths behind the ways of those who almost apologizes for having put his hand in a matter that is not his own, calling for "advance of sympathy" toward "his" Jesus, there is a theologian who became Pope claims a reading of the Gospels under the constraint of the true faith that it would only guarantee of correct interpretation. It may be too much even for those who are Catholic because Catholicism is a little Protestantization from Vatican II onward, but it's too much for those who are not Catholic, and it is foolish to claim those who are not believers and refusing approaches to the text solutions of reading is not argued by reason, especially if they claim that the scale deposited on the text over the centuries of exegetical monopoly are considered integral parts of the same, as if the author of the written word eighteen or nineteen centuries ago still breathed the breath of someone who declares official interpreter.
Joseph Ratzinger knows this and so he put his hands on for now. He knew that he could fool - as he cheated, as the gullible will grant - on the trial and death, but he knew that this time the 'advance of sympathy "had to be huge, said that without faith in the resurrection crucified it's just a poor man.
In commenting on the post that will follow Jesus of Nazareth vol. II leave aside this ridiculous request: the madness of believing that the dead raised up remains so in front of a billion odd lunatics who claim to have happened. I will confine myself to the rest, why dwell on the arguments in favor of the future resurrection of the dead was a theologian who thinks he can demonstrate in writing with the only possible reading - the theological - it is just too much.
0 comments:
Post a Comment